In 2006, only $59 billions dollars were spent towards social welfare and all of its programs, while $92 billion dollars were used for corporate welfare (Sinn). Anti-corporate welfare affiliates argue that this category of welfare is useless and damaging the nation, with one reason being that shifting this money to Americans in poverty would improve living standards and lead to an increase in jobs (Sager). There is a slight flaw in the theory of the anti-corporate welfare affiliate, that flaw being that the money put towards social welfare has been increasing just the same as corporate welfare has, yet the amount of Americans in poverty has rapidly been increasing as every year passes. A major difference between these two categories of welfare is that corporate welfare is used in an effort to increase economy growth and advance beneficial American programs such as the Advanced Technology Program; meanwhile, social welfare is a means to provide for individual citizens who are categorized as not making an acceptable income that are not guaranteed to better their lives during or after their time receiving welfare (Corporate …show more content…
A much-needed reform could temporarily aid an individual or entire family in getting out of debt; however, the ever-growing amount of American citizens eligible for welfare, along with the programs that would continue to receive more funds than those in poverty, would still not reduce the amount of American’s who live below the poverty line. If welfare continues to increase as it has in the last decade, the national debt is due to continue rising, possibly eventually placing the nation on the verge of stagnating economically and permanently bound to debt (Foster). For all of these reasons, it is time for social welfare to be expunged from the United States of America’s list of governmental responsibilities; consequently, the money could plausibly be used to reverse the damage to the economy and debt that America has obtained with the help of social welfare in the last