Posted by wylie715 on 2/15/2023 2:27:00 AM (view original):
and I live in San Diego Count where we have this:
Welfare-to-Work is the Employment Program of the California Work Opportunity and Responsibility to Kids Program (CalWORKs). If you are a CalWORKs recipient and able- bodied, you must participate in WTW activities to continue to receive cash aid.

Love it! All welfare should be like this! Don’t know what WTW activities are and I’m too lazy to google it, but it’s definitely something.

Posted by laramiebob on 2/15/2023 8:24:00 AM (view original):
Ending subsidies for Ranchers/Farmers to use public lands or limited water resources growing water intensive crops in arid areas would be a MUCH MUCH smarter move for the Fed. Gov't to make in the effort for fiscal responsibility than taking away folks SS benefits. Might even be an easier sell to most people.

I love cows but still don't want them running around in MY National Forest. END public grazing or at LEAST charge what it's actually worth.
Better yet STOP sending limited water to Farmers to grow cotton in the desert UNLESS they are paying full market value for their water!!
Right this minute you and I (taxpayers) are paying ranchers to graze their private cattle on OUR land and WE pay the price because the RANCHERS don't have to pay what the grazing is actually worth! We taxpayers subsidize the usage.

Same thing with supplying Colorado river water to cotton growers in Arizona. Other crops too! It makes NO SENSE and can NOT be justified to have taxpayers PAY for the cost of water used IRRESPONSIBLY for private profit by ranchers/farmers!

It's time to stop ALL the gravy trains and we should start with the gravy that goes to folks that don't NEED that gravy as much as the REALLY destitute.

I agree with my friend strikeout that SSI SHOULD NOT be a government program and that the parties that SHOULD be doing that role have failed.
But depending on those that have to provide a basic net for those who don't through the auspices of their doctrine to "care for others" is a pipedream that will NEVER work.

It is akin to voting Republican these days based on the R behind the name.
Foolish beyond belief!

I’m against ALL subsidies, so you’re not going to get any argument from me. I’m also against using the tax code for social engineering purposes. Those two kind of fall in the same basket and they’re both despicable.

Posted by laramiebob on 2/15/2023 8:39:00 AM (view original):
"I just googled it. The top 50% pay over 96% of taxes. The bottom 50% pay 3.06%. This is per the IRS.

Per CNBC, the 61% of Americans paid no income taxes in 2020."

These stats are for income taxes!! That's NOT the FDIC deduction that funds SSI! Which is what I thought we were discussing.
EVERY worker on every paycheck (except a few NOT in the program, is there any?) has $$$ deducted to fund their SSI. It's called the FDIC deduction. (Stands for Federal Deposit Insurance Corp.)
BUT, once you reach a certain dollar amount you stop paying in! It's capped for RICH earners. Those who earn 6 figures and above yearly get to STOP paying the deduction partway thru the year once they reach a certain level of earnings. They pay nada for the rest of the work year!!

Folks who only earn 150 K or less per year keep paying in all year. On 100% of their income, while the wealthier earners sometimes pay for less than 6 months of paychecks and on a small percentage of THEIR work income. Thus they put in a far less percentage of THEIR wealth towards their OWN retirement account than a 30,000/yr. full time employed farm worker (or teacher, etc) pays into the fund.

Most of us pay on 100% of our earnings while the wealthier do NOT!!

Income tax paid in is a whole nother matter!!!
Pluswise we KNOW, the wealthy do everything they can to avoid paying ANY taxes!!
How much has our so-called wealthy former POTUS (Trump) paid in in taxes over the years.
He's NOT an outlier. They all do it!!

Yes, at $130k you stop paying FDIC. We stop paying, but we also stop receiving at that amount. In your opinion, why do you think people should be responsible to pay into an insurance plan that they’re not going to receive benefits from?

It is a common talking point that the rich try to avoid paying taxes and to an extent it’s true, but they fail miserably. From an income tax standpoint the rich pay almost all of the taxes. I’m still curious what you consider to be a “fair share”.

Also, you often hear the argument that those stats only apply to income tax. You hear people say that all of the other taxes are less progressive. What that tells me is that we have too many taxes. We tax absolutely everything in this country. We tax the same money over and over and over again.

STOP SPENDING! Most people agree that we need to be more fiscally responsible as a government/country, but then we can’t agree on a single thing to cut. Every voter has their “off-limits” area. We can’t find a single penny to cut from the $800B military budget. Apparently our country couldn’t survive if we touched the arts (I know we don’t spend a ton on this, but it’s something). We have 10M open jobs right now and we’re still spending trillions on welfare programs. We can’t hold people that went to college responsible for paying back the money that THEY borrowed. The list goes on and on.

i am for abolishing the department of education

and no more minting pennies



and two name changes: Defense back to War and Homeland Security to Defense

"We tax the same money over and over and over again.

STOP SPENDING! Most people agree that we need to be more fiscally responsible as a government/country, but then we can’t agree on a single thing to cut. Every voter has their “off-limits” area. We can’t find a single penny to cut from the $800B military budget. Apparently our country couldn’t survive if we touched the arts (I know we don’t spend a ton on this, but it’s something). We have 10M open jobs right now and we’re still spending trillions on welfare programs. We can’t hold people that went to college responsible for paying back the money that THEY borrowed. The list goes on and on."

I completely concur!

It’s amazing how much people in the real world actually do agree. Honestly we agree on most issues. The differences in opinion come in the solutions.

I've sincerely believed that I could balance the Federal Budget in a VERY short time (3 - 4 years) for literally 3 decades. And still believe that. But some folks would be real ****** off at losing their gravy train. HINT: Those folks would NOT be from the bottom of the economic spectrum!

Posted by strikeout26 on 2/15/2023 9:02:00 AM (view original):

Posted by wylie715 on 2/15/2023 2:25:00 AM (view original):

Posted by strikeout26 on 2/14/2023 10:45:00 PM (view original):
Social security should be dissolved. People that have paid in deserve their money, but it’s a terrible system. Yes. I understand a lot of elderly people rely on it for survival, but it is the government’s way of compelling people to invest in retirement. The government’s job is not to protect people from themselves. That is what SSI does. If people invested the same money that is withheld for SSI in mutual funds they would see a MUCH bigger return over a 40 year period than what they receive from social security.

Government welfares programs are also garbage. They disincentivize hard work. We have them because the religious and social communities have failed. I do believe that we need social safety nets, but the federal government should be the last line of defense. It has become the primary line. Also, able-bodied people should not receive wages without earning them. If people receive welfare, they should be required to work. I believe San Diego County has this, but one of you west coasters can correct me if I’m wrong.

don't know that I agree about SS. My mom, could not have survived without SS the last 10 years of her life without it. Was her lack of any retirement funds her fault? Partially, but my Dad had alzheimers and much of her saving (which admittedly were not much) went towards his care. What should she have done?
I do agree that SS is not a great system, but I doubt our government can come up with anything better. Unles of course it benefits the congressmen and senators who would need to approve it.

Had your mom invested the same money that was withheld from her check, she would have had more money in retirement. Obviously I didn’t know your mother, so I’m speaking generally, but the problem is that most people are financially irresponsible.

Knowing my Mom & Dad, they probably would have been broke a lot earlier than with social security. My parents were both very intelligent people(no, I don't know what happened to me) but they were not the greatest financial planners.

Posted by wylie715 on 2/15/2023 9:50:00 PM (view original):

Posted by strikeout26 on 2/15/2023 9:02:00 AM (view original):

Posted by wylie715 on 2/15/2023 2:25:00 AM (view original):

Posted by strikeout26 on 2/14/2023 10:45:00 PM (view original):
Social security should be dissolved. People that have paid in deserve their money, but it’s a terrible system. Yes. I understand a lot of elderly people rely on it for survival, but it is the government’s way of compelling people to invest in retirement. The government’s job is not to protect people from themselves. That is what SSI does. If people invested the same money that is withheld for SSI in mutual funds they would see a MUCH bigger return over a 40 year period than what they receive from social security.

Government welfares programs are also garbage. They disincentivize hard work. We have them because the religious and social communities have failed. I do believe that we need social safety nets, but the federal government should be the last line of defense. It has become the primary line. Also, able-bodied people should not receive wages without earning them. If people receive welfare, they should be required to work. I believe San Diego County has this, but one of you west coasters can correct me if I’m wrong.

don't know that I agree about SS. My mom, could not have survived without SS the last 10 years of her life without it. Was her lack of any retirement funds her fault? Partially, but my Dad had alzheimers and much of her saving (which admittedly were not much) went towards his care. What should she have done?
I do agree that SS is not a great system, but I doubt our government can come up with anything better. Unles of course it benefits the congressmen and senators who would need to approve it.

Had your mom invested the same money that was withheld from her check, she would have had more money in retirement. Obviously I didn’t know your mother, so I’m speaking generally, but the problem is that most people are financially irresponsible.

