Page 1 of 1

Entitlement mentality: Welfare = $30.60/hr x 40 hrs/week

Posted: Fri Dec 07, 2012 5:45 pm
by _bcspace
The amount of money spent on welfare programs equals, when converted to cash payments, about "$168 per day for every household in poverty," the minority side of the Senate Budget Committee finds. Here's a chart detailing the committee's findings:

According to the Republican side of the Senate Budget Committee, welfare spending per day per household in poverty is $168, which is higher than the $137 median income per day. When broken down per hour, welfare spending per hour per household in poverty is $30.60, which is higher than the $25.03 median income per hour.

"Based on data from the Congressional Research Service, cumulative spending on means-tested federal welfare programs, if converted into cash, would equal $167.65 per day per household living below the poverty level," writes the minority side of the Senate Budget Committee. "By comparison, the median household income in 2011 of $50,054 equals $137.13 per day. Additionally, spending on federal welfare benefits, if converted into cash payments, equals enough to provide $30.60 per hour, 40 hours per week, to each household living below poverty. The median household hourly wage is $25.03. After accounting for federal taxes, the median hourly wage drops to between $21.50 and $23.45, depending on a household’s deductions and filing status. State and local taxes further reduce the median household’s hourly earnings. By contrast, welfare benefits are not taxed."

The universe of means-tested welfare spending refers to programs that provide low-income assistance in the form of direct or indirect financial support—such as food stamps, free housing, child care, etc.—and which the recipient does not pay into (in contrast to Medicare or Social Security). For fiscal year 2011, CRS identified roughly 80 overlapping federal means-tested welfare programs that together represented the single largest budget item in 2011—more than the nation spends on Social Security, Medicare, or national defense. The total amount spent on these federal programs, when taken together with approximately $280 billion in state contributions, amounted to roughly $1 trillion. Nearly 95 percent of these costs come from four categories of spending: medical assistance, cash assistance, food assistance, and social / housing assistance. Under the President’s FY13 budget proposal, means-tested spending would increase an additional 30 percent over the next four years.

The diffuse and overlapping nature of federal welfare spending has led to some confusion regarding the scope and nature of benefits. For instance, Newark Mayor Cory Booker has recently received a great deal of attention for adopting the “food stamp diet” in which he spends only $4 a day on food (the median individual benefit) to apparently illustrate the insufficiency of food stamp spending ($80 billion a year) or the impossibility of reductions. The situation Booker presents, however, is not accurate: a low-income individual on food stamps may qualify for $25,000 in various forms of welfare support from the federal government on top of his or her existing income and resources—including access to 15 different food assistance programs. Further, even if one unrealistically assumes that no other welfare benefits are available, the size of the food stamp benefit increases as one’s income decreases, as the benefit is designed as a supplement to existing resources; it is explicitly not intended to be the sole source of funds for purchasing food.

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/welfare-spending-equates-168-day-every-household-poverty_665160.html


That is over 60K a year in benefits per household as we found out earlier. Here is where you make most of your cuts and new taxes aren't necessary.

Re: Entitlement mentality: Welfare = $30.60/hr x 40 hrs/week

Posted: Fri Dec 07, 2012 6:12 pm
by _Analytics
bcspace wrote:That is over 60K a year in benefits per household as we found out earlier. Here is where you make most of your cuts and new taxes aren't necessary.

It sounds like you have all the answers. Let's break down a bit and see how it would work.

1- A young woman gets pregnant and has limited income. Currently, she could enroll in Medicaid, which would allow her to have prenatal care and have the baby delivered in a hospital. Should this benefit be eliminated? If so, what would you suggest this person do? Have the baby at home with friends and family serving as midwives?


2- Sometimes, the baby from example one is born pre-mature. The only way the baby can survive is with intensive medical treatments that can cost in the hundreds of thousands of dollars. Currently, Medicaid pays for this care. Should this entitlement be cut? Would it be better to let such babies die?


3- When people get so old they can’t perform the basic activates of daily living, they need to enter nursing homes. This care is not covered under Medicare. Depending upon geogrpahy, the service costs around $70,000 a year. If the old people don’t have any assets and can't afford this, Medicaid will pay for it. Should the government stop paying for nursing homes? How should this be handled? Should nursing homes drop off old people who can't afford the care at the nearest living relative or at the nearest church?

Re: Entitlement mentality: Welfare = $30.60/hr x 40 hrs/week

Posted: Fri Dec 07, 2012 10:37 pm
by _just me
Well, I for one make a living getting paid by tax dollars to care for those who cannot care for themselves. And, yes, it adds up.

Shall we euthanize those who are unable to care for themselves?

It is asinine to say the person I care for gets $60K a year. No. There are a bunch of support personnel that get paid to provide services to him/her. There is section 8 housing costs, etc.

Good god. Some people are so clueless.

Re: Entitlement mentality: Welfare = $30.60/hr x 40 hrs/week

Posted: Fri Dec 07, 2012 11:16 pm
by _Analytics
just me wrote:Well, I for one make a living getting paid by tax dollars to care for those who cannot care for themselves. And, yes, it adds up.

Shall we euthanize those who are unable to care for themselves?

It is asinine to say the person I care for gets $60K a year. No. There are a bunch of support personnel that get paid to provide services to him/her. There is section 8 housing costs, etc.

Good god. Some people are so clueless.

Exactly. The $60,000 per household below the poverty line is an extraordinarily misleading statistic, designed to create the illusion that able-bodied welfare recipients are raking in $60,000 a year, less a service fee paid to their case worker.

That is not what's driving this statistic; a huge part of it is to take care of people who not only can't take care of themselves, but also have very expensive medical and care needs.

Re: Entitlement mentality: Welfare = $30.60/hr x 40 hrs/week

Posted: Sat Dec 08, 2012 12:19 am
by _Kevin Graham
The universe of means-tested welfare spending refers to programs that provide low-income assistance in the form of direct or indirect financial support—such as food stamps, free housing, child care, etc.—and which the recipient does not pay into (in contrast to Medicare or Social Security). For fiscal year 2011, CRS identified roughly 80 overlapping federal means-tested welfare programs that together represented the single largest budget item in 2011—more than the nation spends on Social Security, Medicare, or national defense. The total amount spent on these federal programs, when taken together with approximately $280 billion in state contributions, amounted to roughly $1 trillion. Nearly 95 percent of these costs come from four categories of spending: medical assistance, cash assistance, food assistance, and social / housing assistance. Under the President’s FY13 budget proposal, means-tested spending would increase an additional 30 percent over the next four years.


I call BS on this one. Oh, and virtually everyone receiving food stamps "pay into" it.

Image


Image

So to say we spend more on welfare than we do military is just blatant malarkey. But typical of the kinds of "research" we've come to expect from Right Wing outlets like Weekly Standard.