Welfare

They should, but I've heard from many fathers who face hostile treatment in seeking it.

Public assistance payments are set by each State and vary widely - any average would be a meaningless number.

Well it depends on what country you are on about, in the UK its anything that is a vertebrate (so anything that is a invertebrate is not covered). Animals which are not covered are things like Spiders, Scorpions, millipedes, cockroaches etc... things that people don't like lol

becuase they suck

Not as powerful, can have very little action going on at one time.

What you have to ask yourself is, did you fail because you did all you could to pass or did you mess around and decide that you didn't care about school and you made it difficult at home for your parents?

Kids today are being ripped off by the government because it is they who have stuck their noses into everyone's business and failed this generation of teenagers in making them think that they can do whatever they want without any consequences.

If you failed the course because you were slacking off, didn't care about your grades, decided it was 'cooler' to hang out with your buddies and you disobeyed your parents and made life miserable for them, then shame on you.

Give yourself a kick up the butt, decide you're going to take yourself in hand and do the right thing! Let your parents know you are sorry for being a jerk, apologize and let them know that (whether they take you back in or not) you are truly sorry and are going to take life more seriously.

If you've had it rough in the sense that you are constantly in fear of your life, living at home, then you may have to get some help in order to find some temporary shelter and food.

If your situation at home is good, then be a man, try to reconcile with your parents and don't take the 'easy' way and go on welfare and live off the government. That will only lead you down the hard way of life.

medicare

Yes. In the United States, people on welfare are eligible for Medicaid and may also receive services through the public health department, public hospitals, and charitable organizations.

According to the statistics, whites form the largest racial group on welfare; half of all welfare recipients leave in the first two years; and teenagers form less than 8 percent of all welfare mothers.

Introduction

Despite federal and state spending on anti-poverty programs, nearly one in seven Americans fell below official poverty levels in 1992. Progress in reducing the incidence of poverty ended during the 1970s, and the incidence was reversed in the early 1980s. The most important reasons for the reversal were: (1) the entry of women into the labor force and the growth of female-headed families; (2) revisions in the measurement of the poverty rate in 1980 and 1982; (3) the persistence of lower earnings among women relative to men and (4) cuts in federal spending on welfare during the Reagan administration (Sawhill, 1988). The last factor has been estimated to account for about 25% of the increase of the poverty rate since 1980.(1)

Although 25 to 30 million people lived below poverty at any time during most of the 1980s, a much smaller number were poor for prolonged periods. While as many as one person in four experiences a period of poverty during any decade (Corcoran et al., 1985); for most it is a brief experience precipitated by divorce, illness, or job loss. Nevertheless, a significant minority, variously estimated at between 4 and 12 million people, remain poor for long periods, sometimes a lifetime (Duncan, 1987; Nathan, 1988; Ruggles and Marton, 1986; Sawhill, 1988). These are labelled the "underclass", "hard-core poor", or the "chronically welfare dependent (GAO, i.e. General Accounting Office, 1990)."

Changes in marital status or family composition explain much of the dynamics of poverty. For example, the largest increase in poverty since the late 1970s has been in families with young children headed by females (Sawhill, 1988). The fall in the average real wage between 1975 and 1985, lower wages for women, and lack of spousal support make single parent female-headed families prone to poverty.

This paper addresses the relationship between welfare dependency and family status, using personal interview data from a mid-western city. The following questions were asked:

1. What are the characteristics of the dependent welfare poor?

2. What factors best explain how long they stay on welfare?

3. What events explain entry and exit from welfare?

4. How do female-headed families differ from two-parent families on welfare and in reasons for entry and exit.

II

Literature Review

Panel studies show that a high proportion of first-time Aid for Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) spells last two years or less. One recent study (Ellwood, 1986), examined data from the Panel Study of Income Dynamics (PSID) for the 15-year period 1968-1983, and found that only 16.7 percent of all welfare recipients lived in families that received welfare eight or more years in their first spell of welfare (see also Hutchinson, 1981). The median spell on welfare was only two years, although because many welfare recipients experienced more than one spell on welfare, the median total time on welfare was four years. Ellwood reports that 40 percent of those who leave a first spell return for a subsequent spell. Thus, welfare "careers" tend to be made up of multiple welfare spells and, when returns are included, welfare careers can be lengthy. Nearly 31 percent of welfare recipients received welfare for eight or more years over the 15 year span. Also using PSID data, Duncan et al (1984) found that 27 percent of non-aged white female welfare recipients received welfare for eight or more years, as did 44% of non-aged (18-62) black female welfare recipients.

