Welfare

A forum not related to waterfowl for discussing the more controversial and hot topic issues in our world from immigration, politics, the war, etc..

Moderators: Smackaduck, MM

Welfare

Postby OmegaRed » Wed Aug 28, 2013 6:56 am

http://www.cato.org/publications/white- ... fare-trade

"The Work versus Welfare Trade-Off: 2013
By Michael D. Tanner and Charles Hughes
August 19, 2013

In 1995, the Cato Institute published a groundbreaking study, The Work vs. Welfare Trade-Off, which estimated the value of the full package of welfare benefits available to a typical recipient in each of the 50 states and the District of Columbia. It found that not only did the value of such benefits greatly exceed the poverty level but, because welfare benefits are tax-free, their dollar value was greater than the amount of take-home income a worker would receive from an entry-level job.

Since then, many welfare programs have undergone significant change, including the 1996 welfare reform legislation that ended the Aid to Families with Dependent Children program and replaced it with the Temporary Assistance to Needy Families program. Accordingly, this paper examines the current welfare system in the same manner as the 1995 paper. Welfare benefits continue to outpace the income that most recipients can expect to earn from an entry-level job, and the balance between welfare and work may actually have grown worse in recent years.

The current welfare system provides such a high level of benefits that it acts as a disincentive for work. Welfare currently pays more than a minimum-wage job in 35 states, even after accounting for the Earned Income Tax Credit, and in 13 states it pays more than $15 per hour. If Congress and state legislatures are serious about reducing welfare dependence and rewarding work, they should consider strengthening welfare work requirements, removing exemptions, and narrowing the definition of work. Moreover, states should consider ways to shrink the gap between the value of welfare and work by reducing current benefit levels and tightening eligibility requirements."

Also visit the site for full study @ bottom. Some of the figures blew me away. I suggest anyone interested read
OHIODUCKA5 wrote:
Federal Xperts. Would be the only expert I'd want to deal with it

Xpert hunter ^
User avatar
OmegaRed
Fabio
 
Posts: 3112
Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2012 10:38 am
Location: OHIO


Re: Welfare

Postby SpinnerMan » Wed Aug 28, 2013 9:19 am

OmegaRed wrote:Some of the figures blew me away.
I have seen the destructive impact of this in practice. If you live in a neighborhood where the average household income is close to 6 figures or better, this has no impact on your life. If you live some where that the average kid is not going to college, a large fraction of the first homes have wheels on them or have similar price tags, etc., this creates a huge disincentive to work, to marry, to get a second job, to do the things that are necessary to move your family up the economic ladder and the kids learn by example and emulate what their mom did and the random men that shared her bed, some of which were called dad by one or more of the kids living with mom.

My Aunt's step-daughter's husband (the type of family created by these incentives) worked at a factory where the single mothers fought a pay raise because it would have cost them more in lost childcare benefits. These kind of incentives just freeze people in economic place. The hurdle is too big to move up and if they slip back, they get froze in place there for the same reason. It doesn't just harm those taking the welfare, but it harms everybody because all those other factory workers are now at economic odds with the single mothers who ironically are on the side of the corporation fighting for lower pay.
A politician thinks of the next election; a statesman of the next generation. A politician looks for the success of his party; a statesman for that of the country. The statesman wished to steer, while the politician was satisfied to drift.
User avatar
SpinnerMan
hunter
 
Posts: 15772
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 11:24 am
Location: Joliet, IL

Re: Welfare

Postby ScaupHunter » Wed Aug 28, 2013 10:11 am

It is both amazing and sad how our government took a program designed to be short term help for citizens and turned it into a handout program. I am always suprised to hear people claim that welfare is a helping hand and improves the lives of the people who are on welfare.
Bella's
Decoy Setting Pro Staff
Boat Operator Pro Staff
Duck Shooting Pro Staff
Warm Towel Pro Staff
Snack Supply Pro Staff

