Letter: Why welfare is money well spent
To the editor of THE EAGLE:
In his letter on Friday, Jan. 3, Thomas Gilardi laments the fact that he hears about Social Security funding but "we never hear about welfare running out of money." The simple reason is that social and corporate welfare are critical, positive components of our ongoing financial recovery and our improved competitiveness in world markets.
Welfare subsidizes workers so businesses can pay lower wages without employees falling into poverty. This has allowed corporations to ship jobs overseas, cut jobs through automation, hold down wages by ending union power, reduce work hours to cut benefits and force workers to accept poor pay to have a job. For example, Businessweek reported that 300 employees at one Wal-Mart receive a total of a million dollars in public assistance a year, helping the corporation to achieve higher profits while taxpayers made up for the needs workers could otherwise not afford.
Additionally, welfare reduces poverty which means less crime, fewer poor cluttering emergency rooms and fewer homeless despoiling our streets. And according to Tim Worstall, financial blogger, in Forbes Magazine, welfare removes people from poverty -- food stamps are worth $4 day, and "does anyone think you cannot eat well and healthily . . . making life better $4 by $4 a day?"
Meanwhile corporate welfare speaks for itself: increased corporate profits are good for the economy, and they create more low-paid jobs for people who will be lifted from poverty by the generosity of our tax-supported welfare system. And keep in mind that social welfare only costs taxpayers about $400 a year while corporate welfare only costs us $1400 a year -- money well spent!
TALK TO US
If you'd like to leave a comment (or a tip or a question) about this story with the editors, please email us. We also welcome letters to the editor for publication; you can do that by filling out our letters form and submitting it to the newsroom.