US Government Budget

[Darwoth]

nader was a rino ***** i mixed him up again as it has been two decades and he was only the VP nominee, a weak candidate like dole combined with nader is why clinton won a second term.

[toddesloan]

If you cannot afford to go to college you need to get a job, work, save up some money, and then go to college. Or work AND go to college (which is hard but can be done). It's a simple concept.

Do not take out a student loan. Never do that...that could cripple you, literally, for decades to come.

Life is no hurry, especially at 18 years old. Slow down and do it right.

My oldest son is 17, a senior in high school and I cannot afford to put him thru college right now. I am middle class. and our government over the least 20 years has damn near buried the middle class. Hell I make 6 figures, wife stays home with the kids, and are still some weeks paycheck to paycheck. Healthcare reform hurt us financially. Bad. Obama lied his ass off in that regard.

What I can do is offer my kid an outstanding job at my company. He will make great money as an 18 year old, doing good work, IT work, which is what he wants to do. This will give him some money for college, and hopefully some more time for me to help him.

[Darwoth]

local pharmacist worked THREE jobs to put himself through college while he was going, he is a diehard trump supporter and absolutely hates all of the medicaid ***** that filter through his workplace on a daily basis.

[TotalyMeow]

What I can do is offer my kid an outstanding job at my company. He will make great money as an 18 year old, doing good work, IT work, which is what he wants to do. This will give him some money for college, and hopefully some more time for me to help him.

This sort of thing needs to happen more again. We should never have given up the apprenticeship system and on-the-jop apprentice type training should count for better than a college degree. When I got out of college and finally managed to get a job in my field, I barely used what I learned. Like ever. Almost everything I ever found useful at work was something I'd either learned on my own because I thought it would be useful or had learned on the job. The schooling does help and it is good to know some of it, but not everyone needs all of it, though in my case, I think maybe 'Mechanical Engineering' is just way too broad a category anymore and needs to be broken up into smaller specialties.

[Claeyt]

We have seen America without social security and it was so horrifying we had to create social security and medicare.

Have we? Have you seen America before 1934? I know I'm not old enough. I've read history about it, but nowhere have I seen any account of 'horrifying en mass starvation of elderly'. And if such a thing is possible, it's not because we need Social Security, it's because we need to change our society and the way we behave towards the older generations.

Well I agree we should behave with more social help towards the older generations. I don't know if people like Darwoth would agree with you as he talks about letting poor people starve instead. Finally, that's EXACTLY what Social Security and Medicare ARE, it's about treating the elderly, especially the poor elderly with respect and care and giving them a basic living standard through social programs. You seem to have this disconnect between why Social Security and Medicare were created and seeing them as not about having a decent society that cares about it's elderly, the widow or widowers of a worker who payed into SSI and it's children of the working poor with a death of their working parent who payed into SSI.

Here are original Social Security Board posters proving my point and showing that their messages still resonate today as necessary to keeping America stable and free of poverty.

No, some people do not pay, and others receive. That is a lie. Everyone qualifies for some social security and medicare. Even if you are rich enough that you payed more into them than you will probably receive, and you don't need them, you will also have the assurance that if you lose everything for whatever reason you will still receive basic retirement and medical care.

This is where you are mistaken. Social Security is not a trust, you have no right to it and it can be denied to you. Congress can also change the Social Security laws as ANY time and reduce or remove what you are getting as an elderly person no matter how much you paid in when you were working.

Yes, Congress can change the amount all Americans can receive and deny it to everyone at any time but they can not deny by specificity. Right now there are no income restrictions on receiving social security, just a maximum amount you can receive. Same with medicare. I suppose Congress could eliminate the most popular and effective government program this country has ever produced but they'd be idiots and voted out.

1) you included Social Security and Medicare as 'Welfare' even though they are payroll taxes. This shows a conservative bias on your part to put them there as they are not 'Welfare' in my opinion or in the opinoin of the nation.

It's the opinion of the government though (and whatever part of the nation who know the definition of 'welfare') that Social Security is welfare. Also, I'm not sure how 'payroll taxes' is a magic phrase that somehow changes things. The government actually calls it 'income tax' when referring to people and 'excise tax based on income' when referring to the corporate contribution. Go read the Social Security Act of 1935, I dare you. Here's the preamble:

The Social Security Act (Act of August 14, 1935) [H. R. 7260]

An act to provide for the general welfare by establishing a system of Federal old-age benefits, and by enabling the several States to make more adequate provision for aged persons, blind persons, dependent and crippled children, maternal and child welfare, public health, and the administration of their unemployment compensation laws; to establish a Social Security Board; to raise revenue; and for other purposes.

Also, Helvering vs Davis, a court decision made in 1937, determined that the Social Security Act was not a violation of the tenth amendment because it is covered in section 1 article 8. Speaking of which, here is the first part of that:

The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defense and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

It then goes on to talk about establishing a post office and a few other things which I categorized as 'government' or 'public' in my pie chart, so the constitution agrees with my assessment that these things are welfare.

Yet the government no longer calls it welfare and you'll never see the term welfare used in any modern social security budgetary items. It is a social program specifically in opposition to your earlier definition of 'welfare' as charity without contribution.

It's a tax on income based on how much you made in pay, not in yearly income and IT'S COLLECTED AUTOMATICALLY THROUGH THE PAYROLL not through other means. You're confusing payroll tax with the meaning of paying income tax through filed tax returns.

2) you seem to have included several economic programs, such as unemployment, training, ag subsidies and some other things that again show a political bias. I do not think you are being politically neutral in your assessment of what is considered "Welfare".

Finally nowhere did you itemize what you put into "welfare type programs". You did combine whole sections of the budget into groups that you may have considered "Welfare" but which the majority of Americans don't consider welfare. This was political bias on your part.

Unemployment and government sponsorship of retraining ARE welfare and if you actually look at the budget they are all labeled as being 'aid' or 'assistance' or some other variation of 'welfare'. I put agriculture subsidies in 'public'. I actually biased things to a more 'Cleayt friendly' leaning in that I put some things into Defense that probably shouldn't be there, some actual welfare stuff in public, etc., already listed those. I did, in fact, itemize it, which is why I think you didn't read it. Open the spoilers and read them.

I wish you'd stop talking about the 'Majority of Americans' like that. You have nothing to back that statement up, it's a flat out lie.

You did not bias them toward 'Cleayt friendly' views because you still consider Social programs that people pay into like Social Security and Medicare 'Welfare'.

The government, congress and the IRS don't call Social Security or Medicare welfare. In fact use of the term welfare at all is not used in general because of it's lack of definition. Terms like social programs, assistance, benefits are all used because they provide greater definition to what you are talking about.

You are specifically using the generic non-definitive term of 'Welfare' to further your conservative views. Here let me show you:

There is a difference between social programs which include benefits such as Social Security and Medicare and assistance programs such SNAP, WIC and reduced School Lunches and economic incentive assistance programs which may include benefits such as Unemployment and Job Training or may include direct assistance such as Agricultural subsidies and Corporate hiring incentives.

Do you see what I'm trying to say? These terms such as "benefits", "assistance", "incentives" and "social programs" mean something and provide greater definition as to what they include. Some of them do not fit your own description of 'Welfare' as charity without contribution and some of them do. I'm not arguing that direct assistance such as WIC and Reduced School Lunches can't be called welfare but Social Security and Medicare are contributed to and then received in almost all cases and they do not even fit your own definition of "welfare".

[Dallane]

Lol cleaty trying to argue facts, thats cute. He also used 1940's propaganda posters! I like how he talks about unemployment but he doesn't mention the fact that people stay on unemployment for YEARS just because.

[Claeyt]

nader was a rino ***** i mixed him up again as it has been two decades and he was only the VP nominee, a weak candidate like dole combined with nader is why clinton won a second term.

You're thinking of Perot again. Nader was anything but a rino. Statements like this always prove to me how little you actually know about American politics and why you are still in my class here at Salem.

Lol cleaty trying to argue facts, thats cute. He also used 1940's propaganda posters! I like how he talks about unemployment but he doesn't mention the fact that people stay on unemployment for YEARS just because.

First off, this is a lie and can be disproved with a simple google search. Federal Unemployment lasts 26 weeks. It went up to 73 weeks during the recession but is now back down. Nobody can "stay" on unemployment for years without taking full time job training. There are certain specific State run Unemployment programs that extend unemployment but they don't last that long either.

[TotalyMeow]

you included Social Security and Medicare as 'Welfare' even though they are payroll taxes.

I combined several categories that mostly benefit everyone into one category labeled "Public". I also combined governmental categories into one. I combined Health with Medicare (each contributes about 50% to the slice). I combined Income Security with the Education, Training, Employment, Social Services category because the former is mostly concerned with helping the unemployed, while the latter is geared toward helping them get employed. Income Security is about 80% of that slice. The receipts were distributed mostly into Income Security and Health so that those are a bit smaller, while National Defense and Government are probably counting for more than they should. Public contains a few small expenses that probably belong in Income Security, but not enough to make a significant difference.

It's a tax on income based on how much you made in pay, not in yearly income and IT'S COLLECTED AUTOMATICALLY THROUGH THE PAYROLL not through other means. You're confusing payroll tax with the meaning of paying income tax through filed tax returns.

And you are just plain confusing. There is ultimately no difference between a payroll tax and an income tax. They are both taxes collected on income. They are both taken from me to be spent elsewhere on things I may or may not approve of.

