Social Welfare value for money

[Bruv]

How the U.S. spends more helping its citizens than other rich countries, but gets way less

Looks like the 'Free Market' actually costs more.

[FourPart]

I'm not certain quite what the article is trying to say, other than a Welfare System that feeds people is a bad thing, but a Welfare System that houses people is even worse, because they (the country) don't get anything out of it.

[Bruv]

FourPart;1480248 wrote: I'm not certain quite what the article is trying to say, other than a Welfare System that feeds people is a bad thing, but a Welfare System that houses people is even worse, because they (the country) don't get anything out of it.


The way I read it is if the government is the first line of distributing social welfare in the form of health care housing or unemployment pay or it's other forms, the value for the cash spent is greater than if it is left to the free market through tax concessions etc etc.

Or in other words the Nanny State works better for everybody.

[FourPart]

It's like the theory behind the privatisation of the NHS. Yes, when run as a business it runs more efficiently, so as to increase profits for the Fat Cats, at the expense of cutbacks from those who need it most. The reality, though, is also that although the end line savings are made, the benefits of those savings go into the pockets of the shareholders as profits, meaning that in the long run there are no real savings being made. There is still the same cake being sliced up. The difference is that now those of the "Free Market" are getting their slice as well, to the detriment of everyone else.