The Instigator
scriptcoder
Pro (for)
Winning
22 Points
The Contender
billbobjoesmithjr23
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points

Most People on Welfare are Lazy

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/26/2010 Category: Society
Updated: 7 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 11,557 times Debate No: 11559
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (5)
Votes (4)

 

scriptcoder

Pro

Hello everyone. I hope this will be a stimulating discussion.

It is my position that the majority of people on the government assistance program known as welfare are on it because they are lazy. This may seem an offensive position to take at first glance, however it is the most rational explanation for why so many people are on the welfare system.

Let's look at reason why people go on welfare first. We can assume that they have either lost a job recently or have been kicked out of their house for some reason. For both cases the person has lost a means of support. They have no income coming in to buy food and pay for housing or have no one doing that for them. At this point some will turn to welfare and allow that system to pay for them.

The reasonable person will ask: why do these people not get a job to support themselves? Why do they have to leech off of the system? A popular response is to say that there are no jobs available. That the person has tried to find work but has failed. This excuse is flawed. There is almost always a job available if one is willing to put aside pride.

Places such as McDonalds and other fast food restaurant hire any time. They will also hire anyone. Many people protest suggesting fast food saying that Fast Food does not pay enough to maintain a comfortable lifestyle. However the solution to that problem is to change your lifestyle. If you can no longer afford a big screen television then don't buy it. Instead of eating out buy groceries at the local grocery store and make food.

If people learn not to live beyond their means they will soon realize that a temporarily stop at McDonalds will not kill them. Going on welfare is nothing more then leeching the system while giving back nothing to society.
billbobjoesmithjr23

Con

The thing is that when people see that they get help from the government they are afraid that they will not get wellfare later on and they wont have any money. Because if you get a Job wellfare is gone because they think you have enough money. And if their job lays them of then they have to loose everything they on that costs money monthly.
Debate Round No. 1
scriptcoder

Pro

I would like to thank my opponent for accepting this debate.

Before I post further arguments I would like to ask my opponent to use proper grammar. I cannot understand what my opponent posted in round one. It is important in debates to ensure your opponent knows what you're saying, otherwise how can he respond?

It is obvious that my position is the harder to prove. There is undeniable proof that welfare helps many unfortunate people who suffer from both mental and physical disabilities. I do not wish to target them or pock ridicule at their suffering. Welfare exists for the people who are weak (for whatever reason) and cannot support themselves. They are not the target of my statement "Most People on Welfare are Lazy".

Instead I target those who are on welfare and have no physical or mental disability that prevents them from working a basic job. What is a basic job? It's a job where you require no skills whatsoever. McDonalds is such a job as are other skill-less jobs such as services in cleaning, yard maintenance, construction (almost) and so on.

A great argument that is used usually in these types of debates is the skills argument: "People on welfare can't get a job because they don't have the proper education or skills!" This is a valid point. However it can easily be disproved. Thousands of immigrants flooded western nations back in the 70's and 80's. They came without skills and with basic high school education. However they flourished. They got jobs in coffee shops, maid and restaurant cleaning services, and other "demeaning jobs". If a skill-less immigrant can do it then why can't a skill-less American?

It is obvious that many don't want to work 40-60 hours a week at McDonald's. I do not mean to be unsympathetic- I would hate working there as well. However if you are in a position where the only thing you can offer a potential employer is your time and basic use of your feet and hands then that's what you've gotta do. Millions of others go to work in these places everyday. If you are fit, able, and mentally-sound you should be right there beside them.
billbobjoesmithjr23

Con

First off I DON'T LIKE GRAMMER NAZI'S!!!!! OK lets stick to the topic. Tell me what would you do if you have no car no house no money and no job. I now what you would say " Look for a job" but it is hard because you have to compete with millions of people who are looking for jobs and by the way immigrant are not unskilled they are very skilled
Debate Round No. 2
scriptcoder

Pro

It has become obvious that my opponent is not serious about this debate. He asks simple questions that can easily be disproved and delights in his use of impossible to understand sentence structure. However I do thank him for constructing a second round paragraph that I can somewhat understand. It is unfortunate that he advances no arguments and no rationale.

I will humor him and answer his question. The question is: "Tell me what would you do if you have no car no house and no job".

Let's begin. First we must find out why and how I have come to this predicament. What happened in order to place me in this position? Begin fired from a job? Kicked out of the family? I understand that many causes of poverty are not the fault of the person. The people who grow up in poverty and receive little education should receive a limited amount of social assistance, just enough to give them some skills and get them to a job.

This debate is about those who are on welfare and make no attempt to support themselves. If I personally found myself without a job, no car (I don't have one), and no house (I rent) I would perform the following actions:

1) Apply to every single Fast Food place in my area.
2) Find a cheap room to rent.
3) Take out a small loan to pay for the first month of rent.
4) Limit my expenses to the bare essentials.

Those alone would solve my job and my housing dilemma. It is logical to assume that I would quickly tire of working at a fast food place, therefore I would start working on learning skills that can help me get better employment. The library is a free resource for all and has books on: carpentry, computer repair, web design, computer programming, basic electrician, basic construction, basic maintenance and more. Since books are not sufficient to learn "real world" skills I would also attempt to find a Continuing Education course that could teach me employable skills.

I hope that answers my opponents question.

What are people on welfare doing all day? What positive action do they contribute to society? I posit nothing. Instead time and time again we hear of these "welfare moms" (1)(2) who collect their welfare check and do nothing but jump from one man to another getting pregnant. How does giving them a monthly check help them? It merely reinforces and rewards their behavior.

I firmly believe in helping those who need help. The man fired from his 20-year job may not know what to do. The uneducated mother of three needs help for her children. However it doesn't mean that we should simply throw money at them. The helping hand of welfare should be extended with certain restrictions attached. These may include:

1) You must train in a trade, or participate in an apprenticeship, while on welfare. You must obtain decent marks and you must complete the training in a reasonable amount of time.
2) You must become a limited employee of the state while you are supported by the state. People who collect welfare should do things such as pickup trash, sweep dirty streets, clean graffiti, or help in building social housing.

Welfare needs to be a temporary fall back for people in need. Unfortunately it has been taken advantage of. People no longer want to get a job because they won't make more then welfare gives them and they'll have to work. These people are lazy, they give nothing back to society and their way of life must be abolished.

1) http://www.sodahead.com...
2) http://www.postchronicle.com...
billbobjoesmithjr23

Con

billbobjoesmithjr23 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
5 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Posted by RoyLatham 7 years ago
RoyLatham
Con basically failed to show up. Forfeit loses conduct.
Posted by Cody_Franklin 7 years ago
Cody_Franklin
As Con, I would've gone the route of saying that they're simply parasites - whether they're willing (lazy) or unwilling (unlucky) is irrelevant, though chances are that most of them are simply products of bad fortune.
Posted by cactusbin 7 years ago
cactusbin
Neither debater really convinced me either way..

Who had better conduct?
Pro was much more professional

Who had better spelling and grammar?
Pro.

Who made more convincing arguments?
Con dropped too many and didn't really make any good arguments

Who used the most reliable sources?
Neither used any sources
Posted by scriptcoder 7 years ago
scriptcoder
Not a troll although I will admit that I am playing devil's advocate. If my opponent fails to defeat me I'll post a few comments at the end saying why most people on welfare are not lazy and are instead there because they have no other choice.

I've been arguing with a lot of people about this recently and I want to use their points here and seek counter-points from my opponent.

Thanks.
Posted by Zetsubou 7 years ago
Zetsubou
Taken by a troll.

I'm with Con here, only some of them are "lazy". Welfare won't last though.
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by Atheism 6 years ago
Atheism
scriptcoderbillbobjoesmithjr23Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:50 
Vote Placed by RoyLatham 7 years ago
RoyLatham
scriptcoderbillbobjoesmithjr23Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:50 
Vote Placed by JBlake 7 years ago
JBlake
scriptcoderbillbobjoesmithjr23Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by cactusbin 7 years ago
cactusbin
scriptcoderbillbobjoesmithjr23Tied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:50