REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

Moocher society

POSTED BY: HARDWARE
UPDATED: Friday, April 22, 2011 17:40
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 2019
PAGE 1 of 1

Tuesday, April 19, 2011 5:40 AM

HARDWARE


http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Columns/2011/04/18/Budget-Deficit-Govern
ment-Handouts-Top-Tax-Income.aspx


Quote:


For the first time since the Great Depression, households are receiving more income from the government than they are paying the government in taxes. The combination of more cash from various programs, called transfer payments, and lower taxes has been a double-barreled boost to consumers’ buying power, while also blowing a hole in the deficit. The 1930s offer a cautionary tale: The only other time government income support exceeded taxes paid was from 1931 to 1936. That trend reversed in 1936, after a recovery was underway, and the economy fell back into a second leg of recession during 1937 and 1938.





So, this means that voters on the government tit now outnumber the self-supporting voters.
Quote:


"When the people find they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic" - attributed to Benjamin Franklin




The more I get to know people the more I like my dogs.

...and he that has no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one. Luke 22:36

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, April 19, 2011 6:09 AM

FIVVER


That's always been one of my favorite quotes. Here it is in its entirety:

Quote:

A democracy is always temporary in nature; it simply cannot exist as a permanent form of government. A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover that they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse due to loose fiscal policy, which is always followed by a dictatorship.

The average age of the worlds greatest civilizations from the beginning of history, has been about 200 years. During those 200 years, these nations always progressed through the following sequence:

From bondage to spiritual faith;
From spiritual faith to great courage;
From courage to liberty;
From liberty to abundance;
From abundance to complacency;
From complacency to apathy;
From apathy to dependence;
From dependence back into bondage.



I'd definitely put us in the apathy to dependence category with bondage starting to rear its ugly head. Valerie Jarretts, "We'll be ready to rule from day one." comment is the perfect example.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, April 19, 2011 6:34 AM

ANTHONYT

Freedom is Important because People are Important


Hello,

I think the quote and list you have there don't go together, and I'm not convinced who that quote with the list is attributable to. But anyway, it is food for thought.

The question is, is it true? It feels true. It feels like if people can get something for nothing, they will choose to do so.

But I am faced with a reality around me where people are not rolling in the fruits of the public treasury.

Is it possible that corporations exert more force to vote themselves gifts from the public treasury than individual voters?

Is it possible that governmental organisms like the department of defense exert force from within the system to ensure their own share of gifts in excess of their merits?

In short, might not there be more going on than the simplified, "If people can rob the government blind, they will?"

--Anthony

_______________________________________________

“If you are not free to choose wrongly and irresponsibly, you are not free at all”

Jacob Hornberger

“Freedom is not worth having if it does not connote freedom to err. It passes my comprehension how human beings, be they ever so experienced and able, can delight in depriving other human beings of that precious right.”

Mahatma Gandhi

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, April 19, 2011 11:08 AM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


Are you a moocher, or a producer ?





" I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend. "

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, April 19, 2011 11:20 AM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up


It'd be interesting to see the ratio of taxes versus benefits graphed against household income, instead of lumping all households into one group. I'm betting that higher income households receive less benefits and pay more taxes.

"Keep the Shiny side up"

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, April 19, 2011 11:54 AM

PENGUIN


http://www.snopes.com/politics/ballot/athenian.asp





King of the Mythical Land that is Iowa

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, April 19, 2011 12:01 PM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


Quote:

For the first time since the Great Depression, households are receiving more income from the government than they are paying the government in taxes.
Gee, "households"...that means all of us, right? So that 1%, or even the top 20%, are making a LOT of money, not all of which is going to taxes, obviously, and as mentioned, probably don't get much government money, since they can pay for their own health care, retirement, food, stuff like that...

Let's see, unemployment is government money, isn't it? And isn't taxed, or not very high. So if there are lots and lots and lots of unemployed people, they're not bringing wages into their families and forced to live on unemployment and food stamps. I wonder if that's got anything to do with it?

I think that may sound good, but be just a bit simplistic. I'd like to see ALL the facts. Given there are so many more poor and wages haven't gone up in how long?, I think it's possible this isn't exactly an accurate picture.


Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off



NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, April 19, 2011 12:47 PM

FREMDFIRMA



In response to the first post, I defer to Victorique.


NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, April 19, 2011 1:47 PM

DREAMTROVE


Quote:

Originally posted by fivver:
That's always been one of my favorite quotes. Here it is in its entirety:

Quote:

A democracy is always temporary in nature; it simply cannot exist as a permanent form of government. A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover that they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse due to loose fiscal policy, which is always followed by a dictatorship.

The average age of the worlds greatest civilizations from the beginning of history, has been about 200 years. During those 200 years, these nations always progressed through the following sequence:

From bondage to spiritual faith;
From spiritual faith to great courage;
From courage to liberty;
From liberty to abundance;
From abundance to complacency;
From complacency to apathy;
From apathy to dependence;
From dependence back into bondage.



I'd definitely put us in the apathy to dependence category with bondage starting to rear its ugly head. Valerie Jarretts, "We'll be ready to rule from day one." comment is the perfect example.



