fmccap Posted June 8, 2009 Share Posted June 8, 2009 California contemplates ultimate reform - no welfare Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron W. Posted June 8, 2009 Share Posted June 8, 2009 (edited) Could California become the first state in the nation to do away with welfare? That doomsday scenario is on the table as lawmakers wrestle with a staggering $24.3 billion budget deficit. ............. "It's difficult to come up with the right adjective to react to this," Wagstaff said. "It would be devastating to the people we serve." http://www.sacbee.com/topstories/story/1917387.html There are roughly 19,000 illegal immigrants in state prisons, representing 11% of all inmates. That's costing $970 million during the current fiscal year. The feds kick in a measly $111 million, leaving the state with an $859 million tab. * Schools are the toughest to calculate. Administrators don't ask kids about citizenship status. Anyway, many children of illegal immigrants were born in this country and automatically became U.S. citizens. If you figure that the children of illegal immigrants attending K-12 schools approximates the proportion of illegal immigrants in the population, the bill currently comes to roughly $4 billion. Most is state money; some local property taxes. * Illegal immigrants aren't entitled to welfare, called CalWORKs. But their citizen children are. Roughly 190,000 kids are receiving welfare checks that pass through their parents. The cost: about $500 million, according to the nonpartisan Legislative Analyst's Office. Schwarzenegger has proposed removing these children from the welfare rolls after five years. It's part of a broader proposal to also boot off, after five years, the children of U.S. citizens who aren't meeting federal work requirements. There'd be a combined savings of $522 million. * The state is spending $775 million on Medi-Cal healthcare for illegal immigrants, according to the legislative analyst. Of that, $642 million goes into direct benefits. Practically all the rest is paid to counties to administer the program. The feds generally match the state dollar-for-dollar on mandatory programs. So-called emergency services are the biggest state cost: $536 million. Prenatal care is $59 million. Not counted in the overall total is the cost of baby delivery -- $108 million -- because the newborns aren't illegal immigrants. The state also pays $47 million for programs that Washington does not require: Non-emergency care (breast and cervical cancer treatment), $25 million; long-term nursing home care, $19 million; abortions, $3 million. http://articles.latimes.com/2009/feb/02/local/me-cap2?pg=1 State Controller Audit Confirms Massive Wasteful Spending and Abuse in California Prison Medical System It costs $3,850 per year to provide health insurance to the average California worker. CDCR spends $7,000 per inmate per year on healthcare. http://www.californiaprogressreport.com/20..._controlle.html Edited June 8, 2009 by Ron W. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DUCKRACER Posted June 8, 2009 Share Posted June 8, 2009 Could California become the first state in the nation to do away with welfare?That doomsday scenario is on the table as lawmakers wrestle with a staggering $24.3 billion budget deficit. ............. "It's difficult to come up with the right adjective to react to this," Wagstaff said. "It would be devastating to the people we serve." http://www.sacbee.com/topstories/story/1917387.html There are roughly 19,000 illegal immigrants in state prisons, representing 11% of all inmates. That's costing $970 million during the current fiscal year. The feds kick in a measly $111 million, leaving the state with an $859 million tab. * Schools are the toughest to calculate. Administrators don't ask kids about citizenship status. Anyway, many children of illegal immigrants were born in this country and automatically became U.S. citizens. If you figure that the children of illegal immigrants attending K-12 schools approximates the proportion of illegal immigrants in the population, the bill currently comes to roughly $4 billion. Most is state money; some local property taxes. * Illegal immigrants aren't entitled to welfare, called CalWORKs. But their citizen children are. Roughly 190,000 kids are receiving welfare checks that pass through their parents. The cost: about $500 million, according to the nonpartisan Legislative Analyst's Office. Schwarzenegger has proposed removing these children from the welfare rolls after five years. It's part of a broader proposal to also boot off, after five years, the children of U.S. citizens who aren't meeting federal work requirements. There'd be a combined savings of $522 million. * The state is spending $775 million on Medi-Cal healthcare for illegal immigrants, according to the legislative analyst. Of that, $642 million goes into direct benefits. Practically all the rest is paid to counties to administer the program. The feds generally match the state dollar-for-dollar on mandatory programs. So-called emergency services are the biggest state cost: $536 million. Prenatal care is $59 million. Not counted in the overall total is the cost of baby delivery -- $108 million -- because the newborns aren't illegal immigrants. The state also pays $47 million for programs that Washington does not require: Non-emergency care (breast and cervical cancer treatment), $25 million; long-term nursing home care, $19 million; abortions, $3 million. http://articles.latimes.com/2009/feb/02/local/me-cap2?pg=1 State Controller Audit Confirms Massive Wasteful Spending and Abuse in California Prison Medical System It costs $3,850 per year to provide health insurance to the average California worker. CDCR spends $7,000 per inmate per year on healthcare. http://www.californiaprogressreport.com/20..._controlle.html I am not getting my hopes up that the governator will get rid of welfare. This has been a pattern with him for the last few years. He announces these big plans like selling the golden gate bridge and the colosium etc. just to scare people but shortly thereafter he backs down. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RangerM Posted June 8, 2009 Share Posted June 8, 2009 I am not getting my hopes up that the governator will get rid of welfare. This has been a pattern with him for the last few years. He announces these big plans like selling the golden gate bridge and the colosium etc. just to scare people but shortly thereafter he backs down. Even with my right-wing tendencies, I don't believe he should get rid of it outright. I see nothing wrong with a safety net. When it becomes a crutch, is where I have a problem. I think your right about the 'scare tactic' however. My guess is this is a raise in a high-stakes poker game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
