Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

Rex

(65,616 posts)
Sun Apr 14, 2013, 03:32 PM Apr 2013

Why all this talk of cutting social welfare programs?

Wall Street is at an all-time high in record profits. Big Business has never been doing better, maybe we should be talking about cutting corporate welfare and not social welfare? Since one group seems to be doing better then ever and the other group is looking at how to make ends meet on 14k a year.

Just a thought.

110 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Why all this talk of cutting social welfare programs? (Original Post) Rex Apr 2013 OP
Guess what, LOTS of social welfare programs we have DON'T WORK, because they are career patrice Apr 2013 #1
Nice way of dodging the question Rex Apr 2013 #2
I give what I get. It's a corelate of the Golden Rule. Want something different from me? patrice Apr 2013 #22
The truth you bring? You sound like an evangelist. Rex Apr 2013 #24
There are babies' lives at stake here, babies with NOTHING, pardon me if I'm a little rough patrice Apr 2013 #35
So now we are all rich because we have a internet connection and a PC. Rex Apr 2013 #39
This message was self-deleted by its author Blue Palasky Apr 2013 #45
You are a beacon of truth! Posting under your own name, Patrice is like "Madonna" Dragonfli Apr 2013 #47
And microwaves and color TVs, right? Occulus Apr 2013 #80
What babies' lives are at stake. JDPriestly Apr 2013 #93
the false names they are everywhere !!1 the internets!!1 bobduca Apr 2013 #109
The rhetoric at DU has come to this? Really? woo me with science Apr 2013 #13
Right you know how it is with those career politicians using Rex Apr 2013 #23
Gah! woo me with science Apr 2013 #56
Sorry I should not have done that. Rex Apr 2013 #63
Yeah, didn't he get caught for trading commodity peanut butter for powdered eggs or something? Jackpine Radical Apr 2013 #61
Ya he had 10 gallons of milk and tried to bribe the lady at the checkout counter Rex Apr 2013 #64
To say nothing of the pallets of bills "lost in Iraq." JDPriestly Apr 2013 #94
^^FAIL^^ You're the one over-generalizing. I said "LOTS" & you cast a lie on that; I did not say ALL patrice Apr 2013 #28
Amazing, isn't it? All to try to defend the indefensible. But we are getting a real look at sabrina 1 Apr 2013 #68
DU has become freeperville Doctor_J Apr 2013 #90
I'm not sure I get what you mean, exactly. Clarify, please, if you will? n/t AverageJoe90 Apr 2013 #49
Really? Do tell us... Oilwellian Apr 2013 #50
Patrice has taken to just copying & pasting posts from Fox Nation Doctor_J Apr 2013 #91
Just like the bailouts and subsidies and tax breaks for the wealthy don't work, except for them of sabrina 1 Apr 2013 #58
Glad somebody caught that, I just mentioned social welfare programs Rex Apr 2013 #65
Name 1 MNBrewer Apr 2013 #71
Sorry. Your post doesn't make any sense. JDPriestly Apr 2013 #92
Do you have some examples of the ones that should be cut, and why? MannyGoldstein Apr 2013 #95
This message was self-deleted by its author devilgrrl Apr 2013 #97
LOTS of programs work, work well for the people who benefit from them. WCLinolVir Apr 2013 #101
Sounds an awful lot like a Repub talking point Maven Apr 2013 #105
Because one group has earned its money and the other one hasn't... Tom Rinaldo Apr 2013 #3
How has GE earned a tax break? Rex Apr 2013 #6
I was holding my talking point upside down Tom Rinaldo Apr 2013 #8
NP Rex Apr 2013 #9
To make republicans happy AgingAmerican Apr 2013 #4
Because it is time to give all the money to the military again, budget time in the USA Coyotl Apr 2013 #5
Even if we go with giving the Pentagon whatever they want Rex Apr 2013 #14
Corporations are under-taxed people! Coyotl Apr 2013 #73
Excellent Question usGovOwesUs3Trillion Apr 2013 #7
because they are recipients of corporate subsidies. nt abelenkpe Apr 2013 #46
We would not if we had a Democratic congress treestar Apr 2013 #10
Those who do not remember the past are condemned to repeat it. Egalitarian Thug Apr 2013 #21
If only Rex Apr 2013 #32
it's their way of deflecting blame Skittles Apr 2013 #79
+1 woo me with science Apr 2013 #87
Bullshit. progressoid Apr 2013 #48
So how do you get one in 2014? treestar Apr 2013 #76
A lot of us do a lot more than just rant. progressoid Apr 2013 #82
Well you didn't do very well in 2010 did you? treestar Apr 2013 #83
