35 ms·

>We have nothing approaching basic income or housing that anybody could live off reasonably. State welfare programs, section 8, food stamps, "earned income cre

>We have nothing approaching basic income or housing that anybody could live off reasonably. State welfare programs, section 8, food stamps, "earned income credit", medicaid, SSI, TANF, SNAP, etc. There's lots of aid in the US. Over 100m people nationally are on some level of means tested welfare. That's pushing one third of this nation. National spending accounts for $1T in welfare spending. That's slightly less than Mexico's entire GDP; a country of 122m. http://object.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/pubs/pdf/PA694.pdf http://object.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/pubs/pdf/PA694.p... The narrative of the US not having any welfare is asinine. In fact, the spending is staggering. When I lived in poorer neighborhoods in Chicago, most of my neighbors were on a fair amount of welfare to the point where they never had to bother getting a job. If you're willing to live in an urban area and live a modest lifestyle its largely trivial to game welfare benefits for a living.

jrjarrett 11y ago
>>>We have nothing approaching basic income or housing that anybody could live off reasonably. >State welfare programs, section 8, food stamps, "earned income credit", medicaid, SSI, TANF, SNAP, etc. There's lots of aid in the US. I question this response with the qualifier of "living off reasonably." I'm certainly lucky enough not to need any of that, but from what I understand, it's barely subsistence existence.
krisdol 11y ago
I really don't think that cato is in the ballpark of being an objective source on welfare, though I don't have a reason to disagree with the number you mentioned. I'm having trouble calculating a max SNAP/food stamps benefit that would exceed $194/month for an individual in urban NYC. Is that modest? Sure, I bet there are some people who are satisfied living off of public welfare alone. They exist in every country, and probably in greater numbers in more-socialized countries. I'm unconvinced that the problem is big enough to warrant cutting any public-welfare programs. Some level of "mooching" is expected. For me, when I was growing up on food stamps and welfare as a refugee, I know that it wasn't a level of living my family wanted to settle at. Evidently, neither does most of the country. The assistance helped us get settled and avoid a situation that surely would have resulted in us being thrown to the streets.

jrjarrett 11y ago

>>>We have nothing approaching basic income or housing that anybody could live off reasonably. >State welfare programs, section 8, food stamps, "earned income credit", medicaid, SSI, TANF, SNAP, etc. There's lots of aid in the US. I question this response with the qualifier of "living off reasonably." I'm certainly lucky enough not to need any of that, but from what I understand, it's barely subsistence existence.

krisdol 11y ago

I really don't think that cato is in the ballpark of being an objective source on welfare, though I don't have a reason to disagree with the number you mentioned. I'm having trouble calculating a max SNAP/food stamps benefit that would exceed $194/month for an individual in urban NYC. Is that modest? Sure, I bet there are some people who are satisfied living off of public welfare alone. They exist in every country, and probably in greater numbers in more-socialized countries. I'm unconvinced that the problem is big enough to warrant cutting any public-welfare programs. Some level of "mooching" is expected. For me, when I was growing up on food stamps and welfare as a refugee, I know that it wasn't a level of living my family wanted to settle at. Evidently, neither does most of the country. The assistance helped us get settled and avoid a situation that surely would have resulted in us being thrown to the streets.