By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Politics Discussion - How would America handle socialistic programs being shut down?

Porcupine_I said:
IIIIITHE1IIIII said:
Sure, I don't see why not.


It has worked for many other civilized countries.

and now they are not civilized any more

Like who? Yemen? Poland? China? Russia?

Wait, maybe the opposite is true from the beginning, then. Let's take a look at how extreme meritocracies fare. Such as Singapore, South Korea and Taiwan. 

Let's look again at countries who started to think the government should supply people with social programs. Like Cuba, Vietnam and Argentina.

Yeah. But maybe it is a coincidence western economies are failing when they start taking some doses of socialism and the third world is prospering doing the exact opposite. Because the 20th century proved nothing did it.



 

 

 

 

 

Around the Network
ishiki said:
This country needs to cut everything... But we won't.


Well it's not JUST this country.  It's really endemic to democracy.  Politicians buy votes, but not in the way most people think.

In general it's much more convient to spend future money to keep yourself in power then it is to be responsible with the money.

 

Whether it be Social Welfare, Military construction contracts, Stimulus spending or Emergency aid.



Kasz216 said:
ishiki said:
This country needs to cut everything... But we won't.


Well it's not JUST this country.  It's really endemic to democracy.  Politicians buy votes, but not in the way most people think.

In general it's much more convient to spend future money to keep yourself in power then it is to be responsible with the money.

 

Whether it be Social Welfare, Military construction contracts, Stimulus spending or Emergency aid.


I actually don't believe it is a problem with democracy in general, but it is a problem when the media and academics continue to blindly support progressive policies without ever questioning whether they actually work or not. Generations after they were initially started, there is substantial evidence that the social programs that currently exist do nothing but trap people in poverty, make people more dependent, erode the family structure, and remove incentives to do the right thing with your life (and for your children). Even with all this evidence it is impossible to make significant progress on these programs because supporters of these programs judge them based on their intentions not on their results.



kain_kusanagi said:

We aren't sick of paying for the poor, elderly, and insane. We are sick of paying for those that abuse the system and don't deserve it.

Instead of cutting the programs we just need to kick people off the dole that don't deserve it.

My money shouldn't go to a third generation welfare abuser who gets free money and housing and uses his checks to buy beer and cigarettes.

States control what SNAP funds can be spent on.  If people are able to purchase beer and cigarettes with SNAP funds than talk to your local legislators.  The Federal government just allocates funds to States so they can divvy them up accordingly.  The Fed puts minimal restrictions on how they can be used.  In my state it is illegal to use SNAP funds for alcohol, cigarettes, or lottery tickets.  You also cannot purchase any taxable items, drugs or pharmaceuticals, or dietary aides.  Just unprepared or cold/frozen prepared foods and some drinks (soda, milk, juice). 

If someone is getting paid unemployment, then at one time they paid into it.  Same with Social Security benefits.

I won't disagree that all get abused, but as for SNAP if there is abuse it's because it's allowed by your state.



Adinnieken said:
kain_kusanagi said:

We aren't sick of paying for the poor, elderly, and insane. We are sick of paying for those that abuse the system and don't deserve it.

Instead of cutting the programs we just need to kick people off the dole that don't deserve it.

My money shouldn't go to a third generation welfare abuser who gets free money and housing and uses his checks to buy beer and cigarettes.

States control what SNAP funds can be spent on.  If people are able to purchase beer and cigarettes with SNAP funds than talk to your local legislators.  The Federal government just allocates funds to States so they can divvy them up accordingly.  The Fed puts minimal restrictions on how they can be used.  In my state it is illegal to use SNAP funds for alcohol, cigarettes, or lottery tickets.  You also cannot purchase any taxable items, drugs or pharmaceuticals, or dietary aides.  Just unprepared or cold/frozen prepared foods and some drinks (soda, milk, juice). 

If someone is getting paid unemployment, then at one time they paid into it.  Same with Social Security benefits.

