Welfare = Good for the Economy?

Are welfare programs potentially a net economic good since they transfer money to the poorest of the population, who then by habit, fate, or necessity spend it on consumption items, increasing total economic spending, GDP, and economic growth? It transfers wealth from those who do not spend as much to those who spend more.

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=HmlX3fLQrEc
instagram.com/emilyhelenbarry/?hl=en
al.com/news/mobile/index.ssf/2017/04/rebekah_mason_suggested_closur.html
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

Never understood that point. Isn't production that matters? If people consume without producing anything, they are negative

Yes, it transfers wealth, cool. But no one should receive money for sitting on their ass and doing meth with Jamal, Tyrone, and forty other nigs.

gnnnnnnniiiiiiiiiieeeeeeeeehhhhhh
look at me i have big boobs as big as this pineapple
gniiiiiiiiieeeeeeeeeeeehhhhhhhhhhhh
like like like witness me like give me attention

Costs administration fees + it takes money from people who earned it and gives it to lazy niggers

Bro calm down.

Consumption is the impetus of production, with nobody purchasing their goods or services companies would and could not afford to produce their goods or services. If poor people spend a greater proportion of what they have then rich people then them having more money means more money being spent to a point and more money going into producers.

No you fucking idiot. Nothing new is being added to the economy, you're just shifting numbers around in the GDP calculation from savings/investment to consumption with deadweight loss from using the government as an intermediary

I would think no, I heard something about Clinton cutting welfare in the 90's and caused jobs to skyrocket

>But no one should receive money for sitting on their ass and doing meth
what do you think wallstreet and their trustfund kiddies do for a living? you think they wagecuck like you and me?

>earned
define earn. you do know the majority of US profits are from financial repackaged products, right? is it earned to sit on a million dollars and rake in the interest paid by the wagecucks who don't have a million dollars to sit on?

> what do you think wall street do for a living
Most of them: Extremely hard and mentally demanding work, many of them consistently putting in 10 hour days. Do you have any idea how long and hard it is to make good mathematical models like an effective quant and then implement them rapidly? Do you seriously believe they just print money and make it out or nothing by giving it to themselves and just laugh at the other people while not working?

Yes. Because it drives the movement of goods and maintains the flow of production through demand. That same money if left untaxed would not reintegrated into the economy. Wealthy people save their money and siphon it out of the economy. It's better to have more money in more hands to promote spending in order to stimulate the retail and service side of the economy.

the cost of going without welfare programs is greater than the cost of running welfare programs. its that simple.

Not like in the way you're suggesting. You aren't creating spending via redistribution of wealth as rich people were spending/investing that money so there's exactly the same money spent as before.

However, if that 'welfare' money is used to improve the poorest through education and social programs you can make society more productive improve the economy this way. You want to balance it because taxation reduces economically efficient investment and government programs can become a black hole of wasted wealth if not managed properly.

are you telling me wall street bankers are mathematicians? how fucking hard do you think it is to speculate which triplet of letters to gamble money on? you think whatever menial shit they do, a computer isn't doing? holy shit you are brainwashed
>Do you seriously believe they just print money and make it out or nothing by giving it to themselves and just laugh at the other people while not working?
i fucking seriously hope you're trolling, no fucking wonder we have such a retard for a president, my god

youtube.com/watch?v=HmlX3fLQrEc

Milkies

>Isn't production that matters?
There is no point of production if it provides only for the elite few.

It does not help humanity achieve the goal of conquering the stars.

But something is being created: the spending of that money within the country. Folks on welfare don't (or rarely) spend their gibsmedat on overseas vacations or luxury foreign built autos or whatever. They spend the money on rent, booze and smokes, food, clothes, whatever is cheap and affordable and meets their basic needs. I'd prefer to see some rich fucker have some of his money redistributed than see him spend it (or hide it) offshore.

I literally unironically thought exact words of pic related when I saw this.

>Nothing new is being added to the economy
i love this meme. the future is complete automation of jobs. unless you're a social Darwinist and already a millionaire, you and your kids will have to rely on a government job or a basic form of income. you're piece of shit pencil pushing job will be gone a few years from now.

