Posted by Tina
Okay, okay it’s an absurd idea but only because it scares people to death. OMG! What about the poor people?
The first thing that would happen in this imaginary scenario is that the poor people, dear heart, would feel more alive than they have in years!
So sudden death might not be the best solution in the short term. People might panic, might riot and loot, and because we’ve been conditioned to be entitled it could get very messy. But the idea is worth considering in terms of the helplessness and loss of productivity that big government solutions inspire.
What if people had to depend on themselves and their families? How would that affect relationships and opportunities? How would people begin to arrange their lives and their communities so that civility, stability and abundance flourished?
I started thinking about all of this when I read the comment by Pie referring to the President’s big idea to raise the minimum wage:
Boosting the federal minimum wage as President Barack Obama and congressional Democrats are proposing would increase earnings for more than 16.5 million people by 2016 but also cut employment by roughly 500,000 jobs, Congress’ nonpartisan budget analyst said Tuesday.
After five years of Failed progressive democrat policy it’s mind boggling to watch the president trudge down the same path. He makes decisions based on ideological thinking rather than advice and experience.
A John Boehner spokesman, citing the CBO report, explains the folly of Obama’s partisan folly:
“This report confirms what we’ve long known: While helping some, mandating higher wages has real costs, including fewer people working,” said Brendan Buck, spokesman for House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio. “With unemployment Americans’ top concern, our focus should be creating — not destroying — jobs for those who need them most.”
The AP article notes the partisan thinking behind the move:
Instead, they emphasized the millions who would gain higher wages and the 900,000 boosted above poverty.
As our friend Dewey might say, “Bingo!”
If nothing else is true about Democrats the one thing we can always count on is grand deception.
The thing that matters is not whether the economy actually improves but whether people perceive that the economy is improving. It doesn’t matter that we are creating good jobs that allow people to move up to higher pay but the Presidents ability to say his policy “boosted” 900,000 people above the poverty line!
This man is irresponsible…unpatriotic! He puts his radical Democrat progressive agenda above the well being and health of the American people.
That dismantling government scenario is looking better and better.
The government is suppose to be us. Yep shut er down and who will be the dictator? lol Will China be our boss?
in fact get rid of the military! See what happens!
Government is not the problem, it is the unlimited money that bribes our lawmakers.
Really? Fantasyland at best. Unregulated world where they tear up our land, kill us with chemicals and no one to stick up for the people?
Remove democracy for who? One can always spot a paid troll these days. Sell the dream! Remove all rights of humans!
Funny OK had 103 earthquakes since Friday! More fracking please!
Tina: “The thing that matters is not whether the economy actually improves but whether people perceive that the economy is improving. It doesn’t matter that we are creating good jobs that allow people to move up to higher pay but the Presidents ability to say his policy “boosted” 900,000 people above the poverty line!”
Wait, what?
Wouldn’t boosting 900,000 people above the poverty line be good for the economy? Or is that my weirdo liberal perception?
Another question: 900,000 is still bigger than 500,000, right?
Tina, if you’re serious about dismantling government, start with government subsidies to the rich and powerful. Corporate welfare costs our country even more than social welfare with even less benefit:
https://www.google.com/#q=corporate+welfare+social+welfare
I’m telling you this as a friend: all this hair-pulling over welfare to the poor, while you say absolutely zilch about welfare to the rich, does not make your party look very appealing to those who are suffering the worst in this economy.
Thankfully there are genuine anti-government protesters out there who are against the welfare state as it applies to both rich and poor. They support free market principles and oppose government regulation and a minimum wage, but they are against all subsidies and believe that massive corporations could not exist without government intervention. I don’t know whether I agree with their radical ideas, but they are worth considering, especially when compared to those who claim to support the free market while at the same time cheerleading for government-backed corporations.
http://c4ss.org/
For Mr. Decimal and Chris, here’s your gummit at work. Pray that YOU do not become a throwaway American.
http://articles.philly.com/2014-02-14/news/47339521_1_job-applications-new-america-apartment
Re #3: Is this the same water boy who championed supposed “green” industry which could not survive without being backed by the government? wow.
Dewey chill…I support the Constitution, limited federal government, more power at the individual and state levels, and at the federal level a strong military to protect and defend our nation and freedoms.