That cycle is a kinda scary theory, but has a point. History does look like that. I had already gathered that democracy never lasts very long, and tends to end in a disastrous war.

If you look at this, it's clear that mid-early would be the better part of the cycle to be in, and considering that, and looking for it, Islam comes to mind as being 1 or 2, so ahead of us, Iran is probably the best example of 2. Some catholic countries might be higher. Korea could be 4. Who is currently 3?

That's what a ship is, you know - it's not just a keel and a hull and a deck and sails, that's what a ship needs.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, April 19, 2011 2:05 PM

DREAMTROVE


Penguin

Thanks for the link. As always, snopes is full of it, like mythbusters and other agenda-ridden debunkers.

A quick google search reveals the information to be accurate, contrary to snopes opening "Mostly False."

Tytler wrote a book called "Universal history, from the creation of the world to the beginning of the Eighteenth Century." Misprintings and mistakings of names was common at the time, and is the source of the myriad variations on all sorts of common names in the US. This probably in part because many documents were handwritten. That aside, if could have been a typo.

The email actually does not state that Tytler wrote a book called "the Fall of the Athenian Republic" only that he wrote on the subject, which he did. The words also could have an ellipsis after the word dictatorship, since the quotes are not adjacent, but the words are clearly his, and the sentiments expressed represent his views.

Regardless of the 2000 election results, which weren't really at issue here, I'd have to say "Misspelt his name there."

So, without looking it up, what is Joan of Arc's real name?


That's what a ship is, you know - it's not just a keel and a hull and a deck and sails, that's what a ship needs.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, April 19, 2011 2:28 PM

ANTHONYT

Freedom is Important because People are Important


Hello,

Did deeper, Dream. Not long ago I looked into this and the Tytler attribution is not as clear as I'd hoped. (I am a fan of the quote, if not always a fan of how it's used.)

--Anthony


_______________________________________________

“If you are not free to choose wrongly and irresponsibly, you are not free at all”

Jacob Hornberger

“Freedom is not worth having if it does not connote freedom to err. It passes my comprehension how human beings, be they ever so experienced and able, can delight in depriving other human beings of that precious right.”

Mahatma Gandhi

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, April 19, 2011 6:06 PM

DREAMTROVE


Anthony, I just read a few random pages from the book, I didn't see the quote, but it certainly was in line with the ideas he was presenting.

Cycles tend to manifest in this manner. A causes B which causes C which causes A. This logical progression makes a sort of sense, and whether the idea was distilled by him or someone else paraphrasing, it seems to be his idea. A more thorough study would probably reveal a more complex model. It reminds me somewhat of the Kondratieff Wave.

I had actually just been thinking about democracy, and civilization, and how it tended to last just a couple centuries and then fall into chaos for millennia, and that chaos was a preferable state.


That's what a ship is, you know - it's not just a keel and a hull and a deck and sails, that's what a ship needs.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, April 19, 2011 7:36 PM

RIONAEIRE

Beir bua agus beannacht


Oops, can't get it to delete. "A completely coherant River means writers don't deliver" KatTaya

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, April 19, 2011 9:02 PM

DREAMTROVE


Delete post was one of the functions suggested just now in the suggestion thread. I don't know if Haken slated it for the site. He did slate an app, and the merge-thread function.

That's what a ship is, you know - it's not just a keel and a hull and a deck and sails, that's what a ship needs.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, April 20, 2011 2:53 AM

DREAMTROVE


Quote:

Originally posted by Geezer:
It'd be interesting to see the ratio of taxes versus benefits graphed against household income, instead of lumping all households into one group. I'm betting that higher income households receive less benefits and pay more taxes.

"Keep the Shiny side up"


Is it the nature of charity, or the manner in which it is done. I would hope absent such a distribution system forced upon us, the economic redistribution would be similar.

I know I grew up hungry and we lost our house to taxes as did other families, while the kids we played with had parents with millions, even hundreds of millions, and never talked about money. You wouldn't have known from going from one person's house to another who was rich and who was poor. It was an incredibly unfair system, made no less so by the fact that almost the entirety of the wealth of all families was inherited.

We should have social values that encourage better treatment of ones neighbors. I've made it a life goal to never hide talking about finances, and I hope to some extent that this will shame those that do not. I know I now have it better off than some, probably a sad commentary for someone below poverty to say "than most" but it's probably true, as I know what the average savings both annual and total are. I don't feel that I should plunge back into destitution to help the first needy person who comes along, but I think I should help with whatever is well within my means.

I think that the middle of the graph represents a problem. Why should the govt. be keeping so much of our incomes?

Also, we have a system where it is not just our neighbors we are supporting, but whole other economies. I know that NY is paying in a tremendous amount of money to support red states. I'm not sure how I feel about that. I'm also pretty sure that most red staters are not fond of how that money is being spent. I think there's a larger issue here than just the redistribution of wealth, which, by itself, is not necessarily a bad thing.

If you have a situation where Joe and Sam live equal lives because Joe works his ass off and Sam is a lazy bum, and their incomes are redistributed, that's clearly the sign of a failed system.

