Liberaltarian Mantra Blown to Bits: We'll Get to Entitlements Last

[AuH20]

Survey says Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid are a three-headed hydra that need to be slayed tomorrow.

http://blog.mises.org/14134/tax-receipt-fascinating/

[RedStripe]

:rolleyes:

Where's the statistics on the amount of artificial rents that we pay daily due to intellectual property rights, the monetary monopoly, or a thousand other indirect ways that the government has basically handed the economy to the rich on a silver platter?

Oh, the Mises institute doesn't have those statistics? You don't say...

Quick! Cut medical care for the poor! Haha

[AuH20]

:rolleyes:

Where's the statistics on the amount of artificial rents that we pay daily due to intellectual property rights, the monetary monopoly, or a thousand other indirect ways that the government has basically handed the economy to the rich on a silver platter?

Oh, the Mises institute doesn't have those statistics? You don't say...

Quick! Cut medical care for the poor! Haha

Why should the poor further grovel to their captors? Doesn't that add insult to injury? Until the hostage chains are permanently cut by their own volition, the less fortunate will be continue to be manipulated and abused. As of today, entitlements are the chief validation tool for increased deficits and less economic freedom. 'Thou shall not cut entitlement benefits' is the unofficially the 11th commandment, repeated by countless Americans ignorant to the big picture.

Secondly, regarding the countless number of parasitic fees we pay, a strong push towards the gradual elimination of such extortion methods needs to take place. Unfortunately, we may not see a sea change until the masses become desperate and middle does not hold.

[RedStripe]

Why should the poor further grovel to their captors? Doesn't that add insult to injury? Until the hostage chains are permanently cut by their own volition, the less fortunate will be continue to be manipulated and abused. As of today, entitlements are the chief validation tool for increased deficits and less economic freedom. 'Thou shall not cut entitlement benefits' is the unofficially the 11th commandment.

I don't see your point here. Most people who are extremely poor are glad that they don't have to pay for private school, that they can still get healthcare even though they can't afford it (and don't get it through their job(s)).

Entitlement spending, is, in some respects necessary. From a humanitarian point of view it's basically the least (literally, in most cases) the government can do to alleviate the immediate suffering of the victims of capitalism (state-capitalism, cronyism, whatever). Sure, it's humiliating and degrading, but they really don't have much of a choice honestly.



Secondly, regarding the countless parasitic fees we pay, a strong push towards the gradual elimination of such extortion methods needs to take place. Unfortunately, we may not see a sea change until the masses become desperate and middle does not hold.

I agree with you here to an extent. At this point, an elimination of the government intervention that keeps the underclass afloat would basically cause either a violent collapse of the system or an authoritarian police state crackdown, neither of which I really want to see (it would probably get really really ugly). That's actually the exact reason that the more "enlightened" elites (corporate liberals) don't want to eliminate the welfare state - they know it will end very very badly for the system as a whole. That's why very few in any positions of power honestly want to get rid of the safety net, which is nothing more than a safety valve of the system. Simply put, eliminating entitlements wont happen... not because of all the avid partisans of the underclass, but because the people at the top understand that it is an essential aspect of the system.

The fundamental problem is that something is going to have to change eventually regardless due to the numerous crisis tendencies of our current trajectory as a society (state fiscal crisis, corporate fiscal crisis, chronic underemployment and unemployment, energy crisis, dwindling returns on physical capital, undermining of artificial rents by new technology, wage stagnation, etc). The smarter elites understand this, which is why they honestly do realize that the fiscal situation is unsustainable. I suspect that the true guessing game is how long before the state fiscal problems really manifest themselves as an impediment to the state-corporate agenda (already the political manifestation, though largely opportunistic and phony, has begun).

Anyway, the elites are running out of ways of patching up the system. They had to patch it up in the late 1800s after the crisis of the 1890s, they had to patch it up again during the 1930s, they patched it up again in the 1970s, and they've patched it up even more over the last few years (the stimulus really was necessary - to save corporatism). Part of that patching process has been the gradual increase in the welfare state, which serves many purposes: 1) providing reliable demand for consumer goods (excess product that needs to be dumped somewhere) 2) a form of unemployment insurance that businesses don't have to pay for directly (but do, as a cartel, generally pay for (in part) collectively - eliminates prisoner's dilemma for them) 3) increasing social stability, etc.

