'Generation Gimme': Can We or Should We Afford Them?

[WatertheTree]

Oh, and T, Fascism comes from CORPORATISM, not from socialism. Socialism just leads to socialism. Sometimes communism.

And T, Fascism is also a "Statist" form of government.

Oh, but wait, that was Mussolini that said that. Clearly, when it came to fascism, Benito had no clue what he was talking about.

He is still confused about the whole nazi socialist party. Hasnt figured out that labels are ment to control public opinion. Kinda like federal reserve or patriot act.

It doesnt matter what shit is called, it matters what it is.

 

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

The Entitlement mentality does seem to be gripping our nation at this point. Personal responsibility seems pretty much out the window now. But can we or should we afford 'Generation Gimme?'

If by "generation Gimmie" you mean the top 1 percent who are making money hand over fist and screaming for more tax cuts, no, we can't afford them.

The difference is, they are working, investing, and risk taking when it comes to making money. We can not afford to give luxury items (ads for free cell phones to those on WIC for example) to those who whine it's not fair, but are not willing to take the risk or have the determination to work hard to get there on their own. Government hand-outs as a "right" is what got countries like Greece into the financial mess they are in. We can not afford that .

 

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

At some point hard decisions are gonna have to be made. The Well's run dry. 'Generation Gimme' got to the well too late.

It's rather interesting all the cries for cuts in the military budget, including what this administration has already accomplished. Yet how much of those same cuts in reform have there been for social security, medicare, medicade, now obamacare . . . after all they are taking a lot BIGGER slice of the expense pie when you look at the budget of the Federal Government.

Spending scales of the Federal Budget:

Welfare 11%
Health Care 24%
Pensions 23%


vs.


Military 23%



US Federal Budget Pie Chart for FY13 - Charts

 

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

I think many are still trying to avoid answering this question. It is a very difficult problem. What does happen when the Well runs dry?

There is another "problem" no one wants to address.
Should our nation become dependent upon another (oil, and now financially)?
How vulnerable are we as a nation, national security, when China can "rightly" dictate their demands because they hold the financial deed to the United States?
What happens when China says no to further bail-outs?

 

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

This thread, another thread that highlights the Republican plans to "get them born" and then "let them die".

"Let them die", eh? I found it rather interesting that this OWS movment in my state complained, when the city property they were camped out on, told them they would be turning off the city's supplied power outlets there. They had no place to plug in their laptops, microwaves, and electric heaters - throwing a HUGE fit! They felt they had a right to have free electric power supplied to their amenities, and that the city was throwing them out in the cold with no heat. How appropriate that even during a protest movement, the left can get away from the same ideological notion of having someone provide for them without paying for it.

 

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

Divesting the wealthy and the wealth creators of everything they have and redistributing it to the worthless class isnt enough.

Once the worthless have frittered away their lottery winnings they are back to being poor. Have nots in a world of haves. Therefore the wealthy have to keep producing to satisfy the worthless. They can't just give them money and go away. It never ends. At some point the weed is gone, the organic food gone to maggots, they need MORE. And more and more.

Thinking these demands aren't permanent is too optimistic. If anything they will grow. We have a group of people dedicated to doing nothing in exchange for everything.

wow talk about class warfare.


You hate the vast majority of American workers and worship the wealthy.

Do you know that the wealthy have been shown in every study of morals to care less about their fellow man than any other group?


You must be a wealthy spoiled decendent of the monied class.

I can tell due to your complete lack of compassion for your fellow man

Actually the left is the group of least compassion as they don't tend to give "charity", because "people who believe it's the government's job to make incomes more equal, are far less likely to give their money away."

http://abcnews.go.com/2020/story?id=2682730&page=1

 

[AVG-JOE]

I voted yes.... just to piss people off(I was #2).

lol! Voting Yes doesn't piss me off. I know you're wrong.

Did I say you? You are pretty rational... I disagree with your socioeconomic stances... but you aren't a prick. It's the Folk that spout Marxist/Commie every other post, tell me to get a job(when I've been working 23 years at the same place and am pretty well compensated for my efforts) and are little more than outraged parrots of AM radio(you know who you are) are who's skins I was looking to get under.

On a serious note...No... under the current system, we cannot afford them.... But we can do better than the "sink or swim" mentality of the Libertarian/Conservatives. I propose a "work for Benefits" Program that fundamentally changes the method of Welfare delivery. It will actually cost MORE than the current model in the short term, but in the long run, I think it would be a huge success.

Having people work for their benefits does some good things... Gives people a sense of purpose and empowerment, Gets rid of the stigma of being a "welfare bum" and perhaps will develop a sense of pride and dignity of having "earned" that compensation. Furthermore, it will give people who haven't worked in a long time(or never worked) a work history and an evaluation process that will help them get out of the system and into better paying jobs in the private and/or public sector.

The reason it will cost somewhat MORE is supervision and enforcement... the enforcement part is relatively easy... no work/no benefits(exceptions for Developmentally Disabled, Mentally Ill, and severe Physical handicaps will be allowed).