He works for free! Who's the B now?
User avatar
ScaupHunter
hunter
 
Posts: 6387
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2012 5:57 am

Re: Welfare

Postby assateague » Wed Aug 28, 2013 10:34 am

The only people it helps are the politicians. Which is why they all must go.
WOLVERINES

Give a man a fish and he eats for a day. Let a man vote to give himself a fish and he eats until society collapses.
User avatar
assateague
Emu hunter extraordinaire
 
Posts: 21277
Joined: Tue Oct 06, 2009 12:25 pm
Location: Eastern Shore, People's Republic of Maryland

Re: Welfare

Postby SpinnerMan » Wed Aug 28, 2013 10:38 am

In addition to welfare being an economic trap that institutionalize poverty and freezes most people at the lowest economic point in their life, it is also an intellectual trap.

If we must provide "temporary" assistance, how can we cut them off if they still "need" the assistance?

If not providing them that initial temporary assistance is too harmful, when would it ever cease being too harmful to not provide?

It is a never ending loop that ends in wide spread poverty and vastly more "need" for these programs than anyone ever dreamed possible.

If welfare were treated as insurance and not as helping the needy, it could work.

Car insurance - if you total your car, you "need" to replace it. The insurance company cuts you a check. If you take that check and blow it on booze or at the casino, you still have just as much "need" for a car as ever, so what?

Car welfare - you need a car, they cut you a check, you still need a car, here's another check. It never ends until your "need" ends and why would your need ever end, they will stop cutting you check, will they not? You have a car and need a check, you might even have an "accident" to get that check, depending on the size of the check and the value of your car. :yes:

We elect tax cheats, why would there be a widespread moral outrage over welfare cheats? Both are stealing from the same tax payers.
A politician thinks of the next election; a statesman of the next generation. A politician looks for the success of his party; a statesman for that of the country. The statesman wished to steer, while the politician was satisfied to drift.
User avatar
SpinnerMan
hunter
 
Posts: 15772
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 11:24 am
Location: Joliet, IL

Re: Welfare

Postby OmegaRed » Wed Aug 28, 2013 10:45 am

SpinnerMan wrote:In addition to welfare being an economic trap that institutionalize poverty and freezes most people at the lowest economic point in their life, it is also an intellectual trap.

If we must provide "temporary" assistance, how can we cut them off if they still "need" the assistance?

If not providing them that initial temporary assistance is too harmful, when would it ever cease being too harmful to not provide?

It is a never ending loop that ends in wide spread poverty and vastly more "need" for these programs than anyone ever dreamed possible.

If welfare were treated as insurance and not as helping the needy, it could work.

Car insurance - if you total your car, you "need" to replace it. The insurance company cuts you a check. If you take that check and blow it on booze or at the casino, you still have just as much "need" for a car as ever, so what?

Car welfare - you need a car, they cut you a check, you still need a car, here's another check. It never ends until your "need" ends and why would your need ever end, they will stop cutting you check, will they not? You have a car and need a check, you might even have an "accident" to get that check, depending on the size of the check and the value of your car. :yes:

We elect tax cheats, why would there be a widespread moral outrage over welfare cheats? Both are stealing from the same tax payers.


Some very valid points in this :thumbsup:
OHIODUCKA5 wrote:
Federal Xperts. Would be the only expert I'd want to deal with it

Xpert hunter ^
User avatar
OmegaRed
Fabio
 
Posts: 3112
Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2012 10:38 am
Location: OHIO

Re: Welfare

Postby vincentpa » Wed Aug 28, 2013 6:56 pm

Are you having a conversion?

Europeans can't believe it when I tell them our poor have almost the same buying power as the median middle class European. They don't get nearly what our poor do. Consequently, their families and culture haven't been destroyed.
In a free society, it is not the obligation of the citizen to prove to the government that he is a good person. It is the obligation of the government to prove to the rest of the citizenry that the citizen is a bad person, with probable cause.
User avatar
vincentpa
hunter
 
Posts: 7715
Joined: Wed Nov 10, 2010 6:50 am
Location: Pittsburgh, PA

Re: Welfare

Postby blackduckdog2 » Thu Aug 29, 2013 2:41 am

vincentpa wrote:Are you having a conversion?

