From a commenter at Belmont Club » The Empty Sandwich:

"Over the past 20 years the special interest coalitions have progressively discredited the traditional idea that factions were a bad thing. That is now a quaint idea superseded by the notion that there is nothing special interest lobbying cannot solve. A compliant media has convinced the public that to every problem there is an agency and a rule for every purpose under heaven.
The media has learned to craft “compassion trap” stories in which heart-rending problems can be fixed by yet another government bureaucracy whose creation only the cruel could refuse to fund. A powerful coalition of the media and special interests has written the narrative of modern times. Together they have created a “ratchet” and the wheel winds only one way.
In consequence, learning how to manipulate the system became the key modern skill. Governance became a one sided contest between the part-time public and professional activists, who wanted to work the system to rule others and made it their full-time occupation. As the saying goes, “be at the table or be on the menu”. The consequence is that almost everyone who actually does something productive is on the menu for those who do nothing but redistribute the wealth."

Mr. Moore, I am not sure where the statistic you quote regarding welfare spending increasing the GDP by "$1.50" keeps coming from. That $1.00 to start with has been taken from hard working, tax paying citizens, and redistributed to whomever. It might be true that if the welfare user goes to the store to purchase groceries with his/her food stamps, and may inevitable buy something else with cash, then some money re-enters the economy along with the aforementioned redistributed tax money (welfare, but chances are they are using there cash entitlement to pay for the cash item as well, which is really money taken from taxpayers.) Would it not be better for the taxpayer to have that cash to start with and invest or purchase what they wish to? --- Ronsch

My answer:
You started off well but then fell into the trap laid by leftists, that just spending money somehow contributes to the economy. Taking money away from one person and giving it to another to spend, is the same as taking it out of one local economy and giving it to another... net effect on the overall economy, zero. Only by creating income that does not take from another person's income do we create a larger overall economy. Investors do that. Business owners, large or small do that by investing in their own economies and those of suppliers, customers, and employees. Unless value is added to the exchange, nothing is created. For example a carpenter could buy some lumber and resell it to a homeowner, and only add the value delivery to the value of the goods. But if he builds a house, he adds the value of the house to the economy of the homeowner, to his employees, and suppliers. There is also the benefits to the town in increased tax revenue, to neighbors in value of property, etc.

Here is Mike Jarvi's website: Mike Jarvi - Contemporary Furniture

“The tea party represents a new energy in the party … Can the party establishment hold its own against that?”

“Jack brings tremendous energy to the Chairman’s post. Firmly committed to the conservative principles for which we stand, he understands the nuts and bolts of grassroots organizing.”