@Rajk999 saidDead wrong, as usual.
Billion $$ companies add value to the GNP. Welfare recipients are a liability.
Give money to the rich, and it gets funneled to offshore tax havens. Give money to corporations and much the same thing happens since the funds are disbursed to the CEO and principal shareholders.
But give money to the poor and it goes right back into the economy (and small businesses in particular) times a multiplier factor of 1.5 to 2.5 (depending on the study).
https://www.givedirectly.org/multiplier
One of the world’s largest cash studies found that GiveDirectly’s program, giving a one-time $1,000 cash transfer to 10,500 poor households in rural Kenya, led to 2.5x that amount in economic growth.
https://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2019/12/02/781152563/researchers-find-a-remarkable-ripple-effect-when-you-give-cash-to-poor-families
Researchers Find A Remarkable Ripple Effect When You Give Cash To Poor Families
Over the past decade there has been a surge of interest in a novel approach to helping the world's poor: Instead of giving them goods like food or services like job training, just hand out cash — with no strings attached. Now a major new study suggests that people who get the aid aren't the only ones who benefit.
Edward Miguel, an economist at the University of California, Berkeley, and a co-author of the study, says that until now, research on cash aid has almost exclusively focused on the impact on those receiving the aid. And a wealth of research suggests that when families are given the power to decide how to spend it, they manage the money in ways that improve their overall well-being: Kids get more schooling; the family's nutrition and health improves.
https://www.cbpp.org/blog/snap-food-assistance-is-a-sound-investment-in-our-nations-health-well-being-and-economy
SNAP Food Assistance Is a Sound Investment in Our Nation’s Health, Well-Being, and Economy
SNAP’s return on investment far outweighs its costs. By investing directly in the health and well-being of low-income children, SNAP provides lasting gains not only for the children who participate, but for the nation. One study estimated that every SNAP dollar invested in children returns $62 in value over their lifetimes (due to a range of benefits including improved educational outcomes, higher earnings in adulthood, increased life expectancy, and increased government tax revenue). SNAP should be seen as an investment that will deliver continuing benefits for the life trajectories of children and the broader economy.
SNAP plays a critical role in supporting families and local communities during economic downturns. In a weak economy, every $1 in additional spending on SNAP benefits generates $1.54 in economic activity as households use their benefits to shop at over 250,000 local grocery stores and supermarkets, spurring new spending throughout local economies across the country.
We can argue about means testing to determine who really needs welfare services another time, and what the criteria such testing would employ. My main point is that money given to the wealthy winds up in a rat hole—almost literally, as people sitting on mountains of money take any additional money given to them and hoard it in the wilderness like crazed squirrels storing up for winter. Billion-dollar companies are invariably controlled by wealthy individuals, so money given to such companies results in much the same effect. In contrast, money given to the poor via welfare benefits goes back into the economy and lifts all boats.