Hard Work or Liberalism?

[PoliticalChic]

Hard Work or Liberalism?


sad to say...
but we may have crossed that point where we have
too many in the cart being pulled by too few

Sadly, I have no disagreement with your view.

As shown in the thread, the view of the Founders has been discarded in favor of a materialist view, a Marxist view, of the absurd idea that government should, or could, make certain that everyone has the same outcome, no matter their efforts or ability.

It is simply too attractive to those who believe they are entitled to what others have earned.


1. Sociologist Helmut Schoeck’s observation: “Since the end of the Second World War, however, a new ‘ethic’ has come into being, according to which the envious man is perfectly acceptable. Progressively fewer individuals and groups are ashamed of their envy, but instead make out that its existence in their temperaments axiomatically proves the existence of ‘social injustice,’ which must be eliminated for their benefit.” Helmut Schoeck, “Envy: A Theory of Social Behavior,” p. 179

a. Who are the rich that are so envied, and reviled?
Entrepreneurs, small businessmen, corporate executives, doctors, lawyers, just plain Americans…not royalty. The reason to deprive them of rewards with no tangible benefits to oneself: envy.

 

[Neotrotsky]

Historically, it does seem the fate of most great societies that they eventually collapse
In this case as in the others, we know why...

 

[PoliticalChic]

Historically, it does seem the fate of most great societies that they eventually collapse
In this case as in the others, we know why...

Historically, it does seem the fate of most great societies that they eventually collapse
In this case as in the others, we know why...

There is an evil most despicable in those elites who are willing to end this noble experiment in self-governing simply to increase their own power.

But the willingness to agree to same by the majority of the electorate still amazes.


Dante has a special ring in Hell for each.

 

[PoliticalChic]

15. One rather dramatic representation of how far we've strayed from the dreams of the Founders can be seen in the spending in which the federal government engages.


" In fiscal year 2013, the United States’ federal government spent $3.8 trillion after adjusting for all its “off budget” outlays. ... more than $31,000 per American household.

Of that amount, $2.56 trillion [67.4%] was spent on one thing: human resources.That is the government’s innocuous term for the portion of the budget also known as “mandatory spending,” or social programs.


It is called mandatory spending because it is the one budget category that by law the government can’t set a limit on. ... entirely determined by how many people claim the various human resource benefits.

[So....if we have a government that teaches the public to beg for more, it essentially redistributes wealth from earners to takers.]


Americans know these benefits as Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security. And yes, they are benefits. People pay into them, but they get out far more than they put in." Dependent - theTrumpet.com




More than they pay in? You betcha'!

Here's an example:

a. Ida May Fuller, the first person to begin receiving Social Security benefits, in January, 1940, when she was 65- she lived to be 100. “…worked for three years under the Social Security program. The accumulated taxes on her salary during those three years was a total of $24.75. Her initial monthly check was $22.54. During her lifetime she collected a total of $22,888.92 in Social Security benefits.” Social Security History

 

[Decus]

I appreciate your posts PC.

A recent piece of social research touched on a factor which may influence how successful a child will be in later life. The study is shocking in that it states that children should have responsibilities and duties such as chores. It points to the fact that having chores in the house teaches a child self-reliance and responsibility.

I thought the ideas of self-reliance and responsibility were long dead concepts but I guess you have to kill the concept of success first - which seems to be the present trend.

self-reliance + responsibility = increased chance of success.....go figure.

News of the study here:

http://7online.com/family/study-points-to-chores-as-a-measure-for-childrens-future-success/559859/

 

[PoliticalChic]

"Obamacare spending really only kicked in for the first time in 2014. But Obamacare spending alone is expected to grow the major entitlement budget by 44 percent over the next decade. All in all, the total spending increase due to Medicare, Medicaid, Obamacare, Social Security and interest on the debt over the next decade is 85 percent."
The Breakdown of Where Your Tax Dollars Go

 

[PoliticalChic]

16. While the government spent $3.8 billion in 2013, two-thirds on social programs, it actually collected $3.22 trillion.....which means it borrowed $580 billion or so.....

