Don't miss what's happening in Kingwood
People on Kingwood.com are the first to know.
Go to top of page
Close
 
Close
Back
* CONTEST TODAY: 24 Hours Only - Win a $25 Gift Card to Panera Bread!  Ends in 12 hrs Read more »

SocialWelfarePrograms vs CorporateSubsidies

SocialWelfarePrograms vs CorporateSubsidies

12345»
« Back
This discussion has been locked.
Message Menu
by: deltadawn Active Indicator LED Icon 8 OP 
~ 8 years ago   Feb 21, '16 4:06pm  
Loading Image... 4951
* Reactions disabled on political threads.
What are your thoughts? Log in or sign up to comment
Replies:
Message Menu
deltadawn Active Indicator LED Icon 8 OP 
~ 8 years ago   Feb 21, '16 4:06pm  
Loading Image... 4951
* Reactions disabled on political threads.
Message Menu
allymansfield Active Indicator LED Icon 11
~ 8 years ago   Feb 21, '16 7:29pm  
@Deltadawn, do a little research into the income tax.  Pretty much none of it goes to pay for "social programs" or any other thing you think it does.  It all goes to pay off our debt, and even then it doesn't even cover the interest on the national debt.  For example, your income tax dollar do not pay to maintain our roads, the gasoline tax does that.  About 40 cents out of every gallon of gas you buy is a tax from either the federal or state government.   Our income tax money is squandered beyond belief.  And reallocating money that is not yours is called stealing.  How about instead of posting on KDC all the time about how you want someone else's money so you don't have to better yourself or work harder, you go out and figure a way to get it honestly on your own? 4951
* Reactions disabled on political threads.
Message Menu
Retired_Engineer Active Indicator LED Icon 13
~ 8 years ago   Feb 21, '16 7:51pm  
@allymansfield:  You need to do some brushing up yourself.  All of the various federal taxes get bundled together as "income" and are then allocated out according to the budget (or however Congress allocates it).  That's how BOTH parties like it.  Our Democratic president can write as many executive orders as he wants, but if it requires any funding, the Republican Congress can refuse to fund it.A prime example is Social Security.  You would think the tax you pay gets put in a special account and is only used for SS?  Those taxes ARE put in a special account, but Congress can "borrow" from that account at any time.  They have done so numerous times.  After we won WWII, Congress borrowed heavily from SS to help Germany and Japan rebuild.  The reason why SS funds are in trouble is that Congress often does not pay back the money they borrowed.State taxes work the same way.  For instance, when they passed a law that said all proceeds from a lottery would go to education, they didn't include any requirement that existing funds allocated for education from General funds remain.  Therefore, if the lottery brings in say $20million, they allocate that money to education and put $20million back in General Funds that state politicians are free to spend as they wish.  The net impact to education is $0. 4951
* Reactions disabled on political threads.
Message Menu
allymansfield Active Indicator LED Icon 11
~ 8 years ago   Feb 21, '16 7:59pm  
@allymansfield:  You need to do some brushing up yourself.  All of the various federal taxes get bundled together as "income" and are then allocated out according to the budget (or however Congress allocates it).  That's how BOTH parties like it.  Our Democratic president can write as many executive orders as he wants, but if it requires any funding, the Republican Congress can refuse to fund it.A prime example is Social Security.  You would think the tax you pay gets put in a special account and is only used for SS?  Those taxes ARE put in a special account, but Congress can "borrow" from that account at any time.  They have done so numerous times.  After we won WWII, Congress borrowed heavily from SS to help Germany and Japan rebuild.  The reason why SS funds are in trouble is that Congress often does not pay back the money they borrowed.State taxes work the same way.  For instance, when they passed a law that said all proceeds from a lottery would go to education, they didn't include any requirement that existing funds allocated for education from General funds remain.  Therefore, if the lottery brings in say $20million, they allocate that money to education and put $20million back in General Funds that state politicians are free to spend as they wish.  The net impact to education is $0.
 
