Yet Another Study Shows Most Americans Have no Clue

[Red Flag]

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

:

Hidden Beneficiaries of Federal Programs » Sociological Images

 

[Cephus]

Some of those are not "government social programs" in the sense that you mean, they are things that people pay specifically out of their paycheck, or are part of the tax code. Let's try to be fair here.

 

[imagep]

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.

 

[Cephus]

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.

That's because they're not entitlements, any more than getting a bank loan is an entitlement. Unfortunately, some people use this kind of thing to show "what people get from the government", as a defense for other things that are never repaid. It's a whole lot of "you get some too so gimme gimme gimme!" nonsense.

 

[Mason66]

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.

 

[Geo Patric]

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.

because it is a government run program and federal dollars go into paying UI.

you wanna believe that you are only getting you own (and employers) back? no... dunt woik dat way. . . which goes to show the value of the OP.

geo.

 

[Paschendale]

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.

 

[Harry Guerrilla]

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.

 

[Aunt Spiker]

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

 

[Geo Patric]

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.

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.

 

[Geo Patric]

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.

 

[Aunt Spiker]

yeah... definately recommended reading.

geo.

I've read a lot of articles and journal pieces that touch on this subject but hers is thorough - I'm not 100% agreeing with her - but I love research papers that are faithful to their details and explicit in their information.

 

[RiverDad]

"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."

My eyes are bleeding from reading all of the logical contortions puts in this paper.

Did you give any money to charity this last tax year? If so, did you claim a deduction on your tax return? If you did, then you benefited from a government program. You see, you really are dependent on the submerged state. Isn't it time that you rethought your opposition to big government now that you know how kind it's been to you?

 

[Paschendale]

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.

Oh yeah, of course. We all benefit from public investment. That's the whole point.

 

[teamosil]

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.

 

[Harry Guerrilla]

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.

 

[teamosil]

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.

If I were a politician and I wanted to give John Doe $1,000 I could just pick- either give him a check under some pretense or give him a tax break under some pretense. If my consituents are liberal I'd probably be better off politically calling it an entitlement for some noble purpose, if my constituents are conservative I'd probably be better off politically calling it a tax break, but it's the same thing. Either way we have $1,000 more in deficits and John Doe has another $1,000.

 

[Harry Guerrilla]

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.

Edit: Allowing someone to keep more of their own money, is not the same as giving someone money that they did not work for.

 

[teamosil]

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.

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.

 

[RiverDad]

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.

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.

 

[Harry Guerrilla]

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.

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.

 

[teamosil]

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.

Both tax breaks and entitlements can be used to create incentives. A tax break for charitable contribution creates an incentive to donate to charities, an entitlement for veterans creates an incentive to serve in the military. They also both create the same motivations with regards to the government. People are more likely to vote for a party that gives them an entitlement or a tax break just the same, people can become dependent on an ultra low tax rate just like they can on an entitlement. I don't see a difference other than how they are characterized.

 

[imagep]

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.

Yup. I also noticed that they forgot to list grade school, roads and the police on the list. We all use government services every day.

 

[imagep]

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.

A lot of people on the far right, especially those who constantly complain about half our population not having to pay income tax would highly disagree.

Of course they are not rational like you are!

 

[teamosil]

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.

You're saying tax fraud doesn't happen? It happens constantly... Like I would bet you that more people and company commit tax fraud each tax season than don't. I would guess that is far more common than food stamp fraud.

As for making people work less, it is true that at some times in our history in some states certain means tested entitlement programs have created a weird sitution where by working you could actually lose money. For example, maybe if you make more than $500/month in income you don't qualify for a $300 benefit, so if somebody is making $400/month they would lose $100/month by earning $200/month more. That is absolutely and clearly a serious problem. But it was just bad design and it is a very well known problem now. To my knowledge that doesn't actually happen anywhere for any of the programs anymore.