Why only a "progressive" income tax?

[NYcarbineer]

Is that why you want to end Medicaid and food stamps and housing assistance and energy assistance?

What do you think the recipients of that help will do after it's gone?

Would it be pointless to wait for you to tell the truth?


Seems that anything beyond "vote Democrat" is too nuanced for you.

I'm asking you what will happen to the recipients of the welfare system after you've managed to fulfill your desire of ending all of their assistance?

How will that magically make their lives better?

what happened to them before the welfare system? They found jobs. No one wants to eliminate help for the truly needy, those who are physically or mentally unable to care for themselves, but able bodied people should not be given a free meal ticket, free housing, and free energy.

Able bodied people receiving any form of welfare should be required to do public service work before getting their payments-----------clean the streets, paint public buildings, collect the trash, clean the ditches, etc. AND, they should have to pass a drug test before even getting on the list and another one before collecting each payment.

Millions of people eligible for Medicaid and food stamps etc. HAVE jobs.

yes, and if they earn less than the minimum they would pay zero under any of the flat tax plans, and they would keep getting Medicaid and food stamps.

The OP's flat tax plan taxes gross income from your 1st dollar. Stay on topic.

 

[Redfish]

Would it be pointless to wait for you to tell the truth?


Seems that anything beyond "vote Democrat" is too nuanced for you.

I'm asking you what will happen to the recipients of the welfare system after you've managed to fulfill your desire of ending all of their assistance?

How will that magically make their lives better?

what happened to them before the welfare system? They found jobs. No one wants to eliminate help for the truly needy, those who are physically or mentally unable to care for themselves, but able bodied people should not be given a free meal ticket, free housing, and free energy.

Able bodied people receiving any form of welfare should be required to do public service work before getting their payments-----------clean the streets, paint public buildings, collect the trash, clean the ditches, etc. AND, they should have to pass a drug test before even getting on the list and another one before collecting each payment.

Millions of people eligible for Medicaid and food stamps etc. HAVE jobs.

yes, and if they earn less than the minimum they would pay zero under any of the flat tax plans, and they would keep getting Medicaid and food stamps.

The OP's flat tax plan taxes gross income from your 1st dollar. Stay on topic.

None of the flat tax plans that have been presented by the presidential candidates apply the flat rate at dollar one. They all have a floor below which there is no tax.

I am addressing the plans that have been presented, not those of the OP or any other poster on this board.

 

[NYcarbineer]

I'm asking you what will happen to the recipients of the welfare system after you've managed to fulfill your desire of ending all of their assistance?

How will that magically make their lives better?

what happened to them before the welfare system? They found jobs. No one wants to eliminate help for the truly needy, those who are physically or mentally unable to care for themselves, but able bodied people should not be given a free meal ticket, free housing, and free energy.

Able bodied people receiving any form of welfare should be required to do public service work before getting their payments-----------clean the streets, paint public buildings, collect the trash, clean the ditches, etc. AND, they should have to pass a drug test before even getting on the list and another one before collecting each payment.

Millions of people eligible for Medicaid and food stamps etc. HAVE jobs.

yes, and if they earn less than the minimum they would pay zero under any of the flat tax plans, and they would keep getting Medicaid and food stamps.

The OP's flat tax plan taxes gross income from your 1st dollar. Stay on topic.

None of the flat tax plans that have been presented by the presidential candidates apply the flat rate at dollar one. They all have a floor below which there is no tax.

I am addressing the plans that have been presented, not those of the OP or any other poster on this board.

The sort of plans you support screw the people in the middle or upper middle, compared to the current system.

 

[Redfish]

what happened to them before the welfare system? They found jobs. No one wants to eliminate help for the truly needy, those who are physically or mentally unable to care for themselves, but able bodied people should not be given a free meal ticket, free housing, and free energy.

Able bodied people receiving any form of welfare should be required to do public service work before getting their payments-----------clean the streets, paint public buildings, collect the trash, clean the ditches, etc. AND, they should have to pass a drug test before even getting on the list and another one before collecting each payment.

Millions of people eligible for Medicaid and food stamps etc. HAVE jobs.

yes, and if they earn less than the minimum they would pay zero under any of the flat tax plans, and they would keep getting Medicaid and food stamps.

The OP's flat tax plan taxes gross income from your 1st dollar. Stay on topic.

None of the flat tax plans that have been presented by the presidential candidates apply the flat rate at dollar one. They all have a floor below which there is no tax.