So, why do you rant online then? progressoid Apr 2013 #85
Do you remember the Democratic Congress & Senate of 2007? bvar22 Apr 2013 #52
How did they do that? treestar Apr 2013 #75
The events of that day are burned into the memories of so many DUers, bvar22 Apr 2013 #77
That was to save the economy from crashing! treestar Apr 2013 #78
It saved those at the top. progressoid Apr 2013 #84
For Wall Street Execs, WashingtonDC, High Paid Political Consultants, and the 1%... bvar22 Apr 2013 #86
Bwah! woo me with science Apr 2013 #59
We had one 2007-2010 Doctor_J Apr 2013 #89
Hear, hear! k&r n/t Laelth Apr 2013 #11
Because one group owns the politicians and one doesn't? zappaman Apr 2013 #12
But even if we left defense spending alone Rex Apr 2013 #15
Easily. zappaman Apr 2013 #16
Well I am a person and I do pay all my taxes AND on time! Rex Apr 2013 #18
Please call and let me know how it goes since I have the exact same situation. zappaman Apr 2013 #20
Will do. I am calling now. So what would you like? Rex Apr 2013 #29
Just ask yourself . . . Brigid Apr 2013 #17
because those people at the bottom of the spectrum paulk Apr 2013 #19
Many do vote when they aren't be obstructed from voting. n/t Cleita Apr 2013 #27
Some of the poorest people I know vote Rex Apr 2013 #36
That's very good of you. We can mail in our ballots here so Cleita Apr 2013 #38
This area I live in is 85% economically disadvantaged Rex Apr 2013 #43
Also, haven't the CEOs been getting raises? Cleita Apr 2013 #25
Yes Wall Street is overflowing with money and assests Rex Apr 2013 #30
It's obscene, and it's bipartisan. woo me with science Apr 2013 #26
That is the key, it is bipartisan usGovOwesUs3Trillion Apr 2013 #31
Everyone, note: posting under false names, is quite comfortable saying how everything government patrice Apr 2013 #33
You really hate social programs don't you? You are the one Dragonfli Apr 2013 #40
They even renege them the cookie. They feel they shouldn't be paying for it. n/t Cleita Apr 2013 #44
everyone note: sweeping generalizations, tied to a straw-man usGovOwesUs3Trillion Apr 2013 #42
Maybe we liberals post under false names wacked out conservative shooters don't come to our homes Zorra Apr 2013 #98
Attacking "false names"??? LMFAO L0oniX Apr 2013 #106
What's your last name and address? bobduca Apr 2013 #110
Because Wall Street is at an all-time high in record profits Dragonfli Apr 2013 #34
^^Here is the answer. limpyhobbler Apr 2013 #37
But that is okay to some here. Rex Apr 2013 #41
that's the long and short of it Dragonfli Apr 2013 #53
Perhaps they know they won't be in the buss. zeemike Apr 2013 #54
DING DING DING DING DING DING DING We have a winner. woo me with science Apr 2013 #51
In the richest country in the world,... Spitfire of ATJ Apr 2013 #55
WE need to adjust that saying to, 'the richest people in the world live in America'. Rex Apr 2013 #57
No kidding... Spitfire of ATJ Apr 2013 #62
In a post-partisan world, people who need and deserve help from the government jsr Apr 2013 #60
Time for a penny tax on ALL market transactions usGovOwesUs3Trillion Apr 2013 #66
That is such a practical and no-brainer solution, I can't believe they are even Cleita Apr 2013 #67
Yeah, I am sure most Americans would support such a measure usGovOwesUs3Trillion Apr 2013 #69
Since they repealed the anti-congressional-insider-trading bill last week Nevernose Apr 2013 #72
Yeah, more evidence of how corrupt our system has become. Our leaders need to be drug tested as well usGovOwesUs3Trillion Apr 2013 #74
I know it's the weekend and all.... Quantess Apr 2013 #70
Not to mention the "stimulus" effect that Federal "benefits" to poor people has on all levels 99th_Monkey Apr 2013 #81
And that muliplier effect JEB Apr 2013 #100
Like this billionaire said in his TED talk, saying the rich do NOT create jobs 99th_Monkey Apr 2013 #107
I'm glad to see JEB Apr 2013 #108
That would require the reincarnation of FDR Doctor_J Apr 2013 #88
I call BS! Obama IS NOT Nixon! MannyGoldstein Apr 2013 #96
As any rightie will tell you, we are the richest country in history closeupready Apr 2013 #99
The monies in excess of expenditures plus interest in S.S. nineteen50 Apr 2013 #102
This is a no brainer. STET tax on stock purchases, also. grahamhgreen Apr 2013 #103
Capitalism Cal Carpenter Apr 2013 #104

