America and it's entitlement problem

[JEDI]

Young? teenagers and 20 somethings
middle age? (30 to 40s)
Baby boomers about to retire?

Do you think the current generation of baby boomers about to retire expect the government to take care of them? (ie: Social Security and Medicare)

Or do you think the baby boomers more self sufficient than the younger generations?

If the younger entitled generations don't expect the govt to take care of them, are they really that bad?

(No poll for an easy out. Please elaborate your response.)

 

[sandorski]

Not an age, a Class. The Upper Class has the largest sense of Entitlement.

 

[nageov3t]

baby boomers.

I think that my generation has already pretty much accepted that social security won't be there when we retire and that the primary purpose of the government is to fleece money from the young (non-voters) to give to the old (voters). but we really only have ourselves to blame for not voting.

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: sandorski
Not an age, a Class. The Upper Class has the largest sense of Entitlement.

Amazing.

 

[theeedude]

Veterans.

 

[KarenMarie]

Teenagers and 20 somethings.

There is a larger % of them who grew up not knowing the meaning of doing without or scrimping and saving.

 

[smitbret]

Naw, you've got it backwards. I see all classes come through my office at work and the less money people earn, the more accustomed they are to having someone else pay their bills for them (welfare, medicaid, etc.). Translates into everyday life. People that earn money are generaly self sufficient; people that don't, believe that they should always be handed whatever they need.
-Brett

 

[Kelvrick]

Originally posted by: smitbret
Naw, you've got it backwards. I see all classes come through my office at work and the less money people earn, the more accustomed they are to having someone else pay their bills for them (welfare, medicaid, etc.). Translates into everyday life. People that earn money are generaly self sufficient; people that don't, believe that they should always be handed whatever they need.
-Brett

AGreeing with this. I'd have to say about 20-35 lower class.

 

[fitzov]

The phrase 'I pay my taxes' comes to mind--that's been around for a long while. It expresses the idea that one is entitled to something for the taxes they've paid--the idea seems sound to me. The phrase 'entitlement society' sounds like some political mantra that people use to decry the idea that one thinks the govt should do something about the less fortunate, for example. Since the govt is "by and for the people", it should be for all people, not only those who have wealth and power.

 

[rivan]

Originally posted by: JEDI
Young? teenagers and 20 somethings
middle age? (30 to 40s)
Baby boomers about to retire?

Do you think the current generation of baby boomers about to retire expect the government to take care of them? (ie: Social Security and Medicare)

Or do you think the baby boomers more self sufficient than the younger generations?

If the younger entitled generations don't expect the govt to take care of them, are they really that bad?

(No poll for an easy out. Please elaborate your response.)

I see entitlement being a more class/culture-oriented issue as well. There's some expectation for retirees for the government to take care of them, but I don't see that as misplaced; they've worked their whole lives and paid huge sums of their wages over the years into a fund for exactly that.

On one hand, there's the ultra-low class of people who believe having children nonstop is a great way to get free income, from subsidized housing to food stamps. Don't get me wrong - those programs are sometimes genuinely needed, but too often they're used/abused as a crutch, with no intention of ever getting off of them.

On the other extreme are the wealthy/ultra-wealthy (I draw this line around $300k+/year household income) who are allowed to skirt their taxation in any number of ways, from offshore tax-sheltered 'businesses' to simply being able to afford a highly skilled tax attorney that helps them take advantage of every loophole around. Their expectation is to freely operate in a system without helping support it - only reaping the profits without paying any dues.

In the middle, you've got everyone else - people who work hard and still find it difficult to do things like buy their first house, or pay for day care. People who are paying into Social Security without a firm feeling it'll be there for them when they're ready for it.

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: fitzov
The phrase 'I pay my taxes' comes to mind--that's been around for a long while. It expresses the idea that one is entitled to something for the taxes they've paid--the idea seems sound to me. The phrase 'entitlement society' sounds like some political mantra that people use to decry the idea that one thinks the govt should do something about the less fortunate, for example. Since the govt is "by and for the people", it should be for all people, not only those who have wealth and power.

Your problem begins with thinking the government is a provider. It is not. It is a protector. Namely of the rights of individuals. It is not a wealth redistribution machine.

