The problem with the "military vs. social programs" contrast. The argument suggests that because we all contribute to the military (even though some disagree with it's action and leadership) is that it benefits "us all" to have a strong military. In contrast he claims that these social programs do no good to anyone other than those who are currently receiving benefits. This is not the case, as that "safety net" isn't just there for those who are currently receiving benefits, that safety net is there for everyone. If by some weird twist of events, Mitt Romney were sued, or got some weird Mediterranean disease that stripped him of every asset he had, and he were unable to work because of it, that safety net would be there for him as well... It benefits everyone, but only when you need to utilize it. The other way it benefits everyone is that thanks to those types of programs, we aren't inundated with swarms of homeless people living on the street, and revolting against those of us who have things. It reduces crime, and bodes well for the general welfare of the country. As for the morality of those individuals, there can be no blanket statement about those "in" the wagon and those "pulling"... There are plenty of moral and wonderful people pulling, and plenty of wonderful moral people riding. In contrast, there are plenty of immoral sick and twisted selfish bastards on both ends of that spectrum as well. I do find flaw with the analogy regarding the wagon. Some of those "pulling" don't actually do anything to "pull", and some of those "riding" aren't really drawing any of the energy from the wagon, and do pull their own weight...