However, if you have a situation where Joe lives like a king and Sam lives in the gutter because in another century Joe's ancestors killed Sams ancestors and took their money, that's also the sign of a failed system. Yet, with no corrective measure, such a system would punish the children of Sam to the benefit of the children of Joe in perpetuity.

I have seen how the very people who killed my great grandparents live.

That's what a ship is, you know - it's not just a keel and a hull and a deck and sails, that's what a ship needs.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, April 20, 2011 3:40 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Hardware, this graph is just.... weird. It doesn't really make any point that I can see. There are more sources of government income than household taxes, and more expenditures than just transfers of wealth to households. In addition, as Geezer said, it says nothing about the relative effect at various income levels, nor about the history of how we got here. For example, we COULD be looking at the net effect of wealthy households paying less taxes than before, and larger numbers of people on unemployment, which doesn't mean that we have all suddenly become "moochers".

For example, the article begins... "For the first time since the Great Depression". So, according to the article, households during the Great Depression received net transfers of wealth. To put some historical perspective on this, would you say now that the people "back then" were "moochers", or were they hardworking people who were experiencing an economic collapse not of their making?

Would you have said back then that people should lift themselves up by their bootstraps? If you would have, you wouldn't have been alone. There were MANY people "back then"... mostly the wealthy... calling for the abolition of "government charity".

If your view of the people during the Great depression is different from the people of today, why do you view them differently?

It's easy to be general, but If you want to make your point, you'll have to be a lot more specific.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, April 20, 2011 4:49 AM

HARDWARE


Sig, read the article. It states that households receiving some form of benefits from the government outnumber households that do not. Given that there are arguably more voters receiving benefits than those that do not, where does their self-interest lay? Heinlein said that when you can identify someone's self interest in a proposal you can judge the proposal's worth.

Now, why would those voters endorse any movement to cut themselves off from the government tit? It's not in their self-interest to reduce their income. Sure, there may be some patriotic or self-sacrificing individuals who will recognize that it is best for the country for them to give up the government income. But I don't think that the majority will willingly give up unearned income.

If there are more households with government income, and that equates to more voters with government income, where is the stimulus to cut government handouts and subsidies to individuals?

The more I get to know people the more I like my dogs.

...and he that has no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one. Luke 22:36

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, April 21, 2011 5:53 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


HW, I read the article carefully. It just surprises me that you seemed to have missed the most salient points.

The article says
Quote:

Government transfers of income to households started to overtake personal taxes at the start of 2008
So, this trend began in 2008.

Did everyone suddenly decide stop working? Was there a mass decision to skate on government money? Did our nation's moral fiber suddenly unravel? In other words, did we suddenly and voluntarily become a nature of "moochers", as you suggest?

Or did this happen because of financial collapse, economic contraction, and massive unemployment?

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, April 21, 2011 8:37 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Also, think about the inverse of the question:

Up until 2008, households were putting more money INTO the system than they were getting OUT. You didn't seem to notice that, or find it particularly remarkable.

So, let me ask: WHO was getting that "excess"money? And how come you're not labeling THEM "moochers"?

Anyway, I'll leave you with those two thoughts for now. Real life calls.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, April 22, 2011 9:16 AM

DREAMTROVE


Sig,

The govt. The military in particular. Or the moochitary, perhaps. We also have a federal monetary, I mean moochetary (with an e) system which is leeching. Maybe collectively they're the moochatary

That's what a ship is, you know - it's not just a keel and a hull and a deck and sails, that's what a ship needs.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, April 22, 2011 5:40 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


DT- BWAHAHAHAHA!! Thanks!

HARDWARE- You seem like a person who wants to get at the facts. Piece of advice, if you don't mind? Widen your scope of input.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

YOUR OPTIONS

NEW POSTS TODAY

USERPOST DATE

OTHER TOPICS

DISCUSSIONS
Russia Invades Ukraine. Again
Thu, November 7, 2024 03:58 - 7427 posts
Trump wins 2024. Republicans control Senate.
Thu, November 7, 2024 02:49 - 13 posts
Countdown Clock, Trump Going to Jail
Thu, November 7, 2024 02:21 - 1481 posts
In the garden, and RAIN!!! (2)
Wed, November 6, 2024 23:42 - 4681 posts
Elections; 2024
Wed, November 6, 2024 23:15 - 4614 posts
Kamala Harris for President
Wed, November 6, 2024 23:09 - 645 posts
That didn't take long...
Wed, November 6, 2024 22:08 - 36 posts
Electoral College, ReSteal 2024 Edition
Wed, November 6, 2024 21:59 - 43 posts
Will Your State Regain It's Representation Next Decade?
Wed, November 6, 2024 20:54 - 111 posts
Get Woke, Go Broke
Wed, November 6, 2024 20:36 - 66 posts
Suspect arrested after attack on Paul Pelosi, American businessman, married to Nancy Pelosi Speaker of the United States House of Representatives
Wed, November 6, 2024 20:22 - 62 posts
Where are the Libertarians?
Wed, November 6, 2024 20:16 - 91 posts

FFF.NET SOCIAL