Europeans can't believe it when I tell them our poor have almost the same buying power as the median middle class European. They don't get nearly what our poor do. Consequently, their families and culture haven't been destroyed.

Europeans don't maintain an income disparity anywhere near like we do. Consequently, they don't generate anywhere near the volume of poor that we do. Or the incarcerated, to take it a step further. Comparing the problem of European poverty, within its entire social context, to the problem of American poverty is just silly
"We have met the enemy, and he is us."
Walt Kelly, via Slow's avatar. Look it up
User avatar
blackduckdog2
hunter
 
Posts: 6286
Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2008 11:02 am

Re: Welfare

Postby boney fingers » Thu Aug 29, 2013 5:14 am

blackduckdog2 wrote:
vincentpa wrote:Are you having a conversion?

Europeans can't believe it when I tell them our poor have almost the same buying power as the median middle class European. They don't get nearly what our poor do. Consequently, their families and culture haven't been destroyed.

Europeans don't maintain an income disparity anywhere near like we do. Consequently, they don't generate anywhere near the volume of poor that we do. Or the incarcerated, to take it a step further. Comparing the problem of European poverty, within its entire social context, to the problem of American poverty is just silly


You mean all those poor people that can barely afford, smart phones, tattoos, lottery tickets, fast food, drugs, alcohol, smokes, and big screen TVs; I feel real bad for them.
boney fingers
hunter
 
Posts: 793
Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2012 6:30 pm

Re: Welfare

Postby vincentpa » Thu Aug 29, 2013 5:15 am

blackduckdog2 wrote:
vincentpa wrote:Are you having a conversion?

Europeans can't believe it when I tell them our poor have almost the same buying power as the median middle class European. They don't get nearly what our poor do. Consequently, their families and culture haven't been destroyed.

Europeans don't maintain an income disparity anywhere near like we do. Consequently, they don't generate anywhere near the volume of poor that we do. Or the incarcerated, to take it a step further. Comparing the problem of European poverty, within its entire social context, to the problem of American poverty is just silly


Not quite as silly as your post. I'm scratching my head as to your ridiculous response. It's ok if all society is equally poor as long as there is less income inequality. :huh: Income inequality has nothing to do with it. The amount of poor in Europe is about the same as the amount of poor here. Their poor generally don't behave like animals like ours. The European middle class has less disposable income than ours. They generally earn less. Things are more expensive because of VAT taxes. By our standards, most European middle class are poor and their buying power is miniscule.
In a free society, it is not the obligation of the citizen to prove to the government that he is a good person. It is the obligation of the government to prove to the rest of the citizenry that the citizen is a bad person, with probable cause.
User avatar
vincentpa
hunter
 
Posts: 7715
Joined: Wed Nov 10, 2010 6:50 am
Location: Pittsburgh, PA

Re: Welfare

Postby SpinnerMan » Thu Aug 29, 2013 5:36 am

blackduckdog2 wrote:Europeans don't maintain an income disparity anywhere near like we do.
So back when we were living in caves, income inequality was the least it has ever been. I guess it has been all down hill since them.

What about the massive income income inequality between the U.S. and just about every country in the world?

Is it only within a state, a country, or do we need to redistribute across the planet to improve this statistic?

Do we need to age adjust this statistic like we do cancer rates or other things where there is a very large variation with age such that changing demographics skew the statistic?

How large is the inequality between the 20 year old you and the 45 year old you? If you were making the same at 20 as 45, adjusted for inflation of course, I'm sorry to hear that, you probably didn't have a rewarding career. Although, you could have had a good job and your career was not important to you.

In my personal case, the income inequality between the young engineers that will replace me some day is quite huge. Is this a bad thing? Why? If not, how do we correct the statistic to ensure you are measuring whatever you think you are measuring with this statistic?

