The "Entitlement" Mind - Gosh, I had one!
82
Financial Assistance vs Entitlements
One of the most common words being thrown around in discussions today is "Entitlements." For some reason, this word has become very negative in my mind. "Entitlements" is a powerful word that is driving a wedge between the citizens of this country I love so much. Some view this word in a positive manner, and others in a negative manner.
I won't bore you with Websters definition of "Entitlements," it translates to "Something for Nothing." Way back when, the need for Financial Assistance for those who could not help themselves was recognized, and assistance programs were put it place. Most of these Financial Assistance programs were intended to be temporary in nature, and were intended to aid people in getting back on their feet, to once again become productive members of society.
In the title of this hub I told you that I once had this "Entitlement" mind, but let me explain. This was back in 1948 and I was 10 years old. Like many children I received a weekly allowance from my parents. I remember this being a whopping 25 cents per week. After my 10th birthday, my father informed me the free ride was over. I was shocked, I was"Entitled" to this 25 cents per week allowance just for being alive. My father had a friend who owned a small weekly newspaper who needed paperboys to deliver this weekly publication to his subscribers. My father helped me build a box that fit on my bicycle so I could carry the papers that needed to be delivered, and I had my first job. We first had to fold the papers neatly as they came off the press, load them on our bikes, and set off on our individual routes. In those days, we were not allowed to just throw the paper somewhere in the direction of the subscribers house, it had to be placed between the screen door and the front door of the house. These papers had to be delivered rain or shine, hot or cold, with no whining or complaining from the paperboys. I was still angry about losing my "Entitlement" pay, but my father left me no choice in the matter. It was work for a living or be stone broke for the rest of my life.
I'll never forget the day I received my first pay from this paper route. We got paid once a month, in cash, and the owner of the paper handed me 4 one dollar bills. That was the most money I had ever had in my hand at one time in my whole life. I actually remember thinking I was quite wealthy compared to some of my friends who were still not working for a living.
I rode my bicycle home as fast as I could go, anxious to show my new found wealth to my father. He asked me what I was going to do with all this money, and I admitted I didn't know for sure. Then came my next lesson in life. We got in his old beat up car and went straight down to the local bank where I opened a savings account with $1 out of my first payday. From that day forward I always added to this savings account every payday.
After leaving the bank we stopped at a local ice cream parlor for a rare treat. My father took this opportunity to explain to me why he stopped my allowance and helped me with my first job. We talked about practically nothing being free in this world, and a man must learn how to work and provide for his family. A man also must learn to save when times are good, so he is prepared for bad times that are sure to come. These two lessons were probably the most important thing I have ever learned, and they have served me well.
My father was a wonderful man, and I'm glad he is not alive today to see what this country has become. The mere idea of people demanding money for doing nothing would have made him furious. Nobody would ever be able to get my father to accept the idea that anyone is "entitled" to some of his hard earned money just because they were alive but didn't care to work for a living.
Now you know why the word "Entitlements" raises my blood pressure and always will. Yes, like most children, I was "Entitlement" minded. But my father had the wisdom to teach me some valuable lessons at an early age. He often talked about pride, holding your head up high, a fair days work for a fair days pay, and other things of this nature. Now I ask, what happened to these character traits that most Americans were taught at an early age? When did parents quit imparting this wisdom to their children?
In other hubs and comment sections, I have asked for one of those who truly believes in the fairness of "Entitlements" and redistribution of wealth to explain it to me. So far I have had no takers.
Thanks for taking the time to read, and I am open to your comments positive or negative.
vote upvote downshareprintflag
- Useful (8)
- Funny (1)
- Awesome (8)
- Beautiful (2)
- Interesting (12)
CommentsLoading...
Excellent hub. I too am tired of everyone thinking they are entitled just because they breathe. I happen to know a mildly mentally disabled individuals that has managed to work at the same place for 25+ years. He is close to being retired now with his 401K and happy attitude. Alot more capable individuals could do the same but choose not to. NO pity for them from this corner.
I agree with this. I am the same age as you and went through similar "education" as a child. But there are many people in this world firmly convinced they are entitled to much more than us, by birth. And the fools, the "Ragged Trousered Philanthrophists," support them, looking up to them instead of down. This gives a twisted view of entitlement, when so many get so much they are apparently entitled to. It's a bad word, really Bob
OP,
Great article. It is so true, people today expect everything to be given to them, parents need to end that show our youth it takes hard work to achieve your goals.
Mike,
I'm not just doing the supportive thing here. I gave this one a perfect run. I rarey do a run, but this one hit all the buttons.
Trying to explain why bums should be carried by those more fortunate to a hard core liberal, and I said HARDCORE, is like trying to explain to two year old why a puppy had to die. They don't give a damn about math, they just want the puppy back.
There are people who need a hand up, but this abuse is killing us. The math is the math. Pretty soon there won't be anything there for those who actually need it.
"If you want to control a group of people, make sure they have a little. If you allow them to have too much, you can't control them. If you allow them to have nothing, they will rebel. Give them just enough to get them by and you own them." ~themanwithnopants I'll be writting a hub on this soon.
Loved it dude!
jim
@Phoebe Pike - You are very correct. Many who have learned to play the game live better that some of us who work hard for a living. It was not originally intended to be this way, but over time has evolved into a "gimmie" world so many have learned to love. Thanks for your comment.
@Bail Up ! - Thanks for the comment. Most of us know of those less fortunate than ourselves who have managed to hold their heads high and be self sustaining to the best of their ability. They are certainly to be admired in today's world.
@diogenes - Bob, glad to know my father wasn't the only mean old man who thought it a good idea to teach his children some values. I still wonder when parents quit this teaching? I carried this over to my own children and they are all doing fine. Thanks for your great comment.
George - Thanks for the comment. The problem as I see it is sometime back when parents quit teaching this work ethic thing, this entitlement trend started. I'm not sure we will ever get this back.
Jim, as always a pleasure to see you stop by. I completely agree with everything you had to say. I'm not sure we will ever be rid of the "entitlement" thinking. We now have several generations who were raised with this mentality, and in turn raised their own children with this same thinking. As harsh as it sounds, the only way to ever change this now would be to stop their allowance and make them go to work. I have no problem helping those unable to help themselves, but resent being forced to help those who make no effort to help themselves.
Mike, I grew up with a dad with a perfect work record, both commended by Anheuser-Busch for his performance and attendance. I worked all my life with the same work ethic. It didn't protect me. Apparently, doing a great job wasn't enough when the construction industry took a huge hit from the economy. Now, close to retirement age, I remain unemployed, despite no slipper shuffling or laziness on my part. Receiving unemployment made me feel ashamed until I realized I'd paid all my working years for this insurance. Now, I hear that bloated Newt Gingrich talking about taking care of illegals that have managed to evade the laws and work in the States and raise their children here. I find it the height of hypocracy to want to extend a helping hand to those that live here illegally, yet treat citizens that have paid into social security and unemployment insurance out of every earned paycheck like they have an "entitlement" mindset. Bullshit.
I really am sick of people who feel like they are entitled to the world's gold & chocolate. Pull up your boots and learn that everyone is the same.
@Old Poolman - good read, I can't answer why individuals feel entitled - but I think I have a theory why there exist a class of folks that feel it.
Before any one pounces, this just a thought, (but it might make sense), and I'm not advocating anything, but...
The answer could be defective mutations that have been allowed to survive
Pretty basic concept - from the instance of the first life form until "modern" man, the Darwinian concept of "survival of the fittest" ruled. The weakest of any species, perished because their environment was such that only the strongest could survive.
Hence life forms that did not have the needed traits for survival, (from parasites to dinosaurs), perished, leaving only the strongest to propagate that species.
I believe this to be true, right up to the very early 20th century.
Then things changed, as a people we acquired more security in our life - everyday wasn't for the sole purpose of obtaining food. - we developed shelters that made us less pawns of nature. - our basic needs , -food, water, shelter, security were pretty much fulfilled for all of us.
and our concept of life changed - from accepting the truth of survival of the fittest to believing in the concept of --- survival of ALL
sound dumb?
consider, if your image of an "entitlement junkie" is similar to mine - and considering any time period before, say 1910?, do you suppose that person would have survived long enough to raise more children from his stock of genes?
of course life is sacred, but considered without religious connotations - so is death.
Darwin may not have gotten it all right, but I believe he got this part right - it is the natural selection process created by Nature's rules of survival of the fittest that lead to improvements of a species.
Soooo....
GA
I remember a time when Americans had to much pride in themselves to accept handouts! I remember my parent (who were poor) working extra jobs to make grocery money! Excellent hub! voted up!
Amy - Great to see you in here. Everything you describe is exactly why I am in business for myself. It has its' headaches but at least I control my own destiny. As far as the rest of your comment, I totally agree with the "Bullshit."
Pikachusif - Unfortunately, these people will be with us forever, thanks for the comment.
GA Anderson - Thanks for your most interesting comments. I completely agree with everything you said. As you indicated, by natures rules, only the strong survive. That is natures way of keeping a species of bird or animal alive. Being humans of higher intelligence than at least most animal species, we are blessed, or cursed, with compassion for our fellow humans. We put programs in place to make sure even the weakest of our species does not die. Before anyone has a stroke, I am not advocating that we drop these programs and let everyone but the very strong die of starvation. As you pointed out, we changed from a survival of the fittest mode to the survival of ALL mode. Where many of us were raised by hard working and full of pride parents, then this is how we view life as it should be. Others less fortunate were raised by parents who were necessarily on assistance programs, and this is how they view life as it should be. Thus the beginning of the "Entitlement Lovers" and the "Entitlement Haters" among our population. We are all a product of our environment, it is a simple as that.
Excellent points GA, and you give me a fresh look at this subject.
Agree, entitlement is the problem, question is: how do you fix it?
Is it as simple as cutting off the allowance, and saying 'get a job'? For kids, that works ... you can help set up that first job for them, using that former allowance money, if needed. For folks who have grown up figuring out how to get bigger allowance from the government money tree (Phoebe Pike describes the type of situation I've seen), it's not that easy.
