Sacrificing 90%
When reading this post please start with the premise that arguments against various social programs are given in good faith … for now.
Why can’t we help people that need it? We can’t help people that are hungry or homeless. We can’t provide clean water, jobs, healthcare, medications or child care. What exactly is the argument against it?
One of the common ones held up is the “welfare queen”, someone who abuses the system through fraud, child abuse and manipulation to live the high life on the state’s dime. The term was originally coined in the 1960’s but was truly brought to the fore front in 1976 by Ronald Regan’s campaign. Though most welfare fraud was committed by men it still was personified as a woman that abuses the system. A great way to “other” people on state aid along with a side of misogamy as well.
Let’s say the concerns about welfare fraud are true. Lazy, nefarious people just looking to screw the system over and get a free hand out. They are stealing the hard earned money out of our pockets. Well we can’t say everyone is like that. Let’s go with 10% of recipients.
If 1 out 10 are cheating the system,
Why can’t we help the other 9?
To exact “justice” on those other horrible people who are corrupting the true nature of these wonderful programs we should deny everyone the assistance they need. Most of the time we look at things as just the number, instead imagine having to meet those 9 people face to face and tell them they are not eligible for assistance and why. “You can’t have assistance because this single other person is cheating the system”. It all makes very little sense.
It makes even less sense when you look at the actual numbers. Fraud of this nature is far, far below 10%.
I myself after graduating from college took a job for awhile then decided to go back to college. I quit a good paying job, moved across the country, got loans and started a new college program without a job. I was on state aid during that time. I like hundreds of thousands of other people were using the program in good faith. Cases of actual welfare fraud are not as wide spread is as some believe. For example in 2016 there were 8,000 cases opened with 1100 convicted as fraud. Consider TANF (Temporary Assistance for Needy Families) has 432,000 families with 1.6 million children enrolled. That comes to about 0.22% fraud.
The argument “We can only provide an assistance program if we can guarantee there is no one cheating the system” is a fantasy.
To conclude, if we believe arguments against these programs are given in good faith, the argument does not really make much sense. BUT, I don’t believe the arguments are given in good faith it is just another way to “other” another group and make sure money is not spent, no matter how many people are hurt in the process.