" That means that these social programs actually consume almost 80 percent of all non-borrowed money. Four dollars out of five that Americans pay in taxes goes to pay for these programs. That leaves only 20 percent to coverevery other function of government." Dependent - theTrumpet.com



Interest on the money borrowed to cover socialist....that is the accurate term....expenditures is about $0.247 trillion.

That's 6.5% of the government's spending......or almost 7.7% of the money it collects.


Know why that interest amount isn't even higher? Because the Federal Reserve keeps interest low.

17. " Several Credit rating agencies around the world have downgraded their credit ratings of the U.S. federal government, including Standard & Poor's(S&P) which reduced the country's rating from AAA (outstanding) to AA+ (excellent) on August 5, 2011..... The 2011 S&P downgrade was the first time the government was given a rating below AAA. S&P had announced a negative outlook on the AAA rating in April 2011. The downgrade to AA+ occurred four days after the112th United States Congress voted to raise the debt ceiling...

Fitch Ratings on March 21, 2014 upgraded its outlook for the U.S. AAA credit rating, removing the nation from a downgrade watch after politicians put off another debt limit battle until next year. The company, one of three major credit rating firms, changed the outlook for the rating to stable from a negative watch put in place in October."
United States federal government credit-rating downgrades - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia



A. The big fear is that if no [austerity] action is taken, investors might eventually punish the US for its fiscal laxity. That would raise borrowing costs for businesses and consumers, force severe austerity measures and risk social unrest. Not only America’s triple-A credit rating could be threatened; some point to consequences in foreign affairs and defence as well.

Mike Mullen, chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, last year warned that the debt pile could limit the flexibility of the US in funding its military – in his eyes the “most significant threat to our national security”.
- http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/31dbce8a-1f52-11e0-8c1c-00144feab49a.html#ixzz1B38YpCF9



No....the real threat is that Liberalism has infantilized the citizenry, leaving us as a nation populated by pajama-boy hipsters who live for the next hand-out.

 

[PoliticalChic]

So....three fourths of government expenditures are for socialist causes, either designed to make life easier....or to accrue votes, and projections after ObamaCare will move that to 80%.

So....you object to the federal government using your money for programs beyond the enumerated powers in the Constitution????

But.....it's to help the poor!!!



18. Our hand-wringing pals, the ones who support Liberal/Progressive candidates, cry for the poor.....and feel better about themselves. They want the government to dole out all sorts of entitlements.

Three things to keep in mind

a. conservatives actually give more, by every metric, than Liberals.

b. Liberals and their supporters refuse to acknowledge the real meaning of 'poor:' no food, no home, no heat. With that definition, there are hardly any poor.

c. The 'poor' have more spendable money than many who work for a living, and support socialist expenditures:

"In 2012, the Heritage Foundation estimated how much assistance the average welfare recipient received. It found that on average, Americans who depend on federal assistance got the equivalent of $32,748 in annual benefits. That was more than the average American worker makes in a year. The median net wage in America in 2013 was $28,031." Dependent - theTrumpet.com

Startin' to feel like a sucker?




19. “In Entitlement America, The Head Of A Household Of Four Making Minimum Wage Has More Disposable Income Than A Family Making $60,000 A Year.” In it we merely explained what has become the painful reality in America: for increasingly more it is now more lucrative – in the form of actual disposable income – to sit, do nothing, and collect various welfare entitlements, than to work.

This is graphically, and very painfully confirmed, in the below chart from Gary Alexander, Secretary of Public Welfare, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania (a state best known for its broke capital Harrisburg). As quantified and explained by Alexander, “the single mom is better off earning gross income of $29,000 with $57,327 in net income & benefits than to earn gross income of $69,000 with net income and benefits of $57,045.“
Poverty pays better than middle-class employment Human Events


a. You can do as well working one week a month at minimum wage as you can working $60,000-a-year, full-time, high-stress job.

In Entitlement America The Head Of A Household Of Four Making Minimum Wage Has More Disposable Income Than A Family Making 60 000 A Year Zero Hedge


Think politicians don't know this?

Welfare is simply a bribe given for the 'poor's' vote.



There is a simple solution: dump Liberalism, and demand responsibility and hard work!

