If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Some Guy)   Fun fact of the day: For every 1.65 employed persons in the private sector, 1 person is on welfare   (weaselzippers.us) divider line 194
    More: Scary, welfare  
•       •       •

1646 clicks; posted to Politics » on 29 Nov 2012 at 12:21 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



194 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-11-29 10:47:42 AM
Because a site with a donation button for bail money is a credible source.
 
2012-11-29 10:47:49 AM
So more tax cuts for the rich then?
 
2012-11-29 10:50:45 AM
This blog still sucks.

Really, Subtard. If your blog STOPPED sucking so damn much, people might actually donate the bail money you think you deserve.
 
2012-11-29 10:53:09 AM
Well those numbers are way off.

There were four programs with more than 40 million enrollees in 2011: SS, Medicare, Medicaid, and SNAP (food stamps.) So the the first figure is really low. More than 160 were enrolled in just those programs. This does not include TANF or the HUD programs or people receiving disaster aid or any of the clients of smaller programs funded with federal grants. So far greater than the 66 million they cite.

There number is close but slightly low for public sector workers, more like 22 million than 21.

As of October, 2011, there were about 140 million Americans in the workforce, again, far greater than the 109 million they cite.

Hard to understand what their overall point would be either way. Seniors and toddlers should work?
 
2012-11-29 10:53:21 AM
Fun fact of the day: we gutted welfare back in the '90's.
 
2012-11-29 10:54:01 AM
*Their, sorry.
 
2012-11-29 10:58:21 AM

Marcus Aurelius: Fun fact of the day: we gutted welfare back in the '90's.


Could have fooled me.
 
2012-11-29 11:00:45 AM

ginandbacon: Well those numbers are way off.

There were four programs with more than 40 million enrollees in 2011: SS, Medicare, Medicaid, and SNAP (food stamps.) So the the first figure is really low. More than 160 were enrolled in just those programs.


You sure you're not double counting people? People who receive Medicare almost by definition also receive Social Security. Those that receive Medicaid also overlap with those who receive food stamps.
 
2012-11-29 11:01:53 AM

fiver5: Marcus Aurelius: Fun fact of the day: we gutted welfare back in the '90's.

Could have fooled me.


Are you even vaguely familiar with the restrictions on welfare these days? The income limits and lifetime cap? The work requirements? How little it pays?
 
2012-11-29 11:06:47 AM

Dusk-You-n-Me: So more tax cuts for the rich then?


Well duh.
 
2012-11-29 11:07:52 AM

LockeOak: ginandbacon: Well those numbers are way off.

There were four programs with more than 40 million enrollees in 2011: SS, Medicare, Medicaid, and SNAP (food stamps.) So the the first figure is really low. More than 160 were enrolled in just those programs.

You sure you're not double counting people? People who receive Medicare almost by definition also receive Social Security. Those that receive Medicaid also overlap with those who receive food stamps.


Ah nice catch! Could be...but that would still be more than they say given all the other benefit programs.
 
2012-11-29 11:11:30 AM
If someone works at Walmart, does he get counted in both groups?
 
2012-11-29 11:15:57 AM

rumpelstiltskin: If someone works at Walmart, does he get counted in both groups?


I was just wondering that same thing. And if a senior works but is also enrolled in Medicare? Are military families who get SNAP and TANF workers or "on welfare"?
 
2012-11-29 11:16:58 AM
Considering Walmart is the largest private employer in the country it makes sense
 
2012-11-29 11:18:12 AM

ginandbacon: There were four programs with more than 40 million enrollees in 2011: SS, Medicare, Medicaid, and SNAP (food stamps.) So the the first figure is really low. More than 160 were enrolled in just those programs.


if we are talking about distinct (as in unique) americans, you need to remove duplicates. if the same person is in all four programs, they are still counted once - not four times.

That said, we are a welfare state. Only 109 million Americans work in the private sector. Our nation has a population of about 327 million people. That means two other Americans are living off the work of every person working in the private sector.
 
2012-11-29 11:18:21 AM
Fun Fact: Subby's fun facts are neither facts nor fun
 
2012-11-29 11:19:38 AM
So the solution is to kill everyone before they can get on Social Security? There's 60 million people on Social Security, more than the number of food stamps. Medicare is even higher.

