Response to Entitlement Meltdown

[Etaoin]

I do not know what each of your religious or philosophic orientations are, but I do know that all of the well-intentioned support for ANY entitlement beyond what you earn and provide are antithetical to your alleged moral premises!

There are 5 facets that define a human being :

A rational creature (sometimes, or allegedly) can be defined as having the following 4 critical facets:

A Social being
An economic Being
A political being
An Abstract (Spiritual) being.

I think that if you construct a graph when all 4 of these facets are equal, you can assume that the individual is a healthy and wholesome individual.
When these attributes are applied in balance to a society, it too is healthy.

As Ludwig Von Mises postulates in "HUMAN ACTION" inaction is, in fact, a deliberate action!

As pointed out in the Thread, "Entitlement Meltdown," the meltdown was (is) inevitable from the passing of the law creating the first entitlement.

To demonstrate that entitlements are antithetical to a rational society, consider Charity:

If the individual desires to help alleviate a problem for someone else and donates to help them......he has considered or certainly should have considered, Will my action actually benefit the party or will it aggravate the problem. In contributing toward the solution of the problem, I have diminished MY economic position, but by my contribution, I will have enhanced my Social, and abstract (spiritual) position so therefore I am still in balance.

When on the other hand, Government creates entitlements which are funded by taxation....My economic position is diminished, but there is no corresponding enhancement of any of the other facets of humanity. I am taxed to fund that which, IMHO MAY OR MAY NOT BE WORTHWHILE. If I do not support the entitlement, then I am diminished economically with no balancing of the books, as all the other facets are affected negatively.

Throughout the "50"s, I was actively involved in opposition to Social Security. I was a close friend of the first Actuary of the Social Security program (W. Rulon Williamson) and also worked with A Senior VP (Peterson) of Equitable Ins. who was denounced on the floor of the Senate as being from the Den of Inequitable. By 1958, I recognized that there was only one way to get rid of the program as there were already too many dependent on it was to bankrupt the damned thing.

It was under JFK that the SS tax finally broke the 10% barrier that had been considered as insurmountable. The Liberals cheered!

Doc! Don't you have the story of the farmer that captured the wild pigs by feeding the young ones till they allowed a fence to be built around them?

[Republican_Legion]

The problem with goverment benifets is that the money is poorly managed, poorly distributed and leads to problems such as tricking people into supporting higher taxes or increased spending on it when it already has trouble giving the money to the right people.

The problem with charity is that not everyone is a good person. Only so many people will donate to charity. Charity is better managed and is smarter at giving the money to the people who need it.

30 years ago people could be trusted better to give to charity. Todays people are more short attention spanned and more concerned with themselfs that they simply will forget charity or refuse to.

I think the people who give to charity are becoming a smaller minority as society changes and grows.

[Wyatt_Junker]

As pointed out in the Thread, "Entitlement Meltdown," the meltdown was (is) inevitable from the passing of the law creating the first entitlement.


:claps:

[HomeschoolrsRUs]

Etaoin,
You are right on the money, my friend. But once given, how ever do we take it away? Sadly, one can never quite put all the toothpaste back into the tube once it's been squeezed out.
:sad:

[MrSanity]

I've never seen a day before social security was implemented, hence, I can't hardly imagine a country without it.

Unfortunately, it will never be completely rolled back. From youth, we have had the Social Security tax charged against us, and many of us want that money back later in life. Also, much of the elderly population is living off of social security, and the principle of retirement savings is rarely put to practice.

[Etaoin]

The problem with goverment benifets is that the money is poorly managed, poorly distributed and leads to problems such as tricking people into supporting higher taxes or increased spending on it when it already has trouble giving the money to the right people.

The problem with charity is that not everyone is a good person. Only so many people will donate to charity. Charity is better managed and is smarter at giving the money to the people who need it.

30 years ago people could be trusted better to give to charity. Todays people are more short attention spanned and more concerned with themselfs that they simply will forget charity or refuse to.

I think the people who give to charity are becoming a smaller minority as society changes and grows.


The problem with Government benefits is that the government takes in the taxes and spends the money. Social Security was never anything but a massive Ponzi Scheme. It was sold as "Social Insurance" which in the government's hands is fraudulent. The reason Roosevelt called it Social Insurance is because of the sterling performance of Insurance companies as a whole. Insurance companies take your money, invest it in the economy, make a profit and benefit both the policy holder and the economy!

Incidentally, the age at which one could qualify for Old age benefits from the Social Security Administration was deliberately set above the average life expectancy. You weren't supposed to live long enough to collect!

In the old days, people banded together into fraternal organizations such as The The American Legion, Elks, Eagles, Shriners, etc...that maintained lodges where we congregated for dinners, dances, Poker, bingo, etc.... The organizations also had retirement communities that many retired into.