So there's no doubt that the welfare state is in the interests of the system, and, consequently, everyone who benefits from it. But clearly some people benefit more than others, and, compared with a more 'neutral' system, some (most) are actually harmed. The unfortunate fact is that those harmed most by the system also have the most to lose (in the short term, and to a great extent) from "pulling the rug out" by abolishing entitlements.

It's easy to advocate simple solutions (that have no realistic chance of being implemented), but the fact is that the problem is extremely complex. When deregulation becomes a buzzword and businesses (empowered by a system rigged by the state) fly off the loose end because of it (in part), you not only set-back the anti-state position, you also cause a lot of harm for very little serious gain of "liberty" for the vast majority of people who don't own companies.

I know this is extremely long-winded, but it's just so frustrating to see the Mises institute and others make a big deal about things without really looking at the big picture. It's easy to be partisan and whine about taxes. Yes, of course it's generally wrong to take money from people. I mean that's like 101 stuff. I wish the Mises Institute would delve a bit deeper into things than just their superficial attacks on "big government," but I think that might upset some of the wealthy and conservative interests which whom they are likely associated. That's just my take on them.

[legion]

They split all the defense spending up into its obscure departments, obviously. So it's going to look smaller than it actually is because it's split up over the DoE, Homeland Security, DoD, etc.

I don't see any defense research on there, either.

Entitlements come last because people that actually contributed to the system are dependent on them for their survival. It's a terrible problem, but dealing with the most impossible problem first is a good way to make sure we never get anything done.

[Fox McCloud]

:rolleyes:

Where's the statistics on the amount of artificial rents that we pay daily due to intellectual property rights, the monetary monopoly, or a thousand other indirect ways that the government has basically handed the economy to the rich on a silver platter?

Oh, the Mises institute doesn't have those statistics? You don't say...

Quick! Cut medical care for the poor! Haha

Wow, just wow. This is about the most pathetic thing I think I've ever heard you say on this forums. It's truly ridiculous.

The blog piece itself says nothing about what should be cut and what shouldn't, it merely has the headline "Fascinating"; nothing more is stated, nothing less; you're reading into it and seeing it purely the way you want to see it.

And secondly, if you spent even a fraction of the amount of time you spend blithering on and on about mutualism here on the forums on mises.org you'd see they're just as put out and upset as you that the poor are smashed by the rich due to rent-seeking behavior of some of the wealthy elements of society who use the state as their hammer. It's not lost on them that a lot of regulation and current tax structure is in place to benefit some as the expense of the many, nor is it lost on them that the wealthy have largely used the state for eons to benefit only them.

You're statement is pathetic attempt at a strawman and an undue smear against the Mises Institute--I'm not aware of your reading habits, but if you're not currently reading or digging around on Mises.org, perhaps you should actually try to learn a thing or two from them instead of shooting your mouth off on a knee-jerk reaction and assumption.

[Stary Hickory]

Social Security, Mediare, and Medicaid will always be the very last things left standing from the welfare state. However this is also a handy tool to be used to reduce the welfare state in it's own way. Not only the welfare state but the entire scope and size of government.

The argument is: We have to reduce all aspects of government to ensure the stability and viability of our SS/Medicare/Medicaid system. That means foreign policy, military, AND the entire welfare state. We cut back to bare minimums to give these programs their greatest chance of success.

It is a way to get to a smaller government. There is no way to kill these programs off first. BUt at the very least they could be used as an impetus to reduce the size of government in the meantime.

[AuH20]

Pat Buchanan recently penned a piece about this problem. It's simply a quicksand issue and we must do everything in our power to escape it's clutches. Dependency is a powerful narcotic:

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=212741


What a changed country we have become in our expectations of ourselves. A less affluent America survived a Depression and world war without anything like the 99 weeks of unemployment insurance, welfare payments, earned income tax credits, food stamps, rent supplements, day care, school lunches and Medicaid we have today.

