"[...]for example the constant abuse of welfare like Food-Stamps (Buy food products, sell or trade products for drug money on the street), and the procrustean and coldly unpersonal limitations of various things like on government-housing promotes a vicious cycle of fraud and social immobility draining our budget and wasting your tax-revenue."
I have two problems with this statement: 1. (Citation?), and 2. You are lumping the majority of those on welfare as abusers of the system; many today are now on foodstamps because of the economic meltdown in '08 manufactured by unregulated investment banks making bad investments intentionally, who were by the way bailed out. Most of the people who were lower middle class are now poor and actually work minimum wage jobs, but still need help to get by.
Remember Greece and all the economic issues of the European Union nowadays? How about Socialist Moldova (the poorest country in Europe)? How about The NAZI, PSOE, RFP, and all the eastern-bloc nations that broke off from the U.S.S.R ? What’s the difference between socialist policies of Franco the Generalismo and socialist Maduro’s Chuavismo?
Look at Norway, Sweden, Finland, Germany, France to name a few... those are also far left-leaning socialist countries with cradle to the grave societies that are creditor nations and have kept Europe afloat. Greece had more issues going against their economy than only that they are overtly socialistic; that is an oversimplification of the issue.
They shouldn't have been. It's like buying your kid a toy when he's doing something wrong. And was it really caused en toto by bad spending in the banks, and why did the banks spend this way? Are you implying by "unregulated" that the goverment should decide to become involved on how groups spend their money, because many attribute such actions as a cause to the bad choices due to some Clinton Era policies. The fiscal behaviors have awarded through that bail-out. Did anyone learn a lesson from this, or did the goverment just enable them?
This also does not dismiss the massivly faulty track-record I have given as well for the failures of the Welfare State, for every questionable nation you mention I can probably name two certainly negative examples. If you like let's explore these aformentioned nations more in depth then and see if they are as you say they are....But let's leave this for a thread more on topic to respect the plights and focus our thoughts on issues undergoing the Venezuelans.
Oh...and whatever happend to charity, philanthropy? It really helped out during the Depression. It helps when people help people a lot more than big government helping people, there is no red tape between you and a helping hand.
As for citations, My information comes by way of personal interviews with people who work in and for the United States welfare system, from my time as an off and on Journalist, one source being a lady by the name of Vonda Stewart. Also this has been commonly discussed and debated in the news lately, especially my local news WKYTV (You can look it up on the sight). The sad truth is that in my interviews and research I hear more of an unchecked abuse of the system than anything uplifting. Those who wish to become dependent from such are put in arbitrary income-brackets, pretty much cementing them in a defacto caste with an utter lack of social mobility, which is the driving force that uplifts an economy to progress. Once they break that barrier forward as individuals, the rug is unfairly yanked from under them. There is no transition or assistance into becoming better producers rather than worse consumers.
I personally would rather see specific welfare as an investment into a person's economic progress rather than sandboxing them in an arbitrary income-bracket and leaving them unaccountable with that money. This would be much like a student-loan and grants where groups like Vocational Rehab support these individuals into integrating successfully as producers into the free-market. Look at it as an anti-socialist welfare. A welfare where there is more accountability and more mobility. The Social-Safety net has become a Social Safety-Web. There should be a great deal of accountability (same as a college with its grades). Socialism as we know it just makes people dependent on the government, where welfare should be the government investing in their productive independence. Ironically as it going in America this just creates a class-divide and class-envy, as with the case of Greece’s economic problems. Once a wind of market instability blows upon the shaky foundations of these goverment's socialist policies there is dramatic collapse and people are left in economic disillusion. However, the more competition and market-savy minds we have, the more fertile ground for heated and organic innovation for such problems arise.
Also note that nations like Norway have a strong, strong free-market and Norway in paticular is not a member of the EU. For example Norway was able to scrape through the 2008 recession by tapping into its oil and gas-fueled sovereign wealth fund which is currently valued at more than 2.4 trillion kroner ($400 billion!). Norway is the world's third largest exporter of natural gas and the sixth largest exporter of oil, and while oil production has been falling in recent years, natural gas production still continues to rise. Oil and gas from many North Sea platforms pump the small country and its scant population of only 4.8 million people (that is about the size of North Carolina population-wise with a crazy amount of abundant wealth, making it one of the world's richest nations despite it's tiny population. Also note that during the 1920’s and 1930’s Norway’s income tax became outrageous, some of the highest in the world, and welfare was lavish, and some say horribly wasteful. Socialism plays no part in it's economic sucess, and the nation is actually more centrist than liberal in it's fiscal policies. Also think of this... once that unrenewable resource inevitably dries out...do you think that welfare will be stable? Will the goverment as a whole fair well, given light of another current heated situation? And let's ponder how rigid these polices are and how much they encourage a shift towards people becoming more productive in the Free Market rather than dependent on goverment subsidies .
Welfare should be a hand-up, not a hand-out.