I wrote last year about the way in which welfare programs lead to very high implicit marginal tax rates on low-income people. More specifically, they lose handouts when they earn income. As such, it is not very advantageous for them to climb the economic ladder because hard work is comparatively unrewarding.
Thanks to the American Enterprise Institute, we now have a much more detailed picture showing the impact of redistribution programs on the incentive to earn more money.
It’s not a perfect analogy since people presumably prefer cash to in-kind handouts, but the vertical bars basically represent living standards for any given level of income that is earned (on the horizontal axis).
Needless to say, there’s not much reason to earn more income when living standards don’t improve. May as well stay home and goof off rather than work hard and produce.
This is why income redistribution is so destructive, not just to taxpayers, but also to the people who get trapped into dependency. Which is exactly the point made in this video.
P.S. Most of you know that I’m not a fan of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development because the Paris-based bureaucracy has such statist impulses. But even the OECD has written about the negative impact of overly generous welfare programs on incentives for productive behavior.
[…] A Picture of How Redistribution Programs Trap the Less Fortunate in Lives of Dependency […]
[…] The burden of government spending is too high, the tax code is too punitive, red tape is hindering entrepreneurship, and various handouts are creating a dependency culture that discourages work. […]
[…] programs that trap poor people in dependencyand produce inter-generational […]
[…] programs that trap poor people in dependencyand produce inter-generational […]
[…] programs that trap poor people in dependencyand produce inter-generational […]
[…] programs that trap poor people in dependencyand produce inter-generational […]
[…] programs that trap poor people in dependency and produce inter-generational […]
[…] Simply stated, a growing economic pie is much better for poor people that incentive-sapping redistribution programs that trap people in dependency. […]
[…] to much stronger and more rigorous studies showing the various social pathologies (unemployment, dependency, single-parent households, poverty, loss of societal capital, etc) associated with […]
[…] Simply stated, why work harder or work more when an additional dollar of income only leads to a net benefit of 10 cents or 20 cents? Or why work harder or work more when you can actually wind up being worse off? […]
[…] shared an example back in 2012, which showed how a single mother in Pennsylvania would be worse off with $57,000 of income instead […]
[…] shared an example back in 2012, which showed how a single mother in Pennsylvania would be worse off with $57,000 of income instead […]
[…] shared an example back in 2012, which showed how a single mother in Pennsylvania would be worse off with $57,000 of income instead […]
[…] Simply stated, why work harder or work more when an additional dollar of income only leads to a net benefit of 10 cents or 20 cents? Or why work harder or work more when you can actually wind up being worse off? […]
[…] Simply stated, why work harder or work more when an additional dollar of income only leads to a net benefit of 10 cents or 20 cents? Or why work harder or work more when you can actually wind up being worse off? […]
[…] shared an example back in 2012, which showed how a single mother in Pennsylvania would be worse off with $57,000 of income instead […]
[…] shared an example back in 2012, which showed how a single mother in Pennsylvania would be worse off with $57,000 of income instead […]
[…] Since columnists are limited to about 800 words, Sowell doesn’t have leeway to give details, but his explanation of how the government traps people in poverty is the rhetorical version of this amazing chart. […]
[…] I definitely agree that the welfare state hinders upward mobility by creating dependency. And he’s right that this is a drag on growth. That being said, I disagree with his assertion […]
[…] Since columnists are limited to about 800 words, Sowell doesn’t have leeway to give details, but his explanation of how the government traps people in poverty is the rhetorical version of this amazing chart. […]
[…] I definitely agree that the welfare state hinders upward mobility by creating dependency. And he’s right that this is a drag on growth. That being said, I disagree with his assertion […]
[…] cited an astounding example of this phenomenon in 2012, showing that a single mother in Pennsylvania would be better off […]
[…] like that he also addressed problems such as implicit marginal tax rates and the failure of job-training […]
[…] like that he also addressed problems such as implicit marginal tax rates and the failure of job-training […]
[…] subsidies actually turn into wage penalties (i.e., punitive implicit marginal tax rates) when income rises above the target level and the handouts are […]
[…] like that he also addressed problems such as implicit marginal tax rates and the failure of job-training […]
[…] Redistribution programs that were adopted as part of the so-called War on Poverty, for instance, have undermined poverty reduction. Yet politicians look at this bad result and assume the answer is even more spending to trap more people in dependency. […]
[…] porque, quando as pessoas trabalham mais e ganham mais, elas são atingidas por uma combinação de menos benefícios e mais impostos. O resultado final são alíquotas […]
A friend used to work for Social Services hoping to help unfortunate folks. Sadly, after a few years at it and pretty much disappointed about the system she came to the conclusion that ‘We’re paying people no to break into our homes and rob us’ …. wow, eh?
Dear Sir,
I’m very interested in talking to you about this research you posted, here. Can you contact me via email? It’s jthompson7265@gmail.com . Thanks.
[…] I’m not just talking about the incentive not to work. Welfare enables and encourages utterly horrifying examples of […]
[…] create perverse incentives since some people will choose to work less and earn less in order to maximize the amount of handouts they receive. Such behavior is immoral, but understandable. People learn that if they make sacrifices and work […]
[…] create perverse incentives since some people will choose to work less and earn less in order to maximize the amount of handouts they receive. Such behavior is immoral, but understandable. People learn that if they make sacrifices and work […]
[…] porque, quando as pessoas trabalham mais e ganham mais, elas são atingidas por uma combinação de menos benefícios e mais impostos. O resultado final são alíquotas […]
[…] P.S. If one includes the perverse incentive effects of various redistribution programs, the very highest marginal tax rates (at least when measuring implicit rates) sometimes apply to a nation’s poor people. […]
[…] P.S. If one includes the perverse incentive effects of various redistribution programs, the very highest marginal tax rates (at least when measuring implicit rates) sometimes apply to a nation’s poor people. […]
[…] P.S. If one includes the perverse incentive effects of various redistribution programs, the very highest marginal tax rates (at least when measuring implicit rates) sometimes apply to a nation’s poor people. […]
[…] P.S. If one includes the perverse incentive effects of various redistribution programs, the very highest marginal tax rates (at least when measuring implicit rates) sometimes apply to a nation’s poor people. […]
[…] P.S. If one includes the perverse incentive effects of various redistribution programs, the very highest marginal tax rates (at least when measuring implicit rates) sometimes apply to a nation’s poor people. […]
[…] agenda was always a bad idea for both macro and micro reasons, and has become a very bad idea because of demographic […]
[…] agenda was always a bad idea for both macro and micro reasons, and has become a very bad idea because of demographic […]
[…] a complicated and costly mess that traps poor people in dependency while ripping off taxpayers and creating very comfortable lives for “poverty […]
[…] Redistribution programs that were adopted as part of the so-called War on Poverty, for instance, have undermined poverty reduction. Yet politicians look at this bad result and assume the answer is even more spending to trap more people in dependency. […]
[…] redistribution programs that trap people in […]
[…] family in government dependency year after year, generation after generation. Assistance programs often create a very high implicit marginal tax rate for low-income people if they transition from assistance to […]
[…] since, when people work more and earn more, they get hit by a combination of fewer handouts and more taxes. The net result is very high implicit marginal […]
[…] since, when people work more and earn more, they get hit by a combination of fewer handouts and more taxes. The net result is very high implicit marginal […]
[…] since, when people work more and earn more, they get hit by a combination of fewer handouts and more taxes. The net result is very high implicit marginal […]
[…] effect, redistribution programs create very high implicit tax rates on being productive, which is why welfare programs trap people in government […]
[…] function of the quantity of labor that is productively employed. As such, government programs that lure people into dependency obviously reduce national economic […]
[…] function of the quantity of labor that is productively employed. As such, government programs that lure people into dependency obviously reduce national economic […]
[…] it’s easy to see why poor people face very high marginal tax rates that discourage them from additional productive […]
[…] This is akin to a spider web of dependency. No wonder people get trapped in poverty. […]
[…] it’s easy to see why poor people face very high marginal tax rates that discourage them from additional productive […]
[…] income, for fear of losing desirable benefits. Dan Mitchell of the Cato Institute has a wonderful chart and post explaining this very problem, what he calls a “poverty trap.” By raising the […]
[…] It’s been bad news for taxpayers, of course, but it’s also been bad news for poor people since they get trapped in dependency. […]
[…] behavior, they would get hit with punitive taxes and have less disposable income (we have the same self-destructive policy in America, and it’s getting worse thanks to […]
[…] biggest victims of the welfare state. Redistribution programs create a dependency trap because of very high implicit tax rates on productive behavior. Simply stated, handouts are so generous that poor people who enter the labor force generally will […]
[…] I definitely agree that the welfare state hinders upward mobility by creating dependency. And he’s right that this is a drag on growth. That being said, I disagree with his assertion […]
[…] Since columnists are limited to about 800 words, Sowell doesn’t have leeway to give details, but his explanation of how the government traps people in poverty is the rhetorical version of this amazing chart. […]
