patrick.net

So at what "deadbeat ratio" is the 'needy vs deadbeat' argument lost?
90/10?? 50/50??

edvard2 says

zzyzzx says

I don't see how paying a boatload of taxes so that people too fucking lazy to work don't have to is in my best interests.

You are making more gross generalizations. Until you can show us exacting detailed data that proves that all people on government assistance programs are too lazy to work you've lost the argument

JH says

But in reality the problem is that entitled Americans would not take the service jobs. McDonalds and Walmart would be out of business and no lawns in California would ever be mowed.

What would happen with lawns is
1. People would mow their own lawns.
2. People would pay more to have their lawns mowed.
3. People would stop having lawns.

What would happen with McDonald's and Walmart is
1. These companies would pay their employees more.
2. These companies would charge more for their goods.
3. These companies would go out of business and be replaced by better businesses.

Both are examples of the free market working.

zzyzzx says

I'd take away their welfare, social security "disability", Obamaphones, section 8 housing, etc. so they would have to work or starve. That should motivate the deadbeats enough to get a job.

I say cut the warfare budget by 95% and that will get all the deadbeats in that industry working real jobs that produce wealth rather than sucking the government teat.

Every program you mentioned added up together does not cost as much as the warfare industry.

zzyzzx says

I don't see how paying a boatload of taxes so that people too fucking lazy to work don't have to is in my best interests.

It's not. That's why the bank bailouts were bad.

JH says

These millennials living with mom and dad refuse to do anything with their history degrees that doesn't pay six figures.

And it's perfectly within their right to make that choice. They have invested so much time and effort into those degrees, it is perfectly sensible for them to demand a reasonable return in exchange for their skills. It is also perfectly within their rights to decide that a job that doesn't pay enough isn't worth spending the time and doing the labor. This choice is the natural reaction to labor getting paid less and less every year for three generations.

As long as mom and dad are ok with their adult children living with them, as evidently they are even if they don't consider it ideal, then it's fine for Millennials to make the decision to stay with their parents. This is a perfectly logical financial reaction to the piss poor labor market the Millennials inherited after their parent's generation sold off the country to China and India.

For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction.

zzyzzx says

That's their parent's problem. They could have used birth control instead of taking a change and ending up with a deadbeat kid.

I would argue that if the Millennials had inherited the labor market that the Boomer's had between 1950 and 1970, those Milliennials would have jobs. Hell, if the labor market and economy had been like it was from 1995 to 2000, Millennial unemployment would be about zero and they would be producing tons of wealth.

It seems silly to me to blame the one generation that had nothing to do with the shitty state of our economy for not getting jobs. The Millennials are unemployed and living with their parents because the three previous generations sold off our nation's infrastructure, lowered the real wages of labor, raised the cost of housing, health care, and college to ridiculous levels, and forced them into debt before they even entered the labor force. The Millennials were fucked by previous generations before they were even born.

SoftShell says

So at what "deadbeat ratio" is the 'needy vs deadbeat' argument lost?

First you need to define needy and deadbeat. My observation is that people define needy as "I need something" and deadbeat as "somebody else needs something".

Similarly, everyone who drives slower than me is an idiot, and everyone who drives faster than me is a maniac.

Dan8267 says

Every program you mentioned added up together does not cost as much as the warfare industry.

You must be bad at match. Add it state spending on welfare and it's easily several times defense spending:

Dan8267 says

JH says

These millennials living with mom and dad refuse to do anything with their history degrees that doesn't pay six figures.

And it's perfectly within their right to make that choice. They have invested so much time and effort into those degrees, it is perfectly sensible for them to demand a reasonable return in exchange for their skills.

You did notice the degree was "history", right?

Dan8267 says

I would argue that if the Millennials had inherited the labor market that the Boomer's had between 1950 and 1970, those Milliennials would have jobs. Hell, if the labor market and economy had been like it was from 1995 to 2000, Millennial unemployment would be about zero and they would be producing tons of wealth.

You are saying that wealth accumulated from 1995 to 2000 was real wealth?

Dan8267 says

The Millennials were fucked by previous generations before they were even born.

Yes I agree completely with this. (And unfortunately Gen X can make the same argument vs. boomers.) But you are helping me make my point: millennials feel entitled to a certain level of job and refuse anything less. Just because "everyone else" fucked them over, they will refuse to work a lesser job? Sure in America they have a "right" to refuse to work, but that reeks of entitlement.

No I don't. Websters does a good enough job of it.

Full Definition of NEEDY
1: being in want : poverty-stricken

dead·beat noun \ˈded-ˌbēt\
1: a lazy person : a person who does not work

That's one of the problems with society today. Everybody wants to redefine words. Marriage use to mean a union of man and woman. Now you can mate with your canary under the term.

The human mouth is capable of forming thousands of sounds as yet undefined. We should mine this resource instead of redefining everything.
Dan8267 says

SoftShell says

So at what "deadbeat ratio" is the 'needy vs deadbeat' argument lost?

First you need to define needy and deadbeat.

JH says

But you are helping me make my point: millennials feel entitled to a
certain level of job and refuse anything less

Well that is part of how they were raised. If we live in a society that thinks everybody can go to college and can work white collar jobs and "dirty" jobs are for illegals-well it will take some time for reality to sink in.

Unless of course they figure out how to live on welfare.

Dan8267 says

First you need to define needy and deadbeat. My observation is that people define needy as "I need something" and deadbeat as "somebody else needs something".

A deadbeat is someone who is too lazy to work, or just doesn't pay their bills. A needy person has a real, verifiable physical or mental handicap preventing them from working. I.E. - a retard or someone in a wheelchair is "needy", pretty much everyone else on welfare programs are deadbeats.

This is another stupid useless argument where the peons whom watch their little right-winger shows have been totally convinced that anything good for them is bad, anything bad for them is good, and they've been totally programmed to think this way. Thus no need to argue as that is a waste of time.

Dan8267 says

I say cut the warfare budget by 95% and that will get all the deadbeats in that industry working real jobs that produce wealth rather than sucking the government teat.

Dan8267 says

It's not. That's why the bank bailouts were bad.

Dan8267 says

It is also perfectly within their rights to decide that a job that doesn't pay enough isn't worth spending the time and doing the labor. This choice is the natural reaction to labor getting paid less and less every year for three generations.

As long as mom and dad are ok with their adult children living with them, as evidently they are even if they don't consider it ideal, then it's fine for Millennials to make the decision to stay with their parents. This is a perfectly logical financial reaction to the piss poor labor market the Millennials inherited after their parent's generation sold off the country to China and India.

For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction.

Dan8267 says

I would argue that if the Millennials had inherited the labor market that the Boomer's had between 1950 and 1970, those Milliennials would have jobs. Hell, if the labor market and economy had been like it was from 1995 to 2000, Millennial unemployment would be about zero and they would be producing tons of wealth.

It seems silly to me to blame the one generation that had nothing to do with the shitty state of our economy for not getting jobs. The Millennials are unemployed and living with their parents because the three previous generations sold off our nation's infrastructure, lowered the real wages of labor, raised the cost of housing, health care, and college to ridiculous levels, and forced them into debt before they even entered the labor force. The Millennials were fucked by previous generations before they were even born.

Bravo! Post of the week.

zzyzzx says

A deadbeat is someone who is too lazy to work,

That definition could also go for people who waste lots of time spouting off worthless right leaning drivel on various forums.

edvard2 says

That definition could also go for people who waste lots of time spouting off worthless right leaning drivel on various forums.

That definition could also go for people who waste lots of time spouting off worthless left leaning drivel on various forums.

edvard2 says

This is another stupid useless argument where the peons whom watch their little right-winger shows have been totally convinced that anything good for them is bad, anything bad for them is good, and they've been totally programmed to think this way. Thus no need to argue as that is a waste of time.

Is a "liberal" anyone who gets their ideas from places other than Fox News? Or, god forbid, actually thinks for themselves?

Dan8267 says

I say cut the warfare budget by 95% and that will get all the deadbeats in
that industry working real jobs that produce wealth rather than sucking the
government teat.

Every program you mentioned added up together does not cost as much as the
warfare industry.

Dan8267 says

It seems silly to me to blame the one generation that had nothing to do with
the shitty state of our economy for not getting jobs. The Millennials are
unemployed and living with their parents because the three previous generations
sold off our nation's infrastructure, lowered the real wages of labor, raised
the cost of housing, health care, and college to ridiculous levels, and forced
them into debt before they even entered the labor force. The Millennials were
fucked by previous generations before they were even born.

