Has Great Society Welfare spending worked at all?

[Sunnysee]

For a rare few, of course it has. It has saved a few lives since some folks have used it for a "step up" and gone on to be successful at a career of a lifetime.

Thinking back to LBJ's day, and his starting of the welfare system, NO. It has done nothing but breed many more welfare recipients.
It has bought the liberal side a voting base, and done much harm to our once, Honorable and free nation.

[Memphis1979]

Originally Posted by Felix C

I may be in error but I believe Welfare programs came about in the early 1960s as there were significant numbers of U.S. citizens living at the poverty level.(I found this surprising considering foreign competition was destroyed or rebuilding during the 1940s and 1950s) I believe this was the Great Society program championed by LBJ. Is there any data indicating that the programs begun then have led to those original recipients or their following generation to have been able to move out of poverty level incomes? Or are the succeeding 3rd and 4th generations still at povery and at governement sustenance?

Not referring to SS or New Deal spending.

Crime is at an all time low, while income disparity is at an all time high.

I think its working, and yes, thats what it was spent for. If people don't have to look for a meal, even when they fall on hard times, they are much less likely to resort to crime.

[Fiddlehead]

Originally Posted by Huckleberry3911948

it has accomplished in 50 years with the assistance of K12 and some rotten parenting what no one person could ever do on their own.
we created a large group of people that are utterly unemployable. if they ever got a job, they would be fired 1st day on the job. no matter how much credentials, how much training, how much job programs; they will never never never work, and u cant make them.
the skunk juice attitude is carefully cultivated over many years by teachers, social workers and parents that teach them it is appropriate to yell at people 3 times as smart as u, your superiors, curse them, even assault them, and defy all rules and refuse to make yourself useful in any way. genuine ape behavior.
25% of the welfare clients resist this nightmare programming and leave welfare pretty quick and become useful members of the world of employed people and stay that way.

Well, looking around the world I am not sure that we have ever been without worthless derelicts and flatout criminals. And we still have not figured out how to minimize that share of the population. The issue is whether the majority of welfare recipients do advance or whether they become the dependents you suggest, I would suggest that the ratios are much better than 75% parasites you suggest (i.e., most people want to get off welfare), but I don't have the numbers in front of me. I will say, although I feel we need a safety net, I share some of your feelings, (except the ape statement). Something about welfare is both necessary and disabling. What is particularly frustrating is when a new immigrant group is far more likely to use the services than the host population funding them. I have seen that in Sweden as well as here, and it creates a culture of parasites, and a very angry populace. Not pretty. Usually social mores are what make people avoid welfare, but if they do not exist, it can be a problem.

I know I would be horribly ashamed to take welfare, but then I have never found myself in the situation to need it, so perhaps easy to say.