SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
'Hard-hearted politicians think that if they paint the people who get food stamps as lazy and undeserving,' writes Klinger, 'it will blind us to what's really going on': the idle rich are making a killing on the backs of us all. (Photo: Symic/Flickr)
Subsidizing the Idle Rich While Poor Kids Go Hungry
Politicians are slashing taxes for folks who dine on caviar while making it harder for the needy to put food on the table.
May 14, 2015
To hear some politicians tell it, America's welfare system is facing a grave crisis: Millions of poor people, they say, are idling away their time eating lobster and relaxing on cruises.
Kansas Governor Sam Brownback, for example, recently signed welfare reform rules banning people receiving public assistance from using their $100 a week in benefits to buy steak or seafood, go to swimming pools, or take cruises.
Meanwhile, some members of Congress are taking aim at food aid for hungry Americans. They want us to associate "hungry" with "too lazy to work."
They're lashing at an imaginary problem.
Who benefits from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), otherwise known as food stamps? Nearly half of recipients are children, 16 percent are disabled adults who can't work, and 9 percent are senior citizens.
Nearly a third of people who get food stamps have a family member who is working, many at big box retailers like Wal-Mart or fast food establishments. These folks may not be able to get enough hours to work full-time, or their employers pay them so little that even with a full-time schedule, they can't pay for rent and utilities and still afford enough food for the family.
Even 5,000 active-duty military families rely on public assistance because their pay is not enough to raise a family on.
But that's only half the problem.
While these politicians are restricting the public assistance that many Americans use to make ends meet, they're also busy cutting taxes for the idle rich -- who, as it happens, already have plenty of disposable income for expensive seafood and luxury cruises.
The House, for example, just passed a bill repealing the estate tax.
That tax affects just one out of every 700 estates left by Americans who die each year, but it's a crucial source of revenue.
Repealing it will save the nation's multi-millionaires and billionaires about $27 billion a year. It means that the heirs to the Wal-Mart fortune -- who've collectively inherited nearly $150 billion in wealth -- will pass on nearly $60 billion more to their kids when they die.
Opponents of the estate tax claim that it prevents people from passing on family farms or small businesses, but that's nonsense.
In 2013, the feds taxed just 120 estates that were comprised primarily of a farm or a small business, according to the Tax Policy Center. These families paid an average tax rate of less than 5 percent.
Meanwhile, the tax code remains stacked against working families. The idle rich who live off investments pay a maximum rate of 20 percent on dividends and gains. Working parents, though, can pay nearly double that.
One out of every five children in America lives in poverty. In the wealthiest country in the world, nearly 16 million of our children and nearly 5 million of our elders lack food security.
But congressional leaders think the first piece of business should be to ensure that those who pay little in life leave nothing of their great fortunes to the common good after they die.
Hard-hearted politicians think that if they paint the people who get food stamps as lazy and undeserving, it will blind us to what's really going on: They're handing out more tax cuts for those who can afford caviar and champagne and more budget cuts for those trying to put the bare essentials on their kitchen tables.
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
This column was distributed by OtherWords.
Scott Klinger
Scott Klinger is researcher with the Program on Inequality at the Institute for Policy Studies (www.inequality.org).
To hear some politicians tell it, America's welfare system is facing a grave crisis: Millions of poor people, they say, are idling away their time eating lobster and relaxing on cruises.
Kansas Governor Sam Brownback, for example, recently signed welfare reform rules banning people receiving public assistance from using their $100 a week in benefits to buy steak or seafood, go to swimming pools, or take cruises.
Meanwhile, some members of Congress are taking aim at food aid for hungry Americans. They want us to associate "hungry" with "too lazy to work."
They're lashing at an imaginary problem.
Who benefits from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), otherwise known as food stamps? Nearly half of recipients are children, 16 percent are disabled adults who can't work, and 9 percent are senior citizens.
Nearly a third of people who get food stamps have a family member who is working, many at big box retailers like Wal-Mart or fast food establishments. These folks may not be able to get enough hours to work full-time, or their employers pay them so little that even with a full-time schedule, they can't pay for rent and utilities and still afford enough food for the family.
Even 5,000 active-duty military families rely on public assistance because their pay is not enough to raise a family on.
But that's only half the problem.
