As I said, I work in an inner city school...3rd poorest in the country, so I also see it everyday.
In general, I don't think it should be allowed, but I can think of a few reasons why it should.
1.) If people are starving in the streets, my guess is crime would be even higher.
2.) Raising a child is a full-time job (I'm thinking of single mothers/fathers), especially if you have no family support network.
3.) Disability is an exception.
4.) The moral argument (should sick people be untreated because they are a drag on society).
I'm not saying any of these is a particular good reason, and I agree with the premise that those on welfare should be required to be in job training or providing community service. However, I disagree with the idea that all people who are on Medicaid are not doing anything productive (even if they aren't working). There are also mental health factors (depression) that play a role...but I'm going into Counseling, so I'm probably biased in this regard.
I'm at home now so hopefully I'll be able to take the time to give you a response which you may or not agree with, but at least be able to understand.
Before I get to your specific points I'll give you my perspective so you can get a feel for where I'm coming from.
Math and Detroit are symptoms of a long standing problem which has become increasingly problematic. It is a racial issue, and it's bizarre to deny it. Most poor uneducated people in the slums of large cities are black. That doesn't mean that they are inherently inferior, because that's just plain dumb to put forward seriously.
It is a historical situation where blacks were shunned and effectively allowed to live in isolated communities, akin to the ghettos that Jews were forced to live.
Back in the '50s and before you weren't going to get very far most of the time in the White Mans World. You were born poor and ignorant and were expected to die that way.
"Don't get uppity with me boy" was a very real problem for aspiring blacks.
Well, the back of the bus thing was rightfully challenged and finally put to rest. That didn't mean that things substantially improved though.
At this point a few things could have been done, but IMO one of the biggest mistakes was the "Great Society" concept. In essence the solution was to throw money at people figuring they would bootstrap themselves out of their situation because of course people would want to use it to improve themselves.
That was naive in the extreme. It was in essence "Give a man a fish and... well we're sorry but have another fish".
People who are given money and nothing else take the cash and run. In this case it was all about disadvantaged blacks and they got the loot.
What happened? Denial and sloth. That people were still living in slums was the fault of anything but the enlightened vision of a happy world. It completely ignored human nature, not some idealized Noble Savage vision, but that if you give money with no strings attached you are going to get generations of people who are going to expect money with no strings attached.
At least as bad IMO is that this wasn't hope, it was dependence and stagnation.
Now lest someone else comes up with "you can't just say all people are like that", note I didn't. Some did take advantage of the situation and moved on. Today their families don't live in inner city Detroit.
Checks with no serious prospects of achievement is evil. It's a drug which makes people dependent on a system and even worse a sense of entitlement. You owe me.
Well, no, but in spite of that I do not wish to substitute one cause of misery for another. I don't wish to just end social programs, but they need to take into account the reality of human nature and the circumstances of the time.
Growing up in the inner city myself where everyone was poor and having spent more years working with them all over the world for more years than I care to mention have taught me a few things.
First, people are people first, and wage earners second. There are dirty rotten scoundrels who take the check and have no intention of doing anything worthwhile, and there are those who's only goal is to have more no matter who they have to crush to get it. Neither is a good example of a decent person.
At this one place I occasionally work, I'm the white guy. Just me. They have a sign in the workplace that says "Work harder, millions on medicaid depend on you." Wait, wouldn't that be angry white men? No, it's young to middle aged black people living poor. So why the angst? Because while they are working they hear how someone is trying to work the system and what fools other blacks are who carry their own weight.
The last thing they want to hear is a lecture from some white guy tripping on guilt saying how they should be understanding because it's all the history of racism and they need to be tolerant. They'd kick that person's ass and I'd be inclined to help.
So the reality of the situation is we've created a culture where many feel it's tradition to do nothing. Again, this isn't universal. "They all are that way" isn't at all what I said, BUT there is a strong subculture which looks upon hard working blacks as being the white man's tool and if you are smart you are going to get the shit beat out of you. That's a core issue. It's not white people keeping blacks out of school. It isn't the lack of willing teachers or funds. It's just not cool to get educated. Precisely what social program will fix that? Try some more education so that people can be educated to be educated? Cry some more for the past?
It's shameful that we've made so many people slaves to the state for so long that they see a check as a right.
For the nth time, I'm not talking about people like you who are taking advantage of a situation to better yourself or someone who hit the skids and needs a hand for a bit. Neither am I griping about people who would choose to improve themselves, but either because of serious mental or physical illness they cannot. IMO a civilized society needs to care for those who cannot do so for themselves. The flip side of that coin is that civilized people need to contribute to that society by working in it when possible. It's not an option.
That brings me to your points and some suggestions/thoughts about them.
First your concern about people starving and becoming criminals as a result.
Well, that would be a serious issue if I proposed that people just be booted with no recourse. That would be as bad as expecting people to magically find work where there is no job, or making them dependent on the government when they could be adding to our country instead of perpetually taking. Instead, give people the
reward of work for their money. That ought not to be a bizarre concept. You, who are trying to improve yourself, have the satisfaction of doing something well, of taking control of your life. You can eventually move beyond your situation. You have hope. There is no dishonor in an honest days work.
But alas, it's not conforming to a pathological norm which is so often seen.
Then it becomes necessary to teach lessons which can be understood. If you work you eat. If you work better, you can earn more. That extra you made is because you deserved it, and while we're at it we can teach you things to better yourself. You can have a shot at a decent future, but you must be the one to do it. A social program cannot give self respect. That's very much a carrot and a stick.
That is the "why" of making capable people work. In reality, few people will sit around and starve if they can avoid it. If they would be criminals before working, it's entirely likely that they already are.
I've addressed a couple of your other concerns already such as the sick and disabled. I'm willing to pony up the money to take care of them.
The single parent issue... that's a bit more complicated because how that's handled depends on circumstances. If a parent has a disabled child and is taking care if it, then I'm for helping. How much depends on the particulars. I'd rather pay the mom to stay home with a severely mentally or physically handicapped child than to require her to leave him or her in the hands of someone who doesn't know the particular needs of that individual. To me it's a "suck it up thing", and I mean for us not them.
To go to the other extreme though, I can tell you how to piss off a working poor black woman. Let another on welfare tell her she's going to have another baby. Stand back, seriously.
Vaginas are neither clown cars, nor are they supposed to be a means to get a bigger check. Breeding in poverty breeds poverty, and I'm sorry but that's reality. At some point it has to stop, and some may find this objectionable, but while on medicaid a woman needs to be on birth control, period. IUDs, Depo Provera, whatever. I've heard complaints that it is a restriction on reproductive rights, but what about bringing a child into the world who is wanted mostly because he's an extra shot of money in the check? That's OK? That's pathetic.
Well, even what I proposed were to be enacted today your point about single parents remain. Well, what does everyone else do when they have kids and need money? They find someone else to take care of them. I would support good day care (where we could sneak in good nutrition and care and maybe a bit of education) so the parent could take advantage of the same opportunities others have.
So we have people working. We're still paying them, right? It never ends, right?
I don't think that's correct. The aim is to break the
cycle of poverty by creating a work ethic and an appreciation for education over time. If people work and are invested in their own well being and community, then they will take a more active stance against the tragic crimes that happen there. The people themselves become important, not the dependency on a failed system which generates more resignation than inspiration. We can also (seriously this time) invest in people and businesses in areas which show themselves to be making a serious effort. That offers sustainability, and an example to others.
To sum it up, we need to give the fish to those who cannot ever feed themselves and make sure those who can learn to fish for themselves do so, and give them a place to make a good catch.
That's hope and that's change.