I’d like to know exactly what ‘means tested’ implies. The purpose and ultimate goal of these programs should be to foster eventual self sufficiency. What are welfare programs seem to be fostering unfortunately is continual government dependency. I have no problem with my tax dollars being spent on helping individuals and families become self reliant in the near future. The problem is, the politicians in Sacramento and DC expect so very little of welfare recipients. The system has produced multiple generations of ‘I can’t’ people. The concept of working for a living eludes many of them. And it will continue as long as we have administrations that echo entitlement thinking while demonstrating contempt for wealth. Why work hard when those greedy rich people can ‘pay their fair share’? I honestly believe America has been taken on a irreversible course. I hope I’m wrong, but afraid that no amount of fiscal conservatism will be able to crash this party. The majority of the American electorate are too drunk on ‘me-ism’ and ‘entitlementism’ to care. The GOP are fighting a futile uphill battle.

And the huge socialist program known as the military-industrial complex, plus various other subsidies to agriculture, energy, etc., total well over $1 trillion per annum. In the words of the great Paul Krugman, government is essentially an insurance company with an army.

Andy: knock it off with the name-calling already.

The Constitution provides for the military-industrial complex? I don’t think so…and then there’s this:

“To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;”

So why it that expenditure so ongoing? Is it because of the numerous wars we’ve engaged in? Many of which have been wars of choice and not of defense (or defence, as the document notes)…

“And the huge socialist program known as the military-industrial complex, plus various other subsidies to agriculture, energy, etc., total well over $1 trillion per annum”

Well, it depends on the way you look at it Geoff. While those jobs are taxpayer funding, many of those workers are reinvesting via the income taxes they pay and the sales taxes on their expenditures. Those are well paying jobs which means much of what they make gets reinvested in the economy. Not to mention that many of these government contracts allow companies the human resources, infrastructure, and expertise to venture into private/ commercial development. Boeing would be a prime example. We, at least see a marginal return on our investment. Welfare programs that don’t feed people into the work force provides no return. We might as well be flushing that trillion dollars down the toilet.

But they aren’t buying the big ticket items such as homes and cars. Aerospace engineers are. Its simple math, Geoff. Most individuals on assistance are buying what I would consider sustainance goods (food, shelter, basic clothing). Its a very small fraction of sales tax revenue. Have you ever lived on assistance? And those ‘socialist programs’ you mention reinvest ten times more into the economy than welfare does simply because they have more disposable income.

the ‘welfare’ programs also see money get reinvested into the economy.

please provide examples
That money is nothing but retreaded money from tax collection that wasn’t earned. It usually goes to buy things that are beyond basics, Jordan shoes, 28″ wheels, drugs, weaves, pedi/mani’s

There is a reason why local liquor stores will trade food stamps for pennies on the dollar.