@Retired_Engineer: True, but much of it is "borrowed" to pay for things they are "not meant for" like you said with SS.  Much of that is our debt.  That is a main reason our debt keeps increasing.  We are borrowing against ourselves to pay the debt and thus incurring more debt.  It is a viscous circle.  Adding new entitlements, programs, etc (whatever you want to call them) when we can't afford the ones we have will put us into a faster death spiral than we are already in.
4951
* Reactions disabled on political threads.
Message Menu
allymansfield Active Indicator LED Icon 11
~ 8 years ago   Feb 21, '16 8:07pm  
@Retired_Engineer: the bottom line is that taking money from hard working people to pay for those who don't is not fair or right, no matter how you skin it.  As we stand now, our taxes don't cover squat.  Yes, there is a lot of waste in the system, but all these new programs that are being suggested and promised by candidates will require more taxes on the people who are already paying the majority of it.  That helps no one.  If "you" want something you don't have, "you" need to work for it, not expect someone else it give it to "you". 4951
* Reactions disabled on political threads.
Message Menu
donnatella Active Indicator LED Icon 13 Forum Moderator
~ 8 years ago   Feb 21, '16 8:13pm  
No offense to SAHM's, but telling someone to get out work harder and earn more might carry more weight from someone who actually works full-time outside the home, bring home a steady income. Anyone not doing so, seems a bit like a hypocrite. 4951
* Reactions disabled on political threads.
Message Menu
Retired_Engineer Active Indicator LED Icon 13
~ 8 years ago   Feb 21, '16 8:30pm  
@Retired_Engineer: the bottom line is that taking money from hard working people to pay for those who don't is not fair or right, no matter how you skin it.  As we stand now, our taxes don't cover squat.  Yes, there is a lot of waste in the system, but all these new programs that are being suggested and promised by candidates will require more taxes on the people who are already paying the majority of it.  That helps no one.  If "you" want something you don't have, "you" need to work for it, not expect someone else it give it to "you".
 
@allymansfield:  I agree.  I was going to respond that you missed government waste in response to your previous post, but you mentioned it in this post.  That is a MAJOR problem throughout local, state, and federal governments.  Unfortunately, BOTH parties keep expanding government and waste.  The Republicans "talk" about reducing government, but they are just as bad as the Dems when it comes to actions.  That's one reason I am an Independent now instead of a Repub.However, if you look at the actual budget, the amount going to the various welfare programs is pretty small.  I used to have a graphic that showed the budget several years back.  I'll try to finf it or a current version.  While I agree that we need to maintain a strong military, the budget for this is HUGE!  The Industrial Military Complex is very strong in this country.  They spend a lot of money on research and development on new weapons, but periodically, they help push us into a war so that we use our existing stocks of weapons and have to buy more.    While I agree that we need to get the freeloaders off of our dime, there are even bigger issues out there.Each of the new fighter planes, F35A cost $98million each.  The upgraded F35B cost $104million each.  What we do not hear about is that these airplanes are a miserable failure as to their expectations.  Yet, Congress continues to buy them.  One of my son's friends works for an Air Force consultant.  He said that in a one on one fight, an F16 will beat the F35 almost every time.
4951
* Reactions disabled on political threads.
Message Menu
allymansfield Active Indicator LED Icon 11
~ 8 years ago   Feb 21, '16 8:41pm  
No offense to SAHM's, but telling someone to get out work harder and earn more might carry more weight from someone who actually works full-time outside the home, bring home a steady income. Anyone not doing so, seems a bit like a hypocrite.
 