I am addressing the plans that have been presented, not those of the OP or any other poster on this board.

The sort of plans you support screw the people in the middle or upper middle, compared to the current system.

well that's your opinion, but its not supported by math. I am not an advocate of any of the plans, I was only trying to get the truth about them on the table.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Millions of people eligible for Medicaid and food stamps etc. HAVE jobs.

yes, and if they earn less than the minimum they would pay zero under any of the flat tax plans, and they would keep getting Medicaid and food stamps.

The OP's flat tax plan taxes gross income from your 1st dollar. Stay on topic.

None of the flat tax plans that have been presented by the presidential candidates apply the flat rate at dollar one. They all have a floor below which there is no tax.

I am addressing the plans that have been presented, not those of the OP or any other poster on this board.

The sort of plans you support screw the people in the middle or upper middle, compared to the current system.

well that's your opinion, but its not supported by math. I am not an advocate of any of the plans, I was only trying to get the truth about them on the table.

Not supported by another one of your claims not substantiated by anything.

A revenue neutral flat tax cuts the tax burden on the wealthiest by huge amounts. Mathematically that share of the tax burden has to be made up somewhere else.

Where is it made up?

 

[Ame®icano]

A person with a child, a household of 2, making 20,000 a year pays no income tax and is eligible for roughly 200 a month in foodstamps, give or take. That's 2400 a year in food stamps.

Under your plan, at a 10% flat tax, that person would pay 2000 in income tax, thus effectively PAYING FOR 80+% of the food stamps the household is getting.

That is insane by every measure.

In that case, the flat tax rate should be 15%.

 

[Skull Pilot]

It's been over for years

Yeah, let's pretend that this whole thing is really simple, and that when it finishes everything reverts back to normal, shall we?

Or maybe you could look into past recessions and see when the impact of the recession actually stops.

Unemployment is down. However someone decided that "real unemployment" is what matters now, for the first time ever, and that people who choose not to work are somehow "unemployed".

On the other hand there are issues which will never be solved, not because Obama or any other sucker is in the White House, but because politicians, in both the two leeching parties are unwilling to deal with such problems.

Excuses excuses that's the problem with this cuntry that and all the incessant whining

Excuses? I don't see excuses. Actually trying to find out what the reality is rather than playing silly beggers political partisan bullshit game is not making excuses.

But then passing off reality as "excuses" is an easy way of just passing off stuff you find inconvenient, isn't it?

You're making excuses as why a new simplified fair tax system won't work when it clearly would

You have no evidence it works.

You have no evidence it wouldn't

 

[Skull Pilot]

Maybe people think that stuff has to be paid for.

Rich people generally make more use of government services than poor people do.

A poor person will make use of their education and their children's education, of the roads they use and other infrastructure.

Businesses make use of the educations of many people, being able to pick and choose from many educated people, they use roads a lot more, using it to get their workforce to work, to get their goods around the country and so on and on.

Why shouldn't rich people pay for what they use?

I hear the claim that so called rich people use government services more

Yet no one has ever proven that

It's obvious that the poor use government services more than the rich

Rich people don't send their kids to public schools, don't get financial aid or default on government guaranteed student loans don't default on government backed mortgages don't use welfare or food stamps don't use public transportation etc etc and they pay the lion's share of taxes

You want to charge the poor for the government services that were legislated for the sole purpose of helping the poor, and because they were legislated for that purpose,

they were made free.

You're insane.

I want people with an income to pay income tax

Just like people who buy gas pay the gas tax

That is all I want so stop telling me what you think I want and fucking listen to what I say

A person with a child, a household of 2, making 20,000 a year pays no income tax and is eligible for roughly 200 a month in foodstamps, give or take. That's 2400 a year in food stamps.

Under your plan, at a 10% flat tax, that person would pay 2000 in income tax, thus effectively PAYING FOR 80+% of the food stamps the household is getting.

That is insane by every measure.

all flat tax plans have a floor under which no taxes are paid. the people in your example would not pay any income tax under any of the flat tax plans.

I have been proposing a flat tax from the first dollar because it makes no sense to exclude some income from tax only to charge a higher rate on the remaining income

If you make 100K but get to exempt 25K why pay a higher rate on 75 to get X when it's simpler to get X revenue by charging a a lower rate on the entire amount

 

[NYcarbineer]

Yeah, let's pretend that this whole thing is really simple, and that when it finishes everything reverts back to normal, shall we?

