Poll: Taxes Vs Welfare

[goodman528]

I was talking to some random guy at the canteen the other day, and he was one of a kind alright, because he absolutely loves taxes. Unbelievably, he has an upper middle class family, went to a private school, and is the very smart type that will be earning lots of money in 10 years time. However, he believes we should tax the rich much more, and make tax evasion much more difficult, close all off shoring accounting, and publish all executives' earnings. Using this money on education and other public services, in particular, education in poor areas to enable people. Along with educational reforms to make it possible to make teachers accountable for their performance and make them sackable.

Better pay for good teachers for example, because currently teaching is just about the last job choice for graduates, even when the choice is between unemployment or teaching, a lot more people would rather be unemployed for a year or two than become a teacher. None of us believes throwing more money at it is all that is required, but there are certain improvements that will never occur if money is not available. So, don't just add a smart Tory comment saying reforms rather than more taxes, that's just not the point.

 

[Labyrinth]

I like him already. In Australia, the money would need to go to public healthcare along with education. Nurses are so underfunded and the system insanely easy for managers to exploit for personal gain that it's little surprise few people want to go there. Need I mention the inequality rising out of a private sector?

 

[AntiThom]

Hmmmm, how about neither of the two choices. Hell if you pick one you pick the other, it's a vicious cycle of dependence upon others. If every aspect of our education system wasn't unionized and teachers had accountability in the first place we wouldn't have a problem.

 

[JRslinger]

I was talking to some random guy at the canteen the other day, and he was one of a kind alright, because he absolutely loves taxes. Unbelievably, he has an upper middle class family, went to a private school, and is the very smart type that will be earning lots of money in 10 years time. However, he believes we should tax the rich much more, and make tax evasion much more difficult, close all off shoring accounting....

To me he sounds like a trust fund baby. Someone who hasn't worked for a living so he isn't bothered by high taxes. He seems to think that rich people just sit on piles of money and poor people are only poor because they lack opportunities. My clues for him are

1. Rich people invest money which create jobs. Higher taxes= less money invested = fewer jobs created(in the private sector).

2. You can give poor people amazing opportunities but often they'll ignore them and continue a lifestyle of poor choices. I think we have reached a point of very diminishing returns in education spending

3. If you make it illegal to put money into foreign banks, their host nations are likely to retaliate economically.

 

[Ridergurl10]

I was talking to some random guy at the canteen the other day, and he was one of a kind alright, because he absolutely loves taxes. Unbelievably, he has an upper middle class family, went to a private school, and is the very smart type that will be earning lots of money in 10 years time. However, he believes we should tax the rich much more, and make tax evasion much more difficult, close all off shoring accounting....

To me he sounds like a trust fund baby. Someone who hasn't worked for a living so he isn't bothered by high taxes. He seems to think that rich people just sit on piles of money and poor people are only poor because they lack opportunities. My clues for him are

1. Rich people invest money which create jobs. Higher taxes= less money invested = fewer jobs created(in the private sector).

2. You can give poor people amazing opportunities but often they'll ignore them and continue a lifestyle of poor choices. I think we have reached a point of very diminishing returns in education spending

3. If you make it illegal to put money into foreign banks, their host nations are likely to retaliate economically.

I completely agree with this.

My only slight addition would be on the issue of welfare. I think it is a good short term solution which lasts way to long and allows people to become VERY lazy. Not everyone, just some who abuse the system. So I don't believe there should be more welfare, but less welfare and a time limit should be put on it! I had a friend who worked for the governors office in our state and she got a call one day from a lady complaining that she wasn't getting enough welfare after being on it for 14 years . . . yes you read that correctly 14 YEARS! That disgusts me.

 

[TheCheryl]

Higher Taxes or Better Welfare?

What is wrong with you?! Why should I bust my ass on the job so some loser or greedy politician can benefit from my earnings? The blacks in my community have a drop out rate of 85%, they live in the town houses, also known as the low class neighborhood, and mostly are welfare specials. I know, I grew up with them. I watched them drop out one by one in school. I wouldn't raise a kid in that area. They had their chance, they chose to drop out. They chose to become losers.

Here I have a hard time getting a job because I'm pigmentally challenged. When I finally do get picked, and probably only because I managed to hit one of the few target demographics they wanted, that's being female.

Where I can't get a scholarship for college because the majority are targeted to minorities.

And they don't have any opportunities? They get jobs easier for less qualifications, scholarships to college because of their skin color. They have more opportunities than I do!