You are ill informed and unwilling to budge. You are either an idiot or a leftist bumper sticker troll. I’m bettin’ on a bit of both.
Instead of shutting the government down how about we support Trey Gowdy’s recommendation to follow the constitution to disarm the Dictator in Chief.
http://www.ijreview.com/2014/02/116004-trey-gowdy-strikes-youre-blank-right-well-strip-obama-presidency-funding/
Chris: “Wouldn’t boosting 900,000 people above the poverty line be good for the economy.
People moving above the poverty line would be wonderful if they did it by actually getting ahead. A few might enjoy temporary mad cash fever but prices will rise and/or some of their friends will lose jobs or have hours cut. Other jobs won’t be counted because they just won’t ever materialize.
One way or the other this is a very limp noodle way to address the very serious unemployment and poverty problem that just continues to linger and fester.
“…if you’re serious about dismantling government, start with government subsidies to the rich and powerful”
As if I have ever been opposed to it.
” Corporate welfare costs our country even more than social welfare with even less benefit”
Less benefit? By what standard?
One of the most reviled subsidies is the farm subsidy, 80% of which goes to food stamps. The subsidy oil companies receive to locate the places to drill benefits the government which receives a huge profit huge profit from oil. From 1981-2008, “Big Oil” paid $1,000,000,000,000 (that’s billion) in sales and excise taxes. Oil companies make only $ the oil industry made 6.7¢ profit per dollar of revenue. But there is more:
Oil companies provide millions of jobs and the entire nation…all business, and all jobs, depend on the energy produced by oil.
Now that doesn’t mean I an not in favor of changing the system…I am. But the perception that subsidies to companies doesn’t do anything for the people is just flat out wrong!
There are better ways to help people move out of poverty than giving them handouts without asking anything in return.
“I’m telling you this as a friend: all this hair-pulling over welfare to the poor, while you say absolutely zilch about welfare to the rich, does not make your party look very appealing”
I’m telling you this as a friend: Until you can think outside the box you are in you will never understand that I support giving the poor a better chance in life than the welfare state offers! And you will never understand that has been the sentiment behind every right wing economic plan…with extremely positive results!
“…to those who are suffering the worst in this economy.”
You mean those who voted for Obama again with unemployment at 8% (Only actually much higher and even higher than that for minorities)?
How do we talk to people who choose to believe a party that has delivered so much misery?
How do we talk to people who so easily buy the demeaning accusations hurled at the Republicans, the Te Party or anyone who speaks for the right.
How do you talk to people loyal to a party that delivers them into continued poverty year after year and still comes back expecting their votes?
How do you talk to people who believe that companies are evil, because that’s what the “smart people” have said, when they can see if they will look, that millions of people just like them enjoy working for those companies, and they benefit greatly from the pay they receive for their labors, and the products they make are a benefit to us all?
How do you convince people your party is not evil or racist when the opposition party constantly makes the accusation…has been lying for decades about both the greatness of their own solutions and about the intentions of their opponents and and the effects their solutions?
I agree its a problem Chris. I think if you were honest you would have to admit that I have expressed both empathy for the poor and offered solutions I think work. I think if you were honest you would admit that although I have defended companies who are under assault by pointing out the good they do, I have not defended subsidies except to say that the benefit is also to the nation, and the world in some cases. I have also expressed a preference for clear simple regulation that cannot be easily cheated and is easy to monitor. I have defended wealth as property and explained that it too benefits the entire world since the bulk of it is invested and fuels the economy and jobs.
These are not arguments to give the rich advantage but to unleash the power of their wealth for industry and growth…for loans available to people who want to purchase big items or attend colege or start a business.
In short Chris…is it really me or is it just the wall of prejudice and misinformation that is between the conservative view and the poor?
Excellent find Bob! This sentence grabbed me right off the bat: “The family “lived very comfortably”
Most of America strives to live comfortably. Only a very few have the ambition and drive to become wealthy. But that’s beauty of America…when the people are unencumbered and can freely strive the wealthy seem to be make enough to make it possible for people to live their dreams…a nice home a good job and a family. What could be better…no, really!