AR - I can't even remember how many times my wife and I both worked two jobs, or a full time job with work on the side to raise our 4 children. This is just what you did back then. If you wanted food on the table, you worked and earned the money and bought the food. We never once looked to any government agency for a handout. Ah how I long for the good old days.
FitnezzJim - Hello my friend. I wish I had an answer to this dilemma, but I don't. We have created a monster that is now almost too big to kill. Take for instance a single mother with 3 children and little or no education. The best she could hope for would be a minimum wage job that would not even pay her child care expenses. What is she to do? The answer is obvious, just stay in the position she is in until the children are all grown up. Then she is older, still uneducated, has no work history or job skills, and she must remain on the dole to survive.
I just can't believe we were not smart enough to see what a trap we were building for those less fortunate people among us. The door to this seeming hope and dream of financial aid was a one way door with no way out once a person entered. Many who walked through this door are now trapped, and are basically owned by the agency providing the aid money.
If you have any answers to this serious problem please feel free to share them.
http://www.cato.org/research/pr-nd-st.html (note: 1995)
I didn't take the time to nit-pick this article for accuracy, but my guess is they're probably smarter than me anyway.
My solution to this entitle issue is: ask the states. If we split all entitlement programs up among the states, we'll have 50 different things to try at once. Some will work, some won't.
However, if we keep trying to find a federal solution, it will have to be perfect before we all agree, so it'll never get done. And if we do find a solution we agree on, if it fails, it affects all of the states.
There's a reason why federalism is a good idea.
Thanks for writing! Keep up the good work!
comp3820 - Thanks for the comment, and not a bad idea. On the negative side of this plan, the states that came up with the best solution would soon be overpopulated, and some states would be left with a small population. I know of several who have moved to California for their very popular "Entitlement" programs. Of course, California is in serious financial trouble, and can't quite figure out how to get out of it. They can't quite understand that when you give away massive amounts of money, and fewer people have jobs and pay taxes, they just might be headed for trouble. Perhaps one day the money will all be gone, and they can just start over.
Very true. One of my teachers in college told this story:
There was a college professor who was quite intelligent, but didn't feel like working. So he devised his retirement plan as follows: He moved to the Rockies and got a job as a ski lift operator in the winter. When summer rolled around and he wanted some free time, he headed of to California. He parked his camper near the ocean and signed up for unemployment benefits. Under "Occupation," he put "Professional Ski Lift Operator. Willign to accept any work." Of course, the jobs for ski lift operators in California in the summer are few and far between. So he had money to pay for his day-to-day relaxed living before he went back to the mountains for the winter.
As far as I know, it's a true story, but even if it weren't, it points out some problems with California's system - #1, they're one of the states that will give you unemployment even if you haven't paid into the system.
comp3820 - Great story and probably true. You and many others like myself labored under the misconception that one should pay into a system in order to take out of the system. Not true as we now learn.
One thing I have brought up in several hubs concerns our Social Security program. We all know that illegals are able to buy SS cards, but many end up with cards with the same SS number on them. Now, as an employer, every payday I have to match dollar for dollar what my employees pay in SS tax. These payments are sent directly to the government by my payroll company. Now reportedly, the government uses very sophisticated computer equipment to run these programs. Yet they receive hundreds of payments on the same SS number, and their computer system never says "what the hell?" Nope, they cash the checks and put this "extra" money toward whatever. We all know the SS fund is not restricted to paying just SS checks to those lucky enough to receive a payment. This money goes into a big vat where they can dip into it and extract money anytime they need to buy something. Then they can tell us SS is going broke and we are all in serious trouble. The interesting part is that if someone failed to send in the SS withholding and employer matching on payday, the would come down on the employer like a ton of bricks. But when they receive money from hundreds of employers on the same SS number, nothing is said. Even more ironic is that they now have the name and address of the employers, which just might aid them in tracking down illegals, but to my knowledge this doesn't happen either. This might qualify for Ripley's Believe it or Not?
Here's Webster's number one definition: The right to benefits specified by law or contract.
Like the money I'm owed at the end of a job. Like the money my insurance company pays for my fender bender. Like the social security that I have paid into for 42 years. Like my 401k. Like the money the FDIC took from my bank stock (Colonial) and gave to the TARP recipient (BB&T).
The bought and paid for media has you putting the fid to ignorant poor folks while the Ivy League rich folks are stealing you blind. They think they are entitled to it.
No wonder we are in so much trouble! You are all upset about entitlements when you should be upset about China, the Saudis and Deutsche Bank.
WD Curry 111 - If I wrote a hub on everything I am upset about, it would be hundreds of pages and nobody would read it. Of course I am upset about the other things you mention. Many things are wrong, but we can only fix them one at a time. I was mostly addressing those who feel they are "Entitled" just because they are here and questioning how this thinking begin. Thanks for stopping by and the comment.
I hear you. You are my friend. My point is this. Our attention is being diverted to the least of our problems, while our ruin is boiling over on the back burner. That is how propaganda works.
WD Curry 111 - You are so correct my friend. The whole class warfare and Left vs Right thing was designed to divert our attention to what is really going on. And sadly, it is working. When we hear complaints about big corporations and banks ripping us off, this hate is directed mainly toward the Right side of the Aisle. But in truth, it is all of them. All one needs to do is look at who received the big campaign contributions, and who gave them, and the truth becomes evident. We have a great many politicians who are willing to sell their vote to the highest bidder, and it happens almost daily. When we compare voting records to campaign contributions it all starts to fall in place. Thanks for being here.
Old Poolman,
Where did I see that word "entitlement" before?
Good story and good hub.
Cheers
Not too well versed in these programs so I haven't posted till now, but I have been reading almost all the comments. Learning a good bit.
I've been that type that has never needed to use unemployment or housing/food stamp aid so I have never needed to know about it. Therefore I'm skeptical when I hear about people living fatter on welfare than with a job or even getting a better house than someone earning it. I appreciate it Poolman, comp3820, and the rest for showing me it can be true. That's just crazy that loopholes in the system like that exist. Why is it so hard to fix them?
claptona - Interesting comment. I was talking about this with my neighbor, and he brought up an interesting point. Things like SS and Medicare are Entitlements. Most of us have paid into these programs our entire adult life, and we are ENTITLED to get something back for our investment. So these are truly entitlements. When we talk about Section 8 housing, food stamps, WIC, and other programs of that nature, they are not entitlements, they are welfare pure and simple. Calling these programs Entitlements has clouded the issue. Call them by the correct name and much of the mystery goes away.
Lapse - Thanks for stopping by and the comment. Hang around this crowd for awhile and you will be amazed at what you learn. A very good group with lots of knowledge they are willing to share.
Poolman; Entitlement is for those unable to compete in a system that blocks access or by Nature or social conditions prevents one to accomplice what was with in your reach and abilities. Your failure to state corporate entitlements and tax loop holes for the rich indicates a myopic mind set;let others state the reality in which you live.The mentally ill were set lose in the street because we did not want to support them from our pay check;we turn a blind eye to the accident of birth. Poolman, we that are able to compete in the system are all accident of birth- By Nature and/or Socially.No no one picks their birth circumstance and very few are able to pull on the proverbial "Booth Strap".
Old Poolman...
Hello my friend. Alas...I am one of the liberals that wants his puppy back. That said...you were very well served by your father my friend! I remember when my mom had the (get a job) talk with me when I was about the same age...it resulted in the same paper route idea (different time, paper, and route) but the thought still holds!
Excellent job good sir. Like Jim above...I will be hitting all the buttons on the way to the porch to get my paper.
Thomas
Old Poolman, thanks for having me and giving me an ear.
niall.tubbs - Thanks for commenting. I have no problem at all in helping those that can't, but a real problem in helping those who won't. There is a huge difference between the two.
ThoughtSandwiches - Really great to see you in here. I think we all "want our puppy back" whether we admit it or not. It makes me feel good I was not the only one who had to ride a bike and deliver newspapers. But I doubt it hurt either one of us.
WD Curry 111 - You sir have my ear anytime you want. Always great to see you stop by for a visit.
very nice read... OP... I am a big believer in hard work... but just as Amy said there are some out here that are unusual cases for America... I have a friend who kept his business open for the twenty five families that depended upon him... he ran it until the economy took it from him... now he has nothing... he draws unemployment insurance but never feels entitled... it makes me weep for he is a good man and cared for many people...
jeanine - I feel badly for your friend, and am sure he is a great man. Most self employed people are not even eligible for unemployment. When they are forced to close the doors on their business they have no more pay checks, or unemployment. It is indeed a sad situation.
Things will swing back around in the other direction, when the benefits completely run out, and America folds. Then the people will be fighting tooth and nail for jobs, food, clothing, shelter. Unfortunately to break a bad trend, bad things have to happen. At the rate the economy is going, it is only a matter of time. Don't get too comfy slackers, time is a coming!
Eva Hamori - I hope your right on this. Unfortunately when the freebies run out, crime and violence will increase. Just because the freebies are gone doesn't necessary mean people will rush out looking for work.
Another great hub - love the way you think and express yourself. Makes me feel like I'm not alone. I was recently inspired to write a hub "A Lesson In Courage and Perseverance" about an individual who was born with such incredible challenges and yet responded in such a remarkable way that I told friends if they ever hear me having a pity party they had my permission to give me a swift kick. Compare this brave individual with the people who are able bodied but continue to buy into the government owing them a living. Thanks again for being a voice for the rest of us. GClark
GClark - A real pleasure having you stop by to leave such a great comment. I too have seen many with severe handicaps overcome obstacles and achieve a measure of success. Then there are those able bodied individuals with the "gimmie" attitude whom I detest. How anyone can feel they are owed something by just being alive is beyond my comprehension. Life has taught me we get back exactly what we put in, no more, no less.
Being the same age as you, Poolman, (I was 10 in 1949) I agree with you on all counts. When it stopped? I think it began in earnest when the Welfare state started, with LBJ. My biggest complaint is with those who call us old timers drawing our hard-earned Social Security 'entitlers'. We PAID for those payments. In uninflated dollars, dollars that we could hardly afford to give up. Now we get our checks for inflated dollars that hardly pays for anything. We were lied to all those years, told it was a trust fund and would always be there for us when we retired. Now, we are called entitlers, freeloaders! THAT is what galls my cockles.
the sense of entitlement among americans is ludicrous. Even those living at the poverty level in the US (around 22 K for a family of 4) are in the top ten percent in income IN THE WORLD. The average median income (around 50 K) is int he top 1% in the world. It's ridiculous. We need to gain some perspective!
