posted 01-25-2003 01:58 PM               

What I find disturbing at times tho, are people who wouldn't dream of aksing their neighbors or family for assistance...but then are willing to get the help from a govt program. A program which forces people to pay into it. They wouldn't ask for help from freinds and relatives, but don't mind govt forcing that help from strangers and others.

There is generally not a feeling of gratitude for this help, as you would feel towards your freinds helping you...but, generally a feeling of "entitlement"..."I deserve/earned/have a right to this help." Most people who receive this type of help, really haven't contributed much to the programs that help them. Since 95% of the taxes to support these programs come from people who make 50K or more a year...it's basically a gift, or, a transfer of wealth.

What upsets me even more, is the constant criticism of those that are providing these gifts. As if the people receiving deserve the money, and the people forced to support this gift giving deserve to be forced. It's a classic "class warfare" political tool.

Just because you are poor, doesn't make you righteous or deserving of someone else's money. Just because you are not poor, doesn't make you evil or greedy. Those that consistently fan the flames of class warfare do America no service. I see it used by those who want political power, and I cringe when I see thinking people fall for it.

posted 01-25-2003 02:07 PM               

1. I would like to have lower taxes but because the mess, we have put ourselves in, lower taxes now will lead to more trouble in the future.

2. The government spends OUR money on OUR behalf. the problem is, that the system is set up in such a way that they can use OUR money to buy our votes. Mr. Bush wants to buy your vote for the next election. He calls it "economic stimulus" but anyone with even the the tiniest knowledge of human Nature knows that His "plan" will contract the economy, not expand it. It will also weaken investor confidence in this country by driving the public debt even higher. As a Taxpayer and a stakeholder in the economy, I would like to see us pay off our debts before we give ourselves a raise.

3. As a small business owner, you have benefited more from Goventment deficit spending than most of us. You would not have been able to earn nearly as much as you have had taxes always been the way you want them now. If we start behaving sensibly, prosperity can continue. If not, when people start to doubt this country's ability to honour her debt, the crash that follows will be disasterous. The Dotcom crisis and current scandals will be a "blip" by comparison.

posted 01-25-2003 03:36 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ethel the Monkey:
I understand, SF.

Re: some people not asking friends and/or family for help. There are a lot of people who don't have friends or family. And others whose friends and family aren't in a position to be able to help. And still others whose friends and family wouldn't help even if they could. The world can be incredibly bleak place for people in those circumstances.

---

Ethel, its clear you're a very kind and compassionate person. Hat's off to you.

posted 01-27-2003 07:43 AM               

Apologies for trying to make sense before 10 a.m. on a Monday, and thanks for the civil replies to the posts o' mine that, based on their smaller government-endorsing content, could have been taken as a license to go on a stereotyping and name-calling binge. You guys rule!

Peace,

Don

posted 01-27-2003 09:11 AM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by LoopySanchez:
But I do think that at some point when everything hopefully settles down eventually, it would be good to revamp the system in some way that's more efficient, and that lets people take responsibility for their own well-being except in the cases where a person truly needs outside assistance. It would let everyone pay less into the system, but with an understanding that those who didn't truly need assistance in their old age wouldn't qualify for any. Would Bill Gates really miss a monthly Social Security check when he hits 65?

---

Solid proposal. I wouldn't argue with that, though Bill Gates might....because nobody ever told him different. I actually think there needs to be a healthy national debate on the mission of Social Security. I think Americans have all kinds of views and expectations of it. Because, for political reasons, we avoid being clear about it. Some people view SS as quasi-welfare and some view it as a retirement investment thing. Only when we agree on what SS is AND WILL BE can we have a civil and less political debate on changes.

Right now, I think most Americans view SS as BOTH welfare and pension fund. A blend. Nothing wrong with that. Problem is, the government is running like a pure welfare fund, taxes, income and wealth redistribution, slush fund, checks rolling out, etc. With the current de facto blended mission, I think a % of each person's SS should be put aside in secure conservative investment private trust (not usable by govt.) to grow for the purposes of the "pension fund" part of the mission. (Let each person watch their portion of SS withholdings grow, etc.) The remaining portion of their SS withholdings should go into the welfare portion, with people understanding who it is benefiting. Right now, it's a big slush fund. Nobody has a stake and everybody wants "their share", whatever that means. But clearly nobody wants an impoverished elderly.

We could go to an "all welfare" mission where only the "needy" get payment. (If we do that, witholdings should actually drop because less payments will be given, ie: Gates wouldn't get a check too.) And, we could go to an "all investment" Social Security mission. (Witholdings again, would drop over the long term because everybody is paying their own way, right?)