neither party will do much to reform the system. the democrats would lose a segment of guaranteed voters and the republicans would NEVER get a vote from that same segment.
I can't help them if they won't help themselves.
Cute but very inaccurate. Less then 2% of the US population is homeless and the vast majority of the people living in poverty eat as well as the upper middle income according to government data. Those that really need help should get it but we really need to look at all the others.
"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damn lies, and statistics" (Mark Twain).
OK then. Why should I, or any other productive citizen, be obligated to pay for a non-productive individual's food, housing, transportation, and amenities, their offspring (choice), including all of the above PLUS a "education"? Where does it say I am OBLIGATED to support these people and their choices? And, yes, I understand that there are exceptions. Go ahead and hate.
Furthermore, the citizen who makes his living in the private sector (no government monetary input) is paying government employees also. If you factor in assistance programs, government jobs, and the ever shrinking true private sector, meaning no income from government contracts, it is likely that 20% of the working population is supporting the other 80%. Obviously, this is a death spiral.
Government does not create wealth. It uses it. Government employees recycle tax dollars, but at least they contribute back into the pool. You cannot say that about those on "assistance programs".
I heard a report that about 50% of people employed in this country were directly employed by some form of government. There is another group who is indirectly employed by government, then a third group who is provided for by the government. The last group contributes through taxes to pay the first three groups.
All in all, a excellent plan for prosperity for someone, while I cough up about 50% of my income to the government. Yay! Me happy.
Furthermore, the citizen who makes his living in the private sector (no government monetary input) is paying government employees also. If you factor in assistance programs, government jobs, and the ever shrinking true private sector, meaning no income from government contracts, it is likely that 20% of the working population is supporting the other 80%. Obviously, this is a death spiral.
Government does not create wealth. It uses it. Government employees recycle tax dollars, but at least they contribute back into the pool. You cannot say that about those on "assistance programs".
I heard a report that about 50% of people employed in this country were directly employed by some form of government. There is another group who is indirectly employed by government, then a third group who is provided for by the government. The last group contributes through taxes to pay the first three groups.
All in all, a excellent plan for prosperity for someone, while I cough up about 50% of my income to the government. Yay! Me happy.
So you weren't single and didn't have to put your newborn in daycare? How did your girlfriend get health insurance?
Sounds pretty commie to me. Non-productive individuals are "allowed" to be removed from the populace. You wouldn't be obligated to support "these people" because in a socialist society, everyone produces! It's a common misconception, though.
The citizen who makes his living in the private sector only works for voucher from another privately owned business that is only worth anything because of the government. Without the Federal Government, greenbacks from the Fed Reserve become as worthless as the paper they are. I could quote the multitude of income inequality stats, but why bother? If someone makes literally 100,000x as much as me, but I work my ass off, why shouldn't I have a little of that? Especially when those people are actually the ones who benefit from government intervention, ie bailouts, federally preserved golden parachutes, CEO bonuses, etc. If you make $30,000 and you pay 20% tax, you are taxed at a much higher rate because smaller numbers are farther apart. Think logarithmically instead of additionally. I can explain further if needed.
Government most certainly creates wealth. The only reason your wealth is worth anything is because of the government, see above. Let's see a business "create" wealth without using: roads, telephones, faxes, internet, television, or otherwise public advertising.
I'm not sure what you are trying to say here. If what you are saying is we all are able to stay employed because of the government, then I certainly agree with you. This is a horribly naked statement, only using two factors, employment and taxes. There's more to real life than that.
All in all, a excellent plan for prosperity for someone, while I cough up about 50% of my income to the government. Yay! Me happy.[/QUOTE]
And has that income been a result of winning the birth lottery and being a US citizen? Would you have that income if you lived in a hut in Indonesia but didn't pay taxes?
When people say "the government" I guess I just don't know what they mean. Isn't it "by the people, of the people, and for the people"? Aren't you and I "the government"? Are you just blaming yourselves?
Also, if you think poor people in America don't go hungry, and receive medical treatment "when needed", you have never been poor in America. That's horribly, horribly wrong.
Also again, I'm sure all the military and law enforcement members on this board appreciate their jobs being called worthless repeatedly. Governments create wealth by declaring war for Pete's sake!
Also again, I'm sure all the military and law enforcement members on this board appreciate their jobs being called worthless repeatedly. Governments create wealth by declaring war for Pete's sake!
Last edited:
