Red Flag
Banned
- Joined
- Feb 15, 2011
- Messages
- 275
- Reaction score
- 49
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Other
:Mettler first asked survey participants whether they had ever used a federal U.S. government program. Then later in the survey she specifically asked respondents whether they had ever benefited from or participated in specific federal programs. As it turns out, large number of people who have benefited from various federal programs or policies do not recognize themselves as having done so. This table shows what percent of people who said they had participated in or used these 19 federal programs had earlier in the surveys said they had never used any social program
A lot of people probably also don't think of some of these things as "gemmies", like student loans since they have to be repaid, or like unemployment since employers have to pay for that in advance.
Why is Unemployment Insurance onthe list.
Before this financial problem, unemployment insurance was money the employee had paid into and he was getting back his own money.
Even if the government managed the money, that doesn't make it a governemnt program.
So, there's a whole lot going on behind the scenes that we don't take into our daily lives. Why is that a bad thing? Why is it better to itemize every dime of your existence rather than focus on those things that you are good at and let others deal with those that you are not? Teamwork is not a dirty word.
Anyone read her actual paper that goes along with this? A lot of juicy info - I'm still reading it. . . . good stuff. http://government.arts.cornell.edu/assets/faculty/docs/mettler/submergedstat_mettler.pdf
yeah... definately recommended reading.
geo.
i would think the point is that we are not really all that justfied in pointing at 'them' taking 'our' money when a lot more are raking than we realize.
geo.
A 529/Coverdell account is for saving college tuition for a child.
It's a tax deferred or tax free account (can't remember which).
Not even in the same realm as food stamps.
Sure it's the same thing. If you give a tax break to a specific group of people that you don't give to other people, that's no different than giving them a check. Either way the government could be sending them a check. Whether it reads "tax refund" or "entitlement" on the top doesn't make a difference.
Hardly, tax deferral of interest gains on ones own money, is not the same thing as receiving unearned funds to purchase food.
Not even in the same ballpark.
The government will not be sending the first group a check or benefit card.
I realize they sound different. They're different ways to spin the same thing to make different audiences find them more appealing, but they're the same thing. Either way the balance in the federal reserve goes down $x, the money in specific people's pockets go up $x. The people don't care whether they get the money in the form of a tax break or a check, the government doesn't care which way it gets them the money. There really is no practical difference once you dig down past the slogan level.
Incorrect.
The 523/Coverdell account is a tax deferred account.
Meaning the that money in the account earns interest/dividends tax free and as long as it is spent on qualified education expenses, it continues to be tax free.
It is created using a persons own money.
Food stamps, is not a person's own money, but is a benefit program where one attests to not having enough money to purchase food for themselves and thus must rely on government funds, through the use of an EBT card, to pay for it.
Totally different animals.
I realize they sound different. They're different ways to spin the same thing to make different audiences find them more appealing, but they're the same thing. Either way the balance in the federal reserve goes down $x, the money in specific people's pockets go up $x. The people don't care whether they get the money in the form of a tax break or a check, the government doesn't care which way it gets them the money. There really is no practical difference once you dig down past the slogan level.
You need to dig deeper. Look past the slogan to the actual effects. How is it different in the actual effect it has? They both have the same exact two impacts- the individual gains $x and the government loses $x. How it is packaged doesn't matter.
But their effect on human behavior is vastly different. When the government allows me to deduct my charitable contributions, 1.) It's not binding me into the warm embrace of dependency on the kind hearted government, and 2.) it's not making or breaking my decision to give to charity, for even with the deduction I claim I'm still out of pocket quite a bit. This is entirely not the case with food stamps.
Your focus on the budget treatment is orthogonal to the argument at issue. Just because both food stamps and allowing charitable deductions create a cost for the government doesn't mean that their effect in the world is the same.
i would think the point is that we are not really all that justfied in pointing at 'them' taking 'our' money when a lot more are raking than we realize.
geo.
They do not have the same effects.
One can have an effect of working less, to not lose the benefits of Food Stamps or it can induce fraudulent reporting of income, again to not lose the benefit of Food Stamps.
I've seen it happen, the same does not happen with 523/Coverdell accounts.
They do not have the same effects.
One can have an effect of working less, to not lose the benefits of Food Stamps or it can induce fraudulent reporting of income, again to not lose the benefit of Food Stamps.
I've seen it happen, the same does not happen with 523/Coverdell accounts.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?