Also loved the “decimal’ line…made me smile just in time to say good night. zzzzzzzzzzzzz
I tell ya, Miss Tina, when even network admins can’t find jobs you know just how bad this economy has become under Barack Husein Obama and the Demoncrats. I think most people who are employed don’t realize how bad it is. (Or maybe don’t want to realize but think it wouldn’t be so hard to find another job if they lost the job they had now. No one wants to think they could wind up like the guy in the article.)
Tina: “As if I have ever been opposed to it.”
One certainly couldn’t tell that you are opposed to corporate welfare judging by your comments here. You have done nothing but point out what you see as positive results of subsidies to oil companies and big farms while saying nothing of the negative.
It’s not enough for you to bitch about welfare to the poor every day, and then only say “well, yeah, corporate welfare is kind of bad too, except for all the good it does!” only when asked about it. It’s a question of priorities, Tina. If when you think of big government and welfare you can only think of aid to the poor, then your priorities and principles are seriously screwed up.
The stereotype of the callous Republican who sneers at the poor is true, as you are proving in this very thread. If your opposition was really to big government and money for nothing, you’d spend far more time railing against subsidies to the wealthy and powerful.
“I have not defended subsidies except to say that the benefit is also to the nation, and the world in some cases.”
Do you not know what the word “defended” means?
Chris you obviously don’t recognize the roll you play in our conversation. If our readers get one perspective from you do they need lock step agreement from me or would they benefit more from reading another perspective? Are we having a discussion or just throwing rocks at each other?
One difference between us is that I don’t expect anyone to automatically agree with me or be greatly influenced by me. I respect the fact that given enough information people will usually come to the right conclusion.
I believe the left has had a big megaphone for a very long time. I have acknowledged the superior strategy and commitment to getting the progressive message out. They dominate, or have dominated, in education, media, entertainment, and the legal system. They have advanced their agenda over a seventy year span. I don’t think I begin to make my point on a level playing field. And yes, I have a more conservative approach to how poverty should be approached and I think it should be diminished to the greatest extent possible. I have a conservative approach to how best to see our economy grow so it serves all Americans. How much any one person makes in the process is irrelevant. A vibrant economy does cause all boats to rise and individuals are the ones responsible for how high their boat will rise.
You don’t get my perspective. You show few signs of wanting to get my perspective. That may be a result of your age and inexperience to some degree. But I believe it also derives from prejudice. Your last question is indicative of this prejudice as is your view that the stereotype is true. Your opinion that if I really cared about smaller government I would spend my time “railing against subsidies to the wealthy and powerful” is pure ego…you are saying that in order to care I have to be like you.
Please tell me where in our society has there been a welfare office or a director of a SNAP office’s family in his home being subjected to slogan screaming, negative sign carrying conservatives protesting and making news about the “evils” of welfare?
How many lawsuits are initiated against welfare recipients? How many pieces of legislation have been written to shut down welfare programs? Even the so-called cuts that happen from time to time are in reality just cuts to the amount of increase in the programs.
So let me leave you with a few questions that reflects the respect you have shown me. Do you not know the definition of benefit? Do you understand what it means when I say “the nation and the world? Does it compute when I say that the bulk of the farm subsidy money goes to food stamps and the oil subsidy is eclipsed by the revenue generated to the government? Do you really believe that a CEO of a company has more power to damage your life and livelihood than government?
Newsflash…some of the most wealthy and powerful people in America are liberal/progressive Democrats that are in the process of destroying lives one cut at a time. They are in the process of killing the freedom, a gift that people in the Ukraine think it is valuable enough to die for today! There isn’t a company on earth that compares to the destructive nature of radical zealot politicians.
You bet I know what the word defended means and I will continue to defend freedom and the right of any American to have and grow a business to whatever size the market will bear. You want subsidies to end fine and dandy but you had better be prepared at the same tome to lower tax rates and clean up regulations so that things like awarding loans to unqualified buyers and creating toxic instruments to make politicians and bureaucrats rich don’t get in the way of honest and safe business dealings.
Last shot, since this is the game you seem to prefer. You don’t give a damn about the poor having a real shot at life or you would show some interest in ideas that would better serve them and support a way to transition from the current failed system to one that produces more prosperity for them and the rest of us too!
Peggy I love Trey Gowdy. I sure hope he has agreement and the support of both R’s and D’s in the House.