If you are serious, you need to dig deeper otherwise you are simply engaged in the old age that figures never lie, but liars figure and you are quoting a statistic because it supports your agenda and not because it provides insight.
A politician thinks of the next election; a statesman of the next generation. A politician looks for the success of his party; a statesman for that of the country. The statesman wished to steer, while the politician was satisfied to drift.
User avatar
SpinnerMan
hunter
 
Posts: 15772
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 11:24 am
Location: Joliet, IL

Re: Welfare

Postby Andy W » Thu Aug 29, 2013 6:23 am

ScaupHunter wrote:It is both amazing and sad how our government took a program designed to be short term help for citizens and turned it into a vote buying program.

Fixed it.
Andy W
hunter
 
Posts: 612
Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2008 8:30 am
Location: KY

Re: Welfare

Postby beretta24 » Sat Aug 31, 2013 8:07 pm

vincentpa wrote:Are you having a conversion?

Europeans can't believe it when I tell them our poor have almost the same buying power as the median middle class European. They don't get nearly what our poor do. Consequently, their families and culture haven't been destroyed.

How do you figure this? Some European countries provide cradle to grave health care, college tuition, crazy unemployment and vacation benefits, and more. Which countries are you talking about?
User avatar
beretta24
State Moderator
 
Posts: 5318
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 6:54 pm
Location: MN

Re: Welfare

Postby SpinnerMan » Sun Sep 01, 2013 7:50 am

beretta24 wrote:
vincentpa wrote:Are you having a conversion?

Europeans can't believe it when I tell them our poor have almost the same buying power as the median middle class European. They don't get nearly what our poor do. Consequently, their families and culture haven't been destroyed.

How do you figure this? Some European countries provide cradle to grave health care, college tuition, crazy unemployment and vacation benefits, and more. Which countries are you talking about?

Pretty much all of them. I hope you are being sarcastic.

It is those things which is why the countries are relatively poor compared to the U.S and the median European is equivalent to what we think of as poor in the U.S.

This is per capita (men, women, and children) and not per worker. These differences are HUGE!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_per_capita_personal_income

And because we are so more productive, spending a smaller fraction doesn't imply less spending.

Image

And if you dig deeper, it's not based on the assumption that we spend more on military.

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/mil_exp_dol_fig_percap-expenditures-dollar-figure-per-capita

It's the old common sense that a rising tide raises all boats.

Well except those anchored to the floor with a short rope and our welfare system is far more likely to be an anchor with a short rope than a boat repair kit.

And then there are charity spending on top of this. By any measure we spend a lot. Granted we don't get a lot.
A politician thinks of the next election; a statesman of the next generation. A politician looks for the success of his party; a statesman for that of the country. The statesman wished to steer, while the politician was satisfied to drift.
User avatar
SpinnerMan
hunter
 
Posts: 15772
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 11:24 am
Location: Joliet, IL

Re: Welfare

Postby beretta24 » Sun Sep 01, 2013 7:57 am

SpinnerMan wrote:
beretta24 wrote:
vincentpa wrote:Are you having a conversion?

Europeans can't believe it when I tell them our poor have almost the same buying power as the median middle class European. They don't get nearly what our poor do. Consequently, their families and culture haven't been destroyed.

How do you figure this? Some European countries provide cradle to grave health care, college tuition, crazy unemployment and vacation benefits, and more. Which countries are you talking about?

Pretty much all of them. I hope you are being sarcastic.

It is those things which is why the countries are relatively poor compared to the U.S and the median European is equivalent to what we think of as poor in the U.S.

This is per capita (men, women, and children) and not per worker. These differences are HUGE!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_per_capita_personal_income

And because we are so more productive, spending a smaller fraction doesn't imply less spending.

Image

And if you dig deeper, it's not based on the assumption that we spend more on military.

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/mil_exp_dol_fig_percap-expenditures-dollar-figure-per-capita

It's the old common sense that a rising tide raises all boats.

Well except those anchored to the floor with a short rope and our welfare system is far more likely to be an anchor with a short rope than a boat repair kit.

