Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by DavidAdams 1484 days ago
It's unbelievable how much time, money, and wasted potential productivity the USA spends trying (and failing) to make sure that "undeserving" people don't have access to government welfare benefits of various kinds.
7 comments

This is the correct framing: we are willing to spend hundreds of billions of dollars a year as a country, so long as the framing of that money contains the lie of deservedness.

Contrast our funding of SSI with our funding of the defense industry, an industry that would be virtually indistinguishable from a middle class jobs program were it not for its tendency to start wars in the Middle East.

It’s even worse than you think. The military is constantly trying to close bases and get rid of weapons that aren’t needed to save money. But Congress blocks them at every turn. That’s the whole “government doesn’t create jobs. But don’t take away our make work military jobs.”

The military leaders have also been saying for years that our increase debt is an existential threat.

It's been shocking the amount of "emergency" funding for Ukraine that has been passed in the past 2 months. If it were for anything else other than the military, Republicans would have a gargantuan hissy fit over it and probably filibuster it to death.
And none of it helps any of “our great military men and women” that they claim to love. It only helps the military industrial complex.

Again this is not criticizing the military. It’s more of a critique of the defense industry and their lobbyist.

Eisenhower's farewell speech comes to mind here.
And it seems like it accomplishes the exact opposite. I dated a girl who worked in a drug and rehab facility and she'd constantly complain about how the people who actually worked and tried to improve their situations on their own weren't eligible for any help, but there were a set of regulars who were deadbeat losers with no desire to get better who would essentially use the facility as a hotel. I'm not saying the losers shouldn't have access, but having a job should not bar you from getting help.
This is one of the most insidious side effects of means testing. The moment you improve slightly, you cross the threshold and lose the benefits you needed to get established. Which can mean getting a job can worsen your income and quality of life, which is deeply fucked up.
Well said, it's insane the system is so poorly designed, it benefits the type people it's supposed to punish, while hurting the type of people it's supposed to help (according to the reasoning for why we have these laws in place).
Worse than that, we spend it on people with no net worth as opposed to the ppp loans that sent out millions to companies who didnt need it at all. Only accountability for the poor
I think the proper framing here is that this is a (failed) attempt to limit abuse of the system.

It's still bad, but I would rather work on the assumption that this is merely incompetence rather than malice.

At this point, not fixing it is indistinguishable from malice. We've known for at least a generation the side effects of means testing. Keeping them around is cruelty.
The amount of fraud against COVID relief programs (e.g. PUA) was pretty staggering. Extensive abuse of welfare programs may be much nearer than we'd like to think.
Yet the government will approve trillions in assistance to corporations without ever reading the bill
If you have too much abuse in the system trust breaks down and taxpayers won't support it anymore.
Abuse of all safety net programs is quite low. Lower than tax evasion by a considerable amount.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/five-myths/five-myths...

There's almost no evidence that there's widespread abuse of these programs... and claims to the contrary in some cases (like women having more kids to claim welfare) are talking points that are over a hundred years old.

You can also break trust by loudly and persistently exaggerating the prevalence of abuse in the system.