Year after year, our culture of dependence grows

“Millions for charity, but not one penny for tribute”

Obama would do well to learn that phrase and it meaning.

• Link
• Report this comment

My redistribution is actually doing quite well. The companies that I have an interest in get plenty of business from me. I’m still waiting for someone to explain how capitalism works without money being redistributed through the chain.

• Link
• Report this comment

scott- Its a billionaire funded operation

George Soros says “What?”

At least the Kochs are American, not a foreign interest.

• Link
• Report this comment

SC, that would be impossible and/or a excercise in futility as you refuse to listen and bask in the glow of being contrary.

Best of luck to you my friend.

• Link
• Report this comment

Tea party became concerned about the country when Obama became President.

Gee wizz I wonder why. All this time they were never concerned but now they are?

wow. unbelievable. the country is full of fools who can’t read nor perform simple math.

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/business/us_beats_street_mAXnoMeDhbQgAWomyuJX1H

• Link
• Report this comment

I’m an active listener. I also understand there are different forms of redistribution. In my line of work, I come across people who also work in foreign countries. If one does not wish to pay taxes, there are alternatives. Therefore, paying taxes is not a “forced” action. It is just a voluntary as paying for a product. I also know enough about other countries that I don’t mind paying taxes to live here in the US.

• Link
• Report this comment

I jest got my EBT card reloaded today. Git er done! Oh, and thanks gubment!

• Link
• Report this comment

“Tea party became concerned about the country when Obama became President.”

Or one might state

Tea party became concerned about the Country when the Country became non-concerned about its citizens.

Or

Tea party became concerned when the Dems began to implement one-sided, bankrupting legistlation and procdures ie ObamaCare.

Or

Or

Or…

• Link
• Report this comment

j

I won’t argue with you there. That’s some pretty shady stuff that I wouldn’t put any money into. To me, an investment is just that. I invest with the hope that it will create more wealth, not disappear into some black hole in wall street, move from account to account to account, and emerge somewhere else with 5% tacked on.

• Link
• Report this comment

Several have mentioned the Koch brothers this morning. Consider the source of the article accordingly, but read a short yet chilling account of their agenda — follow the links too. Everything is footnoted. You can’t make this stuff up.

http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2010/10/20-4

• Link
• Report this comment

This is how I think the situation with government dependency regarding working-age adults should be handled.

1. Loss of some civil rights while on the dole, especially voting.
2. Mandatory birth control.
3. If single & no children, mandatory, single sex group housing.
4. Absolutely no alcohol or drug use, frequent testing
5. Physical labor cleaning the streets or something similar. We are already paying to feed, house, and clothe them, the should be made to perform some work for the money.

Basically, we should be compassionate for those in difficult straits through no fault of thier own, however we should give tough love to the remainder.

• Link
• Report this comment

Scott
I do expect this one sided stupidity from you lefties, so tell which billionaire has spent over 300 million to make 529 groups, websites and donation to ONLY democrats? George Soros, but why don’t you mention him in you loser tirade? Better yet what president received over 100 million in overseas contributions to his campaign? Obozo…
So why is it OK for the democrats?

• Link
• Report this comment

@A Hearty Cheese Sauce,

Exactly, they changed some rules…to protect the consumer. They did not eliminate fees. What they did is tell the banks they cannot charge hidden fees. For instance, before banks would automatically cover the purchases made on debit cards if there were insufficient funds in the account and then charge a fee without the consumer knowing it. So a $2 cup of coffee could cost the consumer $35 or more. They are still allowed to do it but the consumer has to opt it, being fully aware of it. If the consumer does not opt in, then they transaction is denied.

Of course, some big banks are eliminating “free checking” accounts. A spokeswoman for Bank of America has said there never really was free checking due to the fees banks charged. Notice, it’s only the large banks that have been eliminating “free checking” accounts. If you believe in free enterprise and competition this can lead to people moving their money from the large banks to smaller banks which do not charge outrageous fees. Competition can kick in and force some of the large banks into being more competitive. Competition doesn’t only happen in regulation free environments.

They have also raised interest rates on credit cards and will tell the consumer it’s due to new federal regulations. This is false. I still have a credit card with a fixed rate of 4.9% through a credit union. Competition works, I moved my accounts to a credit union which offers lower interest on credit cards, higher interest on my savings and less fees than the large banks.

• Link
• Report this comment

LukasATL,

A hearty “Heil Hitler!” to you this morning!

• Link
• Report this comment

Wealth is CREATED

So, what you’re saying is that there is some wealth fairy sprinkles pixie dust and money just appears out of nowhere? I understand what you’re saying about wealth being created. However, you can create all the value in the product that you want to. Until someone PURCHASES the product, there is nothing. That purchaser is what allows you to gain your dividend.

On the second half of your statement, you acknowledge some benefit to what the government does. It may not create wealth as a primary benefit, but do you think Kia, Hyundai, or others would bring investments to this area if we were overrun by homeless and other negative stuff?

