The Truth About Welfare

Cuauhtemoc

Silver Belt
@Silver
Joined
May 22, 2010
Messages
13,594
Reaction score
2,219
We've all read that it's actually old white republicans that use most welfare and that they vote against their own interests while vibrant immigrant democrats actually support the country.
But is that true? Let's find out.


Cliffs:
Over 1 trillion dollars is spent annually on welfare.
Whites are over 60% of the population but only 49% of the recipients.
Illegal immigrants collect welfare.
Only 17% of white households are on medicaid, over 40% of blacks and hispanics are on medicaid. Over 50% in the case of immigrant hispanics.
 
Ok, but what should be done about it? How do you get them off welfare?

-I'm 100% fine letting some of my taxes going to welfare as long as those recipients are US citizens and are trying to actively improve their lives, it needs to be short term, not long term imo. Welfare leeches are disgusting. Welfare seems broken imo
 
Last edited:
Ok, but what should be done about it?
Build a wall, deport all illegals.

Also, for the ones that do, stop spreading misinformation about southern white republicans being the ones most affected by welfare cuts.
 
Whites are over 60% of the population but only 49% of the recipients.

I think it's much better to just look at the absolute values whenever we talk about white people <cheer>
SNAPCharts1_1.png
 
The welfare system is a disaster in an ethnically mixed nation, where there is such vastly different levels of intelligence between the different ethnicities. A welfare system works successfully in a homogeneous nation with a conservative culture that looks down on those who are on welfare. Anything other than that at the very least will hold the country back, and at the most completely destroy it.
 
Welfare has definitely been exploited and abused. People have learned how to work the system and make a career of welfare and assistance.
 
Who cares about ethnicity and welfare? I get that people are rightfully pointing out that there are myths around welfare and that drives bad policy, so I'm on board from that perspective. But I think at it's heart the argument is really about should the government help people in need or not. Of course I think it should, but lies and distractions are really just a way to fool people when the underlying rationale lies in what government should do.
 
The problem with decrying welfare recipients and telling them to "Get a job" is that most of them already have one.

To quote The Wall Street Journal (that known liberal rag...)
It's poor paying jobs, not underemployment that strains the welfare system.

http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2015/04/13/get-a-job-most-welfare-recipients-already-have-one/

TS, instead of looking and the subdivisions of who receives welfare and turning this into a race-baiting issue, why not start by acknowledging the real problem: net welfare needs are way up across demographics.

More-Than-100-Million-Americans-Are-On-Welfare-460x334.png


And, by the way, immigration peaked in 2000, so don't blame the immigrants for this.
 
We need to end the welfare state that we live in. Welfare was supposed to be a safety net for hard times, not a goddamn career choice for slackers. There's too many people abusing it and living off of government hand outs, I have several social worker friends who see this every single day, and there's nothing they can do about it.

People say "oh who cares, just leave them alone, big companies get more hand outs, etc", but I think welfare does a great disservice to those who receive it because it stops them from struggling. As human beings, we grow the most when we are forced to face adversity and struggle, it's a good thing and an integral part of growth. Welfare allows people to wallow in their own mediocrity without ever reaching their potential.
 
The problem with decrying welfare recipients and telling them to "Get a job" is that most of them already have one.

To quote The Wall Street Journal (that known liberal rag...)


http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2015/04/13/get-a-job-most-welfare-recipients-already-have-one/
Right. And the ones that don't are temporarily unemployed for the most part. If you look at the numbers most people get off of welfare and those that don't are typically employed like you said and just don't make enough or are sick or disabled, etc..

Again, just myths to fool people into hating on certain people pushed by those that want to cut taxes for rich people or ideologues who don't think government should do anything about the problem.
 
I think it's much better to just look at the absolute values whenever we talk about white people <cheer>
SNAPCharts1_1.png
fuck the huffington post. It shows the same idea though, 40% of recipients, at 60% the population.
 
The problem with decrying welfare recipients and telling them to "Get a job" is that most of them already have one.

To quote The Wall Street Journal (that known liberal rag...)


http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2015/04/13/get-a-job-most-welfare-recipients-already-have-one/

TS, instead of looking and the subdivisions of who receives welfare and turning this into a race-baiting issue, why not start by acknowledging the real problem: net welfare needs are way up across demographics.

More-Than-100-Million-Americans-Are-On-Welfare-460x334.png


And, by the way, immigration peaked in 2000, so don't blame the immigrants for this.
But wait.... everyone tells me that Obama fixed the economy....?
 
@Ruprecht

I've read that Australia has a welfare system that makes the recipient basically work for it, or allocates them to a place that needs a job, no matter how menial.

Am I wrong, or oversimplifying the process?
 
People say "oh who cares, just leave them alone, big companies get more hand outs, etc", but I think welfare does a great disservice to those who receive it because it stops them from struggling. As human beings, we grow the most when we are forced to face adversity and struggle, it's a good thing and an integral part of growth. Welfare allows people to wallow in their own mediocrity without ever reaching their potential.
Struggling is great when there is a light at the end of the tunnel. But some economists predict that by 2050 half of the jobs on the planet will be eliminated and of those that remain, 50% will be effectively minimum wage.
https://www.technologyreview.com/s/...of-us-jobs-are-vulnerable-to-computerization/

http://www.businessinsider.com/expe...ird-of-jobs-will-be-replaced-by-robots-2015-5

http://www.futuristspeaker.com/business-trends/2-billion-jobs-to-disappear-by-2030/

If you want to take away welfare benefits from someone who has mouths to feed, they are going to "struggle," alright. And that struggle will likely involve a gun. Who gets the bullet depends on the temperament of the individual.
 
Last edited:
I've got no problem with helping the working poor. They are trying to make a life and work. The same as I have no problem helping thoses that can't work because of real problems.

We need to go after welfare fraud in whatever form it takes because it hurts the tax payers and people that really deserve it.
 
Another welfare thread/topic/article/graph/etc that fails to account for corporate welfare.

How about you consider the fact that virtually all of Walmart's labor force is subsidized by tax payers and also acknowledge the fact that over 50% of all food stamps are spent there. The amount of welfare Walmart alone receives in the form of employment assistance through healh insurance and back+front-end food stamps gains absolutely dwarfs all individual welfare fraud combined.

It's fine to be mad about our broken welfare system, but it's naive at best to only aim that anger at the ones on the smaller end of the spectrum. Especially when they're 9 out of 10 times more relatable to the average citizen.
 
Back
Top