patrice

(47,992 posts)
1. Guess what, LOTS of social welfare programs we have DON'T WORK, because they are career
Sun Apr 14, 2013, 03:36 PM
Apr 2013

paths for the politically ambitious, just like this board; people get used.

TRUE story.

patrice

(47,992 posts)
22. I give what I get. It's a corelate of the Golden Rule. Want something different from me?
Sun Apr 14, 2013, 03:58 PM
Apr 2013

Stop disrespecting the truth I bring.

 

Rex

(65,616 posts)
24. The truth you bring? You sound like an evangelist.
Sun Apr 14, 2013, 03:59 PM
Apr 2013

Please do carry on with your huge amount of respect for everyone else you show in every post.

patrice

(47,992 posts)
35. There are babies' lives at stake here, babies with NOTHING, pardon me if I'm a little rough
Sun Apr 14, 2013, 04:09 PM
Apr 2013

around a bunch of people who have computers and money for internet connections and who refuse to post under anything but false names.

 

Rex

(65,616 posts)
39. So now we are all rich because we have a internet connection and a PC.
Sun Apr 14, 2013, 04:13 PM
Apr 2013

My my my...you are starting to come unraveled. Please proceed!

Response to patrice (Reply #35)

Dragonfli

(10,622 posts)
47. You are a beacon of truth! Posting under your own name, Patrice is like "Madonna"
Sun Apr 14, 2013, 04:28 PM
Apr 2013

I think it's cool to have only one name like "Prince" before his name became a weird symbol (another bold choice).

Having no computer or money for internet connections must be hard for you, do you use carrier pigeons that sneak messages to a wealthy ally who then posts for you? You work so very hard for so very little.

No wonder you're angry.
Social programs might help you you know, if they are funded well and not cut, you really should not rail against them so.

Occulus

(20,599 posts)
80. And microwaves and color TVs, right?
Sun Apr 14, 2013, 07:42 PM
Apr 2013

I bet they even have cars and refrigerators.

Since you "give what you get" or whatever the hell it was, I don't get your shit any longer, so I'm not going to give one about you.

Ignored. Bye.

JDPriestly

(57,936 posts)
93. What babies' lives are at stake.
Mon Apr 15, 2013, 12:02 AM
Apr 2013

The chained CPI will not cause the deaths of babies. What in the world are you talking about? Drones cause the deaths of babies. Wars cause the deaths of babies. Lack of healthcare causes the deaths of babies. Illness and birth defects cause the deaths of babies.

I don't understand your posts.

woo me with science

(32,139 posts)
13. The rhetoric at DU has come to this? Really?
Sun Apr 14, 2013, 03:48 PM
Apr 2013

We are now at the point of reflexive, general naysaying of SOCIAL PROGRAMS?

 

Rex

(65,616 posts)
23. Right you know how it is with those career politicians using
Sun Apr 14, 2013, 03:58 PM
Apr 2013

social welfare programs to advance political ambitions...THANK goodness NOT A ONE goes into the private sector for career ambitions...NO it is all those nasty SOCIAL programs they go for.

