The Pros And Cons Of Welfare

Welfare is supposed to be the financial support of people truly in need. The benefits provided by this system range from medical coverage to food stamps. People deserving of welfare include the mentally disabled, elderly, and the employees of minimum wage jobs. The United States Government established this system to aid its citizens, but in reality it accomplished the opposite goal. Welfare has been administered unfairly to those attempting to cheat the system. Because of this, the effects have been detrimental to the country. The government should implement stricter rules for applicants of Welfare because the hard working citizens are suffering.
The system in place is worsening the limited number of jobs currently available. The rules of
These applicants feel they have a safety net to fall back on if they lose their jobs, therefore they do not feel like it is necessary to excel in the workplace. When presidents change these systems change with them. The people of Welfare are suffering from disadvantages since they are becoming accustomed to having welfare to fall back on instead of developing laborious work habits. Furthermore, the people who maintain their economic activity are also suffering from it. The health insurance provided by companies is what most people depend on to obtain proper medical care. Since these new laws have made it so expensive for companies to give out insurance to many people, companies are just cutting people from their programs in order to save money. Tom Coburn and John Barrasso have said, “Beginning in 2014, businesses with more than 50 employees will be fined $2,000 per employee if they do not provide government approved health insurance for their employees… the business could hire a part-time employee or independent contractors to perform tasks, rather than grow the business by adding an employee.” Regulations like these discourage employers from aiding
An increasing number of doctors are even not accepting health insurance provided by welfare. Doctor John O’Shea writes, “According to a 2003 Medicare Payment Advisory Commission (MEDPAC) study, only 69.5 percent of physicians surveyed were willing to accept new Medicaid patients, substantially fewer than the number willing to accept new privately insured patients (99.3 percent), Medicare patients (95.9 percent), and even the uninsured (92.8 percent).” More doctors are willing to treat patients who are uninsured over beneficiaries of medicaid. This illustrates the headache and level of difficulty that comes along with caring for the people covered by the government. The inadequate or delay of reimbursement causes doctors to be against treating people since it is more problematic. Similarly, he writes, “In 2004, the ED visit rate for Medicaid and SCHIP patients (80.3 visits per 100 persons) was higher than the rate for those in any other payer group, including those in Medicare (47.1 visits per 100 persons), without insurance (44.6 visits per 100 persons), and with private insurance (20.3 visits per 100 persons)” (O’Shea). The misuse of the emergency department is becoming a growing issue in states throughout the nation since hospital resources are being depleted. Because of the lack of doctors admitting welfare patients, the beneficiaries chose to go to the emergency room instead, since