Research Paper on:
U.S. 'Wealthfare' is a Bad Idea

Unformatted Sample Text from the Research Paper:
abatement programs in cities to paying low rents to the federal government for mineral-rich lands. The reason behind such "wealthfare," as it is called, is, supposedly to spur development and  therefore spur economic wealth. The money and benefits are used to be an incentive so that more money can pour into city, state or even federal coffers.  The difficulty with such programs, however, is that they are funded by taxpayer money - money that should rightfully be allotted to those who need  it, rather than those who already have the money. The further difficulty with such programs is that the U.S. government is already being accused of a great deal of waste  - while Congress continues to slash and/or eliminate benefits received by the poor and the elderly, taxpayers are spending way too much to subsidize wealthy corporations and individuals (Collins 15).  Therefore, wealthfare needs to be totally eliminated. The original premise behind it is ridiculous, as those who benefit from such a scam are more than able to pay for various  projects out of their own pocket. Even worse, subsidies to corporations and wealthy individuals take money away from those who need it the most - including poverty-stricken children.  According to a survey released by Essential Information in 1994, it was estimated that U.S. tax payers would pay more in 1994 for programs  to aid corporations than for welfare programs directed toward lower income individuals and families (Lilliston 10). It was estimated that programs to aid U.S. corporations would cost taxpayers $104.3 billion,  while programs to aid the poor would cost $75.1 billion (Lilliston 10). Its uncertain today how much more taxpayers are paying in wealthfare, but it seems as though there are