Sunshine
Trust the pie.
- Dec 17, 2009
- 19,377
- 3,398
- 183
So how much does the US spend on social welfare? The answer to that question may differ according to one's political leaning.
It seems that there are some who think the richer we can keep rich people, the more job possibilities there will be out there for them. Those same ones completely discount that ALL of the social welfare money goes right back into the economy because the recipients spend it all almost immediately. And this creates jobs as well.
There also seems to be some misconception that social welfare recipients are able to work but choose not to work. Is this really the case? Are you aware that you can disable someone by giving them cradle to grave protection. I've worked with a fairly large cohort of this population and, yes, some have given up their freedom for security, as Maslow describes in his seminal work about the hierarchy of needs. But once they have crossed that break I see very little possibility of EVER getting them back into the work force again. And most truly need the social welfare due to mental illness, low IQ, or just being 'stuck' where they are. Think about it. They can't ALL work at the local fast food joint. Some, maybe yes, but the rest who have no transportation would have to spend the biggest part of their income on work expenses like transportation. That is VERY stifling to the motivation to work.
IMO, it seems to me that care for this contingent of people, whether they need it or not, and most DO need it, has fallen to the middle class, and yet, it isn't really the middle class that has created the demographic. Bearing that in mind, then why doesn't the richest 1% just directly support the poorest 10% of the American population and leave the middle class competely out of it. After all that richest 1% holds roughly 95% of the wealth of the US.
I was thinking about this yesterday when contemplating an income tax in the town where I work. I don't live in that town, and I don't get to vote on anything there, yet that town taxes me 2% of my earnings there just because I work on their soil. Then I hauled out my pay stub and added up ALL the taxes I paid for one month. When I compared that to what SS estimates I will have to live on when I retire, I pay $1000 more a month in taxes than I will have as income as a Social Security recipient. What's wrong with this picture?
It seems that there are some who think the richer we can keep rich people, the more job possibilities there will be out there for them. Those same ones completely discount that ALL of the social welfare money goes right back into the economy because the recipients spend it all almost immediately. And this creates jobs as well.
There also seems to be some misconception that social welfare recipients are able to work but choose not to work. Is this really the case? Are you aware that you can disable someone by giving them cradle to grave protection. I've worked with a fairly large cohort of this population and, yes, some have given up their freedom for security, as Maslow describes in his seminal work about the hierarchy of needs. But once they have crossed that break I see very little possibility of EVER getting them back into the work force again. And most truly need the social welfare due to mental illness, low IQ, or just being 'stuck' where they are. Think about it. They can't ALL work at the local fast food joint. Some, maybe yes, but the rest who have no transportation would have to spend the biggest part of their income on work expenses like transportation. That is VERY stifling to the motivation to work.
IMO, it seems to me that care for this contingent of people, whether they need it or not, and most DO need it, has fallen to the middle class, and yet, it isn't really the middle class that has created the demographic. Bearing that in mind, then why doesn't the richest 1% just directly support the poorest 10% of the American population and leave the middle class competely out of it. After all that richest 1% holds roughly 95% of the wealth of the US.
I was thinking about this yesterday when contemplating an income tax in the town where I work. I don't live in that town, and I don't get to vote on anything there, yet that town taxes me 2% of my earnings there just because I work on their soil. Then I hauled out my pay stub and added up ALL the taxes I paid for one month. When I compared that to what SS estimates I will have to live on when I retire, I pay $1000 more a month in taxes than I will have as income as a Social Security recipient. What's wrong with this picture?
Last edited: