If Mort Divine ruled the world

[EternalMetal]

As long as half of our budget goes towards ponzi scheme welfare that primarily helps useless eaters (the elderly), the deficit problem is never going away.

Honestly, what do you propose as a solution? The elderly are an issue because we cant just leave them to die without help. If you have ever had grandparents in your family who needed money and healthcare to stay alive, you will know that it is also a huge burden on families.

I just hate redistribution. It’s the government stealing and the poor receiving something for nothing that makes me mad.

Your oversimplification of socioeconomic programs, narrowminded viewpoint that only focuses on "people receiving something for nothing", and your complete lack of empathy for anybody but yourself make you a low IQ shitposter with an opinion that nobody should give a fuck about. Many of these programs may not exactly be doing what they are intended to, and require some overhauling, but you arent enough of a human being to have the conversation with.

 

[Dak]

Ive always been concerned about the deficit. I supported most of the stimulus because I was concerned primarily about the country surviving.

Well, it's certainly true that's the ridiculous rhetoric that went along with the salesjob on them, but it was completely bullshit. The country was never in danger of not surviving. The rich/bankers were in danger of losing bubble gains. Fortunately the "country" bailed them out with deficit spending and inflation.

And I don't buy any argument that a bigger tax cut for the wealthy will open the path to new jobs. There are so many other factors here that counteract that possibility.

I know I'm ideologically convicted in this regard, but the bigger amount on the tax refund isn't what unsettles me. What unsettles me is that this amount subtracts monies from elsewhere and sets the stage for massive overhauls, at which point a number of people will be left out to dry. If we choose to do nothing, then that's an ethical crisis. If we choose to do something, it'll likely cost us way more than that little extra amount we'd all be paying in taxes.

More money in the hands of consumers might not lead to more jobs, but at a minimum it would allocate funds more inline with true demand. The stage was set for massive overhauls by creating the ponzi schemes of SS, Medicare, Medicaid, etc. Hastening the reckoning isn't any more or less ethical than kicking the can so it gets worse later. To wit, I specifically disagree with the last sentence.

 

[Matt]

Elaborate on the broken system.

Our system is built for white, upper middle to higher class people. Those born into poverty stay there usually. There's a reason why the black/brown unemployment rate is significantly higher than that of white people and it isn't because those people are just lazier.

 

[Einherjar86]

Well, it's certainly true that's the ridiculous rhetoric that went along with the salesjob on them, but it was completely bullshit. The country was never in danger of not surviving. The rich/bankers were in danger of losing bubble gains. Fortunately the "country" bailed them out with deficit spending and inflation.



More money in the hands of consumers might not lead to more jobs, but at a minimum it would allocate funds more inline with true demand. The stage was set for massive overhauls by creating the ponzi schemes of SS, Medicare, Medicaid, etc. Hastening the reckoning isn't any more or less ethical than kicking the can so it gets worse later. To wit, I specifically disagree with the last sentence.

To wit, I disagree with the penultimate sentence.

 

[HamburgerBoy]

Our system is built for white, upper middle to higher class people. Those born into poverty stay there usually. There's a reason why the black/brown unemployment rate is significantly higher than that of white people and it isn't because those people are just lazier.

How is it built that way? That fails to explain successful non-white minority groups as well as generations of failure in many parts of white America. More tangible factors would seem to include:

1. A suppressed Hispanic median income due to continued import of illegal immigrants
2. High rates of felony convictions among blacks reducing their employability
3. Corrupt local leadership, particularly in black cities
4. Lack of interest in high-demand/well-paying jobs such as engineering and medicine, particularly among blacks

 

[HamburgerBoy]

Honestly, what do you propose as a solution? The elderly are an issue because we cant just leave them to die without help. If you have ever had grandparents in your family who needed money and healthcare to stay alive, you will know that it is also a huge burden on families.

Then let families shoulder that burden. If the luxury of social security and medicare putting grandma out of sight, out of mind is so wonderful, they should pay for it. If grandparents are so terrible that their own children would let them die, that's the fault of the grandparents. The elderly are the last group in America that deserves to be supported by government money.

 

[Dak]

Our system is built for white, upper middle to higher class people. Those born into poverty stay there usually. There's a reason why the black/brown unemployment rate is significantly higher than that of white people and it isn't because those people are just lazier.

https://www.budget.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/CRS Report - Welfare Spending The Largest Item In The Federal Budget.pdf

The results are staggering. CRS identified 83 overlapping federal welfare programs that together represented the single largest budget item in 2011—more than the nation spends on Social Security, Medicare, or national defense. The total amount spent on these 80-plus federal welfare programs amounts to roughly $1.03 trillion. Importantly, these figures solely refer to means-tested welfare benefits. They exclude entitlement programs to which people contribute (e.g., Social Security and Medicare).

You and Ein man. "The system is rigged". Well if this is what a rigged system against the poor looks like, then we know where we need to start cutting.

Edit: I'd actually start with the Fed first, but that's a cow so sacred it's unfathomable.

 

[Einherjar86]

https://www.budget.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/CRS Report - Welfare Spending The Largest Item In The Federal Budget.pdf

You and Ein man. "The system is rigged". Well if this is what a rigged system against the poor looks like, then we know where we need to start cutting.

Edit: I'd actually start with the Fed first, but that's a cow so sacred it's unfathomable.

You just linked a report from Jeff Sessions. You're seriously a Trump acolyte, just licking away at that man's faux-golden asshole.

You should read follow-ups on that report. But I doubt any of them would mean anything to you, since they were conducted by the crooked media.

 

[EternalMetal]

Then let families shoulder that burden. If the luxury of social security and medicare putting grandma out of sight, out of mind is so wonderful, they should pay for it. If grandparents are so terrible that their own children would let them die, that's the fault of the grandparents. The elderly are the last group in America that deserves to be supported by government money.

Most nursing homes cost in excess of $100k a year, which is excessive for anyone but those who are extremely wealthy (it also drains most retirement accounts years before people are ready to die). Most old people usually get to the point where they need 24/7 care, which usually cant be provided for by families properly because they have jobs and other responsibilities (let alone lack nursing training and other skills to properly care for them depending on their ailments). The idea of elder abuse is a problem these days because family units cannot afford to put the money, time, and/or effort into providing the needed care. I also disagree with your last statement. Our elderly citizens more often than not have put their time in working, contributing to the community, and were the backbone of our country in the past. They deserve the support of their communities if the need arises. What other group is more qualified for government aid? Some 30-something who has "back issues" and "cant find work"?

 

[Dak]

You just linked a report from Jeff Sessions. You're seriously a Trump acolyte, just licking away at that man's faux-golden asshole.

You should read follow-ups on that report. But I doubt any of them would mean anything to you, since they were conducted by the crooked media.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blog..._blog.html?tid=a_mcntx&utm_term=.76b9d4478cd2

Nothing in here clearly disputes the findings. He used nonpartisan data and then openly divided it between programs requiring contributions (ponzi schemes themselves, still taking money from the poorer young to give to the more well off old), and those that do not require contributions and are means-tested. The article takes issue with the inclusion of Medicaid for no other reason than because it covers medical services, and as such "doesn't raise income levels". You were taking issue with tautologies earlier, well there is one.

I specifically don't like Session's drug war stance, but that has nothing to do with this.

 

[Einherjar86]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blog...?tid=a_mcntx&utm_term=.7d097327f7e7#pagebreak

 

[HamburgerBoy]

Most nursing homes cost in excess of $100k a year, which is excessive for anyone but those who are extremely wealthy (it also drains most retirement accounts years before people are ready to die). Most old people usually get to the point where they need 24/7 care, which usually cant be provided for by families properly because they have jobs and other responsibilities (let alone lack nursing training and other skills to properly care for them depending on their ailments). The idea of elder abuse is a problem these days because family units cannot afford to put the money, time, and/or effort into providing the needed care. I also disagree with your last statement. Our elderly citizens more often than not have put their time in working, contributing to the community, and were the backbone of our country in the past. They deserve the support of their communities if the need arises. What other group is more qualified for government aid? Some 30-something who has "back issues" and "cant find work"?