Public or private charity were thought necessary, but were almost always to be temporary until a breadwinner could find work or a family could get back on its feet. The expectation was that almost everyone, with hard work and by keeping the nose to the grindstone, could make his or her own way in this free society. No more.

What we have accepted today is a vast permanent underclass of scores of millions who cannot cope and must be carried by the rest of society – fed, clothed, housed, tutored, medicated at taxpayers' expense for their entire lives. We have a new division in America: those who pay a double fare, and those who forever ride free.

We Americans are not only not the people our parents were, we are not the people we were. FDR was right about what would happen to the country if we did not get off the narcotic of welfare.

America has regrettably already undergone that "spiritual and moral disintegration, fundamentally destructive to the national fiber."

[Stary Hickory]

Outline one politically viable way to end these programs. That is the problem. They need to go they should have never been implemented(which is why opposing and repealing Obamacare is important now) ...however how in the world can a group of poiticians stay in office and cut these programs?

The only solution I can see, is that we come clean(the government that is) and say these programs are broken we are letting people opt out of these programs if they like, however for a time we must cover the short falls.

So the breakdown would be like this.(actual % numbers could vary)

People who OPted out pay 5% tax for shortfall in SS/medicare (employer pays half 5%, yeah I know this is a gimmick)

People who stay in the system pay the 5% tax for shortfall in SS/medicare PLUS an additional 15-16% to cover their own plans in the future.

This is one way to fix it. Make people pay the real costs. And we don't simply abandon old crusty people to die in the streets.

[AuH20]

Outline one politically viable way to end these programs. That is the problem. They need to go they should have never been implemented(which is why opposing and repealing Obamacare is important now) ...however how in the world can a group of poiticians stay in office and cut these programs?

The only solution I can see, is that we come clean(the government that is) and say these programs are broken we are letting people opt out of these programs if they like, however for a time we must cover the short falls.

So the breakdown would be like this.(actual % numbers could vary)

People who OPted out pay 5% tax for shortfall in SS/medicare (employer pays half 5%, yeah I know this is a gimmick)

People who stay in the system pay the 5% tax for shortfall in SS/medicare PLUS an additional 15-16% to cover their own plans in the future.

This is one way to fix it. Make people pay the real costs. And we don't simply abandon old crusty people to die in the streets.

There isn't a politically viable way to stop this madness, but despite my visits here, I've never been one to solely subscribe to political solutions. I think it boils down to two outcomes. One, the long-repressed market forces will inevitably wipe out these programs, creating an unrecognizable domestic upheaval, which will probably entail vicious class warfare. I for one, don't want to leave piles of shot poor people on my front porch. Or we can move to outcome B, where reasoned adults step up the plate, who can identify the problem and arrive at a way to avoid this fate. A gradual dismantling of these programs is a must, because annual GDP is threatened of being completely canceled by these insane deficits. There is no way around this. Entitlements need to be slashed with prejudice as well as other sacred departments.

[Stary Hickory]

There isn't a politically viable way to stop this madness, but despite my visits here, I've never been one to solely subscribe to political solutions. I think it boils down to two outcomes. One, the long-repressed market forces will inevitably wipe out these programs, creating an unrecognizable domestic upheaval, which will probably entail vicious class warfare. Or B, reasoned adults step up the plate, who can identify the problem and arrive at a way to avoid this fate. A gradual dismantling of these programs is a must, because annual GDP is threatened of being completely canceled by these insane deficits. There is no way around this. Entitlements need to be slashed with prejudice as well as other sacred departments.

I urge you to look at the system in Russia. It never went away it just payed out less and less until it is a joke how much seniors get. The same ruinous system is still in place and the bureaucracy is just as costly and corrupt as before.

I see no reason why the American government would do anything differently then the Russian government. But like I said I would love to see us get away from it, and I support a massive upheaval of the systems just like anyone else...I just wonder how likely is that scenario.