The Instigator
Noah25
Con (against)
Losing
57 Points
The Contender
Danielle
Pro (for)
Winning
69 Points

Should the US continue to have Welfare?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Vote Here
Con Tied Pro
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: 3/21/2008 Category: Society
Updated: 8 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 3,757 times Debate No: 3331
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (3)
Votes (38)

 

Noah25

Con

People in our country are living off the tax payers money the people who actually have a job! I'm sick of it and it needs to stop! Only those with disabilities should have the privilege to be on welfare! I see people handicapped in fast food restaurants and other places working, but those who have the ability to go out and do something choose not to. I'm sick and tired of it!!!
Danielle

Pro

The welfare system in this country is not perfect and definitely needs reform. However, your generalizations about the people on welfare are incorrect. You've stated, "those who have the ability to go out and do something choose not to." Well what about the people who apply for jobs and don't get hired? What about mothers who cannot afford child care for the time that they would be working, or for whom it's more reasonable (financially) to collect welfare and stay home with their children instead (90% of adult welfare recipients are women, by the way)? On that note, what would you say to a family who's primary bread winner passed away and left no life insurance policy? To continue further, what about families that have members die and leave behind a mountain of debt? I could go on and on... What about people with mental illness, not just physical disabilities as you have mentioned?

Those important (moral) questions aside, the fact remains that the majority of welfare recipients are children. Surely I don't have to go into detail about why some children can not/should not work. To get rid of welfare would mean taking money from poor children - bottom line. Since when are kids responsible for their own financial needs? If that were the case, why would laws regarding child support and child labor laws exist? In this country we deem parents or legal guardians responsible for the fundamental needs of persons aged 18 and under, unless granted legal emancipation. However

I am aware that not everyone on welfare is in dire need. Some do take advantage of the system. However the "laziness" of a minority should not be reason enough to abolish a social program that has helped millions survive. Furthermore, new and improved Welfare-To-Work programs aim to assist welfare recipients rejoin the workforce to improve their own lives and benefit society. The reality is that not everyone chooses to be on welfare; a lot of the time people are stuck in a cycle of poverty and cannot find their way out. A moral and responsible nation would and should work to solve this problem, instead of choosing to abandon those in need because of their ignorant assumptions.

The answer is reform, not abolition.
Debate Round No. 1
Noah25

Con

As I do some-what understand what your saying. By the way when I said illness i ment physical and mentally (something keeping them from working.)
Though I'm sad to say this, but the orphanage is the place to go because these people should have thought about this before they had that child. They also should not have allowed someone to put their name down when getting a credit card. Its not that I dont care I'm just saying that most of our money (people who have a job) are going to laziness and it needs to stop.
Danielle

Pro

My opponent's solution to the welfare crisis is to put children in orphanages instead of providing welfare to the families in need. This solution is significantly flawed for a number of reasons. First, who do you think pays for most orphanages that exist? Tax payers. Not to mention that there are nowhere near enough orphanages in this country to even attempt to put every child who receives welfare into these types of homes. So, it is more than reasonable to assume that new orphanages would have to be built. Again, who will pay for this? Tax payers. It makes absolutely no sense to build thousands of new homes, and transfer millions of children away from their parents and families into these homes, instead of just giving children/families the welfare they need and hope to readmit them into working class society as soon as possible.

As I have mentioned, most people do not CHOOSE to be in a situation where they have to be on welfare. My opponent is suggesting we punish these victims further by taking their children away from them too. Not only would this cause severe psychlogical damage (which may then inhibit them from entering the workforce themselves - especially the children), but it would probably cost tax payers even more money to build these homes, and provide aqeuate living conditions that comply with federal safety regulations. Furthermore, the government would have to pay for orphanage employees, meals, utilities, etc. In the long run, this solution would cost more money than welfare and be a lot less effective.

I maintain the idea that the statement, "these people should have thought about this before they had that child" is completely ignorant and does not represent the majority of situations of people on welfare. As I have mentioned in a previous round, there are countless examples of why people end up on welfare - it's not always the parents/mother's fault. Additionally, I have no idea why my opponent brought up people co-signing for credit cards. That has nothing to do with this debate. And finally, "I'm just saying that most of our money (people who have a job) are going to laziness and it needs to stop." I cannot stress enough - again - the ignorance of this mentality. I thought I had provided adequate insight as to why the myth that most people who are on welfare are "lazy" is completely false. But I suppose my opponent needs factual evidence and links, etc, to support this claim. If this is so, let me know and I will provide proof and whatnot in the final round. Thank you.
Debate Round No. 2
Noah25

Con

You said it was a "myth" that people are lazy? Well I believe you make it sound like thetas not true, but I will tell you that it is.