[…] in case you think that’s an isolated example, look at this remarkable chart revealing how life on the dole can be much more remunerative than a life of striving and work (you […]
[…] same topic. Here’s a post he wrote on the failures of the War on Poverty and another on the “redistribution trap.” That latter is […]
[…] The burden of government spending is too high, the tax code is too punitive, red tape is hindering entrepreneurship, and various handouts are creating a dependency culture that discourages work. […]
[…] Since columnists are limited to about 800 words, Sowell doesn’t have leeway to give details, but his explanation of how the government traps people in poverty is the rhetorical version of this amazing chart. […]
[…] I posted graphs showing how government programs trap people in dependency because of very high implicit marginal […]
[…] All the points I make about jobs, employment, labor force participation, unemployment insurance and disability are simply different ways of saying that it’s not good for the economy when politicians continuously make dependency more attractive than work. […]
[…] Wizard-of-Id parody has the same basic message about labor supply and handouts, and here’s a chart with some staggering real-world evidence of how the welfare state discourages people from productive […]
[…] P.S. If you want to learn more about how redistribution programs such as Obamacare trap people in dependency and discourage them from the job market, click here. […]
[…] P.S. If you want to learn more about how redistribution programs such as Obamacare trap people in dependency and discourage them from the job market, click here. […]
[…] that would be a wake-up call for our politicians on how the welfare state creates a poverty trap and erodes social capital (something that a few honest liberals have […]
[…] So we have to ask ourselves why did so many workers leave the labor market? Was it the overall increase in the burden of government? The increase in the minimum wage? The disability scam? Subsidized unemployment? The welfare trap? […]
[…] So we have to ask ourselves why did so many workers leave the labor market? Was it the overall increase in the burden of government? The increase in the minimum wage? The disability scam? Subsidized unemployment? The welfare trap? […]
[…] So we have to ask ourselves why did so many workers leave the labor market? Was it the overall increase in the burden of government? The increase in the minimum wage? The disability scam? Subsidized unemployment? The welfare trap? […]
[…] picture showing the impact of redistribution programs on the incentive to earn more money. A Picture of How Redistribution Programs Trap the Less Fortunate in Lives of Dependency | Internatio… Reply With […]
[…] why have we stopped making progress? This second chart shows how redistribution programs create a dependency trap. The plethora of handouts from government make self-reliance and work comparatively unattractive, […]
[…] why have we stopped making progress? This second chart shows how redistribution programs create a dependency trap. The plethora of handouts from government make self-reliance and work comparatively unattractive, […]
[…] why have we stopped making progress? This second chart shows how redistribution programs create a dependency trap. The plethora of handouts from government make self-reliance and work comparatively unattractive, […]
[…] illustrated in a study produced by Tanner and Charles Hughes. Moreover, welfare programs create very high implicit marginal tax rates, making it very difficult for poor people to improve their living standards by engaging in […]
[…] tax rates, for instance, punish people for producing. Redistribution programs, meanwhile, create incentives for dependency. And regulation throws lots of sand in the gears of the economy, while also creating big […]
[…] tax rates, for instance, punish people for producing. Redistribution programs, meanwhile, create incentives for dependency. And regulation throws lots of sand in the gears of the economy, while also creating big […]
[…] War on Poverty is bad for poor people. Redistribution creates long-run dependency because of a poverty trap that makes it more difficult to climb the economic ladder. If we really want to help the less fortunate, private charity does a far better job – and […]
[…] War on Poverty is bad for poor people. Redistribution creates long-run dependency because of a poverty trap that makes it more difficult to climb the economic ladder. If we really want to help the less fortunate, private charity does a far better job – and […]
[…] War on Poverty is bad for poor people. Redistribution creates long-run dependency because of a poverty trap that makes it more difficult to climb the economic ladder. If we really want to help the less fortunate, private charity does a far better job – and […]
[…] must be delusional if he thinks making government bigger is good for the poor. Redistribution traps the poor in dependency and a larger public sector hinders economic growth, making life even more difficult for the less […]
[…] redistribution programs operated by government, you create a huge dependency trap. Indeed, the chart shows that many of these programs can be larger than the EITC (which is called “negative income […]
[…] redistribution programs operated by government, you create a huge dependency trap. Indeed, the chart shows that many of these programs can be larger than the EITC (which is called “negative income […]
Can you please demonstrate how you devised a $15,000 childcare benefit?
