What I wrote is based on personal experience, what has been written about, my experience with people on the system, and also other articles written about.  When social services where I am is less humane than the DMV (I am in the United States), that says a lot.  In my case, the system managed to milk over 1/3 of my unemployment extension money in order to house me in a dorm setting, until the money ran out.  At that point, I would of had to lose everything, including my car, because the money would be insufficient to have one.  I would of been locked in a downward spiral that I had little chance of breaking out of.  Also, the way the system is, you get welfare a few years max.  You either then do workfare, or you are out.  The is America.

Welfare should exist but only as a temporary measure. Training and wage subsidies to get people back into work as soon as possible. Welfare measures are a human capital investment. Welfare helps stabilise the economy when an economic downturn results in massive job losses, bank closures and loss of business confidence. 

Full employment should be the goal of every government. Fully utilising the work force and providing opportunities for all citizens who are fit and capable of working. Education and training or military training for young people up to the age of 21 and reduce youth unemployment. Youth unemployment (15 to 21)  ranges from 20% to 40% in most nations. 

Only disabled people, aged people over 60 years , single parents should be able to collect social welfare pensions for prolonged periods. Government, charity groups and agencies should be willing to help unemployed people quickly get back on their feet to rejoin the work force. 

High crime rates and high unemployment rates come hand in hand. The intergenerational welfare mentality needs to be addressed by governments.  

Economic/business cycles impact upon employment prospects. Massive job losses are expected when businesses and banks are going out of business. Economic downturns are only temporary and things turn for the better when confidence picks up and the economy improves. Unemployment benefits provides a buffer when the economy enters a recession/downturn and helps stabilise the economy. The 1930's Great Depression of over 20% unemployment must be avoided. Keynesian cash injections help stabilise the economy. 

Jobs and spending are the 2 big issues. The unfortunate thing is you have to choose. Spending, doesn't matter too much if it is government spending or consumer spending, spending generates jobs. If spending goes down, unemployment goes up. If spending goes down, unemployment goes up. Lose/lose for Democrats, win/win for Republicans.

No, its not compassionate.

Compassion is getting off your rear end, and going to a homeless shelter or food pantry and either giving money to help them buy products to help the needy, or doing work yourself. That is compassion. Welfare is....Welfare. There is no real way to define it other that the word exists in and of itself.

@PS3beats360 - Where exactly did the near-$1 trillion stimulus help the US economy?

What's funny about the Stimulus is, i don't understand why money went where it did.  The District of Columbia was awarded more money then 28 states!

http://www.recovery.gov/Transparency/RecipientReportedData/Pages/Landing.aspx

Not only that, every time I see a 'Stimulus & Recovery Act' sign on the road, its on a road that really didn't need repaired. They have about 1 mile of road all cut up for construction due to the stimulus where I live....Have been working on it for 6-9 months now. The insane part is that the road just got repaired about 2 years prior!

Most of the trillion stimulus was spent to prop up banks and nationalise failing businesses.  Measures to stimulate aggregate demand would have been  better than $1 trillion Corporate welfare.

Spending from government and private consumers creates jobs. Corporate bailouts given to banks is hoarded and not spent/invested into the economy to create jobs. 

Banks and Big Business wins every time: Huge Profits from interest of consumers in the good times and  Banks get bailed out during economic downturns/recessions. International banks and Big businesses are too big to fail. 

You know there were two stimulus programs - one passed by Bush & Congress in 2008, and one in 2009, right?

The second one had nothing to do with the banks: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_Stimulus

Maybe you don't understand what a Constitution is then.

In the US, the 300 million people here own this country. It's ours. When we put people in office, it's there job to run the country in the vision we set. They don't get to make the rules, we do. The way you keep that balance in check, is to give them a document that outlines there authority. That tells them what the people allow them to do, and what they don't allow them to do.

This is the constitution. Without it, the elected shape the country, and not the people.

It's just a job description. I am sure if you hired someone to do something, you would put limits on what they can do as well. We hire the elected officials. They work for us. 

Without the constitution, what limits our workers (elected officials) from taking over the country?

You're taking me a bit more seriously than I meant to be taken. I was merely pointing out the fact that your statement that realising something about your constitution would change everybodies minds doesn't really work because this is an international forum.

And of course I understand what a constitution is. New Zealand has similiar rules - they just aren't all written down in one place.

Also, what was up with that 'freedom isn't for everyone' comment? It's a wee bit insulting that you're insinuating that I'm somehow anti-freedom because I don't agree with you.

The only thing that gives us freedom, is limiting the people in power with a set of rules that they must follow. To not care about those rules, is the same as not caring about freedom.

Without them, the country belongs to Washington, not the people. NZ is a total different situation. Ultimately, the Queen of England owns your country.

Sadly today, there is no diference in freedoms in your country and mine. In fact, you have more. That's because it seems many US citizens no longer care about freedom, and are willing to give it up for a country that provides for them. I for one, do care.