This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.

Guest Post: Our Many Layers Of Entitlement

Tyler Durden's picture


Submitted by Charles Hugh Smith from Of Two Minds

Our Many Layers of Entitlement

The entitlement mindset includes much more than government benefits programs.

The word entitlement commonly refers to government benefits to which we are entitled as taxpayers and/or citizens/residents. But there are layers of entitlement in the American psyche far beyond government benefits programs.

Let's start with the government benefits entitlements. The programs most people refer to as entitlements are Social Security and Medicare, which taxpayers pay for with payroll taxes (even if the money just goes into one giant Federal pot).

Beyond these "I paid into them" entitlements are the "welfare" entitlements of Medicaid, Section 8 Housing, SNAP/food stamps, etc., which are paid out of general tax revenues and which are available to anyone who qualifies, regardless of their status as taxpayers.

Buried within Social Security is another large entitlement program for the disabled and dependents (widows and orphans).

Veterans are entitled to benefits as a result of their military service, as are their families.

Employers pay for other employment-related entitlements: Federal and state unemployment, workers compensation and disability insurance, etc.

The entitlement mindset is thus firmly established in the American psyche. If we experience bad luck and/or the negative consequences of poor choices, we have been trained to expect the government at some level to alleviate our suffering, cut us a check or otherwise address our difficulties.

The poisonous problem with the entitlement mindset is intrinsic to human nature: once we "deserve" something, then our minds fill with resentment and greed, and we focus obsessively on creating multiple rationalizations for why we "deserve our fair share."

Eventually this leads to a government that has been reduced to a competitive stripmining operation in which the spoils are divided up amongst the most politically powerful Elites: in other words, the government we now have.

The entitlement mindset atrophies self-reliance, adaptability and flexibility, all key survival traits. If the government will "fix" our health, we no longer feel responsible in the way one does if there is limited government/employer-provided healthcare. If we expect our Social Security retirement regardless of what other conditions may be affecting the global economy or our nation, then we stop being responsible for managing our financial affairs in the same way as one does when there is no "guaranteed" retirement entitlement.

The question isn't whether entitlements are a "right" or not, the question is their sustainability now that the demographic, financial and energy foundations of those promises has eroded. Clearly, the government has a role in providing for public health and safety, but to claim that entitling every citizen to hundreds of thousands of dollars in healthcare is "public health" spending is absurd.

Based on projections of high-birthrates/cheap-oil/high-growth in the 1940s - 1960s, entitlement programs were promised basically forever, with no recognition that conditions might change. Now conditions have changed, demographically, financially and in terms of energy input costs.

We might usefully think of the government as a ship in a sea governed by forces too planetary to influence: the tides, currents, winds, etc. Entitlements are essentially a claim that the small ship of government "should" be able to bend the sea to its will, regardless of what tidal forces, winds and currents are at work.

we can claim it's our "right" not to sink, but gravity and the ocean do not respond to our claims of permanent "rights."

But these direct government entitlements only scratch the surface of our sense of entitlement. We don't just expect healthcare and retirement; if we're honest with ourselves, don't we also expect these other entitlements?

1. Cheap and abundant fuels and energy. We can debate whether this constitutes an implicit "right" or an entitlement, but the point is that Americans expect unlimited fuels and energy at low cost, and if cheap, abundant energy vanishes then they will demand "somebody make this right," with the "somebody" presumably in government and certainly not the individual American or his community.

2. Ever-more government services and benefits, i.e. the entitlement mindset knows no bounds.

3. Full employment and bountiful employment opportunities. If we can't find a job or create value that someone is willing to pay/trade for, then the government should create jobs out of thin air.

There are only two ways to fund "make-work" jobs: either take more money from existing wage-earners via taxes and redistribute the funds to potentially unproductive uses, or print/borrow the money into existence. Both have costs in terms of the productivity surplus of the entire nation and in the potential to destabilize the financial foundation of the economy.

4. An education suited to the demands of a global economy, etc., as opposed to providing the basic skills of learning, so the citizens can educate themselves throughout life. This distinction is lost in the endless debates over education, but in fast-changing environments and times, the only real value of any education is to learn how to learn. Though it seems "impossible" to the Status Quo educator, the world we are preparing students for--one dependent on consumer spending, cheap oil, globalization, ever-expanding government and healthcare costs, exponentially increasing debt to pay for everything, etc.--may not exist in 5 or 10 years.

