On the road to ruin

[sprinter]

http://theeconomiccollapseblog.com/archives/sheeple-government-handouts-35-percent-of-u-s-wages-but-for-michael-moore-that-is-not-nearly-enough

 

The ratio of government handouts to wages and salaries in the United States is now at an all-time high. According to TrimTabs Investment Research, government handouts have reached a level that is equivalent to 35 percent of all wages and salaries in the United States. Considering the fact that this figure was only 21 percent back in the year 2000 and only 10 percent back in 1960 that is very frightening. The sad truth is that today the American people are more dependent on direct government payments than they ever have been before. What this does is that it takes formerly independent Americans and transforms them into "sheeple" and pets of the government. Today we have tens of millions of Americans that eagerly await the crumbs that the federal government tosses them each month. This is one reason why our national debt is exploding, but our politicians like this system because it enables them to buy votes. Meanwhile, the federal government and the international corporations that dominate our economy have rigged the game so that power and money are becoming increasingly centralized in their hands. As a result of the system that the "big boys" have developed, millions of small businesses across the country are being absolutely crushed, the standard of living of the middle class is gradually being destroyed and more American families slip into poverty ever single day. What we need to do is to dramatically reduce the power of both the federal government and the big corporations so that small businesses and individuals can thrive once again, but instead "activists" such as Michael Moore are out there demanding even more taxes and even more government handouts.

[goinbroke2]

+1

 

micheal moore, what a piece of shit. Hey Mike guess what? I just finished my yearly PT test and I not only " passed" , I got "exempt" so I'm good for two years!

And to celebrate I went to MCDONALD'S! SO %^&* YOU!

 

Supersize THIS bi%^&!

[RangerM]

Didn't Pelosi say government handouts stimulate an economy?

[Trimdingman]

The 2011 federal budget is 3.7 trillion dollars. Total revenue is 2.1 trillion dollars. They are only 1.6 trillion short; or just over 43%. Something has got to give. If they cut social programs; there will be rioting in the streets. If they inflate the currency; there will be higher inflation and an expanding exodus of businesses out of the country; which will further reduce government revenue. We are looking at a Great Depression, and probably a World War; and this time, we could lose it.

Edited March 9, 2011 by Trimdingman

[retro-man]

From the same article:

That isn't going to solve anything. Most of the ultra-wealthy have turned avoiding taxes into an art form. A third of all the wealth in the world is now held in "offshore banks". Many of our largest corporations don't pay a dime in federal taxes even as they pass out multi-million dollar bonuses to their executives.

 

And yet, some people can look at it, and somehow come to the conclusion that Michael Moore and the people he represents - the powerless, poverty stricken, and disenfranchised - are responsible for what is going on. What an incredible perversion of logic. This type of "thinking" (I use the term loosely) causes me to really lose all hope for this country.

 

According to the very conservative Tax Foundation, the total amount of all Federal State and local taxes collected in the US - every single tax dime they can account for; sales, income, SS, B & O, excise, hunting and fishing licenses, auto licensing fees, etc. etc. - is about 28% of GDP. So I'm not sure what hole they pulled that 35% number out of. Even deficit spending doesn't account for that difference.

 

There's probably a significant overlap between the people who believe this article, and the 20% of the US population who believe that the sun revolves around the earth, or the 40% who believe that the world was made over a 6 day period, between 6,000 and 10,000 years ago, and that God put dinosaur bones in the ground to test our faith.

[grbeck]

According to the very conservative Tax Foundation, the total amount of all Federal State and local taxes collected in the US - every single tax dime they can account for; sales, income, SS, B & O, excise, hunting and fishing licenses, auto licensing fees, etc. etc. - is about 28% of GDP. So I'm not sure what hole they pulled that 35% number out of. Even deficit spending doesn't account for that difference.

 

This does not prove that the article is inaccurate. According to the article, government wages and entitlement checks account for 35 percent of all wages and salaries. Wages and salaries are not the same thing as gross domestic product.

 

There's probably a significant overlap between the people who believe this article, and the 20% of the US population who believe that the sun revolves around the earth, or the 40% who believe that the world was made over a 6 day period, between 6,000 and 10,000 years ago, and that God put dinosaur bones in the ground to test our faith.

 

Gross domestic product is the market value of all goods and services produced within a country during a specified period of time. It is different from wages and salaries, which is the measurement the article uses.

Edited March 10, 2011 by grbeck

[silvrsvt]

The 2011 federal budget is 3.7 trillion dollars. Total revenue is 2.1 trillion dollars. They are only 1.6 trillion short; or just over 43%. Something has got to give. If they cut social programs; there will be rioting in the streets. If they inflate the currency; there will be higher inflation and an expanding exodus of businesses out of the country; which will further reduce government revenue. We are looking at a Great Depression, and probably a World War; and this time, we could lose it.

