It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

It's over... The balance has tipped and the welfare state has won... For now...

page: 6
24
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 20 2014 @ 03:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: intrepid
a reply to: Mirthful Me

My friend, and I hope we can still be, is corporate welfare that you just disected. AND corporate welfare cost the taxpayer WAY more than what social welfare costs.



We'll always be friends... No matter how wrong you are...


I have no love of, and no reason to support any welfare, personal, corporate or state... Given the chance I would contract the federal government to it's constitutionally enumerated size, and return everything else to the states... As it was intended to be (yea, 10th Amendment)... If a state wishes to go down the fiscal insanity of progressive socialism then so be it... But when they crash and burn, they are on their own.




posted on Aug, 20 2014 @ 03:39 PM
link   
a reply to: Mirthful Me

If we are going to start with the "socialist bloat" let's start with the Corporate socialist bloat.

Individual welfare has grown because America hasn't been fixed yet. America most likely won't get fixed either. But let's focus on individual welfare as a major problem rather than the REAL problems.

The only thing individual welfare creates is a class of people that are less likely to revolt as long as the free money is flowing. But stoppage is inevitable as is the other thing.



posted on Aug, 20 2014 @ 03:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: Mirthful Me

originally posted by: intrepid
a reply to: Mirthful Me

My friend, and I hope we can still be, is corporate welfare that you just disected. AND corporate welfare cost the taxpayer WAY more than what social welfare costs.



We'll always be friends... No matter how wrong you are...


I have no love of, and no reason to support any welfare, personal, corporate or state... Given the chance I would contract the federal government to it's constitutionally enumerated size, and return everything else to the states... As it was intended to be (yea, 10th Amendment)... If a state wishes to go down the fiscal insanity of progressive socialism then so be it... But when they crash and burn, they are on their own.


AND I"M COOL WITH THAT. I totally agree. What about bailing out AIG? Savings and loan. The airline industry in the 80's? The RIDICULOUS money that Halliburton, Boeing, etc make off of the regular Joe? No one in ANY state has a say over that crap.



posted on Aug, 20 2014 @ 03:43 PM
link   
Read "Capital in the Twenty-First Century" by Thomas Piketty. a reply to: Mirthful Me



posted on Aug, 20 2014 @ 03:45 PM
link   
These numbers really mean nothing as they do not break down what portion of those people are working. It is no secret that most of Walmarks workers get some sort of aid to survive and it is also no secret that many in the military do as well. So in a way it is more a condemnation of corporate America who no longer pays its workers a woking wage and expects the Government to pick up the slack. Yet for some reason in American the same people who complain about this are also against regulation companies, unions, and increased wages. If we are going to let companies do whatever they want then we are going to be stuck picking up the check.



posted on Aug, 20 2014 @ 03:45 PM
link   

originally posted by: intrepid
AND I"M COOL WITH THAT. I totally agree. What about bailing out AIG? Savings and loan. The airline industry in the 80's? The RIDICULOUS money that Halliburton, Boeing, etc make off of the regular Joe? No one in ANY state has a say over that crap.


Pffft... I would have bankrupted General Motors and Chrysler... TARP? Don't get me started...

Once again, all of those actions taken were unconstitutional and violated the rights of the citizens of the United States of America...



posted on Aug, 20 2014 @ 04:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: Pants3204


The only regulation required (aside from a few things) is that which is provided by free enterprise. The power of competition is a much more powerful tool than government regulation, which leads to the situation we have today.


The Big Multinational Corporations and Banks that write regulations to pass off to their cronies in DC do not want competition.
It is not those on welfare and food stamps writing these policies. That would be the lobbyists passing it off to their cronies.

There was a time when the aid available from the government was Government Surplus like Cheese, Powered Milk and so on.
Corporate Cronies did not like that because they could not get a cut of that tax payer money through their usual loopholes.

Grocery Stores was not enough so now Fast Food places and Restaurants lobbied to get a cut off that money as well.