Don't you remember, when Tom Delay got caught doing insider trading while he was running the WIC program?

Member that?

woo me with science

(32,139 posts)
56. Gah!
Sun Apr 14, 2013, 05:01 PM
Apr 2013

I have to get out of this thread now. It's making me dizzy!

And I have a microwave, so there's a lot of guilt involved, too...

 

Rex

(65,616 posts)
63. Sorry I should not have done that.
Sun Apr 14, 2013, 05:11 PM
Apr 2013

But COME ON...you must remember all those backstabbers with political ambition that used social programs as a springboard into politics!

There must be dozens and dozens of them!

Jackpine Radical

(45,274 posts)
61. Yeah, didn't he get caught for trading commodity peanut butter for powdered eggs or something?
Sun Apr 14, 2013, 05:07 PM
Apr 2013

I sorta forget the details…

 

Rex

(65,616 posts)
64. Ya he had 10 gallons of milk and tried to bribe the lady at the checkout counter
Sun Apr 14, 2013, 05:13 PM
Apr 2013

using a hot WIC card. All over the news! Launched his career into Dancing with the Stars it did! Patrice is SO right...DAM those greedy assholes using Food Stamps to further their political careers!

sabrina 1

(62,325 posts)
68. Amazing, isn't it? All to try to defend the indefensible. But we are getting a real look at
Sun Apr 14, 2013, 05:31 PM
Apr 2013

the depth of the problem we ourselves in a way, contributed to. And as I have said before, I believe it is a good thing. It appears that all the anger from certain 'Democrats' at George Bush when he tried to do something similar, was fake? We have in our midst people who either never supported the Democratic Party Platform or are willing to give up on being a Democrat to try to save the reputation of a politician.

One thing I know, we have a huge job to do to clear out Wall St's Third Way from this party before they succeed in totally destroying it. They are undermining the very foundation of the Democrat Party and I for one, do not think we should allow them to do that.

sabrina 1

(62,325 posts)
58. Just like the bailouts and subsidies and tax breaks for the wealthy don't work, except for them of
Sun Apr 14, 2013, 05:02 PM
Apr 2013

course. Any talk of doing something about all that wasted money going to mostly corrupt, failed institutions who outsource jobs and really contribute little to this country?

Btw, Social Security is not a Welfare Program. Did you know that?

 

Rex

(65,616 posts)
65. Glad somebody caught that, I just mentioned social welfare programs
Sun Apr 14, 2013, 05:15 PM
Apr 2013

and corporate welfare programs. No mention of SS.

JDPriestly

(57,936 posts)
92. Sorry. Your post doesn't make any sense.
Sun Apr 14, 2013, 11:57 PM
Apr 2013

How is this board a career path for the politically ambitious.

I, for one, have no political ambitions. My working life is over. I just want a just and moral society.

Response to patrice (Reply #1)

WCLinolVir

(951 posts)
101. LOTS of programs work, work well for the people who benefit from them.
Mon Apr 15, 2013, 11:14 AM
Apr 2013

I get the picture of Obama using the issue to garner votes. But don't bother dismissing the value of programs that help people. There is always room for improvement, but the the hue and cry that "they don't work" just isn't going to cut it anymore and you do not get to frame the debate with such negativity. It is called rhetoric. And unless you want to address the facts of an issue, don't bother peddling your alarmist crap. TRUER STORY.

 

Rex

(65,616 posts)
6. How has GE earned a tax break?
Sun Apr 14, 2013, 03:43 PM
Apr 2013

I mean I know they bring good things to life, but why don't they pay taxes? Is it a good merit badge you can earn or something?

 

Coyotl

(15,262 posts)
5. Because it is time to give all the money to the military again, budget time in the USA
Sun Apr 14, 2013, 03:43 PM
Apr 2013

Controlling the Dialogue *** or *** The Revolution Will Not Happen
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022660816

 

Rex

(65,616 posts)
14. Even if we go with giving the Pentagon whatever they want
Sun Apr 14, 2013, 03:49 PM
Apr 2013

how much money would we save if we did away with corporate welfare - discluding the military? Would it be more than $122 billion dollars in the next 10 years? Something tells me it would be ten times that number in ONE year.

