Spending More Of The Budget On Education

Rather Than Welfare Essay, Research Paper


In the recent February article of the Los Angeles

Times, Clinton has announced to go on with a plan to help

people of welfare. Clinton challenged corporate bosses five

months ago to take people in from welfare and trained them.

One of the main contributors of the project is a chief

executive officer of the Monsanto Ca., the nation’s fourth

largest chemical maker. Clinton singled out the Monsanto

company and other companies for helping out welfare workers.

Monsanto has hired five recipient and found almost twenty

more jobs for others.

Under the new laws of the welfare reforms, the able

body workers should work within the two years of recieving

benefits. Some of the good things out of this plan is that

by the year 2005, only 14% of jobs will be done by more of

the dependent poor people. This is bad because 46% of aid

recipients had not completed high school or earned a General

Equivalency Diploma. The ability to absorb more welfare

recipients is limited by the high- technology chemical,

agricultural, fiber and pharmaceutical development and

manufacturing. These workers would have limited skills.

Monsanto is highly protecteive of the privacy of its special

new hires. The new employees are hired to fill a variety of

clerical and light general- labor positions. They will not

be identified as the company’s welfare-to-work initiative.

The possible short-term effect this would have on

society is that people, on welfare, would be able to work

and get paid for it. This will allow them to be able to

build finance of their own that they will be able to help

them with their lives. The long-term effect, though it

seemed good for the people, would be bad for everyone else

who weren’t on welfare. This would be because the people

working off welfare would really be working off the tax

payers money. So, the people who aren’t living off welfare

would be paying higher taxes and the people who are living

on welfare would be paying less taxes.


Education is an important factor in society today.

Without education, we wouldn’t be able to boost our

technology. Boosting the technology would then help us in

the medical field, help us build better houses that are more

durable to earthquakes, etc. I think that we should spend

more of the budget on education.

If we spended more on education, we would be able to

get more, better teacher to teach our children. With more

teachers on the field, we would be able to teach more

students than normal. To help the teachers out in there

teaching, money would be put in to buy new, improved, and

revised version of books.

Thought this seems good and all, the short- term effect

would be that this would only be able to happen for a

certain amount of time. This is because the people would be

spending a lot of money on education, so the taxes would

rise which is bad. In the long run, though, with the

increase in money for education, we would be able to learn a

lot more. In time, we would be able to find the cures for

the deadly diseases that is in society today.

I believe that all parts of society would benefit from

this because of the possible cause that will happen when we

are able to treat AIDS the same way we treat the common

cold. The only disadvantage is that of the money. I don’t

really think people would agree with the budget becuase they

would want to keep the money for themselves. In general, if

we spent more on education than on welfare, we would be able

to think of better ways to improve the way we live and build

a better place where people can work and live peacefully.


ДОБАВИТЬ КОММЕНТАРИЙ  [можно без регистрации]
перед публикацией все комментарии рассматриваются модератором сайта - спам опубликован не будет

Ваше имя:


Хотите опубликовать свою статью или создать цикл из статей и лекций?
Это очень просто – нужна только регистрация на сайте.

opyright © MirZnanii.com 2015-2018. All rigths reserved.