End all social welfare programs immediately

a reply to: onequestion

A step in the wrong direction from what the future holds.
The world will be automated, whether we like it or not, social welfare and programs alike need to evolve from it's current state, not be taken down.

a reply to: strongfp

So should we keep giving people free money to pay for them to train new people when apparently their business is already massively profitable?

Seems like big government is a total waste time to restore the power to the people

The problem is that if we don't provide welfare or social progams/safety nets, it's puts stress on other areas. And not only stress but it takes money out of these areas.

People without any safety nets, commit more crime, clog up emergency rooms, take more rides in ambulances, take up more room in over crowded jail cells, get sent to prison more, take up hospital rooms and rooms in psych wards, do more damage to public spaces and infrastructure, all that gets paid for by some government somewhere. It's cheaper in the long run to provide a safety net/program.

However, having said that, we also need to provide people with a way out...skills/jobs programs. We don't show the people the way out. We need to. Not everyone knows that they can change their lives simply.

a reply to: amazing

Who's going to hire them when their business isn't scallable because they can't take on the extra cost

originally posted by: onequestion
reply to: olaru12

I don't get it if your running such a profitable business why am I paying you to train people

Because I have the knowledge and facilities to help out.

Your ideology is getting in the way of your common sense.

btw...we don't hire crybabies.

I can see where your wanting to go with this, but the implementation may need to be approached.

Government Aide to Foreign Nations / Trade - This one can be cut almost to the bone. We do not need to be gifting to other countries what do we really owe them, why do we need to bribe and or support them? If the money is so we can have a base or an Embassy there then Pull those boys and Girls home. As far As I see we have not lost a war why are we paying reparations or trying to keep other countries safe, we need to focus on the good old US for a while. As for trade deficits where our exports are getting taxed more then those we import from, that needs to stop ASAP, we need to set a policy where we match % for % what we tax incoming goods to other countries with the condition if they go higher we go higher, if they go lower we lower after 1 year to match, if they want free trade with us then they have to go free first then 1 year we match. They go back up then we match where they went to. If a nation is at war or "armed conflict / rebellion" we do not trade with them or who they are at war with until they have reached peace, if they want American goods they can buy them from 3rd parties at the up charge of that third party.

Domestic Programs:

1. Food Stamps = This one is a pain but here we go, Uncouple it from the farm bill do not let it hide in there anymore make it its own thing. Enforce time limit and Income Tax reimbursement on it if it comes out of the income tax refund that sours the tit on it and people will stop suckling it. A reasonable time limit moves it from a hand out Benefit to a hand up benefit. Maybe add a governmental community service requirement to it for those that are not on disability. Random Drug screen mandatory, hey employed people have to put up with it for hard earned money, same should go for welfare dole money fair is fair after all.

2. Disability programs = Regular checks with doctors on state of persons health and cause of disability, annual reviews if the qualifying problem still exists then there should be no issue, this cuts down on the fraud. Otherwise Leave this Alone.

3. FASA collage money loans = This already goes to collections then if that fails goes to IRS let it stay there. Grants are fine how they are, and VA benefits are basically Prepaid with time in service to the Government Nothing I can see needing to be cut here.

4. Social Security = This one is more difficult, it needs to be Sun Set with a few cut off dates, first cut off date stops collection from paychecks for those who are below a certain age to stop paying into it, over that age you continue as normal. This forces the younger generation to have to plan their life better, maybe even make it a required class for high school graduation like a Math of Money thing... The second date will be when the last person paying into it starts collecting The system then takes it out of the National Budget directly until the last person collecting it dies off (the Third date).

5. Unemployment = Enforce the Limits, include random drug testing, encourage partial employment situations where the person can take a lower wage until they either run out of time or they find employment equal or greater then the job they had prior to going on unemployment.

There we go some ideas on how to approach the topic... But that is not my personal choice...

Instead...

Switch to a pure 7% Sales Based National Tax, Remove the Income tax, Remove the Income tax Refund, what money the government collects from the sales tax is all they get, they have a one year delay on spending from collection, this means the budget can be done ZERO based off the Previous years Taxes. If the government can not afford something then it gets cut, not a penny spent over the total net income of the previous year. Bear in mind though with the population of the USA and the consumer mindset we have there will be a surplus after paying for all existing programs with out having to change much, and it can be adjusted down year to year until the surplus is gone.... Mind it also would require congress to mint what 20 1 trillion dollar coins out of the surplus to reset the debt record to zero, note I said congress not the federal reserve.

There we go Two Solution sets.

