The change had been gradual over several decades until 2009, when President Barack Obama took office and promised to "fundamentally transform" America.
He's changed it all right. America has changed from a nation of achievers to a country of whiners with their hands out, expecting the government to support them. It's not all his fault, of course, but he quickened the pace of change from a slow crawl to warp speed, all in just three and a half years.
One doesn't have to look any further than the June jobs report. In June, more people were added to the rolls of disability than got jobs.
Want another example? Under Obama's leadership our food stamps budget has increased by 110%. In other words, the budget has more than doubled.
But that's not good enough for the Obama Administration. They've spent $3 million on radio advertising to encourage even more people to sign up for food stamps. This week, we also learned that the Obama Administration has been working with the Mexican government to increase participation among Mexicans who are living or working in the United States.
How about another example? Under our President's leadership and the leadership of a Democratically-controlled Congress, unemployment benefits were extended to 99 weeks, just five weeks short of two full years. And if you haven't received unemployment benefits for a few decades, you would be suprised to learn how easy it is to continue receiving benefits. Gone are the days of proving that you actually applied for jobs in order to continue receiving benefits.
As of 2010, nearly one out of every two Americans received some sort of assistance or support from the federal goverment, compared to one in four in 2008.
http://lonelyconservative.com/2011/10/great-news-nearly-half-of-americans-receive-some-form-of-government-assistance/
http://money.cnn.com/2012/02/07/news/economy/government_assistance/index.htm
As one see, it's almost as if our federal government has done everything possible to encourage people not to work.
Want another example of this backward thinking? Take a single mother with two kids and earning $29,000 per year. Let's say that the mother is offered a job earning $69,000 per year, but the job is more demanding. Surely, she would want to take the higher-paying job, wouldn't she, as she would more than double her salary?
Actually, she might want to stay where she is. As the example in the link shows, the single mother has a financial disincentive to take the better-paying job, because she would lose benefits from the federal government that would not be made up with the higher salary.
http://www.aei-ideas.org/2012/07/julias-mother-why-a-single-mom-is-better-off-on-welfare-than-taking-a-69000-a-year-job/
If the President's goal were to create a society of Americans who rely on the federal government, he's succeeded like no other President before him.
The problem is that pretty soon there will be more people receiving government assistance than those working and paying taxes to support them. At that point, America will become a socialist state of mediocrity and the country we love will be long gone.
The election in November can't come soon enough.
No comments:
Post a Comment