This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.

Meanwhile, America's Other "Cliff" Remains Untouched

Tyler Durden's picture




 

...That would be the far more important cliff to America's middle class, the "Welfare Cliff" as a result of which the country's workers, especially those that fall in Obama's middle class sweet spot -  those tens of millions earning between $30,000 and $70,000, are perfectly agnostic if they make $29,000 or $69,000 as their net income and benefits amount to one and the same. Because being "aspirational and upwardly mobile" is so 1999, especially in a nation where it is more important to drag down the rich, than to become them. But hey - just toss this one too in the bin of perverted statist disincentives, along with all those other unintended consequences of central planning and a governmental power grab, not the least of which is the misallocation of trillions to satisfy immediate shareholder demands such as dividends and buybacks in a ZIRP world, instead of actually reinvesting in capital, growth, and hiring of workers: those things that capitalism, at least on paper, used to be all about.

Source: Pennsylvania Department of Public Welfare

 

- advertisements -

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Tue, 01/01/2013 - 14:31 | 3112410 I am Jobe
I am Jobe's picture

Yeah Single Moms should be proud of themselves, at least the future generation can take up prostituiton.

Forward  

Tue, 01/01/2013 - 14:41 | 3112428 SheepDog-One
SheepDog-One's picture

Single moms give over a lot of the check to baby-daddy or they get to taste the pimphand.

Tue, 01/01/2013 - 18:49 | 3113037 boogerbently
boogerbently's picture

But, But, But,

We pay for planned parenthood, why should we pay for Planned Parenthood dropouts, too?

A full time job at federal minimum wage is $15,080. Therefore the MAX anyone should be able to collect from the Welfare system needs to be LESS than that. Otherwise we are REWARDING (disincentivizing) productivity. And it is EXPONENTIAL.

Make all govt. payments "direct deposit" ONLY. And make permission to check all accts of recipients a mandatory requirement.

 

Tue, 01/01/2013 - 15:15 | 3112501 Anusocracy
Anusocracy's picture

You have to sustain the Idiocracy somehow.

Tue, 01/01/2013 - 15:23 | 3112522 Bad Attitude
Bad Attitude's picture

I thought single moms were not smart enough to charge for it, They just gave it away.

Tue, 01/01/2013 - 15:24 | 3112526 Northern Lights
Northern Lights's picture

You don't know how right you are on that one.  Messing around with a 20-ish daughter of one of these single moms is great.  Very low self-esteem, low maintenance.  Tell her she's "pretty" and you'd like to do something "nice" for her like taking her out to McDonalds for a happy meal.  These messed up broads eat this stuff up and are VERY thankful.

Tue, 01/01/2013 - 20:49 | 3113277 smiler03
smiler03's picture

You're a twat. It is clear that the only way you will ever have sex is by using somebody in poverty. You seem to be proud of being a desperate "pay-for-it" desperado who is somebody who will only ever "get it" beause you're an ugly undesirable fuckwit.

 

Of course, if you "knock her up" then you will be honourable and pay for the upbringing of the child for 18 years at least. Won't you?

Seriously, you should stick to masturbation. You're a hypocritical asshole. HIV/Hep C is your destiny.

Tue, 01/01/2013 - 20:06 | 3113202 monkeyshine
monkeyshine's picture

"Single Mom" is so 1992.  Now they are "baby mammas". 

Tue, 01/01/2013 - 20:11 | 3113217 ball-and-chain
ball-and-chain's picture

Why demonize the poor?

They didn't crash the banking system.

They didn't lead us into illegal wars.

This crisis has nothing to do with food stamps.

This is all about the wealthy who made bed bets.

Now they don't want to pay up.

http://www.angrysinner.blogspot.kr/2013/01/yesterday-dragon-lady-made-beef-and-egg.html

Tue, 01/01/2013 - 14:34 | 3112419 Atomizer
Atomizer's picture

Review table C1 thru C8.

SDDS/QEDS Cross-Country Tables

Tue, 01/01/2013 - 14:34 | 3112420 unrulian
unrulian's picture

Other?? theres so many cliffs i can't decide off which to jump

Tue, 01/01/2013 - 14:58 | 3112471 Motorhead
Motorhead's picture

Don't do it, man, don't do it!

