Failure of the Welfare State

[Wiseacre]

If we could just stop spending so much money supporting retired military sitting on their asses, we might be ok.

Fuck you asshole. So tell me, you also okay with a stop in spending money on retired cops, firefighters and teachers? And all those gov't workers that risked getting papercuts every day, you're alright with that, right?

Not at all. I actually respect you and your service.

Thank you.

But to blame the collapse of the economy and the outsourcing of jobs during the Bush administration on libs is bullshit.

Don't remember saying that or even implying it. IMHO, both sides of the aisle are at fault for the collapse of the economy, along with a lot of other people. And not just during the Busgh admin either, that collapse has it's roots long before Bush came into office.

Spending on education, health care, technology, and infrastructure is what drives an economy, not tax cuts for the rich or trillions thrown away on useless wars.

I don't think so. You really think that kind of spending drives an economy? BTW, Bush didn't have that big a majority in Congress to pass those measures, and 115 dems voted for the Iraq war. How come you only blame Bush and the repubs? Don't you think that's a bit disingenuous?

 

[rdean]

Democrats position:

Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime.

Republicans position:

Feed the poor and they'll breed. Let them die. But make sure they have those babies first.

 

[Wiseacre]

Democrats position:

Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime.

Republicans position:

Feed the poor and they'll breed. Let them die. But make sure they have those babies first.

Democrat position: Give a man a fish every day and he'll vote for you every time. Make somebody else pay for the fish or increase the debt/deficit.

Republican position: here's a hook and some line. There's some bamboo poles over there, get off your dead ass and feed yourself.

 

[francoHFW]

" to help stabilize the economy during recessions "

Well, I guess if you're happy with a stable economy with low to no growth and high unemployment, you must be in liberal heaven.

No, I'm not happy at all. Economists were RIGHT...Stimulus Too Small But, I thank GOD we have a Democrat not a Republican in the White House, because it would be MUCH worse today.

So why didn't you guys pass a bigger stimulus bill? Why didn't you raise taxes on the rich when you had the chance? Simple fact: you guys fucked up and you aren't honest enough to admit it.

NOBODY saw Scott Brown coming- And nobody wanted to raise taxes on the rich in a GD Pub depression, dupe- it will happen next year as they always wanted.

 

[AnonymousIV]

Can people on welfare be taught self-sufficiency? Is this reasonable? Can you imagine having to work you way out of poverty? When someone does it's like a miracle has happened to the press. They have habits that are hard to break that keeps them in poverty. But, it seems most of them just take the help and grumble all the way home, about the government. I'm talking about older Americans.

 

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

2. In fact, since
President Obama took office, federal welfare
spending has increased by 41 percent, more
than $193 billion per year. Despite this government largess, more than 46 million Americans continue to live in poverty.

Tell me this -- have you EVER heard of the Great Recession? Do you think it could be the reason for more people having to rely on food stamps and other forms government assistance?

Do you think it would be highly more benefitial to provide an "all of the above approach" to providing jobs, like the Keystone Pipeline, instead of pushing for unemployment extensions while saying this is what actually creates jobs? It's quite clear Pesident Obama would much rather press his own ideology (which is growing dependency on "Big Government" and pouring money into failing green corporations or inferior battery operated cars) OVER actual job creation policies that would encourage private sector growth under a stagnant economy.

 

[editec]

The WELFARE STATE is evidence of the FAILURE OF OUR CAPITALIST SYSTEM to wisely distribute the benefits of the system.

 

[PoliticalChic]

The Constitution is not a factor. The financial crisis was not caused by government. It was caused by the PRIVATE sector.

WHY are you so dense?

Poor, poor BoringFriendlessGuy....


