my kind of "hope and change"
- Thread starter dbw
- Start date
- Status
Superlizard
Hero Member
- Messages
- 2,514
...and since my money's going to someone else out there, the least they could do is send me a damn picture of the family I'm supporting...
I agree with you SuperLim!
If you agree never to make use of any roads, fire departments, police presence, 911, border patrol, or mail, if you put yourself out in front of the military if the country is attacked....and if you don't get any benefit from the people around you being able to read and write, etc., basically if never leave your house and don't use any water, electricity, or gas, I don't think you should have to pay any taxes at all.
Because all that stuff is 'socialism' or something scary like that!
If you agree never to make use of any roads, fire departments, police presence, 911, border patrol, or mail, if you put yourself out in front of the military if the country is attacked....and if you don't get any benefit from the people around you being able to read and write, etc., basically if never leave your house and don't use any water, electricity, or gas, I don't think you should have to pay any taxes at all.
Because all that stuff is 'socialism' or something scary like that!
G
guitlouie
Guest
Lucky #007 said:
Yes there is, but should we, then, take a "Can't win, so don't try attitude"? Shoot down the program that admittedly does some good to deserving folks, to spite the n'er-do-wells who take advantage of it? You know that when they cut spending to programs like that, the first thing to go is usually the appuratus that polices the fruadulent users, thus allowing more fruadulent users to operate with impugnity? Part of the reform that many, many americans, on both sides of the aisle are calling for these days is to have more oversight of these agencies that use our tax dollars, and more accountabilty to ensure that they are indeed doing the things they are supposed to be doing with those tax dollars. It may piss you off, but to have this accountability costs money.
Anyway, what do I know, I'm just a cook who reads a lot and likes to play his guitars.
Nice post GL. Anyhow I thought there was literally no proposal anywhere to expand welfare. I thought think priorities were lessening our dependence on terrorist-funding oil sheiks, and getting a better health care system that will benefit business as well as the working class.
Wana's_makin'_a_guitar said:
Enjoy it while you can. Getting a real job is great, but terribly depressing thinking you have to get up almost every day for the rest of your life and go to work.
I was lucky, I played music for a living for over 25 years (and bitched about things then). Boy did I have it made.
I just play part time now and WORK full time. They don't call it work for nothing.
Enjoy being young cause it will soon change...
Read my earlier post. I wouldn't mind a welfare system that works even if it costs more. What I mind is a welfare system that makes people into government leaches doing nothing but collecting checks and sitting at home. Ultimately, I think a system that worked would cost less in the long run as it would hopefully be a temporary bridge rather than the permanent solution it has become.
Wana_make_a_guitar
Hero Member
- Messages
- 2,793
A bit late, but yes, correctdbw said:
In 2002, the entire "welfare system" of the Untited States could've been funded by 0.4% of the defense budget - and that was before the monstrous expenditures for Homeland Security" even began to be funded, or the price for the occupation of Iraq began to kick in.
In other words, for every two hundred dollars spent on the Defense budget, less than one dollar went to Families with Dependent Children, school lunches, food stamps... it's probably more like 400 to 1 now. Of course there is fraud and abuse. But on a practical basis, if you could cut fraud, abuse, overspending, and contract overruns in the military by 10%, you could save hundreds of billions dollars more than if you cut fraud, abuse, overspending and contract overruns in welfare by 10%. (The only "no-bid" contracts in welfare go to big campaign contributors, just like in the military; poor people aren't campaign contributors, so the main beneficiaries of "welfare fraud" are the already-rich supply contractors....)
The issue is one of perspective. TV commentators would have you believe that welfare for poor people is most expensive, while it's actually welfare for rich people (by a factor of several hundred) that's killing us with deficits. The highest tax rates in the US from Roosevelt to Johnson fluctuated between 80% and 90%. During that time the US built a vibrant middle class (from which you're still benefiting) and became the most powerful nation on earth because the potential of such a large percentage of people was activated - now we're rewarding ignorance by teaching "intelligent design" and driving our best scientist overseas by refusing to fund basic research.
Regarding perspective, did you know that the murder rate in the US has been declining for years? Did you know that there are no more child molesters or white slavers than there were fifty years ago, and it would be perfectly safe to let your children play outside? Did you know that 40 times more people die in hospitals every year from medication mistakes than die from all illegal drug overdoses, totaled together? Your TV teaches you DRAMA, not facts.
Television exists only to sell you products - only. That's a fundamental fact that drives the news, "documentaries", everything you think you knew before the internet (DO you read books?) is shaped by drama that sells products. If you now read books that are chosen based on what you learned as a child growing up watching television, it's still tinted knowledge, if not actually quite so warped.... at least with some study of formal logic, you're able to evaluate the structure of written arguments. I gotta wish the Dittoheads luck, you always wanna hope people know they're supposed to keep growing up even after junior high... but in America "staying young" has become a mantra justifying appalling levels of immaturity, so that's a perhaps too liberal a hope. Good luck with that brain thing, huh?
