I believe this is why hardcore libs want a more"European" America

[Ronin13]

Ronin, mon ami, I wasn't trying to put words in your mouth. That's why I asked a clarifying question. First, I think that we're all in alignment with the desired goal, to reduce the numbers of people on government assistance and reduce the amount of money that the Feds and States spend on government assistance. I do see that there's some disagreement as to the efficacy of suggested methods. For one, I disagree that there are jobs out there for welfare recipients, as there aren't enough jobs out there for people who want to work. I'd would surmise that of the minimum wage jobs that are out there that a substantial percentage are not full time, to avoid having to provide benefits to employees. For single parents on assistance, the cost of childcare while working can be a disincentive to work outside of the home. We'd also have to change the laws that allow someone to earn up to $1000 per month and still collect welfare to reduce overall costs.

Regarding the lifestyles afforded by welfare and by minimum wage jobs, it's true that no one is entitled to earn a comfortable living, at any time. Both lifestyles are poverty level, and by definition those are uncomfortable lifestyles. There are those who are self-directed to work hard enough to escape the generational poverty trap, and we applaud those people who succeed, but those numbers are low enough that there is no significant impact on the numbers who continue on. If we want to reduce government assistance and end up with an enhanced workforce, we have to find ways to teach the majority during childhood, how to escape that trap. We also need to follow through on employment once adulthood is reached

Okay, glad you weren't trying to put words in my mouth. I agree but also have to give the harsh, stark reminder of rights guaranteed in this country: You have the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. You do not have the right to be comfortable in your living. You do not have the right to not be poor. You are not guaranteed the right to succeed- some do, some fail, that's life, no one said it was easy. As far as parents (single or otherwise)- no one forced them to have children. We as a society, and I feel bad for the unfortunate kids, don't get me wrong, have eroded away responsibility- if you can't afford a child, abstain! I know that's asking something that's not realistic, but you do that dance you have to accept the potential consequences of doing so- kinda like jumping onto a bull's back. I have sympathy for children who grow up poor, I have no sympathy for parents who made the choice to take the risk, had a kid, and can't care for it without assistance from the tax payers and (key here) have no desire to rise above the system of assistance. I understand hard times can befall anyone- and I'm not knocking them, I'm knocking the lazy folks who don't try and get off the gov tit. Look at countries that lack a welfare system- Afghanistan for example- they live within their means as they can afford, seems to me like they get along fine without an Escalade and a Sony 40" TV... that's where I get a little angry over this whole bullshit- live within your means- if you make $9.50 an hour, live like you make $9.50 an hour! Jr. doesn't need a fucking XBox.