The Instigator
jeanetta98
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
bluesteel
Con (against)
Winning
14 Points

welfare to poor people

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  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 2 votes the winner is...
bluesteel
Voting Style: Open Point System: Select Winner
Started: 11/11/2014 Category: Economics
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,011 times Debate No: 64966
Debate Rounds (2)
Comments (9)
Votes (2)

 

jeanetta98

Pro

Welfare should be given to the most needy of people. Some people just naturally are in better positions, and sometimes it is jot your fault if your company goes under. People need help. And if you say they are abusing the system, only % of recipients are abusing it and they are not the average prison. Plus you'll say they don't work, to get on a lot of the government assistance programs you must have a job. And the " free phones" they provide are old flip phones with 7 hours a month.
bluesteel

Con

Since LBJ's presidency, the United States has spent $15 trillion on welfare, yet it has done absolutely nothing to alleviate the poverty rate. [Cato, http://tinyurl.com...]. Public works and job-training programs are more effective means of reducing poverty because they give people the skills to succeed. [Fisher, http://tinyurl.com...]. Also, using the money to create a government "grant" program (similar to Kickstarter) for funding smart business ideas would create more jobs.
Debate Round No. 1
jeanetta98

Pro

Lots of people go to these job-training programs, but increasing your skills does not mean there are any more jobs available. According to ed.gov going to job-training programs it leads to you getting lower wages. There are not a lot of these programs available or they can not go. Unless you have been there, like me and my mom currently, you won't see how hard it is and how it keeps you functioning. Also, you can create rolling taxes; the more money you earn the more, not by much, more tax pay.
bluesteel

Con

My opponent concedes that the problem is a lack of jobs. Welfare is not the solution to that. Government works projects (like those during the New Deal) and a "grant" program to help kickstart small businesses is the real solution. If you went back to LBJ's day, do you think it would be more effective to spend $15 trillion on welfare or on government works programs and Kickstarter-type campaigns? Obviously the latter. Vote Con to spend taxpayer money wisely; let private charities fill the void.
Debate Round No. 2
9 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 9 records.
Posted by Mirza 2 years ago
Mirza
I understand that it becomes irrelevant; I was rather curious.
Posted by bluesteel 2 years ago
bluesteel
@Mirza

What I believe is immaterial to the debate. My argument in the debate is that if we had never spent any money on welfare, our nation would be better off.

If this were more than a 500-word-limit debate, I assume Pro could have brought up issues of equity, such as that even if welfare achieves no poverty alleviation, people who can't provide for themselves should still be guaranteed food, housing, etc. But given the simplistic nature of this debate, it comes down to whether you think we should prioritize free handouts or job creation, and I argued for the latter.
Posted by Mirza 2 years ago
Mirza
bluesteel, Do you think that welfare should be abolished entirely, or simply reformed to be more restricted? If the latter is your position, then you seem to agree with the Ins.
Posted by cheyennebodie 2 years ago
cheyennebodie
I disagree with bluesteel also. If history means anything Roosevelts new deal caused a 10 year great depression. How about leaving the money with the people that earned it. They will redistribute it the right way. Freely. They will build bigger companies, hire more people, and spend money much more wisely than government ever dreamed of doing.

When a human being gets his hands on money he did not earn, he will never use it wirely. Government only spends money for political purposes. To effect elections. You would think $15,000,000,000,000.00 would have taught us something.

But every year 1/2 the people still vote democrat.
Posted by cheyennebodie 2 years ago
cheyennebodie
jean......... Why are you blaming others for your lifestyle. You made the choices that put you in that position. People gave a lot to charities before government got involved. Probably 80% of welfare is waste. All that money had to be confiscated from the economy. That is where the extra money for charities went to.If you are taking confiscated wealth ,then you are a freeloader.No one forced you to walk into a welfare office. I was raised by a single mother. With 4 young kids. She walked in integrity. Never took welfare. Raised us from money she earned, not stolen money.That was a privilege to be raised that way.
Posted by jeanetta98 2 years ago
jeanetta98
If you don't like me oh well, and I know what I stand for and that helping people like me is important. If people were not so cheep and would donate to charities that would work, but people don't. So they are forced to rely on government to not lose everything.
Posted by jeanetta98 2 years ago
jeanetta98
People on welfare are not freeloaders, they are trying to keep there kids with a roof over their heads and food on there plates. And charities can't always help all the people who need it because they do not receive enough funding or donations. Never be afraid to ask for help if you are on the verge of being on the street. @cheyennebodie
Posted by cheyennebodie 2 years ago
cheyennebodie
Who determiones if a person is poor enough? Government.t is to their advantage to have the most dependants on them as they can get away with. How is it ever ethical to confiscate by force wealth from someone and give to a person who did not earn it or deserve it.

The moral way to do it is charities. Not government welfare. Anyone who takes government welfare is a freeloader. I would have more respect fpor a person who would walk the neighborhood asking for mooney than someone who sneaks into a welfare office and get money off people that were forced to give it.
Posted by Ariesx 2 years ago
Ariesx
Welfare should be changing the mind frame of America. Although the middle class has been crushed, we need them to be given a fighting spirit. Motivate them. Tell them that they can actually work there way up in capitalism.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by 9spaceking 2 years ago
9spaceking
jeanetta98bluesteel
Who won the debate:-Vote Checkmark
Reasons for voting decision: con shows welfare cannot be done because US has economic hardships, and pro refutes his own case.
Vote Placed by UchihaMadara 2 years ago
UchihaMadara
jeanetta98bluesteel
Who won the debate:-Vote Checkmark
Reasons for voting decision: Pro refutes much of her own case in admitting that factors beyond what welfare can solve are primarily responsible for the United States' economic hardships. Meanwhile Con shows us that welfare is overly expensive and that its alternatives are more effective. Neg vote.