Actually I would argue that welfare is an investment, of sorts, at least when it works. I'm not making any argument for people that could work but simply choose not. If someone shows me some figures that show there's a substantial numbe rof people who are on welfare just because they like life at the poverty line more than they do working then I'll speak to that issue, but until then I will proceed on the understanding that those are marginal cases.Kevin Mackie wrote: Wasteful taxation is the incredible amount of transfer payments, (i.e. welfare), which is simply a zero sum game, even less when you figure the wasteful task of administrating those giveaways.
Anyhow, back to what I was saying. There are costs associated with poverty: crime and healthcare, for example. These costs are translated to everyone else, even without welfare coming into the picture. You could consider denying healthcare to those who can't afford it, but there's no practical way to deny police service. There will be spillover if you let it run rampant, and you can't just let bodies rot in the street. Welfare is an investment to the extent that by bringing people out of poverty, these correlated costs are reduced.
I would go even further to point out that it is a tremendous waste of economic potential that otherwise intelligent and creative persons are trapped in poverty. Now I'm guessing we'll disagree on the extent to which poverty traps a person. I think it's rather significant, but on the other hand Rich can tell his personal rags-to-riches story.
Now I'm not arguing that welfare as it's currently implemented (and I don't even know the details) is a net positive. I'm only arguing that the concept of giving a person an initial boost from which they then become productive is valid, and even aside from any humanitarian argument, can be a net gain in efficiency for the country.
I'm not an economic scholar, though I do have a passing familiarity with Smith. I just started reading Keynes's _General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money_. Is there some particular economist whose works you think I've overlooked? I am open to reading suggestions.Justin, when you understand just how naive that statement was, you'll start to understand another point of view.
I never said that market investments are productive only for the stockholder. Obviously I should have been more clear if that is how you took it.
Just a question: How much money is a strange's life to you? Is there no such thing as "enough" pie? Is there any point at which you would value a stranger's life, even if that person was a lazy derelict, over a dollar?This is capitalism. You want a bigger piece of the pie? you have to cut it yourself; the rest of us are tired of serving everyone else.
Time to let Willie have some fun! 
)
)
