Do you have adblock enabled?
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.

(The Sun)   Know what happens when you spend like drunks on a Friday night while boozing? Take note America, your hangover is coming   (thesun.co.uk) divider line 69
    More: Obvious, paid parental leave, Ed Balls  
•       •       •

1742 clicks; posted to Politics » on 09 Jan 2013 at 9:49 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2013-01-09 08:42:06 AM  
Labour's Liam Byrne said it was a scandal the Government was cracking down on benefits while cutting the top rate of tax for people earning more than £150,000.

They must have plenty of money if they can afford give aways to the well off.

And yeah, I'm sure we will regret all that statutory maternity pay and sick pay and other benefits that we don't have.
 
2013-01-09 08:42:20 AM  
No ishn ot I'm furfectly fine I'll be fuine in the morning uless I shtart drinkinh darkk liquopr
 
2013-01-09 09:28:25 AM  
You can spend more if you get a better paying job.
 
2013-01-09 09:52:58 AM  
Know what happens when you spend like drunks on a Friday night while boozing?

You wake up on Saturday with a naked woman you don't know in your bed?
 
2013-01-09 09:56:05 AM  
So....elect another Kennedy?
 
2013-01-09 09:56:49 AM  
They think that helping people is about trapping more and more people in benefits,"


Stagnant wages and a piss poor economy are trapping more and more people in benefits, not the actual programs meant to help the poor. If you want real savings tighten work/job search requirements that are mandatory to stay on the programs to weed out those who really are mooching from those that are struggling to make ends meet.
 
2013-01-09 09:57:48 AM  
Good old Sun readers, voting to slash benefits, not realising that vast bulk of benefits are ones they themselves are on.

/only a tiny fraction of the benefit bill goes to unemployment
 
2013-01-09 09:58:35 AM  
Congrats on a wonderfully clear, understandable analogy. That's totally inapplicable.
 
2013-01-09 09:59:11 AM  
Comparing a nation's finances to a small business or a household budget just wasn't stupid enough, so someone decided to compare them to my beer money fund.
 
2013-01-09 09:59:31 AM  
I never realized what a reputable, non-partisan news source the Sun is. How about that?
 
2013-01-09 10:01:54 AM  
img.dailymail.co.uk
How fitting, seeing how it was a drunk who ran up the tab.
 
2013-01-09 10:02:03 AM  

gsiofa: I never realized what a reputable, non-partisan news source the Sun is. How about that?


It's the English accent. Everything they write just sounds smarter.

/What? You don't read the Sun with an English inner monolog?
 
2013-01-09 10:03:14 AM  
Except we're all paying for the drunken party our parents and grandparents had. Thanks, boomers. You will be remembered as a disgrace. Congratulations.
 
2013-01-09 10:03:47 AM  
I've got a hangover this morning, so I'm not getting a kick.
 
2013-01-09 10:04:27 AM  

mediaho: Except we're all paying for the drunken party our parents and grandparents had. Thanks, boomers. You will be remembered as a disgrace. Congratulations.


The newer generations have a greater sense of entitlement. I fear we are farked.
 
2013-01-09 10:05:05 AM  

mediaho: Except we're all paying for the drunken party our parents and grandparents had. Thanks, boomers. You will be remembered as a disgrace. Congratulations.


The Greatest Generation may have won WWII, but they royally screwed the rest of us with their entitled children.
 
2013-01-09 10:06:29 AM  

Citrate1007: The newer generations have a greater sense of entitlement.


Said every generation ever.
 
2013-01-09 10:08:36 AM  

Ivandrago: mediaho: Except we're all paying for the drunken party our parents and grandparents had. Thanks, boomers. You will be remembered as a disgrace. Congratulations.

The Greatest Generation may have won WWII, but they royally screwed the rest of us with their entitled children.


Oh, fark off, you snot-nosed punks. And you bet your ass you'd better stay off my lawn while you're at it.
 
2013-01-09 10:10:15 AM  

Dusk-You-n-Me: Citrate1007: The newer generations have a greater sense of entitlement.

Said every generation ever.


That is the joke.
 
