How to Eliminate Welfare? (dollar, education, Nevada, money)
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.
A handful of people... like 0.01% of the population have more wealth than the entire rest of the country combined. We're talking Trillions. No one can do anything with that much money even if they had 1,000 lifetimes. Their children can't spend it all. No one can. So it sits. Much of it parked in tax havens outside U.S. jurisdiction. And we quibble about welfare... ...
Howard Hughes was the equivalent of a billionaire in his day. He lived like a homeless person towards the end. Hair matted, fingernails inches long. Malnourished. Clearly crazy. What is our excuse? All this wealth... trillions of dollars... and we allow people to pull their own teeth... we look the other way while they build homeless encampments in city centers... we sentence young black men to life in prison for shoplifting, so they can work making furniture for Broyhill at $0.45/hr.
If I was uber wealthy I'd definitely be more a Warren Buffet than a Charles Koch but I never hear Buffet, or Gates, or Zuckerberg say anything salty about their less philanthropic contemporaries. I don't blame them. But I can scratch my head at someone on SSDI arguing that their being on SSDI for migrane headaches is legitimate, but SSDI should be curtailed for all the lazy so and so's that are sucking at the public teat. I can say "what?" when I read threads started by people who are very likely lower middle class at best, arguing for an end to welfare. I can, and do.
Nick Hanauer does. I wish more of them would, because that would be the easiest way to defeat them.
I think we should have salary caps; I'd even be incredibly generous and say $500 million. Once you have that much, you can't have anymore.
It would definitely solve a lot of problems, because it would not only force them to reinvest into their companies, like they used to, but then we'd how tons of money for education, healthcare, infrastructure and other public services we need. Then we'd truly be the greatest country in the world again.
you can now track and enforce it, in the digital age. You have to file a legitimate tax return to qualify, and even Conservatives now admit the money goes right back into the economy anyway, and have actually stolen the concept that used to belong to the extreme left.
You also can send home hundreds of thousands of "poverty pimps" whose sole job is to keep the poor poor as their "constituency" except for advocates for mental health, children and the elderly the others can de-list off the books, whether govt. or subsidized org. As Degeneres would say: win/win.!!
Up here in Canada we have what's called a GST rebate every quarter; it goes directly into my Federal Tax account at my bank. Year ago people would double, triple, even quadruple "dip" government largesse by flying to different provinces, packing different I. D. , registering in their maiden and married, and former married name, etc. Today, even if (and I've seen it) your kid and you have the SAME NAME it's becoming very hard to pull your scams off. And eventually govt. will catch up digitally to you.
Today, a guaranteed annual income would eliminate the "evaluation" that goes on that has government TEACHING citizens that if they whine and lie and be drama queens, then they get mo' money.
I can't see any rational person having a problem with this plan. ....
$3 Trillion is the unofficial estimate as to how much Middle Class wealth flowed upward into the 1%, never to return. But I guess we're good with that. ... so... I for one thought the o.p. is on to something... too bad he doesn't really feel the same way...
The basic idea is interesting and deserves some further thought, but consider a couple things...
1. Lots of government jobs will/should go bye-bye, right?
GOOD LUCK WITH THAT!
2. Let us do the math, ok?
Assuming we give the money to those over 18 only, ( uh, is this only for citizens or do Syrians off the jet get it also? Really not sure here..)
Pop = 320,000,000. * .85 (over 18) = 272,000,000
Times Guaranteed annual $$ per person = 20,000
-----------------------------------------
----------------------------------> $ 5,440,000,000,000. EVERY YEAR!
That's one third the GDP!
If this cockamamie idea ever happens, I say just two words: GOT GOLD?
The basic idea is interesting and deserves some further thought, but consider a couple things...1. Lots of government jobs will/should go bye-bye, right?
GOOD LUCK WITH THAT!
2. Let us do the math, ok?
Assuming we give the money to those over 18 only, ( uh, is this only for citizens or do Syrians off the jet get it also? Really not sure here..)
Pop = 320,000,000. * .85 (over 18) = 272,000,000
Times Guaranteed annual $$ per person = 20,000
-----------------------------------------
----------------------------------> $ 5,440,000,000,000. EVERY YEAR!
That's one third the GDP!
If this cockamamie idea ever happens, I say just two words: GOT GOLD?
You took the most extreme scenario of giving every adult $20,000 and you claimed that only 15% of the population is under 18 when the number is actually around 23%.. You then failed to deduct the current cost of all the benefits that would be replaced, i.e .unemployment insurance a large amount of SSI and SSDI, welfare, HUD vouchers, SNAP. I am not going to spend hours trying to figure out the net cost but it would not be even close to what you are claiming.
