This is yet another example of why it is harmful to rely on government programs to supplement and to subsidize low wages. They can always be attacked as gifts to the poor. That the government is paying them because they aren't worth much. It is much better to push their wages up by reversing the policies that we used to push up profits and the incomes of the already rich.
The cynic in me says that is why we have the programs with have with regards to the poor. So that people will hate poor people and ignore poverty.
Yes, they want the poor dependent on the government, on the dole. That way they can characterize the poor as deadbeats unable to care for themselves.
The purpose of having a disadvantaged underclass is so that they bear the brunt of the anger of the middle class, and to divert the anger from those who are really responsible for the constantly worsening position of the middle class, the rich, the upper class.
There was the quite popular idea from our conservative apologists here that the wealthy don't earn enough income that could make any difference if it was to be redistributed to the poor. This is of course ridiculous, the top 10% of the income scale earn nearly six times the income of the lower 50% of earners.
Depending on the definition you use for "being poor,” it would only take about 8% of the income of the top 10% redistributed to eliminate poverty completely for the working poor using the definition of twice the federal poverty rate. And it would go a long way toward reducing crime and improving education.
It would boost the incomes of the middle class too, to maintain the difference with the lower earners. The average household income in the US is about 55,000 dollars a year. If the Reaganomics policies hadn't be adopted and the workers were to share 50/50 in the gains from productivity as they did before Reaganomics the average household income today would be around 90,000 dollars a year today.
The bottom 90% of earners in the country have seen no increase in real income since 1980. All of the income from increased productivity and innovation has gone to the top 10%.
It would boost the economy because the top 10% invest their excess income in largely non-productive instruments like stocks and T-Bills. The poor and the middle class spend their money, boosting demand and providing the impetus for productive investments. The kinds of investments that provide new jobs.
