Welfare should be abolished

Post Reply New Topic

There are possibly some positive externalities in some of these matters, but the issue is then more scientific than "I love the poor" and merely addressing these externalities in the most efficient manner. Are human resources an externality though? Human resources are a trade between 2 individuals, where is the externality? Safety is assuredly an externality. It is hard to say the real effects on everyone's health caused by both of these factors though, the poor guy in NY will not likely affect my health by much. One can argue about contagious diseases but that isn't impacted much by giving money or education.

The first 2 questions are difficult to make a claim for. I think that the first question is misstated as the question isn't one of better than others but better than self. The second question is also better stated as a matter of a trade-off than a loss, as in how much will we save and how much will we lose. The 3rd question doesn't need to be stated at all, as welfare will likely always be less than its maximum and unless abolished it will be more than its minimum.

Well, they set interest rates to prevent inflation, not to maintain unemployment, we just lack information on inflation so we often judge it by unemployment. The idea is that there is a natural rate of unemployment in a nation without inflation, a NAIRU. If we are less than that then we might be inflating, if we are more then we might be deflating, but inflation does increase unemployment, or perhaps it might be wise to claim that the 2 are tied together. The real issue is the nature of this unemployment, as some forms are not really bad and part of a healthy economy as some people will lose jobs but we hope they get new jobs to replace the old. There is also an issue of the true existence of involuntary unemployment, which is not defined as being unable to find a job at the typical market wage but rather being unable to find a job at any wage. The strongly pro-market economists often deny the practical existence of involuntary unemployment, claiming that there is a wage that exists where a given individual can get a job, the claim isn't that this will be a wage that the person will expect and accept, only that it exists.

Yes. I also thought of letting TM1 know the more conventional view of interest rate setting.

BTW - NAIRU in Australia was always historically thought to be about 3% while in America (we were taught) was 5%. Economists explained the difference by saying America had a subclass/culture of people that were very difficult to get to work or who didn't really want employment.

Were you taught this too?

People seem to have forgotten why the British welfare state was introduced in the first place. The impoverished had unstable jobs, low wages, or were unemployed, and the elderly and infirm poor were a huge drain on their families.

Not only that, but the introduction of welfare decreased crime rates. Welfare increased the quality of life in Britain greatly, for everyone. Wealthy people could go out in safety in poorer areas, as the poor suffered much less, and could afford what they needed.

Before the introduction of the welfare state, poverty and suffering was rife in Britain. Later on, the NHS ensured that everyone had equal access to healthcare, and national health went up significantly. Are progressive income tax rates too much to ask? If income taxes are relative to earnings in such a way that it ensures everyone has a majority of their total salary, and yet, using common sense, richer people should have higher tax rates than others.

It doesn't a hurt a millionaire to have 40% tax put on their earnings, as they still have plenty to invest in markets and spend on the most expensive lifestyles.

The matter of greed? Grant titles and certain privileges to the very rich who deserve them, acknowledging their triumphs. Of course, nothing putting them above the law, but a mark of respect and a political voice. This is already in place in the UK, but it needs to be extended somewhat. That way, everyone is happy. The government gets more tax, and to compensate for any feelings of loss, the rich get more respect. Inevitably, some people do not yearn for titles, and will care more about the taxes, and that can't be helped.

However, a full review needs to be carried out. There is much more than meets the eye.

On a side note, the reason that mindless yobs are so out of control in Britain is not because of government welfare, but because of weak parents; bad, irresponsible media; continued weak teaching which has corroded good parenting; and the failure of successive governments in combating the problem. All that has added up to produce many underage, mindless drunken louts, who bring as much hope for the future as the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse, literally.

I blame McDonalds "Restaurants"

see the correlation:



UK Violent Crime Rates
http://www.crimestatistics.org.uk/

(break in trendline due to change in collection methods)

Either McDonalds, or else the tree-hugging lesbian types dabbling with social engineering in the government. I don't think human nature has changed much in the last few millenium, its the influences on parents, not the parents themselves

The reality is if all the people on welfare were able to find jobs the federal reserve would raise interest rates as high as it took to trigger layoffs. The net effect is permanent significant unemployment is a reality. When unemployment insurance runs out people will need welfare. Welcome to capitalism post the "Great Depression". If you have a better theory to run the system then write your doctoral thesis on it and volunteer as an economic adviser to a presidential candidate.