@PC Bob Couldn't agree with you more. People on social security are not at all the same mentality as those who feel they are entitled to have the government buy them a home and whatever else they might desire. It makes me mad when they keep trying to blame Social Security with bankrupting the country. The government never should have been allowed to have access to that money where they kept dipping into it as if it were a well with unlimited water and didn't have to be accountable for what they took and where it was spent. Many years ago, an American came up with an idea of everyone having their own private social security account where they could use it to invest or whatever. That person was ignored and not too long after Chili set up a plan for its citizens so everyone had a passbook that let them know how much money was in there account. I don't remember all of the particulars but do remember that the plan seemed to be a success. When it was proposed for our country, I believe that a person could choose to be part of that or keep the old set up.
While I am on my rant, I think Congress should have to have the same health plan as the rest of us. Do not think they should be entitled to a huge pension for life after they retire from a job where they have already lined their pockets while spending days accomplishing nothing for the citizens of this country. GClark
PDXKaraokeGuy - Excellent points my friend. You put it in a way that I had never thought of, and your absolutely correct. Compare this to many other countries and things don't look all that bad. Those poor folks starving in Mexico would most likely love a 22K annual income and feel like they were pretty rich. Great food for thought in your comment.
PC Bob - Thank you for a great comment. It is interesting how many of the younger generation feel those of us collecting SS are taking welfare. The fact that most of us have paid into the system for over 50 years doesn't seem to mean anything. The fact that SS was nothing but a big well full of money that government could dip into at will, for anything they wanted, is seldom mentioned either. Had we invested the same amount of money into secure investments we would be far better of than the token amount we see in our monthly SS checks. I just received a letter saying I was getting a cost of living increase from SS next year. But I also had an increase it what I must pay for Medicare which is deducted from my payment. My net gain is $2.00 per month. Now I am faced with having to make a decision on what to do with all this extra income.
GClark - Somehow I got my responses out of order, but sure didn't mean to ignore you. Most of us know we could do much better in private investments than the token amount we get back from our SS investment. Most of us will not even get back all that we paid into the system because we won't live that long.
And you are so right that our leaders should be forced to live under the same system and rules that we citizens are forced to follow. If the decisions they made affected their own futures, they might put more effort into the decision making process. Thanks so much for a really great comment.
The first time I heard about private accounts for SS I thought it was a dumb idea, looking at the way the stock market goes up an down. But over time the trend has always been up. From the safety aspect it's much better than what we now have, with Congress taking the money a spending it on other things. If you google on Chilean Social Security you can learn all about their plan and how well it is working for them. They started using the system we have decades before us, so it tanked sooner and they HAD to find a better way. It's OK to force people to put money aside for retirement, but the government has no business meddling in it. The money belongs to the people, NOT the government. Since the government is greedy we must make sure they can't touch it; the mistake of the current system. Everyone has been cheated under the current SS system. Us old timers are stuck with it but the next generation can certainly do better for themselves. At 20 I was offered an opportunity to save in a new plan, a mutual funs plan by the John Hancock Insurance company while I was in the service. I signed up for $10 a payday, but soon canceled it. Had I stayed with that I shudder to think how much better off I would be today, financially speaking. We live and we learn, if we are lucky.
PC Bob - My plan would be that since our leaders are exempt from insider trading laws, and obviously make great money because of this, we could get them to build up the SS fund quickly. Forced savings are great for those who are unable to save by themselves, but not just putting money into a community pot any politician can dip into at will. SS would have been a good program if they had kept a lock on the money box.
Thanks for the comments.
Thanks Poolman. I actually blogged about this on my other blog. read it if you're curious: http://pdxjpricefirstblog.blogspot.com/2011/12/who/2011/12/who-are-one-percenters.html
@Old Poolman and PC Bob - re the social security system in Chile. As mentioned in one of my previous posts, I remember reading sometime ago that their new system was based on a plan developed by an American who couldn't get it implemented in our country and when I did a recent search trying to find out more about that man, I found some interesting info that I wanted to pass on. I have added a couple of web addresses if you or anyone else wants to pull up the complete details. It is truly amazing that a third world country could end up with such a great capitalist program supported by their entire population enthusiastically. Feel free to edit my comments if you think they are too long.
http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=5981 Chile's Soc. Sec. Lesson for the U.S. written by Jose Pinera Note: the following are just a few excerpts from this. I would recommend reading the entire article.
The Chilean system is run completely by private companies. We now have 15 mutual funds competing for workers' savings.
The whole working population of Chile has a vested interest in sound economic policies and a pro-market, pro-private-enterprise environment.We guaranteed benefits for the elderly -- we told those people who had already retired that they had nothing to fear from this reform. We also told people entering the labor force for the first time that they had to go to the new system.
Today, all workers in Chile are capitalists, because their money is invested in the stock market. And they also understand that if government tomorrow were to create the conditions for inflation, they would be damaged because some of the money is also invested in bonds -- around 60%. So the whole working population of Chile has a vested interest in sound economic policies and a pro-market, pro-private-enterprise environment.
http://www.ssa.gov/policy/docs/ssb/v59n3/v59n3p45.
another source which is a 15 page pdf describing their entire program in depth.
some excerpts:
In 1981, Chile introduced a new approach to social insurance, a system of individual capitalization accounts financed solely by the employee. This new privatized system was an improvement over Chile’s failing pay-as-you-go arrangement. As many countries worldwide are facing financial problems with their social security system, they are now looking to the Chilean model in trying to find solutions. This article describes the conditions that led to the new system, the transition, and details of the new privatized system.
New Privatized System: Contribution Rates, Qualifving Conditions, and Benefits
The privatized system set up individual accounts for workers in newly created pension fund management companies (administradoras de fondos de pensiones-AFPs). The worker must contribute 10 percent of earnings each month to his individual account up to a monthly earnings ceiling of 60 Unidades de Foment0 (UF)-a monetary unit adjusted monthly for changes in the consumer price index. As of May 1996, the UF was about US$3 1. The worker may make an additional contribution to his or her account, up to a maximum of 48UF. The mandatory 10 percent contribution is tax deferred, while the additional contribution is subject to income tax. To cover the cost of disability and survivors insurance, a worker must purchase an insurance policy, and pay an administrative fee, totaling an average of about 3 percent of earnings. Contribu-tions for health benefits are an additional 7 percent of earnings. Workers may also set up a separate savings account with the AFP for supplementary contributions. These contributions are technically not considered social security contributions and are subject to income tax. Up to four withdrawals from such accounts are permitted each year. This savings account will be combined with the individual account to finance the worker’s retirement.
Early retirement is permitted if the worker has accrued enough funds to provide a pension that equals at least 50 percent of his or her indexed average annual wage over the last 10 years, and is at least equal to 110 percent of the minimum old-age pension. For workers aged 65 (men) and 60 (women) who have contributed for at least 20 years, the government guarantees a minimum pension4 equal to 85 percent of the legal minimum wage (90 percent at ages 70 or older).
An old-age pension is derived from the insured’s contribu-tions-both mandatory and voluntary-plus earnings. Upon retirement, the insured may:make scheduled withdrawals from his or her individual account, regulated to guarantee income for their expected lifespan; buy an annuity to provide the retiree with lifetime benefits; or choose a combination of the above.
All of the pensions are subject to income tax. There are advantages and disadvantages to each of the different types of retirement options. For scheduled withdraw-als, the advantages are that pension fund investment yields may be higher than those of annuities since annuities are based on more conservative real rates of return and mortality tables; dependents inherit the accounts if the insured dies early but do not if an annuity is chosen; there are no commission charges for scheduled withdrawals; and an insured may continue to switch from one AFP to another. One of the disadvantages is that a retiree could exhaust his savings before death (in which case, the minimum pension provision becomes applicable). In the case of annuities, advantages are that rates are guaranteed
GClark - This is outstanding information. I am covered up with work right this moment, and don't have time to do justice to your great comment, but will be back later to do so. I am going to share this with some friends so they can read it for themselves.
Thank you, GCLARK. I read that awhile back, when Herman Cain first mentioned it. It is certainly something we should look into, here in the USA. To NOT do so would be a huge mistake. To do nothing, which is the now common theme, will soon have us in such a deep hole we may never get out. FDR gave us a mess, back in the 30'a and 40's, one guaranteed to backfire on us, but we don't have to keep it. The Chilean model should have been setup in the beginning. The USA would be in a much different and better place today if we had. Correcting this mess and replacing the IRS will put America far ahead of the rest of the world. All we need is a new leader who has the courage to do it. Herman Cain was my choice for that, but now I guess we must select someone else.
Good points, Mike...we don't spend enough time talking about the "work ethic" anymore and I am sure that we don't teach it. Back in the early days of Social Security, those who qualified for it were receiving "entitlements" because they had done nothing to qualify (i.e. pay money into the system). That situation has long since ended especially with the "baby boomer" generations. We paid our full-boat share into SS whether we wanted to or not and those we elected to office squandered it on other spending avenues which they conjured up over time. Now the system is bust and everyone in Washington wants to call it an "entitlement". To me, that's like investing your money with Bernie Madoff and later finding out that you have nothing because he considered your investment as a "bet" and you lost. Social Security, as Rick Perry puts it, is nothing more than a glorified Ponzi Scheme and has been since LBJ got the legislation passed to access the funds. Those holding office now want to shrug their shoulders and just say sorry. Not good enough! WB
The sad thing is that FDR KNEW it was a Ponzii scheme, from the beginning. He figured it would be years before anyone caught on to it. We can't hold him accountable now, since he is dead. The Madoff scheme ended, too, when people caught on. Those folks are just up the creek and likely won't get much of their money back. In the case of SS it's the government who was running the Ponzii! Since there are literally millions of 'victims', the quetion is, what will they do about it? They can't just say "Sorry!" because us old timers vote! And we will sure as hell vote those turkeys out that try to push us under the bus! If Congress, in all it's infinite wisdom, had left the funds alone we probably wouldn't be in this predicament. Maybe. By the way, do you know what they call a large group of skunks? It's called a 'Congress'. I wonder why? Private accounts are the only viable solution, going forward. Meanwhile, the government must continue to honor the contract for those already drawing SS benefits. IMHO.
Wayne, always a pleasure to have you stop by and comment. You are so right, SS was never intended to be just a pit we dumped money into for use by all the politicians. It was meant to be a forced savings account for retirement age workers. Key word here being workers, as in put money in now, take money out later. But like most everything under government control, it was soon just changed into a money supply that could be tapped at any time for anything.
PC Bob, I totally agree that private accounts would be the way to go. But what would happen to all of those who don't work and depend on the government for their income? They would not have the bucks to invest for the future, so those of us who do work would still have to pay their freight, and most likely invest for them. It is and was a Ponzi scheme, and like all Ponzi schemes it is doomed from the start.
When there is a natural disaster or catastrophe people willingly step in to help those in need. Yes, the system is broken an too many people abuse it, but it is there for a reason. I don't think America's people will ever be at peace until we switch from a "me" to "we" mindset. Other developed nations have social programs and no one will ever go bankrupt simply because they got sick. Our current health care system is designed to keep us sick and does not focus on prevention. Lots of things need to be changed. Thank you for shining a light on one of our nation's problems.
Jennifer Essary I love the "me" to "We" part of your comment. That pretty well says it all for me.
@Jennifer Essary - Good comment, but....
while it is true that people in those other developed nations won't be bankrupted by medical costs - but their countries will. Just look at the mess those developed nations of the European continent are in now - going bankrupt!
but you are so right that changes are needed. and it needs to start with our elected officials.n If we just held them accountable,then SS, medicare, and a national healthcare plan could all be viable options.
GA
@GClark - quite an effort, and excellent comment. And to make your point even more pertinent - we have a similarly excellent example right here in the U.S.
I won't post a lengthy explanation, but anyone interested can just Google "Galveston Texas Retirement plan" and see results that mirror your Chilean example, and return monthly retirement checks that should embarrass anyone trying to oppose privatization of retirement plans.
Just a quick example - in one reasonable income category, (I don't remember which one), SS paid about $1134 per month, but the Galveston plan paid almost $3000 for the same income category.
It's an enlightening read for anyone interested.
GA
What can I add that hasn't already been said so well by my Fellow Hubbers. This was certainly a Thought Provoking Hub, so well written, which gave Everyone a Voice to Express their views. Voted Up!
b.Malin - Always a genuine pleasure to have you stop by one of my hubs. Thanks so much for the comment.
I had to come back. Man, you got some great feedback. You know, I mentioned propaganda before, and I wasn't sure if I was being clear. I assumed that your thoughts on entitlements (which are perfectly valid as you stated them) were stimulated by all of the talk in the media about entitlements.
The talk in the media puts a negative connotation on entitlements. Social Security is an entitlement, and we are being softened up to accept the end of that entitlement. I have been paying in for a long time, but am I going to get my money back? Not if the government puts an end to entitlements.
I was watching ABC News last night. They did a piece on healthy living. They featured young professionals in their twenties who are embracing a health conscious lifestyle in order to avoid common complications in later life. The corespondent asked about their motivation, "Are you doing this because you don't believe that welfare will still be around?"
Do you get my drift? The question should have been, "Are you doing this because you don't believe that Social Security will still be around?"
Someone who writes cue cards wants to plant it firmly in the minds of the American public that Social Security is a form of welfare. Now, that money has been used as a form of welfare, but not by me or a lot of other people who are entitled to that entitlement. The cue card writer is setting me up for the heist. They already got my bank, and I just sat there and took it.
WD Curry 111 - Hello again my friend. I could be wrong, but I don't view SS as an entitlement. It is a program we were forced to invest in, and now we want to withdraw some of our investment. I guess we are "entitled" to get at least some of our money back. My heartburn is those who feel they are "entitled" to take from programs they never invested in, such as food stamps, section 8 housing, etc. Not that these programs aren't necessary, we were not born "entitled" to anything.
Social Security should not be included in discussions with welfare programs. And that is the bottom line, call them "welfare", not "entitlements", and the picture becomes clearer. Like most of the elderly, I will not live long enough to get back everything I paid into Social Security.
@Old Poolman and WD Curry 111 - It sounds like WD Curry 111 is agreeing with you about Social Security but is making a very important point about the "media" and how they are trying to lump it into all these other programs that aren't at all the same thing. It comes down to a point I made before that true journalism hasn't been practiced for some time. The news we get from the media has such a spin put on it that they are acting like a public relations firm for the present government. If you switch channels you will find other networks doing the same thing - they all seem to have received their marching orders and talking points from the same place. Fortunately, some of the public is starting to wake up and see thru all the spin being ladled out which amounts to nothing but the propaganda mentioned by WD Curry 111. Most of the media appears to be as proficient as Obama at convincing the general public that "S..T" is gravy! Excuse the French as some say, but believe that comment says it all. This hub and topic gives me hope that more and more people are developing questioning minds; perhaps they also remember the fable from childhood "The Emperor's New Clothes." GClark
GClark -I wrote my response to WD very early this morning before I had my first cup of coffee. That was a bad move on my part.
Thanks for clarifying what I was trying to say.
I do view SS as one of the few true "Entitlements". We are entitled to get back at least some of the money we were forced to pay into this very poor investment. They also call Medicare a "Entitlement". We pay for Medicare as it is deducted from our SS checks. I just received a letter saying I was getting a cost of living increase on my monthly SS check. But oh, wait a minute, my Medicare deduction went up at the same time so my net increase is $2.00 per month. Wow, an extra $24 per year will almost buy me one half tank of gas at today's prices.
You are correct, the Media is trying to change our thinking to include SS and Medicare with all the welfare programs just by calling them all "Entitlements". The sad thing is that it is working.
GClark - Thanks. I know where Old Poolman is coming from, and you helped out big time with the communication.
Here in Florida, we had a strange state election. Our Governor thumbed his nose at the political machine and ran Independent. He lost to Rick Scott who represents that political machine well. He is a transplant from up north who has made a fortune on a medical (medicare fraud) and development (destroyed sensitive areas) empire.
He is totally out of touch with Floridians. He has pushed the agenda of his counterparts in Tallahassee. He killed high speed rail, drastically cut education (hired Michelle Rhee as adviser), and tried to dismantle hard won conservation measures. We stopped him in his tracks. He can't go anywhere or do anything without getting an ear full. He just announced that he wants to undo the cuts to education.
The FDIC is on a bank robbing spree, our industry and services are all off shore, and we are being trained to accept third world conditions as employees. It is time to test the power of the boycott. Buy American only . . . the best thing for the global economy is a strong American economy. No one has given up on finding a job, and welfare isn't running us broke. It is a diversionary tactic and we are eating it up like lemming chow.
WD - Thanks for coming back. You are so right, we are like mushrooms being fed BS and kept in the dark, we thrive on it.
Glad to hear you are making some progress with your Governor down there in Florida. At least you are getting the message out that these elected idiots are not Royalty, and do have to bend to the will of those they represent.
Keep the heat on this guy and perhaps others will see what you have accomplished and join the battle in other states.
We are making progress all over. We just need to toe the line. We are the government, and it is a short road back if we do it right. How about a boycott?
In some cases,boycott's do at least send a message that is well understood. The problem with "buy american" is very few of the products we use are even made in this country anymore. There is a big difference between "Made in America" and "Assembled in America". Many companies buy all their parts from other countries, slap them together here, and call their product "Made in America". I have no problem at all with a realistic boycott, what did you have in mind?
My father, did the same thing, Old Poolman. I had an allowance until the age of 16, then he got me a job waitressing for the summer. I never had so much money in my life! Once the summer was over, I still waitressed one saturday a week. I felt rich and independent!
Cassie Smith-Your father was a wise man, and you are better off because he gave you this gift. Even in the animal kingdom it is the parents job to teach their young how to survive on their own. Most species kick their young out of the nest so to speak when they have been taught what they need to know to survive.
Parents who mistakenly spare their child from learning these valuable lessons are not doing them a favor.
Thanks for stopping by and commenting.
Sorry for not checking in for awhile. I have read all your comments and they are well taken, for sure. My biggest problem with entitlements, per se, is the conotation that says, "I'm poor and don't have no job and I am ENTITLED to that welfare check!' There are people who are 2nd and third (or more) generations into welfare, never having worked a day in their lives. Are these people 'entitled'? Most would call them leeches. Then there is another class of similar 'leeches'. Here in Illinois, in Chicago, there are high union bosses who are drawing two and even three pensions from the state, for their union 'work'. Some of them never even workde fro the union, but theyget a retirement check, or two, or three. There is talk of splitting Illinois into two states, leaving Chicago as a separate state from the rest. A good idea? Maybe, but Chicago has most of the money and commerce. The rest of the state is old time conservative. Yet they still vote for the democrat. I feel like a round peg in a square hole.
If they do dump SS, what will they expect us old timers ALREADY drawing it to do? Just disappear? In the Chilean plan the government basically pays them until they are grandfathered out.
PC Bob , I could not agree more with your comment. How can anyone be "entitled" to something they never contributed anything? We are "entitled" to SS because we paid into it our entire working life. The problem came when they changed the name of welfare programs to "entitlements." Then some started lumping SS, Medicare, and welfare all into the same bucket. Much of the confusion would go away if they called each program by the proper name, either "entitlement" or "welfare." They really are not the same things.
I think there is something else that has been going on for some time that is tied into all of this and that is encouraging a "victim" mentality. The next step was to promote the entitlement attitude so the end result is no accountability - things happened to me that were not my fault so I am entitled to this and that, etc. If you buy into being a "victim" then you are giving up your power to change any situation. When you have generations raised and conditioned to that attitude, it becomes difficult if almost impossible to turn that around. People used to be thankful for the opportunities that are available in our country to make your life what you want it to be. When did we stop being grateful for what we have instead of whining about what we don't have that our neighbor does? We don't have the right to an equal outcome; that would be like deducting points from students who had rightfully earned an A or B and add those points to someone who would have received a D or F. How motivating a concept would that be for students in the top levels? I can remember many years ago when one of the major school systems in the area decided to give happy faces instead of grades because they didn't want to hurt their little "id." That resulted in many parents putting their kids in private schools where they could count on the basics being taught and the students held accountable.
