Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Red states depend on "handouts"

Last response: in News & Leisure
Share
August 3, 2012 7:09:13 PM

Great article, I would also like to point people to this www.nytimes.com/interactive/2012/02/12/us/entitlement-m...

Its a map of general entitlements by district, guess where the highest concentration is?

Maybe because people in red states typically earn less money, they would qualify for more aid?

Interesting and I would like to keep this thread civil gentlemen.......
August 3, 2012 10:05:30 PM

Whats interesting is, Minnesota is where the first story comes from, a blue state if there ever was one.
I would also like to point out, the further north you go, the more dependent the people are on US handouts, where youll also find, people up here vote democrat, its where Humphrey started, as the DFL became a huge part of this states politics to this day.

The more rural the area, the more dependent, yet, surprisingly enough, the greatest numbers are found in the cities.
Sounds like a contradiction, but here is where things are misunderstood.
The cities have work, or, rather, businesses.
Now, for all those businesses that werent built by their owners without help (as I assume this is the way we are to address success from now on), they are the ones keeping the major cities intact and in the black, even tho theyre blue.
Ignoring these little things, as we are to ignore peoples hard work creating businesses (with help), their ideas(not sure how to handle this one, I guess its only after their ideas can be put to fruition thru others first maybe) and their success (not mentioned lately, maybe its a bad thing to mention?) that pays for all the negatives found within the large cities taking up the slack.
Now, however, taking this POV, if those businesses pay their employees well, then surely, those working for them can easily pay their fair share, tho lately, it seems as tho these pwners and those busi9nesses arent paying their fair share, nor are they paying well, certainly not enough.

Did I get this right?
Its all new to me
Related resources
August 3, 2012 10:26:45 PM

Truly its dishonest to say what a man has earned is not his, therefor he isnt paying his fair share.
Each tax break given has a reason, to just skim over, or not even address those reasons is a false approach to a particular POV, where it crumbles before it gets started, unless of course, youre jealous, hateful, or just are greedy, meaning, you want some of that.
If the design of government was to never give these breaks, they simply wouldnt be there.
To include them and then use them as something thats wrong, well heres a solution, dont take it to begin with, then go from there, instead of the tired, old, worn out, sickening, hippie esque way , theres a victim and a villain.
If we cleared the taxes to the point where average Joe didnt pay them, yet had no tax breaks, then whos to blame?
Wheres the villains?
And Im still trying to find the victims here, is it all of us?
Just certain all of usses?

This is simply a call for higher taxes, to make no other changes in government, as if it were doing the perfect job, as if it was suffering enough not to have it pay its fair share.
Oh, wait a minute, thats the problem, the only claim government can make in this direction is tax breaks, where youll find those in government creating their villains, hoping for victims and votes.
August 3, 2012 10:26:52 PM

Not surprising considering the will to work, achieve, and take care of one's own responsibilities is systematically being bred out of us. Sad to say.
August 6, 2012 2:41:33 PM

JAYDEEJOHN said:
Truly its dishonest to say what a man has earned is not his, therefor he isnt paying his fair share.
Each tax break given has a reason, to just skim over, or not even address those reasons is a false approach to a particular POV, where it crumbles before it gets started, unless of course, youre jealous, hateful, or just are greedy, meaning, you want some of that.
If the design of government was to never give these breaks, they simply wouldnt be there.
To include them and then use them as something thats wrong, well heres a solution, dont take it to begin with, then go from there, instead of the tired, old, worn out, sickening, hippie esque way , theres a victim and a villain.
If we cleared the taxes to the point where average Joe didnt pay them, yet had no tax breaks, then whos to blame?
Wheres the villains?
And Im still trying to find the victims here, is it all of us?
Just certain all of usses?

This is simply a call for higher taxes, to make no other changes in government, as if it were doing the perfect job, as if it was suffering enough not to have it pay its fair share.
Oh, wait a minute, thats the problem, the only claim government can make in this direction is tax breaks, where youll find those in government creating their villains, hoping for victims and votes.


The real problem here is the people who are against handouts are against them because of the rhetoric they are subjected to. What happens if they are completely wiped out and these people go under? Lives will be ruined for the sole purpose of political agendas. The first person in the article printed t-shirts for the tea party rally which is against everything the person is receiving from the government. The amount of ignorance is astounding and before you and OMG blow a gasket, it happens on both sides. Still the Tea party seems to take it to a whole new level. I have no problem with people believing in the tenets of the Tea Party but maybe you should take a look at how you would be affected by these tenets instead of blinding buying into it.

OMG-is that really your argument? When America by far produces more with less than any other nation? Must be nice to live in that fantasy land.


