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.
Your just angry at lazy people who use rec. drugs, when they start basing the corporate welfare (subsidees) that Exxon recieves on negative drug screens then I'll agree with you.They're all handouts just the same.
I don't agree with corporate welfare, but I don't agree with people who compare the two...Exxon gives people jobs and provides a product. What do welfare recipients do? Exist? Gee...great.
Conservatives who rant against government programs are by and large hypocrites. The over 65 demographic has somehow convinced itself that Social Security benefits are not a government social program. How many right wingers are going to stand on their principles and refuse to “live off the government tit” by rejecting their social security payments – either now or in the future? How about Medicare? How many Tea Baggers are going to turn their backs on THAT? How many of you who insist the poor should starve rather than receive food stamps, benefit from the Home Mortgage Interest Deduction or participate in a program that gives preferential tax treatment to money saved for college for your children?
Both of those programs in particular are changes made to the tax code designed to specifically benefit a select group of people–homeowners in one case, parents in the other. There is no natural right to be able to deduct the interest from your mortgage from your taxable income, or to avoid paying taxes on the gains from money kept in a special account with the intention that the money won’t be used until one's child goes to college. Why should childless tax payers or those who have paid off their mortgage be forced to subsidize these two groups of parasites? They benefit from government programs no less than the disabled person living in poverty who gets food stamps. As a childless woman, I strongly protest being forced to subsidize your brat as he parties his way through college.
If college students really need all that money, why don’t they get jobs or study hard enough to get scholarships? Why should they be allowed to buy expensive text books and laptops on MY dime? Why should I be forced to pay for some shiftless teenager’s decision to lay around a college dorm somewhere instead of going out and getting a job like everyone else?
At least food stamps have the benefit of preventing hunger among the poor. What benefit to society accrues from YOUR Home Mortgage Interest Deduction? What makes you think that you are so special that you “deserve” what amounts to yet one more government handout?
The right winger's government hand-outs are sacred, but God forbid that a person with a lower income than theirs be given enough to eat.
Your comparison is totally invalid.
I suspect that the average person drawing SS has paid in more than they will get out, and certainly has paid more in taxes than the average person on food stamps. SS is a retirement program. If you don't pay, you don't get benefits. Food stamps is welfare. You don't have to pay to get the benefits. The two are totally different concepts.
And people with a mortgage certainly are paying more than those on food stamps. I suspect people with a mortgage are paying 1000 times more in taxes than those on welfare.
And last time I checked, mortgage deductions and SS benefits were used by people of all political persuasions, not just "right wingers".
Finally, your complaints are just more reasons to get government out of the welfare business. We should totally eliminate welfare and subsidies for people, products and corporations.
Charity should be a private enterprise, not a wasteful government program.
Some of the poor are HORRIBLE with money. For example, I have personally seen one family go out and purchase a blu-ray player and have no food in the refridgerator. Priorities........ Anyone on government assistance of any sort should have to go take a finance class.
Then, there are those who just take advantage of these programs. I have seen one family on free lunch, but pick their kid up from school in a brand new car. Then, another poor family purchases all sorts of electronic gadgets for their kids like MP3 players, PSPs, Playstation, XBox, and brand new cell phones. I have never been able to buy any of these things.
When I was growing up in the 50's I saw one family nearly starve the kids because the alcoholic father would not take welfare or buy anything but booze. Not pretty.
Anyway the point of welfare is to keep these people buying stuff lest the economy collapse due to insufficient demand. Without welfare of all kinds we would have had a very severe deflation as factories closed, imports ceased, food rotted because it could not be bought, rents went unpaid along with most mortgages. That would destroy a lot of wealthy as well as the rest of us.
Unless they're taxed out of their homes, as many seniors are.
Many states have property tax deferral programs for low-income senior homeowners (and some also for the disabled). (sorry renters, it's okay to tax YOU out of your homes!)
Many states extend preferential property tax rates to homeowners regardless of income. (Called "split roll" property taxes.) Good luck California renters: a proposal would create split roll taxation and would reassess rental property annually, thereby removing the protection renters were promised under Proposition 13. (sorry renters, it's okay to tax YOU out of your homes!)
Many states have "circuit breaker" property tax rebates to homeowners whenever their property taxes exceed a specified proportion of their income.
Many states have caps which limit annual property tax increases.
Politicians and voters are sensitive to the issue of taxing homeowners out of their homes. Renters, not so much.
Many states have property tax deferral programs for low-income senior homeowners (and some also for the disabled). (sorry renters, it's okay to tax YOU out of your homes!)
Many states extend preferential property tax rates to homeowners regardless of income. (Called "split roll" property taxes.) Good luck California renters: a proposal would create split roll taxation and would reassess rental property annually, thereby removing the protection renters were promised under Proposition 13. (sorry renters, it's okay to tax YOU out of your homes!)
Many states have "circuit breaker" property tax rebates to homeowners whenever their property taxes exceed a specified proportion of their income.
Many states have caps which limit annual property tax increases.
Politicians and voters are sensitive to the issue of taxing homeowners out of their homes. Renters, not so much.
The owners of those apt buildings don't get any tax breaks so when RE taxes rise they get hit each and every time with the max amount.
In order to keep their cash flow positive they must raise rents when the lease is up.
Oh the humanity!! There needs to be an increase in food stamps, Section 8 and more free stuff for the "poor".
A good friend of mine was wiped out due to an illness and lost everything. He's on section 8 now and Medicaid. Prior to becoming sick he had worked two jobs his entire adult life and never asked for a "handout."
You should be careful of how you point fingers at the least among us, it could easily be you one day. Karma has a way of bending you over and spanking your bottom when you least expect it.
Unless they're taxed out of their homes, as many seniors are.
What states raise property taxes on seniors?
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.