And then there are charity spending on top of this. By any sure we spend a lot. Granted we don't get a lot.

Not all, even in one of your charts were in the middle of several European countries.

I don't disagree their wages are lower but some of their "benefits" or welfare exceed ours.
User avatar
beretta24
State Moderator
 
Posts: 5318
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 6:54 pm
Location: MN

Re: Welfare

Postby SpinnerMan » Sun Sep 01, 2013 10:06 am

Personal income we are wildly above all European countries. Huge differences.

beretta24 wrote:Not all, even in one of your charts were in the middle of several European countries.

I don't disagree their wages are lower but some of their "benefits" or welfare exceed ours.

And that chart that we are in the middle of is their "benefits" compared to ours and the difference is not that large for most of Europe, but a few it is, but still far smaller than the difference of income.

And the way these countries make this work better than most seems in large part that they don't have immigration like other countries.

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/imm_net_mig_rat-immigration-net-migration-rate
U.S. 2.9 per 1,000 per year. Sweden 1.6, Norway 1.7, although France is lower at 1.5. I think a larger fraction is from developing countries.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_to_Sweden
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_to_France
Much higher fraction from non-EU for France with significant fraction of those from dysfunctional countries.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_to_the_United_States

The U.S. has a big problem with immigration from dysfunctional countries. The more cradle to grave benefits we provide, the greater the negative impact immigration from dysfunctional countries will have.

As long as Sweden and Norway keep their countries lily white, they will still not be as well off as they could be, but it won't be nearly as harmful if they allow a large influx of immigrants from dysfunctional countries who don't understand anything but a dysfunctional culture that produces a dysfunctional country.

This applies in the U.S. as well. As long as New England can isolate its self, the prosperity built by their predecessors won't be harmed, but once a large influx of people from dysfunctional places arrive, it will become dysfunctional such as we see in California.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Somali_and_Bantu_migration_to_Maine
In October 2002, then-Mayor Laurier T. Raymond wrote an open letter addressed to leaders of the Somali community, predicting a negative impact on the city's social services and requesting that they discourage further relocation to Lewiston.


In a closed community, the harm can be kept tolerable. In an open community, it's a death spiral.
A politician thinks of the next election; a statesman of the next generation. A politician looks for the success of his party; a statesman for that of the country. The statesman wished to steer, while the politician was satisfied to drift.
User avatar
SpinnerMan
hunter
 
Posts: 15772
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 11:24 am
Location: Joliet, IL

Re: Welfare

Postby beretta24 » Sun Sep 01, 2013 10:43 am

Agree for the most part...most those countries don't spend schit on defense or foreign aid either in comparison to the US
User avatar
beretta24
State Moderator
 
Posts: 5318
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 6:54 pm
Location: MN

Re: Welfare

Postby SpinnerMan » Sun Sep 01, 2013 11:39 am

beretta24 wrote:Agree for the most part...most those countries don't spend schit on defense or foreign aid either in comparison to the US

But I provided a link for that too. :yes:

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/mil_exp_dol_fig_percap-expenditures-dollar-figure-per-capita
Sweden spends a little less per capita than we do and Norway spends more. Even France spends a little more. This is true of Canada, but not of the European countries.

Most people compare absolute dollars of which we spend vastly more because we are many multiples larger than most of these countries and we don't do as bad of job treating it as welfare and wasting it on social things. This is truly a relative comparison because we do pretty bad.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_population
We are something like 30 times the size of Sweden and a little shy of 5 times that of France. The difference are huge in absolute terms, which is obviously far more important for the power of the military than the per capita spending, but for the discussion here, the per capita spending is the relevant measure.
A politician thinks of the next election; a statesman of the next generation. A politician looks for the success of his party; a statesman for that of the country. The statesman wished to steer, while the politician was satisfied to drift.
User avatar
SpinnerMan
hunter
 
Posts: 15772
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 11:24 am
Location: Joliet, IL


Return to Controversial Issues Forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests