- Joined
- Mar 23, 2005
- Messages
- 44,482
- Reaction score
- 448
Do you believe long-term dependence on government welfare creates or encourages strong, intact families?
No, neither of them.
Welfare programs are needy for low income families.
Do you believe long-term dependence on government welfare creates or encourages strong, intact families?
It's about vouchers (like coupons from the government) to help pay for private schooling for poor children who live in communities where the public schools are failing them.
Are you starting a new topic?
I wouldn't recommend political science for a major if you're expecting a real job after graduation.
I know from experience. My bachelor's degree is in political science. It's not worth much in the job market.
I'm curious where you found your definition of welfare state.I disagree with conservative writer about between welfare state and single parent.
Under my definition, welfare state is other word for socialist and majority of population receive public assistance, that can push taxes to much higher like 50%. In USA, majority of population aren't in welfare state and the welfare programs are restricted to low income families, however some middle class may receive child insurance under government if their private insurance is so expensive to cover the children.
I'm curious where you found your definition of welfare state.
Dictionary.com defines welfare state as:
"1. state in which the welfare of the people in such matters as social security, health and education, housing, and working conditions is the responsibility of the government"
Businessdictionary.com definition:
"Political system based on the premise that the government (and not the individual, corporations, or the local community) has the responsibility for the well being of its citizens, by ensuring that a minimum standard of living is within everyone's reach. This commitment is translated into provision of universal and free education, universal medical care, insurance against disability, sickness, and unemployment, family allowances for income supplement, and old age pensions."
Are you sure about that? If fewer students attend public schools, then the public schools won't need as much money to operate, right?I don't support school voucher because it take money away from public school and make them so much worse.
Orphanages aren't used as much now.No, I'm just showing off about how awesome is gay families and they are happy to take care of children from adoption when not enough heterosexual couples don't want adopt and much cheaper than orphanage. We need stop government discrimination on taxes and give gay families to have a tax break as heterosexual couples do.
Are you sure about that? If fewer students attend public schools, then the public schools won't need as much money to operate, right?
Is it truly lack of money that makes public schools worse?
School vouchers are existed in some states.
Not only for private school, the voucher can be used for out of district school.
Not in many places yet.
"As of October 2011, Louisiana, Indiana, Ohio, Wisconsin (Milwaukee), and the District of Columbia offer low-income students vouchers.
Some states offer vouchers to special needs students allowing them to attend non-public schools. Since the enactment of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) declaring that all special needs students have a right to a free and appropriate education, school districts have occassionally turned to non-public schools that can better meet the educatoinal needs of certain special needs students. But 8 states have offered to fund all special needs students that wish to attend a non-public school. These states are Arizona (being challenged in court), Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Louisiana, Oklahoma, Ohio, and Utah.
School Choice: Vouchers
Orphanages aren't used as much now.
"While there are still some orphanages in the United States today, child welfare systems are less likely to use orphanages as placements for children and youth in foster care. Preferred placements include family settings and, when necessary, residential facilities that include services to help the children and youth reunify with their families or find other permanent families."
Orphanages
The state still pays foster parents to take care of the children.
If there aren't enough heterosexual couples who want to adopt children, why are the prospective parents on such long waiting lists?
There is public housing all over the place. It's not always reserved to inner city high rise complexes. There's a trend in some areas to scatter the residents throughout neighborhoods, to make it less noticeable.I just found from school that where I learned about welfare and social programs so I just give my own definition about welfare state, that relative to real definition.
If USA was welfare state, there should be MANY MANY MANY public housing projects over country, even suburbs and I don't see anywhere, except for few or several in inner city.
There is public housing all over the place. It's not always reserved to inner city high rise complexes. There's a trend in some areas to scatter the residents throughout neighborhoods, to make it less noticeable.
How Long Is The Wait?....I never heard about prospective parents being on long waiting list so care to post article? I haven't hear about it, at least in my state.
How Long Is The Wait?
I also personally know several adoptive, foster, and waiting parents. The adoptive families go into debt and wait long times, and face many disappointments (birth mothers who change their minds). If you're not a rich celebrity, it can be hard.
There are 4,000 families in Birmingham's Section 8 housing.There are no public housing projects in all suburbs in Birmingham metro, only limited to Birmingham city limit and possibly in Bessemer.
Last time for public housing projects expansion was in 1960's after started in 1930's.
That's the social/economic change. Many unwed mothers choose to keep and raise their children themselves now. Not as many women put up their children for adoption. Also, abortion reduces the number of available babies.Oh, that's interesting and thanks for sharing.
That's not surprised about adoption has long waiting period because I thought there were a lot of mothers give the children for adoption.
Do you think that it's fair for low income families to be stuck with lousy schools for their children? Shouldn't they have an option to pick better schools? If the poor kids get better educations they might have a better chance at finding good jobs and getting out of the poverty cycle.Yes, I'm sure because some teachers could lose their job if public school gets less money. I consider private school as luxury and extra service that you have to pay. I know some teachers are hardworking at public school and I don't want them to be gone. In many private school, the children have to pass the entrance exam and if they fail so it is less likely for them to be in and if rest of private school (possible in southern states) are religious so it isn't option for children from non-religious families. I feel that education in public school and private school are not much difference and I'm just smart as other students who come from private school....
There are 4,000 families in Birmingham's Section 8 housing.
Housing Authority of the Birmingham District
Section 8 rental propertiess available in Birmingham area:
Search Rentals
Birmingham public housing development:
Housing Authority of the Birmingham District
That's the social/economic change. Many unwed mothers choose to keep and raise their children themselves now. Not as many women put up their children for adoption. Also, abortion reduces the number of available babies.
If you notice, many couples now adopt babies from other countries because there aren't enough in the USA.
Egad. Can you not tell the difference between a columnist and the paper that published his column? I don't like WND, either, but I do like Thomas Sowell, and you can find his books at the library yourself.
His material is very well researched and back up by careful scholarship.
Do you think that it's fair for low income families to be stuck with lousy schools for their children? Shouldn't they have an option to pick better schools? If the poor kids get better educations they might have a better chance at finding good jobs and getting out of the poverty cycle.
What is Egad?
I don't agree with anyone who blame on welfare programs for increase of social inequality, especially single parent. Why are you make point at black people only? I have seen plenty of single parent, regardless on races and not all of them are on welfare, even some of my friends are single parent and they are not on welfare. There is big reason because change in societies so don't think could be avoided, except for family counseling. The divorce have different reasons and people that I know are victim of domestic violence divorced. Do you think that we need complete abolish of welfare programs, impose a Jim Crow law, etc? For me, no way and it is AGAINST on my political view.
I noticed that you always blame on Democratic Party and liberal policies. It make more difficult for me to trust and you are not neutral person who have critical thinking about both parties.
Thomas Sowell is conservative and I don't agree with conservative views at most time.
No, neither of them.
Welfare programs are needy for low income families.