1. 'In “Reckless Endangerment,” Gretchen Morgenson and Joshua Rosner argue that cozy connections between government and the financial industry were the primary cause of the financial crisis. In a series of clearly written narratives with many names, dates and figures, they show that government officials took actions that benefited well-connected individuals, who in turn helped the government officials. This mutual support system thwarted good economic policies and encouraged reckless ones. It thereby brought on the crisis, sending the economy into a tailspin.'
‘Reckless Endangerment’ by Gretchen Morgenson and Joshua Rosner - The Washington Post

2. "The Republican Party and especially its Tea Party wing have just acquired a new weapon of mass destruction — and it has nothing to do with any of Congressman Wiener’s rogue body parts. If they deploy this weapon effectively in the next election cycle — a big if — then they have the biggest opportunity to move the country rightward since Ronald Reagan took the oath of office back in 1981.

3. The Tea Party WMD stockpile is currently stored in book form: "Reckless Endangerment: How Outsized Ambition, Greed, and Corruption Led to Economic Armageddon." By Gretchen Morgenson, one of America’s best business journalists who is currently at The New York Times, and noted financial analyst Joshua Rosner, Reckless Endangerment gives the best available account of how the growing chaos in the mortgage and personal finance markets and the rampant bundling of dubious loans into exotically toxic securities plunged the world, and millions of American families, into the gravest financial crisis since World War Two.

4. The villains? An unholy alliance between Wall Street, the Democratic establishment, community organizing groups like ACORN and La Raza, and politicians like Barney Frank, Nancy Pelosi and Henry Cisneros. (Frank got a cushy job for a lover, Pelosi got a job and layoff protection for a son, Cisneros apparently got a license to mint money bilking Mexican-Americans of their life savings in cheesy housing developments.)

5. If the GOP can make this narrative mainstream, and put this picture into the heads of voters nationwide, the Democrats are toast.

6. If Morgenstern and Rosner are to be believed, the American dream didn’t die of old age; it was murdered and most of the fingerprints on the corpse come from Democratic insiders. Democratic power brokers stoked the housing bubble and turned a blind eye to the increasingly rampant corruption and incompetence at Fannie Mae and the associated predatory lenders who sheltered under its umbrella; core Democratic ideas may well be at fault.

7. Big government, affirmative action and influence peddling among Democratic insiders came within inches of smashing the US economy.

8. The Great Villain, the man who almost ruined America according to the book, is James Johnson, long one of the most important members of the Democratic establishment. ...Barack Obama, impressed by this track record of discernment, reportedly asked him to lead Obama’s search in 2008 ...

9. Politically, this story is a killer app for the GOP. It demonizes Dems, lends itself to attack ads, divides Democrats between their Wall Street and union bases, and combines GOP hate figures in ways calculated to unify the GOP and heighten the intensity of the faithful. The story illustrates everything the Tea Party thinks about the corrupt Washington establishment and the evils of big government. It demonstrates the limits on the ability of government programs to help the poor.

10. ...if the GOP plays its cards right, Fanniegate could push this country into a new political era."
Fanniegate: Gamechanger For The GOP? | Via Meadia

The “Big Lie,” in a nutshell, is that the 2008 financial crisis was caused not by Wall Street’s shady lending practices or exotic (and ultimately worthless) financial instruments but by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, which were forced by the government’s expansive housing policy to make riskier and riskier loans. Because it conveniently lays the blame for the recession at the feet of the government, the Big Lie is a conservative favorite. The problem is, it’s not remotely supported by facts. Morgenson finds it ironic that “Washington’s push to increase homeownership opened the door for companies to sell poisonous and tricky loans that have now imperiled many of the most vulnerable,” yet private lenders were the ones to pioneer these poisonous loans, and made more of them than Fannie or Freddie ever did. Joe Nocera, a colleague of Morgenson’s at the Times who got his start as a business reporter, summed it up quite nicely on Dec. 23 when he stated that conservative scholar Peter Wallison “almost single-handedly created the myth that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac caused the financial crisis.” Almost, because Wallison had a passel of partners in crime, including the Wall Street Journal editorial page, Congressional Republicans looking for any excuse to attack Fannie and Freddie, and — though he doesn’t mention her — Gretchen Morgenson herself. The Times evidently has a policy against speaking ill of one’s co-workers, as demonstrated by Paul Krugman’s wink-wink-nod criticism of David Brooks’ economic ignorance (“as some pundits have said . . . .”), but Morgenson and her bestselling book Reckless Endangerment are pretty hard to overlook. Reckless Endangerment is the Big Lie writ large — 352 pages large — and has been parroted as gospel by the news media despite an overwhelming consensus by mainstream economists that federal housing policy had almost nothing to do with the financial crisis.