[…] This graph, for instance, shows that various handouts mean that a single mom with $29,000 of income can be better off than a self-reliant person with $69,000 of […]
[…] and bookmark Mitchell’s post. He has another that contains a chart that graphically shows how welfare traps people in […]
[…] That’s a much better track record than other welfare state programs. […]
[…] Welfare programs trap people in poverty. […]
[…] This chart shows that various handouts discourage low-income people from earning more money, and a recent blockbuster study from a couple of my colleagues at the Cato Institute revealed that welfare pays more than entry-level employment in dozens of states. […]
[…] That’s a much better track record than other welfare state programs. […]
[…] skepticism was further augmented when I ran across an amazing chartshowing that it made more sense to live off the government in Pennsylvania rather than earn more […]
[…] skepticism was further augmented when I ran across an amazing chartshowing that it made more sense to live off the government in Pennsylvania rather than earn more […]
[…] skepticism was further augmented when I ran across an amazing chart showing that it made more sense to live off the government in Pennsylvania rather than earn more […]
[…] by the way, that the research is also saying that government handout influence behavior, a point that I’ve repeatedly made when analyzing the harmful impact of redistribution programs on work […]
[…] a system plagued by redundancies and inefficiences, yet is still growing, all the while punishing people who increase their income and make themselves better off. This is insane. The government doesn’t even know how many are actually there, what […]
[…] the same misguided policies exist in the United States. I shared a remarkable chart last year showing that a household would be better off with $29,000 of income rather than $69,000 of income […]
[…] Welfare programs trap people in poverty. […]
[…] Since columnists are limited to about 800 words, Sowell doesn’t have leeway to give details, but his explanation of how the government traps people in poverty is the rhetorical version of this amazing chart. […]
[…] Since columnists are limited to about 800 words, Sowell doesn’t have leeway to give details, but his explanation of how the government traps people in poverty is the rhetorical version of this amazing chart. […]
[…] A Picture of How Redistribution Programs Trap the Less Fortunate in Lives of Dependency | Internatio…. […]
[…] this final slide, I shared in my speeches this amazing chart about the anti-work incentives created by the safety net in the United States, as well as some similar startling data from the United […]
[…] Keep in mind, by the way, that the negative impact of unemployment benefits is just the tip of the welfare-state iceberg. Professor Casey Mulligan has some very good work about the negative impact of redistribution programs, and this chart shows how dependency programs create very high implicit marginal tax rates for the less fortunate. […]
[…] I definitely agree that the welfare state hinders upward mobility by creating dependency. And he’s right that this is a drag on growth. That being said, I disagree with his assertion […]
[…] I definitely agree that the welfare state hinders upward mobility by creating dependency. And he’s right that this is a drag on growth. That being said, I disagree with his assertion […]
[…] Not only is he a bureaucrat, but his job is to distribute welfare, which means he’s been screwing taxpayers and trapping poor people into government dependency. […]
[…] Meanwhile, the “slaves” and “prisoners” wind up living rather comfortable lives, oftentimes bribed into government dependency because they can enjoy higher living standards by mooching rather than working. […]
[…] did share these two amazing charts (here and here), so the audiences did get some powerful data showing that the welfare state is […]
[…] Wizard-of-Id parody has the same basic message about labor supply and handouts, and here’s a chart with some staggering real-world evidence of how the welfare state discourages people from productive […]
[…] Wizard-of-Id parody has the same basic message about labor supply and handouts, and here’s a chart with some staggering real-world evidence of how the welfare state discourages people from productive […]
[…] The burden of government spending is too high, the tax code is too punitive, red tape is hindering entrepreneurship, and various handouts are creating a dependency culture that discourages work. […]
[…] The burden of government spending is too high, the tax code is too punitive, red tape is hindering entrepreneurship, and various handouts are creating a dependency culture that discourages work. […]
[…] Set aside the policy arguments here about redistribution undermining progress in the fight against poverty and making it difficult for the less fortunate to climb the economic ladder. […]
[…] in case you think that’s an isolated example, look at this remarkable chart revealing how life on the dole can be much more remunerative than a life of striving and work (you […]