>Are welfare programs potentially a net economic good
No, only one-time transfers are net neutral, modulo the cost of enacting the transfer (which is never zero).

If you ask me whether plagues are good, though, because they more or less randomly redistribute accrued capital, the answer is yes.

>It transfers wealth from those who do not spend as much to those who spend more.
It doesn't transfer wealth, it transfers money. Money is not wealth.

> Printing money
> Wall St somehow = the FED and Mint now
Also
> What is a quant
You need to look up quantitative finance, and just how much most of Wall St works

no but thicc = good for stick

Too often people try to claim that Republicans are completely and totally against welfare.
>Welfare in itself is not inherently bad. The problems come from the people that exploit the system.
>Be me
>Live in a middle/ upper middle income area
>Have older sister
>Older sister in a relationship with respectable enough guy.
>Find out that his mother gets gib me dats.
>Overhear that his mother works X amount of hours so that she can still collect her gib me dats.
I fucking hate people like her. I understand the necessity of welfare programs, but people like her need to be fucking purged.

Spending doesn't grow the economy, savings does.

All the Emily-posting can't make liberal ideas any more palatable.

Could be worse. Atleast she works X hours. How many people work literally zero hours on purpose?

>r necessity spend it on consumption items,
No
Demand side economics is retarded and just encourages taking on debt
We need deflation

...

Yes, the same idea applies to corporate welfare. Money is a meme. I sometimes wish I lived in a commie hellhole that shoots people in the back of the head if they don't work.

>liberals will justify this

No, clearly its best for an economy to follow the trickle down approach with a laissez faire backbone as supported by ignoring history and foundational economic logic for wishful thinking and conman reagonomic plutocracy propaganda. This time the wealth will totally trickle down, we swear. Oh and you create jobs by giving wealthy individuals and corporations more and more, and removing checks and balances on their unequal economic power to the point they not only screw over others but shortsightedly themselves in the long run from their short term greed. Clearly its a coal company's inability to dump toxins in the nearby river that is preventing more coal jobs and not low demand for coal. Clearly a CEO will create jobs out of the goodness of his heart if only you up the high score on his bank account balance with some more money he stole from his workers pensions...jobs totally aren't something created out of necessity to increase production to meet demand, demand a result of a lower and middle class actually having money to spend...best to make sure they struggle and the CEO gets a bit more...

...some People actually wholeheartedly have been convinced this sarcasm is actually logical. How does one convince someone trickle down retardation makes sense..

>Consumption is the impetus of production, with nobody purchasing their goods or services companies would and could not afford to produce their goods or services

prices would just come down

fat people are next after kikes

if you are fat or encourage fat you deserve the gas chamber

wealth redistribution is easy to debunk. just imagine if walmart gave all of their employees $1000 in store credit. each employee would then spend $1000 buying shit at walmart. what would be the net economic effect in this scenario?

trickle down doesn't make sense

that doesn't imply welfare makes sense

Sauce I know I've seen this chick before somewhere

Can you dispute this?

No, she's the palatable part, but generally people here don't respect women's political opinions anyway.
It's more respectable than just collecting and not working.
Capital savings maybe which invest in furthering production, but production and productivity drive the economy, and spending on goods provides the inpetus for their priduction as well as accumulating wealth and savings among those whose products are purchased.

This guy has got it

>by ignoring history
the 1800s were our golden era

Ever thought about what people on welfare spend their money on? Weed, fast food and sweat shop clothes. They aren't the ones buying American made tools and cars.

She's white, not a chink.
Emily Helen Barry
instagram.com/emilyhelenbarry/?hl=en

>Too often people try to claim that Republicans are completely and totally against welfare.

no, they say they're against welfare for colored people. welfare for whites and corporations are a-okay though.

>but production and productivity drive the economy, and spending on goods provides the inpetus for their priduction
money available for investment creates production
Taxes and welfare create inflation

>Spending doesn't grow the economy, savings does.
what the fuck kind of logic is that? an economy works because one guy spends money another guy lets him borrow. if both people just hoard their money, the economy stagnates which is EXACTLY what's been happening since the 07 recession.