Oh, those people vote Republican and they weren't you wanted to target?
 
2012-11-29 11:20:00 AM

SlothB77: That said, we are a welfare state. Only 109 million Americans work in the private sector. Our nation has a population of about 327 million people. That means two other Americans are living off the work of every person working in the private sector.


so the public sector doesn't add to the GDP? why look at just private? that's pure BS
 
2012-11-29 11:20:46 AM

SlothB77: Only 109 million Americans work in the private sector. Our nation has a population of about 327 million people. That means two other Americans are living off the work of every person working in the private sector.


How many of those other Americans are children, disabled, or the elderly? I would expect them to "live off the work" of every other person.
 
2012-11-29 11:21:48 AM

zedster: SlothB77: That said, we are a welfare state. Only 109 million Americans work in the private sector. Our nation has a population of about 327 million people. That means two other Americans are living off the work of every person working in the private sector.

so the public sector doesn't add to the GDP? why look at just private? that's pure BS


He's constructed his own reality.
 
2012-11-29 11:23:33 AM

zedster: so the public sector doesn't add to the GDP? why look at just private? that's pure BS


Where does the public sector get its money? From the private sector. Those 109 million private workers pay the salaries for the government employees.
 
2012-11-29 11:24:28 AM

Dusk-You-n-Me: SlothB77: Only 109 million Americans work in the private sector. Our nation has a population of about 327 million people. That means two other Americans are living off the work of every person working in the private sector.

How many of those other Americans are children, disabled, or the elderly? I would expect them to "live off the work" of every other person.


but if we don't force the children to work who will have small enough hands to replaced the shuttles on the loom?
 
2012-11-29 11:25:34 AM

Dusk-You-n-Me: How many of those other Americans are children, disabled, or the elderly? I would expect them to "live off the work" of every other person.


apparently about 130.4 million.
 
2012-11-29 11:27:05 AM

SlothB77: apparently about 130.4 million.


Apparently or really? Does it matter to whatever point you were trying to make?
 
2012-11-29 11:29:39 AM

SlothB77: Where does the public sector get its money? From the private sector. Those 109 million private workers pay the salaries for the government employees.


Where does the private sector get it's money? From the public and private sector. What's your point? It's still GDP.

Before you go apenuts, there's lots of good arguments over utility, efficiency, loss, and control to be made on public versus private control of production and resources. But to immediately discount all public sector service and production as completely lacking in economic benefit is pretty boneheaded stupid.

We can argue if there are efficiencies lost because of public control (but I'd probably agree with you anyway), but it doesn't approach infinity. Let's work from facts if we're going to change minds, ok?
 
2012-11-29 11:31:21 AM

SlothB77: zedster: so the public sector doesn't add to the GDP? why look at just private? that's pure BS

Where does the public sector get its money? From the private sector. Those 109 million private workers pay the salaries for the government employees.


and the money disappears after the grubby dirty government employees get their hands on it?
The naval ship keeping shipping lanes safe so trade can occur does nothing to help the private sector?
The teacher helping ensure future workers have the necessary skills to compete in our globalized economy does nothing to help the private sector?
The EPA regulator who makes sure our water supplies are free of diseases which means the private sector will have workers show up in the morning does nothing for the private sector?
The researchers at DARPA,NASA, CDC, NHS, etc... add nothing to the public good that helps the private sector?

stop masturbating to your photoshop of Ayn Rand pegging Milton Friedman and accept that there are places the public sector does jobs that the private sector is ill-equipped to do. The public sector does add to GDP. Hell, food welfare programs have been shown to have a positive ROI between the farmers and the families getting the aid.

Besides, lemon socialism(corporate welfare) far out spends entitlement programs for individuals in the US.
 
2012-11-29 11:32:57 AM

Dusk-You-n-Me: Apparently or really? Does it matter to whatever point you were trying to make?


When you promise wealth transfers from private sector workers to 'children, disabled, or the elderly' where there were none before, the population of 'children, disabled, or the elderly' will explode and the population of private sector workers will shrink. policy alone can influence demographics. That is the evil of the welfare state. It turns good, able, hardworking people into disabled beggars.
 