Poly want a cracker PC???

1. Inaccurate analogy...

I told you, I'm an owl....

....and since you're a rat, you're gonna wind up as a fur pellet....

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zW0TJ-MLGPI]Legend of the Guardians Eglantine regurgitation - YouTube[/ame]


2. "... is that the 2008 financial crisis was caused not by Wall Street’s shady lending practices or exotic (and ultimately worthless) financial instruments but by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, which were forced by the government’s expansive housing policy to make riskier and riskier loans."

Dat's da troooof!

3. You proved it yourself by avoiding answering the simple query....did the Constitution give FDR the right to create Franny and Fredddy?

Therefore, everything that proceeded from that illegal act is the fault of the Liberal-Progressive-Democrats.

quod erat demonstrandum,

True, Pellet?

 

[Wiseacre]

The WELFARE STATE is evidence of the FAILURE OF OUR CAPITALIST SYSTEM to wisely distribute the benefits of the system.

Actually, it's the failure of the gov't. You really think any other economoic model will do any better?

 

[The T]

The WELFARE STATE is evidence of the FAILURE OF OUR CAPITALIST SYSTEM to wisely distribute the benefits of the system.

Actually, it's the failure of the gov't. You really think any other economoic model will do any better?

And it's Government (Progressive Statists) interfering on behalf of those that fail to embrace thier own liberty...by design to collapse the capitalist system.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

Democrats position:

Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime.

Republicans position:

Feed the poor and they'll breed. Let them die. But make sure they have those babies first.

Let me fix that


Democrats: Give a man a fish and you have him voting for you, teach a man to fish and you lose control of his vote

Republicans: Give a man to fish and you have not helped him past feeding him for a day, teach a man to fish and he can care for himself instead of needing Robbin Hood to take care of him.

 

[gallantwarrior]

The WELFARE STATE is evidence of the FAILURE OF OUR CAPITALIST SYSTEM to wisely distribute the benefits of the system.

Considering that the capitalist system (an economic system characterized by private or corporate ownership of capital goods, by investments that are determined by private decision, and by prices, production, and the distribution of goods that are determined mainly by competition in a free market) is not driven by a mandate to distribute the benefits afforded by such a system. Rather, it affords anyone who is so inclined to be able to participate as freely as they desire, to increase their own wealth through personal effort and innovation. Success, or lack thereof, is the result of personal effort.

The government holds claim to the concept of redistribution of "benefits" by enslaving the productive population, taking by force what they deem necessary to create equality of outcome. Government then awards the wealth robbed from the productive to those individuals and economic endeavors that government deems worthy. The only effort rewarded when government redistributes "benefits" is effort expended solely on behalf of that government, its agents, and in support of that government's ideological tenets.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

The WELFARE STATE is evidence of the FAILURE OF OUR CAPITALIST SYSTEM to wisely distribute the benefits of the system.

Considering that the capitalist system (an economic system characterized by private or corporate ownership of capital goods, by investments that are determined by private decision, and by prices, production, and the distribution of goods that are determined mainly by competition in a free market) is not driven by a mandate to distribute the benefits afforded by such a system. Rather, it affords anyone who is so inclined to be able to participate as freely as they desire, to increase their own wealth through personal effort and innovation. Success, or lack thereof, is the result of personal effort.

The government holds claim to the concept of redistribution of "benefits" by enslaving the productive population, taking by force what they deem necessary to create equality of outcome. Government then awards the wealth robbed from the productive to those individuals and economic endeavors that government deems worthy. The only effort rewarded when government redistributes "benefits" is effort expended solely on behalf of that government, its agents, and in support of that government's ideological tenets.

You just explained the basics of it very well. This is also why democrats, in general, are against capitalism while republicans are for it. One is more prone to standing on personal responsibility than the other.