The solution is simple, boot out the Corporations and Bank Lobbyists and the Corporate and Banking Politicians out of DC.



posted on Aug, 20 2014 @ 04:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: LeatherNLace
a reply to: Mirthful Me




I see little hope of correcting this political malfeasance



Ironically, the majority of these recipients live in the southern, red states. Those folks generally vote Republican and against their own self interest, so I wouldn't give up hope if I were you.


States like California, Illinois, New York maybe ?

Other States with high population cities ?

Perhaps we should remove the Social Security/Medicare from the "equations" ?




posted on Aug, 20 2014 @ 04:40 PM
link   
a reply to: Mirthful Me


The topic of the thread is that the tipping point has been reached... That there are more "takers" than "givers" and given that fact, that the Liberal/Progressive/Democrat/Socialist candidates and agenda will prevail for the near future... It is inevitable... And terminal in nature.


That's an interesting opinion based on your political bent and presented as a fact. I dispute the whole "takers" vs "givers" paradigm as it creates a false dichotomy intended to have the remnants of the middle class blaming the poor and feeling not only some sort of bizarre kinship with the wealthy (as if that wasn't bad enough) but an indebtedness?

Sounds like the sort of rhetoric a fascist would try foisting on somebody.

Worship of the "Job Creators." Trickle-down heterodox fantasy. Ayn Rand-esque justification for right-wing sociopathy.


The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness.


-- John Kenneth Galbraith
edit on 2014-8-20 by theantediluvian because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 20 2014 @ 04:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: theantediluvian
a reply to: Mirthful Me

Rich people need everyone else, not the other way around. You want to know how the system is really broken? The level of income disparity we are experiencing is unsustainable. How can we justify 5 people (the Walton heirs) having more wealth than the bottom 40% of their countrymen? 6 people worth more than 125 million people?


I've said it before and will say it again.
During the Soviet Era when we had a thriving Middle Class, we looked down on the Soviets with our propaganda machine where they had increasing income and wealth inequality. The ones at the state level had the most wealth while everyone else was poor.

The Big Corporations and Banks own our government and likewise hold the most wealth while everyone else is sinking and the tune has changed where an increasing Income and Wealth Inequality is A OK.

Walmart, Goldman Sachs and so on would not be where they are if it were not for the Corporate and Banking Lobbyists lobbying for "Free Trade Pacts" with their crony politicians.



posted on Aug, 20 2014 @ 05:16 PM
link   
a reply to: Mirthful Me

I had heard some person commenting on CtoCam that the difference between the depression of today and the depression of the 1930's is that in the 30's you had a visual reality check by all the bread lines and soup kitchens. Today the visual reality is hidden by issuing government money straight to the people. Therefore the vast majority of people do not see the depression.



posted on Aug, 20 2014 @ 05:39 PM
link   
a reply to: Mirthful Me

one thing I know for sure:

People with jobs aren't rioting in Ferguson.

People with jobs didn't show up at OWS for 3 weeks straight

People with jobs rarely are rioting, and rarely are protesting more than a day, 2 max. Because doing that doesn't help them keep jobs.

Maybe its more accurate to say, "People with stuff to keep paying for" instead of "people with jobs". But one begets the other....so i guess it doesn't matter so much.

Point being: the welfare state will destroy itself. Because idle hands are the devils playground, people without jobs will get restless and go looking for something to fill up their time (other than earning a living and facing the daily grind).

Will it suck for awhile? Certainly. But you see....a welfare state creates a system of classes. And the welfare recipients won't tolerate being treated like second class citizens forever. Especially when they are free to start throwing a fit to begin with.

