BP_blog
Lying to Ourselves

America’s Welfare State



If you fear America is becoming like Europe, fear not -- because it’s too late.

Listen Now | Download


Chuck  Colson
In Hamlet, Polonius, the Chamberlain to the King, gives his son what is probably the most famous piece of fatherly counsel in all of literature: “This above all: to thine own self be true.”

Polonius’s exhortation is one that Americans should take to heart — and his famous words came to mind while reading a recent New York Times article. The article was about the residents of Chisago County, Minnesota, who, according to the Times, “describe themselves as self-sufficient members of the American middle class and as opponents of government largess.”

At the same time, they “are drawing more deeply on that government with each passing year.” In 2009, the last year for which data is available, the residents of the county received an average of $6,583 in federal benefits — a 69 percent increase since 2000.

While most of the benefits go to older residents, assistance to younger residents is growing at about the same rate.

To be fair, Chisago County is far from unique – on the contrary, it’s typical. What comes to mind for most Americans when they think of the beneficiaries of “government largess” is an African-American single mother. But a more complete representation requires looking in the mirror.

If this comes as a surprise to you, it’s because the architects of the American welfare state have worked hard to hide that fact.

As David Brooks recently wrote in the New York Times, “the U.S. does not have a significantly smaller welfare state than the European nations. We’re just better at hiding it.” Whereas European countries “provide welfare provisions through direct government payments,” the U.S. does it “through the back door via tax breaks.”

For instance, “European governments offer public childcare. In the U.S., we have child tax credits.” European governments openly “subsidize favored industries.” We provide “special tax deductions and exemptions” for Washington’s favored industries.

This back-door approach allows Americans to indulge in the fantasy of their self-reliance and rugged individualism without actually being self-reliant or rugged.

The back-door approach is also grossly inefficient: Many of the benefits flow to “those who need them least.”  It’s a system that rewards those with the best lobbyists instead of protecting those who truly need help or who would put taxpayer’s money to the best use.

Even worse, it’s unsustainable. The same day Brooks’ column appeared in the Times, European Central Bank President Mario Draghi told the Wall Street Journal that the European “social model” was “already gone.” In other words, it’s a thing of the past – it’s failed – Europe can no longer afford it.

Neither can we. When you include both direct and back-door social spending, our welfare state is bigger than Italy’s. It is “far above average” when compared to other industrialized nations. Unless we intend to leave our children and grandchildren with an unconscionable debt burden, that must change.

That change, as Polonius would tell us, begins with being true to ourselves. Americans say that they are concerned about the deficit, which they propose to close by cutting someone else’s benefits.

Well, we are all “someone else.” Nothing will change until we and our leaders admit this fact.

Further Reading and Information

America Is Europe
David Brooks | New York Time | February 23, 2012

Q&A: ECB President Mario Draghi
New York Time | February 23, 2012

 


Comments:

To Sally Newton
Sally, I am 51 yrs old and have been working since I was 14. Sometimes 2 jobs at once. I even had a home business at the same time working 2 outside jobs. I have worked very hard in my lifetime, but now I am disabled, so I have had to go to the state in which I have lived in all of my life for help to make ends meet. My savings is depleted, and I need help to pay my heat and electric bills, and I also get $200.00 a month food stamps. I am allowed $269.00 a month cash assistance to pay my monthly needs. Thankfully I own my property and do not pay a rent or mortgage. I am a Christian and have a solid relationship with Jesus and faith that He is the One that provides for me and sustains me day by day. Without His provisions and daily blessings, I do not know what I would do. Without Him I am nothing, I go to Him when ever there is a decision to make.
If you would begrudge a person like me the help that I need to be able to stay in my own home than you should revisit your own heart and ask yourself what would you ask the Lord for in such a situation.
@ William Webb
I think your hostility toward the columnist is unjustified. You both agree that it is inappropriate to view a "typical" beneficiary as a single African-American mother. You both make the point that this stereotype is non-representative of many of the beneficiaries of governmental welfare. I think the columnist would place the banks you reference in the bucket of "those who need [government money] least." Or perhaps as those who deserve them least.
Beneficiaries
"What comes to mind for most Americans when they think of the beneficiaries of 'government largess' is an African-American single mother." Well, no, Chuck, that is NOT what comes to my mind when I think of government "largess." Instead, what comes to my mind are multi-billion dollar bailouts handed to banks who are not capable of governing themselves in a manner that would prevent them from becoming insolvent. Instead, they go after the quick buck and end up costing the American taxpayers more than $200 BILLION dollars. The government could support every single mother with children--black, white, Asian, Hispanic--for their entire lives and never even come CLOSE to spending that much money. And this is not even to mention billions more used to "save" the American auto industry. So, no, Chuck, don't blame America's debt problem on single black mothers. Only old, white, Fox News-watching dittoheads like you still believe in that stereotype!
Ideology
HI!

I am a brazilian cristian and I read your article about welfare state. I have noticed that ideolgy is a very serious problem for you americans. Is that an inheritance of the cold war in your minds?

Best regards,

Eusper


Deuteronomy 2-27
"Let me pass through thy land: I will go along by the high way, I will neither turn unto the right hand nor to the left."
welfare state
Something that has been bothering me for some time now is that I see many Christians embracing various forms of government support.I understand that these are difficult economic times. I have personally needed government grants for college as well as unemployment benefits from time to time.

However, I see families who choose not seek possible employment and then are dependent upon various types of government assistance, including food stamps, WIC, EIC, medical assistance, heating bill assistance,cash assistance etc. Somehow it seems wrong, or irresponsible to choose to have a low income and then rely on the government to get you through.

I was brought up by the WW11 generation and was taught that it was shameful to accept government help, especially if there was any alternative, such as taking a less-than-ideal job. How does all this fit in with the Christian concept of being a good steward and of providing for our own families? I wonder.