I was struck by the one soundbite when someone said defensively that Obama had fewer EO’s than “most” other Presidents. LOL. that’s because he’s not done yet and the one with the most in recent years was Bill Clinton with over 300..Bush had over 200 (can’t recall the exact numbers).
The left never misses a bet to spin a positive for themselves without revealing accurate and complete information.
Bob the one thing about having a job in a bad economy is that you don’t feel the heat with the same intensity. On the other hand there are people like me who would retire except that the guys that work for me need a job. A lot of Boomers aren’t retiring because they fear inflation and/or have had savings and equity wiped out but that too would not be noticed by the average person on the street. There are so many indicators that just don’t get counted.
“Re #3: Is this the same water boy who championed supposed “green” industry which could not survive without being backed by the government? wow.”
Geez, Pie. Take an American History class, will you. Right off the top of my head, I remembered the railroads … what did they get? … twenty miles to either side of the track, no matter how happened already to be living on it?
We got Big Oil, an industry well established, still basking in humongous development subsidies.
You make no sense, most of the time; you know that?
No, Bob … that’s YOUR government at work, presuming that you think a Republican leg is the way to go. If you do, it was YOUR leg than went to “contractors”, rather than “employees”. It’s YOUR government that’s gone totally pinch-penny and is laying off contractors and employees, alike, in droves.
And it’s YOUR private sector who won’t pay a 54-year-old $70K, when it can pay a 30-year-old $35K.
Hell, it won’t even pay the 54-year-old the $35K.
What’s going on here is the operation of those “market forces” you all think are so cool … and the operation of YOUR government.
If MY government had been running, lo, these thirty years, none of this would be happening.
So … there!
Pie, I’ve changed my stance since we last discussed the issue of subsidies to green energy companies. I don’t believe they should be funded by the government either.
However, as Libby points out, the amount given to green energy pales in comparison to the amount given to oil. If you’re upset about green energy companies getting subsidies, you should also be upset about oil companies getting subsidies, and vice versa.
But the fact that conservatives waffle between ignoring and defend such subsidies is a pretty big red flag showing that the difference between Democrats and Republicans isn’t that one favors Big Government and the other doesn’t. When people say they oppose Big Government, what they usually mean is that they oppose government doing things they don’t like.
I am in favor of cutting subsidies to green energy companies as well as oil companies. Are you?
Chris that is very sensible of you. Personally I don’t believe in any subsidies, except in the case national security. If a factory or a crop can be shown to be of vital interest to our nation’s defense, then by all means fund it. Who wouldn’t? This is just common sense. However, getting closer to home, rice is not a national security item any more than hemp, so we ought to stop subsidizing rice farmers!
Should there come a time when green energy is vital to our survival…hey, fund that too. But, at the moment I see no compelling reasons to give out welfare to any of these places, do you?
The original intent of U.S. farm subsidies was to provide economic stability to farmers during the Depression to ensure a steady domestic food supply for Americans.
“In the 1930s, about 25% of the country’s population resided on the nation’s 6,000,000 small farms,” per Wikipedia. However, “By 1997, 157,000 large farms accounted for 72% of farm sales, with only 2% of the U.S. population residing on farms.”
Per the Washington Post, “The Agriculture Department projects net farm income of $94.7 billion in 2011, up almost 20 percent over the previous year and the second-best year for farm income since 1976. Indeed, the department notes that the top five earnings years out of the past 30 have occurred since 2004.”
The U.S. government presently pays about $20 billion in cash annually to farmers and owners of farmland. Between 1995 and 2005, the federal government paid about $250 billion in farm subsidies, per the Environmental Working Group in “Government’s Continued Bailout of Agribusiness.”
I have to say, ag subsidies would be an excellent example of “mission creep”. It was a really good idea to insure against crop failures to keep farmers on the land and ensure a stable food supply. But now the gummint uses subsidies like they were tax breaks, to encourage or discourage economic activity, and I don’t hold with that either.
Tina: “Your opinion that if I really cared about smaller government I would spend my time “railing against subsidies to the wealthy and powerful” is pure ego…you are saying that in order to care I have to be like you.”
