This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.

TrimTabs Finds Social Benefits Are Equal To One Third Of All US Wages And Salaries

Tyler Durden's picture


After yesterday TrimTabs Charles Biderman made it all too clear who runs the stock market, today the same firm exposes the system's dirty socialist core: "In a research note, TrimTabs highlights that government social benefits —including Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and unemployment insurance—were equal to 35% of all private and public wages and salaries in the 12 months ended January, up from 10% in 1960 and 21% in 2000. “We have no quibble with the view that the U.S. economy is expanding at a moderate pace,” says Madeline Schnapp, Director of Macroeconomic Research at TrimTabs.  “But we believe Wall Street does not fully appreciate the degree to which growth depends on government support.” Schanpp's conclusion: QE3 is inevitable, leaving aside debt monetization concerns, as without it the US welfare state will collapse. DXY: meet 50, just in time for the NYSE Borse to extends its rollup with the Zimbaber stock exchange.

More from TrimTabs:

“The pressure on the federal government to decrease runaway spending is intense, while state and local governments are slashing payrolls to eliminate deficits,” notes Schnapp.  “Further declines in public-sector employment and transfer payments bode ill for wages and salaries, and they will exact an even larger toll on final demand.”

 “We think very few market participants understand that the economy has become heavily dependent on government largesse,” cautions Schnapp.  “We are hardly convinced that the recovery can persist without outside aid, so we expect the Fed to roll out QE3 shortly after QE2 ends at the close of June.”

One thing is certain: socialist status quo under Uber-Comrade Iossif Vissarionovich Bernankestein must continue as usual, or else US will no longer be able to say it is not Libya.


- advertisements -

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Tue, 03/08/2011 - 18:50 | 1031114 Judge Judy Scheinlok
Judge Judy Scheinlok's picture

Wow this Biderman fellow better sleep in a cast iron bathtub. Don't forget what they did to Kennedy.

Tue, 03/08/2011 - 18:56 | 1031138 zaknick
zaknick's picture

You're actually a judge?


Too scared to do something about the mafia running this wreck?


Honest question.

Tue, 03/08/2011 - 18:59 | 1031144 Judge Judy Scheinlok
Judge Judy Scheinlok's picture

I'm The Great Judge Judy!

Theatrical arbitration engineer.

Tue, 03/08/2011 - 19:47 | 1031325 koot
koot's picture

Judge, The truth be know, "They" the Federal criminals are more afraid of their own comrades than people they pursue.

When the Cops become the criminals, crime becomes the law.  Not even their Mother will forgive them for that.

Tue, 03/08/2011 - 18:51 | 1031117 DaBernank
DaBernank's picture

QE3 then default, inevitable.

Tue, 03/08/2011 - 18:52 | 1031123 financeguru500
financeguru500's picture

Well, if the zerohedge article from a few days ago is true, the Fed won't be providing a QE3 and the economy will collapse immediately upon actual realization of that fact.

Tue, 03/08/2011 - 20:47 | 1031465 SWRichmond
SWRichmond's picture

Anyone know what percent of U.S. wages are government wages? (fed/state/local).  This would give us a good picture of the weight being carried by the producer class.

I just found this:  20 million state and local government workers in U.S. today:

"Figure 1 shows that there are about 20 million state and local workers in America today: 14.3 million local and 5.2 million state employees."  Article date 1 Feb 2011.

And now I found this:

"Largest-ever federal payroll to hit 2.15 million"

So now we got a number: 22 million plus government employees in the U.S.


From here:

we get starting points for extrapolating average salaries for these sectors: I'm going to use $70,000 for federal and $48,000 for state/local. 

20 million state/local = $960 Billion.

2.15 million federal = $147 Billion.


Call federal/state/local government employees = $1.1 Trillion annually.



OK found it:

"Government social benefits to persons (A063RC1)"   The number is $2285 Billion.  From this one: "Wages and Salary Disbursements" we get a total payroll for the U.S. of $6527 Billion.  If we add the above $1.1 Trillion in government employment cost, then the numbers are more interesting.  Government costs $3385 Billion, of a total wage base of $6527 Billion.  Sweet!

Tue, 03/08/2011 - 23:40 | 1032026 ClassicalLib17
ClassicalLib17's picture

The average pay of the municipal employees(478) in my northeastern Illinois city, population 89,000, is over $69,000. Our police and fire pensions are only funded at 39%-41%, respectively.

Wed, 03/09/2011 - 00:24 | 1032106 Buckaroo Banzai
Buckaroo Banzai's picture

Which means that society's producers now make less than society's parasites.


Wed, 03/09/2011 - 05:15 | 1032347 infinity8
infinity8's picture

is that 1.1 Trillion not included in the $6527 Billion? Bet it is, so it should come out. . . I'm not going to do it because these numbers are already spectacularly shitty (which is maybe why I'm up at 3:15 am posting on Zero Hedge)

Wed, 03/09/2011 - 06:17 | 1032368 EscapeKey
EscapeKey's picture

Do these figures include the military?

Tue, 03/08/2011 - 21:56 | 1031808 Henry Chinaski
Henry Chinaski's picture


Govt bubble.

Tue, 03/08/2011 - 18:52 | 1031119 financeguru500
financeguru500's picture

I have to say, the one thing I will feel bad about is when the older generation realizes they won't be getting the pensions they expected to receive.

Here's the real question we should all ask ourselves. If the economy really is "recovering", how do we plan on balancing our trade deficits? How much are people really willing to work for in order to compete with Chinese workers?

Tue, 03/08/2011 - 19:01 | 1031157 Long-John-Silver
Long-John-Silver's picture

I cashed out all my retirement fund accounts taking a substantial hit in taxes. I then turned all that fiat cash into mostly silver and some gold to "diversify". This was when Silver was $12 an ounce. As Charley would say "winning"!