 

usGovOwesUs3Trillion

(2,022 posts)
7. Excellent Question
Sun Apr 14, 2013, 03:43 PM
Apr 2013

Though, that falls outside the bounds of acceptable political discussion with our main-stream media.

 

Rex

(65,616 posts)
32. If only
Sun Apr 14, 2013, 04:06 PM
Apr 2013

that was something I didn't hear about every 2 to 4 years from the exact same people, I would believe you.

progressoid

(49,827 posts)
48. Bullshit.
Sun Apr 14, 2013, 04:36 PM
Apr 2013

We need a LIBERAL Democratic congress.

Even so, the current "Democrats" aren't doing anything. They could be mounting a media blitz to get the public behind actual reform, but they aren't because they are doing the bidding of their corporate buddies.

treestar

(82,383 posts)
76. So how do you get one in 2014?
Sun Apr 14, 2013, 06:48 PM
Apr 2013

Ranting on the internet about one part of the WH proposed budget that won't pass?

That did not work after the several outrages of 2010. This board looks just like it did in 2009 and 2010 and that didn't get a liberal Democratic Congress for the midterms.

progressoid

(49,827 posts)
82. A lot of us do a lot more than just rant.
Sun Apr 14, 2013, 08:09 PM
Apr 2013

This online "ranting" is just part of a broader activism for many of us. In fact, it was so effective that I remember a certain Senator that took advantage these online ranters for his run for president.

treestar

(82,383 posts)
83. Well you didn't do very well in 2010 did you?
Sun Apr 14, 2013, 08:11 PM
Apr 2013

And I don't recall any ranting on the internet regarding Obama. He came from a positive place, not a negative one.

bvar22

(39,909 posts)
52. Do you remember the Democratic Congress & Senate of 2007?
Sun Apr 14, 2013, 04:50 PM
Apr 2013

I do.


[font size=3]In an obscene demonstration of "bi-partisanship" seldom seen in Washington, they handed over a $TRILLION DOLLARS
to Wall Street,
no questions asked,
no strings attached,
after receiving a 3 page extortion note threatening the quarterly profits of their 1% Portfolios.

This forever puts to rest the myth that Congress is too monolithic, too large, too cumbersome, too bureaucratic, or too divided to act quickly on any issue.
They can strike faster than a Rattlesnake when they might have to pay off a personal gambling debt. [/font]



You will know them by their WORKS,
not by their excuses.
[font size=5 color=green]Solidarity99![/font][font size=2 color=green]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------[/center]

bvar22

(39,909 posts)
77. The events of that day are burned into the memories of so many DUers,
Sun Apr 14, 2013, 07:06 PM
Apr 2013

I didn't feel the need to post specifics,
but just for you:

"The Senate passed the $700 billion bank bailout bill on October 3 2008. The guts of the bill was the same as the three-page document submitted on September 21 2008, by Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson. Paulson had asked Congress to approve a $700 billion bailout to buy mortgage-backed securities that were in danger of defaulting. By doing so, Paulson wanted to take these debts off the books of the banks, hedge funds and pension funds that held them.

http://useconomy.about.com/od/criticalssues/a/govt_bailout.htm
"


The hottest stock on the market prior to that time were the banks, hedge funds and pension funds, and all the BIG "Portfolios" were heavy with these stocks.

Our Leaders claimed to have "Saved the Economy",
and that is debatable. What they DID save were the corrupt institutions and their "Executives" that were engaged in these risky practices and their investors from having to pay off their gambling losses.

I wouldn't hesitate to bet that at a minimum 95% (but most probably 100%) of our politicians, Democrats and Republicans, held investments in the institutions they voted to save.
It took them less than 10 days from the moment Paulson delivered his ransom note
to the final passage of the bill that took these bad debts off of the books.

Clear enough for you?