Damn Dan, you're on fire. +10

freak80 says

Is a "liberal" anyone who gets their ideas from places other than Fox News? Or, god forbid, actually thinks for themselves?

A liberal is the conservative's boogeyman for all things wrong with this country. A conservative is the liberal's boogeyman for all things wrong with this country.

While the two fight with each other -the politicians become gazillionares and have fun.

zzyzzx says

That definition could also go for people who waste lots of time spouting off worthless left leaning drivel on various forums.

Its a good thing that sort of left-leaning drivel hasn't been expressed, but instead rather common sense.

You know what I find humorously ironic about all of these so-called fiscally conservative diatribes coming often from people who have a limited grasp on finance? Well, I'd say that I make an income that places me in the upper 10, maybe even 5% of the general population. If there were anyone who 'should' be complaining about taxes, it should be me because about 30% of my income goes to paying taxes while I can almost guarantee a lot of those complaining about taxes are either paying very little, or no taxes at all. So if we're going to talk about people using up tax dollars, well I could very easily turn that around and complain about my tax dollars helping others who make less than I do indirectly by them not having to pay as much tax in general.

Yet I don't complain because I understand that in order to run a modern, democratic society it takes money and so I pay my taxes. It doesn't take a genius to figure these things out.

Dan8267 says

And it's perfectly within their right to make that choice. They have invested
so much time and effort into those degrees, it is perfectly sensible for them to
demand a reasonable return in exchange for their skills. It is also perfectly
within their rights to decide that a job that doesn't pay enough isn't worth
spending the time and doing the labor. This choice is the natural reaction to
labor getting paid less and less every year for three generations.

As long as mom and dad are ok with their adult children living with them, as
evidently they are even if they don't consider it ideal, then it's fine for
Millennials to make the decision to stay with their parents. This is a perfectly
logical financial reaction to the piss poor labor market the Millennials
inherited after their parent's generation sold off the country to China and
India

But oftentimes, the parents are not fine with it, frequently they resent the situation and just dont have the gumption to kick the "kids" out of the house. The millenials predictably sense this weakness and exploit it to the fullest and feel entitled to free housing, free driver and free maid services. It is literally not just/fair to the parents to put up with this sort of burden at a time in their lives where they have fully earned to right to have some peace and privacy if they so choose.

edvard2 says

Well, I'd say that I make an income that places me in the upper 10, maybe even
5% of the general population. If there were anyone who 'should' be complaining
about taxes, it should be me because about 30% of my income goes to paying taxes
while I can almost guarantee a lot of those complaining

Do you run a business and deduct a ton? because if you are making a salary and live in say CA-30% tax rate is not much. Well unless you have a gazillion dollar mortgage.

This goes with Dan's above rant, as he nailed it back then too!!!!

When the Boomers were kids, everything revolved around kids and the nuclear family. When the Boomers were teenagers, everything revolved around sex, drugs, and rock-and-roll. Orgies were the norm. When the Boomers were young adults, everything revolved around disco, booze, and cocaine. Violent crime and drug usage peaked. This was when New York City and other major metropolitan areas were at their shittiest and dirtiest.

When the Boomers entered their 30s, everything revolved around careers and Wall Street. Greed is good came into being. This lasted about 20 years, the exact same period that Boomers were investing in the stock market. Meanwhile, gated communities sprang up as Boomers didn't want to live with people who behaved exactly like they did. Housing prices started to sore.

Now that the Boomers are retiring, Social Security is in dire straights, medical care costs are skyrocketing, and the government's solution is to tax the young to pay for the old through forced private insurance.

Geeze, you notice a pattern here? Everything revolves around the Boomers; they act selfish and self-centered in every stage in life; and every other generation ends up paying for them.

And you say the Baby Boomers had things in great shape until the Millennials came along? Maybe for the Boomers, but not for anyone else.

upisdown says

When the Boomers were young adults, everything revolved around disco, booze, and cocaine. Violent crime and drug usage peaked. This was when New York City and other major metropolitan areas were at their shittiest and dirtiest.

This one has nothing to do with the boomers. Urban decay of the 60's was the result of white flight of the greatest generation to the suburbs combined with the mass movement of manufacturing to the south. The rest is certainly true though.

zzyzzx says

You must be bad at match. Add it state spending on welfare and it's easily several times defense spending:

And you must be bad at both spelling and reading comprehension:

Cash Assistance Under TANF Makes Up 0.18 Percent Of Federal Spending. According to the CRS study, the federal government spent an estimated $6.594 billion in fiscal year 2011 on cash assistance under the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program. That year, total federal spending was $3.603 trillion. [OMB, accessed 10/19/12, Congressional Research Service, 10/16/12, via The Weekly Standard]

Welfare "Pretty Much Always" Refers "To TANF." In a post about the CRS analysis, Salon political writer Alex Pareene wrote:

In the context of political discussions, "welfare" traditionally (as in pretty much always) refers specifically to Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, or TANF, the federal program that was created in 1996 to replace the Aid to Families With Dependent Children program -- also known as "welfare" -- that had existed since the New Deal. This is what people refer to when they say "welfare caseloads" and "welfare rolls," and when conservatives accuse Obama of gutting "welfare reform" they are referring to TANF. [Salon, 10/18/12]

"The con is pretty easy to see when you read the actual CRS report. Senate Republicans are counting 83 separate (and wildly different) programs as "welfare" in order to make the case that the government is spending more on poor people than old people. The majority of this money is Medicaid and CHIP, which are healthcare spending, which is increasing for the same reason that Medicare spending is increasing, which is that healthcare costs are increasing. (And Medicaid is much less generous than Medicare, because it is a program for poor people, not old people.)

But so many other things now also count as welfare, including Pell Grants, public works spending, Head Start, child support enforcement, the Child Tax Credit, Foster Care assistance, housing for old people, and much more. They're also counting the Earned Income Tax Credit, which is, traditionally, the form of "welfare" that conservative Republicans actually support. Basically, all social spending (though specifically not spending on rich old people or on healthcare for veterans with service-related disabilities, which Republicans requested be excluded from the CRS report) now counts as "welfare." [Salon, 10/18/12]"

Here's the real breakdown:

lostand confused says

While the two fight with each other -the politicians become gazillionares and have fun.

Good point. Maybe Patrick.net was created by members of the top 0.1% to keep us fighting amongst ourselves. :-)

^^My question is, if conservatives are so certain that their position on the issues are correct, why do they feel the need to lie and otherwise make shit up to "prove" their point. If what they say is actually correct, shouldn't the facts speak for themselves? Yet they always resort to easily disproved bullshit to make their case.

bob2356 says

upisdown says

When the Boomers were young adults, everything revolved around disco, booze, and cocaine. Violent crime and drug usage peaked. This was when New York City and other major metropolitan areas were at their shittiest and dirtiest.

This one has nothing to do with the boomers. Urban decay of the 60's was the result of white flight of the greatest generation to the suburbs combined with the mass movement of manufacturing to the south. The rest is certainly true though.

I'm not gainsaying either of these explanations, but violent crime may be highly correlated with leaded gasoline.

The real drops in violent crime came when we no longer had lots of 20-year-olds around who had grown up within a half-mile of the freeway, or so say some current researchers.

From Wikipedia:

Reductions in the average blood lead level is believed to have been a major cause for falling violent crime rates in the United States and South Africa. Economist Jessica Wolpaw Reyes of Amherst College found that declining exposure to lead has caused up to a 56% decline in crime from 1992 to 2002. Including other factors that are believed to have increased crime rates over that period Reyes found that this led to an actual decline of 34% over that period.

A statistically significant correlation has been found between the usage rate of leaded gasoline and violent crime: taking into account a 22-year time lag, the violent crime curve virtually tracks the lead exposure curve. After the ban on TEL, blood lead levels in US children dramatically decreased.

bob2356 says

This one has nothing to do with the boomers. Urban decay of the 60's was the
result of white flight of the greatest generation to the suburbs combined with
the mass movement of manufacturing to the south. The rest is certainly true
though.