August 6, 2012 3:14:34 PM

Well, what do you think the ultimate evolution is when you are given 99 weeks (that's almost 2 years for those in Rio Linda) of assistance? Where is the incentive to get a job? And now they want to extend the 99 weeks.

Where do you get the idea the TEA is "against" public assistance? The TEA party is all for helping those that need it. Within reason. This 99+ weeks is ridiculous though.
August 6, 2012 3:26:21 PM

Oldmangamer_73 said:
Well, what do you think the ultimate evolution is when you are given 99 weeks (that's almost 2 years for those in Rio Linda) of assistance? Where is the incentive to get a job? And now they want to extend the 99 weeks.

Where do you get the idea the TEA is "against" public assistance? The TEA party is all for helping those that need it. Within reason. This 99+ weeks is ridiculous though.


There is reasoning behind this, first of all all the money they get they spend on stuff like bills, which is then reintroduced into the economy. Also the whole reason a lot of people need this is because the banks took advantage of a system that was there because the government screwed up. Should they just be left out to dry?
August 6, 2012 3:30:54 PM

johnsonma said:
There is reasoning behind this, first of all all the money they get they spend on stuff like bills, which is then reintroduced into the economy. Also the whole reason a lot of people need this is because the banks took advantage of a system that was there because the government screwed up. Should they just be left out to dry?



Of course not. I am all for helping out people who really need it. I am not so cold as you may think. But the 99 weeks is just insane. I have a friend that took advantage of it. Used up all 99 weeks, had a nice little vacation. Then when it ran out, he found a job within weeks. So it's not as if he couldn't have found a job during those 99 weeks, he just didn't try. This is but one example of what i'm talking about.
August 6, 2012 5:15:17 PM

Interesting article.

It is a shame that it is the same hard working people who created the economic base for America to become a world power are now the same people who are dependent on government. It has put congressional Republicans in the position of spending just as much if not more on social programs as democrats. The notion of government maintaining the middle class from childhood to retirement is/was/and will always be a false promise. This article is proof that central economic planning is a complete and utter failure.

So, here we are on the verge of another recession with the Federal government in the dubious position of trying to deliver on the false central economic planning promises of a social safety net to an aging Baby Boomer population without bankrupting the country and without selling out the current and future generations of America.

More central economic planning is not the answer. More government spending is not the answer. Raising taxes on any income level is not the answer. Rebooting the system and returning America to its constitutional principles would be too much of a shock to the entitlement society. Our politicians are ineffectual.

There is no single answer but big changes are needed.








August 6, 2012 6:23:19 PM

Oldmangamer_73 said:
Of course not. I am all for helping out people who really need it. I am not so cold as you may think. But the 99 weeks is just insane. I have a friend that took advantage of it. Used up all 99 weeks, had a nice little vacation. Then when it ran out, he found a job within weeks. So it's not as if he couldn't have found a job during those 99 weeks, he just didn't try. This is but one example of what i'm talking about.


You are right, there are no doubt people taking advantage of this system, I have a friend who did the exact same thing. I had another friend though that found that the process has tightened up significantly. The requirements now are incredibly tough, something like 2 jobs applications every week and every 4 weeks you have to review all the applications and reapply. Thats just starting out too. He went 2 months before he started his own business, turns out business is good too. We can't overhaul the system because of some worthless people, just make it as hard as possible to do it.
August 7, 2012 3:47:33 PM

You could just have a decent civil war and a bit of a population cull?

Would lower the unemployment rate.

Yo uprobably have enough arms and ammo in every home that you wouldn't need a resupply for a good couple of weeks?

Alternatively invade some poor sap nation on your borders ...

August 7, 2012 3:53:01 PM

Reynod said:
You could just have a decent civil war and a bit of a population cull?

Would lower the unemployment rate.

Yo uprobably have enough arms and ammo in every home that you wouldn't need a resupply for a good couple of weeks?

Alternatively invade some poor sap nation on your borders ...


Mexico is too hot, Canada is too cold(except maybe the western part by the ocean that gets that current heat). We could call it New Canada.
August 7, 2012 4:42:33 PM

The state of Vancouver does have a ring to it
August 7, 2012 5:44:51 PM

Maybe we could even get Alaska touching another state. Instead of being separate but equal.
August 7, 2012 6:20:49 PM

Reynod said:
Alternatively invade some poor sap nation on your borders ...
I'm partial to bypassing Mexico and annexing the rest of Central America from Guatemala down to Panama.
August 7, 2012 11:49:34 PM

:) 
August 8, 2012 5:22:51 PM

Hmm.. better get rid of those handouts then, don'tcha think?
August 8, 2012 8:13:44 PM

Getting gov't benefits are easy. Park your car on the side of the road, sit in a ditch, wait for police to show up. Tell them you have mental problems.

You qualify for gov't assistance for life.
!