Overall, while most people escape welfare relatively quickly, a sizeable proportion of welfare users do not. These are the "dependent poor," and they account for most of the money spent on public assistance. While there is disagreement about the size of this group, reasonable estimates place it at perhaps four to seven percent of the population (Ellwood, 1989). Since this group tends to have multiple problems (poor education, bad health, etc.) and to require multiple services, its members are responsible for a large share of social service expenditures.

Research on welfare dependency associates lack of education or work experience and having children out of wedlock with long-term dependency.(2) Race, taken by itself, is less important when other factors are taken into account (Rank, 1988). A woman who enters the welfare system when young is likely to stay on welfare longer (Bane and Ellwood, 1983; Murray, 1986).

III

Research Methods

Evidence to chart welfare dependency has come from the results of national surveys such as the Panel Study of Income Dynamics, the National Longitudinal Surveys, the Current Population Survey, and, as noted, more recently from the Survey of Income and Program Participation (see Kimeny, 1991, for a critique of these datasets). These studies are nationwide and offer longitudinal records. Panel studies have inevitably found more dynamism in the poverty population than have crossectional studies revealing more people experiencing shorter spells of poverty and fewer people experiencing continuous prolonged spells. (Bane and Ellwood, 1983, 1986; Blank, 1986; Duncan and Hoffman, 1988; Ellwood, 1986, 1987; Hoffman, 1987; Lerman, 1987; Murray and Laren, 1986; O'Neil, et al., 1984).

Unfortunately, very little similar research on poverty spells exits at the local level. Furthermore, there is no local study - with the exception of Kimency's (1991) study of AFDC recipients in Tennessee - which has yet assessed the validity of the national findings with an examination of the patterns of welfare use among the poor. This study replicates the questions asked in several of the national panel studies with a representative sample of poor persons in Akron, Ohio during 1987-88.

Akron, Ohio is a mid-western city of 220,000 people nestled in a region of one-half million in northeast Ohio. Formerly dominated by the rubber industry and automobile related production, the region has been in transition to services and research and development employment. The percentage of people classified as poor by the 1990 Census of Population was 20.5 percent and its African-American population was 24.5 percent. Akron's history and demography is probably typical of that of many mid-sized former production cities in the United States during the past 15-20 years.

The Sample Survey. In-depth personal interviews were conducted with 672 adult non-aged (18-62) people whose income fell below 125 percent of the federal poverty level in the city of Akron, Ohio.(3) Interviewers were recruited and trained by staff at The University of Akron's Center for Urban Studies. The interviews were conducted between Thanksgiving Day, 1987 and the beginning of January 1988. A random sample of housing units was selected from a sampling frame of housing units in high-poverty census tracts within the City of Akron. According to the 1980 Census these census tracts represented 72 percent of the poor households within the City of Akron. Households were filtered for eligibility, and a Kish Table was used to generate a random respondent from within the household. Nearly 86 percent of the households contacted by the interviewers agreed to participate in the survey. The fact that the survey team gave respondents completing the questionnaire a coupon book for $5.00 worth of food at a local fast-food restaurant probably raised the response rate.

Major Variables and the Model. Welfare dependency was measured by first asking: "Have you ever received public assistance or welfare benefits"? Those responding affirmatively were asked which of eight cash or in-kind income maintenance programs they had received. Those who responded AFDC, Supplemental Security Income (SSI), or General Assistance (GA) were then asked to recall the number of times "they had to go on welfare". Respondents were asked for up to four episodes of welfare use, beginning with the most recent one. Information for each episode included the length of time the person was on welfare (in months), the major reason for applying for welfare, and the major reason for leaving welfare (if the person left). Only 1.5 percent claimed more than four episodes of welfare.

You can get unemployment as long as you qualified to receive them and continue to comply with the requirements while you're on it.