 

[PoliticalChic]

On Dec. 7, 2012, liberal New York Times columnist Nicholas Kristof offered an unexpected concession:
“This is painful for a liberal to admit, but … America’s safety net can sometimes entangle people in a soul-crushing dependency. Our poverty programs do rescue many people, but other times they backfire.”

 

[PoliticalChic]

Dependence 1983 vs. 2012


The America of Barack Obama

Federal SSI 1.4% to 6.6 %, 471%increase


Women, Infants, Children....1.1% to 7.3%, 663% increase


Medicare.... 11.9% to 15.6%, 131% increase


Food Stamps.... 8.3% to 16.5%, 198% increase


Social Security....14.1% to 16.7%, 118% increase


Medicaid..... 7.8% to 26.9%, 344% increase


Means tested programs.....18.8% to 35.4%, 188% increase


Receiving Benefits, general....29.6% to 49.5%, 167% increase
Living on Triple-Cr me Gourmet Government Cheese - theTrumpet.com

 

[PoliticalChic]

A while back, some Liberal was claiming that food stamps couldn't be used for
'alcohol, cigarettes, pharmaceuticals, cooked food, pet food, fuel, toiletries or anything else.'

What a fool.


"One act of fraud that’s as easy to commit as it is difficult to catch is food stamp trafficking. Most families enrolled inSNAPreceive $300 to $500 per month in benefits. The program distributes these funds in the form of EBT cards. The cards look and function like debit cards, except that the allotted funds only work to buy uncooked staple foods to be eaten at home. The cards won’t allow cash withdrawals or purchase of alcohol, cigarettes, pharmaceuticals, cooked food, pet food, fuel, toiletries or anything else.

With food stamp trafficking, a person receiving food assistance offers to buy another individual’s groceries with the funds on his or her card in exchange for cash. To give the other person extra incentive, the cardholder usually offers to buy $2 worth of groceries for each dollar of cash. Many shoppers pounce on the opportunity to give the cardholder a $20 bill in exchange for $40 worth of groceries. Cash in hand, the welfare recipient now buys whatever he wants: alcohol, cigarettes, restaurant meals, recreation—all thanks to taxpayer money.

It is also common for convenience store workers to buy an entire EBT card from a welfare recipient at a fraction of the value. All EBT purchases are tax-free, so store owners can use the cards to buy food to stock their shelves tax-free. Or he can create bogus grocery purchases to channel the EBT funds into his store’s bank account. A few hundred dollars here and there adds up fast for some store owners. In 2012, brothers who owned a pair of convenience stores in Louisiana were convicted of defrauding SNAP of $2.7 million.


Watchdog.org says that in many parts of the country, food stamp trafficking is so prevalent that the EBT cards have become “street currency.” The trafficking is not traceable, and it is rare to catch perpetrators, so it isn’t factored into the reported fraud rates for SNAP.


The epic scale of welfare fraud is also prophetically significant because it provides a glimpse of how deeply woven immorality and lawlessness are in the fabric of modern American society. The nation is suffering a broadscale breakdown of morality, strength of families, and individual responsibility. The history of such civilizations as the ancient Greeks and the Romans shows that such breakdowns bring empires to their knees"
Living on Triple-Cr me Gourmet Government Cheese - theTrumpet.com



"...immorality and lawlessness..." thanks to Liberal policies.

 

[Abishai100]

Anchorman Diamondbacks



Modern problems require creative thinking.

Yesterday's problems included how to coordinate Scotland Yard or negotiate the significance of the Christian Crusades within the context of the exploring Moors.

Today's problems include how to deal with urbanization mindsets that foster sexually promiscuous young American women intentionally having unprotected daredevil sex with unwitting males who do not know that they are infected with AIDS.

Why don't people appreciate the Salvation Army? We need that kind of social coordination re-orientation.

I'm convinced that the NSA even monitors how many water-guns Toys 'R Us sells each Christmas, just to keep tabs on the 'accessibility' of American culture analysis by foreign subversive elements (i.e., propaganda terrorists).