Tue, 01/01/2013 - 14:36 | 3112425 nmewn
nmewn's picture

Everbudy up in here got ObamaoFawn!

Tue, 01/01/2013 - 16:12 | 3112642 Tijuana Donkey Show
Tijuana Donkey Show's picture

It's even worse than it sounds. The "Obama phones" were around since Bush II, but..... Carlos Slim (Of international moneywhoring fame) really pushed access into overdrive with Trac(your ass everywhere)phone. The real insult? It's not paid by CONgress, but by the Universal Access Fee on your phone and Internet bill. I know because my company sells to schools, which get a subsidy for our product based on kids on school lunch. Extra credit, which two Fortune 500 companies are milking the hell out of schools and this program? http://www.propublica.org/article/att-feds-ignore-low-price-mandate-designed-to-help-schools (Verizon is doing the same thing too...) And for the drum roll, who pays less than 8% in Federal taxes? http://www.savetheinternet.com/blog/11/11/18/att-verizon-and-other-telecom-tax-dodgers  The saddest part is that the kids eligible for federal lunch is increasing by 8-10% a year, which really shows you what's up with the "e-CON-omy. Obamaphones and circuses bitchez!

Get your own Obama phone!!

http://www.lifelinesupport.org/ls/eligibility/default.aspx

http://www.tracfone.com/texaslifeline/index.jsp

Tue, 01/01/2013 - 14:35 | 3112426 Boilermaker
Boilermaker's picture

Yes, but that brings up an important question.

Do poor people really count?

Tue, 01/01/2013 - 14:39 | 3112429 JPM Hater001
JPM Hater001's picture

The big question: If you show the poor people the math in the forest alone will they still make a sound?

Tue, 01/01/2013 - 14:47 | 3112444 Boilermaker
Boilermaker's picture

I'm not sure.

If you just keep insisting that they go 'get jobs' that don't exist...will the jobs appear?  You know, kinda like Field of Dreams style shit?

Tue, 01/01/2013 - 14:57 | 3112469 Dr Benway
Dr Benway's picture

Even though the rich has stolen their money, through cronycapitalism and cleptocracy and financialization, to the point where but a few hundred people hold most of US wealth, they should be allowed to keep their illgotten loot, because anything else would be 'statist'.

Tue, 01/01/2013 - 15:18 | 3112507 Oquities
Oquities's picture

there are various styles of statism, ranging from minarchist to totalitarian.  you are referencing a fascist/corporatist state.   

i see in our current system strains of fascism, welfare state, oligarchic cronyism, and global extra-governmental governance.  not a free and independent republic.

Tue, 01/01/2013 - 15:20 | 3112510 Anusocracy
Anusocracy's picture

All the dipshits that voted for government are responsible for whoever does the stealing.

Look in a mirror.

Tue, 01/01/2013 - 16:16 | 3112671 Tijuana Donkey Show
Tijuana Donkey Show's picture

What if I didn't vote? The illusion of choice is no choice at all. If voting mattered, they wouldn't let us plebs do it.

Tue, 01/01/2013 - 18:53 | 3113048 boogerbently
boogerbently's picture

Because they can't find, won't take, don't qualify for, jobs, it's somehow MY responsibility to support them?

Tue, 01/01/2013 - 22:17 | 3113619 escargot
escargot's picture

Why do people constantly yammer about "why am I paying for those lazy bums!" and "my tax dollars support those welfare people!" and yet I almost never hear anyone screaming "why do my tax dollars go to bankers!"

Learn who your real enemy is, please.

Tue, 01/01/2013 - 22:22 | 3113630 akak
akak's picture

The gastropod speaks the truth.

Wed, 01/02/2013 - 05:34 | 3114289 boogerbently
boogerbently's picture

Is it more likely to get the govt. to cut the (banker) hand that feeds them, or cut the govt. handout?

Tue, 01/01/2013 - 15:03 | 3112479 bullet
bullet's picture

yes they do... they get three votes each...

Tue, 01/01/2013 - 15:52 | 3112611 Boilermaker
Boilermaker's picture

Unfortunately, it's not the voters that elect politicians.  It's the people that COUNT the votes that decide.