Or maybe you could look into past recessions and see when the impact of the recession actually stops.

Unemployment is down. However someone decided that "real unemployment" is what matters now, for the first time ever, and that people who choose not to work are somehow "unemployed".

On the other hand there are issues which will never be solved, not because Obama or any other sucker is in the White House, but because politicians, in both the two leeching parties are unwilling to deal with such problems.

Excuses excuses that's the problem with this cuntry that and all the incessant whining

Excuses? I don't see excuses. Actually trying to find out what the reality is rather than playing silly beggers political partisan bullshit game is not making excuses.

But then passing off reality as "excuses" is an easy way of just passing off stuff you find inconvenient, isn't it?

You're making excuses as why a new simplified fair tax system won't work when it clearly would

You have no evidence it works.

You have no evidence it wouldn't

I'm not the one advocating it.

 

[NYcarbineer]

I hear the claim that so called rich people use government services more

Yet no one has ever proven that

It's obvious that the poor use government services more than the rich

Rich people don't send their kids to public schools, don't get financial aid or default on government guaranteed student loans don't default on government backed mortgages don't use welfare or food stamps don't use public transportation etc etc and they pay the lion's share of taxes

You want to charge the poor for the government services that were legislated for the sole purpose of helping the poor, and because they were legislated for that purpose,

they were made free.

You're insane.

I want people with an income to pay income tax

Just like people who buy gas pay the gas tax

That is all I want so stop telling me what you think I want and fucking listen to what I say

A person with a child, a household of 2, making 20,000 a year pays no income tax and is eligible for roughly 200 a month in foodstamps, give or take. That's 2400 a year in food stamps.

Under your plan, at a 10% flat tax, that person would pay 2000 in income tax, thus effectively PAYING FOR 80+% of the food stamps the household is getting.

That is insane by every measure.

all flat tax plans have a floor under which no taxes are paid. the people in your example would not pay any income tax under any of the flat tax plans.

I have been proposing a flat tax from the first dollar because it makes no sense to exclude some income from tax only to charge a higher rate on the remaining income

If you make 100K but get to exempt 25K why pay a higher rate on 75 to get X when it's simpler to get X revenue by charging a a lower rate on the entire amount

Why would you have the working poor buy their food stamps?

 

[Redfish]

I hear the claim that so called rich people use government services more

Yet no one has ever proven that

It's obvious that the poor use government services more than the rich

Rich people don't send their kids to public schools, don't get financial aid or default on government guaranteed student loans don't default on government backed mortgages don't use welfare or food stamps don't use public transportation etc etc and they pay the lion's share of taxes

You want to charge the poor for the government services that were legislated for the sole purpose of helping the poor, and because they were legislated for that purpose,

they were made free.

You're insane.

I want people with an income to pay income tax

Just like people who buy gas pay the gas tax

That is all I want so stop telling me what you think I want and fucking listen to what I say

A person with a child, a household of 2, making 20,000 a year pays no income tax and is eligible for roughly 200 a month in foodstamps, give or take. That's 2400 a year in food stamps.

Under your plan, at a 10% flat tax, that person would pay 2000 in income tax, thus effectively PAYING FOR 80+% of the food stamps the household is getting.

That is insane by every measure.

all flat tax plans have a floor under which no taxes are paid. the people in your example would not pay any income tax under any of the flat tax plans.

I have been proposing a flat tax from the first dollar because it makes no sense to exclude some income from tax only to charge a higher rate on the remaining income

If you make 100K but get to exempt 25K why pay a higher rate on 75 to get X when it's simpler to get X revenue by charging a a lower rate on the entire amount

I think there needs to be a floor, or a rebate to anyone making under a specified amount.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Is that why you want to end Medicaid and food stamps and housing assistance and energy assistance?

What do you think the recipients of that help will do after it's gone?

Would it be pointless to wait for you to tell the truth?


Seems that anything beyond "vote Democrat" is too nuanced for you.

I'm asking you what will happen to the recipients of the welfare system after you've managed to fulfill your desire of ending all of their assistance?

How will that magically make their lives better?

what happened to them before the welfare system? They found jobs. No one wants to eliminate help for the truly needy, those who are physically or mentally unable to care for themselves, but able bodied people should not be given a free meal ticket, free housing, and free energy.