@donnatella: I worked outside the home and brought in a lot of money prior to having our son.  I was able to do so because I made good choices in my education and where we chose to live.  I worked while earning my MS degree along with a number of professional certificates so that I could get the job I wanted at the salary I wanted.  When we decided to start a family we sat down and discussed our goals.  It was a choice we made for me to stay home.  And a choice we were able to make due to the consecutive smart choices we made in our education, lifestyle, and savings strategies.  If we wanted a million dollar home on the lake, I could easily go back to work and we could have that, but that is not what we want.  We work for what we want and thus what we have.  We don't expect anyone to allocate resource to us so we can live the lifestyle we want, because we are responsible adults.I also run a small business.  So while I may not work in an office, I do in fact work and make an income, all while raising my son and preparing for a second.  When my son is napping, I am working.  When he goes down to sleep at night, I do the majority of my computer work.  Not all stay at home moms go to play groups all day and play tennis.  And even if they do, that is a choice that the family makes.  It is when you start expecting others to pay for your choices that I have a problem.  If you don't like the situation you are in, it is no one's fault or responsibility but your own.It is not hypocritical in any way for me to expect people to work for what they want and not expect me to pay for it because my family works harder than theirs.
4951
* Reactions disabled on political threads.
Message Menu
foxymama Active Indicator LED Icon 14
~ 8 years ago   Feb 21, '16 8:56pm  
All the stay at home moms I know, which is a LOT, all worked before having their babies and most have college degrees.  So it has been a choice to stay home because they could afford to  live the lifestyle they choose on one income.  None of them are on any government programs asking for free money.  Choosing to raise your kids Instead of paying daycare should not be ridiculed.   Just because you either chose to work or had no choice but to work is what you chose.  And I tottally respect women who stay in the work place and provide for their families.  Many stay at home moms go back to work when their kids are in grade school or have their own Etsy business etc..  4951
* Reactions disabled on political threads.
Message Menu
donnatella Active Indicator LED Icon 13 Forum Moderator
~ 8 years ago   Feb 21, '16 8:58pm  

- - - - - - - -
>> No offense to SAHM's, but telling someone to get out work harder and earn more might carry more weight from someone who actually works full-time outside the home, bring home a steady income. Anyone not doing so, seems a bit like a hypocrite.
 
@donnatella: I worked outside the home and brought in a lot of money prior to having our son.  I was able to do so because I made good choices in my education and where we chose to live.  I worked while earning my MS degree along with a number of professional certificates so that I could get the job I wanted at the salary I wanted.  When we decided to start a family we sat down and discussed our goals.  It was a choice we made for me to stay home.  And a choice we were able to make due to the consecutive smart choices we made in our education, lifestyle, and savings strategies.  If we wanted a million dollar home on the lake, I could easily go back to work and we could have that, but that is not what we want.  We work for what we want and thus what we have.  We don't expect anyone to allocate resource to us so we can live the lifestyle we want, because we are responsible adults.I also run a small business.  So while I may not work in an office, I do in fact work and make an income, all while raising my son and preparing for a second.  When my son is napping, I am working.  When he goes down to sleep at night, I do the majority of my computer work.  Not all stay at home moms go to play groups all day and play tennis.  And even if they do, that is a choice that the family makes.  It is when you start expecting others to pay for your choices that I have a problem.  If you don't like the situation you are in, it is no one's fault or responsibility but your own.It is not hypocritical in any way for me to expect people to work for what they want and not expect me to pay for it because my family works harder than theirs.
 
@allymansfield: Oh yeah, this sounded much less "smarmy mean girl" than before. I actually agree that EVERYONE should earn their keep and not take from or live off of the collective "others."
4951
* Reactions disabled on political threads.
Message Menu
foxymama Active Indicator LED Icon 14
~ 8 years ago   Feb 21, '16 9:00pm  

- - - - - - - -
>>
- - - - - - - -
>> No offense to SAHM's, but telling someone to get out work harder and earn more might carry more weight from someone who actually works full-time outside the home, bring home a steady income. Anyone not doing so, seems a bit like a hypocrite.
 