Tue, 01/01/2013 - 16:16 | 3112673 Tijuana Donkey Show
Tijuana Donkey Show's picture

It's the people who control the machines that count the votes that decide. Fixed that for you.

Tue, 01/01/2013 - 14:36 | 3112427 billwilson
billwilson's picture

What about the defense cliff????? Aka the MIC cliff (military industrial complex).

The US spends 1/2 of all planetary defense expenditures .... but has to borrow the entire amount. Can any one else say UNFUCKINGAFFORDABLE.

Only after the MIC is cut down to size can we begin to make any progress on the other major issues. Throwing money out the window is not an economically effcient way to run an economy.

..... and yeah the rich have to pay more ... a lot more .... heck many of the rich even agree.

Tue, 01/01/2013 - 15:21 | 3112513 OldE_Ant
OldE_Ant's picture

It was something I always found interesting everyone whining about SS, Medicare, and noone talking about MIC money.   The sheer amount the US spends to have the military to police the world w/o any compensation seemed stupid 20 years ago.  Its stupid today.  Let the world police itself, AND pay for it the US can take care of itself.   The US continues to subsidize unsustainable practices which in itself is unsustainable (as can be seen by the deficits the US is running).  We also keep screwing around with costly 'wars' that do nothing for us.   War on drugs, terror, crime, etc.  Every czar they appiont sends a message of FAILURE to intelligent people.

We could have taken 1/2 of the military budget 20 years ago and started a US energy independance project (combined solar, nuclear, NG, conservation (i.e efficiency improvements, grid upgrades etc.) akin to the man on the moon or manhattan projects) and been 1/2 of the way to complete independance by now AND created a hell of a lot of good sustainable US based jobs.

The US is lazy, stupid, and now entirely corrupt top to bottom.   In time the rest of the world will say f' them and the US will have done absolutely nothing to move towards a sustainable economy or to eliminate corruption.   The good that comes out of this mess is more people moving towards more sustainable modes of living.   In time inflation will force people to do more with less forcing sustainable change.  The bad is the corruption will be so intense it may just create a new fascist state that seeks to create its own new world order using that massive computer based military to enslave or kill anyone who doesn't serve.

Each of us has a choice everyday - reduce, reuse, change, leave the existing systems.  Each person not paying Federal/state taxes or sucking on the public tit and living sustainably is one more person that isn't a slave.

Unfortunately too many people depend on the system and can't or won't 'unplug'.

End of Line

Tue, 01/01/2013 - 18:56 | 3113059 boogerbently
boogerbently's picture

It's the exponential superiority of our MIC that allows the printing presses to run 24/7.

Tue, 01/01/2013 - 17:02 | 3112786 Mr Pink
Mr Pink's picture

The MIC is most likely turning a big profit. I wonder where it could be going.....hmmm

Tue, 01/01/2013 - 18:09 | 3112932 GCT
GCT's picture

Alot of you are very smart but cannot see the forest for the trees.  The MIC keeps the USA as the worlds reserve currency as we are the 800lb gorilla in the room and promised protection for the world to keep this status.  I do not like it and wish we would leave all foreign countries but it will not happen.

This is all about control and resources many of you state here day after day.  To do this you need to have a strong military.  For politicians to push other countries around and even its own populice the MIC is essential to them.  I actually even hate to type this shit.

Tue, 01/01/2013 - 14:38 | 3112430 roadhazard
roadhazard's picture

The rich can go ahead and leave the country for all I care. Oh wait, they already have there money offshore. They only remain around for all the tax loopholes, subsidies and pork.

Tue, 01/01/2013 - 15:22 | 3112518 toady
toady's picture

They won't go for precisely those reasons. The subsidies & pork keep the yacht & G4 fueled up and the lobster & prime rib on the table WITHOUT touching the principle.

This line of thinking is overridden by the working poor tearing each other down. They would rather tear down private v public employment & keeping up with the Joneses than give a hoot about the rich and their wholesale looting of the treasury.

Tue, 01/01/2013 - 14:38 | 3112431 SheepDog-One
SheepDog-One's picture

FOR(BACK)WARD!

Tue, 01/01/2013 - 14:38 | 3112433 FubarNation
FubarNation's picture

I was just asked last week by an employee to take off a Health Care supplement that I add on to each employees paycheck.  I guess this is why.

