Welfare In Argentina

[citygirl]

Let's take the "y vos" out of the equation - whilst the US welfare plan has many issues, it is irrelevant to a discussion of the Argentine system.

I will say speaking from first-hand experience, I have been unable to employ multiple people because they refused to work en blanco. Btwn the subsidies they received for being "single mothers" (usually en pareja but not legally married means they get subsidies") plus the subsidy per child plus other plans meant it would actually cost them money to go to work legally so they refused.

Lest someone think I am against welfare programs, I'm not. I actually think tying monies to activities is a great thing and empowering (i.e., scholarship money must be used for studies, people who receive funds for children must be able to show records of doctor's visits, etc) which makes the recipient feel like they are part of the solution, not just receiving money. Welfare and social help programs offer an essential safety net and help people improve their situations. Not only is offering a helping hand a moral issue, it's also quite practical. Every society should want to encourage the upward mobility of its citizens - today they may receive help from the state but ideally tomorrow they are the middle class paying into the system. Where the issue comes in for me is a) when the system is so poorly designed that it actually prevents people from going to work, B) it offers no incentives to change which means WHEN (esp here) the subsidies run out, the people will have nothing to show for it and c) the programs are instituted without any long term plan of how to pay for them.

 

[Jaredberryman]

Let's take the "y vos" out of the equation - whilst the US welfare plan has many issues, it is irrelevant to a discussion of the Argentine system.

I will say speaking from first-hand experience, I have been unable to employ multiple people because they refused to work en blanco. Btwn the subsidies they received for being "single mothers" (usually en pareja but not legally married means they get subsidies") plus the subsidy per child plus other plans meant it would actually cost them money to go to work legally so they refused.

Lest someone think I am against welfare programs, I'm not. I actually think done correctly by tying monies to activities (i.e., scholarship money must be used for studies, people who receive funds for children must be able to show records of doctor's visits, etc), they offer an essential safety net and help people improve their situations. Not only is that a moral issue, it's also quite practical. Every society should want to encourage the upward mobility of its citizens - today they may receive help from the state but ideally tomorrow they are the middle class paying into the system. Where the issue comes in for me is a) when the system is so poorly designed that it actually prevents people from going to work, B) it offers no incentives to change which means WHEN (esp here) the subsidies run out, the people will have nothing to show for it and c) the programs are instituted without any long term plan of how to pay for them.

Well said. Too bad the politicians don't see it that way.