GClark - Excellent points from you. If some had their way the only grade given in schools would be a "C". That would mean one had spent the proper number of years sitting in a classroom, and graduated with exactly the same grade as those in the top of the class.
Then there are those who decided all classes should be paced for the slowest student in the class. The brighter students would be bored out of their minds and would learn no more that the slower students. Fact of life, we were not all born with exactly the same mental capabilities.
Is it any wonder we have so many graduating who can barely read, write, and do simple math? Today's students are the future of this country. God help us.
Wonderful story, voted up and awesome!
Great story and great comments! The experience of that first paycheck at a young age stays with us forever. Entitlements, frivolous lawsuits, workman’s comp are just a few areas that need to be reigned in to strengthen our country. The sooner the better! Thank you for your story Old Poolman.
Old Poolman, this hub is great. Being a Millenial, I don't typically get along well with my peers for several reasons, one of them being the Entitlement mindset. Having a Baby Boomer father, I learned early on that nothing in life is gained without work, and when one works hard enough, one can go anywhere. Having been on a budget my entire life, from my mother I learned the value of money early on. This is why I am two semesters away from an A.A.S. degree, despite being two years away from high school graduation. I grew up working with my parents, and I'm joyfully stuck in the habit. I appreciate hearing these thoughts in someone else's words and from their experience.
weestro - Nice to meet you and thanks for the comment.
charles wade - Nice to make your acquaintance, and I'm sure most of us remember our very first paycheck. Heck I got paid in Cash and did not report it to the IRS. Even though it was only $5.00, shame on me.
toys-everywhere - Indeed a pleasure having you stop by. I have no idea when the "entitlement" mind thing took over, but it is out in full force now. Thank goodness there are still some such as yourself who know the meaning of a good days work for a decent days pay. It sounds like you are an industrious type person with some defined goals in mind. You will do well in this world.
Ironically, that is the second time I hear (or if one should be technical, read) those exact same words, "You will do well in this world." Thank you. I am just so exhausted by hearing so many folks whining about how they deserve this and they don't have that, and not bothering to think of how many have so little... or worse, nothing. It's high time that gratitude was reinstated. - Rachael
toys-everywhere - Hello again Rachael. This entitlement thing has really got me bugged. The "gimme" crowd seems to be growing in numbers, and it is not all because of the high unemployment numbers. For some odd reason some feel they are owed by virtue of being born. Go figure.......
Old Poolman, loved your hub and voted it up. I've noticed that many parents don't teach their children much of anything anymore. They believe that teaching should be left to the schools and the media. Sometimes they teach them to pick up their clothes but in some cases they either do it for them or hire someone for that as well. The only thing I think we are entitled to is our opinion and just because we are entitled to it doesn't make it right.
I have always worked. The people that think they deserve something for nothing have always annoyed me. I heard from someone a while ago that he 'deserved' a 6 bedroomed detached house. He has never worked. How he thought he deserved it I've no idea.
At a party the other day I was talking to someone there that had been in a bump between a delivery lorry and a car. A light impact. He was in the lorry, but not driving. 5 people were claiming compensation from the accident including him and they were all off work sick with supposed whiplash injuries.
It's not the way my mind works, if people realised that thinking they're entitled to this money and claiming compensation for everything just drives up the insurance costs for all, maybe it would stop them. In fact no, it wouldn't.
Anyway, I take pleasure in working and earning my own money, rather than sitting on my backside with my hand out, moaning about life, like a lot of people out there.
Right Black - Great comment and I thank you. I can see a huge difference between the way I was raised, the way I raised my children, and the way they raised their children. I guess things change as the generations go by, and not always for the better. Opinions are like ears, everyone has at least one, but our opinions are not always right or always wrong, but they are ours.
I agree. Sadly, I think America is too far gone to expect recovery. When the number of people (1) receiving benefits "for nothing" (i.e. entirely paid for by those working) and the number of people (2) "working" (but really only employed because of oppresive taxation) outnumber the rest who are actually providing goods and services people freely pay for...the game is over. Ayn Rand saw this coming...
Rain Defence - A pleasure meeting you. Most of us know that deserving and getting are two entirely different things. In my opinion, the "gimmes" are taking over the world. All my generation ever asked for was a chance to earn our own way, that thinking is now considered old school and obsolete. I like the way you think.
pharmacist - I agree. I had a discussion with a good friend about this very subject. The door to "welfare", what are now called "entitlements", appears to be a one way door. Once a person enters this door, there is no graceful way of coming back out. Most benefit programs are structured where they either are, or are not. No phase out that would help someone to get a new job, while still getting partial financial assistance. For many, they make more money staying on the "program" then they can hope to earn at a new job. This is sad but true. Thanks for your comment.
Very good read! You hit the nail on the head methinks.
I am 10 yrs older than you (give or take) and I was raised with a strong work ethic.
My mother worked 3 jobs sometimes to feed us kids. She was divorced. We got the gubmint cheese and potted meat sometimes. We were very poor.
I worked starting at age 16, at the school switchboard after classes. I took in ironing, did odd jobs and babysitting. You get the picture.
I worked all my life. I am now drawing my social security. I don't look at it as an *entitlement*, but as my investment that I am drawing from (poor investment though it may have been - and involuntary at that!).
I don't understand this entitlement mentality. I see it all around me and I just can't wrap my mind around how people can feel this way.
It is a sad state of affairs...
Anyway, great read!!
moonstruck4ever - It seems as though someone flipped a switch one day and just turned off work ethic. One thing that comes to mind is during the era you describe there was little or no welfare to speak of. You either worked or starved. It is not like that these days.
OP, you are right I think. It feels like a switch was just suddenly flipped. Good analogy.
I was raised with the ethic of working hard, then expecting your reward for your efforts. I cannot believe that we have stopped teaching our kids this? Are we crazy?
Explains why the US economy is in such a mess. I hope someone can get in there and turn things around.
When all the money is gone that will be the end of entitlements for sure. That might be sooner than we think. Scary to say the least.
athena2011 - I have no answers for why and when parents quit teaching a work ethic, but they did. Now, more and more are looking to the government to take care of them. Some think this is a good idea, others like me think this is a horrible idea. Thanks for jumping in and the comment.
Mike
I would love to explain to you why you are wrong, but I know there is no point. You see the world as full of welfare cheats, I see it quite differently. I see people who need and deserve help - not just because it's the moral thing to do, but also because it makes economic sense. Again, I know that you and none of the applauding others will ever understand that, but it's the same reason that we provide "welfare" in the form of free education - we all benefit from it.
Fortunately, most voters understand these issues better than most of you do, and that remains true even as right wing media redoubles its lies and misdirections.
Pcunix - Hello my friend from the far, far left. Explain away, I'm sure others would like to hear what you have to say. Based on your comments and hubs, I would guess you fit well with the group that feels the world owes them a living just for being alive. You notice I don't just delete your comments as you do mine, so let's hear what you have to say.
I'd expect that response from you. I'm preparing a hub now even as we speak.
Pcunix - That should prove interesting. Please drop by and let us know when you publish the hub so we can all read it. I really am curious why so many feel the way you do. Heck, if you present a good enough argument I may even join your team.
No, I'm uninterested in providing links for you or the rest of your cheering squad. If you were able to understand the argument, you'd already be on the team. All a link here would do is give me traffic from people I have no interest in having as readers.
"You see the world as full of welfare cheats..."
No, I see welfare as a system that produces a dependent class. I worked with of them many years ago, and they are convinced that they deserve a helping hand simply because they exist. It's a mentality that simply boggles the mind, and it was created by generational welfare.
"...I know that you and none of the applauding others will ever understand that..."
Translation: If you do not agree with a liberal, you must be stupid, because liberals are never, ever wrong.
Going to your own site and creating a Hub on this topic is a great idea, because then, you won't have to compete with people smarter than you.
Pcunix - I suggest you take your childish attitude and just run on home. If you hang around here you might get a spanking.
Wow! I told you OP, you need to read "Arguing with Idiots" to get some pointers! heheh
Actually, it's impossible to debate with someone who will not use logic and reality as a basis.
It's obvious to anyone who examines the phenomenon, that welfare is really a trap that makes victims of those who buy into it. Those who are trapped within the clutches of the state become dependent upon it, and the vicious circle goes on and on.
And before you know it - voila! Another democrat voter is born.
I need to clarify. In my comment above, I am talking specifically about the "career" welfare recipient, not the person who needs a hand up for awhile to get on their feet.
Everyone needs a hand up once in awhile...
moonstruck4ever - There lies the problem. Nobody I know even argues the point that circumstances sometimes require giving someone a hand to get going again. The liberals just refuse to admit that welfare has become a way of life for growing numbers of people. The only thing I can think is these people who protest so loudly are members of the professional welfare recipients. They live in fear their free ride will end if a Conservative were to be elected. I will take your advice and read "Arguing with idiots" if I am going to stay on hub pages. Thanks for the great comments.
PCFREAKINGNUIX?? You let that freak come in here? Dude, this guy can't cut it in the real world. He's got a small group of fruit cakes who listen to his dribble, but if anyone comes in and calls him on his stupid crap, he just deletes them as tells the other fruit cakes they were too stupid to waste his time with. If he really thinks the comment was that stupid, why wouldn't he leave it for others to see? Here's this twerps reply, "My hub, my rules." He's a fraud and a rip off. He was the dude in school who played trombone in high school with the foul breath. Hates the cool guys because he's repulsive and can't fit in. The only choice these nerds have is to reach out to other nerds.
All that stuff isn't the main reason I can't stand the guy though. The fact that he's an athiest isn't the reason either. George is an athiest, and he's a bud. George isn't hateful like this "Gilligan" look a like. The fact is old "Gilligan" is a fraud, a rip off. Flat out he ain't a man. Hey Mike, if you had a goofy looking mug like his, would YOU put in your profile? It wasn't quite as bad when he wore that rainbow Bozo wig though.
jim
Hey Jim, why don't you just write exactly how you feel about this guy? The sad thing is he will never come back and read your comment because I threatened to spank him. I did leave his comments on my hub just because I disagree with the way he deletes any comment on his hubs he doesn't agree with. I guess that makes him feel he is in charge of something.
Yeah, I know Mike. I imagine the freak comes back to smell around though. Why would he come by in the first place?
jim
Qwerstchun, Isn't there a law now that puts a time limit on drawing welfare that was supposed to stamp out having babies for a living? I was thinking there was a 2-yr. limit and a cap on the amount regardless of how many children in the family. There are other types of entitlements, but I was thinking about this one in particular.
Because the Pantless One convinced me that I was rude and quite harsh in a previous comment, I returned to apologize and to vote up, plus-1 and Facebook "like' this hub as penance.
That is going to truly confuse some of my followers (me recommending a hub like this) but I can live with that,
PC,
Once more, good thing extending the olive branch. For me,Instead of putting it on FB, I would rather get an honest civil comment from you on my articles if you stop there. I always say open minded talks create solutions. Hell, we may even learn something.
OK, will do. Not tonight - tired and hungry.
Tony, Wow what a great Christmas present that is. I think we all got kind of carried away with this latest round, and I'm sorry it happened. I actually enjoy a friendly debate, and like AV just said, I have learned a great deal from some of the debates. I have even had to admit I was wrong a couple times. Let's just call a truce and agree to be more friendly with each other in the future.
Thanks,
Mike
Let's try. It's hard not to get upset when we are so far apart, but we CAN try.
Merry Xmas from a nasty old lunatic ACLU atheist liberal!
PC,
Sounds great. But what is there to get upset over? People are entitled to their opinion, does not matter to me that you may not agree with me, in fact I prefer it that everyone does not agree. What a boring world that would be. But in our discussions, there is nothing to get upset over, it is not personal.
Tony - That sounds good to me. Have a great Christmas and we can try to do better next time around.
Trust me, AV, we will find things to get upset over :-)
But I will try to explain why instead of just turning nasty. That's later, though: for now, no nasty. Blind eye, look the other way, I will not see it.
I'm glad to get rid of the anger. Now maybe my dog will come to me. (making goofy smile)
jim
Peace my brothers.......
So glad to have checked back here to see the latest twists and turns. Pcunix, I think you look more like Bill Gates than Gilligan; are you from the one percent? If you are, then it would make sense to me why welfare as a means to control the population makes economic sense to you; simply a good investment from that point of view. I might question the morality of it, but who am I to judge the morals of your “faith” other than it is getting expensive for those of us who do not share your religious beliefs.
If you multiplied my current income by ten, yes, I'd be in the 1%.
I was a bit closer when younger, but never wealthy. Nor do I believe in controlling anyone. I believe in helping.
Old poolman, I understand and agree with the idea of a society of workers and builders. the only problem is when a few people control the whole system and decide that you and your descendants will be enslaved... now it may seem exaggerated,but some people use the help only for a while, when they really need it and work hard at getting back on their feet, in this economy it is a bit difficult, so we let them starve??? no
Now, they are people who abuse the system and feel entitled... that is not fair, that is not right. we need to create opportunities, a better educational system and be better examples because with all those grand theft in Wall Street and other financial and economical places, our children learn that being a crook and user works, so they do it at their level!!!
Just playing a bit of devil's advocate. But do subsidies to large corporations, tax breaks, etc get your blood boiling as much as these "entitlements?" Because, what we give to large corporations dwarf what individuals may get. I think you have a bit of misguided anger in this hub.
Direct welfare to poor people is a drop in the bucket of the overall budget, pennies on the budget dollar, if that. Most funds of that pool go to what should be classified as "earned benefits" (Social Security, Medicare, Unemployment Ins, etc), things people have paid towards. You filter that out and very little goes directly to people on the dole.
If you're interested, I can supply links, for some of the studies I've read. I've done a lot of research on the topic. I would just say to you and some of other commenters to just focus on the things that realy costs us. This fake entitlement fight is just a distraction.
"Because, what we give to large corporations dwarf what individuals may get."
Wrong. Over 60% of federal spending is for individual entitlements and interest:
You took what I said out of context. I was talking about direct spending on the entitlements the author seemed to be talking about (welfare type programs). Most of the chart you linked is for those earned benefits I mentioned (the things people pay for).
For instance, in your chart, Social Security is the biggest chunk of the 2010 budget. But, I don't think the author is upset about someone getting benefits they've paid for. Maybe I misunderstood the post, but he seemed to have more of an issue with direct assistance type programs. And, corporate welfare dwarfs that spending.
http://www.ourdime.us/102/budgetinfo/how-much-do-w
Within that link, you will see that 191 Billion last year went to direct assistance programs (that people did not pay for). And, you're looking at the corporate angle incorrectly as well, when I say "welfare" I'm talking about tax breaks, subsidies, and sweetheart deals they get that won't appear in a spending budget.
This is the type of welfare I mean, Wal-Mart costs us taxpayers 1.5 Trillion by themselves, because of the programs their underpaid employees need:
•"The Democratic Staff of the Committee on Education and the Workforce estimates that one 200-person Wal-Mart store may result in a cost to federal taxpayers of $420,750 per year - about $2,103 per employee. Specifically, the low wages result in the following additional public costs being passed along to taxpayers:
?$36,000 a year for free and reduced lunches for just 50 qualifying Wal-Mart families.
?$42,000 a year for Section 8 housing assistance, assuming 3 percent of the store employees qualify for such assistance, at $6,700 per family.
?$125,000 a year for federal tax credits and deductions for low-income families, assuming 50 employees are heads of household with a child and 50 are married with two children.
?$100,000 a year for the additional Title I expenses, assuming 50 Wal-Mart families qualify with an average of 2 children.
?$108,000 a year for the additional federal health care costs of moving into state children's health insurance programs (S-CHIP), assuming 30 employees with an average of two children qualify.
?$9,750 a year for the additional costs for low income energy assistance."
•The total figure is based on the average $420,750 per-store figure, multiplied by 3700 (the approximate number of stores currently in the United States).
•Source: Rep. George Miller / Democratic Staff of the Committee on Education and the Workforce, "Everyday Low Wages: The Hidden Price We All Pay for Wal-Mart", February 16, 2004.
I guess my point is that it's fun to get your ire up at someone you perceive as lazy or whatever, but there is so much worse going on. I showed $191 Billion in direct welfare programs annually in the budget, compared to 1.5 Trillion in the costs of ONE company. So, you have to decide, which one upsets you more?
NiaLee _ I totally agree with everything you said. No, I would not be one to suggest we just let people starve, if you got that opinion I apologize. I could never let that happen to any human being.
jhaggenmiller - In answer to you question, yes the tax breaks, loopholes, and all the other crap we give to banks and large corporations does infuriate me. Add it all together and these costs are killing America. I would be interested in seeing the links you were referring to.
Hats off to you! Will you please come teach in our pubic schools? I have never heard a really good argument for entitlements, but I will share the most recent I heard from a student who got paid $25.00 to sweep his own driveway by a parent who swears that doing so is the only way to get him to learn the value of work. He told me "I deserve to get paid for doing it. I don't owe that B@tch anything. She's lucky I wanted a new game." I was floored. I pointed out that she feeds him, provides a home for him and takes care of every basic survival need he has. His response was "So what." I would like to say his thinking is not representative of the norm for young people. (He is of age! I teach high school). Sadly, I can't. It's running about fifty fifty.
A side comment on entitlements ~ Welfare was designed to be a temporary stop gap to help those in need. It has created for so many a culture of poverty that is now into multi generations of those who have never held a job! Did it really help or did it just create a new form of slavery?
Not enough up buttons for this hub!
I agree that private enterprise should not be subsidized in any way by government, or 'bailed out'. But corporations should not be taxed for three reasons:
1) They just pass it on to consumers anyway!
2) Taxed US corporations are having a hard time competing with untaxed foreign corporations.
3) Taxed US corporations have been moving operations overseas in order to survive, taking our manufacturing jobs with them! Taxing corporations is stupid!
The 'ourdime' source admits that he has no credentials in the field, so why on Earth are you using him as a source?
poetvix _ Thanks so much for the great comment. like you, I just don't understand when this change to the "entitlement mind" really started. I take heat from the liberals for asking this question, but it exists, and most of us are aware it exists.
Thank goodness we still have teachers like yourself in our public school system.
WillStarr - Few understand that Corporations just treat added taxes as a cost of doing business, and pass the entire amount on to the consumer. They could really care less how much we tax them up to a point. That point is reached when they can no longer compete with goods coming in from other countries when pricing their products. So their only remaining choice is to move their operations offshore where labor and taxes are cheaper, and sadly they take all the jobs with them. Could we now convince any of them to come back to the USA? It would take one heck of a salesman. Thanks for jumping in here.
"My father was a wonderful man, and I'm glad he is not alive today to see what this country has become."
You and your father's American ideals are what made America GREAT. In 1964, things began to change...for the worse. ENTITLEMENTS. Not a hand up but , in actuality, a handout. The tax base can no longer support all the DEMS "gifts."
The "new" American...
S Leretseh - I wish I had thought to use your expression "Not and hand up, but a hand out." That pretty well sums up my feelings. Thanks so much for the great comment.
"WillStarr - Few understand that Corporations just treat added taxes as a cost of doing business, and pass the entire amount on to the consumer."
Then it's high time they drag their heads out of their nether regions and pay attention! Politicians are counting on their stupidity!
Demanding that corporations be taxed at a higher rate is actually a demand that consumers be taxed at a higher rate! And that's a tax that the poor must pay.
The left is counting on your stupidity on this, people. Wake up!
WillStarr - It may be too late for the wakeup call my friend.
@WillStarr I guess we'll agree to disagree, but the "corporations will just pass costs onto us", is somewhat lazy. For me, it doesn't factor in a recalibration of the market. Using Wal Mart as an example, if they pass their tax costs to us and in turn, their sales dropped (b/c of a bad economy, stagnant wages for their potential customers,etc), wouldn't prices be dropped to up their sales? It sounds like you assume the pass through occurs and demand stays the same, which never happens.