Who are we kidding?  Most of America wants Money for nuthin' and their chicks for free.

I'm sad to say but I wish the SHTF already so we can get this over with and start anew. 

The suspense is getting fucking annoying and to be quite honest I'm tired of having to buy Silver an Gold every year now since 1999.

I wish the country would get its collective shit together.

 

New Years Rant over. 

 

Tue, 01/01/2013 - 14:41 | 3112437 primob
primob's picture

Tyler, haven't you come to grips yet that our citizenry is "progressive?" They have progressed to the point where they prefer to be disincentivized because it is easier. I mean, "Smoke a bowl and chill, dude." This will be  our national battlecry by 2025.

Tue, 01/01/2013 - 14:42 | 3112438 Sparkey
Sparkey's picture

This site is Changing! Hysterical attacks upon single Moms, as if the single moms set up the system for their benefit, a lot of people benefit who wouldn't if there where no single Moms!

Tue, 01/01/2013 - 14:49 | 3112448 Dr Benway
Dr Benway's picture

ZH is very good at documenting how the vast majority of the wealth of the rich is stolen money... and very good at argumenting why these thiefs should still get to keep all the stolen money.

Schizophrenia, much?

Tue, 01/01/2013 - 15:13 | 3112494 Ballin D
Ballin D's picture

Get a grip. Its not a personal attack nor a hysterical attack. The only hysterical attack here is yours on ZH.

"...as if the single moms set up the system for their benefit"

The author is attacking a broken system for being broken. An individual single mom is totally insignificant to the big picture being shown here.

Tue, 01/01/2013 - 16:08 | 3112641 FubarNation
FubarNation's picture

Except that we are becoming a nation of single Moms.  When then breed more single moms.  Rince, Repeat.

Tue, 01/01/2013 - 16:26 | 3112700 Tijuana Donkey Show
Tijuana Donkey Show's picture

Krugman would say this helps the economy. We send off the males to fight, and breed the rest. Like cattle, but with Facebook pages.

Tue, 01/01/2013 - 17:30 | 3112837 Sparkey
Sparkey's picture

No mention of `Personal` Attack, the article is disengenous though, the only way you could attach $67,000.00 in benefits to a welfare Mom is by dividing the cost of the program by the number of single moms, this is deceptive and hides the share going to the Administrators! Quite possibly/probably the Lion's share.

Tue, 01/01/2013 - 22:35 | 3113670 escargot
escargot's picture

It's utterly astonishing how quickly people jump to attack the victims of this system rather than the perpetrators.  Yeah, those poor people got a good racket going.  I'm sure they're all giggling about how they've gamed the system and outsmarted all those well-to-do folks who 'support' them.

Bankers are the biggest welfare queens on the planet, but it's easier (and more racially satisfying) to direct anger towards those you perceive to be beneath you.  Most of the people who constantly blather things like "why do my tax dollars support that!" don't want to admit that they're ultimately part of the same social strata as "the poor".  There's the elite, and there are the rest of us.  Get it through your heads.

Tue, 01/01/2013 - 14:42 | 3112439 sangell
sangell's picture

We get something for a military spending. Military power. Can be very useful even lifesaving at times.

What do we get for welfare spending except more criminals and parasites.

Tue, 01/01/2013 - 15:28 | 3112543 Anusocracy
Anusocracy's picture

Let me fix that for you: What do we get from government except more criminals and parasites.

Tue, 01/01/2013 - 15:34 | 3112559 cossack55
cossack55's picture

Solid fix there, Anu.

Tue, 01/01/2013 - 14:43 | 3112440 tooriskytoinvest
tooriskytoinvest's picture

The Final Phase Of The 2008 Crash Dead Ahead: Our Denial Of The Inevitable Is Creating The Inevitable. America Is Obsessed With Cheap Money, Bull Markets, Profits, Consumerism, Fiscal Cliffs. Washington Is Setting Up A New Crash And You’re Not “Going To Get Early Warning Signal When New Bank Meltdown Hits

http://investmentwatchblog.com/the-final-phase-of-the-2008-crash-dead-ah...

Tue, 01/01/2013 - 14:49 | 3112451 waterhorse
waterhorse's picture

Another article brought to us by AEI.

Tue, 01/01/2013 - 14:58 | 3112474 GeorgeHayduke
GeorgeHayduke's picture

Don't forget the derivatives cliff. That one will leave absolute devastation in its wake.

Tue, 01/01/2013 - 15:06 | 3112485 Zola
Zola's picture

Earth to Dr Benway- how about you use the JUSTICE sytem instead of turning into Marx' prodigal son ? That's right, it would need REAL FUNCTIONING INSTITUTIONS and NON CORRUPT politicians...

Tue, 01/01/2013 - 15:24 | 3112524 Dr Benway
Dr Benway's picture

You just answered your own fucking question, lol. 

Tue, 01/01/2013 - 15:12 | 3112493 northerngirl
northerngirl's picture

I'm beginning to think there are no cliffs, but only bottomless pits.

Tue, 01/01/2013 - 21:00 | 3113309 Radical Marijuana
Radical Marijuana's picture

Yes, and when you try to dig yourself out of one, you only discover that that pit is inside an even bigger pit!

Tue, 01/01/2013 - 15:19 | 3112496 Waterfallsparkles
Waterfallsparkles's picture

Why is it that no one ever tries to cut the Welfare Payments?  Neither party will ever address this issue.

It is unfortunate that they allow people on Welfare to live better than the average person.  If they started to reduce benefits and could get the people on Welfare working they could reduce the cost of these programs and the People on Welfare if gainfully Employed would be paying taxes into the Government, insted of taking them.

Yet they continue to attack and try to take Benefits away from Seniors that not only paid into the system thru Taxes but contributed to the Social Security and Medicare Tax thruout their lives.

Tue, 01/01/2013 - 15:26 | 3112537 Lord Koos
Lord Koos's picture

If you think that someone on welfare lives "better than the average person" you're nuts.

Without welfare and food stamps the hungry and jobless would be in the streets making trouble.  Seniors on the other hand, have less energy and stamina for physical protest and so are more easily run over.  However, old folks do vote, which is damned inconvenient.

Tue, 01/01/2013 - 15:38 | 3112571 Anusocracy
Anusocracy's picture

Idiots vote for government, government destroys the economy, idiots lose their jobs, idiots become openly criminal.

The moral of the story: get rid of the idiots and/or government.

The chance of that: about zero percent.

They exist in a symbiotic relationship.

Tue, 01/01/2013 - 20:16 | 3113224 MrPalladium
MrPalladium's picture

"Seniors on the other hand, have less energy and stamina for physical protest and so are more easily run over."

Some forms of protest do not require a whole lot of energy or stamina - merely determination and acknowledgement of the inevitable.

Tue, 01/01/2013 - 15:15 | 3112497 TheObsoleteMan
TheObsoleteMan's picture

There is this clip from Youtube that pretty much sums it all up. The sun is setting on the western middle class, targeted for extinction by the elites. Here is everyone's favorite Rothschild lap-dog {his father was too}, Paul Wolfensohn:

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mOwZwkhFemQ

Tue, 01/01/2013 - 15:27 | 3112523 Lord Koos
Lord Koos's picture

Fun fact:  Less than 15% of the top 1% are entrepeneurs, AKA "job creators".  Of those that do create jobs, who knows how many of those jobs are actually inside the USA. Let's not cry too many tears for those who inherit or manage money for a living.

Tue, 01/01/2013 - 15:25 | 3112531 Waterfallsparkles
Waterfallsparkles's picture

The real shame of this is that for every Child the Welfare Mom has the more Money she gets.  So, for a pay raise all she need to do is pump out another Baby that the Government supports for 18 years.

The unfortunate part of this is the Child is for income and not because she wants the Child.  In so many cases these Children end up in the Criminal System which costs us even more Money.

Tue, 01/01/2013 - 15:27 | 3112540 spinone
spinone's picture

Become the rich?!

Do you think this is a meritocracy?  Work hard and get ahead?  Level playing field?

Chump.  The game is fixed.  If you weren't born rich, your odds of becoming rich through hard honest work are next to nill.  You're just a sheep to be fleeced.

