[GalenErso]

I'm not an expert on poverty, but I don't think it's as simple as concluding that anti poverty programs are a waste of money. For one, looking at the cumulative amount over time is a pointless metric. Second, we cannot deny that a lot of people were genuinely helped by these measures and managed to climb out of poverty and start giving back to society. Third, poor Americans still have a superior standard of living than most of the world. American poverty is its own league.

"Even if you're stuck in the bottom 5% of the US income distribution your standard of living is about equal to that of the top 5% of Indians. Even if you're in the bottom 10% your standard of living is about the same as that of the bottom 10% in other rich countries (which, so we are told, care so much more and do so much more) like Sweden and Finland. And when we sweep everything together into some sort of quality of life measure the American poor are better off than the French or German poor."

https://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2013/06/01/astonish...

The Poorest 20% of Americans Are Richer on Average Than Most European Nations

https://fee.org/articles/the-poorest-20-of-americans-are-ric...

"A groundbreaking study by Just Facts has discovered that after accounting for all income, charity, and non-cash welfare benefits like subsidized housing and food stamps, the poorest 20 percent of Americans consume more goods and services than the national averages for all people in most affluent countries. This includes the majority of countries in the prestigious Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), including its European members. In other words, if the US “poor” were a nation, it would be one of the world’s richest."

Also, official data on US poverty may overestimate the problem.

"US low-income households greatly underreport both their income and non-cash benefits"

"There has been “a sharp rise” in the underreporting of government benefits received by low-income households in the United States. This “understatement of incomes” masks “the poverty-reducing effects of government programs” and leads to “an overstatement of poverty and inequality.”"

[ArnoVW]

Comparing us revenues with eu ones is tricky. Yes, in raw dollars those poor are better off in the US. But, and I admit to not having read any of those links, my guess is that if you compensate for things like public transport, healthcare, education and other things, the US doesn't compare favorable when you're poor.

[pg_1234]

Yeah. Increasingly entrenched wealth inequality, and failing public services means the USA as a whole is looking more and more like a 2nd world state these days. The 1st world part is increasingly just for the upper classes.

[pg_1234]

This study could be summarized as "the poorest 20% of USA residents have as much money spent addressing their poverty as the average citizen of a European country".

But once you pick through the details you realize they are looking at expenditure , not outcomes.

Considering this, and given the gross corruption and inefficiency of US welfare, most notably healthcare, it might be more accurate to say that "The poorest 20% of USA residents have as much money wasted on a farcical attempt to support them ..."

[robocat]

GalenErso wrote “the poorest 20 percent of Americans consume more goods and services”, which doesn’t match your summary at all.