@WillStarr I've heard the pass through argument used against a financial transaction tax too. Like if Bank of America passed through an exorbitant new cost onto me (to make up profit or revenue lost from the new tax), I wouldn't just go to a credit union or something. The pass through argument assumes inelastic demand, no matter what the company does to you. You can apply to every industry. So, unless you have some proof on the pass through argument, it doesn't fly for me.
We even have proof in the banking sector. 650,000 people moved their accounts, when BofA floated their debit card charge. So, pass through is not definite argument. BofA even backed off the debit card charge after the bad press and all teh money moving away from them.
"@WillStarr I guess we'll agree to disagree, but the "corporations will just pass costs onto us", is somewhat lazy"
Lazy? What is 'lazy' about the truth?
We tax corporations and load them down with onerous regulations, and then whine when they finally pack up and go overseas, taking our jobs with them! How dumb is that?
yeah, "onerous" regulations like not being allowed to pollute our water and air,not being able to abuse workers, forcing them to have a safe work place.. oh, no wonder they left!
As to the tax issue, you always forget that corporations have competition. But with your billionaire handlers telling you what to remember and what to forget, who can blame you?
Did you all get your talking points this week?
@Pcunix Thanks so much. I figured that guy couldn't be real, calling for a 0% tax rate, not assuming competition or market equilibrium in the pass through argument. I should've known, probably just a paid shill. That makes more sense than his arguments.
Sorry, guys, but I have to agree -- and disagree with both sides of the fence (how's that for straddling) because I've seen proof of both.
Passing on costs:
1. In the past when an oil tanker leaked or there was a platform accident, our gasoline instantly went up without waiting for the actual costs to go up. We pay for their accidents although they should (and may) have insurance. When insurance rate goes up, they pass the rate to the consumer.
2. Our home owners insurance rates have increased because the insurance companies are passing on the costs of hurricanes and floods. Insurance companies have said so on my policies.
3. Public utilities are the worst of all. Look at your utility bill. It probably will have extra cost lines for fuel adjustment and transportation costs in addition to any regular taxes. My gas bill has charges for distribution, weather normalization, base determinate rate adjustment and EE cost rate(whatever that is). The electric bill has added on fuel & purchased power cost, FERC-Imposed payment, and a municipal franchise adjustment. All this in addition to the regular charges for the gas or electric usage and the sales taxes. This is their right to do so under various state laws in our state too numerous to mention. A.C.A. § 23-4-112 is a new law that gives electric utility to recover storm damages from customers after a bad freeze downed power lines and poles a couple of years ago.
4. Private entities. When the price of fuel skyrocketed, so did the price of groceries at our local supermarkets. That hike wasn’t based on customer demand and availability. Furniture stores that made deliveries either doubled their delivery charge or tacked on an extra fuel charge for delivery, which was stated on the bill. Service companies like plumbers added a fuel charge in my area.
Not only do they pass the charges on, our laws give them the right to do so.
The other side of the fence:
CNN and CBS, to name a few, carried interviews with corporate executives saying that their companies moved to Switzerland, China, Mexico and other countries that had lower corporate tax rates. I don’t approve of it, and I wish we could find a solution to that problem. Of the corporations that keep their facilities in the U.S., their officials draw ungodly bonuses which have gone up exponentially in the last 20 or 30 years.
A flat tax, for which ultra conservatives argue, would make the average person’s income taxes go up. I did the math on my family’s 2010 taxes, and discovered that without the medical and personal deductions, a 10% flat tax rate on us would quadruple what we pay to the IRS. (I know y'allwere arguing corporate tax, but I think this is relevant, too.)
So lets just make peace. jhaggenmiller, please give some examples for your arguments that we can at least research. Personal opinions without some support just don't hack it.
Sorry, I realized I got off track in my last message, but there is such a thing in our laws as entitlements for corporations, too, and I thought that was what the last argument was about.
I humbly apologize to jhaggenmiller, it was pcunix who didn't give satisfying supporting documentation to his arguments.
Whenever someone points out that corporations figure taxes as an expense of doing business and simply pass that cost on to consumers, the liberals go berserk because they want you to believe that corporations absorb that cost! That way, they can trick you into supporting a hidden tax on yourselves!
So when you call for higher taxes on corporations, you are actually asking that your own taxes be raised, and you are also supporting moving American jobs overseas. American corporations pay the highest taxes in the world, so in order to compete with foreign corporations, they move operations overseas!
(And when your arguments are obviously true and indisputable, the left always resorts to personal attacks, jeers, and insults:
"Did you all get your talking points this week?"
"I should've known, probably just a paid shill.")
I'm glad you had such a great dad Old Poolman. People don't give their children practical education in much of anything anymore. I'm in my 20s and struggling because of the laid back attitude socialized into my generation. Not to say their aren't young people who work hard. I myself have been quite ill most of my life and have had trouble because of it.
As far as social benefits go, I think they are actually important. It's the freeloaders who don't really need it and abuse the system that make me mad. I'm Canadian and believe strongly in social support for all citizens, but have seen the system greatly abused. There are many people in my city who line up at the food bank who can afford to eat at a restaurant. That makes me sick.
Some people really do need assistance, and I hope it will be there for me if I ever need it. I don't know if the freeloader's problem is entitlement or just plain selfishness, taking resources from people who truly need them.
@WillStarr we got away from my original point, which was we all should be much more worried about corporate welfare, than what goes to poor people. We should be fighting the big battles first.
To your point about corporate taxes, the US can do things to get in line with other nations. But, going down to a 0% rate is not needed. In 2008, 68% of corps didn't pay Federal Taxes anyway at our job killing, punitive, "it's a cost of doing business", pass through to customers, levels. I'd be for a lower rate w/ an elimination of loopholes, to balance this out. But, to say they are punitively taxed, when 2/3rds don't pay, is not a true argument.
"But, going down to a 0% rate is not needed."
Have you noticed that we are in a deep recession and millions are unemployed? Have you noticed that manufacturing jobs have moved overseas? What do you mean it's not needed?
A zero corporate tax rate would result in an economic boom!
And why can't you just admit that corporate taxation is a fraud? Why can't just you admit that yes, they obviously pass those taxes on to the consumer...to you and me?
Why be so stubborn when it's obvious that what I am saying is true?
@WillStarr
I'm not being stubborn, just looking at the facts. If 2/3rds of companies don't pay taxes anyway, why do they have to be lowered even further? What's your connection between what will result in a negative tax rate and economic growth? Where's your proof of this forthcoming economic boom if tax rates drop further? Do you have any of that? You just make broad, absolute statements with nothing to back it up.
I've showed you why I think what I do (how WalMart costs us 1.5 Trillion per year, how 2/3 of corps pay no taxes anyway, even customer flight from some of these pass through fees in the banking sector). And, all you come back with this talk of some zero tax utopia with nothing to back it up. Please supply some measure of proof, if you comment again. Thanks.
"If 2/3rds of companies don't pay taxes anyway, why do they have to be lowered even further?"
I don't know what you mean by "2/3rds of companies don't pay taxes anyway". In any case, if we tax corporations, that tax must become part of the price, if American corporations are to survive! Since our corporations must compete with foreign corporations WHO PAY LITTLE OR NO TAXES, it puts American corporations at a major disadvantage, so they move overseas!
Why is that so hard for liberals to comprehend?
"What's your connection between what will result in a negative tax rate and economic growth?"
It's a zero tax rate, not a negative, and I just explained why it would promote immediate economic growth!
This is not rocket science. Stop thinking liberal for a moment and just think. You'll see the truth, if you do.
Still waiting for proof. And, please stop acting like you don't know what I mean with a negative tax rate.
Read this and get back to me:
http://www.ctj.org/ctjreports/2011/11/corporate_ta
Here's a synopsis, if you don't feel like clicking on the link.
NEW REPORT: 280 Most Profitable U.S. Corporations Shelter Half Their Profits from Taxes.
“These 280 corporations received a total of nearly $224 billion in tax subsidies,” said Robert McIntyre, Director at Citizens for Tax Justice and the report’s lead author. “This is wasted money that could have gone to protect Medicare, create jobs and cut the deficit.”
30 Companies average less than zero tax bill in the last three Years, 78 had at least one no-tax year.
Financial services received the largest share of all federal tax subsidies over the last three years. More than half the tax subsidies for companies in the study went to four industries: financial services, utilities, telecommunications, and oil, gas & pipelines.
U.S. corporations with significant foreign profits paid tax rates to foreign countries that were almost a third higher than they paid to the IRS on their domestic profits.
"NEW REPORT: 280 Most Profitable U.S. Corporations Shelter Half Their Profits from Taxes."
And just like that he proves my point for me!
If we want American corporations to thrive AND HIRE PEOPLE, stop taxing them and making it so hard for them to compete with the foreign corporations who pay little or no taxes!
Sheesh!
Old poolman, I have no idea why some people feel entitled to something when they have not worked for anything. You have an interesting hub here. Far too many people feel they are owed something. It makes me wonder why people with good healthy bodies who can work choose not to, and people who want to work still try and find some means of making an income. Having a mind of entitlement is certainly not a good thing.
Hi, adrienne2, and what great sense you make!
adrienne2, I could not agree more. Thanks for stopping by and the comment.
@WillStarr
It's obvious you live in an alternate universe. When you're ready to read and understand the facts as they are, we'll chat again.
You can keep responding with broad generalizations and no facts. But, the truth remains that most of these companies pay no taxes anyway and there are not hiring now. But, somehow in your mind, if the tax rate is lowered to zero (when it theoretically is for 2/3rds of corporations), then economic growth is a certainty.
I am jealous of you and some others on this thread. Your level of disillusionment is pretty incredible and it's no use debating, if you continue to ignore the facts. Most of you have made entitlements the boogeyman for this country, while ignoring the true heist (these corporations taking from the public treasury).
Good luck to you.
