Government Pays $60,000 per Poor Family to Keep them Voting for Liberals

How is it possible that $60,000 is spent on each welfare family and yet Liberals are crying for even more money? The total payments amount to $1 trillion. There’s a layer of bureaucracy that exists between the $1 trillion dollars and the welfare recipients:

“According to the Census’s American Community Survey, the number of households with incomes below the poverty line in 2011 was 16,807,795. . . . If you divide total federal and state spending by the number of households with incomes below the poverty line, the average spending per household in poverty was $61,194 in 2011.”

“This dollar figure is almost three times the amount the average household on poverty lives on per year. ‘If the spending on these programs were converted into cash, and distributed exclusively to the nation’s households below the poverty line, this cash amount would be over 2.5 times the federal poverty threshold for a family of four, which in 2011 was $22,350. . . .”

The amount spent keeps increasing, and we keep getting more poverty-stricken families. You get more of what you subsidize. This is exactly the results Liberals were planning on – an increased dependent class of voters that will keep them in office.

The goal has never been to decrease the number of poor families.

Once a welfare program is made law, there are always people who take advantage of it. Consider what’s happening with disability claims.

The number of American workers collecting federal disability insurance benefits hit yet another record high in October, according to the Social Security Administration.

This month 8,803,335 disabled workers are collecting benefits, up from the previous record of 8,786,049 set in September.

This is an increase of 1,334,095 since Obama took office. That works out to a net increase of about 29,646 per month (1,334,095 divided by 45 months), or an average increase of about 975 per day (1,334,095 divided by 1,369 days).

The continued increase of disability claims isn’t only an Obama phenomenon. There has been a steady increase in claims ever sense the program was instituted. People are taking advantage of the system because they can.

Why would any appreciable percentage of these people ever vote for a political candidate that wants to cut the budget and shrink the welfare state? Once their self-interest kicks in, they will vote for the guy or gal who promises to keep the checks coming.

The way to decrease disability claims and welfare is to free-up the economy. Can you imagine what would happen if the $1 trillion dollars spent on welfare were left in the pockets of tax payers? They would spend more, save more, and invest more. The economy would boom. The truly needy could be taken care by voluntary organizations.

The goal should be to wean the impoverished off the teat of the welfare state.