WELFARE FRAUD AND TAX CUTS
My wife’s brother-in-law, who
lives in Massachusetts Portugal
His (the brother-in-law)
biggest ax to grind has to do with federal poverty programs. He feels that there is a large percentage of
the population that chooses to live off handouts from the government instead of
working, and, as a result, he has to support them through his labor (taxes.) There is some justification for that
attitude.
Let me give you a ‘hypothetical’ situation (Hypothetical
because if I did know these people I might be responsible for making trouble
for them as a result of this post. So
this is strictly HYPOTHETICAL.
A young man and women married
about ten years ago and immediately had a child. The man weighed near three hundred pounds and
for a couple of years worked washing cars at a car dealership and later worked
at McDonald's. Because of his weight he developed
a knee problem and eventually had to have a knee replacement (on the
dole.) His weight and lack of exercise prevented
the knee from healing properly. As he wasn't able to work manual jobs and had no skills he applied for disability and received it. The family was already drawing food stamps
and fuel assistance, now due to his disability these increased. About a year ago the couple filed for
divorce and he moved out. Now the wife,
as a single mother, was eligible for more assistance. A couple of weeks after
the divorce was final the man moves back into the house. Later, I overheard the woman saying that her
doctor had refused to sign papers stating she was unable to work due to a back
problem (though to my knowledge she has never worked a day, so I fail to see
the relationship.) She eventually
changed doctors and now I understand that she did apply for, and receives, work
disability.
The young man (about 35 years
old) now works at a sit-down job just enough hours so as not to affect his
disability status. The couple has two
cars, cable television, both have a cell phone and he smokes a pack of
cigarettes a day. The landlord has
recently been notified that their rent is to be paid by a federal program so he
(the landlord) must perform certain maintenance on the house in order to bring
it up to federal standards.
This couple, for all
practical purposes, has been able to retire at age thirty five on government
programs.
As I have said, this is a fictional account; but if I did know
these people I would not hold it against them that they have worked the
system. They are a product of a failed public
educational policy that has resulted in their inability to qualify for adequate
employment that would properly support their family.
Before we designate them as
crooks, we must look at the other side of the equation.
The presidential nominee,
Mitt Romney, does not work so he pays no income tax from a W-2 income. The millions he made last year were the
results of dividends (investment income) that is at present taxed at eleven
percent. If elected president, Mitt
Romney has declared he will do away with taxes on dividend income which would
result in most millionaires and billionaires, including Romney, paying no
federal income taxes.
Welfare fraud and tax cuts
for the wealthy have an inverse proportion effects on our federal budget and
deficit. In other words, the federal
government loses money to welfare abuse and the federal government would lose
money by doing away with the taxes on investment income of millionaires and
billionaires.
Is it any worse for the
people on the bottom of the income scale to be bilking the government than it
is for the people on the top?
Republicans constantly cry
about welfare fraud and at the same time demand tax cuts for the wealthiest
Americans; but, both of these situations should be considered welfare fraud in
the way they affect the federal deficit. We should also include the money the
government pays to mega-businesses like Exxon and the industrial farming
industry in this welfare category.
I don’t doubt that welfare
fraud exist, and that it is costing the government big time; but it exist on
both sides of the equation, and we must ask ourselves which is more heinous,
and why should we vilify the people on the bottom and not on the top.
There are many people that
legitimately need government assistance, and that assistance should be there
for them. Other people need education,
training and oversight to move from the welfare system.
Our government should be
furnishing free training, education and child care for families in poverty in
order to break the chain of welfare dependency.
And, we should insure that no child ever goes hungry or homeless in the United States of America
All of this could be easily
done by defunding corporate welfare, increasing taxes on millionaires and
billionaires and drastically downsizing our military. These changes could supply the funding to allow us to institute an
aggressive training, education and placement component to the federal welfare
program that could move people from welfare to jobs.
The Big Branch Coal Mine
Who’s an outlaw,
Quick on the draw?
Cast the first stone
If you don’t have a flaw.
Who fills the jails,
Who lives above the law?
White collar,
Blue collar.
Who’s rich
Who's poor?
the Ol’Buzzard
We have created a society of inequitable entitlements. The folks at the top feel entitled to keep more of what their portfolio makes even though their portfolio actually produces nothing other than paper profit extracted as the money shifts from one portfolio to another.
ReplyDeleteThe bottom tier has a population who feel entitled to the free ride based not on what they produce but just that they exist inside our borders.
And the middle say 85% of us are only entitled to belly ache about having to carry the water for the deadbeats on either side of them.
I am not sure why the richest among us have become so vocal and stingy. I would think the filthy rich would want more of a buffer between themselves and the bottom of our pile. It is the middle class who keep the poverty mob from storming their shiny gates. This assault on the middle will only hurt the rich in the long run.
I've said for a long time if we are going to have welfare reform, we should start where the big bucks are, corporate welfare. The oil companies need subsidies like a fish needs a bicycle.
ReplyDeleteHaving been on welfare for a short time, I wouldn't wish that life on anyone and anyone willing to live that way can have it with no complaints from me. Just like having worked on an assembly line for Ford, I don't bitch about the wages auto workers get!!
Like MRMacrum, I don't understand the increasing greed of the rich. (I blame St. Ronnie for making greed not only acceptable, but desirable.) I've always said that Unearned Income should not be taxed at a lower rate than Earned Income. There should be a sliding scale for capital gains based on total income like there is for earned income only at a higher percentage at each level than for earned income. What's really obscene is the huge salaries paid to CEOs and they get to pay capital gains taxes on most of it!! I don't understand why, other than pure greed, that they object to paying taxes when they couldn't possibly spend all of it, it's just a way of keeping score!!
Class Warfare exists and the rich have been winning for centuries!!
I'm a little annoyed by the graphic. Yes, convenience stores that sell booze and cigarettes accept food stamps, but that doesn't mean the food stamps can be used to purchase those items.
ReplyDeleteMy own take on welfare reform on the low end of the economic scale involves bringing back honest-to-God social workers. Until about 1970, if you were on welfare, social workers (real social workers, not just clerks who shuffled paperwork) visited clients in their homes. They worked with welfare recipients to make sure the kids went to school, the homes were clean, people had what they needed to get off welfare faster -- and the average time spent on ADC back then was something like three months. Then, gradually, in the interest of economic efficiency and client privacy, the home visits ended and applications got processed strictly in an office by a minimum wage clerk. It became much, much easier to game the system -- and not surprisingly the average time on assistance has crept steadily up.
One of these days I need to do a long post about the realities of being poor in this country -- juggling multiple shit jobs (car wash, McDonald's, whatever) is a lot of work for minimal return; is it any wonder that being able to go on disability even if it pays a pittance can be the rational choice even if it does mean locking yourself into a life of perpetual poverty and living on the bare edge of survival? If you're just barely surviving anyway, being on disability at least eliminates a lot of uncertainty.
I doubt that welfare fraud comes even close to the sums paid to military contractors, the arms industry, or the Exxons and GEs. Someone needs to do the math. It is the taxpayer burden of maintaining the American empire for the benefit of the very rich that is bankrupting your nation. Ron Paul's foreign policy platform was correct.
ReplyDeleteNan you are right about the need for Social Workers to work with welfare recipients. Many of them cannot get off of the treadmill on their own. There are far fewer of them who chose it as a lifestyle than you think. They simply do not know HOW to do otherwise. they do not have the life skills. They are not just like you and I but lazy.
A lot of people need welfare help; but, unfortunately some have learned to scam it and abuse the system. The need is there, and it is a disgrace that this country prefers to spend its money on a giant military and support for the rich. If the money was spent for education, training and placement for those in poverty - and generous support for those in true need - our economy would turn around on its own, and be strong into the future.
ReplyDeletethe Ol'Buzzard