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.

 

Military Spending versus welfare sucking libtards

page: 1
13
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 19 2018 @ 09:42 AM
link   
I have heard countless times right wingers vitriol comments about "liberals" getting a free ride with welfare. I've heard people claim immigrants are getting thousands of dollars per month and a free $100,000 car. I've heard many right wingers call this a "socialist" country because of welfare spending. And I've heard countless times people being labeled "communists" and that "communists" have taken over this country even though wealth inequality is at all time highs.

I've seen some right winger numbers include Social Security as welfare: "It shows up in this recent report from the Cato Institute, which argues that the federal government spends $668 billion dollars per year on 126 different welfare programs (spending by the state and local governments push that figure up to $1 trillion per year).Jan 12, 2014."

So if facts are still important, let's consider the facts. Of course, these facts may be made up fake news numbers. But I've seen basically the same numbers quoted in multiple sources including government websites. So consider the following:



1) Cash and cash-like programs: As Michael Linden of Center for American Progress told me, there are five big programs in the Cato list that are most analogous to what people think of as “welfare”: The refundable part of the Earned Income Tax Credit ($55 billion), Temporary Assistance for Needy Families ($21 billion), Supplemental Security Income ($43.7 billion), food stamps ($75 billion), and housing vouchers ($18 billion) and the Child Tax Credit. All together, that’s around $212 billion dollars."

2) Health care: This is actually the biggest item on Cato’s list. Medicaid spends $228 billion on the non-elderly population, and children’s health insurance plan takes up another $13.5 billion. This is also roughly a third as well.

3) Opportunity-related programs: These are programs that are broadly related to opportunities, mostly in education or job-training. So you have things like Title 1 grants ($14 billion) and Head Start ($7.1 billion) in this category. But as Center on Budget and Policy Priorities’ Donna Pavetti notes, these programs don’t all go to poor people. For instance, Title I benefits school districts with a large share of poor children, however that money will help non-poor students attending those schools.

4) Targeted and community programs: What remains are programs designed to provide certain services to poor communities, which make up the bulk of the number of programs. Adoption assistance ($2.5 billion) and low income taxpayer clinics ($9.9 million) are two examples here.


www.washingtonpost.com...

The federal government spends just $212 billion per year on what we could reasonably call "welfare". I don't think Social Security should be considered welfare spending. And Adoption assistance type programs don't seem to me to be "welfare". When I think of "welfare" I think of cash payments to people who are not able to work.

Regardless of how we split hairs in order to hurt people living in poverty, consider military spending. Recently there has been a big hullabaloo over missing or unauthorized military spending by the Pentagon. I have said that I do not think the US military is any longer of civilian control. If the Pentagon has the ability to spend money without authorization this proves my point.

Here are some recent quotes from recent articles:



The US government may have misspent $21 trillion, a professor at Michigan State University has found. Papers supporting the study briefly went missing just as an audit was announced. Two departments of the US federal government may have spent as much as $21 trillion on things they can’t account for between 1998 and 2015. At least that’s what Mark Skidmore, a Professor of Economics at MSU specializing in public finance, and his team have found.

They came up with the figure after digging the websites of departments of Defense (DoD) and Housing and Urban Development (HUD) as well as repots of the Office of the Inspector General (OIG) over summer.

The research was triggered by Skidmore hearing Catherine Austin Fitts, a former Assistant Secretary in the HUD in the first Bush administration, saying the Inspector General found $6.5 trillion worth of military spending that the DoD couldn’t account for. She was referring to a July 2016 report by the OIG, but Skidmore thought she must be mistaking billion for trillion.




All military spending is socialism. If you compare the missing trillions of Pentagon spending with what we spend on "welfare", the $212 billion dollars represents 0.01 percent of what the military is spending. The military is spending over 100 years of "welfare" with just this one audit.

I understand fighting poverty is a left wing issue, but whatever the truth is here about spending, it seems to me the right wingers are creating false equivalencies and exaggerated hyperbole compared to what is actually happening with government spending.




posted on Jul, 19 2018 @ 09:49 AM
link   
a reply to: dfnj2015

I understand what you're trying to say... But you lost me at military is socialism.

Every country has, and has had a military (for the most part). Many of which are far from socialism or even having social programs.