A kid walked up to me the other day at a comic book store I was browsing and said, "Check out this Green Arrow (DC Comics) issue. Ya know...Green Arrow is America's version of Robin Hood!" I thought he was being idealistic (and immature), but as I reached for my American Express card and thought about the countless 'illegal immigrant refugees' wandering the streets of southern California as they cross-over from Tijuana, Mexico, I considered the spooky reality that America really does need a new Robin Hood.

President Obama needs to be sure that his assessment of modern social healthcare needs is coordinated with actual economics data about 'populism prescriptions.'

I find that BBC News is much more accurate in reporting of the 'people's needs' than CNN.







12 Monkeys (Film)

 

[PoliticalChic]

Anchorman Diamondbacks



Modern problems require creative thinking.

Yesterday's problems included how to coordinate Scotland Yard or negotiate the significance of the Christian Crusades within the context of the exploring Moors.

Today's problems include how to deal with urbanization mindsets that foster sexually promiscuous young American women intentionally having unprotected daredevil sex with unwitting males who do not know that they are infected with AIDS.

Why don't people appreciate the Salvation Army? We need that kind of social coordination re-orientation.

I'm convinced that the NSA even monitors how many water-guns Toys 'R Us sells each Christmas, just to keep tabs on the 'accessibility' of American culture analysis by foreign subversive elements (i.e., propaganda terrorists).

A kid walked up to me the other day at a comic book store I was browsing and said, "Check out this Green Arrow (DC Comics) issue. Ya know...Green Arrow is America's version of Robin Hood!" I thought he was being idealistic (and immature), but as I reached for my American Express card and thought about the countless 'illegal immigrant refugees' wandering the streets of southern California as they cross-over from Tijuana, Mexico, I considered the spooky reality that America really does need a new Robin Hood.

President Obama needs to be sure that his assessment of modern social healthcare needs is coordinated with actual economics data about 'populism prescriptions.'

I find that BBC News is much more accurate in reporting of the 'people's needs' than CNN.







12 Monkeys (Film)

View attachment 38342

".... at a comic book store I was browsing..."


Aha!

Now it all makes sense.

 

[auditor0007]

You miss the point....

...unlike you,Carter, and the rest of the Liberals, I don't want the poor to remain poor.

It's too bad that you do not understand economics. If you did, you would understand that there will always be a percentage of society that is going to be poor. The key is to see to it that their lives are not miserable and that they can still live a productive life being poor, and last of all, that they do have ample opportunity to improve their lot in life and maybe not remain poor forever. Cutting off welfare and all social programs that are beneficial to them is not going to make them become unpoor; it will leave them living on the streets with no roof over their head or food to nourish themselves. It will lead to more crime and a much worse society for all of us.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

You miss the point....

...unlike you,Carter, and the rest of the Liberals, I don't want the poor to remain poor.

It's too bad that you do not understand economics. If you did, you would understand that there will always be a percentage of society that is going to be poor. The key is to see to it that their lives are not miserable and that they can still live a productive life being poor, and last of all, that they do have ample opportunity to improve their lot in life and maybe not remain poor forever. Cutting off welfare and all social programs that are beneficial to them is not going to make them become unpoor; it will leave them living on the streets with no roof over their head or food to nourish themselves. It will lead to more crime and a much worse society for all of us.

Not only does the OP not understand economics, she also doesn't understand history, politics, the law, or the Constitution – being consistently ignorant and wrong is her sole forte.

 

[PoliticalChic]

You miss the point....

...unlike you,Carter, and the rest of the Liberals, I don't want the poor to remain poor.

It's too bad that you do not understand economics. If you did, you would understand that there will always be a percentage of society that is going to be poor. The key is to see to it that their lives are not miserable and that they can still live a productive life being poor, and last of all, that they do have ample opportunity to improve their lot in life and maybe not remain poor forever. Cutting off welfare and all social programs that are beneficial to them is not going to make them become unpoor; it will leave them living on the streets with no roof over their head or food to nourish themselves. It will lead to more crime and a much worse society for all of us.

Well, that means I'm wayyyyyy ahead of you, because you fail to understand economics. human nature, or politics.