Oh lol I thought you said chink instead of chick

Weak argument. More whites are on welfare then blacks, yes. When adjusted for population size blacks are much more likely to receive benefits from the government.
>How are republicans against welfare for darkies?

>if both people just hoard their money

>you can hoard a fiat currency

>he thinks rich people stuff bills in their mattresses
>he has a high school education and no one taught him how savings work in our banking system
user, I...

As long as NEETs spend their welfare money, it goes back into the system so it's all good.

Heard she's Jewish.

It puts more money into the economy if that's what you mean, but it always ends up right back into the fat cats wallet to likely never spent again. While he ramble about how great he is for producing shot but has no one to sell it to cause everyone is broke because he pays a cuck wage and all his higher ups know better than to buy his shitty product.

Welcome to economics.

No because they drive up prices
We have had massive gains in productivity but no deflation because of welfare

The EBT program generates nearly $2 in local economic activity for every $1 it costs, so that's pretty good bang for our buck.

Indeed True.

Laissez Faire does work very well...in a pre-industrial civilization...making it all the more amusing as a typical libertarian rants about it from his jr high world experience and youtube video education thinking he's got it all figured out from skimming wikipedia...advocating for a renewed gold standard in a world where not enough gold exists to back the amount of currency in circulation...all very fun when you point that out and he goes into edgy mode to try to save face and claims a subsequent world wide economic crash would totally be good and he just wants to watch the world burn.

Savings are delayed consumption and provide the capital for businesses to grow.

Have to be 18 years or older to post on this board.

Yes if you work and give all of it away to a bunch of niggers, then the economic gross product was increased.

Only in homogeneous nations does welfare work, as in America corporations use it to import cheap labor

>world where not enough gold exists to back the amount of currency in circulation
You would just have deflation

>Only in homogeneous nations does welfare work
Even there the cause the breakup of the family and create massive unfunded liabilities

>Oh and you create jobs by giving wealthy individuals and corporations more and more, and removing checks and balances on their unequal economic power to the point they not only screw over others but shortsightedly themselves in the long run from their short term greed.
nothing but communist drivel, the only checks you need are environmental and sanitary, everything else is shit enforced by government shills

agreed. there is a class divide even in homogenous nations. welfare gives away goods at full loss and this is always an artificial manipulation of incentives and supply/demand

minorities are more likely to live in the ghettos where their only job prospects are peddling drugs and gangbanging, quit kidding yourself

>>How are republicans against welfare for darkies?
you mean the same grand ole republican party of Alabama that closed down DMVs in black districts to prevent them from voting? yea, show me proof they aren't out to fuck over colored people

al.com/news/mobile/index.ssf/2017/04/rebekah_mason_suggested_closur.html

What do you think rich people are doing with their money? Do you think that, if not stolen by the government, the rich would be skiing around inside a vault of money, Uncle Scrooge-style?

The rich stay rich and get richer by investing their money, which generally means lending it to someone else who wants to spend it. Welfare doesn't generate new spending, it just changes the spender.

You can get a job outside the ghetto

>minorities are more likely to live in the ghettos where their only job prospects are peddling drugs and gangbanging

don't till your field and it's trash
america is principled enough to let them reap what they sow

>but muh innocent child without any allegiance to the wrongdoers

The argument against that is what activity exactly is it? Again, it's shuffling money around to some extent, many people would argue that the opportunity cost of lower average capital among investors used to pay for such programs leads to drastically lowered long-term net productivity since they didn't have as much money to invest in cutting edge technology, labor saving devices, etc.
Where's the proof though other than Sup Forums claims?

Are you fucking retarded? Do you have such low self esteem and self worth that you think it's moral to steal from those who earn and give to parasites who contribute nothing?

fucking kek, corporate pol cocksuckers triggered

You're assuming the money saved from not taking from productive people to hand to poor people sits idle. On this, you're incorrect. They put it into banks, and extract a fee from letting other people spend it. It doesn't simply sit idle.

