I
The balance is that through taxes we can find funds for unemployment for those who are displaced until the economy grows or recovers enough to produce new jobs.
unemployment isn't funded by income tax.
It's funded by an employer.
The key assumption of those who want no social programs, indeed an untrue assumption, is that they do not benefit society. This is simply not true, in fact, the type of wealth some people now enjoy would be impossible without the tax and social welfare structure.
it's not that we want nothing, it's that we want them to no longer be permanent fixtures in people's lives.
. No one ever said anything about a taxless world. We're talking about income tax here, and nothing else.
There would still be taxes on everything else.
And where any deficiencies in funding should come from should be in the form of imports. get your 30% if you need it at the docks. THIS is how income levels are retained to fund anything, and in the long term, jobs come home because american-made products can be priced competitively again.
Almost EVERY other country in the world does this in some shape or another. VAT in the uk, GST in Canada, etc etc....
If you cancel social security tomorrow you will have millions of starving families, you expect them to starve to death quietly?
And this obvioulsy would never happen. But it could stop tomorrow for 17 year olds and younger. They would no longer have to pay in to it, and by the time the 18 year olds today get to retirement age, it's basically been a pro-rated contribution that is very low compared to those today currently on it. It will take an entire generation or 2 to completely phase it out successfully and honestly.
It's not like there is a surplus of jobs out there that they would just have to go out and get if their welfare was cut off. Some of them? Yes. Most? No.
It is this exact mentality that causes the problems. WHY BOTHER? I CAN JUST COLLECT.
And since we can't shoot 'em to protect our property, the hippies keep winning.
On the deterrence model of punishment: Again, there are socioeconomic reasons which drive a lot of crime and the detterence model doesn't effect those. Property crime decreased dramatically with the advent of the welfare state. What use is a second hand to someone who will not survive another month without stealing?
jail isn't a deterrent. It's a hotel stay for some of these people. All their friends are there anyway.
And jail just costs more money than welfare does in the first place.
If you don't want to work, that's fine. sell drugs or something. At least EARN a living.
There is ZERO excuse for any able-bodied person to be on welfare from birth to death. ZERO.
Abolishing the welfare state will never happen because those in charge, even the Republicans, know that it's simply not an option. It's rhetoric, propaganda, so that you will look the other way while they create loop holes so the top 1% can increase the proportion of wealth they have while the middle class carries the burden of this nation.
It is this exact mentality that makes our country suck. Thank you for continuning to think this.
The problem with the burden of this nation IS the burden of this nation. Pick the leeches from the skin. Punish failure, not success. Help, and teach, don't do it for them.
the mindset of the average 'poor' american is broken. It needs to be changed.. I really feel bad for kids today and their kids. The world is going to be like the future in Terra Nova. Shit.
It's now or never.
Adapt and change or die.