 

Why not move out of the country or just shot yourself so you don't have to worry about it...:rolleyes:

[strokinbeast]

+1

 

micheal moore, what a piece of shit. Hey Mike guess what? I just finished my yearly PT test and I not only " passed" , I got "exempt" so I'm good for two years!

And to celebrate I went to MCDONALD'S! SO %^&* YOU!

 

Supersize THIS bi%^&!

I will second that

[NLPRacing]

Didn't Pelosi say government handouts stimulate an economy?

 

I don't remember a direct quote from Pelosi using the actual word "handouts", do you have a source on that? Are you talking about her comment regarding unemployment benefits? The CBO happens to agree with Pelosi (Link-CBO). From page 27:

Extending additional unemployment benefits would directly help those who would otherwise exhaust their unemployment benefits between March and December of this year. Households receiving unemployment benefits tend to spend the additional benefits quickly, making this option both timely and cost-effective in spurring economic activity and employment.

 

Besides, wouldn't a tax cut also be considered a government "handout"? Isn't spending money and cutting revenue basically the same thing?

Edited March 10, 2011 by NLPRacing

[grbeck]

Besides, wouldn't a tax cut also be considered a government "handout"? Isn't spending money and cutting revenue basically the same thing?

 

A tax cut allows you to keep more of your own money. That's not a handout.

 

An entitlement or other government benefit is sent to the recipient based on the person meeting certain criteria or eligibility requirements. The recipient of an entitlement is receiving other people's money that was collected and processed by the government.

[NLPRacing]

A tax cut allows you to keep more of your own money. That's not a handout.

 

An entitlement or other government benefit is sent to the recipient based on the person meeting certain criteria or eligibility requirements. The recipient of an entitlement is receiving other people's money that was collected and processed by the government.

 

So, all tax cuts are good and all entitlements are bad. Good to know.

[grbeck]

So, all tax cuts are good and all entitlements are bad. Good to know.

 

Please show me where I said that. I merely distinguished between the two, and showed how a tax cut is not a handout. The government allowing you to keep more of the money that was yours in the first place is not a "handout" as most people would understand the term.

Edited March 10, 2011 by grbeck

[NLPRacing]

Please show me where I said that. I merely distinguished between the two, and showed how a tax cut is not a handout. The government allowing you to keep more of the money that was yours in the first place is not a "handout" as most people would understand the term.

 

You didn't and I'm sorry for implying you did.

[grbeck]

You didn't and I'm sorry for implying you did.

 

No problem, and apology accepted. There is nothing inherently wrong with either tax cuts or entitlements. Government benefits are needed in a modern industrial society. Some people simply cannot support themselves (the mentally handicapped, the elderly), and others hit a rough streak and need a helping hand.

 

The key is knowing when "enough is enough."

[NLPRacing]

No problem, and apology accepted. There is nothing inherently wrong with either tax cuts or entitlements. Government benefits are needed in a modern industrial society. Some people simply cannot support themselves (the mentally handicapped, the elderly), and others hit a rough streak and need a helping hand.

 

The key is knowing when "enough is enough."

 

I can't disagree with a thing you said.

[RangerM]

I don't remember a direct quote from Pelosi using the actual word "handouts", do you have a source on that? Are you talking about her comment regarding unemployment benefits?

Here's your source.

 

She also included Food Stamps in her comment. Food Stamps are a handout.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SaqGj_rJvHY

[NLPRacing]

Here's your source.

 

She also included Food Stamps in her comment. Food Stamps are a handout.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SaqGj_rJvHY

 

Sorry, didn't hear the word "handouts". Just like Bush never said "torture", he said "enhanced interrogating techniques". Either way, the CBO agreed with Pelosi, so what's the big deal?

[Trimdingman]

So, all tax cuts are good and all entitlements are bad. Good to know.

 

Entitlements have to be paid for. If there is no money coming in, you can't pay for them. There is something called the Laffer Curve. It shows that sometimes if you raise taxes, you reduce revenue. At the far left of the curve, you have zero tax and zero revenue. At the far right, you have 100% tax, and also zero revenue. If tax is 100%, nobody is going to work. At some point between the two extremes, raising taxes reduces revenue. That is why, sometimes tax cuts are good. Tax cuts keep companies from leaving the country, reducing revenue, and increasing the cost of entitlements because of people getting laid off and going on the dole. If you raise corporate taxes, the money has to come from somewhere to pay for it. It will mean lower wages to the workers who work for the company, and higher prices for the goods that they produce. Who is the winner? The monkey wrench in this whole system is the government. They create problems and their "solutions" make the problems worse. Then they blame the Golden Goose; and they harass it and choke it until it either dies or flies away.

