[amai]

If bad economy leads to better social welfare programs than we need more "bad economy". It seems to be good for the people. It is strange that sometimes it is forgotten that economic growth as an indicator only makes sense if at the same time it improves life of the people. Economic growth can also be decoupled from people wellbeing, which happens easily if one doesn't fight against inequality and monopolies in capitalistic societies.

[snehk]

No, it's not good for most people. It's only good for those who rely on welfare programs. It's not sustainable as the money has to come from somewhere. The government has never before seen tax revenue but they still cannot pay the bills and they constantly come up with new ideas to take more money from people.

Let me give you an example. Regular workers in Germany pay for health insurance - people on welfare don't. It's paid for by the government. The government raised welfare payments and promised the insurance companies that they'd cover the costs of insurance for those on welfare. The government then said "Well, we'll pay amount x" but amount x is not enough. The insurance companies now need money so they've raised the rates for every working person to make up for this.

[amai]

Other people living on welfare is good for you, too. Because if they don’t get welfare, they might turn to crime, drugs and violence to survive. And of course you are overlooking that it can happen to you, that you get sick, workless and poor. The social safety net is there for you, too.

And regarding German healthcare: The rich also don’t pay for public health insurance in Germany. And even if they do their amount is lower compared to their income, see https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beitragsbemessungsgrenze

If the insurance companies need money they should and could take it from the rich. And this would be fair and good for everyone.