5. An upper-middle class lifestyle for everyone who does what the Status Quo expects: get a graduate-level university degree, sacrifice for the corporation, remain politically silent/passive, etc. The idea that toeing the line will not result in a big-bucks secure profession/career is somehow a violation of the social/financial contract of Corporate America--once again, a right or an entitlement that is implicit in the American psyche.

6. Cheap and plentiful food. Once again, if food costs actually rose to "percentage of income spent on food" levels found in developing-world nations, Americans would undoubtedly demand that the "government do something." Once again, this is like demanding the ship's crew change the winds and tides. As oil prices rise, food costs will rise. There is no way out of this, as the primary input of agricultural costs is oil and petroleum-based fertilizers, chemicals, transport, etc. extremes of weather can ruin crops regardless of policy.

7. That the U.S. should be able to influence other nations to act in what we perceive as our best interests. The idea that we cannot persuade/force others to do what benefits us is anathema to the general entitlement mindset, e.g. "what's our oil doing under their sand?"

There are undoubtedly many more layers of implicit entitlements, and the analogy that comes to mind is a worm-riddled, leaky wooden-hulled sailing ship approaching a coral reef. The only way into the relative calm of the lagoon beyond is to lighten the ship enough to pass over the reef, or the sand bar on the other side of the lagoon.

If the ship sails on fully loaded with the heavy baggage of the entitlement mindset, the reef will either rip out its bottom or the ship will be wedged on the sand bar, where the waves will break it apart.

In other words, the destruction of the ship is guaranteed in either scenario. The only possible way to save the ship and its passengers/crew is to throw most of the inessential baggage overboard. Everything that the passengers "can't live without" will doom them if it isn't jettisoned, and soon. Once the hull has been shredded by the coral reef, or the hull is stuck on the sand bar, it will be too late: jettisoning all the financial "rights," entitlements and "essentials" will not save the ship or its crew/passengers.

The entitlement mindset is heavy baggage indeed, and the emotional content of the baggage-- resentment, anger, and a debilitating focus on "what I deserve"--is toxic to the traits we will need in abundance to weather the decade ahead: flexibility, adaptability, open-mindedness, experimentation, community and self-reliance.


- advertisements -

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Fri, 09/30/2011 - 10:44 | 1725750 AnAnonymous
AnAnonymous's picture

Human nature...

Fri, 09/30/2011 - 10:45 | 1725754 Pladizow
Pladizow's picture

The words American and Entitled are synonymous!

Fri, 09/30/2011 - 10:51 | 1725780 AnAnonymous
AnAnonymous's picture

The words American and Entitled are synonymous!


Everyone knows it but US citizens prefer to deny as it was party like 1776.

It is now 200 years later and the nature of US citizens is well known.

Either they come with much better propaganda or they shut up.

Fri, 09/30/2011 - 11:11 | 1725839 anynonmous
anynonmous's picture

nice name

FYI on Boomberg TV at noon Laks from ECRI will be on with Tom Keene


(not sure who or why you guys are being junked entitlement duhhh  just ask any soccer mom waiting to collect her brood at the end of every school day as she sips here Starbuck$ whilst texting one of her very best friends )

Fri, 09/30/2011 - 11:55 | 1726034 trav7777
trav7777's picture

Nonsensical bullshit.

There IS NO LAGOON on the other side of the reef.

The Peak Oil reality is that the reef gets sharper and sharper and shallower and shallower.  The wind is onshore and the currents are strongly onshore.

To muster the effort to row against this to deep water to at least look for another landfall has probably passed.  If it hasn't, it is imperative that we reverse course now, not start throwing shit overboard in a FUTILE attempt to find paradise.

Fri, 09/30/2011 - 15:02 | 1726970 AldousHuxley
AldousHuxley's picture

Rich takes wall st. bailout as "entitlement" then wants the middle class to pay for them by cutting middle class "entitlement" such as social security and medicare that they paid for while working for 30+ years. Poor always leaching off of rich and/or middle class but nobody wants to be poor.

