We should not means test social benefit programs

[Mack Knife]

Originally Posted by greywar

It takes money to get money. And here is the reality. Increased inequality means that those who might be the future entrepreneurs aren't. This is not a hard concept here.

Your view is closer too "The top eats all the cake, then complains when the people that grew the grains, milked the cows, and created all of the ingredients, then baked it....ask for some cake. Those monsters."

It takes productivity and value to make money, not money.

First you produce and produce something that is of value to others. It could be as simple as the value of your work for someone else. It could be advice. They exchange something with you for that productivity.

This it takes money to make money starts with the beggar who wants some money for doing nothing more than asking for it. Same old tired cop out because of the unwillingness to do what comes before money.

Get over the teet that feeds one at birth, its the only free meal you should ever get in life.

Don't bake the cake for the rich, bake it for yourself. Get it? Charge the rich ten times what it cost you.

[Costaexpress]

Originally Posted by Mack Knife

It takes productivity and value to make money, not money.

First you produce and produce something that is of value to others. It could be as simple as the value of your work for someone else. It could be advice. They exchange something with you for that productivity.

This it takes money to make money starts with the beggar who wants some money for doing nothing more than asking for it. Same old tired cop out because of the unwillingness to do what comes before money.

Get over the teet that feeds one at birth, its the only free meal you should ever get in life.

Don't bake the cake for the rich, bake it for yourself. Get it? Charge the rich ten times what it cost you.

Here's what happens when some of these irresponsible people get money. That money does not create money. Instead, that money goes to businesses that sell use the stuff because the person simply wants the stuff and wastes the money. A lot of the stuff is redundant and unnecessary for daily life. The money then goes to the rich who owns that business. The poor person now needs more money because they have just spent it. Add to the fact that they continue to be poor is your fault. The cycle restarts again. The money always goes back to the rich.

Then the property taxes raised to help the poor. Property owners raise rents. The poor begin paying higher rents. They are still poor.

It's everybody else's fault. Universities began creating services for poor students. Each service is a department with a well-paid administrator whose position will never be eliminated because of political correctness. These services then increase tuition and student fees. The cost is shifted to the poor.

Again and again, the so-called help designed to help the poor did nothing but increase the cost of living, decrease employment, and make the poor poor again

[elnrgby]

Sorry for not checking this topic, did not realize there was more discussion in the last few days.

@Costaexpress- it is actually not true that I don't have any first-hand experience with poverty. While I did not grow up poor, and I am not poor now, there was a time in my early-mid 20s when, due to some complexities of life, my parents could not help me out financially, and I had to support myself through graduate school on a tiny income from being a teaching assistant for an undergraduate college course - about $20,000 per year in today's money ($8,000 per year in the 1980's money). I was really, really poor for about 4 years, and then did not make a seriously substantial money for the next 15 years either. But even during these 4 very lean years, I just cheerfully adapted to reduced circumstances, was severely frugal, and beyond that, never even thought about money; there were simply too many other more interesting things to think about. If I should become poor again (which is not impossible if I live to be very old), I will adapt to that again. So, I do understand what poverty is - what I don't understand is why all other poor people cannot do what I did, simply make their life worthwhile on what they have. The most important things in life cost nothing (self-esteem, love, good weather, books from a library) or very little (a room in a shared apartment in a cheap part of town, a peanut-butter sandwich).

This is why I think a guaranteed small handout (say, $12,000 per year for every adult in the US) without means testing, would NOT deter poor people fron seeking employment, but just the opposite: if a poor person knew he/she would not lose these 12k if he/she found a job for additional income, he/she would be more motivated to find work, not less. Also, if there were a fixed personal handout for everyone (you, me, Bill Gates, beggar on the street, everyone over 21) and all other welfare programs were abolished, I think poor people would think much harder how to spend this handout, knowing that they will not get anything else for additional children, for claiming disability, for claiming some other kind of disadvantage etc.

The only question is whether we have enough tax money to offer this universal benefit to everyone. Chances are that we do, provided again that we should institute this single universal benefit and NO other welfare programs.