Now, I would say that our excessive spending relates to corporate welfare in a sense is borderline. (We do no bid contracts, get gouged on prices, don't follow up on things ect.)


so·cial·ism ˈsōSHəˌlizəm/Submit noun a political and economic theory of social organization that advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.
source

Now, having tax funded programs that the government oversees does not constitution socialism.



posted on Jul, 19 2018 @ 09:50 AM
link   
a reply to: CriticalStinker

Military spending is stealing money from tax payers and redistributing it somewhere else of social benefits.

You should watch Skidmore's video, it just floors me how the "adjustments" are made in government spending.


edit on 19-7-2018 by dfnj2015 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 19 2018 @ 09:53 AM
link   
21 trillion isn't "missing" it's just not properly documented due to the ridiculous bureaucracy we've inflicted on our armed services.

This has been discussed and explained numerous times in several threads over just the last 2 weeks or so.

Nice straw man argument though.



posted on Jul, 19 2018 @ 09:53 AM
link   
a reply to: dfnj2015

I always love when people try to justify socialism by pointing to the military. I always have to remind them that you are government property in the military and not a free citizen.



posted on Jul, 19 2018 @ 09:56 AM
link   

originally posted by: watchitburn
21 trillion isn't "missing" it's just not properly documented due to the ridiculous bureaucracy we've inflicted on our armed services.


That is absolutely NOT what Skidmore is saying and documenting in the video.



posted on Jul, 19 2018 @ 09:59 AM
link   
a reply to: dfnj2015

You expect people to waste their time on your video when you start your thread with fallacies?



posted on Jul, 19 2018 @ 10:00 AM
link   
a reply to: dfnj2015


Military spending is stealing money from tax payers and redistributing it somewhere else of social benefits.


Hmmmm... While I am no fan on how we have been using military expenditures, it is not stealing. People voted the clowns in that decide to invade a new country every couple of years. It's happened on the right and the left, and very little mainstream outcries.

We should go back to military isolationism, I agree. We should save money by doing so, I agree. But lets not get rid of the military.

The war on terror has cost around 6~ trillion dollars, much of that being Iraq and our long presence in the region. It will cost about 5~ trillion to fix our infrastructure. I would have rather had the money go to that.

As for your points for "social programs", I'm not a fan. The only social program I want tax dollars going towards is education, it's a mess as it stands.

I would be OK with a health system overhaul, but I would want a junk food luxury tax (tobacco and alcohol too) to pay the vast majority for that if not all.

Tell me how it isn't stealing if you take my money and literally put it in someone else's pocket if we're on the subject. I am proof you don't have to be in debt for university or even finish your degree to be well off in life. If I can do it, most people can, and they should.
edit on 19-7-2018 by CriticalStinker because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 19 2018 @ 10:01 AM
link   

originally posted by: dfnj2015

originally posted by: watchitburn
21 trillion isn't "missing" it's just not properly documented due to the ridiculous bureaucracy we've inflicted on our armed services.


That is absolutely NOT what Skidmore is saying and documenting in the video.


I've never heard of Skidmore, so why should he be the end all be all. Anyone can make a video on YouTube.



posted on Jul, 19 2018 @ 10:03 AM
link   

originally posted by: Thejoncrichton
a reply to: dfnj2015

I always love when people try to justify socialism by pointing to the military. I always have to remind them that you are government property in the military and not a free citizen.


Guns or butter, you can't have both. I get it that you do not consider fighting poverty as important as fighting imaginary enemies. I've made it pretty clear I'm a leftist who thinks fighting poverty over here is MORE important than dropping 30,000 bombs per year on Muslim countries in the Middle East. I'm okay that you have a different opinion about the importance of helping people in our communities as a higher priority. I was not disrespecting your choice at all.


edit on 19-7-2018 by dfnj2015 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 19 2018 @ 10:05 AM
link   

originally posted by: watchitburn
a reply to: dfnj2015

You expect people to waste their time on your video when you start your thread with fallacies?


I have no delusions over anything I post will change any right winger's views of reality one iota. Just ignore the thread.



posted on Jul, 19 2018 @ 10:12 AM
link   


I've seen some right winger numbers include Social Security as welfare:


Because it is.

Your only paying 6% toward the benefit received.

The employer is FORCED to match it.

Still doesn't cover it.

Printing more money doesn't.