Tue, 03/08/2011 - 19:11 | 1031195 longjohnshorts
longjohnshorts's picture

Two things are necessary to get the economy back into shape:

- Trim unemployment insurance back to a reasonable duration -- say, four months.

- Eliminate minimum wage laws.

In connection with the latter, I'd like to see some kind of restraint on executive compensation, perhaps in the form of an extremely high marginal tax rate.



Tue, 03/08/2011 - 19:51 | 1031336 dumpster
dumpster's picture

Two things are necessary to get the economy back into shape:

job benefits are a  drop in bucket


social security was a premium paid from the people .. looted by the government  

\many things

1)  cut military spending why are policing the world , on lies about 95%

2) cut the federal education dept . off and the other agencies that just stifle growth

3) let the banks fail,

4) stop the war on drugs

5) get rid of federal reserve .. why pay those suckers a dime out of the public purse

6) eliminate pay  bull shit ,, eliminate your pay ... why tax get rid of tax.


cut to the bone the government

Tue, 03/08/2011 - 20:10 | 1031407 savagegoose
savagegoose's picture

put all public servants on min wages. then sure cut min wages back some more.

if they diont like it they  can ALWAYS GET A REAL JOB.

Tue, 03/08/2011 - 20:19 | 1031459 RezaAlmaneih
RezaAlmaneih's picture

Since we are talking solutions, it is way too late to fix the current system. Here is straw man at the fix:

Let the country go bankrupt, forgive all government debt

Abolish Federal reserve and move back to gold standard

Balance budget.

In the short term give out SS to all retired folks but migrate to SS for only the bottom 33% of the workers. 

Medicare needs to be reduced as well to the bottom 33% with limitations on coverage

Campaign contribution reform

Remove lobbyists

Massive tort reform.

Transfer power to the states.

A bank tax

That would be a good first pass.



Tue, 03/08/2011 - 21:34 | 1031754 Stuck on Zero
Stuck on Zero's picture

I would add, level a tarrif on all goods entering the United States that we see fit.  Pull some good old Asian mercanitilism on the rest of the world.

Tue, 03/08/2011 - 19:50 | 1031340 chet
chet's picture

Sorry, but I feel worse for my generation (age 35) and my kids.  The people retiring right now have been taking with both hands for 30 years and putting it on my tab.

Tue, 03/08/2011 - 20:07 | 1031401 cossack55
cossack55's picture

You may grow to love slavery.  Worship at the alter of Goldman Sachs and JP Morgan. 

Tue, 03/08/2011 - 21:59 | 1031815 Henry Chinaski
Henry Chinaski's picture

Chet, are you enraged yet?

The future for old baby boomers - "loosing."

Tue, 03/08/2011 - 18:53 | 1031121 Jim B
Jim B's picture

How can I get in line for my cut?  LOL  OMG, we are doomed!

Tue, 03/08/2011 - 18:54 | 1031124 InconvenientCou...
InconvenientCounterParty's picture

would like to see the US stacked up against other G7 sovereigns. If Germany is 45% gov't spending and France is 42%, that might be supportive of the $ no?

Tue, 03/08/2011 - 19:02 | 1031158 Sean7k
Sean7k's picture

How about if we subtract all government spending from GDP everywhere? Then let's look at those numbers, because government spending is consumption- not production. The global economy starts looking pretty small.

Then lets apply that number against private market GDP, as it really should be subtracted and find out just how many countries are net positive. 

Then, we can put the monopoly board away and go back to using real money. As JP Morgan would say, "gold is money".

Wed, 03/09/2011 - 05:25 | 1032356 infinity8
infinity8's picture

excellent and excellent, Inconvenient and Sean. . . going to do some research

Wed, 03/09/2011 - 06:19 | 1032369 EscapeKey
EscapeKey's picture

British public sector spending / GDP = 53.1%.

All hail the magic of Gordon Fucking Brown, and his elimination of boom and bust.

Seriously, that guy is the biggest financial disaster these isles have ever seen, counting WW2.

Tue, 03/08/2011 - 18:53 | 1031127 zaknick
zaknick's picture

Free market, biatches!


Can't wait for this monster to bite the dust.... another one down, and another one down... another one bites the dust!





Tue, 03/08/2011 - 18:54 | 1031129 Jim B
Jim B's picture

There will be inflation or total collapse!

Tue, 03/08/2011 - 19:10 | 1031189 pacu44
pacu44's picture

There will be inflation then total collapse!


Fixed it for you...

Tue, 03/08/2011 - 18:54 | 1031131 uno
uno's picture

You mean Manhattan and Connecticut are out of touch with reality like Charlie Sheen is.

Tue, 03/08/2011 - 19:35 | 1031280 malek
malek's picture

That is really an insult... to Charlie Sheen.

Tue, 03/08/2011 - 18:56 | 1031136 Rainman
Rainman's picture

California unemployment is higher than Michigan's. More QE going away?/no way. Fook hyperinflation....the Ponzi is too far along to go down easy now.

Tue, 03/08/2011 - 18:57 | 1031137 Long-John-Silver
Long-John-Silver's picture

Free fiat for votes biatches!

Tue, 03/08/2011 - 19:04 | 1031141 HamyWanger
HamyWanger's picture

Have you something against government spending, welfare and real estate programs???

I can't believe the bigotry and totalitarianism of libertarians.

The cost to the global economy if we ended these programs would be astronomical.

As I've said on a previous post concerning the unemployment rate (which has recently reached a low of 9.7%), we opened two consumer discretionary stores in Detroit and we are simply amazed at the profits we make. 

This city is very wealthy, everyone is profiting from it (including racist libertarians), and this wealth would not exist without government programs. 

Tue, 03/08/2011 - 19:04 | 1031168 johnQpublic
johnQpublic's picture

in a word?




