3 ms·
Whats the solution? Throw another billion at the problem? Have 80% of it get sucked up by the bureaucracy? And the other 20% is used on surface issues. >socia
by robertAngst 7y ago
Whats the solution? Throw another billion at the problem?
Have 80% of it get sucked up by the bureaucracy? And the other 20% is used on surface issues.
>social welfare is not an altruistic indulgence
Both sides want to help people, the great question is, what is the best way?
Should we spend 1B on bandaids? Or should we start earlier in life, giving people opportunities that keep them off the streets?
- baby 7y agoBoth. Some people will always need help and we need to man up and provide that help.
- bayesian_horse 7y agoThat's exactly the kind of "self-reliancy" and "small government" BS that hasn't worked for the US the past 100 years. Well, it has worked for a small minority which has increasingly enriched itself. If you promote "giving people opportunities that keep them off the streets" as a solution, you profess to a total ignorance of how homelessness in the US (and most developed countries) works. It's not poverty or lack of employment. It's more about mental health and substance abuse. You can offer those people all the jobs you want, without medical and psychological/social help, they don't stand a chance. So yes, "1B on bandaids", like better mental health care for the poor, more social workers, more social housing would be a very good start.