>> In the days before a government safety net, people most certainly did die from lack of necessities. The world has plenty examples of total "safety net" lack in the last 30 years - does any of these examples have terrible "die from lack of necessities" scenes? Do you have a statistics of these deaths before the "net" was introduced? In the US in 1900, for example? Also, it's nice to compare these deaths in the US and the countries with better and worse "safety net". Logically, the death rate shall correlate with "safety net" cost and if it doesn't - proves you wrong.
Also, the government safety net shall be designed not to keep people in it but to push people out of it as soon as possible. Why does the government do all the opposite? The list of necessities expands, the cost of support rises, and people are unable to get even low-wage job even if they want to - who can afford $8 per hour for picking tomatoes or digging dirt? These effects combined may, I'm afraid, create even more "poverty".
no subject
The world has plenty examples of total "safety net" lack in the last 30 years - does any of these examples have terrible "die from lack of necessities" scenes?
Do you have a statistics of these deaths before the "net" was introduced? In the US in 1900, for example?
Also, it's nice to compare these deaths in the US and the countries with better and worse "safety net".
Logically, the death rate shall correlate with "safety net" cost and if it doesn't - proves you wrong.
Also, the government safety net shall be designed not to keep people in it but to push people out of it as soon as possible. Why does the government do all the opposite? The list of necessities expands, the cost of support rises, and people are unable to get even low-wage job even if they want to - who can afford $8 per hour for picking tomatoes or digging dirt?
These effects combined may, I'm afraid, create even more "poverty".