Tue, 03/08/2011 - 19:17 | 1031219 HamyWanger
HamyWanger's picture

Without real estate programs (Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac), Americans would never had any chance of profiting from the biggest real estate bull run in history. 

Many fellow Americans have become rich during this period, including members of the proletariat. Libertarians bitching about government spending are those who never managed to profit from it. 

Tue, 03/08/2011 - 20:04 | 1031397 dumpster
dumpster's picture

so hammy you set by with your drivel and wipe your drooling mouth  as your Keynesian's rob and plunder the world

why is it that you like to see poverty , death , wars .  so you can spout bullshift

Watch the drones kill the foreign babies with the social program of the stupid

Tue, 03/08/2011 - 22:49 | 1031937 ronin12
ronin12's picture

Hamy, it is hard to believe that somebody who reads zerohedge could be so clueless.

Tue, 03/08/2011 - 20:21 | 1031466 dumpster
dumpster's picture

Have you something against government spending, welfare and real estate programs???\\


so hammy your for government spending on wars// looks like that defense budget is right up your alley .. of stupid

the program you want is a social killer  . plunder the world , sow inflation. poverty . death world wide . so you can spout abject stupidity

what happend to the money you parent paid to send you to school  part on government expense ;wasted

truly a pointed head ignoramus

Tue, 03/08/2011 - 19:07 | 1031177 Long-John-Silver
Long-John-Silver's picture

What is going to be "astronomical" the the total collapse of the US Dollar (Think Zimbabwe) and what happens to all those people that have been sucking at the government tit when it dries up. Sure; you'll get that Social Security check but it wont actually buy anything or you'll take out your medicare card and the doctor laughs at it.

Tue, 03/08/2011 - 19:13 | 1031208 HamyWanger
HamyWanger's picture

"Total collapse" of the US dollar???

Dude, you're smoking something not very clear. 

No way the USA ever go bankrupt. We are the richest country of the world and we'll stay that way for two centuries more. 

Tue, 03/08/2011 - 19:17 | 1031226 EscapeKey
EscapeKey's picture

I'm getting bored of your predictability. You have to add more variety to your act.

Tue, 03/08/2011 - 19:24 | 1031244 HamyWanger
HamyWanger's picture

I don't understand what you're saying. But I suppose you're one of those bigot, nerdy libertarians. 

You must accept that the destiny of every civilized country is to become a Welfare state, which is the paragon of human generosity, tolerance and progressism. 

The United States of America are already in good progression (47% of gov. spending/GDP), but that's not enough. That's why people like me spread the good talk on the Internet and elsewhere. 

Socialism -- and the economic recovery -- are the destiny of mankind. Libertarians can't fight the forces of nature. 

Tue, 03/08/2011 - 19:28 | 1031257 EscapeKey
EscapeKey's picture

Heh, yeah that's more like it. A bit of fighting spirit. I like how you instantly jump to the conclusion that I'm a "bigot, nerdy libertarian" despite supplying NO evidence in my previous post that I am.

Tue, 03/08/2011 - 19:35 | 1031282 bob_dabolina
bob_dabolina's picture


Tue, 03/08/2011 - 20:30 | 1031492 EvlTheCat
EvlTheCat's picture


Welfare state, which is the paragon of human generosity, tolerance and progressivism.

 I think I would much rather be known as, and die as, a bigoted, nerdy, Libertarian then live as a part of your satirical NWO's brain dead, human cattle collective.  Keep up the posting HW, you represent the mind set of the slave state with true alacrity and articulation.

Tue, 03/08/2011 - 19:36 | 1031287 tsx500
tsx500's picture

10k comedians out of work, and you're givin it away for free . . .

Tue, 03/08/2011 - 19:59 | 1031369 dumpster
dumpster's picture

on Tue, 03/08/2011 - 18:13


hammy you are by far the biggest biget in the hisrtory of worlds

are a keynesian killer of people , plunderer of good ,

love wars , love poverty, unemployment and the like

someone needs to slap you across the face and make you take a basic course in Austrian economics

some thing on the first grade level

go read Roll Back By tom woods

slowly ,,


then count to ten and go soak your head in a gallon of water . for stupidity


Tue, 03/08/2011 - 22:49 | 1031935 MountainLotus
MountainLotus's picture

When a man is rich, it means that he has more income than expense.

That's why USA is broke. It has much more expense than income on EVERY sectors

   - Private sector (too many loan, credit cards, negative saving)

   - US. State (California, Wisconsin.. you name it)

   - USA as a whole (always trade deficit)

   - US. government (always budget deficit)

Right now, USA cover up all those money bleeding just by printing anew which is not sustainable... 

USA is a richest country in the world!!!... Man, did you live on an isolate island for the last 10 years?


Tue, 03/08/2011 - 19:09 | 1031190 Rainman
Rainman's picture

Good job Hamy. I was worried that ZH might become an intellectual monoculture.

Tue, 03/08/2011 - 19:10 | 1031202 Misean
Misean's picture


Tue, 03/08/2011 - 23:31 | 1032016 billwilson
billwilson's picture

Hamy, I'm with you. There is a role for government. All business is NOT good (in fact a lot of it is downright evil!).

Tue, 03/08/2011 - 19:02 | 1031155 Pool Shark
Pool Shark's picture

 "...Social Benefits Are Equal To One Third Of All US Wages And Salaries"

And a good portion of the other 2/3 is wages from government jobs...


Tue, 03/08/2011 - 19:06 | 1031174 EscapeKey
EscapeKey's picture

"Government jobs". Sounds like a paradox to me.

Tue, 03/08/2011 - 19:10 | 1031191 Pool Shark
Pool Shark's picture

Yep. The fiscal equivalent of the perpetual motion machine...

