While growing up, I had neighbors who participated in programs similar to a guaranteed-income payment plan, only it was called a “welfare check” and it had few requirements or restrictions. I don’t recall ever hearing anybody say they had been lifted out of the low-income category by participating. So it’s shocking to me that the current public officials want to bring back a program that was determined to be so ineffective (“L.A. considers guaranteed income plan as more Democratic cities offer no-strings cash,” Web, July 26).
If there are no restrictions, what’s going to stop anyone from using this money to set up an illegal drug business or to buy guns to sell to our youth? The estimated cost of $3.9 trillion is enough for any taxpayer such as myself to be frustrated with public officials. The individual amounts being suggested are so small that it could not cover the cost any type of job-training or apprentice program. Best-case scenario is that this will cover daily household expenses, which solves nothing and lifts up no one. So who benefits?
If you really want to lift up individuals in the low-income category, use this taxpayer funding along with private funding to develop a bridge between them and jobs. Create training for real careers so that more people can participate.
What we taxpayers don’t need is to create any more dependence on government by low-income individuals. It only increases the number of people who fall into low-income categories.
They say a rose by any other name is still a rose — so a welfare check is still a welfare check, even if you change the name.