2012-11-29 11:36:34 AM

Dusk-You-n-Me: SlothB77: Only 109 million Americans work in the private sector. Our nation has a population of about 327 million people. That means two other Americans are living off the work of every person working in the private sector.

How many of those other Americans are children, disabled, or the elderly? I would expect them to "live off the work" of every other person.


About 25% are under the age of 18, about 10% are past retirement age, and those on SSDI is under 3%.
 
2012-11-29 11:38:35 AM

palladiate: But to immediately discount all public sector service and production as completely lacking in economic benefit is pretty boneheaded stupid.


i'm not doing that. we can split the public sector workers 50/50 assuming 50% utility.

that means 119.9M private/ public workers out of a total population of ~325M americans or a little under a ratio of 1 worker for every 2 nonworkers. We should also subtract those who have retired and are completely independent - don't need social security or medicare or medicaid.
 
2012-11-29 11:39:38 AM

SlothB77: When you promise wealth transfers from private sector workers to 'children, disabled, or the elderly' where there were none before, the population of 'children, disabled, or the elderly' will explode and the population of private sector workers will shrink.


Because you say so?

SlothB77: That is the evil of the welfare state. It turns good, able, hardworking people into disabled beggars.


This is a fundamental difference between left and right. The left tends to believe people use that care because they need it, not because they want to. The right tends to believe if people use that care because they need it, they will then always want to.
 
2012-11-29 11:45:56 AM

SlothB77: palladiate: But to immediately discount all public sector service and production as completely lacking in economic benefit is pretty boneheaded stupid.

i'm not doing that. we can split the public sector workers 50/50 assuming 50% utility.

that means 119.9M private/ public workers out of a total population of ~325M americans or a little under a ratio of 1 worker for every 2 nonworkers. We should also subtract those who have retired and are completely independent - don't need social security or medicare or medicaid.


Why not 60/40?
 
2012-11-29 11:49:11 AM

Dusk-You-n-Me: This is a fundamental difference between left and right. The left tends to believe people use that care because they need it, not because they want to. The right tends to believe if people use that care because they need it, they will then always want to.


The right believes a certain percentage of what i'll call 'bad' people will game the system to their own advantage and hoard the finite set of handouts. To prevent themselves from being screwed by illegimate claims, the so-called 'good' people are forced to game the system as well. Eventually everyone is gaming the system and is immoral. That's the evil - turning moral people into immoral people. I'm not saying we are at that stage yet. But I am warning that is not a place you want to be headed.
 
2012-11-29 11:50:51 AM

LockeOak: Why not 60/40?


A completely arbitrary choice. we'll all agree the percentage is less than 100%, though.
 
2012-11-29 11:51:53 AM
i.imgur.com
 
2012-11-29 11:53:55 AM

SlothB77: The right believes a certain percentage of what i'll call 'bad' people will game the system to their own advantage and hoard the finite set of handouts.


I don't disagree with this, though we would probably disagree with how high or low that percentage is.

SlothB77: To prevent themselves from being screwed by illegimate claims, the so-called 'good' people are forced to game the system as well.


Now this doesn't make any sense to me. How does one person gaming the system force anyone else to game the system?
 
2012-11-29 12:04:29 PM

LockeOak: SlothB77: palladiate: But to immediately discount all public sector service and production as completely lacking in economic benefit is pretty boneheaded stupid.

i'm not doing that. we can split the public sector workers 50/50 assuming 50% utility.

that means 119.9M private/ public workers out of a total population of ~325M americans or a little under a ratio of 1 worker for every 2 nonworkers. We should also subtract those who have retired and are completely independent - don't need social security or medicare or medicaid.

Why not 60/40?


I'm not going to buy the deadweight loss of public investment and services as something approaching "half." This is going to require math on someone's part.
 
2012-11-29 12:06:47 PM
Even if taken at face value, a study like this should be a condemnation of the wealth and income inequality of the country, not some judgment on poor people taking handouts.
 
2012-11-29 12:11:33 PM

SlothB77: LockeOak: Why not 60/40?

