Reply
Wed 2 Jan, 2008 06:56 am
Suppose you had an unlimited supply of money, but were not the government and you wanted to establish a social welfare system. What would your system include? How would it be administered.
The first step in creating any social welfare system should be to classify the population into distinct demographic units so you could pinpoint the segments of the population that you want to help and be better able to tailor the welfare programs to the people they need to serve.
Minors class A1: able bodied newborns to age 5.
Minors class B1: able bodied age 5 to age 11.
Minors class C1: able bodied age 12 to 18.
Minors class A2: disabled newborns to age 5 (disabled due to alcoholism, smoking, drug abuse or other optional behavior).
Minors class B2: disabled age 5 to age 11 (disabled due to alcoholism, smoking, drug abuse or other optional behavior).
Minors class C2: disabled age 12 to 18 (disabled due to alcoholism, smoking, drug abuse or other optional behavior).
Minors class A3: disabled newborns to age 5 (disabled due to injury, disease or genetic disorder not due to behavior).
Minors class B3: disabled age 5 to age 11 (disabled due to injury, disease or genetic disorder not due to behavior).
Minors class C3: disabled age 12 to 18(disabled due to injury, disease or genetic disorder not due to behavior).
Adult class A1: able bodied single male with dependents, age 18 to 65.
Adult class A2: disabled single male with dependents, age 18 to 65 (disabled due to injury, disease or genetic disorder not due to behavior).
Adult class A3: disabled single male with dependents, age 18 to 65 (disabled due to alcoholism, smoking, drug abuse or other optional behavior).
Adult class B1: able bodied single male without dependents, age 18 to 65.
Adult class B2: disabled single male without dependents, age 18 to 65 (disabled due to injury, disease or genetic disorder not due to behavior).
Adult class B3: disabled single male without dependents, age 18 to 65 (disabled due to alcoholism, smoking, drug abuse or other optional behavior).
Adult class C1: able bodied married male with dependents, age 18 to 65.
Adult class C2: disabled married male with dependents, age 18 to 65 (disabled due to injury, disease or genetic disorder not due to behavior).
Adult class C3: disabled married male with dependents, age 18 to 65 (disabled due to alcoholism, smoking, drug abuse or other optional behavior).
Adult class D1: able bodied married male without dependents, age 18 to 65.
Adult class D2: disabled married male without dependents, age 18 to 65 (disabled due to injury, disease or genetic disorder not due to behavior).
Adult class D3: disabled married male without dependents, age 18 to 65 (disabled due to alcoholism, smoking, drug abuse or other optional behavior).
Adult class E1: able bodied single female with dependents, age 18 to 65.
Adult class E2: disabled single female with dependents, age 18 to 65 (disabled due to injury, disease or genetic disorder not due to behavior).
Adult class E3: disabled single female with dependents, age 18 to 65 (disabled due to alcoholism, smoking, drug abuse or other optional behavior).
Adult class F1: able bodied single female without dependents, age 18 to 65.
Adult class F2: disabled single female without dependents, age 18 to 65 (disabled due to injury, disease or genetic disorder not due to behavior).
Adult class F3: disabled single female without dependents, age 18 to 65 (disabled due to alcoholism, smoking, drug abuse or other optional behavior).
Adult class G1: able bodied married female with dependents, age 18 to 65.
Adult class G2: disabled married female with dependents, age 18 to 65 (disabled due to injury, disease or genetic disorder not due to behavior).
Adult class G3: disabled married female with dependents, age 18 to 65 (disabled due to alcoholism, smoking, drug abuse or other optional behavior).
Adult class G1: able bodied married female without dependents, age 18 to 65.
Adult class G2: disabled married female without dependents, age 18 to 65 (disabled due to injury, disease or genetic disorder not due to behavior).
Adult class G3: disabled married female without dependents, age 18 to 65 (disabled due to alcoholism, smoking, drug abuse or other optional behavior).
I am separating male and female adults because women have unique medical and nutritional needs because of their ability to be pregnant and nurse infants. I don't know whether or not this would be redundant.
What? No lib has any ideas on this topic? You don't care about the poor and downtrodden?
Or do you realize that anything you propose will end up being as big a fiasco as everything else you've proposed since FRR?
((Psst... No one is answering because it is silly.))
And the Brown man is correct, this is yet another silly thread from Herr Flaja--although no sillier than the other tripe he has been bombarding us with over the last few days.
So none of you libs can design a welfare system that works?
Obviously you're the only specialist in doing so.
I never would have thought that drug abusing five year olds were common enough to warrant their own category.
flaja wrote:So none of you libs can design a welfare system that works?
Given that you start by saying there is an unlimited amount of money, I'd give every citizen a trillion dollars, whether they needed it or not, and let them look after themselves.