Tue, 03/08/2011 - 20:36 | 1031527 EvlTheCat
EvlTheCat's picture


Tue, 03/08/2011 - 19:04 | 1031164 johnQpublic
johnQpublic's picture

i cant even wrap my head around that

35% of all wages then is paid for by the other 65% of all wages

talk about unproductive

Tue, 03/08/2011 - 19:38 | 1031297 malek
malek's picture

It says "equals 35% of all other wages", so that means 25% get transfers paid by the other, working 75%. (And that does not single out government jobs.)

But yeah, looks really sustainable to me.

Tue, 03/08/2011 - 20:30 | 1031493 uno
uno's picture

Seems porn stars are the only ones making an honest living!

Tue, 03/08/2011 - 22:47 | 1031933 Clockwork Orange
Clockwork Orange's picture

at least they signed on to get backdoored

Tue, 03/08/2011 - 21:39 | 1031766 Stuck on Zero
Stuck on Zero's picture

If that 35% just spent the money and played billiards all day we'd be well off.  Instead they are hired to be officious bureaucrats and to make life hell for those who pay their salaries.  Paperwork, forms, permits, licenses, fees, qualifications, statements, affidavits, registrations, ...  need I go on.

Wed, 03/09/2011 - 00:59 | 1032170 BlakeFelix
BlakeFelix's picture

No, I don’t think they are included in the 35%. In this statistic gov workers count in the 65%.

Tue, 03/08/2011 - 19:04 | 1031165 GlassHammer
GlassHammer's picture

“"But we believe Wall Street does not fully appreciate the degree to which growth depends on government support.” 


Neither does anyone who uses GDP to measure growth. 

Tue, 03/08/2011 - 19:47 | 1031331 Backspin
Backspin's picture

Exactly.  GDP does a better job of measuring spending than it does anything else.  It's a flawed metric, but it's the one the government wants to goose by borrowing and spending.

Tue, 03/08/2011 - 19:50 | 1031335 Backspin
Backspin's picture

GDP = Gazillion dollars printed.

That's pretty much it.  Print some money, spend it, and nominal GDP goes up.  Then the politicians brag about how great they are.


Tue, 03/08/2011 - 19:06 | 1031171 EscapeKey
EscapeKey's picture

Jeez, we're back in the Roman Empire. I wonder what happens next.

Tue, 03/08/2011 - 19:06 | 1031173 Pool Shark
Pool Shark's picture


Lots of Vandal-ism...

Tue, 03/08/2011 - 19:10 | 1031187 Long-John-Silver
Long-John-Silver's picture

and starvation.

Tue, 03/08/2011 - 19:43 | 1031317 Eally Ucked
Eally Ucked's picture


Wed, 03/09/2011 - 00:25 | 1032109 Fearless Rick
Fearless Rick's picture

Barbarians at the gate, bitchez! 

Tue, 03/08/2011 - 19:09 | 1031179 Sad Sufi
Sad Sufi's picture


Tue, 03/08/2011 - 19:12 | 1031184 Judge Judy Scheinlok
Judge Judy Scheinlok's picture

Learn how to make flour and how to bake bread.

Hint for a yeastless bread starter:

Get ready, stock up, get some guns to shoot the neighborhood zombies. People will shock you when they are starving.

Prepare. Harden yourself.

Tue, 03/08/2011 - 19:11 | 1031196 bob_dabolina
bob_dabolina's picture

I am going to assume that another 5% - 10% is coming from charity.

So realistically we are talking 40%-45% are dependant on an entitlement whether it be forced from the cold and clamy hands of the dwindling middle class, or generosity from those doing gods work.

Tue, 03/08/2011 - 19:33 | 1031252 EscapeKey
EscapeKey's picture

It's the perfect setup.

49% of the population is the productive middle class, heavily taxed, and severely punished.

49% relies on constant, daily bailouts from the this middle class. Despite only existing because of them, they loathe everything the middle class stands for.

On top, directing the struggle, sits the elite 2%, ready to initiate a major class struggle.

It's fucking divide and conquer, bitches. See the situation in Libya? The Anglo-American empire will sell weapons to the losing side until they've virtually destroyed eachother, tapping eachother of fighting spirit and energy. Then, the Anglo-American tanks will roll in, securing strategic points (aka "oil") in a move which will cost cents on the Dollar.

Tue, 03/08/2011 - 19:57 | 1031374 Eally Ucked
Eally Ucked's picture

Those payments are just price for peace. Just imagine those coffee pickers in Africa working for few cents/hr and then Starbucks sells their swill for 2100$ a barrel(159 liters). The question is to what extend all those coffee pickers are taxed by US service economy?

Tue, 03/08/2011 - 19:12 | 1031204 Goldenballs
Goldenballs's picture

Those in the middle who keep the wheels turning - screwed.

Tue, 03/08/2011 - 19:11 | 1031205 Sad Sufi
Sad Sufi's picture

Try to remember when pundits lump Social Security with Medicare that SS is withheld from wages is then given back out.  It is universally the most popular government program for personal economic stability.  It is self-funded and not a burden on "tax payers."

Tue, 03/08/2011 - 19:30 | 1031264 Hedgetard55
Hedgetard55's picture

Sad, you are a sad sack of shit if you really believe that.

Tue, 03/08/2011 - 21:17 | 1031702 Bobbyrib
Bobbyrib's picture

What's wrong with his logic? If I work for a year then go on SS disability for the rest of my life, I am just getting my money back that I paid in.

BTW, that's what's wrong with your logic sad sufi. You can get back more than you put in. While Gen Xers like myself will get nothing, or something worth nothing.

Wed, 03/09/2011 - 00:28 | 1032112 Bob
Bob's picture

In a private "pension" system, as with any securitized asset, one would expect to get back more than one puts in.  It's called appreciation/interest.  That's how the world is supposed to work.  I wonder why it doesn't apply to SS?

What would the rate of return on all the money we pay into the fund be on the open market, I wonder.  I've been paying for 40 years.  What happened to the wonder of compounding?

