U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 03-01-2018, 02:02 PM
 
Location: Aurora Denveralis
3,036 posts, read 1,028,996 times
Reputation: 3864

Advertisements

Besides all the other points, the OP is essentially 100% backwards, at least from a conventional viewpoint. Our future choices consist of "expanding entitlements" (to use the thread vernacular) or having our cities end up looking like the worst of New Delhi and Bombay slums, with tens of millions or more what we quaintly call "homeless."

The third choice is global genocidal war, and I wouldn't bet against that one.

It's only the smuggest of the Havesies and their working-class chauvinists who think we can kick and cuff and starve everyone back to the glory days of 1955.

 
Old 03-01-2018, 02:09 PM
 
Location: Aurora Denveralis
3,036 posts, read 1,028,996 times
Reputation: 3864
Quote:
Originally Posted by whocares811 View Post
I know that many people get WAY more back from Social Security than they put into it,
Vastly so, especially for those who put in their contributions further back in the inflationary curve. There are varying ways to interpret it, but using the same contributions and a fair growth curve, most retirees exhaust their contributed amounts in a few years - I've seen 3 to 5 most often, I think. And let's not even start on the medical costs of 65 to the grave for most individuals.

The idea that anyone receiving SS or Medicare "paid" for it is on a par with saying a PowerBall winner "paid" for their winnings with a $5 ticket. It's a flat-out entitlement... but of a wealthy, politically engaged and very powerful demographic. So that makes it all completely different from "welfare."
 
Old 03-01-2018, 02:15 PM
 
Location: The Triad (NC)
26,867 posts, read 57,900,981 times
Reputation: 29296
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quietude View Post
The idea that anyone receiving SS or Medicare "paid" for it
is on a par with saying a PowerBall winner "paid" for their winnings with a $5 ticket.
hyperbole aside, who is saying that they paid for what they're getting?
SS and Medicare are insurance plans. These people PAID premiums.
 
Old 03-01-2018, 02:19 PM
 
3,472 posts, read 1,986,388 times
Reputation: 7883
Quote:
Originally Posted by parentologist View Post
i hate medicaid! I hate ssi! I hate snap! I hate subsidized housing!

Oops, i just got laid off. I don't have enough money to stay afloat. Quietly, i'll apply for medicaid, snap, maybe i can go on ssi, since i don't think i"m gonna get another job. I just won't tell anyone.

But publicly, i'll continue to shout that i hate all those social welfare programs!

It's sort of like the person who is anti-abortion, until they or their close relative/girlfriend, whatever, needs one. Then they're okay with it.

The only justified social welfare program is the one that i need, and only when i need it.
bingo.
 
Old 03-01-2018, 02:20 PM
 
Location: Aurora Denveralis
3,036 posts, read 1,028,996 times
Reputation: 3864
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrRational View Post
hyperbole aside, who is saying that they paid for what they're getting?
SS and Medicare are insurance plans. These people PAID premiums.
It is a trope in the AARP crowd and the pols who pander to them that "they earned/paid for/deserve their benefits." One out of three ain't bad.
 
Old 03-01-2018, 02:20 PM
 
3,472 posts, read 1,986,388 times
Reputation: 7883
Quote:
Originally Posted by RamenAddict View Post
Or, you know, it could be that the boomers are now eligible for social security and Medicare. There are more of them than there were of previous generations and the silent generation is still going strong.
Double BINGO.
 
Old 03-01-2018, 02:41 PM
 
Location: WA
5,293 posts, read 20,713,721 times
Reputation: 5622
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quietude View Post
...
The idea that anyone receiving SS or Medicare "paid" for it is on a par with saying a PowerBall winner "paid" for their winnings with a $5 ticket.
...
Both programs were not optional for most of the population. Adjustments may be needed, but the participants definitely paid for these programs.
 
Old 03-01-2018, 03:05 PM
 
Location: Ohio
18,030 posts, read 13,251,134 times
Reputation: 13834
Quote:
Originally Posted by parentologist View Post
I hate Medicaid! I hate SSI! I hate SNAP! I hate subsidized housing!

oops, I just got laid off. I don't have enough money to stay afloat. Quietly, I'll apply for Medicaid, SNAP, maybe I can go on SSI, since I don't think I"m gonna get another job. I just won't tell anyone.