Here's the copy of the original post where I got his rant from:

Mom, why can't I get a job?
By Bubbabear Follow (1) Thu, 25 Apr 2013, 12:05pm 559 views 34 comments
In Yorba Linda CA 92886 Watch (0) Share Quote Permalink

I always find it funny that a lot of boomers are NOW bitching about government programs/policies or departments that were created or started by the very same f-in politicians that they voted for, sometimes more than once(as in the president) and many times over for congress.
I especially love the feigned madness about the government debt, along with how everybody should pay for health care with cash or learn to toughen-up some, while I remember someone that said that asking for a ride to the doctor to get their toenails trimmed.........because Medicare pays for it.

upisdown says

Everything revolves around the Boomers

That's what happens when there are more of you than anyone else. There are approximately 75-80 million Baby Boomers. Gen X is about half the size. The Millennial Generation is estimated to be about as large as the Boomer generation (77 million), so they will have their say before too long.

finehoe says

^^My question is, if conservatives are so certain that their position on the issues are correct, why do they feel the need to lie and otherwise make shit up to "prove" their point. If what they say is actually correct, shouldn't the facts speak for themselves? Yet they always resort to easily disproved bullshit to make their case.

The problem is thinking in conservatives vs democrats vs progressives vs liberals in the first place. Alleged lying is plenty on both mainstream sides of the political spectrum. I think both major parties are blocked by their own idiocy and demagoguery, because otherwise they would realize they are one and the same. Then when someone else with actual solutions and new ways comes along they go back and find one bill from the last millenium where the person representing these (movement of) new ideas and solutions has voted unfavorably to them, call that person names and carry on with blocking real progress.

Call it Crazy says

Liberals aren't allow to think for themselves. They must have the government tell them what to do....

Conservatives are an oxymoron: The very definition of conservative is itself an oxymoron because you can't stop change. As I wrote this, 20 seconds passed. Point made.

Call it Crazy says

Well it's a good thing your here then... Every town needs an idiot...

I see you were one of those who didn't figure it out. BTW.... "Your" should be "You're"

finehoe says

That's what happens when there are more of you than anyone else. There are
approximately 75-80 million Baby Boomers. Gen X is about half the size. The
Millennial Generation is estimated to be about as large as the Boomer generation
(77 million), so they will have their say before too long.

I know, it's either being hit over the head from above or (soon to be)being kicked in the nads from below. What a time to look forward to, whereas both sides are trying to maintain the lifestyles and perks at the others' expense, and being in the middle of both of them and getting f-ed by both.

An oxymoron requires at least two words, no? Or at least a "compound word."

freak80 says

An oxymoron requires at least two words, no? Or at least a "compound word."

The way conservatives use the term is an oxymoron. Because they feel that they can basically keep things the same forever and ever but in the end things change and thus their usage of this as their ideology is a failure.

LOL...

edvard2 says

where the peons whom watch their little right-winger shows

Well, I'm a 1 percenter....mind if I step on your back for awhile??

edvard2 says

Well, I'd say that I make an income that places me in the upper 10, maybe even 5% of the general population.

drop the "and ever" and you might have a coherent sentence.
No need to stutter on a public forum....

edvard2 says

Because they feel that they can basically keep things the same forever and ever

SoftShell says

Well, I'm a 1 percenter....mind if I step on your back for awhile??

Depends on what you're a 1 percent of.

SoftShell says

drop the "and ever" and you might have a coherent sentence.

No need to stutter on a public forum....

No need to waste electricity typing a sentence that is utterly pointless in regards to a sentence that was written in a perfectly fine manner.

mell says

The problem is thinking in conservatives vs democrats vs progressives vs liberals in the first place.

I used to use this line myself, back when I was Libertarian. It was just a COINCIDENCE that I always voted Republican, because you know I was INDEPENDENT and it just happend to work out straight GOP ticket.

Total BS now that I came to my senses. There are substantial differences, Republican Party these days takes hypocrisy and lies to such an extreme, they delude themselves that everyone else is the same.

Vicente says

mell says

The problem is thinking in conservatives vs democrats vs progressives vs liberals in the first place.

I used to use this line myself, back when I was Libertarian. It was just a COINCIDENCE that I always voted Republican, because you know I was INDEPENDENT and it just happend to work out straight GOP ticket.

Total BS now that I came to my senses. There are substantial differences, Republican Party these days takes hypocrisy and lies to such an extreme, they delude themselves that everyone else is the same.

I don't know how you can say that with an (assumed) straight face. Barack Obama as a Senator and presidential candidate back then sounds and acts like the exact opposite of him as a president and his administration:

http://www.youtube.com/embed/d3LZNc_TP_o

You were on the right track back then ;)