Pawlenty continues to set sights on the poor, elderly, and disabled to "solve" budget crisis

[Haver]

Don't forget that for most Europeans, their generous social packages means the average family does not have to save up large sums of money for college, that they do not have to worry about an illness wiping them out financially, that a job loss when they are living paycheck to paycheck does not carry with it the same level of threat to their lifestyle, and they do not have to contribute as much towards their own retirement. They pay their taxes to the government while we pay ours to the banks and to the medical industry and to their respective stockholders - all at a time when industry groups can turn $100 million of lobbying effort into $2 billion in legislative "reward".

Anyways, I think its inevitable that we will start going down a European benefit path as soon as the majority of baby boomers have used up their savings post-retirement. Nothing focuses the mind so much as lack of money.

[MN-Born-n-Raised]

Originally Posted by Haver

Don't forget that for most Europeans, their generous social packages means the average family does not have to save up large sums of money for college, that they do not have to worry about an illness wiping them out financially, that a job loss when they are living paycheck to paycheck does not carry with it the same level of threat to their lifestyle, and they do not have to contribute as much towards their own retirement. They pay their taxes to the government while we pay ours to the banks and to the medical industry and to their respective stockholders - all at a time when industry groups can turn $100 million of lobbying effort into $2 billion in legislative "reward".

Anyways, I think its inevitable that we will start going down a European benefit path as soon as the majority of baby boomers have used up their savings post-retirement. Nothing focuses the mind so much as lack of money.

IMHO, the reason why the USA (past tense) had 25% of the world's wealth while only 4-5% of the population was because of our unique system. We had a lot of motivation (a.k.a. capitalism on steroids) and the ease of starting a business. It wasn't because of our natural resources our education or fill in the blank we are 4th - 15th on and given ranking that most would assume is the reason for our success. Then, that smaller minority kicked butt and created jobs, wealth, etc. That (team) approach created who we are and currently the richest nation on this planet albeit the percentages are changing.

While some people may not want to hear this, there is a certain personality styles that continue to drive hard well after they have more than they need. Think Ted Turner, Bill Gates, the CEO of every company as well as countless small business owners chasing the American dream.

Those people are wired differently. 1st you need to not mind risk and then you are born with this over achieving personality. Every nation has them but not all nations allow them to fully flourish.

I have learned that you cannot motivate individuals in the long run; you hire motivated people and do your best not to de-motivated them. So don't screw with their pay plans, don't make them write reports that are meaningless, don't crush their motivation by belittling or about 500 countless ways.

So in short, this personality style of motivated risk takers succeed and hire people. They tend on ending up in the top 10% of wage earners. Along the way, some people got greedy and the economic scale has gotten a little lopsided. Additionally, over time the wealth becomes even more powerful. So while we work at getting "civilized" we are about to destroy that hyper-motivated guy by taxing him to death in the spirit of saving the under performer. Guys, without this personality that is allowed to fourish we will be in worse shape. Worse yet, we are motivating the deep under performer who is an anchor on society had they are taking down the average group and higher motivated citizen. They are draining the system.

I own a company that sells to the top 1-5% of income earners and they are the movers-and-shakers. They are not household names but they are known in their community. I know what is going on in their heads and all too many are starting to cover their own butt and using the laws to "get out". They already are wealthy so once you take away the motivation, they are going to mentally shut down. Rest assured it's happening as we speak. It may seem like a foreign concept but it factually is the case. Frankly, I think Obama has figured that out (at least I hope).

So in the end, we won't even be as good as the European socialized state because at least they don't have $13 Trillion in debt. Also, they don't have our large homes to support even with "free" college, medicine, social security etc. Meaning their standard of living is a fraction of what we have. So my personal opinion is if we move towards this sort of government (with our debt) we are in for one long painful experience. As I said before, be careful what you wish for. We can all hope it will go back the way it was but I predict it cannot be done.

[backstaber]

advocacy- been in minnesota never knew of any postive from them

[Haver]

But you are assuming that a European model would be imported "whole cloth" without adapting to American conditions, without looking at how economic systems naturally vary to the culture they exist in. Take capitalism for example: The French and the Germans complain about Anglo-style capitalism. Americans are addicted to credit but the Germans who many of us are descended from are notorious savers and risk-averse. Japanese capitalism is very much tied to their hierarchial culture. Hong Kong is virtually "anything goes". Do you really think the American respect for figures like Bill Gates and Ted Turner and other super-achievers will be shot, killed and buried? Name one political, religious, or economic system which remains absolutely consistent from society to society.

So relax, America will always be the land of freedom and opportunity. The margins we're arguing over are whether or not it will be the land of ungoverned license. This is actually a libertarian reaction: you're free to do anything until it affects ... me! A lot of me's have been affected lately by high-class gamblers and anytime that happens there's a natural impulse to examine the economic order, just like during the progressive era, the new deal, the great society, and the Reagan revolution.

[MN-Born-n-Raised]

Originally Posted by Haver

But you are assuming that a European model would be imported "whole cloth" without adapting to American conditions, without looking at how economic systems naturally vary to the culture they exist in. Take capitalism for example: The French and the Germans complain about Anglo-style capitalism. Americans are addicted to credit but the Germans who many of us are descended from are notorious savers and risk-averse. Japanese capitalism is very much tied to their hierarchial culture. Hong Kong is virtually "anything goes". Do you really think the American respect for figures like Bill Gates and Ted Turner and other super-achievers will be shot, killed and buried? Name one political, religious, or economic system which remains absolutely consistent from society to society.

So relax, America will always be the land of freedom and opportunity. The margins we're arguing over are whether or not it will be the land of ungoverned license. This is actually a libertarian reaction: you're free to do anything until it affects ... me! A lot of me's have been affected lately by high-class gamblers and anytime that happens there's a natural impulse to examine the economic order, just like during the progressive era, the new deal, the great society, and the Reagan revolution.

Make no mistake that I see the problems with capitalism if you don't have checks and balances. A chunk of the problem is that government is lining their pockets (which might mean getting voted in so LATER they can line their pockets). Think Fannie Mae and Wall Street.. The most powerful politicians on both sides of the isle were not particularly interested in doing the right thing. They find it more important to cater to the people that vote them in office. Their goal is a future pay-day by being on the board of Directors like Dick Cheney and Tom Daschle. Both are scum IMHO. So the checks and balances are not working because politicians look the other way.

All of the countries that you mentioned in your capitalism examples pale in comparison to ours. That was my point. Add all of your examples up and they don't come close to 25% of the World's wealth! 25% is the worlds wealth that we had. That was a massive accomplishment. I am not only talking about the super achievers. I'm also talking about the guy who wants his own business and works 100 hours a week to do it. Who is talking about the credit leveraged typical guy. If 1% of the population pays 28% of MN income tax (which is the case) those are the people I am talking about who is an over achievers. Why on God's earth would someone want to take a risk of starting a business and work a 100 hours a week when the reward is so low?? Maybe that is why the German's are risk adverse??

The bottom line is you are assuming you can have free retirement, free health care, free college, a living wage when you are competing against a guy willing to work for $1 an hour doing the same job in China. Guess what. The number's won't work in the not-so-distant future. Hey, some will argue Europe is in worse shape than us. Our problem is we are in Hawk. Meanwhile Camden thinks it is a great thing that our Prez dropped peoples taxes and spent Trillions by printing it. Funny he didn't see the logic of TimPaw making sure they didn't raise our taxes. The difference is the state has to balance the budget while the Fed's just print. It sounds like people learned how to spend from our government.

