I researched the numbers then and I am sure they have changed, but the right wing claims are still just as bogus.
Here is some of what I wrote:
"Welfare is to blame for runaway government spending."
In fact, welfare is only a blip on the radar screen of government spending, with means tested expenditures amounting to only 6% of the 2002 federal budget. Conservatives misrepresent welfare spending by including middle class programs like Medicaid and student loans in the statistics they quote.
"People on welfare are lazy and stupid bums."
Welfare payments often do not cover the bare necessities of life. No one would enjoy being lazy under such conditions. The GAO compiled a summary of over 100 studies concluding that welfare does not reduce the desire to work. Welfare recipients find it degrading and demoralizing and would prefer the chance to work.
Conservatives contend that welfare recipients are usually black, teenage mothers who take advantage of the system by staying on it as long as ten years at a time. However, statistics show that whites form the largest racial group on welfare. Half of all welfare recipients leave in the first two years and teenagers form less than 8 percent of all welfare mothers.
"Welfare can be replaced by charity."
Conservatives are strong proponents of this idea, but the reality is that charity is too under-funded, too localized, too mismatched, and too ill suited to replace welfare. Why would Americans, who hate to pay taxes, be willing to open their purses to charity at a rate that would compensate for the loss of governmental funds for welfare? They would have to multiply their current level of charitable donations by ten times to make up the difference.
Conservatives argue that Liberals favor social engineering because the poor receive the most welfare. Quite the contrary! Based on the evidence it appears it is the Conservative who advocates social engineering for the benefit of the wealthy and corporate conglomerates.
Entitlement spending on households is distributed proportionately among the various household groups. However, federal spending tilts in favor of the rich when corporate welfare is added into the mix. The CBO reported in the late 90's that the average taxpayer's share of taxes to fund social programs was $400 per year, while corporate welfare costs that taxpayer $1,400 per year.
Back in 2002 sources for federal government income for the budget broke down as follows: Individual Income Taxes 49%, Social Security Taxes 33%, Corporate Income Taxes 10%, Other 4%, and Excise Taxes 3%. Corporations are not required to pass any standards to qualify for their tax breaks, while welfare benefits for individuals and families are limited by strict eligibility requirements and time limits.
~~~~~
I would love to update all of this with current stastistics, but do not have the time. If anyone has updated numbers, please post them.
= new reply since forum marked as read
