Featured News - Current News - Archived News - News Categories

Trump takes the welfare of welfare into his own hands

by Nicholas Mazur - Campus Talk Editor
Wed, Dec 6th 2017 11:45 am
Donald Trump is no slouch when it comes to money by any means. Therefore, it is something to wonder about when he wants to, as quickly as possible, make welfare more restrictive. It is an issue that ignites the political side in many of us, and the solution to fixing welfare is, like most things, not so cut and dry.
Donald Trump is no slouch when it comes to money by any means. Therefore, it is something to wonder about when he wants to, as quickly as possible, make welfare more restrictive. It is an issue that ignites the political side in many of us, and the solution to fixing welfare is, like most things, not so cut and dry.

Welfare is one of those topics very few people have an opinion on that isn’t strong, especially since Bill Clinton said during his presidency that he would change what welfare looked like. According to CBS, Trump has recently expressed interest in putting his own influence into the welfare system in an attempt to make it more restrictive. Trump believes “people are taking advantage of the system.” Well, he’d know all about that, now wouldn't he?

Trump has offered no detail on what the specifics of the changes might be, but plans to start working on it after the new tax overhaul he is trying to get done by the end of the year. According to CBS, Trump has Paul Winfree, director of budget policy and deputy director of Trump's Domestic Policy Council, working on this issue in order to truly make something happen as quickly as possible, sending a “strong message.” However, if real change is to be made, it must come not only from executive orders, but from true legislation as well. 

According to the The Washington Post, Republicans are also going to try to cut spending to Social Security and Medicaid as well.

Like I said, there’s no middle ground here. Everyone’s got very heated opinions about welfare. The two arguments I come across most are: “I ain't payin' taxes so some freeloader can sit around and live off my tax dollars” and on the other end of the spectrum, “people don’t deserve to starve no matter what, they’re human beings.” To be quite honest, I find myself often confused on where to stand. After all, both arguments in principle seem fair. Middle class taxpayers are getting pushed lower and lower, and the idea of people not working at all while they have to pay more for less seems unfair. However, I also could never bring myself to say someone doesn’t deserve food and shelter.

A lot of the argument around welfare stems from one of my least favorite human beings, Ronald Reagan. According to The Atlantic, in 1976 he created what would become one of the most infamous characters in American history, the ‘Welfare-Queen’. This refers to the stereotypical individual one imagines taking advantage of welfare using fake names and addresses, lying and cheating to get exorbitant amounts of money out of the welfare system without working a day in her life. No doubt this is much along the lines of what Trump imagines when he says people are taking advantage of the welfare system. That’s not to say people aren’t taking advantage. Wherever there is a chance, rather than play fair, there will be people there cheating. The question seems to be: are enough people cheating to warrant this restriction, or will it just be hurting lower class people even more?

If you think I’m going to sit down in front of my computer and solve the welfare “crisis” for you in 650 plus words, I promise you've read this far for nothing. I think perhaps that is what can be learned from this. I can no more solve this issue in 650 plus words than Trump can solve the issues of welfare with one quick snap of his fingers. I highly doubt he has sat down and had his people collect the data for him. I doubt he has sifted through even one statistic on welfare in America. I would hardly be surprised if he has ever even talked to someone who is on welfare.

That's just the danger of a billionaire president. I’m not saying one view is right over another at this point. What I am saying is that a president who consider $1 million a small loan should take caution when deciding how to treat people who live just above, right on or below the poverty line. The poverty line itself is flawed, and to make decisions for a whole nation without being methodical about it, without making sure you were doing what is best, is simply irresponsible.

Photo of the Week