[…] Unlike special legal status for ex-cons, this sounds reasonable. After all, we all would like to help the long-term unemployed break free of the chains of government dependency. […]
[…] Meanwhile, the “slaves” and “prisoners” wind up living rather comfortable lives, oftentimes bribed into government dependency because they can enjoy higher living standards by mooching rather than working. […]
[…] Unlike special legal status for ex-cons, this sounds reasonable. After all, we all would like to help the long-term unemployed break free of the chains of government dependency. […]
[…] P.P.S. Redistribution is bad for prosperity because you’re paying some people not to produce and you’re penalizing some people who do produce. To get a better idea of how the former kills incentives, look at this amazing chart. […]
[…] the same misguided policies exist in the United States. I shared a remarkable chart last year showing that a household would be better off with $29,000 of income rather than $69,000 of income […]
[…] the way, here’s a chart showing the same destructive policies in the United […]
[…] By the way, the same problem exists in the United States. Indeed, this chart shows that the plethora of freebies from taxpayers means a household can be better off with $29,000 of income rather than $69,000 of income. […]
[…] the way, here’s a chart showing the same destructive policies in the United […]
[…] A Picture of How Redistribution Programs Trap the Less Fortunate in Lives of Dependency […]
[…] Welfare programs trap people in poverty. […]
[…] A Picture of How Redistribution Programs Trap the Less Fortunate in Lives of Dependency […]
[…] in 2011, I linked to a simple chart that illustrated how handouts and subsidies create very high implicit marginal tax rates for […]
[…] Traps the Poor in Dependency, the British Version por Dan Mitchell: Earlier this year, I shared an amazing chart that specifically measured how the welfare state imposes these high implicit tax rates. […]
[…] some new rules for golf, based on Obama’s soak-the-rich/entrap-the-poor approach to fiscal […]
[…] in 2011, I linked to a simple chart that illustrated how handouts and subsidies create very high implicit marginal tax rates for […]
[…] in 2011, I linked to a simple chart that illustrated how handouts and subsidies create very high implicit marginal tax rates for […]
[…] in 2011, I linked to a simple chart that illustrated how handouts and subsidies create very high implicit marginal tax rates for […]
[…] The welfare state drawings weren’t even intended as a joke. I wanted to make an important point about how entitlement programs start small, but then balloon in size as politicians buy more votes and create more dependency. […]
Reblogged this on Turophile's 2 cents worth and commented:
If benefits were gradually eliminated it would eliminate the cliff. For example, cut benefits 60 cents for every dollar a beneficiary earns above $20 per week. This plan already exists in the Unemployment system.
[…] also shared this dramatic chart showing how redistribution programs create shockingly high implicit marginal tax… for those with modest […]
[…] Keep in mind, by the way, that the negative impact of unemployment benefits is just the tip of the welfare-state iceberg. Professor Casey Mulligan has some very good work about the negative impact of redistribution programs, and this chart shows how dependency programs create very high implicit marginal tax rates for the less fortunate. […]
[…] Keep in mind, by the way, that the negative impact of unemployment benefits is just the tip of the welfare-state iceberg. Professor Casey Mulligan has some very good work about the negative impact of redistribution programs, and this chart shows how dependency programs create very high implicit marginal tax rates for the less fortunate. […]
[…] pay single mothers to have children out of wedlock. That’s a legitimate complaint since the welfare state has failed both poor people and taxpayers. But they should apply the same analysis and apply even more moral outrage to handouts that […]
[…] about the best way of actually reducing poverty. It’s important to remember, after all, that the welfare state has a human cost that is just as important as the fiscal […]
[…] I don’t believe in respecting politicians because they don’t respect us. They either treat us like fatted calves to be slaughtered with class warfare taxation or as wards of the state that should be permanently trapped in lives of dependency. […]
[…] all I needed to SHRUG. It shows the futility of the Welfare Queen's effort to seek employment. Read it and weep. "The private sector is doing fine" – President Obama 6/8/12 "It is absolutely […]
[…] Set aside the policy arguments here about redistribution undermining progress in the fight against poverty and making it difficult for the less fortunate to climb the economic ladder. […]
[…] But I also think the evidence is very clear that the welfare state is undermining progress in reducing poverty, often by trapping people in lives of dependency. […]
[…] Set aside the policy arguments here about redistribution undermining progress in the fight against poverty and making it difficult for the less fortunate to climb the economic ladder. […]