• Link
• Report this comment

Tea party became concerned about the Country when the Country became non-concerned about its citizens.

Or

—
You probably meant federal government rather than country the second time you mentioned country.

this should have happened when the previous guy lied and got the country in a war. Don’t remember any tea party folks running around complaining.

Do tea party members refuse to cash their social security checks each month?

FYI the feds (D or R) have never been concerned with the citizens just big business and maintaining the power structure.

• Link
• Report this comment

Southern Comfort

I would call the wealth fairy my time and work. If you invest time and work into something, you can create utility and wealth.

I don’t have to sell something to have created wealth. If I’m a caveman and I took a good stick and sharpened it into a spear, I have, in a way, become more wealthy. I can use said stick to multiplicatively impact how much I can eat. I don’t have to sell it to another caveman to realize its worth.

And so what if somebody purchases it? That person wouldn’t purchase it unless the deal were mutually beneficial. That person has become more wealthy themselves.

• Link
• Report this comment

SoCo- Money has to be redistributed for defense, securing the border, and other essential government functions

We can always debate ways to save money. The government is too big of an organization to operate efficiently. Congress is still operating under the assumption “here’s a problem, let’s throw a checkbook at it and make it go away”. That worked for a while, but now we’re out of money and have little to show for what we spent.

• Link
• Report this comment

“Tea party became concerned about the Country when the Country became non-concerned about its citizens.”

Are you talking about the tea party financed by very large “small businesses” who do to eliminate all regulations, pay no taxes and ship our jobs overseas. That’s showing concerns for it’s citizens.

• Link
• Report this comment

The natural extension of a culture of dependence is a culture of taking. Envy, anger and judgmentalism are just window dressing to justify taking from the productive to give to the unproductive. As the dependence grows, the taking must grow too.

• Link
• Report this comment

@TINSTAAFL

You have the right to sue the Federal Government to eliminate all welfare programs. Take it all the way to the supreme court.

• Link
• Report this comment

One in five Americans — 64.3 million people — relies on government handouts to fulfill basic needs for housing, food and/or health care. – Of course, this number is much higher now after the great recession, which was caused by Republican policies removing regulation on markets, corporate greed and excesses, and a dramatic shift of personal wealth to the top 1% in this country.

Of course, it’s never a good idea to look too closely at the numbers, is it Kyle?

• Link
• Report this comment

Maybe Kyle should look at the numbers of dependent people before the Great Depression and Roosevelt. That’s about the time when the middle class began taking off.

During the 80’s we started dismantling the middle class and look where we are now.

Kyle, where do you think elderly people lived after their working years were over? They moved in with their kids! Social Security and wider use of pensions and retirement plans made it possible for them to live on their own. (So you have a need for two houses instead of one – boom, now you have a housing industry!)

Even pat Buchanan understands the need for a thriving middle class. We can’t continue pushing all our money up to the wealthy people.

• Link
• Report this comment

@J-The tea party movement started once BO started passing quazi-socialist policies on healhcare, bailouts, etc. These policies weren’t born of ANY other administration in the past, republican nor democrat. Once we saw where BO was trying to take the country (in the direction of France and/or Canada) people woke up. Thats why after the elections next month, the GOP will be back in charge, followed by the white house in 2012.

• Link
• Report this comment

KW, once you establish (as Citizens United case confirmed) there is no difference between corporate citizens (special interests) and individual citizens (we the People), this all makes sense. as has been noted by yours truly, and others; corporations and other special interests (unions, religious organizations, non-profits, etc.) are all very needy and DEPEND on the federal government in order to survive. as I have said many times, is there a difference between wealth redistribution when it flows through the DoD into the private sector cofferd of Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman or Blackwater/XE, and the wealth that flows through the poor and the unemployed, but eventually ends up as revenue on the balance sheets of ADM, Bank of America, Kroger, Coca Cola or Miller Coors; or wealth that flows through the sick, elderly, indigent (and those pesky anchor babies), but eventually comes to rest at Pfizer, Merck, or Kaiser-Permanente? I find it interesting that Christine O’Connell is both venerated by the Tea Party, and villified by everyone else as an icon of the movement. She is a short-sighted, soundbite-driven, shallow and ignorant, intellectual infant, who extrapolates facts/information to form hybrid fact/fiction myths, fairy tales and fabels, which she then presents as truth. even more bizarre his her (and most of the tea party) penchant for stating the obvious (’no separation of church and state in the first amendment”) as if she is a Constitutional scholar or authority (which is really ironic, because much of the tea party movement are flat earth zealots who eschew the observations of “academics” and “intellectuals”.). the tea party’s greatest liability (as evidenced by O’Connell and her fellow dimwitted floosie, Sarah Palin), is its habit of parsing words and issues; and sellectively interpreting the Constitution (or claiming to know the intentions/motives of the Founding Fathers, which interesting enough, was devoid of “Mama Grizzlies”). and this is no more evident in the tea party movements refusal to acknowledge corporate welfare or out of control DoD spending as complicent in this current mess.

• Link
• Report this comment