And yet I, the one who managed to get through college at my own expense. Who got a job despite everything have to still pay through the nose to shoulder the slack of these dead-beats who have every chance in the world but won't take it because they get handouts?

Don't get me started with the politicians. Those jerks keep putting in pointless public buildings we never needed. A multimillion dollar tourist center? We're in the boonies with no tourist incentives! That's just an office building nowadays for more bureaucrats. The day they start actually budgeting and not spend money on the most useless, stupid, inane pieces of waste I'll gladly not gripe. Until then our toll roads had been paid off ages ago but the booths are still collecting. The road that was repaired last year is already riddled with pot holes, my police force doesn't protect us, they only collect revenue via strictly enforced traffic ticket quotas and they're mooching from the student loans and social security pools with their 100 year interest free loans.

No sir, I don't want to pay higher taxes nor do I want to give hand outs to our dead beats. You're asking me which testicle I want to get smashed with a hammer. I want neither.

 

[Guitarmasterx7]

I think you organized that survey wrong. "lower taxes" and "better welfare" would make more sense being as in order to get better welfare we would need to raise taxes. As for which I say maintain taxes, less welfare. put the money towards better use, like what you said, paying teachers salaries, improving the community ect. I can understand welfare if someone has a medical condition, but people like the octomom who costs 1.5 mil in welfare a year should be allowed to fail in society for their own stupid actions. Off topic are you allowed to swear on escapist forums? I'm kind of new here.

 

[Drachknouir]

when you are on welfare you are SUPPOSED to be looking for a job, so that means that you should be job ready. most jobs do a drug test before they will higher you . you know how much $$ welfare would save if they just drug tested ppl and disqualified drug users.

 

[cuddly_tomato]

when you are on welfare you are SUPPOSED to be looking for a job, so that means that you should be job ready. most jobs do a drug test before they will higher you . you know how much $$ welfare would save if they just drug tested ppl and disqualified drug users.

Disqualify users = ask them to starve to death? Nobody will do it. Easy to say, not so easy when you are hungry.

http://wizbangblog.com/content/2005/09/19/three-meals-fro.php

Balance the cost of welfare over the cost of keeping someone in prison and you will find welfare is quite a bargain.

1. Rich people invest money which create jobs. Higher taxes= less money invested = fewer jobs created(in the private sector).

2. You can give poor people amazing opportunities but often they'll ignore them and continue a lifestyle of poor choices. I think we have reached a point of very diminishing returns in education spending

1. Rich people also hoard money which destroys job creation. Redistribution of wealth has long been an important part of a functioning society. A severe imbalance of rich and poor has terrible consequences.

2. Just... no. Some poor people have made decent choices in their lives and just not had much luck. Not only that put some poor people do jobs which are absolutely essential. Garbage collection is the most important job there is. We can afford to loose investment bankers and Bill Gates, but loose our ability to dispose of the mountains of filth we create each day and the world would grind to a halt within a week.

 

[JRslinger]

Disqualify users = ask them to starve to death? Nobody will do it. Easy to say, not so easy when you are hungry.

http://wizbangblog.com/content/2005/09/19/three-meals-fro.php

They wouldn't starve to death. There are food pantry's and soup kitchens they would use.

1. Rich people also hoard money which destroys job creation. Redistribution of wealth has long been an important part of a functioning society. A severe imbalance of rich and poor has terrible consequences.

2. Just... no. Some poor people have made decent choices in their lives and just not had much luck. Not only that put some poor people do jobs which are absolutely essential. Garbage collection is the most important job there is. We can afford to loose investment bankers and Bill Gates, but loose our ability to dispose of the mountains of filth we create each day and the world would grind to a halt within a week.

1. I think the burden of proof is on you with this one. Besides what's wrong with keeping some cash on hand for a rainy day? Taking away rich peoples reserve money and they'll likely be ruined if their investments go bad, cause then who will you tax?

2. Everyone in the U.S and most modern countries get a taxpayer funded education. The people who work hardest to get good grades are least likely to be poor. The poorest people are most likely to have dropped out of school, so more school funding wouldn't matter much. They are also most likely to have kids before they are ready, despite free sex-ed. As for struggling poor people who have made good choices, if they continue making good choices they may save enough money to let their kids climb the socioeconomic ladder as many immigrant groups have done.

Futhermore what is this garbageman thing about? what does it have to do with investing in education?

