- Prior to the Great Depression in the US in the 1930s, welfare as we know it was almost non-existent. But with so many people out of work, the federal government viewed continuity of income as a federal problem. It responded by passing both Social Security and unemployment compensation laws for low-income seniors and families with children. Years later, the government also began providing so-called "in kind" benefits in the form of food stamps and Medicaid.
- The federal government runs about 75 major welfare programs. The states contribute manpower and money to many of these, as well as programs their own, state-run, programs. It is estimated that between the federal and state governments, over $500 billion is spent annually, with about three-quarters of that cost borne by the federal government. To put it in perspective, the annual cost of the nation's welfare program costs more than $6,000 for every household that pays taxes. Out of necessity, welfare expenditures are greater than the Gross National Product of the United States
- The United States sees to it that more of the needs of low-income people are met than about 90 percent of the nations on this earth. For example, by 2003, the US government provided some form of aid to 2.3 million low-income families, not counting approximately 50 million senior citizens that receive monthly Social Security checks. The country provides so much to low-income families that those benefits are considered by many to be a disincentive to work, although in many cases, it is not true.
- There is a geographic basis for much of the welfare dispensed by both the federal and state governments. For example, in the northern part of the US, known for cold winters, a greater need is evidenced in the winter months. Hurricane Katrina that devastated the Southern portion of the country was reason for much of the nation's attention to low-income people. Finally, when the job market is in peril, as it has been in Michigan for a number of years, the state and federal governments must give a disproportionate share of it welfare dollars to people there.
- No end is in sight of the numbers of programs that will be established for low-income people. That is particularly true when the Democrats are in power, either in Washington, or at the state level, because that is a meaningful item on their agenda.
