Also in this playlist...
This transcript is automatically generated
Backing of a segment tonight -- year 2000 the food stamp program cost the federal government.
Seventeen billion dollars last year food stamps cost 76.
And astronomical rise under the Obama administration so what does this tell us joining us from Washington Fox News political -- program.
So I don't think this is all economic I -- you know Obama administration is a bad economic times recession kicks in people need of food.
But you know going from 171000076.
Billion -- Was in play here what is.
Well look you're clearly right we haven't had a quadruple it.
-- -- a number of people who are hungry -- -- country that's of the food stamp program was meant to be.
What we have we have a political ideology in power in Washington of liberalism.
Which believes that a measure of success of government.
He's how many.
And therefore for them is is a great success they want to see.
It's sort of a natural American aversion to taking a hand out.
You know sort of Whittle down and that people -- so proud I guess that's it right they would use to take -- that a conservative view is if you're destitute if you really in bad shape.
Uterus too old to work are too young disabled psychiatric illness or just the worst luck in the world of course society has an obligation to help you.
That's the safety net mentality.
But the idea is to freeze much enterprise money and energy in the free enterprise system so people can sustain themselves and those who can't you help.
But the liberal ideas much more like the European social democratic idea that the role of government is to sustain you sustain -- many people as you can.
To make sure there are no risks in life on the -- -- of it rough edges are smoothed out and that's why you get.
The growth of these kinds of program.
-- -- -- that it is a difference though between large yes government largesse on the liberal land and really sincerely want to help people.
And a cynical.
Calculation that the more people we hook on government perks.
The more people will vote for us so it's not the same thing.
So you say the Obama administration where are today are they that.
Good people in the compassion of people are they the cynical people.
I think there are other good people -- around so -- cynical people there but there's no doubt there's no doubt that.
Liberals for example do not -- means testing and Social Security now why not.
-- liberals are the ones you see should happen progressive taxation that the rich are -- pay more.
And the poor less so why not have the benefits of Social Security.
The rich get less -- the poor get more which is what conservatives.
Have been arguing for years but they don't want that.
The reason is that they may lose political support.
From the people at the high end as long as -- a universal program they'll get the most support but I would offer a third position.
It is known even I even it is only the cynical but there's something in between.
Liberals -- the party of good government clues are the ones who are the experts and they sincerely believe.
That having the money and the benefits and the resources of society.
Distributed -- of them the experts.
Ph.D.s the political class is superior.
And more good and better for society then if the private sector in the market the invisible hand.
Distributes the resources and a well.
Thought -- that's the underlying idea I had always ask this question to liberals who tell me.
That the government does have a responsibility to provide cradle to grave even people who don't wanna work or didn't cooperate -- -- maybe.
What is compassionate about bankrupting the United States of America.
What is compassionate about driving up the debt to the extent.
Where this country is in a precarious position economically and perhaps militarily down the road what's compassionate about putting every citizen in danger.
For this pie in the sky theoretical stuff.
I agree with you entirely.
Look in the -- when you look at Europe which is -- entitlement society.
It's exactly where we are headed American liberalism wants to -- as an -- -- bankruptcy today metadata that's a bankruptcy going to be bankrupt but that's.
They don't want us but they somehow imagine -- the bounty of the past will continue.
They'll be able to soak the rich should pay it off look at they have no understanding of what's gonna happen even -- we -- given this historical gift.
I'm seeing what's happening in Europe ahead of time so it's a warning.
But there's a second -- it isn't only that it's unsustainable which it obviously is we're gonna hit the wall on this.
Especially our medical expenditures but it's also that even if it -- an unsustainable let's assume -- we have the biggest discovery.
Of gold and oil and history and it was -- here.
Nonetheless it changes the nature of society right and it changes the fiber of the people.
If you are living off the -- time -- I -- it weakens.
-- I got to run thank Andrew search.
Filter by section