Able bodied people receiving any form of welfare should be required to do public service work before getting their payments-----------clean the streets, paint public buildings, collect the trash, clean the ditches, etc. AND, they should have to pass a drug test before even getting on the list and another one before collecting each payment.

Millions of people eligible for Medicaid and food stamps etc. HAVE jobs.

yes, and if they earn less than the minimum they would pay zero under any of the flat tax plans, and they would keep getting Medicaid and food stamps.

Let's not forget that even those well above minimum wage are eligible for the Republican-created 'Earned Income Tax Credit"

 

[PoliticalChic]

It already does, you and I get paid, taxes are taken from our paychecks, some of that money goes to people on food stamps and welfare, much is consumed by the govt beaurocracy.

And lots and lots of it is used to convince the simpleminded that the welfare system does any thing but maintain poverty encourage the habits that produce poverty.

Is that why you want to end Medicaid and food stamps and housing assistance and energy assistance?

What do you think the recipients of that help will do after it's gone?

Would it be pointless to wait for you to tell the truth?


Seems that anything beyond "vote Democrat" is too nuanced for you.

I'm asking you what will happen to the recipients of the welfare system after you've managed to fulfill your desire of ending all of their assistance?

How will that magically make their lives better?

what happened to them before the welfare system? They found jobs. No one wants to eliminate help for the truly needy, those who are physically or mentally unable to care for themselves, but able bodied people should not be given a free meal ticket, free housing, and free energy.

Able bodied people receiving any form of welfare should be required to do public service work before getting their payments-----------clean the streets, paint public buildings, collect the trash, clean the ditches, etc. AND, they should have to pass a drug test before even getting on the list and another one before collecting each payment.

The question is, what should be the source of the help.....the Liberal Welfare System certainly isn't doing the job.

 

[Redfish]

yes, and if they earn less than the minimum they would pay zero under any of the flat tax plans, and they would keep getting Medicaid and food stamps.

The OP's flat tax plan taxes gross income from your 1st dollar. Stay on topic.

None of the flat tax plans that have been presented by the presidential candidates apply the flat rate at dollar one. They all have a floor below which there is no tax.

I am addressing the plans that have been presented, not those of the OP or any other poster on this board.

The sort of plans you support screw the people in the middle or upper middle, compared to the current system.

well that's your opinion, but its not supported by math. I am not an advocate of any of the plans, I was only trying to get the truth about them on the table.

Not supported by another one of your claims not substantiated by anything.

A revenue neutral flat tax cuts the tax burden on the wealthiest by huge amounts. Mathematically that share of the tax burden has to be made up somewhere else.

Where is it made up?

If the rich have more spendable money, where will they spend it? In the economy. more money spent equals more jobs, more jobs equals more income, more income equals more tax collections. Its not complicated.

Now, if you say the rich wont spend the extra and will invest it instead, what happens when businesses have more investment money to spend? they spend it on expansion, new equipment, more employees. All of which result in more taxes paid, again, not complicated.

Your problem is that you are jealous of rich successful people and want to punish them via the tax code.

 

[Redfish]

And lots and lots of it is used to convince the simpleminded that the welfare system does any thing but maintain poverty encourage the habits that produce poverty.

Is that why you want to end Medicaid and food stamps and housing assistance and energy assistance?

What do you think the recipients of that help will do after it's gone?

Would it be pointless to wait for you to tell the truth?


Seems that anything beyond "vote Democrat" is too nuanced for you.

I'm asking you what will happen to the recipients of the welfare system after you've managed to fulfill your desire of ending all of their assistance?

How will that magically make their lives better?

what happened to them before the welfare system? They found jobs. No one wants to eliminate help for the truly needy, those who are physically or mentally unable to care for themselves, but able bodied people should not be given a free meal ticket, free housing, and free energy.

Able bodied people receiving any form of welfare should be required to do public service work before getting their payments-----------clean the streets, paint public buildings, collect the trash, clean the ditches, etc. AND, they should have to pass a drug test before even getting on the list and another one before collecting each payment.

The question is, what should be the source of the help.....the Liberal Welfare System certainly isn't doing the job.

we all know that private charity works better and more efficiently, but the reality of the USA today is that there isn't enough private charity to cover those truly In need.

for the record, I have no sympathy for able bodied people who are too lazy to work, or even look for work.

 

[Hedgology]

People like you think no one's income is their own but what the government leaves them after they take what they want

Maybe people think that stuff has to be paid for.

Rich people generally make more use of government services than poor people do.