It violates the human spirit to give him everything he wants without working for it. And I suspect before it is all said and done, it will be welfare recipients instigating any kind of change in the system (albeit, most likely unwittingly)



posted on Aug, 20 2014 @ 05:41 PM
link   
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

You could also look at in different way. 2 parents have to work 1.5 jobs each to provide. Doesn't leave much time for protesting/bitching about the economy does it?



posted on Aug, 20 2014 @ 06:45 PM
link   
a reply to: Mirthful Me

If this is a "welfare bubble" like you describe, what will happen after it collapses? When housing bubbles pop, house prices plummet. When "welfare bubbles" pop, will we see a drop in consumer necessities like basic food staples, rent, and utilities?

The market may have to adjust or the button-pushers for all of these industries will collapse soon after. Perhaps a welfare bubble collapse would end up being good. Of course... we only like to bail out banks so maybe it wouldn't turn out as well as the housing crisis did.



posted on Aug, 20 2014 @ 07:00 PM
link   
Economics 101 was cut from the American public school curriculum decades ago, to make room for 'Anti-Capitalist Revisionist History' and the supplemental class 'Evil Rich White Guys Who Built America.'

That's why things have gotten this bad, and that's why many replies in this thread are so far off-base.



posted on Aug, 20 2014 @ 07:05 PM
link   
a reply to: OpenMindedRealist

Funny, I had to take an econ class in school and I did not graduate that long ago. Hell, my son is taking an econ class this semester. Guess I didn't see an "Anti-Capitalist Revisionist History Class" on his schedule.

Thing's have gotten this bad because we took out the checks on business' and banks and let capitalism run amok. It would have been just fine if we left the corporate charter system alone, but no.....we had to let the wolves out of the cage.



posted on Aug, 20 2014 @ 07:08 PM
link   
a reply to: Cuervo
A welfare bubble collapse could very well equal total economic collapse, when you have 30%+ of the population reliant upon government handouts. Imagine a society where all of the people provide for themselves by creating something of value. Then imagine 30% of them loosing their jobs all at once. Results are the same; even those who still have jobs will be affected.

Economics 101...



posted on Aug, 20 2014 @ 07:15 PM
link   
a reply to: Pants3204


Obviously if we wish to follow the model of the Scandinavians, the solution isn't to spend more. We already spend nearly as much per dollar in the United States as they do.


Yes, you are correct. The solution is to TAX more (share), not "spend more" of the taxpayers' money (which is 'taken', not willingly 'shared' by many) to the benefit of the mega global corps that don't pull their own weight - nonono...
they provide 'gains' to their precious shareholders at the expense of people's lives. A factory collapses in Bangladesh.
People evicted from their homes right here in the USA.


edit on 8/20/2014 by BuzzyWigs because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 20 2014 @ 07:16 PM
link   
a reply to: sheepslayer247

I took economics 101 as well, 11 years ago. It was only two months long, because US government and economics were crammed into a single semester. That's nowhere near enough time to convey the relevant information, so my grade was based mostly on summarizing newspaper articles. Tests, which are meant to guage my comprehension, only accounted for 20% of my grade.

I was not being literal. The class is still offered, but the material is not taught.


edit on 20-8-2014 by OpenMindedRealist because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 20 2014 @ 07:27 PM
link   
a reply to: jrod

The only problem is, if you look at history back in the days of Carnegie etc the difference in wealth was actually higher. The richer were richer and the poorer were poorer.

The main problem is with HUD properties and those who are content to live there, pay their $25/month for a crap all utilities paid apartment, while they collect their $660/month from SSI and get SNAP (what used to be called food stamps). Most of those in that situation are not looking to get out, they are making babies like the human race was going extinct and they are raising kids with crap for role models and more than likely destined to remain in the cycle.

Once you add to that the piss poor economy we have, the banishment of manufacturing overseas and the growth of the "McDonald economy" (service economy) we are screwed.

Yes, by all means, let's reward those who contribute zilch to the economy and instead just take take take. By all means let's penalize those who show ingenuity, drive and ambition and have a sincere desire to better themselves and their families.



edit on 20-8-2014 by bbracken677 because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
24
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join