Tue, 03/08/2011 - 23:34 | 1032018 billwilson
billwilson's picture

And you are a moron if you can't see the truth.

Tue, 03/08/2011 - 19:16 | 1031207 Waterfallsparkles
Waterfallsparkles's picture

What bothers me is that when I was actively working I was paying over 50% in taxes when you include Social Security Taxes and Medicare Taxes, on top of your regular taxes of about 35%.  Now they are saying that what you paid into Social Security and Medicare was only a Tax.  And now they call it an entitlement like you did not work for or save  for it with you 15% Tax for Social Security Tax and Medicare.

Hedge Funds today pay 15% in taxes in total.  Even Warren Buffet.  I do not even know if the contribute to Social Security and Medicare because their earnings are considered non earned income.

Why did I have to pay over 50% of my income in taxes for 50 years and now they want to take my benefits away.  Especially when Hedge Funds and Warren Buffet do not even contribute?

Talk about feeling like a fool.

Tue, 03/08/2011 - 19:24 | 1031253 Pool Shark
Pool Shark's picture


Sad, but true.

The US tax code is set up to punish anyone who actually works for a living.

On the other hand, if you already have a critical mass of capital, and can live off 'passive' investment income; you pay little or no taxes.

Truly; the rich get richer...


Tue, 03/08/2011 - 20:59 | 1031626 Xkwisetly Paneful
Xkwisetly Paneful's picture

Right with interest rates at virtual 0%. or a 100% tax on interest income screwing every US saver, the unearned interest income now well into the trillions or the people who are really paying with hard currency for this mess.

Tue, 03/08/2011 - 19:42 | 1031315 Dog Paper
Dog Paper's picture

"If you're not cop, you're little people."

-Bryant to Deckard, Blade Runner


Tue, 03/08/2011 - 21:26 | 1031731 Yes_Questions
Yes_Questions's picture

I heard that.

Wasn't Deckard an independent Contractor? And too, the story takes place in 2019, sooo:

No social security insurance, SNAP, UE benefits for you: Brade Runner...


Tue, 03/08/2011 - 19:54 | 1031357 Backspin
Backspin's picture

Sorry, man.  That's reality, though.  A F. Bastiat says, if someone receives without working, then someone else must work without receiving.

All, ALL, of the initial SS recipients received without working.  Those of us who spend our lives paying into it now, before it all falls apart, will be the ones who work without receiving.

My own personal plan is to assume that the SS benefits I will receive will be exactly zero, and then plan, save, and invest accordingly.


Tue, 03/08/2011 - 20:13 | 1031421 cossack55
cossack55's picture

Good for you. You are awake enough to realize it.  Many remain alseep and will probably not make it thru.  It may be incumbent on you to wake your friend/family, if you can.

Tue, 03/08/2011 - 20:16 | 1031436 dumpster
dumpster's picture

 A F. Bastiat says


right on all things Basiat

Hammy the ignorant like to see babies starve poverty , war. with his Keynesian mindset

He is part of the problem and never a solutution  fade to stupid


Wed, 03/09/2011 - 06:27 | 1032371 EscapeKey
EscapeKey's picture

HamyWanger is a parody of HarryWanger. Don't be confused.

Tue, 03/08/2011 - 21:21 | 1031709 Bobbyrib
Bobbyrib's picture

Same here, I was pretty stoked when I found out I was going to pay 1.9% less into the Ponzi. Let's go for the other 98.1% now.

Wed, 03/09/2011 - 09:05 | 1032367 Law97
Law97's picture

That's a good and necessarily cautious plan, but that assumes they screw us in the end. 


It's not too late to protect SS and force them to right the fiscal ship the way they should:  raising taxes on unearned passive income and cutting spending via 1) the military (program cuts, not people cuts), and 2) medicaid and medicare (possible by going to a socialized medicine system). 

Tue, 03/08/2011 - 19:12 | 1031209 Catullus
Catullus's picture

Interesting considering nearly one third of all income is taxed.  It's like paying one third of your salary to get it right back... and paying someone to a shit ton to manage it.

Tue, 03/08/2011 - 19:13 | 1031213 John Law Lives
John Law Lives's picture

Glad to see ZH posted this.

Tue, 03/08/2011 - 19:14 | 1031214 SwingForce
SwingForce's picture

Wow, finally somebody is good with a calculator. Don't blame the man, blame his keyboard. PS- give up bread. Stop baking, cook meat and veggies on a grill. 

Tue, 03/08/2011 - 19:14 | 1031215 manu06
manu06's picture

Let's see, a trillion dollar plus bailout for the banks and then renege on Social Security and other benefits

that we've been taxed to pay for. Yep, this country has been ripped off.  

Tue, 03/08/2011 - 19:55 | 1031363 Backspin
Backspin's picture

That's a fair summary of the situation.  Now, if people would just wake up.

Tue, 03/08/2011 - 21:16 | 1031696 Yes_Questions
Yes_Questions's picture

One huge bucket of Cold Water, coming up!

Tue, 03/08/2011 - 23:35 | 1032020 billwilson
billwilson's picture


Wed, 03/09/2011 - 02:18 | 1032256 Creed
Creed's picture

yeah manu, and many Americans saw it coming back in 08 and screamed their heads off to their representatives


to no avail


so now 2 years later we have the new TAX PLAN called OBAMACARE to steal more of our money to repay what was given to the bankers, as well as enrichen the insurance companies Obama and his ilk are in bed with


and it's deeper then that...OBAMACARE TAX PENALTIES are designed to LOWER THE EARNED INCOME CREDIT sent to 1/3 of America. That's right, people with no money won't pay the new tax and will have part of their tax refund confiscated.