@donnatella: I worked outside the home and brought in a lot of money prior to having our son.  I was able to do so because I made good choices in my education and where we chose to live.  I worked while earning my MS degree along with a number of professional certificates so that I could get the job I wanted at the salary I wanted.  When we decided to start a family we sat down and discussed our goals.  It was a choice we made for me to stay home.  And a choice we were able to make due to the consecutive smart choices we made in our education, lifestyle, and savings strategies.  If we wanted a million dollar home on the lake, I could easily go back to work and we could have that, but that is not what we want.  We work for what we want and thus what we have.  We don't expect anyone to allocate resource to us so we can live the lifestyle we want, because we are responsible adults.I also run a small business.  So while I may not work in an office, I do in fact work and make an income, all while raising my son and preparing for a second.  When my son is napping, I am working.  When he goes down to sleep at night, I do the majority of my computer work.  Not all stay at home moms go to play groups all day and play tennis.  And even if they do, that is a choice that the family makes.  It is when you start expecting others to pay for your choices that I have a problem.  If you don't like the situation you are in, it is no one's fault or responsibility but your own.It is not hypocritical in any way for me to expect people to work for what they want and not expect me to pay for it because my family works harder than theirs.
 
@allymansfield: Oh yeah, this sounded much less "smarmy mean girl" than before. I actually agree that EVERYONE should earn their keep and not take from or live off of the collective "others."
 
@donnatella:
That is tottally your choice and I respect it. I feel that I am working at home raising my daughter. Just like a daycare worker is working to raise kids of working parents. I just don't get a paycheck for the same work.
 
4951
* Reactions disabled on political threads.
Message Menu
foxymama Active Indicator LED Icon 14
~ 8 years ago   Feb 21, '16 9:11pm  
Also, some women find it not financially advantageous to work and put their kids in daycare.  Their paycheck just covers daycare.  Some may work in this situation to keep advancing their careers and others chose to take a break and raise their kids full time.  I think it's a personal descion and one that other people, especially women,  should not judge or ridicule other families about.It really bugs me when women put down other women for the choices and sacrifices  they make for their family.  I think it only tears down the female gender when we should be rising each other up.   4951
* Reactions disabled on political threads.
Message Menu
donnatella Active Indicator LED Icon 13 Forum Moderator
~ 8 years ago   Feb 21, '16 9:27pm  
Also, some women find it not financially advantageous to work and put their kids in daycare.  Their paycheck just covers daycare.  Some may work in this situation to keep advancing their careers and others chose to take a break and raise their kids full time.  I think it's a personal descion and one that other people, especially women,  should not judge or ridicule other families about.It really bugs me when women put down other women for the choices and sacrifices  they make for their family.  I think it only tears down the female gender when we should be rising each other up.  
 
@foxymama: I didn't put down anyone. My issue was not WHAT was said (I actually agreed with the general point), it was the hypocrisy, and that's all. I pointed out the fact that it was being said by someone also not fully employed telling someone else to work harder to earn more and not be a dependent. That scenario was completely unbelievable. Do as I say not as I do because I'm different, special, highly credentialed, blah blah blah.
 
I did and still do both, working inside and outside the home. I get up early, fight a hellacious 1 to 1-1/2 hour one-way commute work 10+ hours, come home and tend to family, home, etc., get up and do it all over again, all week. As if that was not full-time enough, I do both fighting auto-immune issues that have many calling it quits, going on disability and living their lives bed-ridden from overwhelming pain and fatigue.
 
And as I type this last portion, I've just finished cleaning the house so it looks and smells like one of the neighborhood models instead of a frat house inhabited by animals,
 
So you see, it's not a matter of working mom vs. SAHM, because I have always done both, it's about hypocrisy. I wouldn't expect or tell anyone to do anything I'm not already doing to willing to do myself.
 