Knowing my Mom & Dad, they probably would have been broke a lot earlier than with social security. My parents were both very intelligent people(no, I don't know what happened to me) but they were not the greatest financial planners.

Unfortunately your parents were and still are the rule, not the exception. My parents are the same way. But I still believe it’s not the government’s responsibility to protect people from themselves. SSI penalizes those that are financial responsibility to provide a safety net for those that aren’t.

Posted by strikeout26 on 2/16/2023 8:39:00 AM (view original):

Posted by wylie715 on 2/15/2023 9:50:00 PM (view original):

Posted by strikeout26 on 2/15/2023 9:02:00 AM (view original):

Posted by wylie715 on 2/15/2023 2:25:00 AM (view original):

Posted by strikeout26 on 2/14/2023 10:45:00 PM (view original):
Social security should be dissolved. People that have paid in deserve their money, but it’s a terrible system. Yes. I understand a lot of elderly people rely on it for survival, but it is the government’s way of compelling people to invest in retirement. The government’s job is not to protect people from themselves. That is what SSI does. If people invested the same money that is withheld for SSI in mutual funds they would see a MUCH bigger return over a 40 year period than what they receive from social security.

Government welfares programs are also garbage. They disincentivize hard work. We have them because the religious and social communities have failed. I do believe that we need social safety nets, but the federal government should be the last line of defense. It has become the primary line. Also, able-bodied people should not receive wages without earning them. If people receive welfare, they should be required to work. I believe San Diego County has this, but one of you west coasters can correct me if I’m wrong.

don't know that I agree about SS. My mom, could not have survived without SS the last 10 years of her life without it. Was her lack of any retirement funds her fault? Partially, but my Dad had alzheimers and much of her saving (which admittedly were not much) went towards his care. What should she have done?
I do agree that SS is not a great system, but I doubt our government can come up with anything better. Unles of course it benefits the congressmen and senators who would need to approve it.

Had your mom invested the same money that was withheld from her check, she would have had more money in retirement. Obviously I didn’t know your mother, so I’m speaking generally, but the problem is that most people are financially irresponsible.

Knowing my Mom & Dad, they probably would have been broke a lot earlier than with social security. My parents were both very intelligent people(no, I don't know what happened to me) but they were not the greatest financial planners.

Unfortunately your parents were and still are the rule, not the exception. My parents are the same way. But I still believe it’s not the government’s responsibility to protect people from themselves. SSI penalizes those that are financial responsibility to provide a safety net for those that aren’t.

Many Gov't programs and even some laws are created to specificly attempt to do that.

It's a whole worldview of passing the buck to the nanny state and it's a pretty epic fail.

the fact the rich don wanna pay their share

and i know this because they keep gettin richer

is why we have

is why we invented

is why we FDRed

pardon my socialism

The New Deal

now its a old deal. get with the program

Posted by bagchucker3 on 2/16/2023 2:04:00 PM (view original):
the fact the rich don wanna pay their share

and i know this because they keep gettin richer

is why we have

is why we invented

is why we FDRed

pardon my socialism

The New Deal

now its a old deal. get with the program

What do you think is a “fair share”? I asked Bob this and he didn’t answer for one reason or another. (The original income tax was capped at 5% and was supposed to be terminated in 1866.

Also, why is it bad that the rich get richer?

Also, considering the New Deal was a failed response to the Great Depression, I would have to say that it had nothing to do with people paying their “fair share”. While normally economic downturns are an opportunity for people with money to make more money as they can buy on the cheap, the Great Depression was different. It didn’t discriminate. Everyone was hurt by it: rich and poor.

Posted by strikeout26 on 2/16/2023 3:23:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bagchucker3 on 2/16/2023 2:04:00 PM (view original):
the fact the rich don wanna pay their share

and i know this because they keep gettin richer

is why we have

is why we invented

is why we FDRed

pardon my socialism

The New Deal

now its a old deal. get with the program

What do you think is a “fair share”? I asked Bob this and he didn’t answer for one reason or another. (The original income tax was capped at 5% and was supposed to be terminated in 1866.

Also, why is it bad that the rich get richer?

Also, considering the New Deal was a failed response to the Great Depression, I would have to say that it had nothing to do with people paying their “fair share”. While normally economic downturns are an opportunity for people with money to make more money as they can buy on the cheap, the Great Depression was different. It didn’t discriminate. Everyone was hurt by it: rich and poor.

This hits on a few very important points which really changed everything.

"We the people" were systematically walked into transferring our authority to the nanny state for the promise of "economic security".