1. ‘Welfare’ as a wholly owned subsidiary of the government, and its main result is the incentivizing of a disrespect for oneself, and for the entity that provides the welfare. As more folks in a poor neighborhood languish with little or no work, entire local culture begins to change: daily work is no longer the expected social norm. Extended periods of hanging around the neighborhood, neither working nor going to school becoming more and more socially acceptable.
   1. Since productive activity not making any economic sense because of the work disincentives of the welfare plantation, other kinds of activities proliferate: drug and alcohol abuse, crime, recreational sex, illegitimacy, and family breakup are the new social norms, as does the culture of violence.
      "America's Ticking Bankruptcy Bomb: How the Looming Debt Crisis Threatens the American Dream-and How We Can Turn..."
      by Peter Ferrara

In your face, dope:

 

[Moonglow]

‘Welfare’ as a wholly owned subsidiary of the government, and its main result is the incentivizing of a disrespect for oneself, and for the entity that provides the welfare

So again you try to say that welfare makes a person bad? I am sure this trait was already there before EBT..
Always bad if religion isn't tied to the giving, ahhh, but here it is,,,,,food banks ran by religious or even a private affiliations receives benefits from the govt. for doing this work....The idea that charity alone would fill the need is short sighted to say the least....
If there is one thing we can be proud of in this nation is the generosity given to those in need....When Jesus fed the multitude he did not ask for proof of income...

 

[PoliticalChic]

‘Welfare’ as a wholly owned subsidiary of the government, and its main result is the incentivizing of a disrespect for oneself, and for the entity that provides the welfare

So again you try to say that welfare makes a person bad? I am sure this trait was already there before EBT..
Always bad if religion isn't tied to the giving, ahhh, but here it is,,,,,food banks ran by religious or even a private affiliations receives benefits from the govt. for doing this work....The idea that charity alone would fill the need is short sighted to say the least....
If there is one thing we can be proud of in this nation is the generosity given to those in need....When Jesus fed the multitude he did not ask for proof of income...

Liberal welfare policy CAUSES the exact behaviors that result in poverty.


1. "[Many still have] faith in the federal government's ability to make productive citizens out of welfare recipients despite the evidence of its failure to do so. Nearly every U.S. president since Kennedy has expressed agreement with the idea behind Kennedy's words that welfare should be a 'hand up, not a hand out,' whose rolls eventually decrease as welfare recipients are brought into the working class.

Yet when President Clinton signed legislation intended to do just that, there were cries of horror from all over the Left.This is because of a large and dangerous change in the way our society views welfare that happened in the 1960s under Presidents Kennedy and Johnson, who changed government aid from a temporary necessity to an entitlement.


a. ... after the Great Society reforms, welfare recipients were subjected to governmentcontrol of their savings habits, intrusion into their family planning (marriage was strongly discouraged),and embarrassing questions about their personal lives.


.... liberals often object to private charities on the grounds that they are invasive, conveniently forgetting the hoops current welfare recipients must jump through to receive Uncle Sam's money."
The Yale Free Press




And they just love the 'Food-Stamp President' who has made certain that even more are on the government dole.


2. ."....welfare programs rarely encourage good behavior.For example, AFDC explicitly frowns upon thrift, as recipients are allowed to have only $1,000 in savings in order to remain eligible.

Grace Capetillo, a 36-year-old welfare mother, found this out the hard way after she managed to save up $3,000 over four years, only to be sued by the county of Milwaukee.... the county's request that she pay back the $15,545 she had received since going over the limit. However, she did have to pay a $1,000 fine and spend another $1,000 to get under the savings limit."
The Yale Free Press

How, exactly, did Mrs. Capetillo accumulate the vast sum of $3,000 in savings?

a. She had shopped at thrift stores, stocked up on sale items in grocery stores....bought second hand clothes during the summer, and warm-weather outfits during the summer.

b. When her five-year-old daughter's t-shirts grew tight, she simply snipped them under the arms,...

c. When she asked for 'Li'l Miss Make-Up' for Christmas, Mrs. Capetillo didn't pay $19.99 at Toys-R-Us, she found it at Goodwill for $1.89; she cleaned it up and tied it with a pink ribbon.

d. At Goodwill, she found the pieces for Mr. Potato Head, and bought them for seventy-nine cents, saving $3.18.
Her reward from the welfare system was being sued for $14,545.
"The Tragedy of American Compassion," p. 42, by Marvin Olasky





That is the kind of responsibility that the current system penalizes, careful use of one's assets, savings, behaviors that might get one out of the welfare trap......instead the impersonal nature of the welfare system and it's built-in Liberal 'we'll take care of you' structure produce life-long dependency.



