If one must keep that in mind, may one ask what definition of "welfare state" has applied to the USA since its founding?
I'm sure there's plenty. From the Federalist years (George Washington onward) to modern times, the federal government assumed both the responsibility and the management of the US resources as the political winds found necessary. To what degree, has only grown over time in spurts and fits.
I’m going to assume that this is a serious question and try to quickly answer it in good faith.
A quick search finds these figures [0] from the Congressional Research Service.
“CRS identified 83 overlapping federal welfare programs that together represented the single largest budget item in 2011—more than the nation spends on Social Security, Medicare, or national defense. The total amount spent on these 80-plus federal welfare programs amounts to roughly $1.03 trillion. Importantly, these figures solely refer to means-tested welfare benefits. They exclude entitlement programs to which people contribute (e.g., Social Security and Medicare).”
Social Security and Medicare are massive entitlements beyond welfare spending that are all but sacrosanct in US politics, and that’s just federal spending.
Looking at total social spending as a share of GDP [1], the US is in line with Australia and Canada at 2016 numbers. The difference between the US at 19% and the Netherlands or Japan at 22.5% or Germany at 25% is one of degree, not of kind. This is especially true when you consider that in absolute terms the difference is even smaller since the US has considerably higher GDP/capita than those countries.
[0] https://www.budget.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/CRS%20Report%20-...
[1] https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/social-spending-oecd-long...
It is a serious question and I was hoping for something closer to the late 1700s vintage. I'm well aware there is a vast welfare system in place today.
I was caught in a weak moment I guess.
“Since it’s founding the US has never been a welfare state in any sense. Change my mind!”
> If one must keep that in mind, may one ask what definition of "welfare state" has applied to the USA since its founding?
The contention was definitely whether it has been a welfare state ever since its founding. No judgement though - the English language is terribly poorly designed, so I can totally understand how you read it that way.
Go read about the history of Mormons and Utah. The reason the surrounding borders are so weird is because the U.S. gov essentially tried to thwart a larger land grab by the LDS
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_of_Deseret
Their tenants were largely about taking care of each other.
So, in short - there were a lot of welfare states, mostly segregated by religion. As time went on, they mostly morphed into an encompassing welfare state.
Do you disagree? HN is definitely a tough crowd when it comes to ideas of helping the less fortunate it seems. Hopefully your future physical therapists won't charge too much when your ruined backs and wrists are hurting, despite the fact capitalism says "why shouldn't they reap your pains for all they're worth"
Certain groups choosing to take care of their members is not a welfare state so I'm not too sure what you're getting at there.
For what it’s worth, you almost certainly mean ‘tenets’. I don’t know why, but this malapropism has become increasingly common. Tenants are people who rent a property.
Both words come from the Latin tenere, to hold. A tenant is someone who holds a lease. A tenet is a belief that is held.
How is it limited?
Why must it become inaccessible to people with bad eye sight? My feelings aren't that fragile
The way you seem to be looking at it - yes, I mostly agree that the company should not outright be expected to essentially hire another fully time employee to work as the deaf employees interpreter. But in the 21st century, in the developed country that is the United States, I very much feel as if there should be some way to quickly and reasonably pair this employee with a student(s) of a local sign language or whatever school/program in which they come and go assisting in translation services for part of school credit/curriculum/outreach. Anybody learning a language will tell you there's nothing better than real world experience.
This gives the disabled (in the form of being deaf) person a meaningful occupation/independence, and students an assured way to get important experience. However, since the US is a highly capitalistic machine, we seem to not have reasonable things such as this set up on any meaningful scale.
Lots of downvoting. Do HN users have beef with disability accomodations or something?