Tue, 01/01/2013 - 17:46 | 3112884 analyzer_66
analyzer_66's picture

+ 1 true that

Tue, 01/01/2013 - 15:34 | 3112561 ian807
ian807's picture

But hey - just toss this one too in the bin of perverted statist disincentives, along with all those other unintended consequences of central planning and a governmental power grab, not the least of which is the allocation of 20% of the USA's yearly budet to being the world's military police force, when countries like China, less burdened with military expenditure, surge ahead, investing in growth, and hiring of workers: those things that capitalism, at least on paper, used to be all about.

Fixed that for ya.

Tue, 01/01/2013 - 17:24 | 3112827 tango
tango's picture

Yet in the 50s and 60s the defense share was 40 - 50% and we were much more solvent and sustainable. So it's not only how much we spend but TYPES of spending. Social spending inevitably leads to greater social dependence, less productivity, more takers and the situation we now find ourselves in. Take care.

Tue, 01/01/2013 - 15:35 | 3112564 ian807
ian807's picture

But hey - just toss this one too in the bin of perverted statist disincentives, along with all those other unintended consequences of central planning and a governmental power grab, not the least of which is the allocation of 20% of the USA's yearly budet to being the world's military police force, when countries like China, less burdened with military expenditure, surge ahead, investing in growth, and hiring of workers: those things that capitalism, at least on paper, used to be all about.

Fixed that for ya.

Tue, 01/01/2013 - 15:40 | 3112574 midtowng
midtowng's picture

It's funny how the same people hate people who want to tax the rich because of "jealousy" also hate union workers for trying to raise themselves up.

Tue, 01/01/2013 - 16:26 | 3112701 mademesmile
mademesmile's picture

My slogan for 2013 is I don't need money, just the things money buys. In other words, make, re-purpose or do without for the majority.

Tue, 01/01/2013 - 16:42 | 3112750 chogopogo
chogopogo's picture

The whole thing with the taxation of the rich is smoke and mirrors. It is meant to make different social classes turn against each other, while it address not the main problem. I am just currious, if you people at ZeroHedge could make the following analysis. Could you estimate were the global profits of the big multinational companies comes from? What percentage comes for example from fiscal facilities accross countries, what percentage from undervaluated work in third world countries, what percentage from innovation and so on, for each important item. It would be an interesting paper. The second interesting thing would be the impact on the global wealth different economy sectors have. For example, a company that sells coffee or smart phones: if they produce in China but are selling in Occident, how does this fact impact the debt and revenues in the both countries? And what is the total impact on the global welth such a company has? They operate with income that comes from other places. What industries produce wealth and what industries consume wealth? Thanks!

Tue, 01/01/2013 - 17:30 | 3112841 tango
tango's picture

The old tax the rich argument that is unfortunately all too common - even here - is the epitome of intellectual dishonesty. First it reflects the idea that "they have things i can't afford so that's wrong". Second it solves nothing related to debt. Last, it hurts the economy by removing capital that could have been used for investment, charity, savings or products. Instead, it disappears down the DC sink hole.

Tue, 01/01/2013 - 16:51 | 3112772 TheObsoleteMan
TheObsoleteMan's picture

Remember back about 15 years ago when all the snake oil slaesmen were pushing "emerging markets", especially China and India funds? Anyone that bought them was funding their ascension. When I look around this once great country all I see is the fruits of DISINVESTMENT. Closed mills. Shuttered factories. Money that would have not that long ago found it's way into reinvestment, is now going elsewhere.

Tue, 01/01/2013 - 17:27 | 3112815 rwe2late
rwe2late's picture

 The study cited is actually a product of the always suspect American Enterprise Institute.

 The general reality is not what the AEI portrays in its atypical example.

In many ways, all the chart shows is the real "cliff", the difficulty of a single parent, often with only a high school education or less, with two young children to be economically self-sufficient.

"Child Care" expenses are paid for those who require child care because they are working or attending school. The chart incorrectly adds child care expenses as income for all those who are not working (zero wages). Correctly shown, there is some incentive to go from not working to working.

The child care as depicted by the AEI chart is for two children, aged 1 and 4. Were the children older, attending school, child care expenses would be lower, as well as the "cliff" smaller. Well might we ask why should single parents with such young children be compelled to work by the state at added cost to the state?

The AEI chart also takes the case of employers who pay only a straight wage, with NO benefits. Were the employer to include medical care, the state medical cost would be reduced. Otherwise, it could be said the state is also "subsidizing" the employer by removing need or demand for medical coverage.