Now I would like to say that giving a little bit of money to each person will not do much good. Though its like you have a dollar and you give 1 penny to 100 families. That one penny will barely make a difference. If that wont make a difference then why give it to them?

Thanks for the Debate, you obviously have some better points, but I will stand by what I said.
Danielle

Pro

Very well. Since my opponent appears to have conceded in his final argument, I will wrap up my side of the debate with a few myth-busters and other facts as well as my personal opinion. Here we go...

Myth: People on social assistance are lazy and do not want to work.

Reality: Many people on social assistance want to work, but cannot find jobs to support themselves or their families. A study of social assistance recipients by York Univrsity found that the most commonly cited reason for leaving their 'best job' was becaus of a layoff or because the employer went out of business, closed or relocated. That people continue to need social assistance says more about the labor market and changing economy than about the character of people. Lack of work is the largest single reason why people are on welfare, and it probably accounts for more than half of all welfare cases. Disability is the second most common reason, and is a factor in one quarter of all cases.

(Source: http://www.incomesecurity.org...)

And finally, to respond to my opponent's point that giving a lot of families a little bit of money won't make much difference, I am going to provide a link to a simple google search: Welfare Success Stories. Perhaps the 339,000 articles that come up might change your mind.

http://www.google.com...

Ps. I can't believe you're saying that it's better to give no help then a little help. I know it's nearly April but damn... maybe you need to brush up on A Christmas Story or something.

The bottom line is that people need more jobs, not more schooling or ambition. In fact the Daily Bread and Food Bank reports that OVER 40% of food bank clients on welfare have some college or university education. Thus the problem is bigger than "laziness" and people who don't know the facts should not join the ignorant right-wing bandwagon who complain about poor people in need stealing their money. Our country should be ashamed of itself for the way we treat our poor considering our status as a world super power. There are so many lies being spread; for instance, that welfare rates are too generous, mothers on welfare have too many kids, that the welfare system is rife with cheating and fraud, etc.

Except the reality of the situation is clear to people who take the time to reach out and check out the facts. The truth is that all welfare rates are below the poverty line by tens of thousands of dollars. Also, families on welfare tend to be relatively small. "Nearly half of all single parent families on welfare have only one child; another 31% have two children" -- Profiles of Welfare: Myths and Realities, National Council of Welfare, 1998. Plus, the rate of fraud found in the income tax system is approxamitely twenty times higher than the rate of fraud in the welfare system (http://www3.uakron.du...).
Debate Round No. 3
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by SweetBags 8 years ago
SweetBags
i mistakenly put pro first, sorry. every time my last post said pro i ment con, and vice versa.
Posted by SweetBags 8 years ago
SweetBags
the pro just states yet unfounded opinion in the first round, wasting it.
con uses logic and (a little) evidence, doesn't waste the round.
again pro uses opinion, although some logic pokes through, bring up credit cards was a mistake
con again does a good job refuting his opponent and rebuilding his case
pro wastes his final round, saying people are lazy (which is true) and providing an (somewhat inaccurate) analogy. pros best round even though he basically conceded. quite logical
con does another great job rebutting, and provides sources =), good job crystallizing the round.
Posted by Danielle 8 years ago
Danielle
Oh man my third round got all screwy! The last 2 paragraphs were supposed to be after the second cource... damn. I knew I should have reviewed it before submitting lol. Please don't let my misorganization typo take away from the facts and points that I have made. Thanks :)
38 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by MitchyMill 6 years ago
MitchyMill
Noah25DanielleTied
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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by numa 7 years ago
numa
Noah25DanielleTied
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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by JBlake 7 years ago
JBlake
Noah25DanielleTied
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:07 
Vote Placed by theBwerd 8 years ago
theBwerd
Noah25DanielleTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by Jamic 8 years ago
Jamic
Noah25DanielleTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by DorothyDorothy 8 years ago
DorothyDorothy
Noah25DanielleTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by HungryAssassin 8 years ago
HungryAssassin
Noah25DanielleTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by GleefulJoker 8 years ago
GleefulJoker
Noah25DanielleTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by Fantasticlover 8 years ago
Fantasticlover
Noah25DanielleTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by JeffGordon 8 years ago
JeffGordon
Noah25DanielleTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30