But we would need supervision to work with these people, and that supervision has to go beyond the role of a taskmaster. They will have to be Counselors too... Job Coaches so to speak.

The secret is the education system. It needs to be redesigned with a new goal of finding SOMEthing productive for every little girl and boy to do when they grow up or finding them profoundly disabled, and the responsibility of society at large.

Far too many are exiting the system with few if any skills and no real reason NOT to be working and productive.
Remember, Aid to Families With Dependent Children is NOT our most expensive welfare program - prison is.

 

[007]

If this is generation gimmme then how did all the money get funneled to the top?

Ever heard of getting an education and then working hard at a job to earn some of that money at the top?

Probably not. Most liberals are government tit sucking, high school drop out, unemployed, where's my freebie handout, fat assed lazy skanks that live in mommy and daddy's basement.

Oh geee... lookie there... I just described YOU!

 

[AVG-JOE]

The real question is whether the younger generation can afford YOU.

You know that, right?

It turns out that from a societal point of view, the quality of the retirement of one generation is directly proportional to the quality of their education investment for the next generation.

What? Are you trying to say that I would be insane to promote cuts in education spending because having a generation filled with poorly educated, unprepared people in charge of things when I become elderly is a bad thing?

That Sir, is PRECISELY what I'm trying to say.

 

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

And I don't mind people demanding they shut the Hell UP...and get a damned job.

You do understand you can't complain in one breath that there are no jobs due to President Obama and his "socialist" policies and then in the next breath demand that anyone who's unemployed go get a job without coming off as a giant hypocrite, right?

You do understand you can't raise taxes on small and big business, close charitable loopholes, sue the banking industry because it's politically popular (which in turn tightens the noose of the banks ability to lend for a business loan), force businesses to cover expenses to remain compliant in keeping pace with the constant bombardment of MORE government regulations . . . yet have the financing available to hire more workers, right?

 

[AVG-JOE]

Blah, blah, blah.

So, reform the ******* tax system that YOU broke.

The youngest generation had nothing to do with that shit, and now you want to blame them for it?

The people who don't pay taxes don't pay them, for the most part, because they have deductions for other things, like children, or property taxes and outrageous interest rates on houses that they can't afford.

They don't pay them, because they don't have any income to tax, once all the bills are paid.

Having 12 children this day in age is fiscally irresponsible. But many do it. It reminds me of the time that my douchbag ex-brother in law held his hands above my nieces heads when he was figuring up his taxes, and excitedly exclaimed-"Cha-ching, cha-ching...!"...he was dreaming of his deductions.

I consider two people having several children, just as guilty as of milking the system, as the "welfare moochers". 12 children....one parent working, grosing $50k per year...irresponsible planning. If you don't agree with that....too bad.

I have a difficult time understanding why so few see the hyposcrisy in this.

Now now... having children produce the taxpayers of the future. How about we start Compensating labor appropriately instead of blaming people who are producing the next generation of Working Americans? Obviously your douchebag ex brother in law was working and contributing to society.

"Now now... having EDUCATED children produce the taxpayers of the future. How about we start Compensating labor appropriately instead of blaming people who are producing the next generation of Working Americans? Obviously your douchebag ex brother in law was working and contributing to society"


Fixed it for ya!

It's all about productive people. As it should be.

 

[Full-Auto]

It turns out that from a societal point of view, the quality of the retirement of one generation is directly proportional to the quality of their education investment for the next generation.

What? Are you trying to say that I would be insane to promote cuts in education spending because having a generation filled with poorly educated, unprepared people in charge of things when I become elderly is a bad thing?

That Sir, is PRECISELY what I'm trying to say.

I disagree. Not due to K-12

But college.

Our Legislature controls tuition. Damn wall street as the OWS would say.

 

[AVG-JOE]

The Entitlement mentality does seem to be gripping our nation at this point. Personal responsibility seems pretty much out the window now. But can we or should we afford 'Generation Gimme?'

If by "generation Gimmie" you mean the top 1 percent who are making money hand over fist and screaming for more tax cuts, no, we can't afford them.

The difference is, they are working, investing, and risk taking when it comes to making money. We can not afford to give luxury items (ads for free cell phones to those on WIC for example) to those who whine it's not fair, but are not willing to take the risk or have the determination to work hard to get there on their own. Government hand-outs as a "right" is what got countries like Greece into the financial mess they are in. We can not afford that .

You're BOTH right. As soon as the productive people in the middle figure this out, we can build an economy for our kids to drive to the stars on fair taxes, a balanced budget and transparency in politics. I hope I live to see it.

 

[Jackson]

What? Are you trying to say that I would be insane to promote cuts in education spending because having a generation filled with poorly educated, unprepared people in charge of things when I become elderly is a bad thing?

That Sir, is PRECISELY what I'm trying to say.

I disagree. Not due to K-12

But college.

Our Legislature controls tuition. Damn wall street as the OWS would say.

