Welfare

Welfare In the recent February article of the Los Angeles Times, Clinton has announced to go on with a plan to help people of welfare. Clinton challenged corporate bosses five months ago to take people in from welfare and trained them. One of the main contributors of the project is a chief executive officer of the Monsanto Ca., the nation's fourth largest chemical maker. Clinton singled out the Monsanto company and other companies for helping out welfare workers. Monsanto has hired five recipient and found almost twenty more jobs for others. Under the new laws of the welfare reforms, the able body workers should work within the two years of recieving benefits. Some of the good things out of this plan is that by the year 2005, only 14% of jobs will be done by more of the dependent poor people. This is bad because 46% of aid recipients had not completed high school or earned a General Equivalency Diploma. The ability to absorb more welfare recipients is limited by the high- technology chemical, agricultural, fiber and pharmaceutical development and manufacturing. These workers would have limited skills. Monsanto is highly protecteive of the privacy of its special new hires. The new employees are hired to fill a variety of clerical and light general- labor positions. They will not be identified as the company's welfare-to-work initiative. The possible short-term effect this would have on society is that people, on welfare, would be able to work and get paid for it. This will allow them to be able to build finance of their own that they will be able to help them with their lives. The long-term effect, though it seemed good for the people, would be bad for everyone else who weren't on welfare. This would be because the people working off welfare would really be working off the tax payers money. So, the people who aren't living off welfare would be paying higher taxes and the people who are living on welfare would be paying less taxes. Education Education is an important factor in society today. Without education, we wouldn't be able to boost our technology. Boosting the technology would then help us in the medical field, help us build better houses that are more durable to earthquakes, etc. I think that we should spend more of the budget on education. If we spended more on education, we would be able to get more, better teacher to teach our children. With more teachers on the field, we would be able to teach more students than normal. To help the teachers out in there teaching, money would be put in to buy new, improved, and revised version of books. Thought this seems good and all, the short- term effect would be that this would only be able to happen for a certain amount of time. This is because the people would be spending a lot of money on education, so the taxes would rise which is bad. In the long run, though, with the increase in money for education, we would be able to learn a lot more. In time, we would be able to find the cures for the deadly diseases that is in society today. I believe that all parts of society would benefit from this because of the possible cause that will happen when we are able to treat AIDS the same way we treat the common cold. The only disadvantage is that of the money. I don't really think people would agree with the budget becuase they would want to keep the money for themselves. In general, if we spent more on education than on welfare, we would be able to think of better ways to improve the way we live and build a better place where people can work and live peacefully.