A poor person will make use of their education and their children's education, of the roads they use and other infrastructure.

Businesses make use of the educations of many people, being able to pick and choose from many educated people, they use roads a lot more, using it to get their workforce to work, to get their goods around the country and so on and on.

Why shouldn't rich people pay for what they use?

I hear the claim that so called rich people use government services more

Yet no one has ever proven that

It's obvious that the poor use government services more than the rich

Rich people don't send their kids to public schools, don't get financial aid or default on government guaranteed student loans don't default on government backed mortgages don't use welfare or food stamps don't use public transportation etc etc and they pay the lion's share of taxes

You want to charge the poor for the government services that were legislated for the sole purpose of helping the poor, and because they were legislated for that purpose,

they were made free.

You're insane.

I want people with an income to pay income tax

Just like people who buy gas pay the gas tax

That is all I want so stop telling me what you think I want and fucking listen to what I say

People with income, who currently pay no tax and receive government assistance, under your plan, would start paying income tax.

They would be receiving assistance from the government that was once free but now is costing them the amount of their income tax.

Therefore, yes, you do want the poor to start paying for their government assistance,

which is insane at every level.

Actually, there is nothing insane about it.

At least, it's not insane if you truly want to implement lots of social programs, which needs adequate funding. This is exactly what Nordic nations have done for a long time. Their tax structure is set up so it targets the poor vastly more than the wealthy. Essentially, these countries are taxing the poor, to pay the poor.

Another reason the Bush tax cuts negatively impacted revenue growth. While indeed, the tax cuts allowed the wealth to keep more of their income, this only covers one-quarter of the tax cuts. The rest of the tax cuts were towards the middle class and the working poor, and there are significantly more non-rich than there are rich people.

This means if you want to fund adequately fund the government in any meaningful way, you're going to have to soak them.

 

[NYcarbineer]

And lots and lots of it is used to convince the simpleminded that the welfare system does any thing but maintain poverty encourage the habits that produce poverty.

Is that why you want to end Medicaid and food stamps and housing assistance and energy assistance?

What do you think the recipients of that help will do after it's gone?

Would it be pointless to wait for you to tell the truth?


Seems that anything beyond "vote Democrat" is too nuanced for you.

I'm asking you what will happen to the recipients of the welfare system after you've managed to fulfill your desire of ending all of their assistance?

How will that magically make their lives better?

what happened to them before the welfare system? They found jobs. No one wants to eliminate help for the truly needy, those who are physically or mentally unable to care for themselves, but able bodied people should not be given a free meal ticket, free housing, and free energy.

Able bodied people receiving any form of welfare should be required to do public service work before getting their payments-----------clean the streets, paint public buildings, collect the trash, clean the ditches, etc. AND, they should have to pass a drug test before even getting on the list and another one before collecting each payment.

The question is, what should be the source of the help.....the Liberal Welfare System certainly isn't doing the job.

On the contrary:

America's Real Poverty Rate Is Around And About Zero

 

[NYcarbineer]

Is that why you want to end Medicaid and food stamps and housing assistance and energy assistance?

What do you think the recipients of that help will do after it's gone?

Would it be pointless to wait for you to tell the truth?


Seems that anything beyond "vote Democrat" is too nuanced for you.

I'm asking you what will happen to the recipients of the welfare system after you've managed to fulfill your desire of ending all of their assistance?

How will that magically make their lives better?

what happened to them before the welfare system? They found jobs. No one wants to eliminate help for the truly needy, those who are physically or mentally unable to care for themselves, but able bodied people should not be given a free meal ticket, free housing, and free energy.

Able bodied people receiving any form of welfare should be required to do public service work before getting their payments-----------clean the streets, paint public buildings, collect the trash, clean the ditches, etc. AND, they should have to pass a drug test before even getting on the list and another one before collecting each payment.

The question is, what should be the source of the help.....the Liberal Welfare System certainly isn't doing the job.

we all know that private charity works better and more efficiently, but the reality of the USA today is that there isn't enough private charity to cover those truly In need.

for the record, I have no sympathy for able bodied people who are too lazy to work, or even look for work.

Charity does not work better. Take note too that the flat tax here does away with the charitable deduction.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Is that why you want to end Medicaid and food stamps and housing assistance and energy assistance?

What do you think the recipients of that help will do after it's gone?

Would it be pointless to wait for you to tell the truth?


Seems that anything beyond "vote Democrat" is too nuanced for you.