But publicly, I'll continue to shout that I hate all those social welfare programs!

It's sort of like the person who is anti-abortion, until they or their close relative/girlfriend, whatever, needs one. THEN they're okay with it.

The only justified social welfare program is the one that I need, and only when I need it.
There's no reason for the federal government to fund those programs, when the States can do it, and often do it better than the federal government.

Many States run their own HUD-like housing programs. It happens that Ohio does not, since voters rejected an amendment to the Ohio Constitution, but that was due largely to the fact that cities and counties in Ohio run their own HUD-like housing programs (and the fact that the ballot language was just plain terrible).

Quote:
Originally Posted by RamenAddict View Post
Or, you know, it could be that the boomers are now eligible for social security and Medicare. There are more of them than there were of previous generations and the silent generation is still going strong.
There are 92,477,000 Americans age 55 and older -- 40% of the voting age population, and 70,895,000 age 60 and older.
 
Old 03-01-2018, 03:05 PM
 
5,058 posts, read 604,101 times
Reputation: 13124
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quietude View Post
Vastly so, especially for those who put in their contributions further back in the inflationary curve. There are varying ways to interpret it, but using the same contributions and a fair growth curve, most retirees exhaust their contributed amounts in a few years - I've seen 3 to 5 most often, I think. And let's not even start on the medical costs of 65 to the grave for most individuals.

The idea that anyone receiving SS or Medicare "paid" for it is on a par with saying a PowerBall winner "paid" for their winnings with a $5 ticket. It's a flat-out entitlement... but of a wealthy, politically engaged and very powerful demographic. So that makes it all completely different from "welfare."
I think you are diluting your point with the Powerball comparison. If someone voluntarily spends $5.00 and wins a $50,000,000 Powerball, that is quite different from, just for example, involuntarily paying $50,000 in Social Security deductions and getting back $150,000 -- not only in the rate of return, but also the fact that people do not voluntarily have Social Security payments deducted from their pay. In other words, no one forces someone to play Powerball and Powerball is a gamble -- although I think it is true that some would argue that Social Security today is also a gamble.

And as far as paying the medical costs "to the grave" of elderly U.S. citizens who have worked and paid income taxes for most of their adult lives, I feel much better about paying those costs than I do about paying the medical costs for adults* who have not paid anything for their medical care in any way, meaning insurance premiums, Medicare deductions from their pay, or paying out of their own earnings. (*I do not, however, begrudge paying for necessary medical care for children.)

However, I will NOT dispute that things are not fair in the U.S. in many ways, but I think that it is unfair and unjust to try to group all people who think as I do -- that we ARE entitled to have the medical care and social security to which we contributed -- in with the likes of Bill Gates and Donald Trump and high school drop-out racists. Most people who have paid into Social Security have struggled for most of their lives to pay for their food, clothing, shelter, and other needs; most of us are certainly NOT wealthy except when compared with some people in some poorer countries. (I will willingly admit that most middle-class U.S. citizens live extremely luxurious lives compared with the average citizens of some other countries.)

So now my question is this: Why should people who have not contributed very much toward their present or future welfare be entitled to the same benefits as those who have paid quite a lot of their earnings into "the system"? (And, btw, I can see the justification for this as regards blacks and so-called "American Indians", but NOT for people who have just arrived in the country or for people of any ancestry, including many whites, who have always been content to have others pay their way.)

Last edited by katharsis; 03-01-2018 at 04:30 PM..
 
Old 03-01-2018, 03:06 PM
 
24,952 posts, read 11,617,850 times
Reputation: 11655
Quote:
Originally Posted by steveklein View Post
The rich already pay way more than their fair share of taxes and that will continue with Trump's new tax policy. Military spending is less than half of what it was 50 years ago as a percentage of GDP. Which useless war do you want to stop funding?

Let me know when you want to talk about the hundreds of thousands if not millions of people who are able-bodied, do not work, and continue to rely on the government (read: taxpayers).
The top 1% own 90% of the wealth. And pay about half the taxes.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Closed Thread

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top