Does it cost 100k a year to let grandma live with you? If no, then it's a luxury, not a necessity.

The elderly have the privilege of an illusion of earning it. The average lifetime of tax dollars contributed to the system do not come close to the amount that they end up taking back out. Social Security and Medicare payroll taxes required constant hikes until the 90s when they reached a politically inconvenient threshold and preferred to just allow the systems to simply accrue a deficit. If they contributed so much to the community, it should have been reflected in their earnings or savings.

Children are the most qualified since they lack most rights that adults possess, and as a result are quite helpless. They also are the group with the most potential in life and the most malleable minds. The elderly are merely the shell that remains after all their potential has been drained.

 

[CiG]

Our system is built for white, upper middle to higher class people. Those born into poverty stay there usually. There's a reason why the black/brown unemployment rate is significantly higher than that of white people and it isn't because those people are just lazier.

How is it built that way? That fails to explain successful non-white minority groups as well as generations of failure in many parts of white America. More tangible factors would seem to include:

1. A suppressed Hispanic median income due to continued import of illegal immigrants
2. High rates of felony convictions among blacks reducing their employability
3. Corrupt local leadership, particularly in black cities
4. Lack of interest in high-demand/well-paying jobs such as engineering and medicine, particularly among blacks

If all that's standing in the way of minorities (besides the ones already doing amazingly well like most Asians and Jews as well as many African immigrants) is that a bigoted manager won't hire anybody with "Jamal Johnson" at the top of their résumé then they should just change their name to "Bjorn Eriksson" and enjoy some of that sweet sweet white privilege.

 

[TechnicalBarbarity]

I’m fully aware of that but don’t think we should use government force on the unwilling (rich and middle class taxpayers) to fix it

Those that want to help them should do it out of their own pocket and free will

That won’t cover everybody who needs help but life’s tough

best post from the last 2 pages

 

[rms]

@Dak

https://www.washingtonpost.com/nati...cbb62019393_story.html?utm_term=.76fe57b594dd

 

[Einherjar86]

Does it cost 100k a year to let grandma live with you? If no, then it's a luxury, not a necessity.

The elderly have the privilege of an illusion of earning it. The average lifetime of tax dollars contributed to the system do not come close to the amount that they end up taking back out. Social Security and Medicare payroll taxes required constant hikes until the 90s when they reached a politically inconvenient threshold and preferred to just allow the systems to simply accrue a deficit. If they contributed so much to the community, it should have been reflected in their earnings or savings.

None of this is sensible or believable.

The cost of "letting grandma live with you" may not be reflected in $100,00 per year for groceries and other necessities, but it might necessitate a different living arrangement, which would mostly likely mean an increase in rent, which might mean that the family needs to work more to pay rent, which means they wouldn't be around to take care of their elderly family member.

Additionally, "the amount of tax dollars contributed to the system do[es] not come close to the amount they end up taking back out" because many of them don't make enough money to pay that much in taxes, which also means they don't end up with enough personal savings later on. This doesn't mean they haven't contributed to society. Working a decent, socially contributing job that pays very little might not afford someone enough savings to make the transition into a nursing facility. There's no reason to assume that legitimate contributions to society automatically result in enough money to pay for elder care.