 

[SimuLord]

Someone explain to me the difference between some layabout poor meth-addled fuck robbing me at gunpoint and that same piece of human garbage getting the government to do it for him every April 15th. I am unequivocally, adamantly opposed to any form of direct transfer payment that penalizes hard work so some worthless piece of shit can prop up his life rather than going and getting a gods-damned job.

Note that this does not apply to stuff like payments to the elderly and disabled---any morally decent affluent society should have some mechanism in place to help those who cannot help themselves (or who, in the case of the elderly, gave the prime years of their lives to a soulless system and who should not be tossed aside like Boxer the horse in Animal Farm just because some Bernie Madoff type fucked them over or because they outlived their retirement savings.) Welfare is a different matter when it's going in the form of Social Security to someone like my grandfather, who retired at age 62...in 1983. Unless you support mandatory suicide, I defy you to look an 88-year-old World War II veteran in the eye and tell him you won't pay taxes to keep him fed and cared for.

But able-bodied people? Work or starve, and if you try to rob me, I also support concealed carry laws, so I'll shoot first.

 

[Drachknouir]

Disqualify users = ask them to starve to death? Nobody will do it. Easy to say, not so easy when you are hungry.

ahhh .... right these are the kind of ppl who sell there stamps to other ppl to buy beer. they don't have $$ to buy food because they spend it on drugs. I say let them get high and die off. there no help to our tax paying civilians.

 

[sneakypenguin]

Someone explain to me the difference between some layabout poor meth-addled fuck robbing me at gunpoint and that same piece of human garbage getting the government to do it for him every April 15th. I am unequivocally, adamantly opposed to any form of direct transfer payment that penalizes hard work so some worthless piece of shit can prop up his life rather than going and getting a gods-damned job.

Note that this does not apply to stuff like payments to the elderly and disabled---any morally decent affluent society should have some mechanism in place to help those who cannot help themselves (or who, in the case of the elderly, gave the prime years of their lives to a soulless system and who should not be tossed aside like Boxer the horse in Animal Farm just because some Bernie Madoff type fucked them over or because they outlived their retirement savings.) Welfare is a different matter when it's going in the form of Social Security to someone like my grandfather, who retired at age 62...in 1983. Unless you support mandatory suicide, I defy you to look an 88-year-old World War II veteran in the eye and tell him you won't pay taxes to keep him fed and cared for.

But able-bodied people? Work or starve, and if you try to rob me, I also support concealed carry laws, so I'll shoot first.

But it's too harsh to actually make people work. And we know all the poor people are just hard working honest americans who just want to provide the best life they can for themselves. /sarcasm

Yeah, I worked at a discount grocery for 3 years, I saw these "poor" people, asking if food stamps would by cigarettes or complaining because they got a job their foodstamps got cut back. Or the guy who would buy a buggy full of coke products for his vending machine company(with food stamps) There was a lady who drove a Infiniti G35 who payed with foodstamps for her gatorade everytime she went to the fitness complex next door.

I have pity on those who truely need it and I don't mind nets for them to live, but i've seen the system and it is fucked up with waste like you wouldn't believe.

 

[Ancientgamer]

If we get to keep our money, (and we manage it wisely) Then we shouldn't even need welfare in the first place. I'm all for helping other people out, but when I do, it's going to be me that decides when and how I do it. It's not the government's place.

 

[SimuLord]

Someone explain to me the difference between some layabout poor meth-addled fuck robbing me at gunpoint and that same piece of human garbage getting the government to do it for him every April 15th. I am unequivocally, adamantly opposed to any form of direct transfer payment that penalizes hard work so some worthless piece of shit can prop up his life rather than going and getting a gods-damned job.

Note that this does not apply to stuff like payments to the elderly and disabled---any morally decent affluent society should have some mechanism in place to help those who cannot help themselves (or who, in the case of the elderly, gave the prime years of their lives to a soulless system and who should not be tossed aside like Boxer the horse in Animal Farm just because some Bernie Madoff type fucked them over or because they outlived their retirement savings.) Welfare is a different matter when it's going in the form of Social Security to someone like my grandfather, who retired at age 62...in 1983. Unless you support mandatory suicide, I defy you to look an 88-year-old World War II veteran in the eye and tell him you won't pay taxes to keep him fed and cared for.

But able-bodied people? Work or starve, and if you try to rob me, I also support concealed carry laws, so I'll shoot first.