4951
* Reactions disabled on political threads.
Message Menu
Retired_Engineer Active Indicator LED Icon 13
~ 8 years ago   Feb 21, '16 10:28pm  
I couldn't find the current block diagram, but I found one from 2011.  Not much has changed since then except most boxes have gotten bigger.  You have to move your cursor around to each block to see what it is for and how much is in in.  Most of the "welfare" programs are in the Income Security section.  You just have to look to find the different programs.  There are a few other "welfare" programs scattered in other sections but they are usually pretty small.  The biggest welfare piece is Medicaid in the Health section.  www.nytimes.com/inte ractive/2010/02/01/u s/budget.html?hp& ;amp;_r=0Note:& That will be very difficult to see on a cellphone or even a tablet.  Medicaid fraud elimination is obviously an area that deserves more
attention that it gets.  Other than Medicaid, "welfare" programs are
actually pretty small potatoes compared to the rest of the budget.  I'd
still like to ween the freeloaders off of welfare but we need to realize
that, other than make taxpayers feel a little better, it doesn't have a
big impact.There are a couple of things that jump right out at me from that block diagram:1.  Look how much is spent on National Defense.  The Industrial Military Complex is a very powerful lobbying force.  This gives you an idea of how much we spend vs. several other countries. Even if you add China and Russia together, we still spend over twice as much as they do!  I agree that we need a strong military force, but do we really need to spend that much?!?2.  The next biggest sections are Social Security and Medicare.  Now, if these are funded by themselves (separate from other taxes), in my opinion, they should be listed separately with their own income and outflow amounts.  I think they have to include it in the federal budget because the federal government owes Social Security $2.7 Trillion for all the times they have "borrowed" (I prefer the word stolen) the SS funds and not paid them back. http://www.fedsmith.com/2013/05/23/government-owes-2-7-trillion-to-social-security/The statement "Social Security is not broken, but at the moment, it is broke" is key.  When you have to supplement outflow to SS with general tax income money, because there is not enough SAVED/INVESTED in SS to cover the outflow to SS recipients, then SS is broke.  If Congress had not "borrowed" money from the SS account, there would be AT LEAST the $2.7 Trillion (not counting interest) in it as well as the yearly taxes being paid into it. 4951
* Reactions disabled on political threads.
Message Menu
Retired_Engineer Active Indicator LED Icon 13
~ 8 years ago   Feb 21, '16 10:33pm  

- - - - - - - -
>> @allymansfield:  You need to do some brushing up yourself.  All of the various federal taxes get bundled together as "income" and are then allocated out according to the budget (or however Congress allocates it).  That's how BOTH parties like it.  Our Democratic president can write as many executive orders as he wants, but if it requires any funding, the Republican Congress can refuse to fund it.A prime example is Social Security.  You would think the tax you pay gets put in a special account and is only used for SS?  Those taxes ARE put in a special account, but Congress can "borrow" from that account at any time.  They have done so numerous times.  After we won WWII, Congress borrowed heavily from SS to help Germany and Japan rebuild.  The reason why SS funds are in trouble is that Congress often does not pay back the money they borrowed.State taxes work the same way.  For instance, when they passed a law that said all proceeds from a lottery would go to education, they didn't include any requirement that existing funds allocated for education from General funds remain.  Therefore, if the lottery brings in say $20million, they allocate that money to education and put $20million back in General Funds that state politicians are free to spend as they wish.  The net impact to education is $0.
 
@Retired_Engineer: True, but much of it is "borrowed" to pay for things they are "not meant for" like you said with SS.  Much of that is our debt.  That is a main reason our debt keeps increasing.  We are borrowing against ourselves to pay the debt and thus incurring more debt.  It is a viscous circle.  Adding new entitlements, programs, etc (whatever you want to call them) when we can't afford the ones we have will put us into a faster death spiral than we are already in.
 
@allymansfield:  No matter how you word it, our debt boils down to the fact that our government SPENDS more than it BRINGS IN (from Taxpayers).
4951
* Reactions disabled on political threads.
12345»
This discussion has been locked.
« Back to Main Page
Views: 49
# Replies: 66

McNamara Law Office, PLLC




AFC Urgent Care Kingwood Logo The Pines at Porter Logo The Brass Tap Kingwood Logo Houston Hyperbaric Oxygen Center Logo Fire Craft BBQ Logo VCA Kingwood Animal Hospital Logo Primrose School of Eagle Springs Logo Texas Water & Ice Logo Fox Family Pools Logo Flowers of Kingwood Logo West Lake Houston Automotive Logo J + A Pool Plastering Logo iSchool High Atascocita  Logo Aire Serv of Kingwood Logo Challenge Soccer Club Logo Pirate's Cove Car Wash Logo Club Studio Logo Vertere Coffee Roasters Logo
Sponsor an ad Sponsor an Ad »