"Thank GAWD it passed!!!!"

bvar22

(39,909 posts)
86. For Wall Street Execs, WashingtonDC, High Paid Political Consultants, and the 1%...
Sun Apr 14, 2013, 09:05 PM
Apr 2013

..Saving Wall Street IS Saving THEIR economy,
or at least saving their fat portfolios.
For the Upper Middle Class with fat 401Ks, they would have taken a hit too.

But for all the rest of us, not so much.

"The Economy" is much, MUSH bigger than just Wall Street Banks and the investment gambling of the Well Off.

The Economy would have recovered just fine had the we let the market take its course.

zappaman

(20,605 posts)
12. Because one group owns the politicians and one doesn't?
Sun Apr 14, 2013, 03:48 PM
Apr 2013

Personally, I think we need to drastically cut defense spending before ANYTHING else.

 

Rex

(65,616 posts)
15. But even if we left defense spending alone
Sun Apr 14, 2013, 03:50 PM
Apr 2013

and just decided to cut corporate welfare, would that be $122 billion in 10 years savings?

zappaman

(20,605 posts)
16. Easily.
Sun Apr 14, 2013, 03:52 PM
Apr 2013

Corporate welfare is out of control but no one will talk about it.
Remember, corporations are people!

 

Rex

(65,616 posts)
18. Well I am a person and I do pay all my taxes AND on time!
Sun Apr 14, 2013, 03:54 PM
Apr 2013

Plus being in business for myself (and working for others) means I have to know the tax rate in each county I do business and I do all that...my my. You think I should call D.C. and ask for my corporate welfare entitlements?

Wonder how THAT conversation would go.

zappaman

(20,605 posts)
20. Please call and let me know how it goes since I have the exact same situation.
Sun Apr 14, 2013, 03:56 PM
Apr 2013

I'm sure they will invite you to DC for a wonderful lunch...probably at HOOTERS or OLIVE GARDEN.

 

Rex

(65,616 posts)
29. Will do. I am calling now. So what would you like?
Sun Apr 14, 2013, 04:01 PM
Apr 2013

A 100% tax break or a 100% subsidy? Since I am asking for you too, I need to know.

Brigid

(17,621 posts)
17. Just ask yourself . . .
Sun Apr 14, 2013, 03:54 PM
Apr 2013

Which group has more power: the Wall Street crowd or the ones who depend on social programs to survive? Therein lies your answer.

paulk

(11,586 posts)
19. because those people at the bottom of the spectrum
Sun Apr 14, 2013, 03:56 PM
Apr 2013

don't vote and/or don't have the money to affect the political process in any way.

 

Rex

(65,616 posts)
36. Some of the poorest people I know vote
Sun Apr 14, 2013, 04:10 PM
Apr 2013

mostly because I drive them to the election stations.

Cleita

(75,480 posts)
38. That's very good of you. We can mail in our ballots here so
Sun Apr 14, 2013, 04:13 PM
Apr 2013

that makes it easy for the elderly and shut ins. The poorest people are left out though, the homeless, because they don't have addresses to receive ballots at. Some of the homeless shelters try to get as many of them registered and to the polls as possible but still many are left out.

 

Rex

(65,616 posts)
43. This area I live in is 85% economically disadvantaged
Sun Apr 14, 2013, 04:17 PM
Apr 2013

as the Haves like to put it. Too many of the kids go home from school to dirt floors. I guess this is why I am pissed off so much about it.

Cleita

(75,480 posts)
25. Also, haven't the CEOs been getting raises?
Sun Apr 14, 2013, 04:00 PM
Apr 2013

I heard a blip in passing on the TV while I was doing my chores that the economy was doing better and everyone at the top were getting raises. Sorry I don't have a link because as I said it was in passing and I don't even remember what channel or show.

 

Rex

(65,616 posts)
30. Yes Wall Street is overflowing with money and assests
Sun Apr 14, 2013, 04:04 PM
Apr 2013

it is like each one has a pool full of money now...I just know that if one is doing great on the government dime...so should not the other one be doing great, since they actually pay the taxes? Seems if we are looking to save $100 billion over 10 years, it would only be fair to all.

woo me with science

(32,139 posts)
26. It's obscene, and it's bipartisan.
Sun Apr 14, 2013, 04:00 PM
Apr 2013

Deficit obsession on both sides.
And look at what we have now. A Democratic Party offering to cut Social Security.