2013-01-09 10:20:13 AM  
There is no debt problem as long as ordinary Americans are not concerned about the debt problem.
Money is just paper, and hardly that these days.
There is no real "value" in money beyond the perceived values that ordinary Americans give it.
The government can print as much money as it needs, as long as ordinary Americans don't see any problem with that.
The government justifies the printing of money by "selling" bonds to the Chinese government.
The bonds are "purchased" with money the Chinese government printed out of thin air also.
So print all the money you like as long as ordinary Americans are not worried about it.
There is no money.
There is no spoon.
 
2013-01-09 10:22:17 AM  
Yeah, our generation will get to live with the ever-worsening hangover and we weren't even the ones who got drunk.

Bar was dry long before we got here, but we get to pick up the tab and the liver failure.

Cool.
 
2013-01-09 10:24:45 AM  
I know exactly what happens, you wake up the next day and start drinking again.
 
2013-01-09 10:26:01 AM  

Citrate1007: They think that helping people is about trapping more and more people in benefits,"


Stagnant wages and a piss poor economy are trapping more and more people in benefits, not the actual programs meant to help the poor. If you want real savings tighten work/job search requirements that are mandatory to stay on the programs to weed out those who really are mooching from those that are struggling to make ends meet.


...it's my contention that this sort of tightening actually costs the program money, because the number of "moochers" thrown out of the system by it doesn't cover the cost of said requirements, plus the number of non-moochers caught in such requirement-tightening makes it counter-productive.

/This is mainly because many of the qualities of "moochers" and non-"moochers" are pretty much the same. The only real difference is that the non-"moochers" either already have a job or just got let go from one through absolutely no fault of their own.
 
2013-01-09 10:29:15 AM  
So, to sum up, making massive increases to the debt and deficit is ok when Republicans do it? Is that correct?
 
2013-01-09 10:30:12 AM  
Know what happens when you hire drunks to write your articles?
 
2013-01-09 10:32:08 AM  

Testiclaw: Yeah, our generation will get to live with the ever-worsening hangover and we weren't even the ones who got drunk.

Bar was dry long before we got here, but we get to pick up the tab and the liver failure.

Cool.


farm3.staticflickr.com
 
2013-01-09 10:35:22 AM  
You know what happens when you try austerity in a demand-driven crisis?

Oh wait, you're Britain, you do.

You're the guys that farked up the recovery from recession.

You're the guys now on the verge of a triple dip.

You're the guys who have been in the slump far longer than they were in the Great Depression.

You're the guys whose Chancellor of the Exchequer has had to abandon all his budget targets, whether deficit, debt or unemployment.

This is not a spend-like-drunks issue, this is a cold-turkey-from-addiction issue. You cut out the drugs and it really farks you up.
 
2013-01-09 10:36:52 AM  
I can spend like a drunk if I make enough money.
 
2013-01-09 10:39:34 AM  
Done in one.

Subby is an idiot.
 
2013-01-09 10:39:55 AM  

mediaho: Except we're all paying for the drunken party

for the rich our parents and grandparents had voted for. Thanks, boomers. You will be remembered as a disgrace. Congratulations.

That's more like it.
 
2013-01-09 10:43:24 AM  
All we need to cure a nasty hangover is some good weed.

I guess that means we should finally legalize it? Sounds good to me.
 
2013-01-09 10:47:29 AM  

born_yesterday: gsiofa: I never realized what a reputable, non-partisan news source the Sun is. How about that?

It's the English accent. Everything they write just sounds smarter.

/What? You don't read the Sun with an English inner monolog?


I read it with an inner "Monty Python Twit of the Year" monolog.

/M.P. Gumby monolog would also be acceptable.
 
2013-01-09 10:50:48 AM  

Tyrone Slothrop: I read it with an inner "Monty Python Twit of the Year" monolog.


Oh, so Niall Ferguson, then! Every time I read one of his feces smatterings mistaken for journalism, I imagine him wearing a pith helmet and wondering aloud just how in God's name these savages will ever learn.
 
2013-01-09 10:51:17 AM  
Don't go into debt and spend that money on things that don't have an ROI greater than one. That is the only rule you need to follow when planning an economy. It isn't farking rocket science.