And well might we all remember, the benefits are not paid to the adult parent per se, but are intended to insure that the children have proper food, medical care, and housing.

The problems of children born into this society are most due to the war on drugs, the mass prison industry, the priority of warmaking over proper investment in infrastructure, and the priority of bankster handouts over everything.

Tue, 01/01/2013 - 17:30 | 3112839 waterhorse
waterhorse's picture

Indeed.  AEI =  neocon think tank propaganda at its "finest".

Wed, 01/02/2013 - 04:29 | 3114257 awakening
awakening's picture

This combined with Sparkey's comment on the middle men (administrators) of those funds and how much they take from within these programs (much like the larger more 'commercialised' charity groups where a higher portion of funds is spent on the organisation structure and its members over funds meeting the core charitable goals of such groups) should be more than enough to dispell this little bit of class warfare.

Divide and conquer, from which this article as shown clearly that one wearing the TD mantle is not immune.

Tue, 01/01/2013 - 17:55 | 3112852 Nels
Nels's picture

misallocation of trillions to satisfy immediate shareholder demands

Eh, hadn't expected this from ZH.

When return on capital becomes difficult, return of capital becomes imperative.  It is not your money (assuming you are not a shareholder), so it's none of your business how it is allocated, as long as no laws are broken.

If the furure looks crappy, returning the cash to the shareholders is a good thing to do, as it lets the shareholders do a little prepping for the crap to come.

Tue, 01/01/2013 - 17:59 | 3112873 Monedas
Monedas's picture

Stop nepotism in government .... no more "tag team" husband and wife and kids bureaucratic "double dippin' dynasties" !  Talk about concentration of privilege .... more equal distribution of government suck jobs .... where the fuck is the EGALITE' .... liberal fucktards of the 19th century revolution ?       

Tue, 01/01/2013 - 18:04 | 3112888 Monedas
Monedas's picture

Yesterday's poor civil servants .... are the new ruling class .... and how slow the left is to recognize the new injustice .... fucking leftard firing squad fodder and mudder and brudder and sistern !  Trickle down government Ponzi pyramid needs to be flipped on it's head .... a new revolution of the left .... THE LEFT BEHIND .... people of the private sector .... we've got the guns .... and we are the "oppressed left behind" .... take revolution to the bloodsucking, hypocritical left .... they haven't a clue !  Power to the real people !

Tue, 01/01/2013 - 18:08 | 3112928 Monedas
Monedas's picture

A financial disaster is a terrible thing to waste .... let's start getting loud and rowdy .... you see the liberal fucktard government employees get a pass .... they've got "cliff insurance" .... they don't have guillotine insurance, do they ?

Tue, 01/01/2013 - 18:39 | 3113008 Mr. Hudson
Mr. Hudson's picture

You see the problem as a "liberal vs, conservative". The bankers are neither liberal nor conservative. They are evil.

Tue, 01/01/2013 - 23:00 | 3113419 hooligan2009
hooligan2009's picture

hahhahhahhhahhh...so the 29,000 earner will demand a 40,000 increase in earnings before it becomes a promotion? hahahahahaha..

and for the next trick...just watch the HUGE increase in claims if this ever gets out to the gerneral public who had NO IDEA this is how the maths worked!!!!

millions will be asking for pay cuts down to 29,000 and making new benefit claims

maybe we will see a leap of weird company benefits in lieu of salary cuts so that the state can pay benefits..talk about fucked up communist thinking!

or maybe everyone can go snatching those hard to get shelf stacking jobs for 69,000 including all benefits!

Wed, 01/02/2013 - 02:24 | 3114177 dunce
dunce's picture

Intel just borrowed 6 billion to buy back stock, this will juice earnings per share but not increase the prodution of the company. The earnings may increase slightly but not the number of chips nor will it lower their costs. This is just one company, many others are taking the super low interest money and doing the same. This does not make the pie bigger, at best it remains the same, but an increasing population means that each share is in fact smaller. The GDP will seem to expand only because it is not adjusted for inflation so many will be confused by govt. statistics and not know who to blame for their decreasing standard of living. The politicians all know this and have orchestrated it, i can not figure out why  they are doing this. Slow death is still death.

Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!