I saw something on Facebook a while back that got me thinking. At first I was completely behind it, as it was talking about ways to reform public assistance. It talked about taking most everything but basic staples off of food stamp programs. If you wanted things like “steak and frozen pizza” you had to get a job. It also talked about mandatory birth control and drug testing if you wanted to stay on public assistance. Not sure I fully agree with the birth control thing, but it would keep from putting new kids on welfare rolls, and I definitely agree with the drug testing. If you want to have children or do drugs, then you should be getting a job. Next was public housing, which would be expected to be maintained in good working order and inspections would be possible at any time. Again, if you wanted housing you could destroy as you saw fit or wanted things like an Xbox, you had to get a job.
But then things started to get a little questionable to me. The next part talked about either presenting a pay stub from a job or you would be assigned a government job, such as cleaning highways or government housing. Unemployment insurance exists so that if someone loses their job, like many Americans have lately, you can get by until you find work similar to what you had and for which you have the skills. Forcing someone to take whatever job the government sees fit to give you sounds a lot like Communism to me and I will not get behind that.
The part that really got me came next. The post asserted that while on public assistance, you would relinquish your right to vote as it would be a conflict of interests. Regardless of your employment situation in this country, or lack thereof, everyone over the age of 18 in this country has the right to vote. That right is only dependent on citizenship and not having committed a felony. Taking the right to vote from people just because of no employment would lead to huge amounts of disenfranchisement throughout the populace. Continue reading