Public Assistance Programs

[Dakotah]

I believe the Constitution does give us the authority to do what I am proposing.

You ignore the 8th amendment, which is the prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment. A prison official may not refuse to provide medical care to a seriously ill inmate. (Estelle v. Gamble, 429 U.S. 97, 97 S. Ct. 285, 50 L. Ed. 2d 251 [1976]). The restriction of food to an inmate would also be a violation of the 8th amendment.

 

[FreakyLocz14]

You ignore the 8th amendment, which is the prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment. A prison official may not refuse to provide medical care to a seriously ill inmate. (Estelle v. Gamble, 429 U.S. 97, 97 S. Ct. 285, 50 L. Ed. 2d 251 [1976]). The restriction of food to an inmate would also be a violation of the 8th amendment.

Most ailments do not qualify as "seriously ill". Also, denying care and food is not the same thing as making those who are able pay or work for it.

 

[Dakotah]

Most ailments do not qualify as "seriously ill". Also, denying care and food is not the same thing as making those who are able pay or work for it.

You'd have a VERY difficult time arguing that case before the courts. But you're welcome to try. Just be prepared to hear more than a few muffled snickers.

 

[twocows]

I find it funny that the needy have trouble getting shelter, healthcare, food, etc., but criminals have all of that provided to them. Something isn't right there. We should take away free healthcare for prisoners and make them work for their food and shelter. Criminals who have lots of money (Bernie Madoff comes to mind) should have to pay for the cost of their incarceration.

I find that funny too. However, I think your solution is a bit off. How about instead of taking away free healthcare from prisoners, we just give it to everyone else? Prisoners can get the same healthcare they always had. That makes more sense to me. I'd be willing to pay more taxes for that.

 

[Kura]

You ignore the 8th amendment, which is the prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment. A prison official may not refuse to provide medical care to a seriously ill inmate. (Estelle v. Gamble, 429 U.S. 97, 97 S. Ct. 285, 50 L. Ed. 2d 251 [1976]). The restriction of food to an inmate would also be a violation of the 8th amendment.

I really don't see how putting prisoners to good use by having them work in the same sort of job environment that many others already work in calls for cruel or unusual punishment.
I'd totally get it if they were being whipped or something.. but they wouldn't be. I get what Freaky is saying. Having them do mandatory community or factory/ labour work for a few hours a day to sort of pay off the free food and shelter they are getting makes perfect sense to me.
How would it be cruel? Everyone else in the world does it; we have to work to eat.. so why not have the same standards in jail?

 

[Dakotah]

I really don't see how putting prisoners to good use by having them work in the same sort of job environment that many others already work in calls for cruel or unusual punishment.
I'd totally get it if they were being whipped or something.. but they wouldn't be. I get what Freaky is saying. Having them do mandatory community or factory/ labour work for a few hours a day to sort of pay off the free food and shelter they are getting makes perfect sense to me.
How would it be cruel? Everyone else in the world does it; we have to work to eat.. so why not have the same standards in jail?

The last time I checked, all prisons had some form of work programs for inmates, many of which are mandatory to those physically capable of doing the work. Also, the purpose of incarcerating an individual for breaking the law is to protect the public. I find it ridiculous then that someone would advocate having these inmates work outside the prison, thereby increasing the risk to the public, and also the added security costs.

 

[FreakyLocz14]

I find that funny too. However, I think your solution is a bit off. How about instead of taking away free healthcare from prisoners, we just give it to everyone else? Prisoners can get the same healthcare they always had. That makes more sense to me. I'd be willing to pay more taxes for that.

If California can't afford free healthcare for prisoners, how in are we going to afford to give it to everybody else. Every time CA tried to raise taxes, the people overturned them at the ballot box.

 

[Kura]

The last time I checked, all prisons had some form of work programs for inmates, many of which are mandatory to those physically capable of doing the work. Also, the purpose of incarcerating an individual for breaking the law is to protect the public. I find it ridiculous then that someone would advocate having these inmates work outside the prison, thereby increasing the risk to the public, and also the added security costs.

Not if it's to help in asylums for other convicts who have pleaded insanity. I'd find that to be perfectly ok to be with their own kind like that.. and the "civilians" would already be trained to deal with those people.
Win/Win situation.

 

[Mr. X]

I find it funny that the needy have trouble getting shelter, healthcare, food, etc., but criminals have all of that provided to them. Something isn't right there. We should take away free healthcare for prisoners and make them work for their food and shelter. Criminals who have lots of money (Bernie Madoff comes to mind) should have to pay for the cost of their incarceration.

As rare as this is, I agree with you on this.

But still, odds are it would never happen because a lot of people would find this morally wrong.

But still, they are a untapped resource. Blood is always needed, so they should have to donate blood as often as safely possible.

 

[Livewire]

I find it funny that the needy have trouble getting shelter, healthcare, food, etc., but criminals have all of that provided to them. Something isn't right there. We should take away free healthcare for prisoners and make them work for their food and shelter. Criminals who have lots of money (Bernie Madoff comes to mind) should have to pay for the cost of their incarceration.

Then we need to make sure the needy, the truly needy, get what they rightfully deserve in order to get back on their feet.

 

[FreakyLocz14]

Then we need to make sure the needy, the truly needy, get what they rightfully deserve in order to get back on their feet.

That isn't free. I proposed that we take these services away from criminals to compensate. Compulsory military service in exchange for assistance seems like a good idea.

 

[Livewire]

That isn't free. I proposed that we take these services away from criminals to compensate. Compulsory military service in exchange for assistance seems like a good idea.

Everyone is entitled to those rights, you can't pick and choose who deserves them and who doesn't.

 

[twocows]

That isn't free. I proposed that we take these services away from criminals to compensate. Compulsory military service in exchange for assistance seems like a good idea.

No.

Nobody should be required to risk his or her (nvm the draft discriminates against women) life for to go kill others.

People on welfare need these services you're referring to or they will die. Therefore, in order to live, they would be required to undergo military service. You argued yourself that nobody should be required to risk his or her own life to go kill others. Are you saying that the homeless aren't actually people, that they're some sort of sub-human species? Because that's the only way your argument makes any sense whatsoever.

 

[Halmtier]

To much assistance makes people lazy, not enough causes major social devisions. Sadly, people are prone to abuse systems to get off easy and I don't think that's correct either. There needs to be more boundaries on these things to stop mothers from popping out babies to use as free welfare rides.