In Keynsian economics, unemployment and inflation have an inverse relationship, so what TM1 says is as valid as targeting inflation with interest rates.

More evidence to support this view is the push for "globalisation" of labor markets. Clearly those pulling the levers in the Australian government want to reduce the cost of labor and increase the returns to capital.

Um, todd, I hate to tell you this, but welfare accounts for maybe 3% of your tax bill...

The biggest chunk goes toward social security, the next biggest chunk goes to the military, then government workers get the next biggest chunk...

I'm guessing that you really don't know much about the welfare system... the truth of the matter is, able bodied unemployed people are not even eligible for welfare in the US... it goes mostly to pay single mothers, most of whom work but don't earn enough to feed their kids...

Would you feel better if you had to run a gauntlet of begging, starving children on your way to work, and got to save six dollars a week off your tax bill?

I think you're barking up the wrong tree... if you want a lower tax bill, complain about wasteful spending in government... like the 20 billion they spend every year to put pot smokers in jail... or the trillions they spend fighting wars in countries that don't stand a chance of ever invading us... or the huge amount they spend running public service ads telling kids not to be cyberbullies... farm subsidies... pork barrel spending projects...

I haven't been told much about the different NAIRUs for the different nations in all honesty.

welfare needs severe reform but i don't think it needs to be out and out abolished....i wouldn't even mind social security if i knew i'd actually be seeing it or could take advantage of it.

but as of right now, both are being wasted, abused and i'm losing my money.


how about we fire politicians and just completely overhaul DC with people who are actually intelligent and care about people and not just themselves?

Yeah good point we missed. When my parents separated in 1981 we( mother and kids) qualified for food stamps and free lunch at school. My brother who has 4 kids and chronically unemployed has never been able to get welfare. But if he left his wife she could get it.

He stated that he believed he shouldn't have to pay a cent, which means that that amount is too high for him even.

Well, actually there is difficulty in having them maintain suitable employment.
Never happen anyway, these people are out of sight out of mind anyway, and the kids are already nuisances.

Definitely correct. The welfare he mentions isn't the biggest threat.

Where can we get people with both characteristics who would take the job? If they are intelligent then they are likely vicious machiavellians, if they are caring then they are probably also negligent ret*ds who area used by the former. Politics is politics, it will be won by those who are good at it.

Todd489: I find that f*cking insulting of you to consider people on welfare as leeches and parasites. I take it that you don't need a pension because of disability or assistance in trying to find a job. Your attitude is what got the bloody Nazis into trouble in the war. Wipe out all those who don't contribute.... Same as Hitler wanting to wipe out the Jews. What gives you the right to sit in your little Shangri-La and complain about others less fortunate than yourself when you have it so goddamn easy? Typical Conservative/republican attitude which, I don't mind telling you, is just why most of us OUTSIDE America think you are just a bunch of self-serving, arrogant power-hungry ego-maniacs out for World Domination. Thank Christ we are more civilized here and actually CARE about those less fortunate than ourselves. Oh, and by the way, I am on a disability pension, worked for 13 years before becoming redundant, and I am NOT leeching off the government; I am taking what I believe to be my rightful entitlements. Sh*t, I bet if I lived in America, i) I'd have Buckley's chance of getting work, because it seems that anyone employed there is working under crap conditions, and I'd expect to be able to earn enough to live (so no job offers); ii) no concessions for health or transport, because people with your attitude would make sure that someone like me had no entitlement to them and with no HMO or private cover I'd be f*cked; iii) I'd be more than likely killed by gang violence or some nutter going wild with a gun (although we won't go into that, that can happen to even Americans). If you are so fed up with the welfare system you have, then either get off your arse and campaign for a better system, or accept what you have and there is nothing you can do to change it and just improve what directly affects you. In the meantime, stop whinging about those less fortunate, because they are like that for a reason.

The Jews were contributing.

I dont think money or tax is a good indicator of how much someone contributes to society.

For instance, a friendly welfare recipient with a 'good samaritan' mindset is a better member of society than someone who works for monsanto, or an aggresive scam salesman.

Actually i could spend all day listing examples of ppl in the higher tax rates that are socially parasitic. But its a sunny day here in the projects & i need to get wasted & be socially menacing to random taxpayers in the park