If you don't believe that, why don't you believe they'll spend an appropriate amount of money to support their kids?
My company entrusts me with a lot of responsibility, yet does not provide me the option to cash out my benefits package. It's nothing about treating people "like children". It never has been. I keep saying that and you keep ignoring me when I say that. It's about society paying into a system in order to achieve specific goals.
Trust of each individual is not a factor... if it were, it would require increased overhead to determine those who are trustworthy and those who are not, and to tailor the program to each individual case. Is that what you want? More overhead?
And you glossed over the telling fact that you yourself suggested that the disabled should be an exception as if you see some virtue there you do not see in the working poor.
I said "which are special cases and perhaps should be handled differently". As in, I don't know and I haven't thought it through. But I wasn't saying that they should not have restrictions... I was more leaning toward providing them with an additional unrestricted cash fund, simply because the incentive to work created by keeping entitlements on the low side and restricted would not make a difference for those people.
But again, I don't know, it's a worthy issue to discuss but it's not the central matter. In fact, providing that fund for those who cannot work would be a separate matter altogether... they would still receive the same restricted entitlements that everyone else would receive.
I think they can't budget properly because they have little choice but to deal with the welfare system where working more hours or getting a raise can leave you with less money and actually saving money in a bank like a normal person can leave you destitute.
Perhaps, and of course one of the points of this system is to get rid of the one you are talking about.
That is true mostly because of people piling on rules they claimed were meant to make sure the welfare money was being spent properly.
No... it's because the current system fundamentally does not provide for all basic needs on a permanent basis. Getting a job today means you lose entitlement benefits. That would not be the same under my system.