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.
I'd argue a growing sense of entitlement is more likely killing our society than the "let them eat cake" mentality.
As much as I'm not a fan of Reagan and would argue at length many of our problems today were seeded by his time in office, I do agree when he said "If you want more of something, subsidize it. If you want less of something, tax it.”
We are increasingly subsidizing indolence while taxing those trying to succeed. We subsidize those that will not improve their lots in life. We subsidize big business. We tax small business, which are those looking to build something.
I had a job a couple years ago working for a property manager. There was this one specific individual that was on welfare. This individual was single, no kids, didn't work. Among many welfare programs he was on, the one that really gets me is that he was receiving $1,400/month from the city for his own 3 bedroom apartment. That's 75% of my 15 year mortgage payment on a 3800 sq foot house, the biggest (too big I know) one in the neighborhood.
Fast forward a couple years and I open a business. In order to do this...
- I have to this fee.
- I have to pay that fee.
- Oh you payed that fee, you also have to pay this tax on all your work stuff.
- Oh wait a minute, you missed a fee.
- Your employee needs that license? That'll be $3,000.
- Here's another fee that needs to be paid quarterly/annually.
Now the tax write-offs are great and all, but that doesn't make up for all the fees.
Now... I do believe in welfare programs. I'm not your cold hearted darwinist. However, I do believe there comes a point when it is too much. When you enable certain people to be lazy, they'll be lazy. Doesn't matter what training you give them, they will not care to better themselves.
Fortunately, your theory can be tested by comparing outcomes for the entitlement class (families with children) and childless adults, who government pretty much leaves to fend for themselves.
What city gives welfare to childless adults? Who pays childless adults enough money to rent an apartment?
There was this one specific individual that was on welfare. This individual was single, no kids, didn't work. Among many welfare programs he was on, the one that really gets me is that he was receiving $1,400/month from the city for his own 3 bedroom apartment.
I've known lots of destitute people who got nothing but foodstamps. What sort of welfare was this guy on, and how did he qualify for it?
Let me make some comments about how other countries where I have lived:
EU - . Unemployment 15- 20% (country dependent) - you get Healthcare, Subsistence payments and rent (if your poor or have no job) + high taxes (and high prices) on almost everything - Now the EU has a refugee crisis. Crime - Medium
Singapore - Unemployment <3% - Your get gov't subsidies for housing and Healthcare but you must invest your own money first. If you are homeless you will be picked up and placed with your family. You must work or live with your relatives. Public disturbances are not tolerated. Foreigners are encouraged to move there IF you have a job - no job and you have to leave. . Quotas for hiring locals; cheap Healthcare; Crime - almost none
UAE - Unemployment <4%. Subsidies for locals (big ones); Preferences for local business ownership. Preferential hiring for locals including quotas; Foreigners encouraged to move there with a job - no job and you must leave. Low cost of living compared to US; healthcare included with job; almost no crime.
Brasil - Unemployment >25%; taxes on everything imported. Cost of living low for rent and food; high for luxury goods including branded clothes, cars, etc.; Huge population of nonworking citizens paid subsistence payments by the gov't; Free Healthcare but awful quality - many monied Brasilians have private HC insurance. Crime - Rampant.
We can do better in the US, we should be open to new ways of thinking. We have lots of advantages over other nations, However we must get behind consensus building solutions or watch ourselves fall further and further behind as we fight amongst ourselves while other nations move on.
As much as I'm not a fan of Reagan...I do agree when he said "If you want more of something, subsidize it. If you want less of something, tax it.”
If your wages are taxed, your net income declines. If your response is to work less, it only worsens the problem. If only economics were as simple as Reagan was.
Opening a business is something native born Americans tend to shy away from....
How did we ever get 28 million small businesses? How is it that about half of all private sector US employment is in the small business sector? If this is all the doing of immigrants, maybe we should be encouraging a lot more of them to come.
I've known lots of destitute people who got nothing but foodstamps. What sort of welfare was this guy on, and how did he qualify for it?
It was a program with the city of Portland, Maine.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Major Barbara
If your wages are taxed, your net income declines. If your response is to work less, it only worsens the problem. If only economics were as simple as Reagan was.
Sure I'll admit it. I support it. But that's not "punishing." Don't be over-dramatizing.
It is a political based rant on economic policy, that is a basic proponent of any stance. Rhetoric is used like water for cleaning clothes. I admit I do it but just because it is so hard to not use rhetoric.
Obviously too lazy to change their circumstances. That! would take action and true, it is easier to have pity parties for yourself. News Flash... Pity parties won't change it.
If someone is gaming the system then yes, that should be investigated.
Why is that even a question that needs to be asked?
Do you honestly think that every single person on some type of welfare is just lazy?
And if everyone on welfare for reasons other than health were suddenly released into the workforce, what would that do to the other workers? You don't think that businesses would do everything they could to take advantage of an even larger worker surplus? What do you think that these welfare recipients would DO if they no longer received benefits and couldn't get jobs?
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.
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.