[Etaoin]

I've never seen a day before social security was implemented, hence, I can't hardly imagine a country without it.

Unfortunately, it will never be completely rolled back. From youth, we have had the Social Security tax charged against us, and many of us want that money back later in life. Also, much of the elderly population is living off of social security, and the principle of retirement savings is rarely put to practice.

The programs that exist today will not survive the inevitable economic collapse readjustment. No government in history has been able to control its misuse of the printing press! Fiat currencies have always ended up being of no more value than the paper on which ever larger numbers were printed. Inflation has always been the government's method of collecting ever more taxes from its flock of sheep. Inflation is the ever present and ever growing cancer that will destroy regardless whether it is a fast growing or a slow growing cancer, IT IS STILL TERMINAL!

The people of this nation were once taught freedom, honor and independence. Today, the Department of Education teaches Compliance, indescriminate values, standards and dependence (i.e. Security). It is not an accident that the LOGO for Socialism is a MAILED FIST in a VELVET GLOVE!

[Wyatt_Junker]

You weren't supposed to live long enough to collect!

Hasn't there been talk that they want to move retirement age from 65 to 70, hoping you'll die in those 5 years and have no need to collect?


In the old days, people banded together into fraternal organizations such as The The American Legion, Elks, Eagles, Shriners, etc...that maintained lodges where we congregated for dinners, dances, Poker, bingo, etc.... The organizations also had retirement communities that many retired into.

Good stuff, Etaoin.

And conversely, with SSI, it does just the opposite, everybody can stay in their own home and be introverted. Not socially healthy. State dependence robs from the formation of community because you don't need help from the community.

If we could somehow rid ourselves of SSI, then the Church would have to fulfill its vocation. As it stands, the church can be lazy, thanks to the State's inefficient, cold hand.

If we didn't have SSI, just think how much more generous the individual could be, let alone the Church?

And if someone didn't save up for their own retirement, then they become a bastion of the Church as they throw themselves at the foot of the door. The Church is where almsgiving used to prevail. The Church, the sanctuary, used to be the storehouse for the poor. And from that, true life-changing evangelism could unfold. Not only did you get a meal, but you got a new life that taught you how to get meals for yourself. And if you were literally incapable of getting those meals yourself, you were adopted by the Church.

Currently, Federal programs foster a sickening kind of psychological inertia & rob the soul of its purpose and meaning, thus turning the individual into an empty shell.

Will some people fall through the cracks without a 'safety net'? Sure. But many already do now. The poor you will always have with you. Somebody famous said that. The Church is best qualified to deal with that. And without SSI, people will have more money to be charitable with as well as more money for the economy in general.

Which also brings me to the prescription drug benefit program that Bush signed into law and may have a whopping trillion dollar price tag. What are all these government entitlements beside political vote whoring? They are immoral in that my children are being put into bondage 35 years from now so that, today, politicans can get elected. And who said that everybody's boo boo is a responsibility of the state? And who said that everyone is guaranteed healthcare(medicare/caid)? And who said that the government is your daddy? WHO?

Its okay to die. Its okay to suffer. Its okay to be without. It really is. Its okay. My great grandparents and great great grandparents didn't saddle me with their geriatric bill. They took it on the chin. They didn't want to live forever. They didn't want to burden their children. How far we've come.

America has a problem with death. They fear it to the point of narcissism. But, death is natural. It is the only thing you are guaranteed in life. Death.

Now, let's unguarantee ourselves from its twin brother... taxes.

Turn over social reengineering to the Church. The conversion will take awhile and a few people will carp and some will starve, but many many more will thank us later and our communities will grow as relationships form.

The Fed is the new church of atheism that robs communities. The Fed is the Father of the ghetto.

[MrSanity]

The programs that exist today will not survive the inevitable economic collapse readjustment. No government in history has been able to control its misuse of the printing press! Fiat currencies have always ended up being of no more value than the paper on which ever larger numbers were printed. Inflation has always been the government's method of collecting ever more taxes from its flock of sheep. Inflation is the ever present and ever growing cancer that will destroy regardless whether it is a fast growing or a slow growing cancer, IT IS STILL TERMINAL!

The people of this nation were once taught freedom, honor and independence. Today, the Department of Education teaches Compliance, indescriminate values, standards and dependence (i.e. Security). It is not an accident that the LOGO for Socialism is a MAILED FIST in a VELVET GLOVE!Pretty freaky if you think about it. We haven't had social security for a complete century, and we're already faced with a shortage of workers to compensate for it. As we can plainly see, the road to Hell is paved with good intentions.

The reason government doesn't work is that people don't want to listen to the government. They don't want to be told how to live their lives. Refer to any given example, like Jimmy Carter in his yellow sweater telling you to use less, and essentially, do less, so they can do more "for" us.

It might work in our favor for a while, but eventually, the train is going to hit us unless we rehabilitate ourselves.

[Republican_Legion]

Unfortunately most americans oppose getting rid of social security all together. We might be able to win on reforming it but talking about killing it just helps us lose elections.

[Wyatt_Junker]

Unfortunately most americans oppose getting rid of social security all together. We might be able to win on reforming it but talking about killing it just helps us lose elections.

Sidenote.

I get an employee freaking out the other day saying there's no WATER!

I'm thinking, what, the water main broke? They can't flush the crapper?

No.

Alhambra, the water guy, didn't come and they have to drink tap water right out of the sink! They can't stick their nice little styrofoam dixie cup underneath the water cooler for some nice, refreshing springwater. The bottles are all empty! The outrage!

She's also the employee that uses the 'harassment' word ... a lot.

Anyway, I'm thinking about that, and how soft today's generation is.

Let's all crawl into our time machines for a minute, go back to 1974. In 1974, no one carried around water bottles. Arrowhead, Aquafina, Alhambra... none of them even existed. Neither did Starbucks(but that's another topic). Did we die of thirst back then? Were there more cases of kidney stones back then? Was it like the Mojave desert where everyone crawls around on their bellys, their lips parched and their throats dry?

No.

But people born from wombs 1980 forward all were raised on bottled water. Not tap water. No. They were too evolved at that point. The water that sullied their lips must be from a plastic bottle, not copper tubing.

And so, the point is, once you lose something... you can never get it back.

Once your society accepts something as given, you can never break through their cow-like stare and take it away from them.

They are unthinking beasts.

Social security is the warm, comfy blankey. A heat blankey that we use to put you to sleep, to swaddle you. Don't tell Americans their history though, that we didn't always have SSI. They won't believe you. For the same reason that the sky is blue and the grass is green, SSI is there for you so that you don't have to sleep in a cardboard box when yer 65.

The irony is, of course, that it is all the more reason why you'll be more likely to sleep in that cardboard box. Its Plato's Republic all over again. Americans are the cave people who don't realize what its like to walk out into daylight.

I thought that this was a free country, at least rhetorically. But I have to pay SSI. I have A GUN pointed at MY HEAD that SAYS I MUST PAY SSI. A GUN!

I have no choice. You have no choice. They will take it by force. You will either go to prison or be killed by the state if you don't pay into SSI. Think I'm kidding? Think I'm overexaggerating?

Try it. You'll find out.

Resist.

Hole yourself up. Don't come out when they bullhorn your name on your front lawn.

And here we are trying to save Iraq from fascism while simultaneously using cliches about our freedoms. Its amusing stuff.

[Republican_Legion]

I'm not even gonna bother reading that because its hard to tell between the sarcasm and non sarcasm.

I receive SSI money because well of disablity and living with my parents they barely can hold off on paying rent. We've tried the church but they just dont have enough to help everyone. If SSI disapeared we'd probally be living on the streets.

[Wyatt_Junker]

I'm not even gonna bother reading that because its hard to tell between the sarcasm and non sarcasm.

I receive SSI money because well of disablity and living with my parents they barely can hold off on paying rent. We've tried the church but they just dont have enough to help everyone. If SSI disapeared we'd probally be living on the streets.

And again, you're missing the point entirely. Also, you sound desperate, as if what SSI is providing is just barely allowing you to squeak by. That's immoral government waste. You should be skating. SKATING! How do you skate? Read on and this time, follow the yellow bouncing ball.

The church is not the Church I described. Take away SSI. Kill it. Watch two things, 1) personal pocketbooks grow and 2) people wandering the streets gnashing their teeth at the sudden realization that the ground floor just fell out below them.

But also watch for 3) The social void being met with a new charitable dynamic that didn't exist prior to state socialism. The Church does not have the financial ability, right now, to be what it could be if its congregants suddenly had more wherewithal to give. I'm saying Americans are more charitable than we give them credit. Let them be philanthropists. The government is not allowing them to be the givers that I know they are capable of. And not just the Church, but a lot of private organizations could also give.

You don't realize how much I have to pay in taxes as an employer for every employee I have. I have to match their taxes. What you see on a paystub is only the employee's portion. Then there's also the employer's portion. Give back the employee their money. Give back the employer his money. Both now are in a position to reinvest and give and make a society that is healthier & more efficient than it ever could be. And, more giving.

[Republican_Legion]

And again, you're missing the point entirely. Also, you sound desperate, as if what SSI is providing is just barely allowing you to squeak by. That's immoral government waste. You should be skating. SKATING! How do you skate? Read on and this time, follow the yellow bouncing ball.