>Are welfare programs potentially a net economic good since they transfer money to the poorest of the population
it increases economic growth and expansion however it doesn't increase profitability.

there is a difference between wealth of a nation and profit margins. gdp is a measure of the latter.

>if you dont gib me free moneys you are a corporate cocksucker XD

>INDIVISIBLE GUIDE: LEFTIST ORGANIZATION TRAINING PEOPLE TO DISRUPT AND HARASS TRUMP AND HIS PEOPLE
>founded by (((EZRA LEVIN))) and (((LEAH GREENBERG)))

www.indivisibleguide.com

>the only checks you need are environmental and sanitary
yea we don't need regulations against monopolies and preventing stock market crash catastrophes. please tell me you're a millionaire or a social Darwinist actively cucking yourself for the wealthy

Your logic is the same as this: We should send poor people into a store and take 100$ from the till and give it to them... then they will most likely spend it on the store and the store owner will get the money.

Do you see the problem there?

Another example: If a swimming pool has more water in the deep end and less in the shallow end, you should get a bucket and take some water from the deep end, sloshing a lot on the ground along the way because of governemt beurocratic bs, and put it in the shallow end. See! Now the pool has more water in it.

Naw man. Economics 101. Putting money in the hands of someone else, they will always mishandle your money.

not everyone wants to give up freedom for shekels

>generally people here don't respect women's political opinions anyway.

I challenge you to find a woman with non-retarded political opinions, because while I love Emily's fat titties, her politics are abhorrent.

Holy shit, you ironically believe that there's no economic mobility in the United States?
>Why is there no emphasis on education in the fucking hood?
>Why do niggers get beat up for reading outside of class?
>Why do niggers get called "Uncle Toms" for speaking correct English rather than nigger-bonics?
>Why is the single mother rate in the black community so damn high? Did whitey make Jamal fuck Shaquisha and then leave?
The only argument that I would understand for economic inequality in the United States is the relation to the high conviction rate for blacks. I believe that more blacks are getting convicted for a number of reasons. 1. There's more crime in ghettos. 2. When blacks get charged they don't have the money for someone other than a public defender, who offers inadequate legal representation. You can fuck off with your cherry-picking story about the Alabama.

...

More black felonious convictions, harder for blacks to get jobs.

You're not wrong, but that just furthers my point.

you want people to produce, then pay taxes, so poor people can spend their tax money, on the shit they produced...

If I make shit how about you don't pay you to buy it

...

what economic mobility is there when wage cucks working 40 hours a week barely make enough to pay rent and have none left over to save? what economic mobility is there when a walmart plops in the middle of your 10,000 population hick town and provides all of its residents with everything they need? what economic mobility is there when your shitty paper processing or IT tech job are completely automatized or outsourced to india in the next few years?

fucking educate yourself, wage cuck, your piece of shit family is being gentrified to extinction

>what economic mobility is there when wage cucks working 40 hours a week barely make enough to pay rent and have none left over to save?
keep living wiht your parents until you saved up enough money
>d provides all of its residents with everything they need?
Walmart has plumbers electricians and welders?

this one believes in cnn

She's a jew.

what a shitty nosejob

There are some bomb ass Jews out there. Such a shame that they are tainted

If you aren't contributing to your tribe you're a useless waste of shit. Including elite

All women have retarded political opinions. If you find a hot one whose not braindead hang on to her. I swear to god they're trying to drive us into WW3 just because they hate men.

...

no

Living within your means is a beautiful thing.

>jew face
>cheap nosejob
>her facebook said she was jewish before she made it private

They spend it dumb shit mostly.

Would be better spent being invested in good ideas than just buying more Pepsi and Doritos

>Woman has big tits and posts random pics of herself on the internet.
>100k followers.

God dammit that gender has it easy.
Have big tits or big ass and a horde of thirsty people will do anything for you.
Hope she's smart enough to make a ton of money off those people, rather than thinking that they're there to follow her daily activities and travel pictures.