You are spot on. The corporate wealth in this country is obscene and growing, but we still have both parties banging the austerity drum for the rest of us. That's what happens when both parties are corporate-bought.

 

usGovOwesUs3Trillion

(2,022 posts)
31. That is the key, it is bipartisan
Sun Apr 14, 2013, 04:04 PM
Apr 2013

Pelosi said moving to a less generous formula for adjusting Social Security benefits to inflation — if it protects the most vulnerable Social Security beneficiaries — might be preferable to other entitlement cuts Republicans are urging, like raising Medicare's eligibility age.

http://thehill.com/homenews/house/288157-pelosi-open-to-obama-proposal-on-entitlement-cuts

That's called good-cop vs bad-cop.

patrice

(47,992 posts)
33. Everyone, note: posting under false names, is quite comfortable saying how everything government
Sun Apr 14, 2013, 04:06 PM
Apr 2013

does is fucked-up, but, oh wait, SOCIAL PROGRAMS work just fine. Now let me guess what percentage of persons, posting under false names here, have anything to do with social programs, especially pay-check wise. That wouldn't have to be a very high percentage to be significant in this milieu.

Dragonfli

(10,622 posts)
40. You really hate social programs don't you? You are the one
Sun Apr 14, 2013, 04:14 PM
Apr 2013

claiming what the Government does is fucked up, at least regarding social programs. May I ask how long have you been helping to demonize these social programs that have you in such emotional distress? Are you afraid some poor person might get a cookie you should have instead?

Zorra

(27,670 posts)
98. Maybe we liberals post under false names wacked out conservative shooters don't come to our homes
Mon Apr 15, 2013, 09:58 AM
Apr 2013

in a rage and waste us, and our families, because of our liberal viewpoints.

Something you don't have to worry about, for obvious reasons.

Dragonfli

(10,622 posts)
34. Because Wall Street is at an all-time high in record profits
Sun Apr 14, 2013, 04:07 PM
Apr 2013

They like to invest some of those profits in policy because it doesn't cost them that much (relative to their wealth).

They staff and finance the think tanks that write legislation and proposals to cut social welfare programs, then their purchased politicians try to get them passed using the talking points created in those think tanks. They work both sides of the aisle, they appear to be quite successful in their purchases, both parties are dutifully pushing their agenda for them.

limpyhobbler

(8,244 posts)
37. ^^Here is the answer.
Sun Apr 14, 2013, 04:13 PM
Apr 2013

It's a bit of a vicious cycle. They use their money to drive politics. Then use government to get more money. Bit of a capitalist death spiral we seem to be it.

 

Rex

(65,616 posts)
41. But that is okay to some here.
Sun Apr 14, 2013, 04:15 PM
Apr 2013

As long as We are driving that bus over the cliff...everything is hunky dory.

Dragonfli

(10,622 posts)
53. that's the long and short of it
Sun Apr 14, 2013, 04:52 PM
Apr 2013

If you are one of the people that feels it is not okay, those cheering the drive over the cliff here become quite angry with you - or me - well most of us actually, but they like to think they are the majority.

zeemike

(18,998 posts)
54. Perhaps they know they won't be in the buss.
Sun Apr 14, 2013, 04:53 PM
Apr 2013

And the ones that are are just collateral damage.

woo me with science

(32,139 posts)
51. DING DING DING DING DING DING DING We have a winner.
Sun Apr 14, 2013, 04:46 PM
Apr 2013

"They like to invest some of those profits in policy."


 

Spitfire of ATJ

(32,723 posts)
55. In the richest country in the world,...
Sun Apr 14, 2013, 04:58 PM
Apr 2013

....one would think the basics are covered and the money you make from working is all gravy.

 

Rex

(65,616 posts)
57. WE need to adjust that saying to, 'the richest people in the world live in America'.
Sun Apr 14, 2013, 05:02 PM
Apr 2013

It is apparent they are what make this country rich. It is their wealth.

jsr

(7,712 posts)
60. In a post-partisan world, people who need and deserve help from the government
Sun Apr 14, 2013, 05:07 PM
Apr 2013

are those who have a record cash hoard and record profits.