Edited March 11, 2011 by Trimdingman

[RangerM]

Sorry, didn't hear the word "handouts". Just like Bush never said "torture", he said "enhanced interrogating techniques". Either way, the CBO agreed with Pelosi, so what's the big deal?

No problem. Since we now know what you DIDN"T hear, can you tell us what you DID hear?

[NLPRacing]

No problem. Since we now know what you DIDN"T hear, can you tell us what you DID hear?

 

I heard foods stamps, unemployment payments, etc. I know you think of those as "handouts" and I know statements like "Didn't Pelosi say government handouts stimulate an economy?" are great talking points, but that doesn't change the fact that entitlements like food stamps & unemployment do spur the economy. I do think that abuse of these leads to complacency and laziness, but that's no reason to get rid of them entirely.

[retro-man]

This does not prove that the article is inaccurate. According to the article, government wages and entitlement checks account for 35 percent of all wages and salaries. Wages and salaries are not the same thing as gross domestic product.

 

......

Oh, that includes government wages. I thought the article said "handouts" account for 38% of all wages paid. If you term soldiers, firefighters, teachers, park rangers, etc. wages as "handouts", then I suppose the article's title is accurate. I went through the article a 2nd time, and a lot of what is says is true, I'll readily grant that.

[retro-man]

There is nothing inherently wrong with either tax cuts or entitlements. Government benefits are needed in a modern industrial society. Some people simply cannot support themselves (the mentally handicapped, the elderly), and others hit a rough streak and need a helping hand.

 

The key is knowing when "enough is enough."

True enough.

[grbeck]

Oh, that includes government wages. I thought the article said "handouts" account for 38% of all wages paid. If you term soldiers, firefighters, teachers, park rangers, etc. wages as "handouts", then I suppose the article's title is accurate. I went through the article a 2nd time, and a lot of what is says is true, I'll readily grant that.

 

I'm sure that the terms used by the writer were meant to inflame as much as anything else. Although I do believe that we need to look at total military spending. And while I appreciate the service of our troops, I have a problem with people who retire with a full military pension in their late 40s or early 50s, and then get another government job (at either the local, state or federal level) and proceed to collect a full military pension plus another government salary.

 

Plus, many state and local jobs offer pensions and very good benefits, and allow military personnel to bridge at least a portion of their military service for purposes of pension and benefits eligibility!

Edited March 11, 2011 by grbeck

[RangerM]

I heard foods stamps, unemployment payments, etc. I know you think of those as "handouts" and I know statements like "Didn't Pelosi say government handouts stimulate an economy?" are great talking points, but that doesn't change the fact that entitlements like food stamps & unemployment do spur the economy. I do think that abuse of these leads to complacency and laziness, but that's no reason to get rid of them entirely.

If Food Stamps doesn't fit your definition of a handout, I'm not sure what would.

 

Unemployment "insurance" is just that, insurance. Premiums are paid (by the worker) while the worker is employed, and benefits are paid (to the worker) when the worker has lost his job.

 

After the period the insurance was covered for, any further payments are not insurance; they are welfare.

 

BTW, I said "Didn't Pelosi........" I did not quote her. Call it what you want. It doesn't matter if the items she specified fit the definition of a handout.

 

Also btw, I didn't say that they should be dispensed with. But they should not be misrepresented (as not being welfare). Calling them stimulative is a slap in the face of those whose pockets were picked to pay them.

Edited March 11, 2011 by RangerM

[NLPRacing]

If Food Stamps doesn't fit your definition of a handout, I'm not sure what would.

 

Unemployment "insurance" is just that, insurance. Premiums are paid (by the worker) while the worker is employed, and benefits are paid (to the worker) when the worker has lost his job.

 

After the period the insurance was covered for, any further payments are not insurance; they are welfare.

 

BTW, I said "Didn't Pelosi........" I did not quote her. Call it what you want. It doesn't matter if the items she specified fit the definition of a handout.

 

Also btw, I didn't say that they should be dispensed with. But they should not be misrepresented (as not being welfare). Calling them stimulative is a slap in the face of those whose pockets were picked to pay them.

 

I didn't say you were quoting her, but you did insert your own definition to make a great talking point. They are welfare, I just don't consider welfare, when handled in which the way it's supposed to be, as a handout. I know you do and that's where we'll have to agree to disagree.

Edited March 11, 2011 by NLPRacing