It's a hard read given what's happened with all the waste and excess in the social safety net. The social workers in my neighborhood live in nicer houses than me and lease vehicles that people purchase when intelligence isn't the limiting factor (e.g FCA products), and they leave for work after me and arrive home before I do. Yet I see stories about their clients needing winter coats and socks.
I look at how much of my paycheck goes to taxes and it seems like there should be enough to ensure that kids don't go hungry but apparently not.
But the solution remains the same as always. The bureaucrats bleat "we need more money" - I don't think I've ever heard one say "we need to do a better job with the budget".
I hear what you're saying, but the fact is the roles of poor being helped by these systems are ever growing, therefore them constantly needing more money makes perfect sense. Especially after the housing crash in '08, from which many many households never recovered.
The fact is though we spent something on the order of 13 trillion dollars on a plane for the USAF that's not yet flown a single mission since it was purchased in what, 2008? Until that type of stuff starts getting cut, I refuse to buy the argument that "we can't afford it." BS we can't. Right now we won't afford it but that's not the same thing.
We've spent less than a trillion on it so far. I don't know where you got your 13 trillion dollar expense, but I'd like to know more about the claim.
I don't argue that we don't have the money to take better care of the poor. I'm just reluctant to advocate for more money until our welfare system demonstrates its efficiency. If it kicked butt, I'd want much more money going into the welfare system. But it's awful that so many good intentioned people run a system so poorly and the most vulnerable take the hit.
Be careful judging others based on your quality of life standards.
You might get angry realizing everyone has it better than you; but perhaps debt, lost love, resentment and bitterness is funding those extravagant purchases.
In theory anyway, yes, it would be a much more efficient system that directly benefits the people under it. I'm sure you'd still need some staff but it would be drastically lower, and a fraud department wouldn't be required.
I look at how much of my paycheck goes to taxes and it seems like there should be enough to ensure that kids don't go hungry but apparently not.
But the solution remains the same as always. The bureaucrats bleat "we need more money" - I don't think I've ever heard one say "we need to do a better job with the budget".