What still baffles me is that although many Governments has been giving away welfare aids to people below a certain income level, this does not help solve poverty at all.
Poor people can now fulfill their basic needs, but they have now become dependent on the Govt to give them the necessary resources for life. I think this is a gross misallocation of resources which could have been put to better use to create jobs instead of making poor people dependent.
It doesn't take a genius to figure out that this solution is only beneficial in the short run so why is it still being done?
In Denmark less than half the population works. Half their income is taken from them before it even hits their bank accounts and redistributed to those who do not work. It's even worse than that since government employed get their saleries from taxes, and that sector is ever-growing.Poor people can now fulfill their basic needs, but they have now become dependent on the Govt to give them the necessary resources for life. I think this is a gross misallocation of resources which could have been put to better use to create jobs instead of making poor people dependent.
It doesn't take a genius to figure out that this solution is only beneficial in the short run so why is it still being done?
Think how it would be if there were no welfare checks. Taxes could be low, maybe 15% instead of 50, wages would go down while actual buying power would go up due to less taxation. Everyone who works would be wealthier, and more people would work out of necessity so the country would be more productive. The only downside is that people who can't or won't work would be worse off, but there is no perfect system. It's really a matter of, do we want a functioning country where the majority benefits or do we want 0% of the population to live in the street?
In Spain, the welfare system is so fucked up that you have to be half crippled to get something, and even those with legitimate minusvalies are having problems getting their deserved monthly paychecks, what this means is even if these that may be just lazy (and we could discuss if lazy is just a word to describe a legitimate biological problem that really makes working for you hell) aren't getting a single penny from welfare, you don't see any improvement or people being successful as entrepeneurs. In my observations the only thing i've gathered is poverty attracts more poverty and success stories aren't the norm. Similarly, money attracts money, this is why people who inherit can keep on building more and more of it wasting almost no energy.
I do agree that it would tend to bring everyone to the same level however.