 

[NYcarbineer]

The WELFARE STATE is evidence of the FAILURE OF OUR CAPITALIST SYSTEM to wisely distribute the benefits of the system.

Considering that the capitalist system (an economic system characterized by private or corporate ownership of capital goods, by investments that are determined by private decision, and by prices, production, and the distribution of goods that are determined mainly by competition in a free market) is not driven by a mandate to distribute the benefits afforded by such a system. Rather, it affords anyone who is so inclined to be able to participate as freely as they desire, to increase their own wealth through personal effort and innovation. Success, or lack thereof, is the result of personal effort.

The government holds claim to the concept of redistribution of "benefits" by enslaving the productive population, taking by force what they deem necessary to create equality of outcome. Government then awards the wealth robbed from the productive to those individuals and economic endeavors that government deems worthy. The only effort rewarded when government redistributes "benefits" is effort expended solely on behalf of that government, its agents, and in support of that government's ideological tenets.

Then public education is is a 'redistribution' of wealth that ought to be abandoned altogether in favor of letting education be acquired only by those with the means to acquire it.

 

[NYcarbineer]

So....now you agree with the OP?

There was no reason to waste the $15 TRILLION DOLLARS!!!!!

No. I don't agree, and nothing I said even implied I agreed.

This is only fun when someone bites it big time....that's where you come in!

OK, franco....here goes:

You said: "the poverty rate goes up and down with the business cycle."

If that is the case, then why did we waste $15 trillion in welfare?



(Hint: Could it be to buy votes?)

Because without any material assistance to lower income Americans,

the poverty level would go up and down with business cycle, but at a much lower level.

 

[The T]

Courtesy of FOGHAT

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fOkTwmgLJWI"]Live Now...Pay Later[/ame]

It's just where WE find ourselves courtesy of our electeds...

 

[PoliticalChic]

The WELFARE STATE is evidence of the FAILURE OF OUR CAPITALIST SYSTEM to wisely distribute the benefits of the system.

Actually, it's the failure of the gov't. You really think any other economoic model will do any better?

Yes...they think that.
Of course, they're incorrect.

" 1. For Babeur, socialism would distribute prosperity across the entire population, as it would “[have] us eat four good meals a day, [dress} us most elegantly, and also [provide] those of us who are fathers of families with charming houses worth a thousand louis each.”

2. Oscar Wilde: “Under socialism…there will be no people living in fetid dens and fetid rags, and bringing up unhealthy, hunger pinched children in the midst of impossible and absolutely repulsive surroundings…Each member of society will share in the general prosperity and happiness of the society…”

3. Marxism rested on the assumption that the condition of the working classes would grow ever worse under capitalism, that there would be but two classes: one small and rich, the other vast and increasingly impoverished, and revolution would be the anodyne that would result in the “common good.” But by the early 20th century, it was clear that this assumption was completely wrong! Under capitalism, the standard of living of all was improving: prices falling, incomes rising, health and sanitation improving, lengthening of life spans, diets becoming more varied, the new jobs created in industry paid more than most could make in agriculture, housing improved, and middle class industrialists and business owners displaced nobility and gentry as heroes.

4. These economic advances continued throughout the period of the rise of socialist ideology. The poor didn’t get poorer because the rich were getting richer (a familiar socialist refrain even today) as the socialists had predicted. Instead, the underlying reality was that capitalism had created the first societies in history in which living standards were rising in all sectors of society."
From a speech by Rev. Robert A. Sirico, President, Acton Institute for the Study of Religion and Liberty.
Delivered at Hillsdale College, October 27, 2006

 

[CrusaderFrank]

The Communists that have controlled the Democrat Party behind the scenes since FDR have been the biggest proponents of the Welfare State BECAUSE it crushes the human spirit and turns people into government worshiping slaves.

What is the Exit strategy for the "War on Poverty" that we've been fighting since the mid-1960's?

 

[NYcarbineer]

Then what non-welfare state should we model ourselves after?

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

Then what non-welfare state should we model ourselves after?

The pre-welfare USA?