suv_guy_19 Posted June 8, 2009 Share Posted June 8, 2009 Even with my right-wing tendencies, I don't believe he should get rid of it outright. I see nothing wrong with a safety net. When it becomes a crutch, is where I have a problem. I would hope that the above is what most of us beleive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RangerM Posted June 8, 2009 Share Posted June 8, 2009 (edited) I would hope that the above is what most of us beleive. It's the location of that line between net and crutch where we will find much of our disagreements. Edited June 8, 2009 by RangerM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
suv_guy_19 Posted June 8, 2009 Share Posted June 8, 2009 That's correct. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fmccap Posted June 8, 2009 Author Share Posted June 8, 2009 A few words from one of our Founding Fathers. I am for doing good to the poor, but I differ in opinion of the means. I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it. In my youth I traveled much, and I observed in different countries, that the more public provisions were made for the poor, the less they provided for themselves, and of course became poorer. And, on the contrary, the less was done for them, the more they did for themselves, and became richer. Benjamin Franklin, On the Price of Corn and Management of the Poor, November 1766 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
suv_guy_19 Posted June 8, 2009 Share Posted June 8, 2009 Too bad it's not 1766. We don't accept the same type of living conditions today in civilized societies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RangerM Posted June 8, 2009 Share Posted June 8, 2009 Too bad it's not 1766. We don't accept the same type of living conditions today in civilized societies. Unfortunately for many SUV, the increase in the standard of living has been accompanied by a disproportionate sense of entitlement. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark B. Morrow Posted June 8, 2009 Share Posted June 8, 2009 Unfortunately for many SUV, the increase in the standard of living has been accompanied by a disproportionate sense of entitlement. It is a sense of entitlement that is not limited to the poor. The same sense of entitlement is why failing CEOs believe they are entitled to multi-million dollar salaries and bonuses. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted June 8, 2009 Share Posted June 8, 2009 (edited) No welfare = increased desperation, street violence and robberies. Edited June 8, 2009 by jpd80 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
napfirst Posted June 8, 2009 Share Posted June 8, 2009 It is a sense of entitlement that is not limited to the poor. The same sense of entitlement is why failing CEOs believe they are entitled to multi-million dollar salaries and bonuses. Straight out of the socialist playbook.....deamonize the people who have succeded in life and who carry the tax burden in this country... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xr7g428 Posted June 8, 2009 Share Posted June 8, 2009 It is a sense of entitlement that is not limited to the poor. The same sense of entitlement is why failing CEOs believe they are entitled to multi-million dollar salaries and bonuses. Surely you felt a little dirty after writing that? What is it exactly that makes lawyers feel entitled to charge what they do? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
suv_guy_19 Posted June 8, 2009 Share Posted June 8, 2009 No welfare = increased desperation, street violence and robberies. Yes....I am starting to become concerned about what is happening. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
macattak1 Posted June 8, 2009 Share Posted June 8, 2009 California contemplates ultimate reform - no welfare "County welfare directors are "in shock" at the very idea of getting rid of CalWORKs, which has been widely viewed as one of the most successful social programs in the state's history, said Bruce Wagstaff, director of the Department of Human Assistance in Sacramento." Most successful how? Peace and Blessings Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
macattak1 Posted June 8, 2009 Share Posted June 8, 2009 It is a sense of entitlement that is not limited to the poor. The same sense of entitlement is why failing CEOs believe they are entitled to multi-million dollar salaries and bonuses. I was never fond and still am not fond of kids that point the finger at others when they are caught with their hand in the cookie jar. Basically, you are saying what? You don't want to fix either situation unless we fix the CEO one first? :wacko: Peace and Blessings Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sixt9coug Posted June 8, 2009 Share Posted June 8, 2009 ive always been in favor of a 5 year maximum welfare claim. Only certain circumstances would warrant exception. 5 yeras is long enough to go to a 4 year scool and get a job. Its enough time to get back on your feet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fmccap Posted June 9, 2009 Author Share Posted June 9, 2009 (edited) Too bad it's not 1766. We don't accept the same type of living conditions today in civilized societies. I guess your right, most don't like real freedom. No welfare = increased desperation, street violence and robberies. No gun laws = less street violence and robberies resulting in giving people more of an incentive to make ends meet. Edited June 9, 2009 by fmccap Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
suv_guy_19 Posted June 9, 2009 Share Posted June 9, 2009 I guess your right, most don't like real freedom. Freedom? Perhaps people who need assistance should have to freedom that is life? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fmccap Posted June 9, 2009 Author Share Posted June 9, 2009 Freedom? Perhaps people who need assistance should have to freedom that is life? They do if they have the will. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
suv_guy_19 Posted June 9, 2009 Share Posted June 9, 2009 If only it were that easy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fmccap Posted June 9, 2009 Author Share Posted June 9, 2009 If only it were that easy. I don't want to hear that crap. I have been through it myself and to this day try to be as independent as I can be. If government collapsed tomorrow I am 100% confident I would survive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
suv_guy_19 Posted June 9, 2009 Share Posted June 9, 2009 That's good, but not all people can do what you did or what I have managed to do. I wish they could, but a lot of them need a great deal of help. It's sad, but it's true. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fmccap Posted June 9, 2009 Author Share Posted June 9, 2009 That's good, but not all people can do what you did or what I have managed to do. I wish they could, but a lot of them need a great deal of help. It's sad, but it's true. They can if they wanted to. I would have to say that some is from there upbringing but still it needs to end somewhere. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.