You are right. Through the costly Pell grants and governement giveaways, the legislatue has raised the cost of tuition exorbinately. Meanwhile we don;t have enough skilled tradespeople for the jobs in manufacturing. But we do have remedial reading in college.

What's wrong with this picture?

 

[Full-Auto]

That Sir, is PRECISELY what I'm trying to say.

I disagree. Not due to K-12

But college.

Our Legislature controls tuition. Damn wall street as the OWS would say.

You are right. Through the costly Pell grants and governement giveaways, the legislatue has raised the cost of tuition exorbinately. Meanwhile we don;t have enough skilled tradespeople for the jobs in manufacturing. But we do have remedial reading in college.

What's wrong with this picture?

Democrats here said we need to raise taxes so they dont have to increase tuition.

would someone from the idiot left tell me how wall street is responsible.???

 

[Vast LWC]

How about tax incentives to the private sector to hire people off of the "workfare" roles? How about the Job Coaches be skilled in recognizing and developing the talents of the people they are in charge of? Some of them may become part of the business community themselves.

Sure, some would get integrated in the Public Sector. Working for the Public Sector is not a bad thing in and of itself. The problem is what we have now... too many Bureaucracies that are redundant. Through attrition(Not Hiring when Public Employees retire), we can achieve the necessary downsizing of governmental employees. When it gets to the point where we NEED workers again...then we can hire from the Workfare Roles as well as the Civil Service list... let the most qualified win.

We need a scalpel approach on this... A meat cleaver will just put more middle class people out of work.

Hmm, all good points. Not a bad plan really. I'll sign on.

 

[Vast LWC]

Actually the left is the group of least compassion as they don't tend to give "charity", because "people who believe it's the government's job to make incomes more equal, are far less likely to give their money away."

Who Gives and Who Doesn't? - ABC News

Yeah, except the "charities" that the Right gives to are ones that they get to choose, and therefore include their own children's little league teams, contributions to church social events that they attend, etc, etc...

When given the opportunity to make "charitable" deductions, people donate their money to their own community (usually to people who don't need it), thus benefitting themselves, then they claim a tax deduction, and then they crow about it like they did something wonderful. Meanwhile the only thing they did was give little Timmy's soccer team the ability to buy shiny new uniforms so little Timmy can look good on the field.

And that's not even including the millions and millions of dollars that are claimed on tax forms for non-existent "charitable" donations.

Let's face it, people on the right HATE paying taxes, and will do ANYTHING to avoid doing so.

 

[Vast LWC]

If this is generation gimmme then how did all the money get funneled to the top?

Ever heard of getting an education and then working hard at a job to earn some of that money at the top?

Probably not. Most liberals are government tit sucking, high school drop out, unemployed, where's my freebie handout, fat assed lazy skanks that live in mommy and daddy's basement.

Oh geee... lookie there... I just described YOU!

Yeah, it would appear that you don't actually know too many Liberals. Of course that won't stop you from making crazy generalizations.

I'm mostly a Liberal, and I make plenty of money. I also pay my taxes without bitching like a little girl about it.

 

[Jackson]

Actually the left is the group of least compassion as they don't tend to give "charity", because "people who believe it's the government's job to make incomes more equal, are far less likely to give their money away."

Who Gives and Who Doesn't? - ABC News

Yeah, except the "charities" that the Right gives to are ones that they get to choose, and therefore include their own children's little league teams, contributions to church social events that they attend, etc, etc...

When given the opportunity to make "charitable" deductions, people donate their money to their own community (usually to people who don't need it), thus benefitting themselves, then they claim a tax deduction, and then they crow about it like they did something wonderful. Meanwhile the only thing they did was give little Timmy's soccer team the ability to buy shiny new uniforms so little Timmy can look good on the field.

And that's not even including the millions and millions of dollars that are claimed on tax forms for non-existent "charitable" donations.

Let's face it, people on the right HATE paying taxes, and will do ANYTHING to avoid doing so.

Little league uniforms and donations are not taxable. I certainlywould give to them than to anyone who is on welfare.

But I would certainly give Timmy a job in school so he can feel good in that uniform like he deserves something like the other kids, despite his lazy mom or non existent fathers..

"Who's going to pay for my Fifteen kids???"

 

[Vast LWC]

Democrats here said we need to raise taxes so they dont have to increase tuition.

would someone from the idiot left tell me how wall street is responsible.???

Well, I'm honestly not sure we do need to lower tuitions for everyone. I think perhaps we need to be more selective about who we provide tuition assistance for.

Not everyone actually needs to go to college. If they've proven that they don't get very much out of school through low grades, and are aiming at a vocation that does not require a higher education, perhaps we should not actually pay for their college education.

That would save us a large chunk of money.

But I will say that the reason Wall Street is responsible is that certain interests in the financial industry paid off (mostly) Conservative members of our Government to privatize the Student Loan industry, and now student loan interest is killing the earning potential of younger generations before they even get started.