Author: dragon8

Almost Half of America is on Welfare   [Copy link] 中文

Rank: 8Rank: 8

Post time 2014-8-29 00:40:52 |Display all floors
KIyer Post time: 2014-8-28 14:18
yes, they will spend $5 for $1 to reach the recipient, when it is the government directly deliveri ...

You've got it in a nutshell.....

Here in the UK I receive a phenomenal number of calls daily trying to sell me free solar panels free house insulation and a free new gas boiler. All supplied courtesy of the taxpayer. These corporations are not doing it out of humanitarian or environmental concern..... it is done for profit, and their willingness to spend an enormous amount on telephone calls, indicates that the taxpayer is getting a raw deal.
The world needs more idiots like me, all the others think they are clever.

Use magic tools Report

Rank: 6Rank: 6

Post time 2014-8-29 01:25:44 |Display all floors
This post was edited by sfphoto at 2014-8-29 01:29

You forgot to mention the number one recipient of welfare in the U.S.A.: CORPORATIONS. Their list of benefits make one drool over how good they have it in the Land of the Free and Home of the Brave: 1). ZERO TAXES ON OFFSHORE INCOME 2). TAX SHELTERS 3). GOVERNMENT BAILOUTS (e.g., Obama's TARP) and 4). GOVERNMENT HANDOUTS (e.g., Bernanke's QE programs). The latest trend in corporate welfare is "inversion" or taking over a foreign company and then moving the legal domicile of the U.S. corporation (e.g., Walgreens) OUTSIDE of the U.S.A. to avoid paying taxes to the IRS.

Use magic tools Report

Post time 2014-8-29 02:42:26 |Display all floors
Reminder: Author is prohibited or removed, and content is automatically blocked

Use magic tools Report

Rank: 8Rank: 8

Post time 2014-8-29 03:13:47 |Display all floors
sfphoto Post time: 2014-8-28 12:25
You forgot to mention the number one recipient of welfare in the U.S.A.: CORPORATIONS. Their list of ...

you kno your welfare state much better than i do...and that's exactly right & they're drainin out much funds from the gov't  
a man who uses his hands is a laborer. one who uses his hands and his mind is a craftsman. but he who uses his hands, his mind, and his heart, is an artist...

Use magic tools Report

Rank: 8Rank: 8

Post time 2014-8-29 12:16:55 |Display all floors
coralbay Post time: 2014-8-29 02:42
Isn't it absolutely disgraceful that any government would try to promote energy conservation?

There are ways and means of doing that....... some are more wasteful than others. Allowing the private sector to plunder the treasury is not in the interests of the taxpayer.
Much like the drive towards "Greener" cars.....  yes it is a desirable goal, but by subsidizing the purchase of a new car, the taxpayer is paying towards an increase in pollution rather than a decrease. A serviceable car is scrapped at government expense to be replaced by a new one. The average car in its lifetime will not consume the energy used during its manufacture. So the taxpayer is promoting the manufacture of more cars and adding to the pollution.
The world needs more idiots like me, all the others think they are clever.

Use magic tools Report

Rank: 8Rank: 8

Post time 2014-8-29 18:28:13 |Display all floors
This post was edited by Ted180 at 2014-8-29 05:30
Alarico Post time: 2014-8-28 14:17
So you want the laziest and most unaccomplished people to be given stuff for free on the government ...


1.What about the children of incompetent parents? Do you want society to neglect them so they can't become more competent than their parents? So they will cause increasing crime? 2. Social transfer payments provide purchasing power to incompetents. They have the highest MPC (marginal propensity to consume). They spend every cent they receive. Wealthier people (like me) have a much lower MPC (we save and invest). But the current slow recovery from recession is caused by inadequate consumer demand. So much so that the return on our investments is much lowered. Transfer more money to the poor (many of whom are indeed less competent) and they'll spend it all - creating more profits for us rich. Have you not figured that out? 3. It is cheaper and safer to give money to the poor than to spend it on police and prisons to protect your wealth. 4. Finally, there is the moral aspect of this. Every religion commands us to help those less fortunate than ourselves. In summary, Alarico, your post shows both a total lack of economic thought plus an immoral selfishness.
My problem is simple: I just know better than everyone-else!

Use magic tools Report

Rank: 8Rank: 8

Post time 2014-8-29 18:34:00 |Display all floors
TheHermit Post time: 2014-8-27 23:55
The only reason these programs exist in the US is that they are subcontracted out to the big finan ...

I appreciate there's a problem with this "subcontracting". But that's no reason to stop social payments. This can be reformed.
My problem is simple: I just know better than everyone-else!

Use magic tools Report

You can't reply post until you log in Log in | register

BACK TO THE TOP
Contact us:Tel: (86)010-84883548, Email: blog@chinadaily.com.cn
Blog announcement:| We reserve the right, and you authorize us, to use content, including words, photos and videos, which you provide to our blog
platform, for non-profit purposes on China Daily media, comprising newspaper, website, iPad and other social media accounts.