That doesn't necessarily mean recipients are unemployed. It could mean taxpayers are subsidizing low-wage employers through public assistance to their employees, with a minimum wage that hasn't increased since 2009.
Haha reminds me of the postal worker hinting that a lot of welfare cheques go to some affluent neighborhood in Vancouver. The business owns the house and the Lexus!
You've missed the original point. Someone can be working a job and realistically pulling their own weight, but the system we have distributes that money to the owners and investors, who then pay tax and give some part back to the worker through welfare.
The country is better off having this person even if they are receiving welfare. Of course that's not the situation for all people on welfare, but the idea that the top percent of earners are doing all the work while the majority of people sit around getting stuff for free is obviously untrue.