The church is not the Church I described. Take away SSI. Kill it. Watch two things, 1) personal pocketbooks grow and 2) people wandering the streets gnashing their teeth at the sudden realization that the ground floor just fell out below them.

But also watch for 3) The social void being met with a new charitable dynamic that didn't exist prior to state socialism. The Church does not have the financial ability, right now, to be what it could be if its congregants suddenly had more wherewithal to give. I'm saying Americans are more charitable than we give them credit. Let them be philanthropists. The government is not allowing them to be the givers that I know they are capable of. And not just the Church, but a lot of private organizations could also give.

You don't realize how much I have to pay in taxes as an employer for every employee I have. I have to match their taxes. What you see on a paystub is only the employee's portion. Then there's also the employer's portion. Give back the employee their money. Give back the employer his money. Both now are in a position to reinvest and give and make a society that is healthier & more efficient than it ever could be. And, more giving.

The system can be reformed. It doesnt have to just be killed.
Privatized, restrictions on who they give to, private accounts etc.
Cut the taxes that pay for it.


And again, you're missing the point entirely

Again your going into stretching things as far as you can.


you sound desperate, as if what SSI is providing is just barely allowing you to squeak by. That's immoral government waste. You should be skating. SKATING! How do you skate? Read on and this time, follow the yellow bouncing ball.

And without it we'd be on the streets.
Not very christian to kick people onto the streets by killing off SSI comepletly without even trying to reform it.


The Church does not have the financial ability, right now, to be what it could be if its congregants suddenly had more wherewithal to give. I'm saying Americans are more charitable than we give them credit. Let them be philanthropists. The government is not allowing them to be the givers that I know they are capable of. And not just the Church, but a lot of private organizations could also give.


Well people certainly could give the same amount to charity they always have regardless of how much they have. I certainly wouldnt expect Liberals to donate more to charity. They would just give more to NARAL and ACLU.

[Wyatt_Junker]

The system can be reformed. It doesnt have to just be killed.


Grandaddy it out over time. Shoot it in the head on day one. I don't care. Question: What did our needy do in America before SSI?


Privatized, restrictions on who they give to, private accounts etc.

I'm all for it.


Cut the taxes that pay for it.

That makes no sense.


Again your going into stretching things as far as you can.

And 'cut taxes' that pay for 'it' is what? Yoga?


And without it we'd be on the streets.


Which streets? The curvy ones or the steep ones?


Not very christian to kick people onto the streets by killing off SSI comepletly without even trying to reform it.

I know, methodone perscriptions to a heroin addict are probably a better way of coming off the DTs.

However, have you been to the Sudan lately? God is ever present. Does that then make him cruel? Because of the Sudan? Or what about S. Africa? A lot of starving poor children dying of AIDS. Does that discredit or invalidate the reality of the Gospel in anyway? Or is this teat-sucking SSI addiction just an all-American form of dependency, one that, without it, demystifies Christ and challenges the work of the Holy Spirit? You see, when compared to other areas of the world, your bellyaching seems weak.


Well people certainly could give the same amount to charity they always have regardless of how much they have.


They could. They couldn't. Seems you've already made up your mind.


I certainly wouldnt expect Liberals to donate more to charity. They would just give more to NARAL and ACLU.

Or Save the Whales.

Again, libs don't go to church anyway. I wasn't including them. I said 'church' as in churchgoers. I wouldn't expect you to get a free ham-n-cheese at the abortuary or the ACLU.

Kill SSI. Go to Church. Its to be said one right after the other.

[Etaoin]

The Fed is the new church of atheism that robs communities. The Fed is the Father of the ghetto.


AMEN!

[Etaoin]

Pretty freaky if you think about it. We haven't had social security for a complete century, and we're already faced with a shortage of workers to compensate for it. As we can plainly see, the road to Hell is paved with good intentions.

The reason government doesn't work is that people don't want to listen to the government. They don't want to be told how to live their lives. Refer to any given example, like Jimmy Carter in his yellow sweater telling you to use less, and essentially, do less, so they can do more "for" us.

It might work in our favor for a while, but eventually, the train is going to hit us unless we rehabilitate ourselves.

Pretty Freaky? Is there a program designed by the Liberal mentality that hasn't ended up being an insoluble economic problem IN THE LONG TERM?
In every case, the "answer" to the problem created by "good intentions" is always greater power to a State controlled by the liberal mind-set!

Is there anything on the national scene that suggests that THE PEOPLE will tighten their belts, put their noses to the grindsstone, work night and day, 7 days per week? And...isn't that the only answer to the government created problems?

[Naturalized-Texan]

The irony of it is that without mandatory spending - i.e., entitlements - the ONLY increases in the budget under President Bush are for national defense and homeland security. In the past 2 or 3 years non-defense/non-homeland-security discretionary spending has hardly changed at all.