Written By : Dave Blount

When liberals whine that the war to liberate Iraq cost too much, they make an argument that would be reasonable — but only if someone else were making it. We now know that their Teleprompter Messiah will flush more money down welfare in the next year than Bush spent on the entire war.

During the entire administration of George W. Bush, the Iraq war cost a total of $622 billion, according to the Congressional Research Service.

President Obama’s welfare spending will reach $888 billion in a single fiscal year — 2010 — more than the Bush administration spent on war in Iraq from the first “shock and awe” attack in 2003 until Bush left office in January.

Obama’s spending proposals call for the largest increases in welfare benefits in U.S. history, according to a report by the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank. This will lead to a spending total of $10.3 trillion over the next decade on various welfare programs. These include cash payments, food, housing, Medicaid and various social services for low-income Americans and those at 200 percent of the poverty level, or $44,000 for a family of four. Among that total, $7.5 trillion will be federal money and $2.8 trillion will be federally mandated state expenditures.

Welfare money is worse than wasted, because it doesn’t just disappear: it buys poverty. Other than sinking us so deeply into debt we will probably never dig our way out, the only thing accomplished by Comrade Obama’s pork-laden “Stimulus” bill was that it repealed welfare reform, which had been amazingly successful at getting people out of poverty.

If the government wants less of something — say, entrepreneurship — it taxes it. Where it wants more, it subsidizes. Our rulers subsidize poverty for the same reason they allow millions of Third World peasants to flood the country. To the government, more poverty means more power. This explains Democrat economic policy in a nutshell.

Hat tip: The Blogprof. Cross-posted at Moonbattery.

0