All I am saying is the people who are set are not going to participate. Right now yours and my taxes are a fraction of Germany for instance because some guy is paying his unfair share. Now we are asking that top 1% group who pay for 28% of MN tax to pick-up some more slack because someone doesn't have healthcare?? Drop the cell phone, stop drinking, cancel cable, sell the house and get a smaller one, take in a renter until you afford the coverage. If not, then my vote is let the person go bankrupt because they don't know how to manage their priorities. If we allowed this to happen more often, people would be more responsible. It sounds cold but that is the way it use to be when we all didn't see the state as a nipple. But that won't happen because people "care" and because it isn't their money. It's funny that the politicians don't "care" ass much for other people in other countries. They "care" to get re-elected.

[Camden Northsider]

Originally Posted by MN-Born-n-Raised

Worse yet, we are motivating the deep under performer who is an anchor on society had they are taking down the average group and higher motivated citizen. They are draining the system.

So in the end, we won't even be as good as the European socialized state because at least they don't have $13 Trillion in debt.

MN Born, your arguments constantly espouse your belief that the US is on a slippery slope of over-spending/ taxation and you point to family welfare/ TANF spending in the US as the culprit to blame for this. This is a classic conservative "red herring" argument that conveniently (and coincidentally it seems) fails to address and/or glosses over the US's biggest spending/ deficit problems.

Total US federal spending for "Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF)"-e.g. family welfare- in FY 2007 (last available data here): $13.6 Billion - note, a small fraction of what Wall Street and other large companies have received this year.

Total MONTHLY US spending on War in Iraq in 2008: $12 billion

Expected total costs of War on Iraq: usually somewhere in the TRILLIONS.

[MN-Born-n-Raised]

Camden. I also think Iraq is the massive mistake. If it was such a great idea (and in hind site is was idiotic) then we should have only picked up a percentage of the tab. But the rest of the world will always look at the USA as the Sugar Daddy just as most Liberal's look at the top 10% as being able to afford it. We have to stop spending money we don't have in all categories.

Additionally a lot of the military expenditures are a complete waste. In the late 80's and early 90's I worked at Honeywell as an engineer and saw what our country got for its money. Honeywell knew that we didn't have to be completely accountable. If you go over by double, that is o.k.. Trippe. No problem. We are "cost plus"; the more the cost the more the plus. In conclusion, don't trust the government to spend correctly or to ever have people accountable. They don't care because they are spending someone elses money!

I heard Economist Milton Friedman say this while being recognized. It is a great summary how the government spends. He said if you are buying your friend a gift with your own money, you care what you buy and how much you spend. If you buy your friend a gift with someone else's money, you care what you buy but not as much on how much you spend. If you buy someone you don't know a gift with someone elses money you don't care what you buy and you don't care how much you spend. He said THAT is how the government behaves. So the more we keep out of the government's hand the better off we all are.

Camden. Just as the republicans know how to doctor the books so do the liberals. Add up local, state, and federal expendutures of citizens who don't contribute enough to pay into social security, healthcare, home owners assistance and welfare and tell me if it only comes to $13.6 billion. Add up all of the human services. I'm not talking about the $250 a week your people get. I'm talking about what happens if they need an operation for $200K. Never mind if what they cost us when they get in an accident without insurance or how we pay for their 4 kids in school per year even though they don't pay any MN income tax or piddles in county taxes. Sorry. If we are being honest they are a drain. If you believe that this is only $13.6 Billion dollar problem, no wonder why you think it is a great idea to fund all of these programs especially since it is your employer.

As I have said before, it's not your money to give. Just because you point to some pigs on Wall Street doesn't give you the green light to rationalize your wasteful spending which is ruining these people. Sink or swim. And that goes for Wall Street. Sink or swim. We taught them that they can be reckless and it won't hurt too much. So it seems our American brand of capitalism that Haver has referred to is capitalism without personal responsibility. Additionally, every 1000 of loss in the stock market is an evaporation of a Trillion of wealth. But a lot of that wealth was fictitious with our housing ponzi scheme. Now that the bubble burst, we all get to realize that we will have to compete with that guy in China who is willing to work for a $1 an hour. Our emotional bubble will burst when we realize what it is going to take to keep people afloat when the unemployment reaches disturbing levels. Think 60% taxes for the average guy because the guys I sell to won't particiapate. We always can blame all of it on republicans when in reality both parties are damaging.

