Should welfare recipients have to sell assets before getting benefits?

Asked by: CitizenL
  • Yes, if they have a car, jewelry, or other things that can be sold

    I am not opposed to public assistance for those who truly need it. However, before collecting benefits that gold jewelry, expensive car, and tech gadgets need to be sold. I think you should limit the number of children you have to those you can afford but I do not support government intervention in reproduction. You may think this isn't fair but it isn't fair to collect benefits when you had things that could have been sold first. Don't tell me this isn't happening, I see it all the time, tons of gold jewelry, tattoos, expensive hairdo's etc. Years ago, there was a political cartoon that showed a little red wagon. The wagon was shown holding as many children as it could. Beneath the cartoon was the caption "Who's gonna pull the wagon when everybody wants to ride?" There is the question for you to consider. I am really tired of pulling the wagon for people that just collect from and do not contribute to society. Religious people you can disagree but it is in your own book in 2 Thes. 3:10 "For even when we were with you, this we commanded you, that if any would not work, neither should he eat. It is time for everybody to start pulling that wagon instead of riding in it.

  • Public Assistance Should Be a Temporary Last Resort

    I assume this question is being asked in response to the recent buzz about a woman rec'd public benefits driving a luxury vehicle she had reportedly obtained before she lost income.

    In the case of a person in possession of a luxury vehicle, furs, expensive cocktail jewelry and other items of significant value (we're not talking about grandma's wedding ring, family heirlooms or a 25 year old antique truck here...), yes, I would expect them to live off the sale of liquid assets for as long as possible. PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY

  • No responses have been submitted.

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.