should there be welfare

I will let my opponent go 1st

Hey - Welcome to DDO! Good luck :)

-- -- --

Ill begin by assuming that this debate is focused around the United States. As such, it's fair to say that we live in a capitalistic society. When we do something that works, we are rewarded with money and subsequently continue doing what works. If we do something that doesn't work, the result is that we lose money, and that's our incentive to drop what doesn't work and try something else. This is how we remain productive and contribute to society, as well as command the supply and demand aspect that rules our economy. With welfare, the incentive works the other way around. The money you receive isn't about your effort - it's about your lack of effort. In that case, the incentive is to do what is rewarded, which is to be dysfunctional (do what doesn't work) or simply not work at all in order to keep being rewarded. The result is a lack of production (work) meaning a lack of contribution to society, and actually a drain on society (the tax payers) who are forced to give money without merit... in other words, legal theft.

The quickest way to ruin a productive society is to create a welfare state. As I said, there is no incentive to work and contribute. For those who wish to work but have lost their jobs, we have the social program of Unemployment. For those who wish to work and can't find work, I submit that the government should utilize the money spent on paying people for nothing and instead create jobs. For those with disabilities or handicaps, we again have various social programs to take care of those individuals, as well as insurance plans, union benefits and other company policies that specifically help in those situations. Now, I could go on regarding social and responsibility, but I'll wait to see how Pro responds before discussing philosophy, politics and other things that we here on DDO like to discuss :)

welfare strives to promote the basic well-being of individuals in need. These efforts usually strive to improve the financial situation of people in need but may also strive to improve their employment chances and many other aspects of their lives. welfare helps people who truly need it like single parents who's spouse died or went to prison. people want to band welfare why? because you don't want to pay the extra money in taxes for people who's too poor to barely eat. yes, their are some people who take advantage of it but why punish the people who truly need it? if you band welfare you might as well band Medicaid and chip and other programs that help people, that use tax payers good earned money for that too.

Pro responds by telling us what welfare aims to do; however, she fails to mention that welfare doesn't work. If it did, then welfare programs would be decreasing after helping people, instead of increasing by fostering more incentives for non-production and the creation of a welfare state. Sure there are some people who "really need" welfare, but again, what's their incentive to work? I'm waiting for Pro's answer. Taxes are essentially legalized theft. In the case of income tax, the government actually penalizes productivity. Welfare rewards the lack of productivity. This is an essential illogical dichotomy that makes welfare immoral. Also, Pro didn't respond to my points about there being other programs to help people in need, and more importantly, my point about the government working to create jobs instead of providing welfare. Since that's not what happens, we can observe how the government is actually oppressing people in this way, and assume that the politicians do it for their own personal gain. "When you rob Peter to pay Paul, you can always be assured of Paul's vote." I'll send this discussion back to Pro for now.

con says what is their incentive to work? well people who actually cant find a job like convicts or single mothers who has small children and cant go out and work right now. its hard to find a stable good paying job this day in age especially when you have kids and bills you need to take care of. yes their are some people who take advantage of welfare but should we let the people suffer who actually need it? their are some people who is on welfare till they find a job. it does help some people get motivated to get a job but some its a small income to put food on their table and clothes on their children's backs while they go out and look for a job. governments should do a better job of monitoring the people on it and help them find other solutions instead of cutting it out completely for the people who really need it. should we really be that worried about were are taxes are going if its helping someone? forget all about the people who take advantage of the program and focus on the people who actually need welfare those are people that matter, they are the people we help support.

Ladies and gentlemen, you'll notice that Pro still hasn't provided one incentive to work when one receives welfare. As such, my point stands. Pro mentions single mothers and convicted criminals who can't find jobs, and harps on an appeal to emotion fallacy explaining that it is society's obligation to help these people. The reality is that people suffer all the time for various reasons, but we can't steal from others to rectify something (especially when the proposed solution doesn't even work). Perhaps the felony offender should have considered the penalty for his crime before committing it, or the single mother should have insisted that her partner wear a condom. If we don't hold people accountable for their actions, we'll wind up with a society where the responsible support and pay for the mistakes of the people who become burdens on society. This will only create a widening disparity between the rich and the poor.

If people know that they're going to be responsible for themselves, they will do their best to make good decisions, work hard and seek success instead of purposefully remaining stagnant to receive help. The problem with welfare once again is that it only helps those who make under a certain amount of money. Therefore once an impoverished individual gets a job, they'll probably be making the same or just above what they were receiving from the government. The difference is that they would have to work which is inconvenient. So, as I said, welfare specifically encourages people to remain stagnant and irresponsible.

Once again, you'll notice that Pro completely ignored my arguments about the government providing jobs instead of hand outs. Additionally, Pro didn't respond to my point about government programs like Unemployment which are also aimed at helping jobless individuals get back on their feet. The government doing "better monitoring" of welfare recipients once again costs tax payers money, so either way the people who do work and are productive are hurt by this system. As such, it's not only unfair but illogical. The reality is that we're not helping anyone - neither the individual or society as a whole - when we provide government welfare. We should continue to seek charitable alternatives and responsible choices.