But it's too harsh to actually make people work. And we know all the poor people are just hard working honest americans who just want to provide the best life they can for themselves. /sarcasm

Yeah, I worked at a discount grocery for 3 years, I saw these "poor" people, asking if food stamps would by cigarettes or complaining because they got a job their foodstamps got cut back. Or the guy who would buy a buggy full of coke products for his vending machine company(with food stamps) There was a lady who drove a Infiniti G35 who payed with foodstamps for her gatorade everytime she went to the fitness complex next door.

I have pity on those who truely need it and I don't mind nets for them to live, but i've seen the system and it is fucked up with waste like you wouldn't believe.

Anyone who's ever lived in a city with a drug problem or a crap economy or just a high concentration of trailer parks (like Reno, where I live, which has all three) has seen enough to put them off the idea of ever wanting to give even one red cent of tax money to the welfare state.

If we simply must have welfare, I say we make it like the WIC program, where poor mothers are explicitly required to buy healthy food for their baby. You've really got to treat welfare recipients like they're blithering idiots (because if they weren't blithering idiots, they wouldn't be on welfare) and hand-hold them like children.

 

[Rolling Thunder]

@sneaky: those aren't poor people, those are benifit fraudsters. They're criminals. Are you saying all poor people are criminals? Or indeed, that most poor people are criminals. Methinks not, as if they were criminals then they wouldn't be poor.

Secondly- yes, we all hate taxation. But we like sewers, roads, schools and hospitals. Which taxation pays for. So it's sort of a trade-off. I also support paying teachers more, and giving them more power. I also support giving nurses more, as they do a shitty, often dangerous job run by half-assed burecrats.

 

[Booze Zombie]

If America has any sense, it will have a National Health Service being funded by those taxes some day. That would be money well spent, in my opinion.

But, back on subject. I notice a lot of the complaints in here aren't actually about welfare amount, but who's getting that amount.

If you don't like that welfare is discriminating against certain types of people (racially or otherwise), then complain. Politicians are meant to listen to the people, otherwise you'll not let them keep their jobs, eh?

You ever consider socialism? I think it'd work better for everyone.

 

[gh0ti]

I think that welfare needs to be better targetted and tougher, but at heart I'm in favour of the welfare state. This is how I think it should work.

People firstly should be assessed by their qualifications. A person with a good degree, from a good uni, backed up with A-Levels etc. should be treated differently from someone who has none of these things. Let's say neither has a job, so they start drawing benefits. The benefits people should then set them up on interviews. The uneducated guy should be then told if he doesn't attend the interviews, he doesn't get paid (this is what is supposed to happen already). If he then gets offered a job, and turns it down on anything other than medical grounds, he should lose his benefits. The person with the degree on the other hand should be granted a little more slack. They've earned the right to choose a job that suits them - they've likely incurred thousands of pounds of debt to get those qualifications and it is the responsibility of the govt. to ensure that there are suitable jobs available for such people.

It sounds very harsh, but that's how the world works I'm afraid. If you're at the bottom of the ladder and have nothing valuable to offer a business, then you're going to get a crap job. No point complaining about it. I say this because of speaking to numerous people first hand who turn down jobs of decent pay on such basis as "Don't want to work with a bunch of foreigners". Like British people are all entitled to great jobs. We shouldn't be paying for this type of person to get to pick and choose. They either get into employment or they get on the breadline, no cash for plasma TVs.

 

[Dele]

[
1. Rich people also hoard money which destroys job creation. Redistribution of wealth has long been an important part of a functioning society. A severe imbalance of rich and poor has terrible consequences.

Sorry Butters, it seems that you have read some absurd Keynesian book, not making a clear difference between hoarding and saving. Hoarding = having money under your pillow. Having money in your bank account is not hoarding but saving and saving creates new jobs. Also imbalance of rich and poor is natural and not a negative thing unless we are talking about oligarchy.

Secondly- yes, we all hate taxation. But we like sewers, roads, schools and hospitals. Which taxation pays for. So it's sort of a trade-off. I also support paying teachers more, and giving them more power. I also support giving nurses more, as they do a shitty, often dangerous job run by half-assed burecrats.

Yes but only because we have decided so. Taxation is not essential nor needed to maintain basic services. Funny that you mention teachers and nurses as private would pay them a lot better and exploit them a lot less. Many modern healthcare systems are built around exploiting nurses and having them work 14h/day.

 

[SilentHunter7]

Well I think better welfare is less welfare going to people who abuse it, so in my mind, better welfare = lower taxes.