70% Of U.S. Spending Is Writing Checks To Individuals

[Gopher]

Entitlements. There are many, but Social Security should not be lumped in with the welfare/Medicaid numbers. This is a pet peeve of mine. i worked full-time from 1965 to 2011, a long time. For several years I paid maximum fica. I worked for my benefits.

Now many like to argue we on SS are betting more back than we paid in. Oh, I love that argument, it's so full of holes it could pass for swiss cheese.

We had a young computer nerd, genius working for us, he took the SS payments for one man from 1966 to 2010 taken from his paycheck. He created a program showing the highs and lows from the stock market during that period. He formulated that if those SS payroll deductions were invested in the market in low/moderate risk ventures, the test subject would be getting 2 1/2 times more monthly than Uncle Sam is currently sending him.

It's not the fault of retirees that the government didn't handle or invest OUR MONEY efficiently. They squandered it away with their reckless spending.

The SS system should be more than solvent. LBJ "borrowed" the SS trust fund in '64 to pay for his new welfare program that has evolved into the "give me free stuff" mentality of today. He took the SS trust fund and combined it with the general fund, and it has never been paid back as he promised. The welfare system has been funded with the blood, sweat and tears of the working class, who have seen their SS decimated by the "charitable left".

So please don't call SS an entitlement. It's our money, taken from us by mandate, to be "a retirement account with a livable payment of return".

 

[depotoo]

Yep,
1. Welfare
2. Defense

Look how little we spend on real investment in our country? (Science, tech, r&D and infrastructure). Those two area's above need to be slashed big time and some of that money needs to go into real investments and the rest needs to go into paying down some of the debt. We can bring our troops home and cut 200 billion from defense and reform welfare!

we already spend 25% more than any other industrializee nation on r&d, Matthew, at $405 billion in 2011. On top of that in 2009 we spent $54.8 billion on science plus funding from NOAA et al as well. How much more do you want??

 

[Little-Acorn]

we already spend 25% more than any other industrializee nation on r&d, Matthew, at $405 billion in 2011. On top of that in 2009 we spent $54.8 billion on science plus funding from NOAA et al as well. How much more do you want??

Who's "we"?

Government spending the people's money (taxes)? Or the American people spending their own money directly?

 

[depotoo]

we already spend 25% more than any other industrializee nation on r&d, Matthew, at $405 billion in 2011. On top of that in 2009 we spent $54.8 billion on science plus funding from NOAA et al as well. How much more do you want??

Who's "we"?

Government spending the people's money (taxes)? Or the American people spending their own money directly?

I just double checked. R&D $137 billion + is fed spending, science is all fed.

 

[NYcarbineer]

One third of that is Social Security? That's just the People getting the return of their own money, with interest.

 

[jasonnfree]

You're a fucking idiot. Piece of crap.

Defense is proper but we shouldn't be defending the entire effin world. Also we been spending on infrastructure for the past 150 years from the federal level. Investment is always good you 18th century piece of trash!

There is a good point in this.

Just as infrastructure is local, so should defense be local. We should not be paying for the defense of other countries.

I wonder how that would have turned out if we simply retaliated against the Japanese for Pearl Harbor and let Europe fend for itself.

Something tells me we would need a much larger military than we have right now.

Be careful what you wish for.

Got it. I'm real worried about Afghanistan launching a major attack on USA soil with it's vast army, air, and naval forces. The same threat we faced from Vietnam and later Iraq under both of the bushes, gw and hw.

 

[jasonnfree]

Needs to go towards advancing that person and getting them back to work. Growing our economy should be the goal!

WHAT needs to go towards advancing that person etc.?

Government payments?

Or private charities that grow to take up the slack for illegal govt payments getting cut off?

Private charities. I donated some money a while ago to an important cause, a person needed an operation. It was through Fund Me. The goal to be reached was about 60 thousand dollars. Amount reached - 3,000 dollars.

 

[jasonnfree]

What happens to the people of the United States when the government stops issuing welfare checks?

Q: What happens to a heroin addict when you cut off his smack?

A: Less than what happpens to Welfare addicts when you cut off their free gravy train. But for the same reason.

Needs to go towards advancing that person and getting them back to work. Growing our economy should be the goal!

Maybe by making it less attractive for corporations to move their operations offshore, chasing cheap labor, there would be more jobs here making the stuff here in USA that we turned around and bought in USA? Just saying, may not be possible now, but it wasn't an option for companies before Nafta, Most favored Nation, etc. What's the chance of a politician advocating that anyway?

 

[ScienceRocks]

Needs to go towards advancing that person and getting them back to work. Growing our economy should be the goal!

WHAT needs to go towards advancing that person etc.?

Government payments?

Or private charities that grow to take up the slack for illegal govt payments getting cut off?

Private charities. I donated some money a while ago to an important cause, a person needed an operation. It was through Fund Me. The goal to be reached was about 60 thousand dollars. Amount reached - 3,000 dollars.

Private charities and the private sector being the force behind infrastructure and other neassury aliments of society isn't workable. I am all for the private sector and enjoy what they do as a consumer greatly. Time to be honest about needing both sectors.

I never said that the government should be the be all and end all. I do understand that the private sector when it comes to profit does the better job and should be doing most of the work within our society. Some area's just can't be handled by the private sector is all I am saying.

 

[Little-Acorn]

we already spend 25% more than any other industrializee nation on r&d, Matthew, at $405 billion in 2011. On top of that in 2009 we spent $54.8 billion on science plus funding from NOAA et al as well. How much more do you want??

Who's "we"?

Government spending the people's money (taxes)? Or the American people spending their own money directly?

I just double checked. R&D $137 billion + is fed spending, science is all fed.

