Support money for the "Welfare State," buy a gas hog. Originally Posted by slim deezGas in Austin at $1.81 for regular, $2.08 for premium. I was in N.Y. over the summer and paid $4.45 a gallon in Southampton.
- SpeedRacerXXX
- 01-07-2015, 06:23 AM
- Yssup Rider
- 01-07-2015, 11:39 AM
If anybody would know about the WELFARE STATE, it would be you, slim.
- IIFFOFRDB
- 01-07-2015, 07:17 PM
Our wallets are long, gone... Read the comments or don't... fuckers
http://www.nationalreview.com/articl...michael-tanner
The Welfare State
AUGUST 27, 2014 4:38 AM
How long can a shrinking number of taxpayers support a growing number of beneficiaries?
By Michael Tanner
One hundred ten million! That’s how many Americans now live in households that receive some form of means-tested welfare benefit from the federal government. According to a report from the Census Bureau released last week, that’s the highest absolute number in American history, and it represents 35.4 percent of the American population. Think about it — more than one out of every three Americans live in households that are now on welfare. Looked at another way, America’s welfare state now has nearly three times the population of the largest actual state.
Because many of these households include more than one person, the number of individual households is smaller, but still a record – roughly 33.5 million, more than a quarter of the country’s households. Worse, 10.5 million households receive benefits from three or more separate programs.
While liberals would undoubtedly like to blame this on the bad economy, the welfare rolls have actually grown by nearly 4 million households since the end of the recession. Welfare is rising even as unemployment declines.
On the other hand, the growing welfare caseload cannot be blamed solely on President Obama. True, the number of people on welfare has increased by 12.5 million since he took office. But welfare also increased during the Bush administration: The proportion of households receiving SNAP (food stamps), TANF (Temporary Assistance to Needy Families), or SSI (Supplemental Security Income for the disabled) increased 36 percent during his presidency.
And none of these numbers include the middle-class social-welfare programs like Medicare and Social Security. Counting these programs, more than 153 million Americans, nearly half the population (49.5 percent), are living in households now dependent on government for a significant portion of their income.
Of course seniors may object to linking entitlement programs like Social Security and Medicare with welfare programs, since they paid payroll taxes that they were told financed those programs. But, in reality, payroll taxes are simply taxes like any other form of tax and are unrelated to benefits. As the Supreme Court held in Helvering v. Davis (1937), “The proceeds of both [the employer and employee] taxes are to be paid into the Treasury like internal revenue generally, and are not earmarked in any way.”
Besides, if you counted taxes paid into the system, today’s seniors get back far more than they ever contributed. For example, a two-earner middle-income couple will pay roughly $150,000 in Medicare taxes over their working lifetimes. While that is a great deal of money, that family can also expect to receive more than $350,000 in benefits. Young people may end up net losers when it comes to Social Security, but today’s retirees can expect to be big winners.
There are also some 2.76 million non-military federal employees, and millions more who depend on government contracts. Nor should we forget government subsidies paid to corporations, farmers, and others.
According to calculations by Harvard’s Greg Mankiw, based on data from the Office of Management and Budget, roughly 60 percent of Americans receive more in government benefits than they pay in federal taxes. A Tax Foundation study suggests that as many as 70 percent of Americans are net recipients of government largesse. Those numbers will only grow worse in the future.
Increasingly, the welfare state is us.
These numbers should scare us for two reasons. A healthy economy cannot realistically depend on an ever-shrinking number of people to produce the wealth that will be distributed to the larger population. As Margaret Thatcher reputedly said about the problem facing modern welfare states, eventually they “always run out of other people’s money.”
Yet, it should also be clear that the more people there are who depend on government programs, the harder it becomes to cut those programs. That is not to say that the people on those programs are freeloaders or refuse to take responsibility for their lives. But it does mean that they have a vested interest in maintaining those programs. Simply look at what is happening in European countries today. Despite the fact that their welfare states have become unaffordable, any attempt to trim benefits leads to massive resistance.
