
States with the fewest welfare recipients have the best economies.
Only 2 states out of the top 10 best state economies in the nation have more than 40,000 welfare recipients. California, which has the one of the worst economies in the nation, has over a million welfare recipients.
More welfare = worse economy. It’s simple mathematics.
Source:
http://www.statemaster.com/graph/eco_wel_cas_tot_rec-economy-welfare-caseloads-total-recipients
http://www.alternet.org/economy/152187/the_10_states_with_the_best_economies_in_america/
Well, yes… but it could (more) easily be said that worse economy = more people on welfare.
Silliness. The economy sucks BECAUSE of the policies those states use, including allowing hundreds of thousands on welfare. Free handouts = less revenue for other state programs like crime prevention, education and infrastructure improvements that would create jobs. Your equation is both wrong and less easy.
More welfare = worse economy.
For me, I really don’t care if the State can or cannot provide welfare more efficiently than voluntarism, or if...
I have to point out that there’s some serious issues with directional causation here. Which makes more sense, that high...