Fri, 09/30/2011 - 21:25 | 1728009 Bicycle Repairman
Bicycle Repairman's picture

So completely wrong about SS.  Completely bankrupt intellectually and morally.  I'm tired of arguing with you clowns here.  I invite you to leave this dusty little corner and bring this out on to the street.  You will get the kind of welcome reserved for holocaust deniers and pedophiles.

It is exactly what you deserve and exactly what you'll get.

Fri, 09/30/2011 - 21:38 | 1728034 SoNH80
SoNH80's picture

We have squabbled in the past, but I agree on SS BR.  I stand with Eisenhower on this.  SS = basic income support for seniors of modest means.

Fri, 09/30/2011 - 22:03 | 1728074 Bicycle Repairman
Bicycle Repairman's picture

Thanks for your support.

To others I reiterate.  Go ahead and try to form the "March Against SS" and take it public.  Pick a city.  DC, NY, or wherever the f#ck you think you'll be welcome.  It won't be a "million man march" I can assure you.

To get ready for the experience I suggest you view some public KKK marchs on YouTube.  It's only fair for you to see the reaction you'll get.  Don't be surprised if even the klan disowns you.

Fri, 09/30/2011 - 22:28 | 1728105 AldousHuxley
AldousHuxley's picture

you can't argue with SS when you bailout the banksters in millions of bonuses


Also, people have the right to at least the amount of SS tax they paid into it. You can't let the boomers get away with scheming off the top.

Fri, 09/30/2011 - 22:48 | 1728128 Bicycle Repairman
Bicycle Repairman's picture

If you want to cut things there are a million other places to cut before SS.  When you've done that come back.

Fri, 09/30/2011 - 12:33 | 1726226 ElvisDog
ElvisDog's picture

I buy coffee beans at Starbucks. Every time I'm in there there are 2-3 "coffee store" guys sitting in the comfy chairs intently typing on their laptops. Often, I'm in there during work hours, so "coffee store guy" apparently doesn't have a job. I'm always tempted to ask one of them "how's your screenplay going?".

Fri, 09/30/2011 - 14:59 | 1726956 AldousHuxley
AldousHuxley's picture

your problem: "I buy coffee beans at Starbucks"



Fri, 09/30/2011 - 18:47 | 1727746 BigJim
BigJim's picture

I'm always tempted to ask one of them "how's your screenplay going?"

And David Simon will look up and say, "pretty well, thanks."

Fri, 09/30/2011 - 15:00 | 1726960 AldousHuxley
AldousHuxley's picture

No money, no love....but how many states are solvent?



Fri, 09/30/2011 - 15:09 | 1726993 DosZap
DosZap's picture

Lets not MIX the two.....................we have enough class warfare already over the ENTITLED payouts, which are DUE,and are OWED.

Welfare is for people who are getting largess at the cost of the taxpayers, without paying into the system.

Entitled means payed into.

Welfare is FREE OF CHARGE to recipents.

Two MAJOR differences, meanings and words.


 "welfare" entitlements of Medicaid, Section 8 Housing, SNAP/food stamps, etc., which are paid out of general tax revenues and which are available to anyone who qualifies, regardless of their status as taxpayers.

Fri, 09/30/2011 - 18:52 | 1727751 BigJim
BigJim's picture

Unfortunately, a lot of the 'entitlements' you thought you were paying 'into' were actually transfers. The first generation of people who enjoyed these 'entitlements' - had they been paying 'into' them all their lives? No.

It was a ponzi scheme, pure and simple. If you're lucky the ponzi will hold long enough for you to get some of 'your' money back, but unless your retirement is imminent, I wouldn't bet on it.

Fri, 09/30/2011 - 10:49 | 1725770 AnAnonymous
AnAnonymous's picture

Human nature, again this crap.

The US has been nothing but a story of entitlement since its inception.

US citizens were entitled to the indian land, they were entitled to the negro labour, they were entitled to a superior status because of their whiteness...

Entitled to this or that because of this or that.

So cheap propaganda to claim that the US culture of entitlement is anything new to them. US citizens had it from the start.

So cheap propaganda.

The US citizen nature is eternal.

