Setting the record straight on spending

[P@triot]

Report: Welfare government’s single largest budget item in FY 2011 at approx. $1.03 trillion

The government spent approximately $1.03 trillion on 83 means-tested federal welfare programs in fiscal year 2011 alone — a price tag that makes welfare that year the government’s largest expenditure, according to new data released by the Republican side of the Senate Budget Committee

Govt spent $1.028 trillion on welfare in FY 2011 | The Daily Caller

 

[P@triot]

The left (many anyway), always claim that we spend the most on defense and scream that it is an "outrage". That fact is, we more than double the unconstitutional spending on the parasite class than we do on the #1 Constitutional responsibility of the federal government (defense - $500 billion and change).

 

[The Rabbi]

And many of those programs overlap and duplicate each other. They exist because of bureaucratic turf that gets protected no matter what.
And the result of those programs is more poverty and dependence, not less. End it all.

 

[editec]

The GOP's definition of WELFARE inclues social security, and VETERANS benefits.


The GOP loves to play this semantics game.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

America needs to change it's name to Amerigreece

 

[LibertyLemming]

The GOP's definition of WELFARE inclues social security, and VETERANS benefits.


The GOP loves to play this semantics game.

How are those things not welfare?

 

[LoneLaugher]

Yeah! How are Social Security and veterans benefits not welfare?

A perfectly reasonable question. You will no doubt find your answer at your local VFW. Have at it..

 

[LibertyLemming]

Can't tell if trolling or just making vague statements instead of attacking the actual premise.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Can't tell if trolling or just making vague statements instead of attacking the actual premise.

Neither are welfare
Social security is paid into by those who receive it. Are retirement plans welfare?

and Vet's have earned their benefits they receive after they retire.

 

[LoneLaugher]

Can't tell if trolling or just making vague statements instead of attacking the actual premise.

Maybe you know the answer. I have asked every budget hawk here ( I use that term liberally as many of them are simply lemmings ) this question. Not once has it been answered.

How many? How many able-bodied, sane and mentally capable adult Americans refuse to obtain available employment and instead live entirely off of public assistance.

If you can answer that, please also put a dollar amount on it. How much do those people cost us?


Thanks in advance.

 

[LibertyLemming]

Can't tell if trolling or just making vague statements instead of attacking the actual premise.

Maybe you know the answer. I have asked every budget hawk here ( I use that term liberally as many of them are simply lemmings ) this question. Not once has it been answered.

How many? How many able-bodied, sane and mentally capable adult Americans refuse to obtain available employment and instead live entirely off of public assistance.

If you can answer that, please also put a dollar amount on it. How much do those people cost us?


Thanks in advance.

Well I'm no "budget hawk" and I can't answer that question accurately. I'm not sure what you are driving at with that question anyway. Please elaborate and I shall respond in kind.

@bigreb: I'm not a huge fan of whipping out the dictionary but I'll go ahead and do it anyway:

Welfare: Financial or other aid provided, especially by the government, to people in need.

Social Security is financial aid for the elderly. Vetrans benefits are no different. Notice I'm not taking a position on the value of providing welfare before you attack me. I'm just claiming that they are forms of welfare.

What is actually happening with social security is that the people who are taking out of the fund right now have already had the money they "put in" spent on other things.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Can't tell if trolling or just making vague statements instead of attacking the actual premise.

Maybe you know the answer. I have asked every budget hawk here ( I use that term liberally as many of them are simply lemmings ) this question. Not once has it been answered.

How many? How many able-bodied, sane and mentally capable adult Americans refuse to obtain available employment and instead live entirely off of public assistance.

If you can answer that, please also put a dollar amount on it. How much do those people cost us?


Thanks in advance.

Well I'm no "budget hawk" and I can't answer that question accurately. I'm not sure what you are driving at with that question anyway. Please elaborate and I shall respond in kind.

@bigreb: I'm not a huge fan of whipping out the dictionary but I'll go ahead and do it anyway:

Welfare: Financial or other aid provided, especially by the government, to people in need.

Social Security is financial aid for the elderly. Vetrans benefits are no different. Notice I'm not taking a position on the value of providing welfare before you attack me. I'm just claiming that they are forms of welfare.

What is actually happening with social security is that the people who are taking out of the fund right now have already had the money they "put in" spent on other things.

Well not exactly true
What is Social Security? | National Academy of Social Insurance
What is Social Security?
Social Security is largely a pay-as-you-go program.

 

[LibertyLemming]

Maybe you know the answer. I have asked every budget hawk here ( I use that term liberally as many of them are simply lemmings ) this question. Not once has it been answered.