If you think we should have health care for the elderly, great! But pay for it through taxes, not debt.
If you think we should have a generous social safety net, perfect! But pay for it through taxes, not debt.
If you think we should have a massive military, fine by me! But pay for it through taxes, not debt.

Since we paid for the above through debt, and since the ROI on those programs is less than one, we are now forced to cut them and send our economy into a recession depression beyond the thunderdome.
 
2013-01-09 10:51:21 AM  

Tyrone Slothrop: born_yesterday: gsiofa: I never realized what a reputable, non-partisan news source the Sun is. How about that?

It's the English accent. Everything they write just sounds smarter.

/What? You don't read the Sun with an English inner monolog?

I read it with an inner "Monty Python Twit of the Year" monolog.

/M.P. Gumby monolog would also be acceptable.


I could only read that article with Rupert Murdoch's Australian voice patronizing me.
 
2013-01-09 10:55:10 AM  

MattStafford: Don't go into debt and spend that money on things that don't have an ROI greater than one. That is the only rule you need to follow when planning an economy. It isn't farking rocket science.

If you think we should have health care for the elderly, great! But pay for it through taxes, not debt.
If you think we should have a generous social safety net, perfect! But pay for it through taxes, not debt.
If you think we should have a massive military, fine by me! But pay for it through taxes, not debt.

Since we paid for the above through debt, and since the ROI on those programs is less than one, we are now forced to cut them and send our economy into a recession depression beyond the thunderdome.


What a perfect description of the worst possible way to operate a national economy! Now that we've read it, we're all just a little bit closer to death,
 
2013-01-09 11:05:01 AM  

BMulligan: What a perfect description of the worst possible way to operate a national economy! Now that we've read it, we're all just a little bit closer to death,


The brainwashing is complete - because we are a country we can live beyond our means indefinitely! Full speed ahead! More welfare! More health care! More military! Costs be damned!
 
2013-01-09 11:08:31 AM  

MattStafford: BMulligan: What a perfect description of the worst possible way to operate a national economy! Now that we've read it, we're all just a little bit closer to death,

The brainwashing is complete - because we are a country we can live beyond our means indefinitely! Full speed ahead! More welfare! More health care! More military! Costs be damned!


You really don't have even the most elementary understanding of economics, do you?
 
2013-01-09 11:18:42 AM  
I absolutely hate to say this, but the GOP sort of has a point when it comes to welfare spending.

thf_media.s3.amazonaws.com

According to the Census, there are 46.2 Million Americans living below the poverty line. Given the spending outlined above, we could simply write every man, woman and child under the poverty line a check for $20,000.

I'm all for having a social safety net. The problem is, ours seems to be huge, made of the finest silk and is chocked full of holes.
 
2013-01-09 11:22:48 AM  

dr-shotgun: I absolutely hate to say this, but the GOP sort of has a point when it comes to welfare spending.

[thf_media.s3.amazonaws.com image 726x475]

According to the Census, there are 46.2 Million Americans living below the poverty line. Given the spending outlined above, we could simply write every man, woman and child under the poverty line a check for $20,000.

I'm all for having a social safety net. The problem is, ours seems to be huge, made of the finest silk and is chocked full of holes.


Actually they don't. The chart you provided shows small increases in welfare spending with the exception to healthcare spending. Get healthcare costs under control and you have taken care of the majority of increases in safety net spending.
 
2013-01-09 11:24:40 AM  

dr-shotgun: I absolutely hate to say this,


Sure you do, cupcake. Your concern is legendary.

I'm all for having a social safety net. The problem is, ours seems to be huge, made of the finest silk and is chocked full of holes.

Yeah, the poors are living the the lap of luxury, all right.
 
2013-01-09 11:29:11 AM  

dr-shotgun: I absolutely hate to say this, but the GOP sort of has a point when it comes to welfare spending.

[thf_media.s3.amazonaws.com image 726x475]

According to the Census, there are 46.2 Million Americans living below the poverty line. Given the spending outlined above, we could simply write every man, woman and child under the poverty line a check for $20,000.

I'm all for having a social safety net. The problem is, ours seems to be huge, made of the finest silk and is chocked full of holes.