Because they own the government.

Cleita

(75,480 posts)
67. That is such a practical and no-brainer solution, I can't believe they are even
Sun Apr 14, 2013, 05:25 PM
Apr 2013

too greedy for that. It really would put millions into the coffers and the Wall Street banksters wouldn't miss the money except on paper. It wouldn't be enough to change their lifestyles one iota. Thom Hartmann riffs on this from time to time.

 

usGovOwesUs3Trillion

(2,022 posts)
69. Yeah, I am sure most Americans would support such a measure
Sun Apr 14, 2013, 05:35 PM
Apr 2013

However, the bankers would never tolerate it, and why i believe it isn't even brought up, unless for scorn and ridicule.

Nevernose

(13,081 posts)
72. Since they repealed the anti-congressional-insider-trading bill last week
Sun Apr 14, 2013, 06:07 PM
Apr 2013

I'd say its a cold day in hell before that happens.

 

usGovOwesUs3Trillion

(2,022 posts)
74. Yeah, more evidence of how corrupt our system has become. Our leaders need to be drug tested as well
Sun Apr 14, 2013, 06:12 PM
Apr 2013

Not to mention all of our CxO's, before any ordinary American, they are so transparent in their corruption they must be on some something potent.

Quantess

(27,630 posts)
70. I know it's the weekend and all....
Sun Apr 14, 2013, 05:42 PM
Apr 2013

I get the distinct impression that one or more DUers on this thread cracked open their 13th beer when they posted.

Edit to add: just one DUer, and that must have been 13 beers on an empty stomach.

 

99th_Monkey

(19,326 posts)
81. Not to mention the "stimulus" effect that Federal "benefits" to poor people has on all levels
Sun Apr 14, 2013, 07:53 PM
Apr 2013

These poorest among us will spend every last dollar they get, plowing
that money directly into the local economy to buy essential goods and
services, which has a multiplier effect benefiting both the local economy
and the economy as a whole.

It is not only immoral and reprehensible to cut social programs, it is
also piss-poor public policy; esp. while trillions are spent on pointless
wars and corporate tax loopholes and noa-bid contracts for $500
toilet seats, etc.

 

JEB

(4,748 posts)
100. And that muliplier effect
Mon Apr 15, 2013, 10:57 AM
Apr 2013

would lead to more jobs and hiring and back to a more healthy economy. I just don't get why helping poor people is such a demonized idea. The money flows immediately back into the economy also helping businesses and rich people as well. Like a chain, we are only as strong as our weakest link.

 

99th_Monkey

(19,326 posts)
107. Like this billionaire said in his TED talk, saying the rich do NOT create jobs
Mon Apr 15, 2013, 02:34 PM
Apr 2013

That's why we call it an ECO-nomy, it's an ecosystem.



The super-rich aren't investing, they are hoarding their capital.

 

JEB

(4,748 posts)
108. I'm glad to see
Mon Apr 15, 2013, 03:40 PM
Apr 2013

that at least one rich SOB has the foresight this guy does. I'd advise him to avoid small planes.

 

MannyGoldstein

(34,589 posts)
96. I call BS! Obama IS NOT Nixon!
Mon Apr 15, 2013, 09:38 AM
Apr 2013

Reagan got us out of a bad recession through adequate government spending.

Obama is Hoover.

 

closeupready

(29,503 posts)
99. As any rightie will tell you, we are the richest country in history
Mon Apr 15, 2013, 10:20 AM
Apr 2013

the wealthiest state ever, anywhere -

And yet, we "need" to cut spending?

Um, no. We need to increase revenue, first and foremost.

K&R

nineteen50

(1,187 posts)
102. The monies in excess of expenditures plus interest in S.S.
Mon Apr 15, 2013, 11:49 AM
Apr 2013

from 1980 until most recently was taken and spent used as general funds for tax breaks and wars. Now the government wants the same people whose deposits into S.S. they took pay again by reducing their benefits.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Why all this talk of cutt...