//That presupposes that if they have less, it will be spent more wisely//
No, no. I don’t assume that at all , Zacs. I assume that however much they are able to access, the government will waste a sizeable proportion of it. In fact, if anything the proportion of waste is likely to be higher because the wasteful spending will continue at the same level, whereas the spending on things that people could do with will be cut due to “lack of funds.” Generally speaking, governments and “spending wisely” do not go hand in hand, so the less they are able to get their mitts on, the less they will have to waste.
//State pensions and State benefits have reduced the occurrence of absolute poverty.//
Possibly. But were they not at such generous levels it could be argued that indolence and dependency might be lower and people’s effort to sustain themselves might bring greater rewards. Who knows? Once the principle of “cradle to grave” dependency became an option the genie was well and truly out of the bottle and will never be returned. With the possible exception of the Covid vaccine rollout, I can’t actually think of too much that the State has done recently that has improved my quality of life significantly.