These indirect corporate subsidies massively inflate the apparent amount spent on "entitlements"
If politicians really gave a damn about helping people move up the economic ladder, they would significantly bump the minimum wage instead of whining about cutting these programs.
Originally shared by +Jim Fawcette
Public Assistance Actually a Massive Taxpayer Subsidy for Too Big Conglomerates
We're seen this argument applied to select firms such as Walmart and MacDonald's, but new studies look at the bigger picture. State and federal government spend $150 Billion on antipoverty programs, much of which goes to working families, not the idle indolent. Texas, land of small government and independence, has more working poor on aid than any other state. A staggering 67% of aid in Texas goes to working families paid too little to live on.
Study PDF at:
http://laborcenter.berkeley.edu/pdf/2015/the-high-public-cost-of-low-wages.pdf
NYT.com: "“The low-wage business model practiced by many of the largest and most profitable employers in the country not only leaves many working families unable to afford the basics, but also imposes significant costs on the public as a whole,” Sarah Leberstein, a senior staff lawyer with the National Employment Law Project, testified recently before Connecticut lawmakers." {article at embed}
WaPo: "This picture casts the culprit in a different light: Taxpayers are spending a lot of money subsidizing not people who won't work, but industries that don't pay their workers a living wage. Through these four programs alone, federal and state governments spend about $150 billion a year aiding working families, according to the analysis (the authors define people who are working here as those who worked at least 10 hours a week, at least half the year)."
A University of California study finds that taxpayer money is effectively subsidizing employers who pay at or around the minimum wage.