Study: More Than Half a Trillion Dollars Spent on Welfare But Poverty Levels Unaffect

You can find the rest of the article at the link. There are some very interesting reader comments there as well.

I look forward to reading your comments

 

Welfare was never intended to relieve poverty. It was intended to turn people into dependents that can be controlled.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iR6oYX1D-0w"]Aloe Blacc - I Need A Dollar - Official Video HQ - YouTube

 

Controlled in the sense that a support / voter base for the proponents of such programs has been built and is growing by leaps and bounds at every turn.

"When the people find that they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic."

 

big numbers always sound bigger until they're put into context. like the REAL number of people on the planet, and the extravagance that is lavished on conflict and the means of killing.

 

Thanks for beating me to it.

 

BIG banks have money invested in the FOODSTAMP system. The money they give the poor people, is less than the money they get back on the goods the poor people buy.. fact.

 

Wow what good responses I hope to see more comments.

 

Stopped reading at "libertarian Cato institute". How can you have a research organization with an agenda/ideology?

 

Call me a bitch, but I think in order to be eligible for welfare you should have to get sterilized! People, if you don't have the money to feed yourself, how the hell are you going to have the money to feed an infant??? I don't fucking get it and it pisses me off to see the same people on welfare continuously popping out kids left and right.

 

in regards to this, I think IF welfare was redesigned to get people out of the cycle of poverty (which it will not be because welfare is designed to perpetuate the cycle) it should be designed with continuing education requirements, including sex education and easy access to birth control.

 

We all know that statistics and reports can, and usually are, provided with some 'slant' toward a particular viewpoint -- even if perception of such is based on the connotation of words or phrases included. One might even find it difficult to find a "research organization" without some agenda or leaning toward a particular ideology. Finding fault with statistics / reports are usually easier if one happens to disagree with an organization's (alleged or perceived) agenda/ideology.

What are your disagreements with the report of the OP?

 

Even though I have said the same at one time or another, the sterilization thing may be taking the issue a bit too far -- there are certain types of cases where such would seem completely justified.

A problem that seems to be ever-increasing is the second and third generation welfare recipients. Kids learn by imitation -- too often, what they grow up with becomes the norm and the acceptable way of life. Then, they go on to produce yet another wave of those increasingly dependant on the government's support.

"Education", at least to some extent, seems to have failed to provide the solution to the welfare problem. It's certainly time for stronger measures!!

 

I agree, education is also a major issue.

 

"I am for doing good to the poor, but I differ in opinion of the means. I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it. In my youth I traveled much, and I observed in different countries, that the more public provisions were made for the poor, the less they provided for themselves, and of course became poorer. And, on the contrary, the less was done for them, the more they did for themselves, and became richer. " -Benjamin Franklin


I think welfare recipients property should be taken in consideration before being accepted. If someone has a $30,000 car, flat screens in every room of their house, designer clothes/jewelry/accessories, etc. they should have to sell those items of luxury before they can claim Benifits. Though this may be easier said than done.

 

Here are some numbers from CNN:

here are the dry no slant government welfare numbers:

1. Total number of American’s on welfare 15,000,000
2. Percent of the US population on welfare 4.1 % Total government spending on welfare annually (not including food stamps or unemployment) $131.9 billion
3. Percent of recipients who are white 38.8 %
4. Percent of recipients who are black 39.8 %
5. Percent of recipients who are hispanic 15.7 %
6. Percent of recipients who are Asian 2.4 %
7. Percent of recipients who are Other 3.3 %
8. Total amount of money you can make monthly and still receive Welfare $1000
9. Total Number of U.S. States where Welfare pays more than an $8 per hour job 40
10. Number of U.S. States where Welfare pays more than a $12 per hour job 7
11. Number of U.S. States where Welfare pays more than the average salary of a U.S. Teacher 9

 

Some states do include consideration of assets in their eligibility criteria: http://www.tanf-benefits.com/

Under-staffing is generally cited as reason that asset information provided by applicants is not fully verified. In many cases, no consequence (other than denial of further benefits) is suffered if such information is later found to be erroneous -- only the most extreme cases are generally prosecuted as "welfare fraud".

 

it's simple. The more people we kill, the less people there are to be impoverished.

 

So far, even that hasn't worked.

 

Food for thought, even if you disagree with the content: http://insurancenewsnet.com/article.aspx?id=328354 (a bit long, but worth the time)