Tue, 03/08/2011 - 19:18 | 1031232 John Law Lives
John Law Lives's picture

<<<  “But we believe Wall Street does not fully appreciate the degree to which growth depends on government support.” >>>

Wall Street DOES appreciate this... all the way to the bank for some more easy money.

The Ben Bernank = enemy of the world

Tue, 03/08/2011 - 19:20 | 1031238 Waterfallsparkles
Waterfallsparkles's picture

I totally suppot the idea that Banks and any Company considered To Big To Fail pay into an insurance fund.  The higher their risk the higher their insurance premiums.  Accumulate a stock pile of Money in the Insurance Fund to guarantee that if a Bank failed the insurance fund would pay for it, not the American public.

This would take the responsibility off the American People and put it square on the Banks.

Tue, 03/08/2011 - 19:56 | 1031365 Backspin
Backspin's picture

Supposedly that's what the FDIC is.

Of course, the FDIC is broke now.  But, hey, it's backed by ... the Taxpayer!

Man, this sucks.

Tue, 03/08/2011 - 19:29 | 1031258 FoieGras
FoieGras's picture

Another nail in the coffin of the "working class is being ripped off" theory. The poor and middle class are living in the land of milk and honey thanks to Uncle Sam handouts, financed by communist taxes on the upper middle class/rich combined with an unlimited debt binge.

Bread and Games.

Tue, 03/08/2011 - 21:26 | 1031732 Bobbyrib
Bobbyrib's picture

Yes, the burden of the wealthy in this country is a sin upon humanity. (sarcasm) Let me make enough to not have to worry about money ever again and I will whine that I do not have enough. When I get more, I will then...whine I don't have enough.

Upper middle class business owners I can see, but the very rich can afford it.

Tue, 03/08/2011 - 19:28 | 1031261 Caviar Emptor
Caviar Emptor's picture

You should be shocked, but not surprised. This is what happens in mature, post-industrial economies. They know it well in Europe and Japan. We're in their footsteps now. In 1804 Lewis and Clark needed guides and scouts in America. Now there's no place left to run or hide. If you don't support the masses they'll rebel on you led by a new elite who'll take the whole thing over. 

Tue, 03/08/2011 - 19:34 | 1031281 buzzsaw99
buzzsaw99's picture

And yet 1% of the people own 99% of the wealth. [/exageration]

Tue, 03/08/2011 - 19:35 | 1031284 Xkwisetly Paneful
Xkwisetly Paneful's picture

Of course that is why temp agencies are booming magically charging 30%.

Tue, 03/08/2011 - 21:08 | 1031667 Yes_Questions
Yes_Questions's picture

Thats cheap.  Try temping out High Steel Workers (construction/not cannibus)

Wed, 03/09/2011 - 06:29 | 1032372 dumpster
dumpster's picture

Of course that is why temp agencies are booming magically charging 30%.


yep magical,,   15% goes streight to taxes.. workers comp is a charge

so the temp agency works with about 10%   ofice costs , hiring cost,  support staff cost

yep magic make  some profit 3to 4%

if their is such a big markup go do it your self for all that free cash,

Tue, 03/08/2011 - 19:36 | 1031292 ifishivote
ifishivote's picture

What about the 44 million on welfare?

Tue, 03/08/2011 - 19:42 | 1031308 mynhair
mynhair's picture

SNAP.  It's different.

Tue, 03/08/2011 - 19:37 | 1031295 mynhair
mynhair's picture

Give me four more years of these morons!

Swear, I will figure out when to short in there, somewhere.

Tue, 03/08/2011 - 19:51 | 1031345 cougar_w
cougar_w's picture

QE3 is inevitable, leaving aside debt monetization concerns, as without it the US welfare state will collapse.

And the day that happens Los Angeles, Detroit and Philidelphia all burn.

Tue, 03/08/2011 - 20:15 | 1031433 cossack55
cossack55's picture

At least nothing worthwhile will be damaged in the flames.  Burn, baby, burn.

Wed, 03/09/2011 - 02:13 | 1032251 Creepy Lurker
Creepy Lurker's picture

Agree (I grew up in Detroit) I would cheer as I watched it burn on TV.

Wed, 03/09/2011 - 09:09 | 1032516 Law97
Law97's picture

And if the don't do QE3, then Wall Street burns. 

With whom do you think the Federal Reserve will side?

I'll put my money on Detroit burning first.

Tue, 03/08/2011 - 20:12 | 1031423 savagegoose
savagegoose's picture

hey russia had guranteed pensions as well look how well it worked out for their retired people

Tue, 03/08/2011 - 20:52 | 1031591 jtmo3
jtmo3's picture

50 my ass. We can't even break below 76 and you're looking at 50? If I had a dollar....

The question long can they hold the market and economy up with debt spending? one knows but the way it's looking...quite a bit longer. Right now, it's in most everyone's best interest to keep the crooked US afloat.

50? Not any time soon. When everyone prints, the US will not be singled out and drop that much.

Wed, 03/09/2011 - 06:31 | 1032373 dumpster
dumpster's picture

 76 and you're


well in relation to the other currencies in basket as they fall it just looks like the dollar goes up

all things being equal, the buck would be a lot lower if other currencies had kept value .

Tue, 03/08/2011 - 20:52 | 1031600 All_Is_Well
All_Is_Well's picture

“But we believe Wall Street does not fully appreciate the degree to which growth depends on government support." They have always known.  Wall Street IS welfare capitalism.

Tue, 03/08/2011 - 21:01 | 1031636 Yes_Questions
Yes_Questions's picture

government social benefits —including Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and unemployment insurance—were equal to 35% of all private and public wages and salaries..

Does this include income by non-wage earners or the income above the FICA Cut Off.

This seems high and the article is a little talking..point..ish...

As if retirees, SNAP recipients, unemployeed are the problem.

I call BullSNAP..

