Is this pie chart of US budget accurate? (pic)

[omega3]

Bernie Sanders complains alot about not enough money being spent on social, but when looking at the budget pie chart below it seems already 60% is spent on social security + medicare (blue 33% + orange 27% = 60%). How come that's not enough to help out poor people? I really wonder if all this medicare and medicaid money is being spent well as there seems enough money allocated to it or am I missing something? Where does all that money go?

Also, how much % of the budget is being given as favors to the fossil fuel industry? The chart mention 1% for "energy & environment" but I'm pretty sure the fossil fuel industry gets alot more. Anybody has an idea?

 

[MooseNSquirrel]

Pie charts are terrible. That is all.

Also, 16% on Defense is stupid.

 

[ivwshane]

I think pie charts about government spending that include social security are misleading but that's just me.

Social security should be separated out or have only unpaid debts to social security in the chart.

 

[omega3]

I think pie charts about government spending that include social security are misleading but that's just me.

Social security should be separated out or have only unpaid debts to social security in the chart.

Why? It's the money that will be spent on social security so that's what the chart lays out.

Am wondering why 60% of budget is not enough to help people?

 

[ivwshane]

Why? It's the money that will be spent on social security so i don't see anything wrong with that?

Was mainly wondering why 60% of budget is not enough to help people?

Social security is paid for directly (by the people), there is a nearly 3 million dollar trust fund to cover any current and future costs. When you look at your 401k do you look at the balance and think to yourself, "wow! I owe a lot of money"? So why would you do that when you look at the federal budget?

 

[Meghan54]

Bernie Sanders complains alot about not enough money being spent on social, but when looking at the budget pie chart below it seems already 60% is spent on social security + medicare (blue 33% + orange 27% = 60%). How come that's not enough to help out poor people? I really wonder if all this medicare and medicaid money is being spent well as there seems enough money allocated to it or am I missing something? Where does all that money go?

First, where'd you ever get the idea Social Security and Medicare are just for poor people? They're for retirees primarily, and to collect from SS, you have to have contributed to it for a minimum of ten years. And at ten years of contributions, the payout at the end is a pittance. You ought to learn the facts about SS.

Medicare is, again, for retirees. You have to be 65 to access it, not poor.

 

[MrSquished]

Why? It's the money that will be spent on social security so that's what the chart lays out.

Am wondering why 60% of budget is not enough to help people?

because SS is self-funded by a special tax. the only reason it is under attack is because congress has literally pirated money from SS to fund their pet projects. it shouldn't be part of the expenditures as it should be self funded, if congress didn't pillage it.

 

[agent00f]

Bernie Sanders complains alot about not enough money being spent on social, but when looking at the budget pie chart below it seems already 60% is spent on social security + medicare (blue 33% + orange 27% = 60%). How come that's not enough to help out poor people? I really wonder if all this medicare and medicaid money is being spent well as there seems enough money allocated to it or am I missing something? Where does all that money go?

Also, how much % of the budget is being given as favors to the fossil fuel industry? The chart mention 1% for "energy & environment" but I'm pretty sure the fossil fuel industry gets alot more. Anybody has an idea?

Social security and medicare are not what's considered part of the discretionary budget, the money that congress can choose to spend or not, for reasons mentioned above.

Of the part we choose to spend, about half is defense subsidy related, which disproportionately goes to red/rural areas; basically white welfare, without which those places would probably collapse.

 

[BoomerD]

First, where'd you ever get the idea Social Security and Medicare are just for poor people? They're for retirees primarily, and to collect from SS, you have to have contributed to it for a minimum of ten years. And at ten years of contributions, the payout at the end is a pittance. You ought to learn the facts about SS.

Medicare is, again, for retirees. You have to be 65 to access it, not poor.

hey, dammit...I'm not 65 and I get Medicare...and have for over 3 years. (but, I can't get supplemental Medicare coverage from anyone until I hit 65.)

Otherwise, I agree with most of the posters here. Social Security and Medicare should be broken out from that pie chart because, for the most part, they're "self funded" by the workers who pay into the funds...the money doesn't come from the general budget. In fact, it ran a sizeable surplus for years...until Ronnie Rayguns found out he could raid the fund...and it's gone downhill ever since.