My wife would be interested to hear that. So would the company she works for, a multinational pharmaceutical research company that regularly comes out with new medicines, new procedure, and the government is a comparatively minor customer.

Looks like we have yet another version of the old leftist trope, "If government doesn't do it, no one will do it."

Doesn't matter how many times you debunk it, people still fool themselves into thinking it's true.

 

[ScienceRocks]

Who's "we"?

Government spending the people's money (taxes)? Or the American people spending their own money directly?

I just double checked. R&D $137 billion + is fed spending, science is all fed.

My wife would be interested to hear that. So would the company she works for, a multinational pharmaceutical research company that regularly comes out with new medicines, new procedure, and the government is a comparatively minor customer.

Looks like we have yet another version of the old leftist trope, "If government doesn't do it, no one will do it."

Doesn't matter how many times you debunk it, people still fool themselves into thinking it's true.

Both are good and add to the greatest of this nation in science!

 

[oldfart]

In effect, the government has become primarily a massive money-transfer machine, taking $2.6 trillion from some and handing it back out to others. These government transfers now account for 15% of GDP, another all-time high. In 1991, direct payments accounted for less than half the budget and 10% of GDP.

Every fiscal policy has a redistribution effect. For example, interest on the public debt redistributes money to holders of government debt. The redistributional effect of this is pretty huge as 80% of that interest goes to the top 5% of income recipients. Tax policy redistributes money from individuals to corporations as the portion of total revenue derived from corporate income tax has fallen to 10%.

 

[depotoo]

Who's "we"?

Government spending the people's money (taxes)? Or the American people spending their own money directly?

I just double checked. R&D $137 billion + is fed spending, science is all fed.

My wife would be interested to hear that. So would the company she works for, a multinational pharmaceutical research company that regularly comes out with new medicines, new procedure, and the government is a comparatively minor customer.

Looks like we have yet another version of the old leftist trope, "If government doesn't do it, no one will do it."

Doesn't matter how many times you debunk it, people still fool themselves into thinking it's true.

I would love to see what our dollars actually produce. There should be a full accountability as to what they actually do produce, where we are all able to see that information.

 

[AVG-JOE]

What a colossal waste of money.

How much of that 70% is monthly checks to grandma, grandpa or a veteran?

Did the Social Security beneficiaries not contribute?

Are YOU going to tell a veteran that footing the bill for the foot she left in Afghanistan is a waste of money?

Sweeping generalizations are dangerous, Kiddo.

 

[AVG-JOE]

this is sad and scary all rolled into ONE...Not only are we working to support our family, but everyone else's too...I miss the days when people would use TAXPAYERS as the last resort

SNIP:
By JOHN MERLINE, INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY


Posted 03/10/2014 06:21 PM ET




Buried deep in a section of President Obama's budget, released this week, is an eye-opening fact: This year, 70% of all the money the federal government spends will be in the form of direct payments to individuals, an all-time high.

In effect, the government has become primarily a massive money-transfer machine, taking $2.6 trillion from some and handing it back out to others. These government transfers now account for 15% of GDP, another all-time high. In 1991, direct payments accounted for less than half the budget and 10% of GDP.

What's more, the cost of these direct payments is exploding. Even after adjusting for inflation, they've shot up 29% under Obama.

ObamaCare, Medicare...

Where do these checks go? The biggest chunk, 38.6%, goes to pay health bills, either through Medicare, Medicaid or ObamaCare. A third goes out in the form of Social Security checks. Only 21% goes toward poverty programs — or "income security" as it's labeled in the budget — and a mere 5% ends up in the hands of veterans.

Interestingly, despite Obama's frequent pledges to reduce income inequality, the share of direct payments going toward "income security" has dropped from 25% in 2009 to 20% in 2014. (The average share from 1980 to 2008 was 25.4%.)

Obama's Fiscal Year 2015 budget calls for this share to drop to just 17% by 2019, as his programs devote more and more federal tax money to middle-class entitlement programs such as ObamaCare.

Here's another way to look at it: If all these federal direct payments went only to the poor, every person living in poverty today would receive an annual check worth $55,900.

The 1% Handouts


70% Of U.S. Government Spending Is Writing Checks To Individuals - Investors.com

where is my check?....

Waiting for you to pull the trigger sometime between age 62 and age 70, ass-u-me-ing you've filed at least 10 U.S. Tax Returns that show minimum productivity.

`​

 

[AVG-JOE]

You're a fucking idiot. Piece of crap.

Defense is proper but we shouldn't be defending the entire effin world. Also we been spending on infrastructure for the past 150 years from the federal level. Investment is always good you 18th century piece of trash!

There is a good point in this.

Just as infrastructure is local, so should defense be local. We should not be paying for the defense of other countries.

I wonder how that would have turned out if we simply retaliated against the Japanese for Pearl Harbor and let Europe fend for itself.

Something tells me we would need a much larger military than we have right now.

Be careful what you wish for.

We were already deep in Europe. The war that ended with Hiroshima and Nagasaki was a sequel... the story began in 1914.

 

[AVG-JOE]

1. Cut Defense spending. Let other countries pay for their own defense.

2. Raise the Social Security and Medicare eligibility ages to 70 and index to 9 percent of the population going forward. We are living decades longer than our ancestors, we should be working longer.

3. Ban all tax expenditures, period.

These three simple things would generate a massive surplus which could be used to pay down the debt and lower tax rates for everyone.

If #3 means eliminating all tax credits, and doing away with deductions, in favor of a fair and simple tax code, I think you should make that #1.

Doling out welfare via the tax code is stupid. Although the vultures at H&R Block are making a killing.

That's my only suggestion for your list.