Have we reached that tipping point yet? No, but we may be getting perilously close.
http://www.nationalreview.com/articl...michael-tanner
The Welfare State
AUGUST 27, 2014 4:38 AM
How long can a shrinking number of taxpayers support a growing number of beneficiaries?
By Michael Tanner
One hundred ten million! That’s how many Americans now live in households that receive some form of means-tested welfare benefit from the federal government. According to a report from the Census Bureau released last week, that’s the highest absolute number in American history, and it represents 35.4 percent of the American population. Think about it — more than one out of every three Americans live in households that are now on welfare. Looked at another way, America’s welfare state now has nearly three times the population of the largest actual state.
Because many of these households include more than one person, the number of individual households is smaller, but still a record – roughly 33.5 million, more than a quarter of the country’s households. Worse, 10.5 million households receive benefits from three or more separate programs.
While liberals would undoubtedly like to blame this on the bad economy, the welfare rolls have actually grown by nearly 4 million households since the end of the recession. Welfare is rising even as unemployment declines.
On the other hand, the growing welfare caseload cannot be blamed solely on President Obama. True, the number of people on welfare has increased by 12.5 million since he took office. But welfare also increased during the Bush administration: The proportion of households receiving SNAP (food stamps), TANF (Temporary Assistance to Needy Families), or SSI (Supplemental Security Income for the disabled) increased 36 percent during his presidency.
And none of these numbers include the middle-class social-welfare programs like Medicare and Social Security. Counting these programs, more than 153 million Americans, nearly half the population (49.5 percent), are living in households now dependent on government for a significant portion of their income.
Of course seniors may object to linking entitlement programs like Social Security and Medicare with welfare programs, since they paid payroll taxes that they were told financed those programs. But, in reality, payroll taxes are simply taxes like any other form of tax and are unrelated to benefits. As the Supreme Court held in Helvering v. Davis (1937), “The proceeds of both [the employer and employee] taxes are to be paid into the Treasury like internal revenue generally, and are not earmarked in any way.”
Besides, if you counted taxes paid into the system, today’s seniors get back far more than they ever contributed. For example, a two-earner middle-income couple will pay roughly $150,000 in Medicare taxes over their working lifetimes. While that is a great deal of money, that family can also expect to receive more than $350,000 in benefits. Young people may end up net losers when it comes to Social Security, but today’s retirees can expect to be big winners.
There are also some 2.76 million non-military federal employees, and millions more who depend on government contracts. Nor should we forget government subsidies paid to corporations, farmers, and others.
According to calculations by Harvard’s Greg Mankiw, based on data from the Office of Management and Budget, roughly 60 percent of Americans receive more in government benefits than they pay in federal taxes. A Tax Foundation study suggests that as many as 70 percent of Americans are net recipients of government largesse. Those numbers will only grow worse in the future.
Increasingly, the welfare state is us.
These numbers should scare us for two reasons. A healthy economy cannot realistically depend on an ever-shrinking number of people to produce the wealth that will be distributed to the larger population. As Margaret Thatcher reputedly said about the problem facing modern welfare states, eventually they “always run out of other people’s money.”
Yet, it should also be clear that the more people there are who depend on government programs, the harder it becomes to cut those programs. That is not to say that the people on those programs are freeloaders or refuse to take responsibility for their lives. But it does mean that they have a vested interest in maintaining those programs. Simply look at what is happening in European countries today. Despite the fact that their welfare states have become unaffordable, any attempt to trim benefits leads to massive resistance.
Have we reached that tipping point yet? No, but we may be getting perilously close.
- Yssup Rider
- 01-08-2015, 11:06 AM
READ THE STORY OR NOT, SLOBBRIN!
You're willing to go to the mat based on data from a "Harvard elitist," as you GED dropouts like to call them.
Further, you obviously agree that this isn't necessarily Obama's fault.