[Camden Northsider]

Originally Posted by MN-Born-n-Raised

If you believe that this is only $13.6 Billion dollar problem, no wonder why you think it is a great idea to fund all of these programs especially since it is your employer.

Again, as I have explained already in this thread, I am not employed by the government, and the programs we are referring to are all government-funded.

Originally Posted by MN-Born-n-Raised

As I have said before, it's not your money to give. Just because you point to some pigs on Wall Street doesn't give you the green light to rationalize your wasteful spending which is ruining these people.

I'm sorry MN Born, but do you know me? For never having met me and knowing nothing about me, you sure make a lot of negative assumptions about me which I find completely unfair. My posts on this board in no way represent my work or the agency I work for- I may vaguely draw on my career experiences to illustrate some points and/or point to a certain subject matter that I have knowledge about, but I find your comments and assumptions highly offensive. I am happy to be someone that devotes 60-80 hours a week on average to the work that I do (and get paid a very average 40/hr week nonprofit salary) as my work involves oversight of programs that empower people to move from one side of the fence (unemployment, welfare recipients, etc.) to the other (productive taxpaying citizens)- the fact that our agency receives government dollars to fund SOME staff and programs means that we take on an even greater level of social responsibility and accountability in the work that we do. I find any one/organization that purposefully takes advantage of/ misuses taxpayer dollars to be grossly unethical, and I view your former coworkers at Honeywell to be highly criminal- much moreso than the "hustler" welfare recipient stereotype that you are so hellbent on propogating.

If I happen to believe that everyone should have the right to be treated for illness/ injury, then that is my personal prerogative.

But this is my last post in relation to this argument/ back-and-forth argument we're having MN-Born- if you feel the need to continue this discussion feel free to DM me, but I would rather not waste the other good members of this forum's time with petty bickering.

[MN-Born-n-Raised]

Camden. If I came off as sounding like I was attacking you I apologize. I cater to the upper middle class and the wealthy in a luxury goods. Hence I see their point of view. Additionally, if they get taxed, I'm going to layoff people and my personal revenue will be cut. What the government does will affect everyone. Hence, if TimPaw cuts spending on health and human services, I assume cuts will happen in your department (cuts happen to counties, and counties cut your budget). So why I completely understood that you are not a direct employee, cuts will have an impact on your charity. That was my point. It wasn't meant to misrepresent or sound personal. How we get our income will defenately shape our opinion and it does with me. My point of view is personal donations sound more like a charity than getting funds from a government agency forced out of my fingers but that is just my personal opinion. If that sounded personal it wasn't. I'd be more impressed if you got your funds from the United Way (as an example).

Speaking honestly, I guess your tone offended me my saying timPaw was balancing the budget "on the backs" of so and so when you started this thread. I figured a person who accuses our fiscally responsible governor just short of being ethically criminal could back his point of view. Correct me if I am wrong. I attempted to explain the other point of view.

Additionally I attempted to explain that ALL govenment expendatures end up being abused. Be it Honeywell, Katrina aid, welfare, unemployment, bank bailouts, student aid, etc. the American govenment had a function (past tense) and it has been expanded to a Nanny State. While it will help that person across fromy your desk it will hurt someone else. I was trying to explain the net result. It seems some people will automatically default back to simplifying to help that person in need. People have to look through the trees to see the forest. We agree; Iraq, government contracts, bailouts are a catagory of waste. I would love to do away much of these handouts as well.

So when a person is really understands why this country got 25% of the wealth with 4-5% of the population you will understand why I am deeply opposed to going the direction we are going. When you can expain who this happened you will see why I am apposed to your view point and why I think TimPaw is actually being responsible. If someone in the process is hungry or without shelter, I say we let the charities or their family help out not the govenment.

We simply need to agree to disagree.