How many? How many able-bodied, sane and mentally capable adult Americans refuse to obtain available employment and instead live entirely off of public assistance.

If you can answer that, please also put a dollar amount on it. How much do those people cost us?


Thanks in advance.

Well I'm no "budget hawk" and I can't answer that question accurately. I'm not sure what you are driving at with that question anyway. Please elaborate and I shall respond in kind.

@bigreb: I'm not a huge fan of whipping out the dictionary but I'll go ahead and do it anyway:

Welfare: Financial or other aid provided, especially by the government, to people in need.

Social Security is financial aid for the elderly. Vetrans benefits are no different. Notice I'm not taking a position on the value of providing welfare before you attack me. I'm just claiming that they are forms of welfare.

What is actually happening with social security is that the people who are taking out of the fund right now have already had the money they "put in" spent on other things.

Well not exactly true
What is Social Security? | National Academy of Social Insurance
What is Social Security?
Social Security is largely a pay-as-you-go program.

I prefer more direct links. I don't need an overview of the program.

Social Security is already paying out less money than most paid in: Social Security Benefits Less Than What Workers Put In | TIME.com

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Well I'm no "budget hawk" and I can't answer that question accurately. I'm not sure what you are driving at with that question anyway. Please elaborate and I shall respond in kind.

@bigreb: I'm not a huge fan of whipping out the dictionary but I'll go ahead and do it anyway:

Welfare: Financial or other aid provided, especially by the government, to people in need.

Social Security is financial aid for the elderly. Vetrans benefits are no different. Notice I'm not taking a position on the value of providing welfare before you attack me. I'm just claiming that they are forms of welfare.

What is actually happening with social security is that the people who are taking out of the fund right now have already had the money they "put in" spent on other things.

Well not exactly true
What is Social Security? | National Academy of Social Insurance
What is Social Security?
Social Security is largely a pay-as-you-go program.

I prefer more direct links. I don't need an overview of the program.

Social Security is already paying out less money than most paid in: Social Security Benefits Less Than What Workers Put In | TIME.com

Your link isn't a direct link that refutes my source or what I said.

 

[LibertyLemming]

Well not exactly true
What is Social Security? | National Academy of Social Insurance
What is Social Security?
Social Security is largely a pay-as-you-go program.

I prefer more direct links. I don't need an overview of the program.

Social Security is already paying out less money than most paid in: Social Security Benefits Less Than What Workers Put In | TIME.com

Your link isn't a direct link that refutes my source or what I said.

I didn't read every piece of content on your page. You linked me to an overview of the system which doesn't really tell me much. My link however directly shows that people are paying in (arbitrary number) 1000$ in their lifetime and only receiving (arbitrary number) 750$ back. That more or less proves that they are not getting what THEY put in.

EDIT: I'd prefer you just say what you are trying to say and if I find it ridiculous I'll ask you to prove it or just go ahead and dispute it with facts of my own.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

I prefer more direct links. I don't need an overview of the program.

Social Security is already paying out less money than most paid in: Social Security Benefits Less Than What Workers Put In | TIME.com

Your link isn't a direct link that refutes my source or what I said.

I didn't read every piece of content on your page. You linked me to an overview of the system which doesn't really tell me much. My link however directly shows that people are paying in (arbitrary number) 1000$ in their lifetime and only receiving (arbitrary number) 750$ back. That more or less proves that they are not getting what THEY put in.

EDIT: I'd prefer you just say what you are trying to say and if I find it ridiculous I'll ask you to prove it or just go ahead and dispute it with facts of my own.

Which still does not refute what I said
Social Security is not welfare it's a system that recipients pay into until they retire.

I asked earlier is a retirement plan welfare.

 

[freedombecki]

The GOP's definition of WELFARE inclues social security, and VETERANS benefits.


The GOP loves to play this semantics game.

How are those things not welfare?

Social security is set up to be paid for by contributors' interest, not the government as granting something. It was taken out of people's paychecks, 7% and their employers were also required to pitch in a matching amount to provide for their old age. Congress was to keep this separate. In the 1960s, Lyndon Johnson changed that to up his financial numbers for his election. He literally expropriated people's retirement savings to use as part of his budget. Since then, all others have done the same thing. Now, it's used as "gift from the government" status as Obama stole Medicare money to start of Obama care with.

Obama has no honor in stealing money from me to give to his pet rock project. That was money taxpayers put there for their own pensions, and Obama took it upon himself to take that away because he doesn't understand that other people's money is not his ticket. He thinks everything belongs to him, and that he can withhold government services from Arizona and senior citizens' social security benefits into his pet rock project of taking all America's money and putting it in Democrat pockets. He gets his share in campaign contributions, or he doesn't play.

