The Conservative Cave
Current Events => The DUmpster => Topic started by: dandi on December 02, 2010, 02:45:39 AM
-
The DUmbass, and, I presume, the dumbasses who did this study are trying to prove that a lot of people use government social programs either without knowledge or without a willingness to admit it. Just more of the same BS they to push along the lines of, "If you use an interstate highway or avail yourselves of police/fire protection, you're a capital "S" Socialist. :thatsright:
krispos42 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Journal Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Wed Dec-01-10 09:39 AM
Original message
"No, Have Not Used a Government Social Program"
(http://i923.photobucket.com/albums/ad77/dandi56/DenialofWelfare.jpg)
:banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x9663743#9665799
First off, I don't consider anything that lets you keep more of the money you earn, as in the tax breaks in the list, a "social program."
The EITC, yes. Because it effectively can give you a tax "refund" that you never paid in, and so is a redistribution of wealth.
Secondly, GI Bill and Veteran's benefits? Really? They could only be construed as social programs in the sense that they are government-run and affect a lot of people. I consider them more as part of a benefits package we add to our servicemen and women's compensation for the unique sacrifices they make.
So, you're looking at about a third of the list wiped out right there.
Social Security is a dedicated program most working people pay into all their lives, so it's only right to expect to get it back at some point, though it's a piss-poor retirement system and one which many conservatives would willingly forgo if they could keep the money or have it invested into a more private system like the Thrift Savings Plan.
So I think one can begin to see why some of the respondents would not consider themselves as participants in a "social program." At least not in the sense of taking entitlements.
The rest, with the exception of perhaps 2-3 items, are programs most conservatives really wouldn't mind were it not for the fact that they are so rife with abuse, such as food stamps, unemployment and Medicare. Conservatives like to know that these funds are going to people truly in need and not to line the pockets of scam artists and leeches. It's really just that simple. If you demand that accountability, though, you are branded as "racist," "callous" or "judgmental."
Just more of the same BS that attempts to paint small-government conservatives as dog-eat-dog anarchists.
trotsky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Journal Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Wed Dec-01-10 09:41 AM
Response to Original message
1. Wish I could say "unbelievable"...
but sadly, it's entirely believable. Many Americans are shockingly ignorant.
Coming from someone at a website that stands as a monument to Humankind's ignorance, that's a bold statement.
Amonester Donating Member (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Thu Dec-02-10 02:00 AM
Response to Reply #1
29. Or 'willfully' brainwashed...
by their corporate "ma$ter$" ...
and ma$ter$ they surely R, at every crime they commit
because they always 'manage' to get off scot-free (and richer).
What will it take?
Notice A Molester's artful placement of the "$" signs. It means he's insightful and tragically hip to the machinations of Teh Corporations. It also means if you have ever exchanged money for goods or services, you are a de facto slave to said Corporation.
gristy (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Wed Dec-01-10 10:19 AM
Response to Reply #4
15. Google: No results found for "Social Governmental Issues and Participation Study"
Looks like a phantom study. Never done. If it was done, dollars to donuts it wasn't a very good study.
You're catching on.
mainer (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Wed Dec-01-10 02:05 PM
Response to Original message
27. Is mortgage interest deduction a "government social program?"
The homeowner works for the income, and the deduction allows him to keep a bit more of it. It's not that the government is giving him something; it's merely allowing him to keep a more of what he worked for.
I once saw a "tax refund" referred to as a "government social program." But that's like a guy taking ten dollars out of your wallet, giving you back five, and calling it his gift to you.
That kind of attitude isn't going to get you far at The Hive. Don't you know that all income belongs to the community, and what you get to keep is only due to the benevolence of The Great Deity Of Government? :asssmack:
-
I had a DUmbass liberal tell me the "because you use interstate hughways, you benefit from a government program" shit one time.
I told him that: 1. Government doesn't own the interstates. They paid to have them built, procured the right-of-ways, etc., but do not own them, and 2. What does my fuel taxes pay for? Seems to me that I PAY for the use of the nations roads and highways, with every gallon of gas I buy.
Reply from DUmbass liberal....crickets....
-
Really? Student loans? I have to pay back every dime of those, most of it, with interest. And there is no way if your life goes into the shitter you are getting out of them. I'd say for the small subsidy given for a portion of the interest, they actually should be one of the smarter programs since their intended outcome should produce someone who would pay on a higher tax base(being better educated and making a higher income) and therefore should be someone who will now put more money back into the coffers rather then taking it out. Their intention is to take someone off of some of the other programs listed there that are real hand outs.
That said, why don't dummies ever address the issue of lifetime handout takers? I admit, during my divorce, I have had to avail myself of some of those resources and I have a disabled son who is on something called a medicaid waiver, but imo that's what the programs were really meant for. The seriously disabled and as temporary assistance to those going through major life changes until they get back on their feet. I'm not sitting at home taking in every program I can. In fact, I declined a few of the handouts I could have received and I applied for work all summer until I finally landed the FULLTIME job I have now. And I am working and looking to a future where I don't have to take any handouts from either hte gov or my ex-husband. It's those using these programs as some lifelong income stream that are breaking the system, but a liberal never seems to make that connection and wants to throw it in the face of any conservative who actually used the program AS INTENDED.
-
Since when is a tax deduction a "social program"? I saw that and pretty much stopped reading right there.
-
Since when is a tax deduction a "social program"?
Let's recall the idea that the DUmp has . . . Hell, all Democratics in general . . . that there is a finite amount of money in the world. If taxpayers qualify for a deduction, it's the gubbmint that made that so. Ergo, a social program.
-
I had a DUmbass liberal tell me the "because you use interstate hughways, you benefit from a government program" shit one time.
I told him that: 1. Government doesn't own the interstates. They paid to have them built, procured the right-of-ways, etc., but do not own them, and 2. What does my fuel taxes pay for? Seems to me that I PAY for the use of the nations roads and highways, with every gallon of gas I buy.
Reply from DUmbass liberal....crickets....
Zero bongs, no conversion, no "so" at the beginning of the story... :-) :tongue:
-
I had a DUmbass liberal tell me the "because you use interstate hughways, you benefit from a government program" shit one time.
I told him that: 1. Government doesn't own the interstates. They paid to have them built, procured the right-of-ways, etc., but do not own them, and 2. What does my fuel taxes pay for? Seems to me that I PAY for the use of the nations roads and highways, with every gallon of gas I buy.
Reply from DUmbass liberal....crickets....
My wife likes to say the same kind of stuff to me, arguing that all the benefits (healthcare, BAH, BAS, etc) I get from the military amount to socialism.
-
In the 1940s or to some extent in the 1950s, you could say the GI Bill was a social program, but for anyone who joined service after it was enacted, it's just a part of the comp package for service. And I totally agree that including any 'benefit' in the tax system is a logical inversion, like blaming the victim.
-
Mainer is still around? He's gotten into it with them before. He's a quite well-to-do person who is willing to be taxed at 50%, but not any more than that. The goons go apeshit on him, tugging at his pockets, wanting more, more, more.
-
And FWIW DUmpmonkeys, I've paid FAR more in student loan interest than I ever got in Pell Grants for college, and I didn't get all that many loans.
Also, for the record, I haven't drawn on SS, unemployment, Medicare/Medicaid, I have no kids in school, and the cops around here are next to worthless. Never used HUD Section 8 housing, WIC, food stamps, and in fact never got to use my GI Bill or any "bennies" after I got out.
I pay more in federal taxes alone than most of ya'll MAKE. Trust me, if I wanted to go Galt along with a few million like-minded folks, ya'll would be fuuuuuuuccccckkkkkeeeeedddd....
-
I don't see the child tax credit a "social program". It's really stupid to "pay" people to have children. Just don't take the taxes to begin with. If I am charged less taxes, I'd have more money to provide for my child(ren) right away. I believe we received $1,000 from Carleigh last year. Maybe it was $500? Don't remember. I just thought it was ridiculous.
-
I don't see the child tax credit a "social program". It's really stupid to "pay" people to have children. Just don't take the taxes to begin with. If I am charged less taxes, I'd have more money to provide for my child(ren) right away. I believe we received $1,000 from Carleigh last year. Maybe it was $500? Don't remember. I just thought it was ridiculous.
The EITC allows some low wage earners with children to get back more money than they paid in taxes.
-
The EITC allows some low wage earners with children to get back more money than they paid in taxes.
Why?
Stop having kids if you can't afford them.
-
Why?
Stop having kids if you can't afford them.
That's just it--the government makes it so you can't afford NOT to have kids, and in doing so, creates a whole new dependent class which will ensure they'll pull the lever for the "D" candidate until they crank out another herd of illegitimate rats who will do the same, etc., etc., etc...
-
Why?
Stop having kids if you can't afford them.
It's the gubberment. :mental:
-
That's just it--the government makes it so you can't afford NOT to have kids, and in doing so, creates a whole new dependent class which will ensure they'll pull the lever for the "D" candidate until they crank out another herd of illegitimate rats who will do the same, etc., etc., etc...
I know better.
It's just that my common sense-itis is getting the best of me today.