Entitlements or Welfare?

welfareEntitlements or welfare?

We continue to hear Washington talk about entitlements.  Sorry folks, entitlements were stolen from us long ago, when Congress decided to loot the Social Security (SS) program and put those dollars you and I invested for so many years to their own pet projects.

Entitlements come because you are entitled to receive them, i.e. you’ve invested and deserve a return on your money.  However, in order to buy those precious votes, Congress decided that SS should also pay for, as a for instance, widows and children of those who invested in the program (and probably for some who didn’t), regardless of how much and how long they invested.  If a young man died at 25, his widow and children would begin receiving benefits.  He may have only paid into the program for three years, subsequent to his going to college, and may have sired two children.  Until those children reach their majority, they would receive benefits.

Sorry, Charlie, that’s welfare, not entitlement.

My current dictionary on my iPad from Dictionary.Com, however, now defines “entitlement” as 1) the act of entitling 2) the state of being entitled 3) the right to guaranteed benefits under a government program, such as Social Security or Unemployment Compensation.

However, my 1960 Webster’s Dictionary defines entitle (none for entitlement), as it’s 3rd definition after those relating to titles in the English Ton system, as 3) to qualify (a person) to do something; to give a claim to; to give a right to demand or receive; as his labor entitles him to his wages.

The first (current) definition infers that one is entitled because he lives under a “government” and the second (1960) infers that you’re entitled because you’ve invested something, such as your labor.  A return on investment is not welfare.

How times change.

Now, I’m certainly not suggesting that we shouldn’t take care of orphaned children, or even children of a household which has lost it’s primary provider…however my mother raised my brother and I by herself, with hard work and self-reliance, and without one dime of government aid other than our living in County low rent housing.  However, those orphaned or in need children are not entitled as they did not invest in the system.  It’s welfare, and should be called welfare.

We should be entitled to health care if we’ve invested in health care, if we receive a return on that investment over and above the return on the money we’ve invested, then it’s welfare.  You can call a pig a peacock, but he’s still a pig.  You can call SS payments entitlements, so long as they reflect a return on what’s paid in, anything over and above that is welfare.

Last year 800 billion was paid into SS and it paid out 700 billion.  And a good portion of that was paid to those who didn’t pay into the system, take the illegal alien for instance who never paid a dime into the system, but if he’s a resident of the U.S. and of age, he qualifies for SS payments…but it’s welfare, not SS, and certainly not “entitlement.”  At least not when the system of entitlements was working, in 1960.

Like most creeping socialistic cancers, welfare has come to be known as “entitlement.”  Maybe it makes those who receive it feel better, but it’s still welfare, and should be labeled as such, and maybe many of them who receive government aid of so many varied kinds:  food stamps, welfare, college loans that no longer have to be repaid, and, yes, Social Security and Medicare/Medicaid, would move faster to become self-reliant.  Call a pig a pig, and it might make a difference, if there’s any personal pride left in Americans.

Hard work makes a man; hand out, palm up forsakes a man.  And hand out, palm up, is welfare.

Leave a Reply