 

[IronWing]

Move a big chunk of that Energy and Environment spending over to Defense as well since the money is used to clean up the weapons complex.

 

[Starbuck1975]

Social security and medicare are not what's considered part of the discretionary budget, the money that congress can choose to spend or not, for reasons mentioned above.

Of the part we choose to spend, about half is defense subsidy related, which disproportionately goes to red/rural areas; basically white welfare, without which those places would probably collapse.

Do you have data to back this disproportional allocation? Most defense contractors have a sizeable footprint in SoCal, and only in recent years have we seen a meaningful shift of manufacturing to more friendly red states. SoCal was the hub of many rocket, satellite and space flight technologies, all extensions of or directly related to defense spending. Denver now has a sizeable rocket footprint. Philadelphia still has a large rotorcraft footprint, and CT is still a hub of defense manufacturing. Even Puget Sound has some defense life in it.

Yes there is a defense footprint in St Louis and the remnants of one in Houston and Huntsville, but I wouldn't call it disproportionate.

 

[agent00f]

Do you have data to back this disproportional allocation? Most defense contractors have a sizeable footprint in SoCal, and only in recent years have we seen a meaningful shift of manufacturing to more friendly red states. SoCal was the hub of many rocket, satellite and space flight technologies, all extensions of or directly related to defense spending. Denver now has a sizeable rocket footprint. Philadelphia still has a large rotorcraft footprint, and CT is still a hub of defense manufacturing. Even Puget Sound has some defense life in it.

Yes there is a defense footprint in St Louis and the remnants of one in Houston and Huntsville, but I wouldn't call it disproportionate.

Eg. http://www.pewtrusts.org/en/researc...briefs/2014/12/federal-spending-in-the-states

Almost an inversion of how much each state puts into the kitty.

 

[Genx87]

Social security is paid for directly (by the people), there is a nearly 3 million dollar trust fund to cover any current and future costs. When you look at your 401k do you look at the balance and think to yourself, "wow! I owe a lot of money"? So why would you do that when you look at the federal budget?

Everything on the budget is paid for by the people in some way. Either through direct taxation or having to borrow.

And SS isn't like a 401k. The money paid in is paid out except for a small surplus which Congress borrows against. When SS runs a true deficit who funds the deficit? Tax payers. A 401k isnt a revolving door of contributions and withdrawals. Unless you are a total moron and enjoy paying a 10% penalty on your money.

So yes, SS absolutely should show its costs on the budget.

 

[Starbuck1975]

Eg. http://www.pewtrusts.org/en/researc...briefs/2014/12/federal-spending-in-the-states

Almost an inversion of how much each state puts into the kitty.

Good data but curious that you linked to the dated and not the updated version.

In the updated version, New York and Texas have the most to complain about. Most states with a manufacturing base are receiving federal aid, the rust belt especially. Georgia and North Carolina are becoming more self sufficient which is a reflection of their diversifying economies.

Sure a few southern states are still welfare ones, the same southern states for which radical reconstruction failed after the civil war. A similar trend emerged after WW1, with the victors so punishing and crippling Germany economically that it set the stage for fascist nationalism and the rise of the Nazis. Blacks in the south were merely a scapegoat as were Jews in Europe, and sufferered disproportionally as a result.

 

[HomerJS]

Since the black budget is not published I doubt this chart's accuracy

 

[agent00f]

Good data but curious that you linked to the dated and not the updated version.

In the updated version, New York and Texas have the most to complain about. Most states with a manufacturing base are receiving federal aid, the rust belt especially. Georgia and North Carolina are becoming more self sufficient which is a reflection of their diversifying economies.

Sure a few southern states are still welfare ones, the same southern states for which radical reconstruction failed after the civil war. A similar trend emerged after WW1, with the victors so punishing and crippling Germany economically that it set the stage for fascist nationalism and the rise of the Nazis. Blacks in the south were merely a scapegoat as were Jews in Europe, and sufferered disproportionally as a result.

Texas is one of the rare red states pitching in more than it receives, even if it's near the top recipient of defense money by dod numbers, which otherwise approximates this map. If you break these down by county, the phenomenon is far worse. It's simply matter of reality that government handouts overwhelmingly go to the "white-country/welfare-queen" crowd.

