Welfare is bad for the Economy

"You say that government spending of any sort help to keep the economy strong but how exactly do you think that it keeps it strong? "There are more person's to spend more funds which keeps communities strong as entities which overall aids in revenue on all levels. "And what does welfare have to do with giving out coupons by lowering prices? You are calling welfare a coupon and I do not know what you mean by this. "That is a form of welfare. WIC for instance is essentially a coupon program. SNAP uses a card to allocate funds for very specific sets of food items and includes exclusions. Etc. "You say that welfare is good for the populace. But where do you think the government gets the money? The answer is from the tax payers and if that tax payer money is going toward other people's belongings then the government basically robs from the rich to feed the poor. "Many programs (such as the one shown for BlueCross) are actually enterprises or contracted so it isn't all tax money; very few programs get significant amounts of tax dollars (. https://www.nationalpriorities.org...) that would go to fund these programs so major donations and other sources are really the mainstay. These are handled on the State or Provincial level usually anyway. "But, it is the people that abuse it and the people that get welfare for a little extra ease on their lives that ruins the whole welfare system. It is allowing for hard working Americans with high income to have to give money to the less income just for the family to have a little more ease on themselves and take it easy. "Do you have any citations that would show that this is significantly true to the point where it would be worrisome? "You said in your first sentence that, "Countries that have more social programs and integrate these social programs into their culture have higher ratings in whatever that social program's value is. " You said that the more social programs they are the more important they are. That is obvious because the more you have of something is because of the value that it has. "This basically acts as a proof of the value of community over the individual, yes. "This is simply not true because by giveing more money to the lower class, that completely interfers with the market. The majority of people are in the lower class and if the government pills up all that money to the lower class, then the target market will drift toward the target market being the lower class and this will help industries that produce a lot of product for only a little bit of money such as fast foods and dollar stores. "While normally it's your job to prove your own claims I'll just show that this is wrong with simple marketing: . http://www.learnmarketing.net...Price Marketing easily, just by the way it works, shows that the effect you claim there to be on he economy doesn't exist at all. "First you talk about class disparity then wefare then the real world and you use Common Knowledge to prove a point that you never made. I think you need to rephrase that one. " No. Unless you somehow show that there is real threat to the class system being "destroyed" by the marketing you "fear" exists (which it doesn't) then I'll not be bothering with the point any further. There's no grounds. "Yes, the government should not interfer with the market but there are exceptions like monoplies that the goverment needs to make sure do not take over the market. In the event of a monoply, the producer for that certain good or service can increase the price as much as they want because they have no competitors to offer a better alternative. In an event like that, the government must make sure to prevent that market in order to protect the citizens. Yes, it is a double standard but you have to understand that the government can only stay out of the market until a certain point where the goverment needs to intervene to prevent coruption. "There are no buts. You claim that there will be an upset in the current class structure but you're willing to prevent the natural flow of class structure using the government that you stated ouright as a means to prevent welfare programs from existing should stay out of the market.