A completely arbitrary choice. we'll all agree the percentage is less than 100%, though.


I'm glad we're agreed on 60/40. We all know that a frightening number of government employees are only worth 3/5 of a private sector worker.
 
2012-11-29 12:13:09 PM

SlothB77: zedster: so the public sector doesn't add to the GDP? why look at just private? that's pure BS

Where does the public sector get its money? From the private sector. Those 109 million private workers pay the salaries for the government employees.


And where does the private sector get its money? from the sale of products and services to OTHER PEOPLE. It's basic economics.

Oh and "Those 109 million private workers pay the salaries for the government employees" ignores the fact that those government workers pay the same taxes as all those private workers.
 
2012-11-29 12:18:26 PM

SlothB77: i'm not doing that. we can split the public sector workers 50/50 assuming 50% utility.


{Citation needed}
 
2012-11-29 12:24:11 PM
Fun fact: Being employed full time in the private sector and being on welfare is not mutually exclusive.

Welfare subsidizes private businesses.
 
2012-11-29 12:24:42 PM

fiver5: Marcus Aurelius: Fun fact of the day: we gutted welfare back in the '90's.

Could have fooled me....


.... which is a task whose difficulty is akin to beating Contra using the Konami code.
 
2012-11-29 12:24:49 PM

ginandbacon: There were four programs with more than 40 million enrollees in 2011: SS, Medicare, Medicaid, and SNAP (food stamps.) So the the first figure is really low. More than 160 were enrolled in just those programs.


Did you get that 160 number from somewhere, or did you just assume that no one who is on one of those programs is on any of the others?
 
2012-11-29 12:26:52 PM
Again, FTFC:Abolish Welfare. Maybe the Woman-folk would keep there knees tighter, and I remember the day when a Wife was quite territorial about her Husband... mess with my man and get your butt kicked, your hair torn out and clawed half to death.

Now-adays... oh.. he's messing around... I'll just let him go, Welfare will handle everything and I can do whatever I wanna...


I am not reading any comments on any link ever again. This just.....makes me weep. (figuratively, of course)

/off to KEEP MY KNEES TIGHTER
//sounds like this guy has a thing for watching cat fights too
 
2012-11-29 12:27:35 PM

thurstonxhowell: ginandbacon: There were four programs with more than 40 million enrollees in 2011: SS, Medicare, Medicaid, and SNAP (food stamps.) So the the first figure is really low. More than 160 were enrolled in just those programs.

Did you get that 160 number from somewhere, or did you just assume that no one who is on one of those programs is on any of the others?


ConservativeFactCheck.com - Facts are always mutually exclusive if they help Jesus win.
 
2012-11-29 12:28:17 PM

fiver5: Could have fooled me.


You appear to be one of those who Lincoln apocryphally noted could be fooled all the time.
 
2012-11-29 12:28:32 PM
So government employees and contractors are considered to be on welfare?
 
2012-11-29 12:28:58 PM
Jobs, bread or bullets. The capitalists won't provide work, so they can help support the people they don't "need" but who they suck blood from and who still need to live.
 
2012-11-29 12:29:19 PM

SlothB77: Dusk-You-n-Me: Apparently or really? Does it matter to whatever point you were trying to make?

When you promise wealth transfers from private sector workers to 'children, disabled, or the elderly' where there were none before, the population of 'children, disabled, or the elderly' will explode and the population of private sector workers will shrink. policy alone can influence demographics. That is the evil of the welfare state. It turns good, able, hardworking people into disabled beggars.


When you promise wealth transfers from private sector workers to 'defense contractors' where there were none before, the population of 'defense contractors' will explode and the population of private workers will shrink. Policy alone can impact the direction of contractors. That is the evil of the military-industrial state. It turns good, able, hardworking engineers and business men into profiteers looking for the government to use their inventory so they can sell them more.
 
2012-11-29 12:30:22 PM
if you actually click the image and read the fine print they are calling "welfare" food stamps and medicaid coverage. So if you work a fulltime low wage job and also get foodstamps you apparently cancel yourself out or something...
 
Displayed 50 of 194 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report