Honestly, American taxpayers are getting screwed by leeches on welfare. Before you get upset about what I just wrote, understand that our welfare system is a global magnet. That’s right, people from all over the world want to come here because of our generous welfare program. We have the welfare leeches who’re citizens but then we have welfare leeches who’re refugees brought here by the UN and the State Department. Yes, they’re dumped in your communities and given all the goodies that are available:
Refugee access to welfare on the same basis as a U.S. citizen has made the program a global magnet.
The federal programs available to them include:
∙ Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) formerly known as AFDC
∙ Food Stamps
∙ Public Housing
∙ Supplemental Security Income (SSI)
∙ Social Security Disability Insurance
∙ Administration on Developmental Disabilities (ADD) (direct services only)
∙ Child Care and Development Fund
∙ Independent Living Program
∙ Job Opportunities for Low Income Individuals (JOLI)
∙ Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP)
∙ Postsecondary Education Loans and Grants
∙ Refugee Assistance Programs
∙ Title IV Foster Care and Adoption Assistance Payments (if parents are ⌠qualified immigrants – refugees, asylees, etc)
∙ Title XX Social Services Block Grant Funds
17. Welfare use is staggering among refugees. Welfare usage is never counted by officials as part of the cost of the program. Yet, when it is included, the total cost of the refugee program soars to at least 10-20 billion a year.
As some Americans are pushed off of time-limited welfare programs many refugees are going on to life-time cash assistance programs. For instance, 12.7% of refugees are on SSI – a lifetime entitlement to a monthly check / Medicaid for elderly or disabled. This rate of usage is at least 4 times higher than the rate of usage for SSI among the native-born population and is reportedly rising from these already very high levels.
Permanent and intergenerational welfare dependence has been allowed to take hold to a significant degree in some refugee groups.
Read more: Refugee Resettlement Watch
NEW YORK IS A GOLD MINE FOR WELFARE RECIPIENTS:
When they hear the term “welfare state,” most people think of Europe — especially Denmark or France. No doubt those countries offer a wide range of benefits targeted to the middle class, retirees and so forth. But according to a study released by the Cato Institute this week, someone who is poor might just be better off here in New York.
The federal government currently funds more than 100 anti-poverty programs. While no one participates in all of them, many can and do collect assistance from multiple programs.
In New York, a mother with two children under the age of five who participates in six major welfare programs (Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, housing assistance, the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program, the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children and free commodities would receive a total benefits package with a value of more than $27,500 per year.
Using a similar measure, Cato found that benefits in Europe ranged from $38,588 per year in Denmark to just $1,112 in Romania. In fact, New York’s welfare system can be more generous than every country in Europe except Denmark and the United Kingdom. New York is much more generous than such well-known welfare states as France ($17,324), Germany ($23,257) and even Sweden ($22,111).
Moreover, this benefit comparison doesn’t include Medicaid, which would be worth roughly $10,460 for this household, because Europe’s health-care systems are not targeted to the poor, unlike Medicaid.
One of the problems with these welfare systems is that they can reduce the incentive to increase work effort because beneficiaries would stand to lose most of their earnings through lower benefits or higher taxes, while also having to bear the costs associated with going to work, like transportation.
These people would see little tangible improvement in their standard of living by working more hours or moving up the job ladder.
They’re not lazy, but they’re also not stupid. Like everyone else, they respond to incentives. If welfare pays better than work, people on welfare will be less likely to work.
Indeed, economists often discuss the danger that high marginal tax rates can discourage economic activity. But some of the highest effective marginal tax rates in the world are for someone leaving welfare for work.
By creating such a big disincentive for work, our tangled, ineffective welfare system can end up punishing the very low-income people it is supposed to help, in addition to the taxpayers who must fund nearly $1 trillion per year in anti-poverty spending.
After all, the evidence strongly suggests that work, even in a low-paying entry-level job, is an important route out of poverty: fewer than 3 percent of Americans who work full-time are poor.
READ MORE: NYP