Terms like social programs, assistance, benefits are all used because they provide greater definition to what you are talking about. [...] terms such as "benefits", "assistance", "incentives" and "social programs" mean something and provide greater definition as to what they include.

But then what word does one use when referring to them as a whole? If you have such a big problem with everyone using the word 'welfare' what do you suggest we say instead?

[Claeyt]

you included Social Security and Medicare as 'Welfare' even though they are payroll taxes.

I combined several categories that mostly benefit everyone into one category labeled "Public". I also combined governmental categories into one. I combined Health with Medicare (each contributes about 50% to the slice). I combined Income Security with the Education, Training, Employment, Social Services category because the former is mostly concerned with helping the unemployed, while the latter is geared toward helping them get employed. Income Security is about 80% of that slice. The receipts were distributed mostly into Income Security and Health so that those are a bit smaller, while National Defense and Government are probably counting for more than they should. Public contains a few small expenses that probably belong in Income Security, but not enough to make a significant difference.

You combined Social Security and Medicare into the end 65% "Welfare" number right?

It's a tax on income based on how much you made in pay, not in yearly income and IT'S COLLECTED AUTOMATICALLY THROUGH THE PAYROLL not through other means. You're confusing payroll tax with the meaning of paying income tax through filed tax returns.

And you are just plain confusing. There is ultimately no difference between a payroll tax and an income tax. They are both taxes collected on income. They are both taken from me to be spent elsewhere on things I may or may not approve of.

The nature of democracy is that we elect a government that collects taxes for things the majority agrees with. Again, I fundamentally disagreed with my tax dollars going to Bush's war in Iraq but you don't see me harping on it and saying that they were "taken from me to be spent elsewhere on things I may or may not approve of." How are your views on where taxes go and mine any different, except for the fact that you ***** about it as 'Welfare' going to people who don't deserve it. Get over it, that's democracy. If you don't think you should be taxed for SSI because you disagree with the majority of us then you are anti-democratic and want to overthrow the democracy based on your minority view.

If you don't like Social Security then go vote for whichever right wing nut job is running on that losing platform.

As for payroll tax being income tax. Income tax is better defined as the federal income tax collected through tax filings as defined by federally legislated income tax levels and deductions; while payroll taxes such as Social Security and Medicare are better defined as taxes on income through a general payroll tax and put into a Social Security trust that can not immediately be used by the government for general funding.

And just because you want it to be called 'Welfare' for undeserved people doesn't mean that's what it is.

Terms like social programs, assistance, benefits are all used because they provide greater definition to what you are talking about. [...] terms such as "benefits", "assistance", "incentives" and "social programs" mean something and provide greater definition as to what they include.

But then what word does one use when referring to them as a whole? If you have such a big problem with everyone using the word 'welfare' what do you suggest we say instead?

You can't refer to them as a whole. They are in most cases entirely separate acts of government and as you pointed out in your graph Social Security and Medicare aren't even directly connected to the general federal budget. Comparing SSI with SNAP is like comparing the VA with CIA special forces. (arguably SSI has more connection to the VA than SNAP has to the underpaid special forces collecting SNAP)

They are meant to do completely separate things at completely separate times and their budgets have zero connection beside the fact that they are controlled by congress.

[TotalyMeow]

You combined Social Security and Medicare into the end 65% "Welfare" number right?

Sure, in that tiny end paragraph that was my conclusion drawn from my findings. You want to draw a different conclusion? Fine. But you've done nothing for this entire thread but talk entirely about that one little paragraph and completely ignore everything else I posted. I suppose it's because you truly don't know what to say and so must fall back on attacking my opinion instead of bringing up your own facts? Or even examining mine?

I fundamentally disagreed with my tax dollars going to Bush's war in Iraq but you don't see me harping on it and saying that they were "taken from me to be spent elsewhere on things I may or may not approve of." How are your views on where taxes go and mine any different, except for the fact that you ***** about it as 'Welfare' going to people who don't deserve it. Get over it, that's democracy. If you don't think you should be taxed for SSI because you disagree with the majority of us then you are anti-democratic and want to overthrow the democracy based on your minority view.

Democracy does not at all mean that I must agree with the majority just because they are the majority. The majority is not always right and I DO have the right to stand up on whatever box I can get away with and harp about whatever the hell I want to harp about to anyone who will listen. You wanna start a thread about how stupid Bush's war was? Go ahead! Maybe we'll agree on something for a change.

But then what word does one use when referring to them as a whole?

You can't refer to them as a whole.

***** that. Merriam Webster backs me up here. I was willing to use whatever liberal nonsense word you could come up with but no way am I going to use several sentences every time I want to refer to welfare programs as a whole. 'Merica.