[…] some people who do produce. To get a better idea of how the former kills incentives, look at this amazing chart. Like this:LikeBe the first to like this. By Everette Hatcher III, on September 18, 2012 at 6:22 […]
[…] P.P.S. Redistribution is bad for prosperity because you’re paying some people not to produce and you’re penalizing some people who do produce. To get a better idea of how the former kills incentives, look at this amazing chart. […]
[…] some people who do produce. To get a better idea of how the former kills incentives, look at this amazing chart. Rate this:Share this:PrintEmailFacebookTwitterMoredeliciousDiggFarkLinkedInRedditStumbleUponLike […]
[…] off by making less income. These are known as “Welfare Cliffs.” Here’s a brief discussion from Dan Mitchell’s blog: A Picture of How Redistribution Programs Trap the Less Fortunate in Lives of […]
[…] Combine the knowledge that government programs do nothing to stimulate economic activity with the welfare cliff and one can understand that the economic incentives for growth as presently constructed in the US […]
[…] then you have a safety net that traps people. Which of course, one use for a net, I guess. Hey, remember the major success of the Clinton […]
[…] the knowledge that government programs do nothing to stimulate economic activity with the welfare cliff and one can understand that the economic incentives for growth as presently constructed in the US […]
[…] Read more by Dan Mitchell […]
[…] the knowledge that government programs do nothing to stimulate economic activity with the welfare cliff and one can understand that the economic incentives for growth as presently constructed in the US […]
I’ll experience this soon. My fiance is getting supplementary income and health card because of her serious health problems. That goes away when we get married because my income is 70 cents an hour too high. So I get a $1000 hit/month for insurance and the income she loses. Tempting to tell the employer to give me 2 weeks leave up absence a year but we will just deal and do what we need to do. This wouldnt have been an issue 3 years ago but I took a 24% cut in pay when I get layed off. We’re hoping the medical care she is currently getting enables her to get out of this health problem so she can work and I can find a better job than the current asshats I work for. She was told by a social worker that because she was responsible and didnt pop kids out that she couldnt get as much aid.
This was exactly my experience as I transitioned from public assistance to self-sufficiency – a decade of decent raises with no improvement in my net income or standard of living. There were many days I wondered if it was worth it . . . it’s a real, substantial issue that won’t be solved by people sniffing about freeloaders. We need to figure out a way to incentivize people to get past the hurdles, perhaps by making the assistance benefits less attractive or the reductions in assistance less draconian. Encourage people to get out of that valley, don’t sneer at them for finding the climb difficult.
Your term “less fortunate” is misleading. More accurate to describe as “non achievers”.
Years ago, when I was in fast-food management, I remember one of my employees (a single mom living in subsidized housing, etc.) telling me not to give her more than a certain number of hours, because if she made over $X/wk she’d go into a different bracket for calculating her rent, etc., and it would actually cost her money. At that time, I realized that our so-called “progressive” tax system, once one considers a loss of benefits as equivalent to a tax, is in fact very regressive, with the effective marginal tax rate for low-income people at or in some cases above 100%. By that I mean that there these “cliffs” at which earning $100 more not only fails to put ANY of that $100 into the worker’s pocket, it actually removes far more than that.
I think you meant “goof off”. Great article.
And to think that the graph does not even seem to include Obamacare, a program that will radically change the graph, for the worse. None of the other two major welfare entitlement programs (Medicare and Social Security) are as redistributive – and thus as long term destructive – as Obamacare. The pace of American decline will greatly accelerate once Obamacare irreversibly flattens the effort-reward curve come 2014. American voter lemmings are walking towards the Europeanization of HopNChange – Decline by design, decline by the irresistible short term benefits of redistribution. The skeletons of many one cultures who listened to those sirens lie on the rocks of HopNChange. American voter lemmings will get what they want – in the short term – and what they ultimately deserve in the longer term: loss of exceptionalism and decline.
Reblogged this on Public Secrets and commented:
And, in fact, just today we learn the Obama Admin. has gutted the Clinton-era welfare reform, giving people even more incentive to stay dependent: http://is.gd/XhRpIl
And that is exactly why people in the UK on benefits, choose to remain on benefits, both in terms of not wishing to work at all, or to try and earn more, but loose benefits in doing so.
Reblogged this on insipidbanality and commented:
WTF – Sad but true. I have anecdotal evidence to support