 

[Tom]

entitlements are not about the government "taking care" of people.

btw, all you youngsters who think you're earning your own way..your full of shLt. Like every other generation you've been handed the means to make a success of yourself, and those means were earned through the blood, sweat, and tears, of every generation that came before you.

 

[Brackis]

Originally posted by: loki8481
baby boomers.

I think that my generation has already pretty much accepted that social security won't be there when we retire and that the primary purpose of the government is to fleece money from the young (non-voters) to give to the old (voters). but we really only have ourselves to blame for not voting.

There is a constant debt of social insurance. The old people on one generation assumed the debt in their youth that came from the start of social security. (The old folks who first got social security had not paid into it).

If you making people of all income levels buy into social security, and not just people earning under $70,000 in payrool income, social security will continue to work.

 

[BillGates]

Old people.

 

[Brackis]

Originally posted by: Kelvrick

Originally posted by: smitbret
Naw, you've got it backwards. I see all classes come through my office at work and the less money people earn, the more accustomed they are to having someone else pay their bills for them (welfare, medicaid, etc.). Translates into everyday life. People that earn money are generaly self sufficient; people that don't, believe that they should always be handed whatever they need.
-Brett

AGreeing with this. I'd have to say about 20-35 lower class.

Read the laws of TANF (TEMPORARY assistance for needy families).
After 60 months you don't get another dime of $$ welfare from the states, and are required to do at least 35 hours of work or community service per week to even qualify.

AFDC Welfare programs are a thing of the past that are still used as a propaganda tool, when they have been off the books for over 10 years.

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: Tom
entitlements are not about the government "taking care" of people.

btw, all you youngsters who think you're earning your own way..your full of shLt. Like every other generation you've been handed the means to make a success of yourself, and those means were earned through the blood, sweat, and tears, of every generation that came before you.

I have no doubt that my opportunities and rights were secured by previous generations (just as some were thrown away by them as well). However, my success could not have happened without my own hard work and self determination.

 

[fitzov]

Your problem begins with thinking the government is a provider. It is not.

Well, in fact it is--it provides services all the time. Roads, for example.

But what you mean is that you don't think it should be. That's typically what the upper class thinks because they think they are entitled to all their wealth.

 

[Brainonska511]

Originally posted by: rivan

On the other extreme are the wealthy/ultra-wealthy (I draw this line around $300k+/year household income) who are allowed to skirt their taxation in any number of ways, from offshore tax-sheltered 'businesses' to simply being able to afford a highly skilled tax attorney that helps them take advantage of every loophole around. Their expectation is to freely operate in a system without helping support it - only reaping the profits without paying any dues.

I think you're drawing the line a little low. People that make between $100-$400K a year have been getting hit with the flat 28% that the AMT forces on them. It is the people that make huge amounts of money off of capital gains or those that are making $600</year that make a killing when it comes to getting out of taxes.

 

[Brackis]

Originally posted by: fitzov

Your problem begins with thinking the government is a provider. It is not.

Well, in fact it is--it provides services all the time. Roads, for example.

But what you mean is that you don't think it should be. That's typically what the upper class thinks because they think they are entitled to all their wealth.

BINGO

The triumphant individual forgets that the roads he drives on, the bank account insured by the FDIC, the tax deduction he got on his HUD controlled rate mortgage, the SEC which oversees the stocks he owns, the federal reserve interest rate etc...

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: sandorski
Not an age, a Class. The Upper Class has the largest sense of Entitlement.

Amazing.

Yes, it is amazing. It is amazing that the Upper Class has taken over Politics with Lobbyists. It is amazing that the Upper Classes have pretty much routed the organizations of the Working Classes through Legislation and other strong arm tactics. It iis amazing that the Upper Classes will put Millions of Workers out into the street, not because they(Upper Class) are losing money, but because they can Profit even more by moviing their operations to a part of the World with substandad wages and living conditions. It is amazing how the Upper Classes profit, while the Lower Classes die in Iraq.

You are 100% correct, it is truly amazing how the Class that recieves the least from Government is accused the most of having "Entitlement".

 

[KarenMarie]

Originally posted by: fitzov

Your problem begins with thinking the government is a provider. It is not.

Well, in fact it is--it provides services all the time. Roads, for example.

But what you mean is that you don't think it should be. That's typically what the upper class thinks because they think they are entitled to all their wealth.

And why should the rich not be entitled to their wealth? It is theirs, no?

 

[Brackis]

Originally posted by: KarenMarie

Originally posted by: fitzov

Your problem begins with thinking the government is a provider. It is not.

Well, in fact it is--it provides services all the time. Roads, for example.

But what you mean is that you don't think it should be. That's typically what the upper class thinks because they think they are entitled to all their wealth.

And why should the rich not be entitled to their wealth? It is theirs, no?

Their wealth was not created in a vacuum, read my post above yours. The wealth of the rich benefits the most from government economic provisions.

 

[Kelvrick]

Originally posted by: Brackis

Originally posted by: Kelvrick

Originally posted by: smitbret
Naw, you've got it backwards. I see all classes come through my office at work and the less money people earn, the more accustomed they are to having someone else pay their bills for them (welfare, medicaid, etc.). Translates into everyday life. People that earn money are generaly self sufficient; people that don't, believe that they should always be handed whatever they need.
-Brett

AGreeing with this. I'd have to say about 20-35 lower class.

Read the laws of TANF (TEMPORARY assistance for needy families).
After 60 months you don't get another dime of $$ welfare from the states, and are required to do at least 35 hours of work or community service per week to even qualify.

AFDC Welfare programs are a thing of the past that are still used as a propaganda tool, when they have been off the books for over 10 years.

Eh, I'm too lazy. Does that apply only to welfare or other government assistance programs too? Like section 8 housing, food stamps, medicare? I went on it with my mom and two little sisters after the rents got divorced and mommy had to take over and I think we were on housing and medicare for well over 60 months. We got back on our feet and got off of it, but I'm pretty sure there are people who stay on it for well over 5 years.

 

[Brackis]

Originally posted by: Kelvrick

Originally posted by: Brackis

Originally posted by: Kelvrick

Originally posted by: smitbret
Naw, you've got it backwards. I see all classes come through my office at work and the less money people earn, the more accustomed they are to having someone else pay their bills for them (welfare, medicaid, etc.). Translates into everyday life. People that earn money are generaly self sufficient; people that don't, believe that they should always be handed whatever they need.
-Brett

AGreeing with this. I'd have to say about 20-35 lower class.

Read the laws of TANF (TEMPORARY assistance for needy families).
After 60 months you don't get another dime of $$ welfare from the states, and are required to do at least 35 hours of work or community service per week to even qualify.

AFDC Welfare programs are a thing of the past that are still used as a propaganda tool, when they have been off the books for over 10 years.

Eh, I'm too lazy. Does that apply only to welfare or other government assistance programs too? Like section 8 housing, food stamps, medicare? I went on it with my mom and two little sisters after the rents got divorced and mommy had to take over and I think we were on housing and medicare for well over 60 months. We got back on our feet and got off of it, but I'm pretty sure there are people who stay on it for well over 5 years.

Like I said, Ca$h Welfare. Each state has some variations in its rules, but the maximum number of months (consecutive or not) that a family can receive $ welfare is 60 months, and in a single parent household there are service/work requirements of 35+ hours a week, and I believe 50 hours per week in a two parent household. TANF was signed into law in 1996, AFDC was an old New Deal program originally designed to help single widow mothers who in that cultural period were assumed to stay in the house and not work.

Just Wiki AFDC or TANF. ANYONE WHO WANTS A GOOD READ ON THIS TYPE OF STUFF, "AMERICAN DREAM" BY JASON DEPARLE

 

[KarenMarie]

Originally posted by: Brackis

Originally posted by: KarenMarie

Originally posted by: fitzov

Your problem begins with thinking the government is a provider. It is not.

Well, in fact it is--it provides services all the time. Roads, for example.

But what you mean is that you don't think it should be. That's typically what the upper class thinks because they think they are entitled to all their wealth.

And why should the rich not be entitled to their wealth? It is theirs, no?

Their wealth was not created in a vacuum, read my post above yours. The wealth of the rich benefits the most from government economic provisions.

so wait... all taxpayers pay for these things and all taxpayers have the opportunity to use them. I don't understand how this should make rich ppl not entitield to what they work for.