Purely in Economic context, yes, poverty can set off a vicious circle, culminating in even more poverty. It goes something like this :

Poverty > Less Income > Less Consumption > Low Consumption Expenditure > Low Revenue for firms > Lesser Production > Lesser Income for Factor Inputs > Poverty

Therefore, this vicious circle will keep on incrementing. This can be prevented by suitable injections of capital investment by governments to increase availability of credit in the economy.

Steps for development of wellbeings of a family as of they can maintain a family with peace and love.

Welfare Reform (1997) was about cash assistance (AFDC/TANF); it didn't deal with Medicaid.

CALWORKS is the State Of California's welfare programs that gives money to needy people.

FIrst of all, the Grandparents MUST have legal custody of the children awarded to them by the court. Then, they can contact whatever social assitance agency their state government has in place for aid to families with dependent children (AFDC). Most all states have such programs - contact your local Dept of Social Serivces.

I know that some Billabong's board are made in conditions not too clear :

From NY Times December 2003 :

''Mr. Liu's struggle to unionize workers at Neil Pryde, a leading maker of sailing and windsurfing gear sold globally under its own name and for brands like Quiksilver and Billabong, is emblematic of the battle workers are waging to earn basic rights in China's fast-growing export industries.''

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/12/29/international/asia/29CHIN.html?ex=1388034000&en=fe9edffeee8c92b1&ei=5007&partner=USERLAND

In Austalia, Fair Clothes garanties that Billabong does not uses sweatshops :

http://www.fairwear.org.au/media/client/05.09.01walletcard.pdf

I have no proof that Billabong uses sweatshop from the rest of their merch, but no proof they don't.

No, he is not. The Republicans in the House of Representatives voted to cut Food Stamps from the Farm Bill Budget, but the Senate refused to accept those cuts, so nothing has been resolved yet. The president remains 100% in favor of protecting food stamps as well as continuing to offer help to those who are the most needy.

Social Welfare (used to help people), industries, organizations, and communities are all part of the larger social structure of society. Incidents or events in one of these will always affect the other three--- positively or negatively (or perhaps neutrally, e.g. no effect). For example, if industry decided they will only hire people with a B.A., it would immediately place an undue burden on Social Welfare and on Communities at large, while private organizations would try to step in to help offset the burden. As an example, the US has a hunger problem. Children do not get enough to eat. Public Welfare, a social welfare program, gives Food Stamps to the poor, but also cut monthly benefits. Working parents cannot make enough to provide food, housing, utilities. So Industries and Private organizations increasingly run food drives to stock food pantries run in communities for people who need food. However, if industries paid a reasonable wage, and hired full time instead of part time, perhaps more people could afford to buy nutritious food. Yet, the majority of politicians and the population still believe Welfare is a "hand out"---so they want people to receive LESS Welfare and Food Stamps. Taxpayers are taxed to death paying for "social" and "community" issues (roads, schools, property) plus to fund State programs, like Welfare. In response to growing community needs, Organizations try to become advocates for what people need, speaking on the news, lobbying public officials, etc. So the impact---a constant roller coaster where big parts of society are always "down side" while others are mostly on the up side.

Welfare programs are "means tested," i.e., participants' income and asserts must be less than the relevant threshold: e.g., TANF (f/k/a AFDC); SNAP (food stamps); Medicaid, Children's Health Insurance Program; public housing; subsidized [private] housing; Women, Infants and Children's (WIC) program; Supplemental Security Income (SSI); Low Income Household Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP). TANF, SNAP, SSI and Medicaid are "entitlement programs," i.e., the Federal and/or State government must ensure that every eligible applicant receives the benefits to which they are entitled. Please note: "regular" Social Security, Medicare, workers compensation and unemployment compensation are not welfare programs.

Not exactly sure because I myself have never been on welfare but I have a couple friends that have needed it in the past and they just went down to there local family community services agency to apply.

236 for one child

impossible to determine by status

How much time can a person get for wellfare fraud in Henrico VA.

If the government of the US had been more successful in carrying out the constitutionally stated goal of promoting the general welfare, then there would not be so many dissatisfied people who feel the need to express their dissatisfaction by occupying Wall Street.