Wed, 03/09/2011 - 01:01 | 1032172 Fearless Rick
Fearless Rick's picture

Yes, you have questions. Re-read the article, or at least the snippet you quoted. Plainly, the US economy has been, largely, since the 2008 crash, been kept afloat by transfer payments: SS, Medicare, Medicade, disability checks, military pensions, UE, food stamps, welfare.

Where do you think all that buying power has been coming from. When the govt. is just handing out checks (hell, they sent me a check last year in their "making jobs work" plan last year when I showed negative income. It's absurd, unsustainable, the complete welfare state in spades.

Tue, 03/08/2011 - 21:11 | 1031681 equity_momo
equity_momo's picture

DXY at 50.   Honestly. No.  You understand the basket of currencies in the DXY i assume Tyler?

And your assumption of a DXY at 50 implies the rest of the constituent nations will happily sit back and let their currencies appreciate during their own economic meltdown.

Er no.   Wait for Japan , Europe and the UK to go Super Nova.   Bernankensteins helicopters will be knocked out of the sky by Airbus 380s

Tue, 03/08/2011 - 21:39 | 1031769 disabledvet
disabledvet's picture

I've already told my 50 year old buddy's grandmother  "get a gun, you're going to Libya."  Sure she's 90 and barely able to get out of the car after her taxpayer paid doctor visits--and is taking care of his nieces and their daughters--we've gotta get real tho.  These social benefits ain't no free lunch and "i still sense a feisty ness."  Besides--she voted for FDR.  She understands.  It's "Call to Duty" meets "your parents."  And i say "IT'S TIME FAR PAST"!

Tue, 03/08/2011 - 22:01 | 1031826 DavidC
DavidC's picture

15 years ago I didn't have the intense interest in the economy that I've developed over the last 5 years or so (thanks in large part to the likes of Chris Martenson and ZeroHedge).

I also didn't realize that we'd be living through genuinely historic times, even though I'd thought Gordon Brown's 'End of boom and bust' and Fukuyama's 'End of history' statements were the height of hubris.

And here we are...


Tue, 03/08/2011 - 23:13 | 1031982 alien-IQ
alien-IQ's picture

I guess ZH had to throw a bone to the "kill the poor" crowd.

Socialism for the needy - evil.

Socialism for the rich (corporations) - Capitalism (?)

Tue, 03/08/2011 - 23:23 | 1031998 Rodent Freikorps
Rodent Freikorps's picture

Socialism is nothing but theft and slavery.

Wed, 03/09/2011 - 00:17 | 1032086 Bob
Bob's picture

You sound like Big Brother, Rodent.  It's a cadence thing.   What does it have to do with the post?

Wed, 03/09/2011 - 05:53 | 1032366 infinity8
infinity8's picture

Thank you, Bob - and same with alienIQ above Rodent. They must not be good with numbers.

Tue, 03/08/2011 - 23:41 | 1032022 Bob
Bob's picture

An interesting metric, that one.  Social benefits.  It bears contemplation. 

I was drawn to wonder just what the value of the surrounding society is to the Corporate Person.  Is it a balance sheet liability?  They pay (not talking about the nominal rate) virtually no taxes.  I guess it must be an asset, then. 

Let's weight costs and benefits!

Tue, 03/08/2011 - 23:42 | 1032031 californiagirl
californiagirl's picture

The following is civilian employment (excludes military).  Something went horribly wrong in the 1960s and 1970s.  Johnson’s not so “Great Society” maybe? Total employment and total Civilian Federal+State+Local Government employment presented:


12/31/2009 - 137,953,000 employed, 21,128,000 (15.3%) government

12/31/2008 - 143,350,000 employed, 21,415,000 (14.9%) government

12/31/2007 - 146,334,000 employed, 20,836,000 (14.2%) government   

12/31/2006 - 146,080,000 employed, 20,871,000 (14.3%) government

12/31/2005 - 142,918,000 employed, 20,252,000 (14.2%) government

12/31/2004 - 140,278,000 employed, 20,381,000 (14.5%) government

12/31/2003 - 138,556,000 employed, 19,821,000 (14.3%) government

12/31/2002 - 136,598,000 employed, 19,636,000 (14.4%) government

12/31/2001 - 136,269,000 employed, 19,612,000 (14.4%) government

12/31/2000 - 137,846,000 employed, 19,747,000 (14.3%) government

12/31/1999 - 134,696,000 employed, 19,169,000 (14.2%) government 

12/31/1998 - 132,732,000 employed, 18,912,000 (14.2%) government 

12/31/1996 - 127,903,000 employed, 18,331,000 (14.3%) government

12/31/1995 - 125,136,000 employed, 18,274,000 (14.6%) government

12/31/1994 - 124,729,000 employed, 18,454,000 (14.8%) government

12/31/1992 - 118,990,000 employed, 18,389,000 (15.5%) government

12/31/1991 - 117,396,000 employed, 18,199,000 (15.5%) government

12/31/1990 - 118,110,000 employed, 17,980,000 (15.2%) government

12/31/1989 - 117,698,000 employed, 18,035,000 (15.4%) government

12/31/1988 - 115,978,000 employed, 17,627,000 (15.2%) government

12/31/1987 - 113,679,000 employed, 17,206,000 (15.1%) government

12/31/1985 - 108,063,000 employed, 16,315,000 (15.1%) government

12/31/1984 - 106,050,000 employed, 15,987,000 (15.1%) government

12/31/1983 - 102,802,000 employed, 15,688,000 (15.3%) government

12/31/1982 -   96,149,000 employed, 15,695,000 (16.3%) government

12/31/1981 -   99,561,000 employed, 15,808,000 (15.9%) government

12/31/1980 -   99,579,000 employed, 16,147,000 (16.2%) government

12/31/1979 - 100,013,000 employed, 15,925,000 (15.9%) government

12/31/1978 -   97,669,000 employed, 15,814,000 (16.2%) government

12/31/1976 -   89,850,000 employed, 15,317,000 (17.0%) government

12/31/1975 -   86,688,000 employed, 15,074,000 (17.4%) government

12/31/1972 -   83,424,000 employed, 13,696,000 (16.4%) government

12/31/1971 -   80,527,000 employed, 13,374,000 (16.6%) government

12/31/1970 -   78,690,000 employed, 12,774,000 (16.2%) government

12/31/1968 -   76,699,000 employed, 11,941,000 (15.6%) government

12/31/1967 -   75,337,000 employed, 11,611,000 (15.4%) government

12/31/1965 -   71,819,000 employed,   9,997,000 (13.9%) government

12/31/1964 -   69,543,000 employed,   9,627,000 (13.8%) government

12/31/1963 -   67,791,000 employed,   9,381,000 (13.8%) government

12/31/1960 -   65,287,000 employed,   8,247,000 (12.6%) government

12/31/1959 -   64,927,000 employed,   7,869,000 (12.1%) government

12/31/1956 -   63,266,000 employed,   7,745,000 (12.2%) government 

12/31/1955 -   63,268,000 employed,   7,004,000 (11.7%) government

12/31/1952 -   60,748,000 employed,   6,550,000 (10.8%) government

12/31/1951 -   60,252,000 employed,   6,621,000 (11.0%) government

12/31/1950 -   59,352,000 employed,   5,901,000 (  9.9%) government

12/31/1948 -   58,554,000 employed,   5,450,000 (  9.3%) government


Total Population 1960 – 180,671,000

Government workers as % of total population 1960 – 4.56%


Total Population 1970 – 205,052,000

Government workers as % of total population 1970 – 6.23%


Total Population 1980 – 227,726,000

Government workers as % of total population 1970 – 7.09%


Total Population 1990 – 250,132,000

Government workers as % of total population 1970 – 7.19%


Total Population 2000 – 282,385,000

Government workers as % of total population 1970 – 7.00%


Total Population 2007 – 302,004,000

Government workers as % of total population 1970 – 6.90%


Data gathered from following websites in January 2011.

Tue, 03/08/2011 - 23:53 | 1032044 Bob
Bob's picture

Jesus H, something certainly went wrong in your presentation of this data. Rolling over the recipient with brute force makes for a cheap argument.  I'll get back to you when I digest it.

Well, that was quick.  What stands out is that during the "Great Society" era government employment accounted for a higher proportion of total employment.  That makes sense. 

But would you not gladly trade our economic condition then with what we now enjoy?

What do you think the data reveals?

Wed, 03/09/2011 - 00:26 | 1032116 glenlloyd
glenlloyd's picture

citizens / democrat lawmakers in Iowa are up in arms about the spending cuts to FREE pre-school programs.

Free...well it might be free for some but that only means someone else pays for it.

Wed, 03/09/2011 - 02:13 | 1032252 Creed
Creed's picture

Here's some welfare money SC wants to collect from it's residents for going 1 mile an hour over the speed limit. $150 bucks.

This welfare money is being collected for the OVERPAID PUBLIC "SERVANTS" so they can continue to enjoy their TAXPAYER WELFARE PAYMENTS.

When you have men with guns collecting fines at their whim so they can be paid EXCESSIVE COMPENSATION well then Margaret, you have TYRANNY.

Wed, 03/09/2011 - 04:14 | 1032322 ebworthen
ebworthen's picture



If you are on the cusp of the lower-middle class you would be wise to get the freebies the illegals and the lower class is getting, no?

You have to make almost double median wage to not be the mule whipped to carry the load for everyone above and below you, no?


Wed, 03/09/2011 - 04:48 | 1032337 faustian bargain
faustian bargain's picture

Hey people, it's Hamy not Harry.

Wait, are the 'indignant' responders playing along with the game now? That's taking the parody to a new level.

Wed, 03/09/2011 - 08:58 | 1032488 Bob
Bob's picture

If there was no Harry, we would invent Him.

Wed, 03/09/2011 - 17:54 | 1034216 Guy Fawkes Mulder
Guy Fawkes Mulder's picture

Harry: "Harry isn't here. Harry went away. Harry's gone."

Wed, 03/09/2011 - 08:53 | 1032456 Doeko
Doeko's picture

You wanna find out "who runs the stock market"? Go here: scroll down to page 92 and you will find it's mainly mom 'n pop who are buying extra in 2010. Waiting for Q4 statistics still, but I think it will be the same picture. You're obviously a retard if you think it's the Fed, PD's or whoever that owns a large part of the US corp equities.

The only thing that's not "business as usual" is the growing part ETFs play in the market, however that is also mom 'n pop activity. So, don't say dumb shit ok?

That said, the end result will probably be the same (declining equity valuations and most likely prices) because mom 'n pop buy high and sell low. Decide accordingly.

Wed, 03/09/2011 - 10:19 | 1032701 MarkCaplan
MarkCaplan's picture

"Today the same firm reveals the system's socialist core."

Tyler Durden makes the common mistake of confusing welfare-state free-market capitalism with socialism. Under socialism, the government assures full employment, so welfare benefits (i.e., money paid to people who sit at home in their pajamas and post erudite comments to blogs) are minimal.

Under welfare-state free-market capitalism, unemployment can sometimes soar to 10% (U.S.), 15 % (Greece) or even 20% (Spain), so welfare benefits also soar commensurately.

Wed, 03/09/2011 - 13:51 | 1033471 gaoptimize
gaoptimize's picture

This topic discussed by Rush Limbaugh at 12:45 pm on 9 March 2011.


I've come to the conclusion, with an additional 25% associated with administering these benefits, we are WELL PAST the Alexis de Tocqueville event horizon. American democracy is doomed, and YOU need to figure out what your plans are for the collapse.
Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!