Something to chew on

CoBaZ

a reply to: CoBaZ

Thanks I like your ideas and I'm glad you understand the problems and didn't knee jerk emotionally react without offering any solutions of your own.

Great options I like them better than what we have now.

at least if consolidated all these program into one, they'd have a better understanding of just how much some people are getting in assistance!
the way I would handle it is to have it coming from one source, estimate the amount that is needed for the average sized family to survive, and then make the amount paid to that family a little less that your estimate, and increase the living wage to the amount you are giving out in aide. and, treat other family sizes, and working families who just need help likewise, just bring them up to that minimum wage level. that might help bring the cost of living closer to being in line with the wages people earn. but you are not going to be able to cut welfare out completely till you have the cost of living jiving with the wages that are being earned by so many more in line with each other.

and by the way, it cost money to dispose of bodies also, so don't think you are getting off in the clear by just letting the poor starve to death. and as far as the gov't not being in the charity business, well, when was the last time it didn't have some type of welfare program???

a reply to: olaru12

In not a cry baby just seeks ridiculous that I'm paying you to train people when obviously you can afford it on your own.

Looks like the real entitlement queens aren't only millenials but business owners as well.

The entitlement mentality is strong in today's day and age.

a reply to: onequestion

Did you miss the entire thread or is that all you got?

Nah, I had the pleasure of reading all the deep thoughts ... and that short post of mine might not be all I got, but importantly, it's all I need.

a reply to: ketsuko

That's an excellent idea. There's already too much confusion in the system that offers too much opportunity for abuse. Whatever is done, it must be done with an established expiration date, and with the understanding that Social Programs must be eradicated with no option to bring them back.

originally posted by: onequestion
Tell me how much it costs to hire a full time employee and why

You keep posing this question, so let me answer it for you.

Simply put, it cost less than the employee generates for the company.

Any "for-profit" business owner that hires employees who's services don't generate a net profit for the company is probably not going to succeed.

Now that's pretty basic.

originally posted by: onequestion
a reply to: pikestaff

Tell me how much it costs to hire a full time employee and why

Depends I know some salesmen that make my company millions.

a reply to: Flatfish

Great but that tells us nothing

a reply to: amicktd

Great is that on average or the exception to the rule

a reply to: BELIEVERpriest

Getting people out of poverty so we don't NEED those programs would be ideal... I would like to see people present ideas on how to accomplish this. Keeping in mind that there are disabled, elderly and children who, as a civil society, we should not cast into the midden heap.

Do you agree??

AB

a reply to: onequestion

what state do you live in ?

the last time I had this discussion was with someone who lives in New York. I told him welfare was a small portion of the budget, he insisted it was about 40%

In New York, interest is 3%, welfare is 4%

forgive my lame internet skills, I am trying to post a chart, but for now a link will have to do

NY data

someone making $40,000 would owe NYS $1,750

4% of that is$70

please direct your righteous anger at something worth the effort, lol

originally posted by: onequestion
a reply to: amicktd

Great is that on average or the exception to the rule

No that is the top salesmen of the company, but I can tell you all of them make the company money. Other positions are also beneficial to the company or they just wouldn't hire them.

originally posted by: AboveBoard
a reply to: BELIEVERpriest

Getting people out of poverty so we don't NEED those programs would be ideal... I would like to see people present ideas on how to accomplish this. Keeping in mind that there are disabled, elderly and children who, as a civil society, we should not cast into the midden heap.

Do you agree??

AB

These programs were designed FOR the ones who absolutely could not do for themselves, not the ones who can but choose not to or made choices that inhibited their ability to.

I think people should be encouraged to hold down jobs, any jobs, and their disbursements should be tailored to supplement their income up to a point. We need to end the all-or-nothing approach so many of our programs are. It is enormously disincentivizing to realize that if you make just a single penny too much on your own, you loose more than that penny could hope to compensate for.

Try a weaning approach with perks attached to making more on your own than you simply take. Perhaps the more independent you become, the less restrictions like drug tests and the like could be attached to your aid.

a reply to: CoBaZ

To your first point, part of the money we give in foreign aid, if not all of it, isn't simply out of the goodness of our hearts. It gives us control in those regions. We buy a voice and power. It replaces war in some circumstances. It is part of the art of Diplomacy and Negotiation between nations.

I don't like the idea of people going hungry in America while we feed other nations, but I think its not simply Charity. Again, we purchase power and a voice. It may not always seem obvious how, either. We may be purchasing a voice with another wealthy nation rather than directly in the area we give to. Or we may be sticking our noses into an area because we see its economic potential for US companies, if ONLY it were a more stable area for them to expand to...etc.

In other words - it ain't as simple as it looks.

peace,
AB