Obscene Salaries of Welfare Recipients- Reported to be Truth!

Wow! Rarely have I seen statistics mutilated so much. Author Michael Tanner references his own research, which supports his own position. (Surprise. Surprise.)

The study did not say that anybody ACTUALLY makes that much in welfare. See the methodology. They added up several benefits that a person might conceivably receive and the result is that readers are led to come to Tanners conclusion: Welfare is bad. Libertarianism (CATO) is good. (Another surprise, surprise.)

It's easy--and popular--to believe that those "Other People" are not working because they're getting too much in welfare. However, real studies, new and old, around the world, show that people would rather work for $x than be given $x. Of course there are exceptions, and there is fraud. Maybe welfare, as practiced now, needs fixing. But for sure, this "study" needs fixing.

The fact that generation upon generation have been abusing the system makes everyone who received assistance look bad. While the leadership in Washington D.C. have 2 views on it. First is to lessen the government and make some accept personal responsibility, or even work to receive benefits. The other believes in pandering to the abusers and actually think that dependency on the government is great. It's actually paying for votes and it keeps the ignorant voting away our rights.

ok, so if I understand this article correctly, the numbers given int he first column represent the yearly (annual) amount of cash received in each state for a family of three? If that is the case, I will tell you right now it is nothing but a bunch of horse manure and I can tell you from personal experience.

take Michigan as an example. In 2008 I received maximum cash assistance (welfare) for myself and my two sons. That was a total of $475 per month, which totals $5,700 per year. Now, I understand this was done for 2013, 5 years later, and I was already off of welfare at that point. But I can tell you right now that welfare did not increase by over $2,000 per month in five years.
I moved to New York in 2008 and started out on welfare there; again max for three people. it was something like $515 per month; a difference (supposedly) of $2,900. Again, not happening in five years time and highly unlikely to be happening even now. Especially since National poverty level, which is what the welfare is based off of is set at something like $16,400 annually for a family of three.

Now, let's presume that when they say welfare, they are also talking about food stamps, which is NOT welfare. in Michigan in 2008, I received between $400 and $500 for food stamps; again the max available for a family of three. Since I can not remember the exact amount, we will double the $475 cash assistance I received to get a general idea of what I received. That would be $11,400 per year cash and food stamps in michigan. in New york, again doubling the cash cause I can not remember the exact number of foodstamps, would mean $12,360 food and cash per year.

Okay, so far we have figured in both cash assistance (maxxed) and food stamp assistance (maxxed) for a family of three and come up with a little under two thirds difference in the numbers. Hmm let's try adding medical insurance. Basic medical insurance, let's say $200 per month, that's $2,400 per year, plus the $11,400 in Michigan would make, $14, 800 per year, rounded to an even $14,000. new York would be $14,760 per year, or $15,000., Again just shy of a 2/3 difference from the article.


I just do not see michigan or new york increasing welfare (which is only cash assistance) by that much in five years. Do you?

Edit: by the way, for those interested, this equates to $7.29 per hour, 40 hours a week, 4 weeks a month, 12 months a year for Michigan and $7.81 for New York ;-)