While these politicians are restricting the public assistance that many Americans use to make ends meet, they're also busy cutting taxes for the idle rich -- who, as it happens, already have plenty of disposable income for expensive seafood and luxury cruises.
The House, for example, just passed a bill repealing the estate tax.
That tax affects just one out of every 700 estates left by Americans who die each year, but it's a crucial source of revenue.
Repealing it will save the nation's multi-millionaires and billionaires about $27 billion a year. It means that the heirs to the Wal-Mart fortune -- who've collectively inherited nearly $150 billion in wealth -- will pass on nearly $60 billion more to their kids when they die.
Opponents of the estate tax claim that it prevents people from passing on family farms or small businesses, but that's nonsense.
In 2013, the feds taxed just 120 estates that were comprised primarily of a farm or a small business, according to the Tax Policy Center. These families paid an average tax rate of less than 5 percent.
Meanwhile, the tax code remains stacked against working families. The idle rich who live off investments pay a maximum rate of 20 percent on dividends and gains. Working parents, though, can pay nearly double that.
One out of every five children in America lives in poverty. In the wealthiest country in the world, nearly 16 million of our children and nearly 5 million of our elders lack food security.
But congressional leaders think the first piece of business should be to ensure that those who pay little in life leave nothing of their great fortunes to the common good after they die.
Hard-hearted politicians think that if they paint the people who get food stamps as lazy and undeserving, it will blind us to what's really going on: They're handing out more tax cuts for those who can afford caviar and champagne and more budget cuts for those trying to put the bare essentials on their kitchen tables.
Scott Klinger
Scott Klinger is researcher with the Program on Inequality at the Institute for Policy Studies (www.inequality.org).
To hear some politicians tell it, America's welfare system is facing a grave crisis: Millions of poor people, they say, are idling away their time eating lobster and relaxing on cruises.
Kansas Governor Sam Brownback, for example, recently signed welfare reform rules banning people receiving public assistance from using their $100 a week in benefits to buy steak or seafood, go to swimming pools, or take cruises.
Meanwhile, some members of Congress are taking aim at food aid for hungry Americans. They want us to associate "hungry" with "too lazy to work."
They're lashing at an imaginary problem.
Who benefits from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), otherwise known as food stamps? Nearly half of recipients are children, 16 percent are disabled adults who can't work, and 9 percent are senior citizens.
Nearly a third of people who get food stamps have a family member who is working, many at big box retailers like Wal-Mart or fast food establishments. These folks may not be able to get enough hours to work full-time, or their employers pay them so little that even with a full-time schedule, they can't pay for rent and utilities and still afford enough food for the family.
Even 5,000 active-duty military families rely on public assistance because their pay is not enough to raise a family on.
But that's only half the problem.
While these politicians are restricting the public assistance that many Americans use to make ends meet, they're also busy cutting taxes for the idle rich -- who, as it happens, already have plenty of disposable income for expensive seafood and luxury cruises.
The House, for example, just passed a bill repealing the estate tax.
That tax affects just one out of every 700 estates left by Americans who die each year, but it's a crucial source of revenue.
Repealing it will save the nation's multi-millionaires and billionaires about $27 billion a year. It means that the heirs to the Wal-Mart fortune -- who've collectively inherited nearly $150 billion in wealth -- will pass on nearly $60 billion more to their kids when they die.
Opponents of the estate tax claim that it prevents people from passing on family farms or small businesses, but that's nonsense.
In 2013, the feds taxed just 120 estates that were comprised primarily of a farm or a small business, according to the Tax Policy Center. These families paid an average tax rate of less than 5 percent.
Meanwhile, the tax code remains stacked against working families. The idle rich who live off investments pay a maximum rate of 20 percent on dividends and gains. Working parents, though, can pay nearly double that.
One out of every five children in America lives in poverty. In the wealthiest country in the world, nearly 16 million of our children and nearly 5 million of our elders lack food security.
But congressional leaders think the first piece of business should be to ensure that those who pay little in life leave nothing of their great fortunes to the common good after they die.
Hard-hearted politicians think that if they paint the people who get food stamps as lazy and undeserving, it will blind us to what's really going on: They're handing out more tax cuts for those who can afford caviar and champagne and more budget cuts for those trying to put the bare essentials on their kitchen tables.
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.