I won't disagree that all get abused, but as for SNAP if there is abuse it's because it's allowed by your state.


Not actually true.  You may be thinking of WIC.  If a state or city wants to put restrictions on SNAP they need federal approval.

"In late 2010, New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg and the state's governor sought federal permission for a pilot project to exclude sugary drinks from food stamp coverage.

Ten months later, the federal government turned down the request. One nutrition advocate summarized the government's objections this way: "Too much, too soon, too big, too complex, too hard to evaluate."

"

http://articles.philly.com/2012-12-31/news/36081261_1_sugary-drinks-food-stamps-supplemental-nutrition-assistance-program



Around the Network
HappySqurriel said:
gergroy said:


Thats a terrible graph, because money is the problem.  Its funny that your graph starts in the 70s because that is the decade that the government started imposing regulations on schools.  They demanded a special education program and said they would fund half but only funded 10%.  Demanded kids had to stay in school till a certain age.  Stuff like that.  The scores is also stupid as tests have evolved and become more demanding over the years.  If a kid back then took a test from today, they would do a lot worse.

basically, the schools today have to do a lot more then they had to.  I am a school teacher and did you know almost half our budget goes just to special education?  Not saying we should do away with special education, it is valuable, but it has never been properly paid for...

 

From my understanding, I think you have it backwards ... Take away a calculator and have your best high-school math student do a test from the 1950s, I'm positive he will struggle to get a passing mark; and probably won't come close to finishing the test in time. Without a calculator students can't do basic arithmitec, without a word processor students can't write an essay, and without the internet students can't write a basic research paper anymore.

 

With that said, I think the primary problems with the school system is lack of discipline and lack of accountability of students; and the protection of incompetent teachers by the union.


Im not going to go into it, but that isnt a very good understanding of the school system.  Except the word proccessor and essay part, that may be somewhat true, at least from a spelling and grammatical perspective...



I doubt it would go too well, if every government program went even gradually, then the unemployed and homeless or those in poverty would probably starve or commit suicide (like after the wall street crash). There could very well be many protests and riots if they closed the programmes as well as yet higher crime rates. The economy is a big part of the problem, America wastefully spent money on pointless wars and lost much money as business went bankrupt over the last 5 years.

Welfare is there for those who need and cutting it in any form, will be bad. America should cut more wasteful services before cutting any welfare (your medicare shouldn't be affected either). Inflation is also a problem, as it has made goods too expensive and forced people to rely more on welfare too. So much for your neo-liberal economy!



Xbox One, PS4 and Switch (+ Many Retro Consoles)

'When the people are being beaten with a stick, they are not much happier if it is called the people's stick'- Mikhail Bakunin

Prediction: Switch will sell better than Wii U Lifetime Sales by Jan 1st 2018

How AMERICA will handle it?

It will change from country to country.

Venezuela will colapse, the goverment gives too much aids.
Chile will agree but some will protest.
Peru, not sure but I think they will also protest
Bolivia may not colapse, but most likely they will change the president and the congress will not allow the changes
Colombia, same thing protest all around and congress will not approve.
Brasil, ok that is a wild card President itself will not allow but if they have too they will have to cancel the world cup.

And from there you can guess the other countries that are in the continent.



spurgeonryan said:

Everyone says they are sick of paying for the poor, elderly, insane, etc. But how would this country deal with these programs being closed down? Not even automatically. Lets say over a five year time period.

 

Clinton greatly reduced dependence on Welfare in America during his second term in office. The country is still here. Now Medicare is being cut, and America is struggling to afford other programs. Would everything be alright if 90%-100% of socialistic programs were shut down?

 

Maybe we should? Better than cutting defense. Other countries are just biding their time for when we do. Guarrantee it!

Shows us much you know about american defense....

 



PS3-Xbox360 gap : 1.5 millions and going up in PS3 favor !

PS3-Wii gap : 20 millions and going down !

Not well...not well.



Before the PS3 everyone was nice to me :(