As usual, the post's title (see below) is meant to mislead you. People ignore the contradictory statement farther down that, "To be clear, not all households living below the poverty line receive $61,194 worth of assistance per year."
So each U.S. household in poverty did not get $60 K in cash or other assistance in 2011. Nevertheless, this lie is now bouncing around the rightwing echo chamber, repeated as fact. The damage is done. (Google "60,000 welfare u.s. october 2012" to see what I mean.)
In fact, that "welfare" went to people who are middle class, too. So if you take the numbers in that post, and divide $1 trillion by 110 million people receiving some kind of "welfare" in 2011, that comes out to $9 K per person, or about $23 K per household. Still nothing to sneeze at, but certainly not enough for a plush lifestyle at taxpayers' expense.
You could argue that the government should not be giving middle-class Americans food stamps and whatnot, but that's a separate discussion from this one. Although I will say this: it makes sense to give recently unemployed Americans a hand before they become poor. Middle-class Americans who have fallen on hard times are able and willing to get back on their feet, so temporary government assistance to them is not fostering "dependency," as you'll hear Romney, Ryan, et al claim.
P.S. - This is becoming a habit at The Weekly Standard, taking a big $ figure and dividing it by the wrong denominator. Last year they tried to do the same thing with the Recovery Act to argue erroneously that the cost per job created by the stimulus bill was $278 K.
P.S. - This is becoming a habit at The Weekly Standard, taking a big $ figure and dividing it by the wrong denominator. Last year they tried to do the same thing with the Recovery Act to argue erroneously that the cost per job created by the stimulus bill was $278 K.
By Daniel Halper
October 26, 2012 | Weekly Standard
No comments:
Post a Comment