Another way to think about it is as time pollution. It's not a perfect analogy, but you can imagine the US government as a factory that slowly churns out "Bene

Another way to think about it is as time pollution. It's not a perfect analogy, but you can imagine the US government as a factory that slowly churns out "Benefit Programs", and in the process emits a large amount of pollution onto nearby homes. This factory could invest in polluting less, but that would cost money, and would require it to increase the price of the product. And it so happens that the factory's customers are very price conscious! The customers are willing to accept a lot of pollution, because their goal is primarily to go back to their bosses and say "Look how cheaply I got all these Benefit Programs!" None of the participants in the production or buying processes have much incentive for the factory to clean up its act, so accordingly it keeps spewing out pollution onto people who, even if they hate it, can't really do anything to stop it (besides moving away from their homes). One possible tactic for resolving these negative externalities is to give the factory owners and customers skin in the game by making them live right next to the factory. In real world terms, this would be something like requiring lawmakers to live entirely off of government benefits, instead of any other income or wealth they possess. Another possible tactic is establishment of a universal basic income, which (in theory) could replace every other welfare program and thereby remove a lot of potential for time pollution. TL;DR: The incentives for US government administered benefits are all in favor of shifting work away from the government and onto individual citizens, as a way of saving money.