I remember reading a couple of years ago about how some state (maybe my state) was bragging about how they had signed up some additional number of people onto foodstamps and that the program was a success. Shouldn't success be measured by getting people OFF of foodstamps and supporting themselves?
People often express surprise when government actions seem to lack "common sense," such as handcuffing eight-year old school children for trivial offenses or praising the expansion of foodstamps. Under Austrian theories of human action, State actors have their own set of motivations and goals that differ from non-State, private actors. Primary motivations of State actors include increasing their control, relevance, and budgets. Viewed in that light, it makes perfect sense, and is not a lack of common sense, for foodstamp expansion to be viewed as a positive. It is my theory that the primary impetus for open immigration is to increase the clientele for various government programs as the native population is no longer sufficient.