JHM,
You are so right. Them bastard corperation who pay no taxes, refuse to hire and expand because of the uncertanty of regulation and policies they face from this administration. They are all shit, they should just shrivel up and die. They are so Un-American, how dare they want tax breaks to expand their business, how dare they want deductions like the people get. Now for a shameless plug, I wrote an article on revamping the tax system I think you would like. Ok Back to unplugged
I mean what good do these businesses do. It's not like the donate money to build wings on hospitals or colleges. It's not like they give free scolarships for students, not like the donate to school programs. Not like they are willing to sponsor little league teams, or put their names on stadiums. Not like they are willing to give money to medical research. not like they are willing to give money to charties that feed or clothes people. Not like the give money to help the homeless or provide for shelters. Not like the help people who could not get a home through project like Habitat for Humanity or Christmas in April. It's not like corpeations step forward to help whti what they can during any of our nations nature disasters. Not like they helped anyone during Hurricanes, tornados, earthquakes, fires and more. It's not like they do anything at all to help the betterment of mankind.
I could keep going but I guess everyone gets the point,Business are just greedy bastards that hold on to all the money.
"@WillStarr
It's obvious you live in an alternate universe. When you're ready to read and understand the facts as they are, we'll chat again."
And so, he turns to the usual liberal insulting and personal attacks, because he knows I'm right.
Typical.
jhaggenmiller - I believe there are very few who have a problem providing assistance and financial aid to those who need help. I think there are a great many who are fed up with those who have gamed the system for years, and will continue to do so until that is stopped. All they really do is take money from those who really need and deserve help.
"Entitlements" is a horrible word. It implies one is entitled to something by virtue of being on the planet. I don't feel that was ever the way it was intended to be.
It is rarely a single thing creating the problems we see today. When we put Corporations such as GE paying no tax in combination with our increasing Entitlements need, we have a huge problem. We can rarely look at and blame one single thing when it is many things in combination that are breaking our backs financially. For the most part, the bailout program was a disaster, and only served to fatten to personal pockets of some who should have been convicted and sent to prison. We gave money to banks with no direction as to how that money should be used to help the economy. So they just put most of that money in their pockets, and are sitting on the remainder. Try to get a small business loan from a bank and they will laugh you out the door.
The whole picture is very gloomy right now, and rarely is it only one thing we can point at to blame and make us feel better. We also need to recognize that most of these Corporations pay lobbyists to gain special favors. GE contributed heavily to the Campaign's of several politicians, and they were rewarded with tax favors. Favors are for sale in Washington, and many are purchased every year. Only after this is stopped will it even approach being fair to everyone.
You also got it right that your entitlement allowance was a pittance compared to what you earned working--so it is the same in a macro sense. I think I understand entitlement a bit more since my friend lost his job. He took unemployment despite never believing he would "take" from the government. However, he has to pay his bills, not just for him, but for his two daughters.He believes that he paid into the system. Since social security, which is deducted from his unemployment compensation will not be there for him when he is 70, he feels "entitled" to his unemployment. He has tried for over a year to find a job, but to no avail. Taking on part-time work will eliminate his benefits, and he will not make as much as unemployment pays. In America, there is a perfect storm, which makes otherwise hard-working citizens begin to feel entitled. This includes the reality of having to pay the heating bill for his home, which unemployment does, but a part-time job would not, an inability to find full-time work and the government bailing out big banks with the citizens' money. In theory, working hard to earn a living is the best way versus sucking off the government, but it leads me to ask, does working hard actually get you somewhere these days? I am not advocating entitlement, just trying to explain the mentality and reality of the situation these days. All honorable people want to work hard and pay their bills, but what if these two things come into conflict? What if working hard does not mean you can pay your bills? Then what?
jhaggenmiller I love your answers, you made the point, we know who takes $300 a month not deserved and attack them but we have no way to tie up those who stole billions from us! American people are being held hostage by a system that even steals from other people in other countries and benefits those who control the system.
Let's get to work in a different way, that is what my family and have done and be careful about what we do with what we have. By the way, this republican primary looks like SNL now... if not Mad TV! We need people who are serious and able to lead the country in the real world!!!
JuliaFine - Excellent comment and thanks for stopping by.
America was always a land of opportunity, and many have done very well by seizing on this opportunity, working hard and working smart, and achieving various levels of success. By taking risks and building these business's, they were able to offer employment to others, who then paid income taxes, and contributed to the overall society. Now the system is broken for a great many and varied reasons. Increasing regulations and the inability to borrow money to expand these business's have cost many people their jobs. Unemployment was designed to be temporary in nature. When a business laid off or closed, there was another job waiting in the near future for these employees. Now it is not that way. To lose a job now is a disaster with almost no hope in sight. I can see why for many it is just better to stay on unemployment.
I wish I had some answers for this problem, but fear it will get even worse before it gets better.
I'll bookmark this pop, until I understand every bit of it.
Thank you for sharing this! I think it's a necessity to me.
@Will Star and Jhaggenbiller, if I may. I think both of you make valid points, and your philosophies may be closer than you think, but I am sure you'll let me know if I'm wrong. Let me explain. What would you say if I proposed that we tax small businesses less and huge Corporations more? If huge Corporations migrate to more tax-friendly regions, perhaps American small businesses will proliferate enough to serve their markets? The U.S. is still a giant consumer market--perhaps we should look at our market as too big to fail? I am thinking small businesses are those with less than $5MN in profits. If the tax burden and extreme regulations were lifted on them, I believe they would proliferate. Currently, they are lumped into the fray of all businesses,including the GEs, Cokes and McDonald's of the world that can afford to grease palms, lobby and find tax loopholes. Let's give the small businesses loopholes and let's tighten existing tax law and regulations on big businesses. What do you think? My husband and I owned a very successful business, but the Davis Bacon act makes it impossible to compete. I literally get a registered letter almost every day from some government entity claiming we owe it hundreds of thousands of dollars for some infringement. I've never seen $100K, so the threats are laughable. I've toughened up, as it used to scare me, but since the government has essentially forced our businesses to close for no good reason, I can only laugh at the threats and fines. There is simply nothing left, and you have to believe me on this, we did everything right except we started to bid on government funded jobs when the consumer market collapsed. It was a giant #$%Sstorm for which I was unprepared. We must realize that liberals get angry from ignorance because most of them have never owned a business; they just have no idea what it takes and can only think in theoretical terms, or cite other PhDs who've never owned a business. When it comes to business issues, we need to listen to those who actually own them. Anything else is senseless. Liberals don't know how shocking it is to have a relatively small payroll of $12,000 per week, and then have to fork over another $6,000 just for having the wonderful luxury/hassle of employing people. Liberals think all businesses are bad. They do not differentiate. Non-business owners who can make the following scenario work without loans or capital investors, please let me know how to do it: Pay employees a mandated $60/hour or more for a 40 hour week, not including OT, Holidays and other Union-mandated foolishness ($60/hour is just a low average, look up prevailing wage rates in the Northeast), pay the payroll tax, be low bidder on a project and not get paid at all for six months. Now, add to that the fact that any disgruntled employee can complain to the state Department of Labor and Industry and at the very least cause you time defending yourself and your company. However, once a complaint is lodged, I've not known one company that has escaped outrageous fines as well as time and a tarnished reputation among liberals and fat-cat unions. Say to a liberal, change Davis Bacon, and they look at you like a deer in the headlights--like what is that? That is the problem here. I suspect writers on this site are not CEOs or owners of the huge American conglomerates, so can't we all just get along? (LOL)
JuliaFine - Absolutely outstanding comment. You are right, until you have walked in the shoes of a business owner, large or small, you could not possibly understand what it is really like. Few realize that whatever the weekly payroll is, it costs the employer half again as much in payroll taxes alone. Every increase in the cost of insurance, gas, utilities, rent, and taxes comes straight out of the owners share of the profits.
With the stroke of a pen, politicians can write into law something that will force a business to close and cost more jobs for this country. Sometimes these strokes of the pen are paid for by lobbyists paid by someone who will benefit from this new law.
Again, thanks so much for this outstanding comment.
OldPoolman...You are so much more succinct than I. Passion invokes the verbosity in me. Thanks for accepting the comment, I thought you might not because of its word count. I wish I wasn't as knowledgeable about the subject, but everything I wrote is true, and I learned by having our business go belly up. I have too many ugly stories about gov. intervention. When you write on this stuff, what tags do you use? You've inspired me...
JuliaFine Before I could respond to your comment, I actually had to go look up the definition of the word "succinct." Nothing at all wrong with using lots of words, I just write like I talk. I never have much to say, just enough to get my message across and then I shut up.
Just write the way you do, you have many interesting stories to tell, and information we could all use. I rarely use many tags at all. HP suggests a few and I use them, or I just throw something in there to satisfy the HP requirement for a couple tags. Sure glad you dropped by.
reading this hub and follow up comments, it really amazes me how hard it is for adults sometimes to coexist with those who think differently then them. There's plenty of morons on "both" sides of the aisles, and plenty of geniuses too. just because people think differently then you do, doesn't meant they are any less intelligent then you are. Life experience, socioeconomic class, religion, sex, marital status, geography, health, age: all these things can affect someones political viewpoint. Intelligence has very little to do with it (as evidenced by the fact that most most politicians actually do very little thinking ;-) Why does it often have to regress into name calling, deleting and "hrumphing"? I'm a social liberal, fiscal conservative with the ability to rationally discuss issues an ideas without (publicly ;-) reverting to name calling.
Most people here are civil, so this comment isn't really directed at anyone. just an observation
Hi Mike!
Noting that you are succinct is a high compliment, and I too appreciate someone can boil it down to a few words.
In fact, I am likely to ignore someone who writes a column in the comment section. I just don't have the time or patience.
Your smart father raised a smart man. I don't like the connotations of the word either. I wish that more people had the opportunity to see or walk in the shoes of a person's life who is worse off than them. These types of experiences usually bring about a quick change in the minds of those who believe they are entitled.
Phoebe Pike Level 7 Commenter 5 months ago
I know most don't plan on living off the state, but many stay on it. The way they see it, they live better than the people who actually work. I see it all the time. I was actually called "stupid" for working when I could just pop out more children and let the state pay for everything.
Then there's the discrimination in housing. People who have the state pay for their rent get better housing and apartments than those of us who work. "Section 8 ONLY/Preferred" is a common item in the papers. Then, when someone who is working needs help putting food on the table, guess what happens? The state tells them to have more children or work less before offering any help at all. The government wants us to be dependant on it because that means they have total control. The state tells us to be less independant if we want food on the table. Apparently having four jobs isn't enough for them to even consider helping their citizens.