Yes! Thank you :)

I know...but it could have been done better... it was too close to the crap they came out with when Paul Ryan was campaigning for VP...roll gramma off a cliff kind of shit.

Yes....

I know that..... but it implies that those that are the "burden" are in wheelchairs when, actually, so many that are on the dole are able bodied. ie: drug users who fain mental illness to get an SSI check every month, and many other scenarios. It also hints at 'if you don't want to help people wheelchair bound then you're heartless", which is also not the case. Bad cartoonage.

Ahhh... Yes. It would have been better received if they were pushing or pulling the cart as the ratio changed/ load increased..

It's not just that, there are more people in wheelchairs, which is fine, it was to be expected after the boomer generation, but there are also less people propping the system up.. so I took it to mean that all of those people who are able to work but choose not to are just absent. Government programs always make a lot of assumptions regarding human behavior and that is why they are always flawed. They assume as population grows, people will be more and more productive, they did not account for the fact that people tend to act in their economic best interest, many devoid of principle or value. If the program exists to benefit you economically without you having to work, the majority will take that route. The same thing applies to Obamacare.. the ACA assumed that everyone wanted a certain kind of health insurance, when according to reality, most young, healthy people want high deductible or health savings plans which were economical, but are no longer available. The result is more people dropping and opting out so the system is collapsing.

That cartoon - spoken for truth!

When I was young, I lived in a welfare state, the unemployed got a government income, such people were very few, so no one cared, it made no difference, why be concerned?
For some reason, I remember an occasion when we had visitors and they spoke about a brother who could not get a job and got the benefit. I cannot recall the words but there was sympathy and no condemnation, all knew the chap was trying and would get work.
Things have changed, the benefit has become a lifestyle choice. The income is not big but sustainable. Many on it have no interest or motivation to work. There is more money when there are children and they see it in the same way as a viable career.
Sometimes the economy is up, sometimes down, but the unemployed numbers relentlessly increase.
Like the other comments, if I have a fault to find with the cartoon it is in those in the wheel chairs, the aged and injured are the same in number but the newer ones are young fit and happy.

Its meant to show the ratio of burden to the individual.

It's not meant to be taken literally.

Why does the cartoon imply that all welfare recipients are in wheelchairs? That's bothersome and extremely incorrect.