I doubt anyone thinks I worry about what Robert or Buck are going to do to me, other than vote more leftists into office.

You are right that this is affecting a broad range of the population. Like I said, that's the idea. There is no power in benefits specifically targeted only to those who really need them. There aren't enough of them.

The goal is to have every person in the country getting something from the State in some way or other, and insuring that they have a lot to gain from the State keeping the power.

The result here will be what you're seeing in Greece: When the gravy train inevitably derails, the burning will begin, because now most of the population is dependent and will hit the skids in one way or another.

Chronic poverty is addressed by economic growth and prosperity, which is, in the real world, generated by people in the private sector making shitloads of money creating goods and services for other people.

It is not created by government printing money and handing it out.

Even then, the poverty rate between 1969 and 2009 is almost unchanged. How does that figure into the increase in dependence? The government is over three times the size it was back then in constant dollars. Where is this money going? Or is the definition of "poverty" being constantly tweaked, like those income calculations that omit government benefits?

Since "percent of income" is independent of population growth, something else is going on here besides simple safety nets for those who really need them.

Addiction to the State.