But why would we have to give everyone a cash grant, and why $20,000? Maybe it should be regional and a recipient in Missouri would get less than one in Los Angeles, and perhaps a 2nd family member should receive less to account for economy of scale. It should be enough to meet basic needs but not so high tht it discourages work.
I don't think it's a crazy idea, I think it makes sense. Give them a fixed amount, let them make their own choices about how they spend that money but if they spend it foolishly they will have to live with the consequences, just like the rest of us do.
Once in awhile I see someone who wants to take a panhandler to McDonalds and watch them eat what they buy for them. Makes me furious. Why the need to strip all the essential dignity from a person because they have come to you in need. Don't give it to them if you need to micro-manage how they use the gift.
Do you follow them inside to see that is what the donor is doing? How do you know that they are watching the recipient of the donation actually eat the meal? I just don't think that happens.
Years ago I lived in West Germany and when I was in the Bonn train station, I had a situation that is not the same as what you wrote, but which is related (and is sort of a reverse of your story, as you will read). As I was walking toward my train, a middle-to-older-aged man crossed through the rushing bunch of people, made a straight beeline as fast as he could directly to me (blonde American who can pass for German). He spoke very loudly "Ich bin hungrig!" (I am hungry!) and (also in German), please buy me something to eat. I didn't hesitate and said "of course, what would you like?" He took me into a snack bar (not McDonalds, but something German) and the person behind the counter sort of groaned and I said quietly "give the gentleman whatever he wants" and the poor man then said he wanted two sandwiches so he could take one home. No problem.
I just paid for what he ordered and left. After he got his sandwiches he ran out to thank me profusely and loudly. I didn't need to hear that, but he needed to eat and he asked for nothing more and sped off out of the station with his sandwiches. I have no idea why he chose me, but I felt honored to help him, even it was only in that small way.
You're right... I erred in that according to the US 2014 stats only 77 pct of Americans are over 18.
So the numbers are off by 8 percent. MEA CULPA.
I used $20k 'cause that's what all the geniuses on this thread were using.
And exactly how much money are we saving, Sleepy?
I have no problem with the concept, but communism sounded real good to me when I was a young pup and that did not work out too good either.
Just sayin'.
You only need to give it to those who are not working, but are working age: >16 <67. You only need to give it to those with income of less than the $20K/yr being proposed, and a to be determined limit amount of savings/assets in their name. The total payout will be less than the $5 Trillion you have calculated.
Now I'm just sayin... Germany is without doubt the most dynamic of the EU countries and is a world leader in manufacturing, etc. it has 80M people and 100 billionaires. The U.S. has four times the population but more than 5x as many billionaires. But way more importantly, the U.S. has 23% of the population as underclass while less than 3% of Germany's population might be considered underclass. As underclasses go I also think it might be preferable to be down and out in an EU country than in the United States. Put those uber wealthy people to work making life better for the rest of us. We are the ones that got them where they are! How do you make a billion dollars if no one buys your widgets?
Edit: btw.. communism in theory... nothing all that bad about it... that's why it "sounded real good to you". Cuba (the example you were going to drop on us if pressed) is not "Communist". It is a dictatorship. There is a difference. When you have a Totalitarian dictator controlling a populace, who denies privacy, liberty and other aspects of human dignity it tends to overshadow any positive benefits of systems like Socialism or Communism. You knew that, right?
Last edited by Leisesturm; 12-12-2015 at 02:07 AM..
Do you follow them inside to see that is what the donor is doing? How do you know that they are watching the recipient of the donation actually eat the meal? I just don't think that happens.
It does happen. I don't know how often as a percent of total panhandler/public interactions, but I have witnessed it more than once in my life. I don't follow them inside McDonalds, I am already inside said McDonalds, ordering my own meal (before my spouse forbade me from eating there) when I see some guy saying "give him x,y and z." and when the food comes they head to a table. I also see people say to people that ask them for "a dollar", say "no, I won't give you a dollar, but I will go to Subway's with you and buy you a sandwich". Really? I haven't got time (or inclination) for that much need to control other people's activities.
Guaranteed income is just welfare in a pretty new box. It's still stealing money from one group of people for the unearned and undeserved benefit of another group of people. Which we know is immoral and evil. The idea is to get rid of welfare, not put new window dressing on it.
If we want to get rid of something, the best way to do it is to just do it. Get rid of it. Then it is gone and something that is bad and evil is no longer in our way.
Keep it simple. Provide notice. End it.
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.
