3 ms·
>However, today it's easier than ever to live off the nanny state WITHOUT a career. In what way?
by matt_mb 5y ago
>However, today it's easier than ever to live off the nanny state WITHOUT a career.
In what way?
- noasaservice 5y agoLike the way corporations do, I guess? PPP was a boon - 'Here is a loan that converts to freebie money for millions of companies'. Where'd the money go? Buying Lambo's and the like. Or, when can I get a tax abatement for 10 years? COmpanies can because of this mythical 'they create jobs' tripe. Just look up corporate welfare. And if I was permitted to, I would.
- hammock 5y agoWelfare payments supplemented wages by about 8% in 1960. That figure has risen to about 36% today, a 3.5x increase. Chart: http://www.mygovcost.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/government-welfare-TrimTabs-2011-01-thumb-550x238-44146.png http://www.mygovcost.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/governme... Source: http://www.mygovcost.org/2011/03/14/the-u-s-as-welfare-state-government-entitlements-now-35-of-wages/ http://www.mygovcost.org/2011/03/14/the-u-s-as-welfare-state... (the first random example I found on Google)
- _moof 5y agoThis chart includes Social Security and Medicare. I don't think it makes sense to include retirees in a data set when making an argument about "welfare."
- hammock 5y agoYou don't have to be retired to receive Social Security or Medicare. Anyway, do you have some alternate data to consider?
- _moof 5y agoYes, I'm aware, but that doesn't actually affect my objection. And no, I don't have any alternate data, and I don't feel it's my responsibility to come up with any. You're the one presenting this data set to make an argument; you do the work.