• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Welfare Scratcher

Joe Steel

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 30, 2007
Messages
3,054
Reaction score
560
Location
St. Louis, Missouri, USA
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
Republicans have shown a great deal of concern in recent years about the government debt. That concern has been manifested in various proposals to cut spending but none to raise revenue. Democrats generally are opposed to any proposal which will not include at least some revenue. Bringing the two sides together has been difficult, if not impossible. An idea which could work, however, would be voluntary revenue increases. Here's one example.

Temporary Aid to Needy Families (TANF) was created in the late '90s as a replacement for traditional welfare. It's funded by federal grants to the States. Benefits are low and of limited in duration and beneficiaries often have to perform some sort of service in exchange for the benefits. That can be used to generate new revenue.

What if the States included in their state lotteries a scratcher game which would allow the winner to have the services of a poor person? The poor person would sign-up for the game in exchange for an increase in his TANF benefit. The player would buy a scratcher for, say, $20.00, $50.00 or more. The prizes could be a day, a week or month of a poor person's time. If the player won, he'd choose a poor person from among a catalog according to the skills he needed. The State would contact the poor person and tell him to report for work at the player's home or place of business for the required time. He'd clean the pool, cut grass or maybe watch the kids. Whatever the player wanted.

Economically, the game could be a big winner. Rich players could get a poor person for a week for only $20.00. That's a good deal better than paying minimum wage and FICA. The State would have to pay increased TANF benefits but might be able to generate millions of dollars in lottery revenue.
 

WCH

Believer
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 30, 2013
Messages
30,944
Reaction score
9,015
Location
The Lone Star State.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Sort of a temporary indentured servant?

If it gets lazy Americans off their collective asses.....:cool:
 

WCH

Believer
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 30, 2013
Messages
30,944
Reaction score
9,015
Location
The Lone Star State.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative

TheNextEra

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 14, 2006
Messages
16,575
Reaction score
6,767
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left
Republicans have shown a great deal of concern in recent years about the government debt. That concern has been manifested in various proposals to cut spending but none to raise revenue. Democrats generally are opposed to any proposal which will not include at least some revenue. Bringing the two sides together has been difficult, if not impossible. An idea which could work, however, would be voluntary revenue increases. Here's one example.

Temporary Aid to Needy Families (TANF) was created in the late '90s as a replacement for traditional welfare. It's funded by federal grants to the States. Benefits are low and of limited in duration and beneficiaries often have to perform some sort of service in exchange for the benefits. That can be used to generate new revenue.

What if the States included in their state lotteries a scratcher game which would allow the winner to have the services of a poor person? The poor person would sign-up for the game in exchange for an increase in his TANF benefit. The player would buy a scratcher for, say, $20.00, $50.00 or more. The prizes could be a day, a week or month of a poor person's time. If the player won, he'd choose a poor person from among a catalog according to the skills he needed. The State would contact the poor person and tell him to report for work at the player's home or place of business for the required time. He'd clean the pool, cut grass or maybe watch the kids. Whatever the player wanted.

Economically, the game could be a big winner. Rich players could get a poor person for a week for only $20.00. That's a good deal better than paying minimum wage and FICA. The State would have to pay increased TANF benefits but might be able to generate millions of dollars in lottery revenue.
The problem I see with this is the "employer" would have to adhear to all rules that apply to regular employers regarding treatment of the "employee". If they didn't, this could open up many doors of abuses, etc. of the employee.

Not a bad idea, but given that the employer would have to learn, follow, or even at times get hit by regulations, I don't see it being worth their time.
 

Joe Steel

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 30, 2007
Messages
3,054
Reaction score
560
Location
St. Louis, Missouri, USA
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
The problem I see with this is the "employer" would have to adhear to all rules that apply to regular employers regarding treatment of the "employee". If they didn't, this could open up many doors of abuses, etc. of the employee.

Not a bad idea, but given that the employer would have to learn, follow, or even at times get hit by regulations, I don't see it being worth their time.
The program would be implemented in red states and would apply to poor persons so I'd expect it to suspend all employer regulation.
 

TheNextEra

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 14, 2006
Messages
16,575
Reaction score
6,767
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left
The program would be implemented in red states and would apply to poor persons so I'd expect it to suspend all employer regulation.
Then that is just silly since all that would do is cause abuses by employers. I wouldn't support such a plan.
 

justabubba

long standing member
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 22, 2005
Messages
51,140
Reaction score
32,851
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
win a poor person



hell of a game. can't wait to see the reality show
poor, uneducated recipient is obliged to perform work assignments at the direction of the 'winner'
no way that could turn into an abusive situation [/sarcasm]
 

Joe Steel

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 30, 2007
Messages
3,054
Reaction score
560
Location
St. Louis, Missouri, USA
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
win a poor person

hell of a game. can't wait to see the reality show
poor, uneducated recipient is obliged to perform work assignments at the direction of the 'winner'
no way that could turn into an abusive situation [/sarcasm]
America was settled, in large measure, by indentured servants and settlers under contract to corporations. It was built, to some extent, by slave labor. Welfare scratchers are consistent with the finest American traditions. If there's a little abuse, we can think of it as The American Way.
 

justabubba

long standing member
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 22, 2005
Messages
51,140
Reaction score
32,851
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
America was settled, in large measure, by indentured servants and settlers under contract to corporations. It was built, to some extent, by slave labor. Welfare scratchers are consistent with the finest American traditions. If there's a little abuse, we can think of it as The American Way.
excellent
call the reality show 'modern slavery'
a tribute to our nation's heritage could be the tag line
with any luck we will be able to watch the grimy old white dude - the 'winner' - raping the young black female in keeping with that heritage
again, great idea [/s]
 

Joe Steel

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 30, 2007
Messages
3,054
Reaction score
560
Location
St. Louis, Missouri, USA
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
excellent
call the reality show 'modern slavery'
a tribute to our nation's heritage could be the tag line
with any luck we will be able to watch the grimy old white dude - the 'winner' - raping the young black female in keeping with that heritage
again, great idea [/s]
Actually, it might be.

Thomas Jefferson believed a slave woman producing one slave baby every two years was more valuable than a slave working in the field. That creates a whole new perspective on his relationship with Sally Hemings.
 
Top Bottom