re: How to stop inner city violence

Dump a toxic load of crack onto the streets

That sounds good in theory, but I don't know how you'd enforce it.

quote:

---

People have to be forced to work or literally starve/ go homeless.

---

Agree, but then a line has to be drawn. Ok, say welfare can be given to people with disabilities. But what makes something a serious enough disability? Because a lot of the people abusing welfare have orders from doctors not to work. Who (and at what level) in the government is the decider on whether someone's disability/doctor's orders are legit or not? That opens up a whoooole lot of liability since you can't always "see" very real disabilities.

quote:

---

If you have a kid, you should be forced to house and feed them. If you can't pay for it yourself, then you are going to be forced to work to pay for it.

---

Then young mothers come into play. FWIW, I 100% agree with you.. but how do we implement this? Do we open government run daycare centers? Well okay, now we have to create an entire system around it like we do with public schools because you can't just open a "government daycare" and throw some staff in it. There must be health standards, employee standards, etc. And where does the funding for these public daycare centers come from? Taxpayers, of course. OK, so we are paying less towards welfare but now we are just paying for another aspect of them having children. You can't just leave the infant at these people's homes while forcing them to work

Ok, so what if mother in question CAN get a job, but that job is still not paying for her to raise a child? So now we are putting her child into publicly funded daycare so that she can go to Burger King or whatever and make $8/hour which hardly affords the things she needs to raise a child and take care of herself, so we are STILL giving her welfare. Sure, she is working for it, but are we really saving money here?

quote:

---

Start patrolling their houses and if they can't pay for food, then they don't get luxuries like tvs, cable, cars, etc.

---

And how do we do this? We go into someone's home and steal items of theirs? We take away their welfare because Uncle So-and-So gave them a new TV? Ehhhh. I see where you're coming from, but there are way too many factors stopping this from being realistic in practice.

And then who is patrolling? Are we create an entire government department that OUR TAX DOLLARS ALSO PAY THE SALARIES FOR .. so someone can go patrol welfare people's homes? I don't know about you, but I'd rather my tax dollars go towards the welfare system them go towards some state/federal employee being paid $40k+ to patrol low income people's homes and deal with the inevitably drawn out case it will be for literally every person who fights back because the luxury possessions were "gifts" or whatever.

It just isn't realistic.

quote:

---

Ok, say welfare can be given to people with disabilities. But what makes something a serious enough disability? Because a lot of the people abusing welfare have orders from doctors not to work

---

This is an incredibly small portion of the population and not the abusers having kids. If you can have sex and have a kid then you can work 99.9% of the time.

quote:

---

And how do we do this? We go into someone's home and steal items of theirs? We take away their welfare because Uncle So-and-So gave them a new TV?

---

Yes. The true cost of say a family of 3 (mom and 2 kids) to live in a house with food is like $500-600. I'm talking little to no luxuries. Everyone should be forced to make that in a month. If you can't make it, then yes we come in and sell your tv. You can't work under the table to afford luxuries when you can't work enough to sustain your life.

Also, there's already tons of programs for childcare already. We are not far away at all from being able to enforce it.

ETA: We are already paying for welfare and food stamps the kids to stay at home with their mother, its really not that much money to add to that to pay for childcare so the mom can work 4 days a week.

Change black culture.

Blood Eagles

I don't disagree with your desire for it. I just think there are a million small factors that make it unrealistic. The sheer manpower required to carry out such a thing would be more expensive than what we are currently paying in welfare, in my opinion. I could be wrong - it is just how I see it playing out.

I agree that something needs to be done, but I just don't know what the answer is.

Granted, this thread did say that if you had unlimited funds.. in which case I'm sure your plan would be quite effective.

quote:

---

The true cost of say a family of 3 (mom and 2 kids) to live in a house with food is like $500-600
W
T
F

---

How much does water, beans, and rice cost for family of 3 for a month?

Do you know what a mortgage payment is on a $50,000 house for 30 years? Like $300.

Why should we provide anyone with anything nicer than those two things?

Colonization

quote:

---

Exactly. Another thing to note. There are thousands of people on welfare who aren't the people he's referring to. I used to have a friend whose dad got laid off from his job where he already wasn't making much money. His dad got a low skill job to tide them over until he could find another job in his blue collar industry, but this wasn't paying enough to put food on the table and support the family.

So .. are we going into this dude's home and taking away the furniture, electronics, etc. they already owned pre-layoff? And how are people going to prove this kind of thing? This is just not a realistic thing to do.

---

Exactly none of that is the issue at hand. We are talking 20 year old moms that stay at home to raise 3 kids and a dead beat dad.

I'm saying, we don't allow anyone free food and shelter. If they can't pay for those on their own, they literally get no luxuries.

The guy that was laid off was receiving unemployment or something.

quote:

---

Change our welfare system so people are rewarded for having multiple kids out of wedlock while living at or below the poverty line.

---

I assume you mean "aren't"