Most of us in Europe wouldn't consider the US to have much of a safety net at all. Not even the strictest Thatcherite would want the flimsy US system. Yes, there are homeless in every nation, but I always find the scale of homelessness in the US genuinely upsetting. when I visit.
 
2013-01-09 11:34:30 AM  

max_pooper: Actually they don't. The chart you provided shows small increases in welfare spending with the exception to healthcare spending. Get healthcare costs under control and you have taken care of the majority of increases in safety net spending.


Cut the cost of medical care in half. I don't exactly know how you would do that, but let's say we found a way to make it so...

We would still be spending $15k per person living under the poverty line.

Yet, for all that spending, the folks I know who are living under the poverty line are still absolutely struggling to make ends meet. Getting sick is still a major financial crisis for them. What are minor financial inconveniences to me are an absolute nightmare for them. They are still trapped under a grinding wheel with few opportunities to get out from under it through better education or employment options.

So where the fark is all that money going? We are spending $7,600 per person under the poverty line in cash, food and housing aid alone. While I am sure there are some folks who are helped by it, this spending clearly isn't really making a huge social impact on the lives of people who really need help.

Despite all our spending, the poverty rate seems to be fixed and tracks more with the economy. All this spending and all these programs seems to not have made a dent.
 
2013-01-09 11:37:22 AM  

BMulligan: dr-shotgun: I absolutely hate to say this,

Sure you do, cupcake. Your concern is legendary.

I'm all for having a social safety net. The problem is, ours seems to be huge, made of the finest silk and is chocked full of holes.

Yeah, the poors are living the the lap of luxury, all right.


That's my farking point, cupcake.

We are spending a tremendous amount of money on the poor, with what seems to be little/no positive impact on their lives.

Just because the government spends money on a program doesn't mean that you will necessarily get the results you want.
 
2013-01-09 11:39:40 AM  

dr-shotgun: All this spending and all these programs seems to not have made a dent.


i63.photobucket.com

You can't have it both ways.
 
2013-01-09 11:46:26 AM  
The best way to institute a safety net is by cash handouts that decrease based on your income. Let's say 20,000 is what you get if you make no money. For every dollar after that you make, your benefits are reduced by 50 cents. Make 1000 bucks, get 19,500 in cash, for a total of 21,500. Make 10,000, get 15,000 cash, for a total of 25,000. Make 30,000, get 5,000 cash, for a total of 35,000. Make 40,000 and you're on your own.

I understand that there will be a massive increase in under the table payments, but that is already a problem. This fixes the problem where there is disincentives to work. The more you work, the more money you should take home, and the less the government should help. Pretty simple stuff.
 
2013-01-09 11:47:23 AM  

BMulligan: You really don't have even the most elementary understanding of economics, do you?


I have a bachelor's degree in econ, but in all honesty I don't think it's worth the paper it was printed on. Please explain to me how a country can spend beyond its means indefinitely.
 
2013-01-09 11:50:13 AM  

MattStafford: BMulligan: You really don't have even the most elementary understanding of economics, do you?

I have a bachelor's degree in econ, but in all honesty I don't think it's worth the paper it was printed on. Please explain to me how a country can spend beyond its means indefinitely.


The US is not spending beyond it's means. It is currently spending beyond what it is willing to collect in taxes.
 
2013-01-09 11:50:55 AM  

MattStafford: BMulligan: You really don't have even the most elementary understanding of economics, do you?

I have a bachelor's degree in econ, but in all honesty I don't think it's worth the paper it was printed on. Please explain to me how a country can spend beyond its means indefinitely.


With historically low taxes, we can increase our means. We choose not to.
 
2013-01-09 11:57:03 AM  

dr-shotgun: I absolutely hate to say this, but the GOP sort of has a point when it comes to welfare spending.

[thf_media.s3.amazonaws.com image 726x475]

According to the Census, there are 46.2 Million Americans living below the poverty line. Given the spending outlined above, we could simply write every man, woman and child under the poverty line a check for $20,000.

I'm all for having a social safety net. The problem is, ours seems to be huge, made of the finest silk and is chocked full of holes.


Now show us a per capita spending chart. Then show us a mortality rate chart for that income group.
 
Displayed 50 of 69 comments

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

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report