[coldtea]

>In the current system, you can go stay at home and get income support, which should provide you with the basics i.e. a home, food, electricity etc.

Really? How that explains millions of homeless, poors eating in soul kitchens and/or with coupons, etc?

[tinco]

He's talking about a proper country, not the U.S.

[switch007]

They mention income support, so I take that as the UK, where hundreds of thousands of people rely on foodbanks each year.

[tinco]

Ah, I just took the opportunity to naïvely hate on the U.S. a little. I think their lack of social security is appalling. How can such a well faring nation have such a low income tax, and so many poor people.

I guess I just don't understand their definition of liberty.

[Jach]

There's plenty of welfare in the US, and stable and reasonably intelligent individuals (though with dubious ethics) are already capable of exploiting it to never have to work. In some parts of the country homeless people make tens of thousands per year tax-free from panhandling and choose to live the way they do. (For more typical earnings you really have to look on a city-by-city basis. The US spans a continent.) I think the main problem with homelessness though is that there's just not much support or sympathy for the mentally ill -- who make up the majority of homeless people. If you're mentally ill, a lot of places won't even let you in a homeless shelter. Your cost-to-live-stably also goes up a lot due to the prices of medication. Furthermore, low IQ is often found in individuals with the types of mental disorders that can easily lead to homelessness, so you get the double whammy that even if they manage to get stable, they're still limited in what sorts of economic activity they can do since higher wages usually require a higher IQ. Minimum wage is not enough to cover the cost of living and the cost of medication. Some states have better support for the mentally ill than others, but it's a messy problem all around.

[vasilipupkin]

There is quite a bit of welfare benefits in the U.S. the complete lack of social security in the U.S. is a strawman. Now, it's probably true that the benefits are not as generous as elsewhere, but they are fairly extensive, and depending on the state you live in, are quite generous

[lingoberry]

You would only say that if you were born in the US. Your definition of "generous" is pretty laughable in most other developed countries.

[vasilipupkin]

an Illinois family of one mother and two children receiving Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, or TANF; Medicaid, food stamps, Women, Infants and Children, or WIC; public housing; utility assistance; and free commodities (e.g., milk and cheese) would have a benefits package worth $19,442 per year. - See more at: http://illinoispolicy.org/the-work-vs-welfare-trade-off-in-i...

Now, I am not sure whether this is a high enough level of benefits or too high - but I don't think it's laughably low

[krapp]

It's simple, you're as free as you can afford to be.

[wil421]

> So many poor people.

I think poor is a relative term and I dont think America has as many as lets say Central or South America. I dont see people living in shacks sifting through landfills to make ends meet.