Read the comments? Yeah, just like read the comments here on ECCIE. I didn't, but wouldn't be surprised to find comments containing erudite terms like "fuckers," "Ozombies" and "cum gobbling."
You post it. You own it.
Dipshit!
On the other hand, the growing welfare caseload cannot be blamed solely on President Obama. True, the number of people on welfare has increased by 12.5 million since he took office. But welfare also increased during the Bush administration: The proportion of households receiving SNAP (food stamps), TANF (Temporary Assistance to Needy Families), or SSI (Supplemental Security Income for the disabled) increased 36 percent during his presidency.Obviously you don't read your own bullshit, SLOBBRIN. You're describing YOURSELF! LMAO!
And none of these numbers include the middle-class social-welfare programs like Medicare and Social Security. Counting these programs, more than 153 million Americans, nearly half the population (49.5 percent), are living in households now dependent on government for a significant portion of their income.
Of course seniors may object to linking entitlement programs like Social Security and Medicare with welfare programs, since they paid payroll taxes that they were told financed those programs. But, in reality, payroll taxes are simply taxes like any other form of tax and are unrelated to benefits. As the Supreme Court held in Helvering v. Davis (1937), “The proceeds of both [the employer and employee] taxes are to be paid into the Treasury like internal revenue generally, and are not earmarked in any way.”
...
There are also some 2.76 million non-military federal employees, and millions more who depend on government contracts. Nor should we forget government subsidies paid to corporations, farmers, and others.
According to calculations by Harvard’s Greg Mankiw, based on data from the Office of Management and Budget, roughly 60 percent of Americans receive more in government benefits than they pay in federal taxes. A Tax Foundation study suggests that as many as 70 percent of Americans are net recipients of government largesse. Those numbers will only grow worse in the future.
Increasingly, the welfare state is us. Originally Posted by IIFFOFRDB
You're willing to go to the mat based on data from a "Harvard elitist," as you GED dropouts like to call them.
Further, you obviously agree that this isn't necessarily Obama's fault.
Read the comments? Yeah, just like read the comments here on ECCIE. I didn't, but wouldn't be surprised to find comments containing erudite terms like "fuckers," "Ozombies" and "cum gobbling."
You post it. You own it.
Dipshit!
- SpeedRacerXXX
- 01-09-2015, 06:48 AM
Our wallets are long, gone...What bullshit. I paid into Social Security in 45 years, and counting, of working. I paid in a total of $145,000. My company paid in $149,000. That's $294,000. Now if I had been able to invest that money from day 1 and continued to invest it for 45 years, even at the rate of a savings account, what would it be today? A hell of a lot more than $350,000. And this is not taking into account my wife's payments into Social Security. The government had my money. If they chose to put it into a general account instead of a specific account earmarked for my future payments, and did not invest it, that is their problem today.
The Welfare State
And none of these numbers include the middle-class social-welfare programs like Medicare and Social Security. Counting these programs, more than 153 million Americans, nearly half the population (49.5 percent), are living in households now dependent on government for a significant portion of their income.
Of course seniors may object to linking entitlement programs like Social Security and Medicare with welfare programs, since they paid payroll taxes that they were told financed those programs. But, in reality, payroll taxes are simply taxes like any other form of tax and are unrelated to benefits. As the Supreme Court held in Helvering v. Davis (1937), “The proceeds of both [the employer and employee] taxes are to be paid into the Treasury like internal revenue generally, and are not earmarked in any way.”
Besides, if you counted taxes paid into the system,today’s seniors get back far more than they ever contributed. For example, a two-earner middle-income couple will pay roughly $150,000 in Medicare taxes over their working lifetimes. While that is a great deal of money, that family can also expect to receive more than $350,000 in benefits. Young people may end up net losers when it comes to Social Security, but today’s retirees can expect to be big winners.
Originally Posted by IIFFOFRDB
Yes, I depend on Social Security for a major part of my retirement income, but it is MY money. It is NOT welfare, or anything close to it.
