s government employees. Some would argue that this money could be saved by implementing a simpler system with less overhead administrative costs. Some economists have argued that it is foolhardy to continue to increase spending on social welfare, because of the law of diminishing marginal returns. The more money that the government spends on welfare, the less obvious the effects are. Some would argue that the current costs of improving the poverty situation in America out weigh the benefits. Therefore, they assert, funding should be decreased in these areas and allocated to more needed locations. The argument that welfare encourages idleness is more of a psychological issue than an economic one, but it is a valid concern nonetheless. Does giving out relatively free services and finances cause people to become dependent on them, rather than aid them in helping themselves escape poverty? Although there is no conclusive evidence that supports either side of this argument, both sides are very vocal about their reasons. Those who believe that welfare causes idleness and laziness might use domesticated animals. Humans have taken away these animals need for various survival behaviors by giving them food and shelter whenever they need it. Domesticated dogs and cats would have a very difficult time surviving in the wild. Similarly, some believe that doling free handouts to the poor only compounds the situation by encouraging them not to work. This camps motto is Give a man a fish and he will eat for a day; teach a man to fish and he will eat for a lifetime. Others think that welfare gives the needed resources that people in poverty lack so that they might escape poverty. These people believe in giving resources to people with the belief that they will be able to help themselves in the best way that they know how. The undeniable fraud that occurs both among the suppliers of welfare assistance (government agencies, health care organizations) and t...