It would also go a long way to help the environment and slow down global warming.
No-one would be prepared to work anymore, so everything would grind to a halt, thereby drastically reducing pollution.
Everyone would get pissed by the fact that the whole infrastructure had collapsed, but would be able to emigrate to somewhere exotic and the USA would quickly revert to being once again a deserted wildlife sanctuary, with great herds of Buffalo roaming the plains in peace.
It's a shame my plan would come too late for the passenger pigeon to make a return, but there y'go.
Re: ideal welfare sytem
flaja wrote:Minors class A2: disabled newborns to age 5 (disabled due to alcoholism, smoking, drug abuse or other optional behavior).
I also believe that alcoholic, drug-abusing babies should be treated differently under any conceivable welfare system. Indeed, this is a societal problem that has, for too long, been ignored. I am constantly stepping over the sprawled bodies of inebriated toddlers as I go to work each morning, and harassed by needle-wielding infant drug addicts on my way home every night. Something needs to be done about this problem right now! Also, I need to move to a better neighborhood.
ebrown_p wrote:I never would have thought that drug abusing five year olds were common enough to warrant their own category.
Which category are you talking about?
BTW: a child can be addicted without actually being a drug abuser. If a woman is a drunk her baby could be born with fetal alcohol syndrome. If a woman is hooked on cocaine, her baby can be born with a cocaine addiction. Children born to such women would have healthcare and educational needs that the general population wouldn't face, thus they should be in a separate category so social welfare programs can be targeted specifically to them.
vid wrote:flaja wrote:So none of you libs can design a welfare system that works?
Given that you start by saying there is an unlimited amount of money, I'd give every citizen a trillion dollars, whether they needed it or not, and let them look after themselves.
With no provisions or safeguards to see to it that the money isn't wasted? Why would you simply give money to a heroin addict and expect him to seek treatment and rehab and not simply buy more heroin?
Your thinking is precisely what we have now in many cases with the limited money we do have to spend. We give welfare recipients money with no demand that they use the money to truly better their lives so they can get off welfare.
flaja wrote:vid wrote:flaja wrote:So none of you libs can design a welfare system that works?
Given that you start by saying there is an unlimited amount of money, I'd give every citizen a trillion dollars, whether they needed it or not, and let them look after themselves.
With no provisions or safeguards to see to it that the money isn't wasted?
That would mean government, and I disapprove of government on principle.
flaja wrote:vid wrote:flaja wrote:So none of you libs can design a welfare system that works?
Given that you start by saying there is an unlimited amount of money, I'd give every citizen a trillion dollars, whether they needed it or not, and let them look after themselves.
With no provisions or safeguards to see to it that the money isn't wasted? Why would you simply give money to a heroin addict and expect him to seek treatment and rehab and not simply buy more heroin?
Your thinking is precisely what we have now in many cases with the limited money we do have to spend. We give welfare recipients money with no demand that they use the money to truly better their lives so they can get off welfare.
But your scenario has unlimited money flaja. How can you "waste money" if you have unlimited supply? You have also ignored vid's point that no one would sell heroin since everyone would have money and not need more by selling drugs.
Well, if there are unlimited funds here, i want a new f*cking jeep, and i want it now!
. . . well, i'm waiting ! ! !
flaja wrote:vid wrote:flaja wrote:So none of you libs can design a welfare system that works?
Given that you start by saying there is an unlimited amount of money, I'd give every citizen a trillion dollars, whether they needed it or not, and let them look after themselves.
With no provisions or safeguards to see to it that the money isn't wasted? Why would you simply give money to a heroin addict and expect him to seek treatment and rehab and not simply buy more heroin?
Your thinking is precisely what we have now in many cases with the limited money we do have to spend. We give welfare recipients money with no demand that they use the money to truly better their lives so they can get off welfare.
Point 1. There was no mention in your intro regarding provisions. If this supply of provisions is also unlimited, I would give each person a freezer full of beef and another of pork, unless their religion forbids either or, in which case I would substitute the forbidden meat with lamb.
Point 2. If you gave someone on welfare a trillion dollars, I bet he'd never make another claim. There, you have now removed the entire population from welfare at a stroke.
Can you tell that we're not taking you all that seriously on this one? If so, what gave the game away?
Point 3. The drug addicts would forget they all had a habit, as they would be too busy lying in between two supermodels on a beach in the Caribbean, drinking rum.
<<ebrown tries to imagine a 5 year old between two supermodels>>
ebrown_p wrote: ebrown tries to imagine a 5 year old between two supermodels
If they were face down, at least he'd have somewhere to stand his Grape Krate.
(that shows my age
)
Stumble It!
Tweet This
Bookmark on Delicious
Share on Facebook
Share on MySpace