Borrowing more money from foreign countries doesn't.

Printing treasuries DOESN'T.

Yeah your getting a FREE RIDE.
edit on 19-7-2018 by neo96 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 19 2018 @ 10:15 AM
link   

originally posted by: CriticalStinker

originally posted by: dfnj2015

originally posted by: watchitburn
21 trillion isn't "missing" it's just not properly documented due to the ridiculous bureaucracy we've inflicted on our armed services.


That is absolutely NOT what Skidmore is saying and documenting in the video.


I've never heard of Skidmore, so why should he be the end all be all. Anyone can make a video on YouTube.


I've heard many leftist criticisms of fascism rising in this country. And one of the things they say as a reason why fascism is on the rise is for right wingers who is talking is MORE important that what is being said. Your comment seems to confirm it. It's not like Skidmore has an agenda as far as I could tell from the video. He was just relaying what he found in his research and from conversations with government officials. I did not think he was "spinning" anything unless you think just talking about a particular topic makes you a "communist".

Here's a really good leftist article on US-style fascism:

truthout.org...


edit on 19-7-2018 by dfnj2015 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 19 2018 @ 10:19 AM
link   
a reply to: neo96

I think you are mistaken. Liabilities of Social Security are held with US Treasury bonds. Unless the government defaults of paying US Treasury bonds Social Security has nothing to do with the budget.



posted on Jul, 19 2018 @ 10:19 AM
link   
a reply to: dfnj2015

Social security is welfare.



posted on Jul, 19 2018 @ 10:21 AM
link   

originally posted by: neo96


I've seen some right winger numbers include Social Security as welfare:


Because it is.

Your only paying 6% toward the benefit received.

The employer is FORCED to match it.

Still doesn't cover it.

Printing more money doesn't.

Borrowing more money from foreign countries doesn't.

Printing treasuries DOESN'T.

Yeah your getting a FREE RIDE.


You know liberals aren't good at math...

The vast majority of people get back far more than they actually contributed while a lot us (like me) won't get back nearly the amount that I have "invested" in social security, particularly when you consider the lost opportunityu cost of me not having that money to invest on my own.

Secondly, social security is welfare because the government does not actually have any of the money that was contributed, not too mention people are getting more than they put in. People falsely believe there is some protected social security account with your name on it. Government already pissed away your money. Social security is an "IOU". At some point, government could say they are going to cut your benefits or not even pay it out.



posted on Jul, 19 2018 @ 10:22 AM
link   
a reply to: dfnj2015

No I'm not.

No one funds their social security by themselves.

There's a snip ton of other peoples money going to that monthly stipend.



posted on Jul, 19 2018 @ 10:23 AM
link   
a reply to: Edumakated




You know liberals aren't good at math...


Ain't that the truth.




posted on Jul, 19 2018 @ 10:25 AM
link   


People falsely believe there is some protected social security account with your name on it


Fleming V Nestor.

Look it up people.



posted on Jul, 19 2018 @ 10:26 AM
link   
a reply to: dfnj2015


I've heard many leftist criticisms of fascism rising in this country. And one of the things they say as a reason why fascism is on the rise is for right wingers who is talking is MORE important that what is being said. Your comment seems to confirm it.


You could have included some background on him. I asked why he should be the end all be all when many of us on this site have looked into the "trillions missing".

I'm not a right winger, I just take my information with a block of salt, and rarely use one source to answer a question.

As for the "rising of fascism", I think it's important to know what that is.


often capitalized : a political philosophy, movement, or regime (such as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition
source

As an independent, I can't speak for everyone, but I think the fact that they keep claiming fascism is on the rise is why people aren't listening to them to much right now. Dictators have absolute power, Trump does not. Dictators cannot be voted out, Trump can. Dictators forcibly suppress opposition, and if you don't count dumb rhetoric on tweets or "CNN is fake news", Trump does not.

You could argue this administration and country are many things, fascist is not one of them... Until you prove me wrong, I'm open minded and would love to see examples. The whole "illegal immigrant" thing not being one, it's being handled poorly, but we are still taking in legal immigrants. I am not a proponent of allowing unlimited in, as it would cause harm to us and them. I'd rather cut back foreign projection and legalize weed so that cartels don't hold those nations hostage... making them more suitable for people to live.




top topics



 
13
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join