 

[Dak]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blog...?tid=a_mcntx&utm_term=.7d097327f7e7#pagebreak

I saw that article, but that's a rebuttal of a chart presented in a hearing related to household spending, rather than simply the gross expenditure, which was what my link referred to. I understand there are many more difficulties in determining things like household spending, not the least of which is determining the number of "households". Again, the only notable disagreement to the writeup I linked was at the inclusion of Medicaid, as it "isn't income". I reject that as irrelevant. It may rightly be considered the "benefits" side of a "pay and benefits" package for merely existing in a mostly or entirely unproductive state in America (for whatever reasons that state of low or no productivity might be). Ironically, this is the same sort of issue ignorant rightwingers stumble over when looking at military pay. Military pay is much higher now than in the past, but even before and now, the DoD pay chart fails to capture a significant amount of benefits that are not paid in income, but instead save that paid income for other expenses - most notably the provided housing, food cost, and medical coverage. This "benefits" half of the pay and benefits package, at lower ranks, may exceed the pay side. Nevermind access to free amenities like gyms, pools, etc.

@Dak
https://www.washingtonpost.com/nati...cbb62019393_story.html?utm_term=.76fe57b594dd

Pretty torn on this issue on several levels, all the way down to the reversal on the water bottle ban. I think that preserving many park spaces is a valuable enterprise, but that it shouldn't be an endeavor done at the Federal level whatsoever. I am concerned that this doesn't appear even like a half measure in that direction though, so much as simply hanging it out to dry. I'm fine with that in some areas, as bureaucracies often create their own work. The safe maintenance of physical spaces though is not something that can just be back-burnered. Hand it off to the states, or take proper ownership of it.

 

[HamburgerBoy]

None of this is sensible or believable.

The cost of "letting grandma live with you" may not be reflected in $100,00 per year for groceries and other necessities, but it might necessitate a different living arrangement, which would mostly likely mean an increase in rent, which might mean that the family needs to work more to pay rent, which means they wouldn't be around to take care of their elderly family member.

Additionally, "the amount of tax dollars contributed to the system do[es] not come close to the amount they end up taking back out" because many of them don't make enough money to pay that much in taxes, which also means they don't end up with enough personal savings later on. This doesn't mean they haven't contributed to society. Working a decent, socially contributing job that pays very little might not afford someone enough savings to make the transition into a nursing facility. There's no reason to assume that legitimate contributions to society automatically result in enough money to pay for elder care.

lmao, you seriously think the difference in renting a slightly larger home with one guest room is going to add 100k/yr to a family budget? Back a couple generations when it was common to have grandparents living with you, everyone apparently earned enough to shoulder that 100k/yr burden? In Mediterranean cultures where it's still common to have multi-generational family units, are they all somehow making more than 100k/yr despite having far lower reported median income numbers than the USA? Completely absurd.

It pretty much does. A person working minimum wage for their entire life with no savings has fucked up severely somewhere. These are people that never made a net contribution to society. Pitching in a quarter and taking out a dollar isn't a contribution.

 

[Dak]

lmao, you seriously think the difference in renting a slightly larger home with one guest room is going to add 100k/yr to a family budget? Back a couple generations when it was common to have grandparents living with you, everyone apparently earned enough to shoulder that 100k/yr burden? In Mediterranean cultures where it's still common to have multi-generational family units, are they all somehow making more than 100k/yr despite having far lower reported median income numbers than the USA? Completely absurd.

It pretty much does. A person working minimum wage for their entire life with no savings has fucked up severely somewhere. These are people that never made a net contribution to society. Pitching in a quarter and taking out a dollar isn't a contribution.

I would point out that real estate prices are different in different places and eras. Where Ein lives, it might cost an extra 100k. However, no one is making everyone live in the US North East, and most people don't. But those people should be planning to exit places like that. It's not on all of society that some people, and their families, won't take any ownership of their issues.

 

[Einherjar86]

lmao, you seriously think the difference in renting a slightly larger home with one guest room is going to add 100k/yr to a family budget? Back a couple generations when it was common to have grandparents living with you, everyone apparently earned enough to shoulder that 100k/yr burden? In Mediterranean cultures where it's still common to have multi-generational family units, are they all somehow making more than 100k/yr despite having far lower reported median income numbers than the USA? Completely absurd.

No, I don't think that. And if you read what I wrote, it isn't at all what I was saying.