Does Welfare 'Ruin' Ambition? - James Bartholomew

Complete video at: http://fora.tv/2009/05/18/James_Bartholomew_The_Welfare_State_Were_In

Author James Bartholomew argues that welfare benefits actually increase government handouts by 'ruining' ambition. He compares welfare to a humane mousetrap.

-----

In the controversial book The Welfare State We're In, James Bartholomew argues that the welfare state in Britain has resulted in a generation of badly educated and dependent citizens, leading to lives of deprivation for thousands and undermining the original intent behind its creation in the 1940s.

Has the welfare state really led to more harm than good? What does this imply for the ever-expanding welfare state in the United States? - Cato Institute

James Bartholomew trained as a banker in the City of London before moving into journalism with the Financial Times and the Far Eastern Economic Review, for whom he worked in Hong Kong and Tokyo. Returning to England on the Trans-Siberian Railway through communist China and the Soviet Union an experience which influenced his political outlook he subsequently became a leader writer on The Daily Telegraph and the Daily Mail.

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• unemployment
• reform
• liberal
• policy
• policies
• nanny
• state
• big
• small
• government
• work
• jobs
• socialism
• socialist
• handout
• fora.tv
• foratv
• fora
• tv

[davidmaren2000]

what do you mean why did it happen just look at human nature and it explains everything. no incentive no ambition

[davidmaren2000]

socialism has failed all over the world. huge government makes for a very ineffectual system. human nature always overcomes reason. we are all introuble because of the modern welfare state. western europe who embraced it so widely are now seeing that it is unsustainable.

[Gamer1990100]

I'm sure welfare does ruin ambition with all the drug addicts abusing it.

[Cosmo1093]

@sdmitch16 Too bad security isn't ALLOWED to shoot without a damn good reason. If they apprehend someone, they can't legally arrest them either - they lack the legal authority.

Why should ANYONE have to pay for libraries when we are now in the digital age where the internet and eBooks have taken over, nullifying the usefulness of libraries for most Americans? I'm biased, I prefer the internet to books anyway. Your question doesn't apply only to the rich, but for the entire middle class as well.

[sdmitch16]

@Cosmo1093 They could hire security that would be more powerful than police. Police have very low shooting accuracy in real world situations, unlike military personal. They don't need police. Why should they have to pay for them? Why should the the rich be forced to pay for libraries that stock books they will never read? Why shouldn't they be able to choose not to pay taxes on libraries and then not be allowed to use library services?

[Cosmo1093]

@sdmitch16 Hm, maybe because those services benefit everybody, including the rich. That means they pay for the sake of themselves too, not solely for the sake of others in a government attempt to steal from one socioeconomic group to pay for another. Even if the rich have security, they still have to call the police because of their security's relatively limited power. Why exactly would the rich buy a book they can simply check out? The rich like to save money when possible, they''re smart.

[sdmitch16]

@Cosmo1093 Why should the rich be forced to pay for police when they could afford their own security? or libraries when they could buy their own books? Should the entire government be optional?

[carcabe]

Benjamin Franklin was right. “I observed that the more public provisions were made for the poor, the less they provided for themselves. And, on the contrary, the less was done for them, the more they did for themselves.”

[sdmitch16]

@Cosmo1093 It would cost less to have them use food stamps because they could buy cheaper food than corn. Also, they could get better nutrition because all foods would be 'subsidized' instead of one. It would be good for the environment to because corn uses more water and fertilizer than the average crop and most of the plant can't be eaten.

The military may not get more than Medicare but defense does. Defense and Medicare are getting cuts, so defense will probably still be bigger than Medicare

[Cosmo1093]

@sdmitch16 "Food stamps will take care food price increases." - That's only shifting funding between programs. Instead of tax money paying for subsidies, it now has to pay for more food stamps.

Before you said "The Military budget is over $ trillion dollars for 2012". "Defense related spending" isn't all for the military. The DoD (which all branches of the military fall under) gets $684 billion for 2012 as of now. This number will actually too decrease due to all the budget cuts.