His overblown ego tells him he is priviledged to steal money through taxes and social security payments that other people made that is truly not his to take.

Obama is trouble, trouble, and nothing but trouble, stealing other people's money any which way he can.

 

[PaulS1950]

I paid into SS for nore than 40 years. I paid into 401K plans for 20 years and I paid into a real retirement program for just 8 years. I get 11% of my income from the retirement account. I think they ought to do away with SS and the 401Ks and set up real retirement accounts. If I had put into the retirement account for 40 years I would be making more now than when I was working.
Social security is not welfare but it sure pays like it is.

 

[Care4all]

The GOP's definition of WELFARE inclues social security, and VETERANS benefits.


The GOP loves to play this semantics game.

How are those things not welfare?

Social security is set up to be paid for by contributors' interest, not the government as granting something. It was taken out of people's paychecks, 7% and their employers were also required to pitch in a matching amount to provide for their old age. Congress was to keep this separate. In the 1960s, Lyndon Johnson changed that to up his financial numbers for his election. He literally expropriated people's retirement savings to use as part of his budget. Since then, all others have done the same thing. Now, it's used as "gift from the government" status as Obama stole Medicare money to start of Obama care with.

Obama has no honor in stealing money from me to give to his pet rock project. That was money taxpayers put there for their own pensions, and Obama took it upon himself to take that away because he doesn't understand that other people's money is not his ticket. He thinks everything belongs to him, and that he can withhold government services from Arizona and senior citizens' social security benefits into his pet rock project of taking all America's money and putting it in Democrat pockets. He gets his share in campaign contributions, or he doesn't play.

His overblown ego tells him he is priviledged to steal money through taxes and social security payments that other people made that is truly not his to take.

Obama is trouble, trouble, and nothing but trouble, stealing other people's money any which way he can.

NOT quite right there Becki....LBJ added SS to the fiscal budget so he could MASK the percentage of the budget used for Defense....the Viet Nam war....with SS as a part of the budget, it made the percentage paid out for defense spending appear much smaller.

HE DID NOT use or steal any SS funds to pay for anything other than SS....at the time SS taxes were only 3% plus employer match...

There was NO SURPLUS monies collected for SS, it was a PAY AS YOU GO system.

It was NOT UNTIL Reagan, who gave us a 100% TAX INCREASE on SS taxes, and DOUBLED what we and our employers had to pay in SS taxes, that a ''SS surplus'' became available for him and all other presidents and congresses there after to 'spend' or rather to mask their budget deficits with the SS surplus collected. ty Reagan, NOT!

 

[bigrebnc1775]

How are those things not welfare?

Social security is set up to be paid for by contributors' interest, not the government as granting something. It was taken out of people's paychecks, 7% and their employers were also required to pitch in a matching amount to provide for their old age. Congress was to keep this separate. In the 1960s, Lyndon Johnson changed that to up his financial numbers for his election. He literally expropriated people's retirement savings to use as part of his budget. Since then, all others have done the same thing. Now, it's used as "gift from the government" status as Obama stole Medicare money to start of Obama care with.

Obama has no honor in stealing money from me to give to his pet rock project. That was money taxpayers put there for their own pensions, and Obama took it upon himself to take that away because he doesn't understand that other people's money is not his ticket. He thinks everything belongs to him, and that he can withhold government services from Arizona and senior citizens' social security benefits into his pet rock project of taking all America's money and putting it in Democrat pockets. He gets his share in campaign contributions, or he doesn't play.

His overblown ego tells him he is priviledged to steal money through taxes and social security payments that other people made that is truly not his to take.

Obama is trouble, trouble, and nothing but trouble, stealing other people's money any which way he can.

NOT quite right there Becki....LBJ added SS to the fiscal budget so he could MASK the percentage of the budget used for Defense....the Viet Nam war....with SS as a part of the budget, it made the percentage paid out for defense spending appear much smaller.

HE DID NOT use or steal any SS funds to pay for anything other than SS....at the time SS taxes were only 3% plus employer match...

There was NO SURPLUS monies collected for SS, it was a PAY AS YOU GO system.

It was NOT UNTIL Reagan, who gave us a 100% TAX INCREASE on SS taxes, and DOUBLED what we and our employers had to pay in SS taxes, that a ''SS surplus'' became available for him and all other presidents and congresses there after to 'spend' or rather to mask their budget deficits with the SS surplus collected. ty Reagan, NOT!

Well Clinton sure did