I'm asking you what will happen to the recipients of the welfare system after you've managed to fulfill your desire of ending all of their assistance?

How will that magically make their lives better?

what happened to them before the welfare system? They found jobs. No one wants to eliminate help for the truly needy, those who are physically or mentally unable to care for themselves, but able bodied people should not be given a free meal ticket, free housing, and free energy.

Able bodied people receiving any form of welfare should be required to do public service work before getting their payments-----------clean the streets, paint public buildings, collect the trash, clean the ditches, etc. AND, they should have to pass a drug test before even getting on the list and another one before collecting each payment.

The question is, what should be the source of the help.....the Liberal Welfare System certainly isn't doing the job.

we all know that private charity works better and more efficiently, but the reality of the USA today is that there isn't enough private charity to cover those truly In need.

for the record, I have no sympathy for able bodied people who are too lazy to work, or even look for work.

"...the reality of the USA today is that there isn't enough private charity to cover those truly In need."

Actually, we don't know that.
Roosevelt took over private charity based on the enormous numbers of unemployed that the created....or at least, added to.



Prior to Franklin Roosevelt, welfare was handled by charities and churches, carefully considering who got the relief, and the reasons for same.

Under FDR, welfare and charity became a patronage endeavor, to get votes rather than to ease suffering.

The Reconstruction Finance Corporation (RFC) doled out relief nationally to those states with the best political connections. The Emergency Relief and Construction Act of 1932 began with the best of intentions...but under the Democrats it went to well-connected friends, including mayors and governors.

Illinois, a swing state, got $55,443,721, which was almost 20% of the RFC's $300 million, more than NY, California, and Texas combined.
Murray Rothbard, "America's Great Depression," p.262-263.



But in terms of functionality....private charity is far more efficacious.
Marvin Olasky, in "The Tragedy of American Compassion," explains that human needs were taken care of by other human beings- not by bureaucracies. The important difference was that the latter may take care of food and shelter...but the former also dealt with the human spirit and behavior.
Welfare programs today, are Liberal….conservatives don’t look for material solutions, but understand that changing values is what solves the problem of poverty..

 

[NYcarbineer]

Would it be pointless to wait for you to tell the truth?


Seems that anything beyond "vote Democrat" is too nuanced for you.

I'm asking you what will happen to the recipients of the welfare system after you've managed to fulfill your desire of ending all of their assistance?

How will that magically make their lives better?

what happened to them before the welfare system? They found jobs. No one wants to eliminate help for the truly needy, those who are physically or mentally unable to care for themselves, but able bodied people should not be given a free meal ticket, free housing, and free energy.

Able bodied people receiving any form of welfare should be required to do public service work before getting their payments-----------clean the streets, paint public buildings, collect the trash, clean the ditches, etc. AND, they should have to pass a drug test before even getting on the list and another one before collecting each payment.

The question is, what should be the source of the help.....the Liberal Welfare System certainly isn't doing the job.

we all know that private charity works better and more efficiently, but the reality of the USA today is that there isn't enough private charity to cover those truly In need.

for the record, I have no sympathy for able bodied people who are too lazy to work, or even look for work.

Actually, we don't know that.
Roosevelt took over private charity based on the enormous numbers of unemployed that the creates....or at least, added to.



Prior to Franklin Roosevelt, welfare was handled by charities and churches, carefully considering who got the relief, and the reasons for same.

Under FDR, welfare and charity became a patronage endeavor, to get votes rather than to ease suffering.

The Reconstruction Finance Corporation (RFC) doled out relief nationally to those states with the best political connections. The Emergency Relief and Construction Act of 1932 began with the best of intentions...but under the Democrats it went to well-connected friends, including mayors and governors.

Illinois, a swing state, got $55,443,721, which was almost 20% of the RFC's $300 million, more than NY, California, and Texas combined.
Murray Rothbard, "America's Great Depression," p.262-263.



But in terms of functionality....private charity is far more efficacious.
Marvin Olasky, in "The Tragedy of American Compassion," explains that human needs were taken care of by other human beings- not by bureaucracies. The important difference was that the latter may take care of food and shelter...but the former also dealt with the human spirit and behavior.
Welfare programs today, are Liberal….conservatives don’t look for material solutions, but understand that changing values is what solves the problem of poverty..

Conservatives just want to let the poor experience poverty to its fullest on the theory that the pain will make them magically leap out of poverty.