 

[JSt0rm]

Texas is one of the rare red states pitching in more than it receives, even if it's near the top recipient of defense money by dod numbers, which otherwise approximates this map. If you break these down by county, the phenomenon is far worse. It's simply matter of reality that government handouts overwhelmingly go to the "white-country/welfare-queen" crowd.

whites deserve it because that are the real 'murica.

 

[ivwshane]

Everything on the budget is paid for by the people in some way. Either through direct taxation or having to borrow.

And SS isn't like a 401k. The money paid in is paid out except for a small surplus which Congress borrows against. When SS runs a true deficit who funds the deficit? Tax payers. A 401k isnt a revolving door of contributions and withdrawals. Unless you are a total moron and enjoy paying a 10% penalty on your money.

So yes, SS absolutely should show its costs on the budget.

I tried dumbing down the point so that even you would get it but it looks like I failed.

 

[Starbuck1975]

Texas is one of the rare red states pitching in more than it receives, even if it's near the top recipient of defense money by dod numbers, which otherwise approximates this map. If you break these down by county, the phenomenon is far worse. It's simply matter of reality that government handouts overwhelmingly go to the "white-country/welfare-queen" crowd.

From your link:
"Retirement and nonretirement benefits accounted for more than half of all federal spending in the states in fiscal 2014. Over one-third of total spending went to retirement benefits, including Social Security and federal employee pensions. Nonretirement benefits, the largest of which is Medicare, accounted for over one-quarter of federal spending in the states. Grants, the largest of which is Medicaid, and contracts made up roughly one-sixth and one-ninth of spending, respectively. At 9 percent, salaries and wages accounted for the smallest share. (See Figure 3.)"

I thought Social Security, Medicaid and Medicare were the crown jewels of New Deal liberalism? The safety net entitlements of living in a first world progressive society? Are we dismissing these things as welfare now?

 

[agent00f]

From your link:
"Retirement and nonretirement benefits accounted for more than half of all federal spending in the states in fiscal 2014. Over one-third of total spending went to retirement benefits, including Social Security and federal employee pensions. Nonretirement benefits, the largest of which is Medicare, accounted for over one-quarter of federal spending in the states. Grants, the largest of which is Medicaid, and contracts made up roughly one-sixth and one-ninth of spending, respectively. At 9 percent, salaries and wages accounted for the smallest share. (See Figure 3.)"

I thought Social Security, Medicaid and Medicare were the crown jewels of New Deal liberalism? The safety net entitlements of living in a first world progressive society? Are we dismissing these things as welfare now?

You should ask your conservative friends whether it counts when welfare queens collect it, wouldn't want to hold them to others' standards.

 

[Genx87]

I tried dumbing down the point so that even you would get it but it looks like I failed.

This is such a boring predictable response from you.

 

[Fern]

I think pie charts about government spending that include social security are misleading but that's just me.

Social security should be separated out or have only unpaid debts to social security in the chart.

Agreed.

Fern

 

[nickqt]

From your link:
"Retirement and nonretirement benefits accounted for more than half of all federal spending in the states in fiscal 2014. Over one-third of total spending went to retirement benefits, including Social Security and federal employee pensions. Nonretirement benefits, the largest of which is Medicare, accounted for over one-quarter of federal spending in the states. Grants, the largest of which is Medicaid, and contracts made up roughly one-sixth and one-ninth of spending, respectively. At 9 percent, salaries and wages accounted for the smallest share. (See Figure 3.)"

I thought Social Security, Medicaid and Medicare were the crown jewels of New Deal liberalism? The safety net entitlements of living in a first world progressive society? Are we dismissing these things as welfare now?

Clearly you're very, very concerned on how they are semantically labeled.

 

[Starbuck1975]

Clearly you're very, very concerned on how they are semantically labeled.

Merry Christmas!!!

 

[nickqt]

Merry Christmas!!!

Hey, look!

With the recent election of Strongman Trump, it's safe to say Merry Christmas again, as the long-waged WarOnChristmas™ has finally come to an end!

Hooray Trump!