Plus the author keeps flip-flopping back between "Medicare" and "Social Security" which are 2 different subjects -- related but different. Very few 2 earner, middle-class families will pay over $150,000 in Medicare taxes based on my calculations. If a couple earned $200,000 for 40 years and was taxed for Medicare at the current rate of 1.45% of earnings, it would come out to a total contribution of $116,000. And how many of us, probably most of whom are considered "middle-class" are making $200k as a 2 earner family from the first day of work?
Yes, if I live a long life I will out-live the money I, and my company, paid into Social Security. But to call it "welfare"? Total bullshit.
- LexusLover
- 01-09-2015, 07:05 AM
There is no "Obama tax hike." Originally Posted by Yssup RiderYou can keep your doctor, if you like your doctor.
You can keep your insurance, if you like it.
Those people were killed because of a video.
Isis are just a bunch of junior varsity.
No boots on the ground.
Blah, blah, blah.
Pssstttt..... YOUR MAN IN THE WHITE HOUSE ... just the other day "cautioned" everyone that gasoline will not stay cheap for very long!!!! .... Now,....why would the cost of a gallon of gasoline suddenly (SUDDENLY) increase?
Or ... why would he say that?
Did you get a grant this year for your health care coverage?
Or did you have to claim last years grant on your 2014 taxes?
- gnadfly
- 01-09-2015, 08:02 AM
So won't the tax revenue sky rocket now that gasoline is basically cut in half? True more people will be driving and theoretically that will lead to more road wear but in Texas road maintenance isn't that big of an issue.
- LexusLover
- 01-09-2015, 08:27 AM
- Yssup Rider
- 01-09-2015, 09:19 AM
In two quick posts, LLIdiot has cemented his position as the demented elder statesman of the Idiot Klan, errr, KLAN!
Link to the bill or order that increases the federal gas tax, LLIdiot.
Link to the bill or order that increases the federal gas tax, LLIdiot.
- LexusLover
- 01-09-2015, 09:57 AM
- LexusLover
- 01-09-2015, 09:59 AM
Link to the bill or order that increases the federal gas tax,.... Originally Posted by Yssup RiderYou link where I posted there IS A BILL OR ORDER!!!!
I didn't!!!!!
You and WTF keep making up shit claiming people post it. Is that the only way you can prevail in a conversation .... changing what you each say and what others say?
Must be frustrating to be so incompetent for you both. Does it make you feel inferior?
- i'va biggen
- 01-09-2015, 07:11 PM
- Guest040616
- 01-09-2015, 07:14 PM
"Pssstttt..... YOUR MAN IN THE WHITE HOUSE" ... left behind the perpetrator of 9/11, along with two unfinished and unfunded wars.
Pssstttt..... YOUR MAN IN THE WHITE HOUSE ... Originally Posted by LexusLover
And if that was not enough, "Pssstttt.... YOUR MAN IN THE WHITE HOUSE" also left behind the worst economic disaster in America since The Great Depression.
It is little wonder that "Pssstttt..... YOUR MAN IN THE WHITE HOUSE" ... (AKA The Little Shrubbie) is still known as "The Most Unpopular (and Incompetent) President in Modern US History."
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com...odern-history/
- Yssup Rider
- 01-09-2015, 09:08 PM
"Pssstttt..... YOUR MAN IN THE WHITE HOUSE" ... left behind the perpetrator of 9/11, along with two unfinished and unfunded wars.
And if that was not enough, "Pssstttt.... YOUR MAN IN THE WHITE HOUSE" also left behind the worst economic disaster in America since The Great Depression.
It is little wonder that "Pssstttt..... YOUR MAN IN THE WHITE HOUSE" ... (AKA The Little Shrubbie) is still known as "The Most Unpopular (and Incompetent) President in Modern US History."
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com...odern-history/ Originally Posted by bigtex
- LexusLover
- 01-10-2015, 04:16 AM