Literature Review

Welfare and Unemployment Checks

            When it comes to these two topics there is many views on what should be done if anything. Welfare by definition is; statutory procedure or social effort designed to promote the basic physical and material well being of people in need. Now welfare can mean many different things in which the government is assisting someone, it could mean food, cash, bridge cards, child support, medical assistance, and more. One of the main views is reducing the payout the government gives to the people, creates a stronger application or testing to be able to accept money, and imposes a time limit on all collection benefits. One of the biggest controversy’s debating around welfare recipients right now is to make recipients take drug tests if they shall keep their check supply steady. “The bill’s sponsor – Republican Rep. Jeff Farrington, R-Utica – has said the legislation is about “appropriate uses of hard-earned tax dollars.” He said taxpayers don’t want the money provided for welfare assistance to be going toward paying for substance abuse.” (http://www.mlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/03/drug_test_welfare_recipients_m.html ).  And that’s just the tip of he iceberg, when you look at it in a different light, you can see why people would want to keep welfare or keep receiving it. There are a million reasons why some people need government assistance, and the best way I can put it is “things happen”. Things happen that you cant control, maybe your husband passes away unexpectedly and you have no way to support 3 children on a 40 hour a week retail job. There is plenty of statistics on the subject, and none of these topics I’ve discussed even breach the door. So before I get too far into things while not even writing the paper I should probably talk briefly about unemployment. Unemployment in Michigan has become a huge problem, having 8.8% of Michigan receiving unemployment checks (http://www.milmi.org/ ). Unemployment checks to get by for a short period of time is totally fine, but it’s the people who stay on unemployment because they receive as much if not more money than they did while working just to sit around and do nothing. The biggest problem with this phenomenon is that the people doing this are completely content with living off of the government, not having to work a day in their lives.

            I think from what I have wrote in this literature review it is pretty easy to see what side I am for. I am for cutting welfare and unemployment substantially, initiating a strict time limit to get people on their feet, and enforcing a much more vigorous screening on whom receives any money.