Social Security stacked up against the handouts to global capital by the federal government. My guess it'd be paltry in comparison. Besides, Food Stamps help support the bottom line of WalMart and other underpaying businesses.

Aren't we reading about a tax holiday for the business scofflaws that haven't paid their taxes and are hiding the money off shore because they will only have to pay of fraction of what they owe the government. How much is the giveaway this time,Obama?

How about sending a bill to Big Finance and Big Oil for the military "softening up" done on behalf of their bottom lines? Do the oil companies tell the soldiers "We honor your service?"

“... this legislation provides an historic opportunity to end welfare as we know it and transform our broken welfare system by promoting the fundamental values of work, responsibility, and family.” --Bill Clinton, 1996

“I’ve advocated tying the welfare payment to certain behavior about being a good parent. You couldn’t get your welfare check if your child wasn’t immunized. You couldn’t get your welfare check if you didn’t participate in a parenting program. You couldn’t get your check if you didn’t show up for student-teacher conferences.” --Hillary Clinton, 1997

(2 Thess 3:10) and Stalin/Lenin both agreed that

those who do not work, neither shall they eat.

partly about how they dealt with the poor.

"Early American patterns of publicly funded poor relief emerged mainly from the English heritage of early settlers. The policies and practices of aiding the poor current in England when the Pilgrims landed at Plymouth, Massachusetts were shaped primarily by the Elizabethan Poor Laws of 1594 and 1601, and the Law of Settlement and Removal of 1662. The English poor laws classified poor/dependent people into three major categories and established a requirement for “residency” before aid was provided. Dependent persons were categorized as: vagrant, the involuntary unemployed and the helpless. In effect, the poor laws separated the poor into two classes: the worthy (e.g., orphans, widows, handicapped, frail elderly) and the unworthy (e.g., drunkards, shiftless, lazy). The poor laws also set down the means for dealing with each category of needy persons and established the parish (i.e., local government) as the responsible agent for administering the law. Parish officials were given the authority to raise taxes as needed and use the funds to build and manage almshouses; to supply food and sustenance in their own homes for the aged and the handicapped, (e.g., blind, crippled); and to purchase materials necessary to put the able-bodied to work. If vagrants or able-bodied persons refused to work they could be put in jail."

how one is supposed to work when there are not enough jobs.

FDR did it, but they don't like his "socialism".

We have about 7 million long-term unemployed. Either get the rich to let loose of their tight-fisted hoarding of the money and create 7 million fulltime living-wage jobs and then talk to me about how everyone should work (really it needs to be more than that to accommodate the underemployed and part-time who would like fulltime, but whatever). Or have the government do the same. Say $30K per job, so that would cost $210 billion per year. We probably have the need, if you look at all the infrastructure needs.

So spend $210 billion from the pockets of the rich one way or the other, create 7 million jobs at $30K/year (about $15/hour fulltime), consider that a small step in the right direction, and then if you have everyone sitting around refusing to work, then we might begin a conversation about the moral value of work.

Personally, I know a lot of retired people who hate retirement. I think working, feeling useful, is a human need. If you give people enough to live on with a guaranteed basic income, most will still work to fulfill that need and to buy more than the basics.