After all.. a healthy, able workforce produces more money right?
2007-04-24 10:12:08 · 14 answers · asked by pip 7 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
only if the social programs actually require the people who recieve the benefits to work for their benefits...
otherwise, it just creates an incentive to NOT work..
2007-04-24 10:15:59 · answer #1 · answered by excaliburtb 2 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Social programs are not Capitalist in the slightest. Capitalism is an economy free of government interference. An economy with government interference is either Mercantilist or Socialist. Mercantilism leads to massive "income inequality." Socialism leads to universal poverty.
If only there were actually Capitalist countries. Capitalism is the only economic system that raises the standard of living for all the people, rather than a few (Mercantilism) or none (Socialism).
2007-04-24 17:26:13 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Social programs are a drag on the economy, a drag on individuals and families.
Social programs are a burden on government, cause government to grow, are typically very wasteful, have little or no accountability and promote unhealthy, unstable and often times illegal behavior.
They are in no way connected with the success of the United States and quite to the contrary are the biggest drain on the economy, the family budget and stunt economic success.
A very small "social safety net" should be in place for those people that are truly, truly, truly need help but our policies & programs go far beyond what they should.
2007-04-24 17:39:32 · answer #3 · answered by InReality01 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
you can look at it that way, but you would err in one major area.
What you would need to do is see what the ROI is on a given program, then determine if you receive a greater ROI relying on the marketplace to meet the need.
Hands down, the marketplace wins everytime. However, whenever someone always tries to argue Adam Smith and the free invisible hand of the market, remind them that even Adam Smith says that some things should not be left to the marketplace as a matter of ensuring social order and/or defense.
Good question though.
2007-04-24 17:24:07 · answer #4 · answered by lundstroms2004 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
If done properly yes. Things like student aid for education is an investment in capitalism because we know a more educated person means a more successful person in most cases. When social programs go wrong is when it is used because of someones own poor dilligence and not because of unfortuanate circumstances and tragedies.
2007-04-24 17:17:15 · answer #5 · answered by Drake 4 · 2⤊ 1⤋
An investment into capitalism would be giving the poor of our country grants and scholarships to higher education so that they can get jobs and contribute to the system that helped get them on their feet. Free money in the form of welfare doesn't create a healthy & stable workforce. All free money does is create more dependency on the government.
2007-04-24 17:15:32 · answer #6 · answered by ? 4 · 3⤊ 3⤋
social programs are a sucking vampire on capitalism. What does health have to do with capitalism. With capitalism you can afford your own health insurance.
2007-04-24 17:21:57 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
No. Social programs are an investment in Socialism.
2007-04-24 17:14:38 · answer #8 · answered by lizardmama 6 · 2⤊ 2⤋
NO. Social Programs create more fat and needy sloths and taxes. They keep growing and growing until they get big like infected zits.
2007-04-24 17:20:21 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
There under lies the problem..."able work force"! If it was an able work force they wouldn't need the social program!
2007-04-24 17:18:10 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