The Founders Understood The Dangers Of Welfare And Redistribution Schemes


The Federal government has spent about $3.7 trillion on various welfare programs over the past five years. This is combined with more than $200 billion in welfare programs contributed by the States.

According to a recent CATO study, the average household in the District of Columbia receiving the six largest benefits received Federal welfare with a cash value of $43,000 per year. In Hawaii, a family receiving the same benefits would have received $49,000. Not even socialist Great Britain paid out that much in comparable benefits per family.

Welfare benefits long ago reached a point at which it’s more beneficial to not work and continue receiving government largess than it is to seek employment. It has created a massive and ever growing dependent class that is bankrupting the country.

The Founders understood well the dangers of welfare programs and redistribution schemes.

“Repeal that welfare law, and you will soon see a change in their manners. St. Monday and St. Tuesday, will soon cease to be holidays. Six days shalt thou labor, though one of the old commandments long treated as out of date, will again be looked upon as a respectable precept; industry will increase, and with it plenty among the lower people; their circumstances will mend, and more will be done for their happiness by inuring them to provide for themselves, than could be done by dividing all your estates among them,” wrote Benjamin Franklin.

He also said: “I am for doing good to the poor, but I differ in opinion of the means. I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it. In my youth I travelled much, and I observed in different countries, that the more public provisions were made for the poor, the less they provided for themselves, and of course became poorer. And, on the contrary, the less was done for them, the more they did for themselves, and became richer.”

And James Madison, the author of the Constitution, told the House of Representatives that welfare is not the duty of the Federal government. “[T]he government of the United States is a definite government, confined to specified objects. It is not like the state governments, whose powers are more general. Charity is no part of the legislative duty of the government.”

Personal Liberty

Bob Livingston

founder of Personal Liberty Digest™, is an ultra-conservative American author and editor of The Bob Livingston Letter™, in circulation since 1969. Bob has devoted much of his life to research and the quest for truth on a variety of subjects. Bob specializes in health issues such as nutritional supplements and alternatives to drugs, as well as issues of privacy (both personal and financial), asset protection and the preservation of freedom.

Join the Discussion

Comment Policy: We encourage an open discussion with a wide range of viewpoints, even extreme ones, but we will not tolerate racism, profanity or slanderous comments toward the author(s) or comment participants. Make your case passionately, but civilly. Please don't stoop to name calling. We use filters for spam protection. If your comment does not appear, it is likely because it violates the above policy or contains links or language typical of spam. We reserve the right to remove comments at our discretion.

  • Motov

    “Welfare benefits long ago reached a point at which it’s more beneficial to not work and continue receiving government largess than it is to seek employment. It has created a massive and ever growing dependent class that is bankrupting the country.”
    This is why we need to impeach the criminal in the White House NOW.

    • Stephine

      Is bankrupting the country? Has is more like it.

      • Motov

        I agree,

  • Doc Sarvis

    From my quick research, it looks like the “$3.7 trillion on various welfare programs over the past five years” figure INCLUDES Corporate Welfare which is the largest portion of the total by far. sure, let us keep pounding on the poor folk (a VERY small % of which may abuse the program) while lining the CEO top 1%ers pockets so he can ship our jobs overseas.

    check out:

    • 5live5

      Yeah, doc a very small % abuse it. More like MILK the hell out of it!

    • Vigilant

      Your “research” was indeed quick (and superficial as well as outdated). Look at the graphs and you’ll see that none cover the Obama period, an era where things have gotten a lot worse.

      Moreover, you’ve fallen for the guy who lies with statistics, a common trait amongst the progressives who snatch up figures quickly before truly researching them.

      The most egregious (intentional) error is the bogus claim that corporate welfare is larger than social welfare. No figures ANYWHERE support such a ridiculous assertion. Go to the second pie chart at for a TRUE picture of the federal spending proposed in the 2014 budget and you’ll be singing a different tune, Sarvis.

    • Stuart Shepherd

      Hey Brain surgeon “Doc”/left wing reactionary- what does that have to do with what the author was writing about (except that you purposely lied about the statistics and the numbers presented, which I’m sure were NOT misrepresented). If you’re implying that conservatives endorse “corporate welfare” and that’s why being a liberal is superior (which you seem to be doing with your confrontational tone and by changing the subject of the ‘re going to sit there with your accusatory holier-than-thou discussion thread) I’m pretty sure it’s the other way around, by the way. Although republicans DID participate in tARP and bail-outs and DO provide corporate subsidies, etc., it is not something constitutional conservatives support and, in fact, oppose. The democrats are the masters at greasing the palms of their “friends” and most corporations will allow their palms to be greased no matter who’s doing it. Of course, this is all corruption, and a form of fascism, but you need to go into proctology if your going to sit on that part of your anatomy with your accusatory holier-than-thou attitude.

    • Robert Messmer

      Wait a minute! Corporate welfare….past five years…..Obama! Can’t blame President Bush because Obama was going to change all that bad stuff the Republicans did. So if he didn’t live up to what he promised, that is his bad.

    • Ried

      Doc, Irrelevant. Both forms of welfare need to be severely curtained. Bush and Obama are equally guilty of handing out TARP bailout “welfare” to banks too big to fail. That is just as bad as indiscriminate aid to people who don’t want to work for a living.

  • 5live5

    What the Government doesn’t seem to understand is that the more you give to people free, the more they want and think they DESERVE!!! It will never end until they STOP IT!


    people don’t forget,that socialistic countries fall,and that obama and all his henchmen are about control,that’s one of the objectives too here!give the money,dumb down the kids(core teaching)sexualize them too,disarm citizens,make them lazy and dependant so they will not want to lose the so-called free stuff and wont fight back!obama wants to be a king(he acts like one now)the NWO is creeping up and all over us and no one wants to take off their blinders to see it!why?
    history tells us that everyone who attemps to socialize a country,fails,it fails,it destroys itself!but history tells us that every socialist thinks he has the new answer to the problem and that their way will work!history tells us that doesn’t work either!it never does,it just destroys lives.

    • shamu9

      And-Everyone WORKS in Commie China, and Cuba, or they Freakin’ STARVE. That’s where Obama’s headin’ the U.S.! He’s Importing New Citizens from Mexico, and Somalia, ’cause they’re used to being USED as Serfs. The Current RECIPIENTS will NEVER Work, and will be Neutralized, when they Revolt! The Revolution starts when the SNAP and AFDC Checks don’t arrive! Get Ready!

  • JimH

    $7.3 trillion invested in “helping” the poor and they’re still poor.
    Enabling lazy people must be a bad investment.
    I’m all for offering a “had up” to someone down on their luck. Continual hand outs don’t allow anyone to help themselves.
    If you feed the wildlife they become dependent and forget how to forage, same with people.
    A hand up not a handout.

  • Chris

    “My” favorite are those who are on unemployment and will ride that gravy train until it’s time for it to expire………..THEN look for a job!

    • Robert Messmer

      I don’t know about your state but here the “Unemployment” check is only 2/3 of your qualifying wage and limited to a maximum of $275 per week. Not exactly what I would call riding the “gravy train”.

    • shamu9

      That’d be All of ’em!

  • Chris

    No……….but I’ve known people who have done this.

  • noname

    Society can only “help” people so much, when they must actually “do” some things for themselves. I cannot go to school for these people, seek out opportunity or free job training from unemployment for them. We cannot “make” them, or “force” them to take action to better themselves. Until we stop “giving” them everything, they will never “act” for themselves.

  • Chuckb

    The solution, Plant more cotton, If they want to eat then let them start picking.
    It’s surprising how industries a hungry person gets when the dinner bell is ringing.
    Send all illegals back to Mexico, the Carribean, Mid East and .African countries, Simple solution.