Bob Hubbard’s recent article, It’s About Choice, stirred up a lot of reactions on Facebook, both positive and negative. This Friday Follow-up will briefly recap a couple basic facts that frame the debate, and then a counterpoint by a Liberal blogger that challenges the belief that out welfare system is pervasive and not generally flawed.
First, Politifact addressed (and positively confirmed) the statements that the top 5% of earners pay over half of all federal income taxes, and the lower half in fact pay no net income tax at all and/or get money back. This utterly wipes out any excuse to assert there’s not significant existing progressive taxation.
Second, blogger Pat O’Mally states that less than half of 1% of American citizens actually receive welfare at any one time, and administrative costs are as low as 7.4%. It also debunks generational welfare and lifetime eligibility, perhaps the belief in which are residual prejudices from before the major reform overhaul during the Clinton administration. However, her use of partisan epithets makes clear her bias, and she fails to mention other assistasnce programs such as [[Food Stamps]], addressing only one program in the whole spectrum of public assistance, and side-stepping any issues of fraud or it’s prevalence.
I plan to research this further, as even my own recent article on the subject did not venture past the realm of anecdotal evidence and rational assumptions.