idea of a runaway welfare state is a myth

If welfare is overly narrowly defined as Pro suggests, to "helping poor people", then perhaps he has a point. However, since we are debating the idea of the US being a "runaway welfare state" it becomes us to consider what exactly those who use the phrase actually mean. Britannica defines a welfare state in the following way: "Welfare state, a concept of government in which the state or a well-established network of social institutions plays a key role in the protection and promotion of the economic and social well-being of citizens." Therefore, it does not follow simply because a program aims to help "everyone" rather than "just poor people" that said program does not qualify as a component of a welfare state. On the other hand, Britannica`s definition is a bit broad, but it is clear that the concept of the welfare state began in the early twentieth century, supplanting the laissez-faire states. We may therefore as a heuristic method of defining which programs are components of the welfare state and which are not, exclude all programs that were well-funded in all or almost all developed nations. Among these are the military, basic physical infrastructure, administration of justice and the like. I cite as an example the UK central government public spending in 1870, because I was unable to find detailed data from the US from such an early period. http://www.ukpublicspending.co.uk... I invite the reader to expand the dropdown menus. We see in this chart that the largest budget items by far are defense and interest on the debt. Expanding "Protection" we see "Public Order" as a budget item. In "General Government" we see such items as executive and legislative organs. Utterly absent from the central government`s spending is any sort of social or economic assistance to the citizenry. We may profitably define therefore any social or economic assistance to the citizenry not in exchange for any good or service (as for example pensions are) as welfare. Social Security and Medicare, despite being "paid into" are not treated as accounts, and it is possible, and indeed, probable, that many retirees will get a lot more than they put in. (Do not be shocked at the interest spending in that period, either; perceive that the interest is only 2.5% of GDP which is saying something considering the enormous military conflicts the UK was fighting in the years prior, the Crimean war being one of them.) Returning to the current state of the US budget, https://media.nationalpriorities.org... Excluding the military, veteran's benefits, international affairs, interest on the debt (arguably a result of welfare programs, but I will include it as a non-welfare expense), transportation, and science (many of these have welfare elements within their legitimate, non-welfare purposes, but as including them as "non-welfare" does not significantly hinder my case so I will not delve into the specifics), we have an astounding figure of approximately 70% of the budget being spent on welfare. We are literally spending such an amount of money that if we entirely eradicated the military, which used to be in political thought the chief responsibility of the national government, the savings (517 billion according to https://appropriations.house.gov...) would not resolve the deficit (684 billion, both values referential to FY 2017 data). The remaining deficit of 177 billion would only barely be covered if we confiscated all of Microsoft`s 77 billion in equity (assets-liabilities) and Apple`s 128 billion. Revenue is not any lower as a share of GDP than the historical trend. In fact, in the entire recorded history of the US from 1792 to 1920, it is far higher. As an example, here is the data from 1792 to 1920 http://www.usgovernmentrevenue.com.... Using 1900 as an example, the GDP was 20.76 billion and the revenue a mere 669 million, giving federal receipts a mere 3% of the GDP, compared with today`s whopping 17.5%. Blame for the debt therefore lays squarely with spending, and blame for spending squarely with welfare programs.