I’m sorry you see it that way. The way I see it, all I’m asking is that you stay consistent with your own stated principles. If you are against big government and welfare, you should be against big government and welfare to the rich and poor alike. If you are against government intervention in the marketplace, you should be against government intervention in the marketplace even when it makes life easier for business. If you believe that handouts to the poor make them lazy and discourage work, you should believe that handouts to the rich make them lazy and discourage work.
I am not asking you to agree with me. I am asking you to agree with yourself. Right now, your positions totally contradict each other.
I think I have shown that I am willing to consider an alternate perspective from people whom I disagree with, provided those people can provide logically consistent arguments for their positions. The free market anarchists I’ve linked are more anti-government than you, but they manage to do this. I can believe that they are sincere in their position because they are willing to put their money where their mouth is, rhetorically speaking. The modern GOP uses phrases like “small government” as a fairly unconvincing beard for outright hostility to the poor. I can respect people who disagree with me if I believe they’re being honest with me and with themselves.
“If MY government had been running, lo, these thirty years, none of this would be happening.
So … there!”
So Libster, who is hiring and paying all these contractors? Your beloved gummit led by Barack Husein Obama! So there!
Libby: “…it was YOUR leg than went to “contractors”, rather than “employees”.
Really? Or was this pure liberal spin repeated over and over to demonize the Bush administrations in the form of that insane antiwarcry: “Halliburton”!
Frontpage Magazine:
A blog references remarks by National Review editor Rich Lowry who was writing for TownHall at the time (direct link unavailable):
…The Clinton administration made the same calculation in its own dealings with Halliburton. The company had won the LOGCAP in 1992, then lost it in 1997. The Clinton administration nonetheless awarded a no-bid contract to Halliburton to continue its work in the Balkans supporting the U.S. peacekeeping mission there because it made little sense to change midstream. According to Byron York, Al Gore’s reinventing-government panel even singled out Halliburton for praise for its military logistics work…
“…the U.S. Army Logistics Civil Augmentation Program, or LOGCAP… is a multiyear contract for a corporation to be on call to provide whatever services might be needed quickly…” Halliburton has frequently been the low-bidder on LOGCAP, and both no-bid contracts were been made in the context of many Halliburton low bids to do exactly the same things. The idea that Dick Cheney just tossed a crony contract to his old firm is rubbish spread by toads who get to sleep quietly at night because decent Americans like Mr Cheney and the folks at Halliburton roll up their sleeves and tackle horrible problems in faraway places. And if they are well-paid for it, good! They deserved it. It doesn’t look to me like they are nearly as overpaid as the NGO’s and multinational institutions that the snivelers would prefer. (emphasis mine)
It would have been refreshing if just one of the people in the Clinton/Gore administration had stepped forward to acknowledge these facts . Isn’t it disgusting that the so-called professional journalists/media who pretend to be the nations fourth estate never bothered to silence the loud yammering voices of derision
Not only do Democrats use independent contractors, they used Halliburton and KBR and praised them!
So…there!
“So Libster, who is hiring and paying all these contractors? Your beloved gummit led by Barack Husein Obama!”
Listen … do you want this guy to have a job or not? The private sector has amply demonstrated that it won’t provide. Our government would … if the Leg weren’t full of Republicans.
Make up yer freakin’ minds.
Tina or is it Jack?
Your statement of “limited federal government, more power at the individual and state levels, and at the federal level a strong military…”
reads like a WW2 regime that the world took out.
The military is also no more than a imperialist regime for big oil. The Iraq war was criminal and preplanned as was the Vietnam…
Response to your statement
“You are ill informed and unwilling to budge. You are either an idiot or a leftist bumper sticker troll. I’m bettin’ on a bit of both.”
I will put my facts up in a public debate. You refuse to acknowledge any facts, truth and repeat prewritten Propaganda.
Breibart is not alive in case you do not know.
Troll? No I do not make crap up and spread it around.
Also Norcal deserves better than this Propaganda. One can find it on the Tea Party Koch sites and then see it repeated here.
I do not actually believe you believe this stuff you write. I can go around and see the flip flop of writing in many places.
Bottom Line Epic Fail, I actually speak to congresspeople and lawmakers, I have seen and heard what really goes on.
