From a purely government monetary income and cost perspective there are definitely disabled people who would be a net negative. But yeah sure it does depend on the type of disability and their ability to find work that is compatible.
that misunderstands economics, specifically money flow, and government though. which makes sense why a lot of people would oppose it. give new immigrants to your community some money and where are they most likely to spend it? in your community. give aid to someone who is disadvantaged (not necessarily disabled) and you (1) earn loyalty and (2) get money into your local economy. give aid to someone who doesn’t need it and you build resentment. fortunately, right now pretty much 95% of people need help so you don’t have to be picky.
Isn’t it more that, govts have enough income (immigration) of disadvantaged people with high political value, that they don’t really need those low political value immigrants?
For the ideal case: Let’s say you have 2 people and only want 1 (you are not low in population). Which would you prefer?
Give money to Person. Person increases money circulation in community.
Person gives you work. Created value gets you x money. You pay Person x-y money. Person increases money circulation in community.
For the real case:
govts get loyalty by control, not by benevolence
govts would rather take some resentment from powerless and pay those already powerful. Because govts are made out of people too and would rather not get murdered
it’s easier for people to understand benevolence from a person than from a large organisation like a govt.
From a purely government monetary income and cost perspective there are definitely disabled people who would be a net negative. But yeah sure it does depend on the type of disability and their ability to find work that is compatible.
that misunderstands economics, specifically money flow, and government though. which makes sense why a lot of people would oppose it. give new immigrants to your community some money and where are they most likely to spend it? in your community. give aid to someone who is disadvantaged (not necessarily disabled) and you (1) earn loyalty and (2) get money into your local economy. give aid to someone who doesn’t need it and you build resentment. fortunately, right now pretty much 95% of people need help so you don’t have to be picky.
Isn’t it more that, govts have enough income (immigration) of disadvantaged people with high political value, that they don’t really need those low political value immigrants?
For the ideal case: Let’s say you have 2 people and only want 1 (you are not low in population). Which would you prefer?
xmoney. You pay Personx-ymoney. Person increases money circulation in community.For the real case: