In our society, being a mother is considered one of the most noble positions any woman can occupy. In fact, many people, particularly social conservatives, believe that working women are, in effect, "abandoning" their children. It's a man's job to bring home the bacon! However, this attitude is completely switched in regards to poor women.
Today in my women's studies class, one of the professors from the sociology department came in and spoke about welfare as it has been since 1996. The TANF (Temporary Assistance for Needy Families) was implemented by President Clinton. Basically what happens in our current welfare system is that each state gets a block grant from the government based on their "success rates". Now, the Feds view "success" in a way that makes no sense. A woman may receive TANF is she has children, is below the poverty line, and is working so many hours a week. A mother of 5 must work 20 hours a week. Why isn't this working? The state pays a daycare center $2500 a month to care for her 5 children, and gives her an additional assistance of $400 per month. This amount is the same whether she or one of children is ill. (Either way she wouldn't be at work.) A mother is supposed to stay at home and raise her kids, except poor women who are expected to work their asses off for no money to receive assistance. All of this assistance goes into paying other people to raise her kids. There is a five-year limit on TANF. In five years, her aid is taken away. This woman is still probably only flipping burgers and can barely afford housing, and is virtually being punished for wanting to be a mother, which is what we're supposed to aspire to be.
The Feds see a "success" rate as having more of the caseload working. Or having the caseload drop. Well, the caseload drops after each family hits the five-year limit. These people may be off of welfare but ARE STILL LIVING IN POVERTY. So though more cases are in the workforce, they work to receive the $300 or whatever a month they get. (It really is little more than that.) They only receive aid if they have children. Children NEED THINGS. None of these policies are working.
HOW IS THIS JUSTICE? HOW CAN WE DO THIS TO THE CHILDREN?
Conservatives and Welfare Reform (Why this isn't working)
By luxaurumque - Posted on November 17th, 2006
Tagged: Society
• Broad prosperity
because we don't give a shit. that is what capitalism is about, capitalizing on the misfortune of others. the misfortune of others must be maintained for the whole scam to work. people of privledge want to maintain that prevledge. the moment someone beneath your level of status increases in fortune, your power over them decreases. this is the nature of a capitalist system. it's all about profit, and taking care of yourself, and who cares about the rest. THIS REALLY IS THE SYSTEM THAT WE ARE LIVING UNDER, AND THAT SO MANY OF US ARE SO PROUD TO DEFEND AND CALL OUR OWN; THIS IS WHAT WE'VE BEEN REDUCED TO.
It may be true that the current welfare system isn't working, but it is also true that the welfare systems of the past didn't work. If you provide x amount of money for everyone who has an income that is below $300 a month and start taxing their income .50 for every additional dollar until the benefit is equal to zero you decrease the incentives to work. People who work small amounts will work less, because they have none labor income. People who make more than three hundred dollars a month have less incentive to work, because their wage rate was cut in half.
Furthermore, working 20 hours a week is nothing. Thats four hours five days a week, or a little less than three hours a day. Think about how much free time you would have if you only had to go to class for 20 hours a week, and didn't have to work or study.
This has always been a hard subject with all people. How deserves the most help? There is never a true answer. we all still hear about all the children who are orphaned. about the abused women who leave with there children to nowhere. there needs to be more help, but how is the question