Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 116 (8796 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 10-19-2017 9:31 PM
328 online now:
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: jaufre
Upcoming Birthdays: Astrophile, Flyer75
Post Volume:
Total: 820,877 Year: 25,483/21,208 Month: 1,110/2,338 Week: 231/450 Day: 51/52 Hour: 2/1

Announcements: Reporting debate problems OR discussing moderation actions/inactions


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
1
2345Next
Author Topic:   Welfare - what is it and who benefits
RAZD
Member
Posts: 19085
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 2.5


Message 1 of 70 (797102)
01-11-2017 2:14 PM


I saw this article on my facebook feed and thought it would make a good discussion topic.

quote:
7 Lies About Welfare That Many People Believe Are Fact

First of all, many people would be surprised to discover that there is no one program called “welfare.”

The word “welfare” refers to a number of different government assistance programs that provide help to Americans struggling with poverty in distinct ways. SNAP/food stamps, unemployment insurance, Medicaid, Temporary Assistance for Need Families (TANF), Women, Infants and Children (WIC), tax credits for working families, and Social Security are just a few programs under the welfare umbrella.

In fact, many people who complain the most about the “evils” of welfare are actually receiving it themselves—in some form or another. They just don’t realize it, because they don’t know what welfare really entails.

Myth #1: Welfare Payments Are Too High

Myth #2: Welfare Recipients Are Lazy

Myth #3: Undocumented Immigrants Are All on Welfare

Myth #4: People Use Welfare to Support Their Drug Habits

Myth #5: The ‘Welfare Queen Is Hoodwinking Us All

Myth #6: Welfare Is Not Effective

Myth #7: You’ll Never Need Welfare

Providing a safety net through government assistance makes our country stronger—and it’s time for Americans to stop spreading untrue and damaging rumors decrying the very programs that are creating a brighter future for our nation’s most vulnerable. It’s time for politicians to stop trying to cut meager benefits to struggling families.

Because there are millions of people out there who truly need these programs to help them get back on their feet. And you never know—someday, you might be one of them.


Read the article for how these are false myths if you disagree and reply with the myth as a subtitle.

There are many people who benefited from these standard types of low-income welfare early in life and ended up being successful.

Now, we can also argue that any benefit you get for a government source is social welfare, and in the broadest sense this would include (but not be limited to):

  1. Military protection
  2. Police protection
  3. Fire protection and rescue
  4. Natural disaster protection and assistance
  5. Public infrastructure works and maintenance (roads, bridges, tunnels, water and sewage treatment, etc)
  6. Tax credits and tax cuts (including IRA's, Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC), etc. )
  7. Public school education
  8. Government loans at reduced rates (mortgages, school loans, etc) and grants
  9. Government regulations that ensure breathable air, drinkable water, unpolluted lakes and streams, safe working conditions, etc. etc. etc.

General welfare would include standard low income welfare and social welfare, and thus in this broader sense we are all receiving general welfare.

So the question becomes not so much who is getting benefits, but what is the best way for society to invest the welfare dollars for the good of the people:

quote:
U.S. Constitution

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.


... to promote the general welfare for ourselves and our posterity ...

IIRC (if not correct let me know) several studies have shown that giving a poor person a dollar returns ~$1.40 or more to the economy (trickle up works) while giving a rich person a dollar returns ~$0.90 or less to the economy (trickle down doesn't work).

Additional information to aid the discussion, from WELFARE-TO-WORK PROGRAM BENEFITS AND COSTS

quote:
This synthesis also reports estimates of the return on investment (ROI) per net dollar invested by the government. ROIs were calculated for each program from all three perspectives. ROIs are popular with analysts and program operators because they facilitate comparisons of the cost-effectiveness of programs per net dollar invested. ROIs, which are often called “benefit-cost ratios,” are computed by dividing program benefits by program operating costs.

  • The participant ROI ratio measures the change in participant income per net dollar invested in the program by the government, not by the participants themselves. If participant income increases as a result of a program, then the participant ROI will be positive. If the participants gained more than a dollar in income for each dollar invested by the government (implying that the income transfer process is quite efficient), the participant ROI will be not only positive but greater than one.
  • A government budget ROI ratio in excess of one implies that the government’s return on its investment, from a budgetary perspective, was in excess of its cost.
  • A social ROI ratio of greater than one implies that society has received more than a dollar in increased resources for each public dollar invested in the program. Because the social perspective in this synthesis is usually defined as the sum of the participant and the government budget perspectives, the social ROI is usually the sum of the participant and the government budget ROIs. ...

Table ES.2
Five-Year Summary Statistics of Net Value and ROI per Program Group Member, by Program Type (in 2006 dollars)

Program TypeMeanMedianMinimumMaximum
Earnings supplement
a Participant perspective$5,396$5,602$239$10,141
(4.22)(4.22)(3.72)(4.71)
Government budget perspective-$3,532-$1,472-$10,958-$228
-(0.16)-(0.16)-(0.91)(0.58)
Social perspective$1,865$1,132-$815$6,009
(4.06)(4.06)(2.82)(5.30)


Note that this study only covered the "standard" low income welfare programs and not tax cuts and credits, etc. ... and that I have only included one example from the data. This one example shows that for a $1 investment that the return was a net loss of $0.16 from the government and a net gain of $4.06 for the economy.

This paper discusses "standard" welfare benefit by age: Return on Investment: Cost vs. Benefits and there is a graph on page 2 showing the most return is during the younger years.

Likewise studies on raising the minimum wage results in economic growth, and as that is a means to provide Earnings supplement the above excerpt from the table is applicable in showing why this occurs.

All the standard welfare programs are efforts to provide a minimum living income, so the next logical step is for societies to move towards a guaranteed living income, because Earnings supplements show a positive gain for the economy and society in general.

Enjoy


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆Zen☯Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

Replies to this message:
 Message 3 by Phat, posted 01-11-2017 3:17 PM RAZD has responded
 Message 5 by Riggamortis, posted 01-12-2017 8:48 AM RAZD has responded
 Message 70 by Davidjay, posted 06-08-2017 7:59 PM RAZD has acknowledged this reply

  
AdminPhat
Administrator
Posts: 1815
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-03-2004


Message 2 of 70 (797104)
01-11-2017 3:04 PM


Thread Copied from Proposed New Topics Forum
Thread copied here from the Welfare - what is it and who benefits thread in the Proposed New Topics forum.
    
Phat
Member
Posts: 9891
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.4


(1)
Message 3 of 70 (797105)
01-11-2017 3:17 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by RAZD
01-11-2017 2:14 PM


A Hand Up and not a Handout
Providing a safety net through government assistance makes our country stronger—and it’s time for Americans to stop spreading untrue and damaging rumors decrying the very programs that are creating a brighter future for our nation’s most vulnerable. It’s time for politicians to stop trying to cut meager benefits to struggling families.

Because there are millions of people out there who truly need these programs to help them get back on their feet. And you never know—someday, you might be one of them.

I am grateful to be able to pay taxes and that unemployment insurance exists for those of us who through no fault of our own lose our jobs. I have a lot of customers who use government assistance and can readily empathize with them. I dont know how people even survive at minimum wage jobs. They have to work a full 40 hours just to scrape by. They cant make enough to get ahead.

Things happen in life. People get hurt...they get sick...they fall behind. It is our governments duty to help the less fortunate.

Lets talk about the myths.


Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. –RC Sproul
"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." –Mark Twain "
~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith
Whoever trusts in his own mind is a fool, but he who walks in wisdom will be delivered.~Proverbs 28:26

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by RAZD, posted 01-11-2017 2:14 PM RAZD has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 4 by RAZD, posted 01-12-2017 8:21 AM Phat has not yet responded

  
RAZD
Member
Posts: 19085
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 2.5


Message 4 of 70 (797127)
01-12-2017 8:21 AM
Reply to: Message 3 by Phat
01-11-2017 3:17 PM


Myth #1: Welfare Payments Are Too High
I am grateful to be able to pay taxes and that unemployment insurance exists for those of us who through no fault of our own lose our jobs. ...

I have been on unemployment several times and other forms of assistance at various times and now I am getting social security, but I also have investments that now allow us to live comfortably.

Things happen in life. People get hurt...they get sick...they fall behind. ...

Indeed, and that is why it is called unemployment insurance -- a policy that you pay into against the chances of being unemployed, and not an "entitlement" -- and also why it is called social security -- to ensure elderly and disabled have a livable income, again it is an insurance policy that you pay into against the chances of being destitute and not an "entitlement" ....

... It is our governments duty to help the less fortunate.

And this is where there is a divide between conservatives and progressives: how much is our government bound to assist those less fortunate individuals.

Lets talk about the myths.

Starting with Myth #1: Welfare Payments Are Too High ... from the article in Message 1

quote:
In reality, welfare benefits are modest at best, despite the continual attacks by conservative politicians who try, year after year, to reduce them.

Take the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), formerly known as food stamps: The average benefit per person is $1.50 per meal.

Can you imagine trying to feed yourself adequately—not to mention healthily—on such an small amount of money?

Similar to SNAP, most other government assistance programs seek to provide only the barest minimum amount of help that an individual or family needs to survive.


I would challenge anyone who thinks these programs are paying to much to live on the allowances they provide.

One of the problems I have with the programs is that when you start working or get a raise your benefits are cut by the same amount, making it a lot harder to climb out of the hole, and also presenting a disincentive to advance by working harder.

How much better would it be to have a guaranteed livable income regardless of your financial condition, and then be able to build on that through work.

Enjoy


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆Zen☯Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by Phat, posted 01-11-2017 3:17 PM Phat has not yet responded

  
Riggamortis
Member
Posts: 167
From: Australia
Joined: 08-15-2016
Member Rating: 1.9


(2)
Message 5 of 70 (797129)
01-12-2017 8:48 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by RAZD
01-11-2017 2:14 PM


Nice topic, here is some Aussie data on unemployment vs job vacancies.
http://unemployedworkersunion.com/...kers-v-job-vacancy-data

2016 (November)

Unemployed: 725,200

Underemployed: 1, 059,400

Hidden Unemployment: 1.386 million

Job Vacancies: 163, 700

Ratio of job seekers to job vacancies: 19.36

That's nearly 20 people looking for work for every job vacancy! There's just not enough work. I cant imagine how bad crime would be if not for our social safety net. Newstart(job seekers) allowance is roughly $265 Aus per week. Anyone receiving a welfare payment is also eligible for rent assistance and we have a public housing system that charges on a percentage of income basis.

There are two family tax benefits A and B, my wife and I are eligible for one of them despite a combined annual income upwards of 100k. We are also reimbursed for childcare costs up to $5000 per year(from memory). My wife and I are reimbursed around 50% of the cost of visits to the doctor, we pay nothing for the kids to see a doctor. We have used the local govt hospital on many occasions for injuries and the births of our kids with no out of pocket expense. You do have to pay for prescription medication on the way out though which is subsidised for those on pensions etc. We received a first home buyer grant of $7000.

I got a bit carried away there but I thought it wouldn't hurt to add some insight into a more socialist nation. Maybe you guys will see what you're missing out on 😂


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by RAZD, posted 01-11-2017 2:14 PM RAZD has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 6 by RAZD, posted 01-12-2017 11:07 AM Riggamortis has responded

  
RAZD
Member
Posts: 19085
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 2.5


(2)
Message 6 of 70 (797135)
01-12-2017 11:07 AM
Reply to: Message 5 by Riggamortis
01-12-2017 8:48 AM


I got a bit carried away there but I thought it wouldn't hurt to add some insight into a more socialist nation. Maybe you guys will see what you're missing out on

I lived in Canada for nigh on 19 years, our son was born there at no cost to us, my impacted wisdom teeth were removed at no cost to us. I collected unemployment at one point and also now receive the Canadian Pension Plan -- one of two plans they have in lieu of Social Security.

Hidden Unemployment: 1.386 million

I'm curious how this is calculated, and does this include stay-at-home moms (which I would consider "underemployed")?

That's nearly 20 people looking for work for every job vacancy! ...

When I was unemployed in Canada there were ~400 applicants for a single position in my field.

When I was employed (by a town), I was hiring technical staff to fill out a new department, and I had ~200 applications for one job.

Enjoy


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆Zen☯Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by Riggamortis, posted 01-12-2017 8:48 AM Riggamortis has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 7 by NoNukes, posted 01-12-2017 2:51 PM RAZD has responded
 Message 8 by Riggamortis, posted 01-12-2017 3:57 PM RAZD has responded
 Message 29 by ringo, posted 01-16-2017 11:21 AM RAZD has acknowledged this reply

  
NoNukes
Member
Posts: 9997
From: Central NC USA
Joined: 08-13-2010
Member Rating: 2.2


(1)
Message 7 of 70 (797137)
01-12-2017 2:51 PM
Reply to: Message 6 by RAZD
01-12-2017 11:07 AM


I'm curious how this is calculated, and does this include stay-at-home moms (which I would consider "underemployed")?

What would be the point of such a classification? What if it turned out that 50% of married women were stay-at-home moms? Would that be a bad thing?

Being a stay-at-home parent is only a negative thing if the parents have not decided that staying at home is in the interest of their family.


Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people. Martin Luther King

I never considered a difference of opinion in politics, in religion, in philosophy, as cause for withdrawing from a friend. Thomas Jefferson

Seems to me if its clear that certain things that require ancient dates couldn't possibly be true, we are on our way to throwing out all those ancient dates on the basis of the actual evidence. -- Faith

Some of us are worried about just how much damage he will do in his last couple of weeks as president, to make it easier for the NY Times and Washington post to try to destroy Trump's presidency. -- marc9000


This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by RAZD, posted 01-12-2017 11:07 AM RAZD has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 16 by RAZD, posted 01-14-2017 9:19 AM NoNukes has responded

    
Riggamortis
Member
Posts: 167
From: Australia
Joined: 08-15-2016
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 8 of 70 (797139)
01-12-2017 3:57 PM
Reply to: Message 6 by RAZD
01-12-2017 11:07 AM


http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/mf/6220.0

A link to the hidden unemployment data. As I understand it unemployed is those without a job and actively looking, underemployed is those with a job but actively looking for more work and the hidden unemployment is people capable of work who do want to work but aren't actively looking. The figure is mostly stay at home parents and students.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by RAZD, posted 01-12-2017 11:07 AM RAZD has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 15 by RAZD, posted 01-14-2017 9:14 AM Riggamortis has responded

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 7195
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 3.1


(1)
Message 9 of 70 (797140)
01-12-2017 4:00 PM


The Fraud Myth
I have also heard many politicians spreading the myth that there is rampant welfare fraud. The truth of the matter is that outright fraud is very rare. A quick google search turned up some figures for food stamps:

"The U.S. Department of Agriculture, which administers the food stamps program, said 3.8 percent of benefits were paid in error in 2011, according to a factcheck done by PolitiFact Texas in June 2013. The error rate covers both overpayments, including fraud, as well as underpayments. Caseworker mistakes, rather than fraud, were the primary cause."
http://www.politifact.com/...cents-every-1-spent-four-govern

3.8% of benefits are paid in error, and this includes all errors, from clerical mistakes to outright fraud. Therefore, fraud probably makes up about 1% of the budget assigned for food stamps.

Conservatives like to vilify the other 99% of welfare programs based on that 1% fraud. That's sickening, and they shouldn't be allowed to get away with it.


Replies to this message:
 Message 10 by RAZD, posted 01-13-2017 9:30 AM Taq has responded

  
RAZD
Member
Posts: 19085
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 2.5


(1)
Message 10 of 70 (797158)
01-13-2017 9:30 AM
Reply to: Message 9 by Taq
01-12-2017 4:00 PM


Re: The Fraud Myth -- Myth #5
I have also heard many politicians spreading the myth that there is rampant welfare fraud. The truth of the matter is that outright fraud is very rare. ...

That's covered by

quote:
Myth #5: The ‘Welfare Queen Is Hoodwinking Us All

Ronald Reagan once made a speech in which he claimed “There’s a woman in Chicago. She has 80 names, 30 addresses, 12 Social Security cards… She’s got Medicaid, getting food stamps, and she is collecting welfare under each of her names. Her tax-free cash income alone is over $150,000.”

“Who is this woman and how dare she steal the money of innocent, hardworking people?”cried the voices of people across the nation.

Thus was born the infamous and still widely discussed “Welfare Queen.”

She stands for all welfare recipients that are (supposedly) lazily drinking the day away, popping out babies in order to “rake in” more welfare money, and fooling the system by getting more than their share of benefits and then using them to buy iPhones and lobster dinners.

Oh, and she’s obviously Black. Although Reagan didn’t specifically mention her race, he played upon white America’s racial fears to ensure that people assumed she was Black.

What’s more, she is the perfect scapegoat for us to blame for the problems of our nation, the perfect reason to not feel bad about voting for politicians who want to cut meager welfare benefits to struggling families.

There’s just one catch.

She doesn’t exist. Good old President Reagan made her up.

What’s much more important than the falsehood of that single example is the fact that this stereotype doesn’t hold up in general. As we’ve already discovered, most welfare recipients are people just like us—hard workers struggling to support themselves and their families in the wake of the Great Recession.

My advice? Speak out when people bring up the tired Welfare Queen and her 12 babies. A future in which people don’t begrudge struggling families their humble benefits based on a racist myth is possible.

Spread knowledge and knowledge will overcome.


Conservatives like to vilify the other 99% of welfare programs based on that 1% fraud. That's sickening, and they shouldn't be allowed to get away with it.

Indeed. Especially when the problem is companies that don't pay a living wage for a 40 hour work week. Companies like Walmart that even have courses for employees to file for welfare and medicare programs instead of paying enough and providing health insurance for their workers -- THEY are scamming the system to line their greedy pockets when million dollar incomes are not enough: THESE are the real [i]Welfare Queens, and they put Ronald's mythical queen to shame. We end up subsidizing these billionaires from our tax dollars.

Enjoy


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆Zen☯Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

This message is a reply to:
 Message 9 by Taq, posted 01-12-2017 4:00 PM Taq has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 11 by Taq, posted 01-13-2017 3:01 PM RAZD has responded

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 7195
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 3.1


(3)
Message 11 of 70 (797174)
01-13-2017 3:01 PM
Reply to: Message 10 by RAZD
01-13-2017 9:30 AM


Re: The Fraud Myth -- Myth #5
RAZD writes:

Indeed. Especially when the problem is companies that don't pay a living wage for a 40 hour work week. Companies like Walmart that even have courses for employees to file for welfare and medicare programs instead of paying enough and providing health insurance for their workers -- THEY are scamming the system to line their greedy pockets when million dollar incomes are not enough: THESE are the real Welfare Queens, and they put Ronald's mythical queen to shame. We end up subsidizing these billionaires from our tax dollars.

This is part of a general trend where people have different rules for megacorporations and the rich as compared to the poor. A poor person steals a $200 car radio and they face some major jail time. A rich person subverts financial laws and earns $20 million dollars, and they will probably face no jail time, and possibly not even a trial.

This is a battle that people have been fighting since the very inception of our country. There have always been wars between corporations and labor. Different political movements will either bust unions or support them. What I think everyone agrees on is that capitalism isn't a fair economic system. However, it is one of the better economic systems out there. Welfare and labor laws are an attempt to make up for the injustices of a capitalist economy. When you try to strip these away you are supporting injustice.

Edited by Taq, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 10 by RAZD, posted 01-13-2017 9:30 AM RAZD has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 12 by RAZD, posted 01-13-2017 3:55 PM Taq has not yet responded

  
RAZD
Member
Posts: 19085
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 2.5


Message 12 of 70 (797177)
01-13-2017 3:55 PM
Reply to: Message 11 by Taq
01-13-2017 3:01 PM


Re: The Fraud Myth -- Myth #5
... What I think everyone agrees on is that capitalism isn't a fair economic system. ...

Capitalism is inherently amoral and has no mechanism to reign in amoral people. Left to it's own devices a free market capitalist system will always trend towards increasing income inequality, that will take advantage of moral people and poor people, because it can, and because it rewards amoral behavior -- amoral people stealing, cheating, scamming -- taking what they can, however they can.

Because of this a free market capitalist system will create and maintain multitudes of poor people. I'd like to thinks that these poor people have stronger morals than the takers ... but I don't know for sure.

... However, it is one of the better economic systems out there. ...

So far, and only as it applies to large scale systems. Communal sharing works well in small groups (indeed it is the default system for virtually all indigenous tribes), such as worker owned companies, where the profits are shared equitably among all employees (as opposed to feudal model corporations concentrating profit gains to the kings and lords).

This doesn't mean that we can't tweak the system to provide more equitable results. Social Capitalism, such as seen in the Nordic Countries, for example, provides a democratic social conscience to the system, and a goal to treat the least well off in a humane and respectful manner. This is where universal healthcare and guaranteed living income become public\government goals rather than personal or corporate profits.

Those who do better than others pay taxes based on how much they benefit from the economic system.

Enjoy

Edited by RAZD, : No reason given.


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆Zen☯Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

This message is a reply to:
 Message 11 by Taq, posted 01-13-2017 3:01 PM Taq has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 13 by Tangle, posted 01-13-2017 4:39 PM RAZD has responded
 Message 14 by Hyroglyphx, posted 01-14-2017 5:58 AM RAZD has responded

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 5101
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 2.2


(2)
Message 13 of 70 (797180)
01-13-2017 4:39 PM
Reply to: Message 12 by RAZD
01-13-2017 3:55 PM


Re: The Fraud Myth -- Myth #5
RAZD writes:

Because of this a free market capitalist system will create and maintain multitudes of poor people. I'd like to thinks that these poor people have stronger morals than the takers ... but I don't know for sure.

Well I think we know for sure that people are universally the same - on average.

But we also know that they individually differ. And a very common feature of individuals that make and run large corporations is psychopathy. So go figure.

This is why we have laws and regulated capitalism - to differing degrees.


Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien.

"Life, don't talk to me about life" - Marvin the Paranoid Android

"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by RAZD, posted 01-13-2017 3:55 PM RAZD has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 17 by RAZD, posted 01-14-2017 9:50 AM Tangle has not yet responded

  
Hyroglyphx
Member (Idle past 49 days)
Posts: 5512
From: Austin, TX
Joined: 05-03-2006


Message 14 of 70 (797193)
01-14-2017 5:58 AM
Reply to: Message 12 by RAZD
01-13-2017 3:55 PM


Re: The Fraud Myth -- Myth #5
Capitalism is inherently amoral and has no mechanism to reign in amoral people. Left to it's own devices a free market capitalist system will always trend towards increasing income inequality, that will take advantage of moral people and poor people, because it can, and because it rewards amoral behavior -- amoral people stealing, cheating, scamming -- taking what they can, however they can.

Amoral or immoral?

This doesn't mean that we can't tweak the system to provide more equitable results. Social Capitalism, such as seen in the Nordic Countries, for example, provides a democratic social conscience to the system, and a goal to treat the least well off in a humane and respectful manner. This is where universal healthcare and guaranteed living income become public\government goals rather than personal or corporate profits.

Those who do better than others pay taxes based on how much they benefit from the economic system.

Ahhh, hopeless, starry-eyed naïveté... The Nordic system you refer to is crumbling under its own weight. They have a massive housing crisis in places like Sweden due largely in part to an influx in a migrant population that is eating its reserves without replenishing it. They think they can model after America's melting pot, but they've got the formula all wrong. Immigration in places like America only works because it is metered and regulated in a way where assimilation into the culture is much more fluid. Europe has turned on the firehouse and have expected the same results, but is in actuality creating a climate that promotes insular, sectarian factions.

And that has always been the crux of the issue when it comes socialism -- the human condition. You talk about income inequality as if some people are intentionally holding other people down but make no mention of the inequality of effort where one person has to bust their ass to feed someone who knows they can live off the forced charity of a system. The hilarious thing is that you have no problem watching this fitness in action in biological, evolutionary terms. THAT is truly amoral -- neither moral nor immoral. It's just the reality. And the reality that you prefer not to recognize is that none of us deserve jack shit. Not a single one of us. Just because we're out of the forests doesn't mean that survival of the fittest no longer applies. We have to fight our lives every single day. There are winners in that game and there are losers.

Now, since humans have more or less decided to get together for the betterment of our species as a collective way to maximize our survival, I would agree that safety nets ought to be in place in the form of unemployment insurance and to a lesser degree welfare, but to think that expanding the welfare state is the answer is extremely naive. People should be incentivized towards self-sufficiency. Some people legitimately cannot and it is those people that the system was designed for. But as we see in this country, almost a 3rd of the nation is on some form of welfare... Ridiculous. And unnecessary.


"Reason obeys itself; and ignorance submits to whatever is dictated to it" -- Thomas Paine

This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by RAZD, posted 01-13-2017 3:55 PM RAZD has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 18 by RAZD, posted 01-14-2017 10:15 AM Hyroglyphx has responded
 Message 19 by RAZD, posted 01-14-2017 10:35 AM Hyroglyphx has not yet responded

    
RAZD
Member
Posts: 19085
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 2.5


Message 15 of 70 (797198)
01-14-2017 9:14 AM
Reply to: Message 8 by Riggamortis
01-12-2017 3:57 PM


... the hidden unemployment is people capable of work who do want to work but aren't actively looking. The figure is mostly stay at home parents and students.

Ah, so that could be inflating the number a bit. I don't consider people not looking for work as unemployed, whereas this seems to assume that everyone capable of working should work.

And a parent staying home would be an underpaid childcare worker, not unemployed ... as I see it. Their "income compensation" would be in tax credits and the income of a working spouse.

Likewise I don't think every student should have to work as well as go to school.

Thanks.

Edited by RAZD, : .


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆Zen☯Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by Riggamortis, posted 01-12-2017 3:57 PM Riggamortis has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 21 by Riggamortis, posted 01-14-2017 4:01 PM RAZD has acknowledged this reply

  
1
2345Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2017