The challenge:
what, exactly does this system accomplish outside of enlisting the 'poor' as 'reliable Democrat voters'?

 

[auditor0007]

You miss the point....

...unlike you,Carter, and the rest of the Liberals, I don't want the poor to remain poor.

It's too bad that you do not understand economics. If you did, you would understand that there will always be a percentage of society that is going to be poor. The key is to see to it that their lives are not miserable and that they can still live a productive life being poor, and last of all, that they do have ample opportunity to improve their lot in life and maybe not remain poor forever. Cutting off welfare and all social programs that are beneficial to them is not going to make them become unpoor; it will leave them living on the streets with no roof over their head or food to nourish themselves. It will lead to more crime and a much worse society for all of us.

Because not providing a safety net has worked so well in other parts of the world. We call those places third world countries you dope. For supposedly being well educated, you are one of the dumbest people here.




Well, that means I'm wayyyyyy ahead of you, because you fail to understand economics. human nature, or politics.

1. ‘Welfare’ as a wholly owned subsidiary of the government, and its main result is the incentivizing of a disrespect for oneself, and for the entity that provides the welfare. As more folks in a poor neighborhood languish with little or no work, entire local culture begins to change: daily work is no longer the expected social norm. Extended periods of hanging around the neighborhood, neither working nor going to school becoming more and more socially acceptable.
   1. Since productive activity not making any economic sense because of the work disincentives of the welfare plantation, other kinds of activities proliferate: drug and alcohol abuse, crime, recreational sex, illegitimacy, and family breakup are the new social norms, as does the culture of violence.
      "America's Ticking Bankruptcy Bomb: How the Looming Debt Crisis Threatens the American Dream-and How We Can Turn..."
      by Peter Ferrara

In your face, dope:

 

[DGS49]

LIBERALS DISDAIN HARD WORK; it's as simple as that.

The hardest workers in this country are entrepreneurs. There is really no question about it. They work their asses off for as many hours as it takes to get the job done, to satisfy their customers, and to keep their business from going down. And yet Liberals and their policies ATTACK and PUNISH entrepreneurs with crushing regulations, costly mandates, and mindless red tape. Count the permits and licenses that are required to build something in that bastion of Liberalism, New York City. Look at the tsunami of bullshit that Liberals around the country have thrown at Lyft and Uber - companies that are shining examples of the encouragement and possibilities of small-time entrepreneurship.

Who are the real targets of the Minimum Wage battles going on right now? Small businessmen, mainly, from whose pockets the higher wages will be taken.

What college degrees do Liberals honor and respect? Engineering? Accounting? Pre-med? Hard sciences? NOOOOOO. They gravitate to education, social sciences, humanities, Wimmin's/Ethnic Studies, and garbage like that. Majors with MINIMAL academic rigor, majors where the professor prefaces all the most of the tests with the statement that, "There are really no right answers..."

What careers and professions to liberals aspire to? Bureaucrat, regulator, politician, social worker, teacher...jobs where you can do "just enough" work to get by. None that are truly demanding. When a Liberal uses the expression, "hard-working American," (it makes my teeth curl up in my mouth), they are invariably talking about the 7-8% of American workers who are members of labor unions. Don't even ask about the other 92% who actually ARE WORKING HARD, because Libs have no use for them.

They LOVE Hollywood-types, whose success and grotesque financial rewards are based largely on looks and serendipity, and scorn their counterparts in Sports, whose success is based on excellence and making it through dozens of levels of Darwinian competition to reach the top. They are positively REVOLTED by anyone who has made a success of himself in the business world. According to Libs, they are the "lucky" ones, being "unfair" to The Poor. Yeah, how lucky they are to be working until 8pm every day, coming in on weekends TO GET THEIR JOB DONE!

Liberals' best example of working hard is some Community Organizer working to help people suck more from the government's capacious teats. Someone like Our Beloved President, for example.