A fool I a not. I am Independent but certainly not a right wing nut job who thinks I should dictate to others.
Budge? Tea Party just follows what their masters say believing lies and as long as they are bashing the man in office they feel good.
Americans who watch no TV at all are better informed than Fox Viewers.
Where are your posts on Christie? Walker? Foreign money being hidden in our elections?
Nowhere cause it doe not matter to you.
I am a true American sick of the corruption in the political system. I will call out a Dem or Rep. But As an American I do not believe that hating all Liberals or Conservatives is Democracy.
Name calling is reserved for you. I think the record profits on wall street are just fine. The middle class was crushed and we need to build it back up.
CBO report said some companies may slow down hiring, good! No one can support themselves on 7 or 8hr. Rent, gas, food, not enough at all.
Before the crash and the outsourcing of our jobs those were teenagers in those jobs. Now it’s families!
Walmart will not even notice the higher wages.
you act like wall street investors need more and workers are the problem
I stand by my facts and do allot of research. I just find it silly to try and even hold a conversation, but sick of the propaganda.
you act like Tea Party Politicians are saviors and they are some of the most corrupt in either party. Facts prove it!
It’s Tina, Dewey…it says so right at the TOP of the article.
We’ve hear it before pal.
Libby: ” The private sector has amply demonstrated that it won’t provide. Our government would…”
Not without taking the money (wealth) from those who produce!
Your precious government only knows how to confiscate, print money (which makes your dollars worth less), and spend.
Pal? You’ve heard it all before? Than it is now clear your goal.
You see what is going on in the Ukraine? That is what it would look like here.
The giant is organizing. We are repossessing our flag and our eagle.
“we the people” will not be tread on by the Tea Party Politicians
Propaganda is anti American. Hate of half the country is Anti Democratic. Constant talk of shutting down our gov and overthrowing it is Treason.
We want the money out of our elections and the corrupt politicians taken down. We will win in the end no matter how long it takes nor how much damage Tea Party politicians do.
It does not matter if one is Democrat, Republican, or Koch Tea Party……corruption will be addressed.
Enough is enough! Independents are coming out of the woodwork.
Dewey: “Your statement of “limited federal government, more power at the individual and state levels, and at the federal level a strong military…”
reads like a WW2 regime that the world took out.”
Dewey, I agree with a lot of what you say, but this is just silly. No one can reasonable say that Nazi Germany had a “limited federal government.” And the implied Nazi comparison is simply offensive, period.
“Not without taking the money (wealth) from those who produce!”
Yeah, well, you might want to consider the possiblity that the preserving your pile may not be of paramount importance to a civil society.
Libby: “…you might want to consider the possiblity that the preserving your pile may not be of paramount importance to a civil society.”
My “pile” has nothing to do with it.
You might want to consider just how uncivil it will become in America when the left runs out of other peoples money and the middle class completely collapses…you live closer to the big cities where riots, looting, raping and the like are likely to affect YOU!
Also, please explain to me how “civil” the nations poor neighborhoods have become with all of the redistribution since 1964 and that asks NOTHING of minority young men…shoves them aside and makes them unnecessary with respect to the family and children…emotionally damages and entices them into crime and drug use and serial absentee fathers/spermdepositors?
Your original statement was absurd: “The private sector has amply demonstrated that it won’t provide.”
It provides the wealth to run the bloated government and it provides all of the jobs that so many Americans rely on for their families. What the he77 more do you want? Blood?
“Listen … do you want this guy to have a job or not? The private sector has amply demonstrated that it won’t provide. Our government would … if the Leg weren’t full of Republicans.”
Libster, it was a cabinet level agency that got rid of the guy and is not hiring him back. That cabinet level agency is run by Barack Husein Obama and his minions, not the Republicans. Obammie could make a call and have that guy back on the job tomorrow.
CNN:
Credit Write Downs:
It would be stupid to raise taxes at a time when we are already paying a heavy price for energy (Job and economy killer) but otherwise I agree. Plus the private sector energy producers were already investing their profits in alternative
energy solutions:
It’s a natural fit and if anyone can find a way to make it workable and affordable oil companies can. they are in a much better position to evaluate possibilities, absorb failures, and take risks. Plus it will unfold naturally rather than being forced with a bunch of junk science hype.