In other words, for every two hundred dollars spent on the Defense budget, less than one dollar went to Families with Dependent Children, school lunches, food stamps... it's probably more like 400 to 1 now. Of course there is fraud and abuse. But on a practical basis, if you could cut fraud, abuse, overspending, and contract overruns in the military by 10%, you could save hundreds of billions dollars more than if you cut fraud, abuse, overspending and contract overruns in welfare by 10%. (The only "no-bid" contracts in welfare go to big campaign contributors, just like in the military; poor people aren't campaign contributors, so the main beneficiaries of "welfare fraud" are the already-rich supply contractors....)
The issue is one of perspective. TV commentators would have you believe that welfare for poor people is most expensive, while it's actually welfare for rich people (by a factor of several hundred) that's killing us with deficits. The highest tax rates in the US from Roosevelt to Johnson fluctuated between 80% and 90%. During that time the US built a vibrant middle class (from which you're still benefiting) and became the most powerful nation on earth because the potential of such a large percentage of people was activated - now we're rewarding ignorance by teaching "intelligent design" and driving our best scientist overseas by refusing to fund basic research.
Regarding perspective, did you know that the murder rate in the US has been declining for years? Did you know that there are no more child molesters or white slavers than there were fifty years ago, and it would be perfectly safe to let your children play outside? Did you know that 40 times more people die in hospitals every year from medication mistakes than die from all illegal drug overdoses, totaled together? Your TV teaches you DRAMA, not facts.
Television exists only to sell you products - only. That's a fundamental fact that drives the news, "documentaries", everything you think you knew before the internet (DO you read books?) is shaped by drama that sells products. If you now read books that are chosen based on what you learned as a child growing up watching television, it's still tinted knowledge, if not actually quite so warped.... at least with some study of formal logic, you're able to evaluate the structure of written arguments. I gotta wish the Dittoheads luck, you always wanna hope people know they're supposed to keep growing up even after junior high... but in America "staying young" has become a mantra justifying appalling levels of immaturity, so that's a perhaps too liberal a hope. Good luck with that brain thing, huh?
stubhead said:
Interesting read! This whole thread is actually very interesting and informing, though maybe not always in the way the participants expect. If it's still alive on ca. Monday I may be able to participate a little bit myself. Have a good weekend and keep keeping it civil, you're doing fine so far
Superlizard
Hero Member
- Messages
- 2,514
tfarny said:
Yeah... because that makes complete fooking logical sense... put the crack pipe down, thillary. :icon_tongue:
Superlizard
Hero Member
- Messages
- 2,514
stubhead said:
Source?
Stubhead may have exaggerated the numbers a little bit - I'm not sure his sources. It does partly depend on what how you define 'welfare' - obviously AFDC and food stamps are the main things but if you wanted to be ridiculous you could call military pensions, student loan aid, etc. 'welfare'. If you go that route you might as well consider farm subsidies to be 'welfare' as well as all the corporate givebacks enshrined in the tax law. I attached a budget guide from 2002, the last one made available by the Bush administration, and did a bit of googling around.
From what I can gather, total welfare payments are about 1/20 of the defense budget, about 1/15 the cost of paying interest on the debt, and much less than NASA, which is mostly an exercise in boys with cool toys. Total federal education , environmental protection, arts, and other spending is far, far lower still.
http://bcn.boulder.co.us/pss/welfare.html
http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/L-runawaywelfare.htm This site is really well sourced, you obviously have internet access yourself and can look up their sources if you doubt them.
From what I can gather, total welfare payments are about 1/20 of the defense budget, about 1/15 the cost of paying interest on the debt, and much less than NASA, which is mostly an exercise in boys with cool toys. Total federal education , environmental protection, arts, and other spending is far, far lower still.
http://bcn.boulder.co.us/pss/welfare.html
http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/L-runawaywelfare.htm This site is really well sourced, you obviously have internet access yourself and can look up their sources if you doubt them.
Superlizard
Hero Member
- Messages
- 2,514
tfarny said:
Instead of putting words in our mouths or redefining terms like "welfare" willy-nilly to fit your "argument" (which you are infamous for), how about actually reading what us conservative-minded posters are saying in terms of "welfare"?
I'm not the only one in this thread that pointed out that free handouts to lazy-asses is the aspect we frown upon.
None of us has expressed distaste in having to pay for military pensions, student loan aid, roads, schooling, etc...
(I mean really, enough with your shell game... stick to the definitions at hand)
What is your opinion of people like the octo-mom? Do you think the taxpayers should fund her?
The reason I included the possibility of that other stuff is that you could call it 'welfare' and then you'd have a bigger number with which to argue the conservative side. Sticking to AFDC and food stamps, you end up with 1/20 of the defense budget and 1/15 of the interest on the debt. I wasn't calling anyone anything, I was answering your request for a source, chill out!
Oh, the octo-mom. That is a horrendous story. What do I think about her? Well, I don't think the government should let her kids be homeless or starve to death, it's not their fault. I also wonder how much of your dollar goes to supporting that one, ridiculous, terrible example, versus how much of your dollar was wasted by Blackwater and Halliburton in the earlier phases of the Iraq war. You could look that up, though the real numbers will never be known. Basically, sure there's welfare fraud but there's all kinds of fraud, there's fraud in business too. Focusing on the very small numbers (and $) of poor people who fleece the system prevents you from looking at the much bigger issue of how our actual budget reflects our actual priorities. That's what stub was saying about TV, logical thought, and emotion vs. facts.
- Status
Similar threads