Fri, 09/30/2011 - 11:11 | 1725848 Smiddywesson
Smiddywesson's picture

Sorry AnAnonymous, but in bashing Americans, you just described every empire in the history of the world.  If we lemmings always do this, then it is human nature you are railing against, not anything unique to one people or one culture.


Fri, 09/30/2011 - 11:16 | 1725863 anynonmous
anynonmous's picture

entitlement is not quite as widespread as you might think in for example western Uganda but I agree that it is not unique to Americans though they likely lead the pack

Fri, 09/30/2011 - 12:16 | 1726135 Smiddywesson
Smiddywesson's picture

Yes, I was talking historically.   Most of the things you pointed out apply equally to the Romans right up to the sun never setting on the British Empire.  I know we are not really lemmings, but are actions are predictable and the story is always the same.

Fri, 09/30/2011 - 11:43 | 1725990 AnAnonymous
AnAnonymous's picture

you just described every empire in the history of the world. If we lemmings always do this, then it is human nature you are railing against, not anything unique to one people or one culture.

Wrong. US citizens have their specificities.

If indeed, what you wrote is true, please provide an empire that declared that every human being was entitled to freedom and kept slavery.

One specificity of US citizenism is to hijack humanity to further their selfish interests.

Romans did not hide behind humanity. They did what they did because they were Romans.

That crap of human nature and pretending to sum up the whole human kind is something new and that was brought by the US.

But please provide.

Fri, 09/30/2011 - 12:24 | 1726189 ServingMyKing
ServingMyKing's picture

<<an empire that declared that every human being was entitled to freedom and kept slavery>>

The Declaration and Constitution are clearly anit-slavery documents - go read Frederick Douglas.  "Kept slavery" should be rephrased as "reluctantly tolerated slavery while insuring its demise."  Don't even suggest that the Constituition counting "other persons" as 3/5ths of a person is evidence of it being pro-slavery or you will be wrong.


Fri, 09/30/2011 - 15:06 | 1726986 Are you kidding
Are you kidding's picture

But you assume that negros ARE men...  At that time they were not.  The 3/5ths rule was for voting.  The south had a LOT of slaves that WOULD vote the way their master wanted them to vote.  The North put that in!

Fri, 09/30/2011 - 12:32 | 1726218 Smiddywesson
Smiddywesson's picture

If indeed, what you wrote is true, please provide an empire that declared that every human being was entitled to freedom and kept slavery.

One specificity of US citizenism is to hijack humanity to further their selfish interests.

It all depends upon how you define freedom and slavery.  Using your definition, there has never been a free country or empire, and yet the citizens of those nations always believed they were free too.  What has changed today is the physical chains have come off, but the non physical chains have been slapped on everyone.  No offense, but you seen to think times are great for all of us shameless exploiters in the USA.

A discussion of the history of propaganda is beyond me, and certainly too detailed for this thread, but it was hardly invented by the USA.  If you are saying the US is worse because we are hypocrits, I would counter that the Romans believed they were doing the right thing in bringing the Pax Romanus to the people "invited" to join their empire. 

People always see the world from their own viewpoint.  You see the world being ruined by the Americans, I see it being ruined (again) by human nature.

Fri, 09/30/2011 - 12:03 | 1726067 AnAnonymous
AnAnonymous's picture

Still no one to take up the gauntlet? I know honour and respecting one's word is not in the US citizen nature but please help that US citizen and produce cheap propaganda in a follish attempt to claim that the US citizen nature is human nature.

Fri, 09/30/2011 - 12:28 | 1726205 Schmuck Raker
Schmuck Raker's picture

I'm not here to pick up a gauntlet, just...

It's entirely possible nobody is interested in engaging with you in conversation. How many of your posts don't mention propagand? In my experience it is often the person complaining loudest that is most suspect as a perpetrator.

Try changing your tune a bit, rather than your handle...AnAnonymous/ anynonmous?

Just sayin'.

Fri, 09/30/2011 - 12:40 | 1726261 Smiddywesson
Smiddywesson's picture

You're just angry that the USA is debasing its currency, which is just another way of saying its debasing your currency reserves, the reserves for which you slaved away at $0.25 per hour.

Now I'd love to discuss these matters like rational adults, but I know you have to get back to making those sneakers and I have to trade in the SUV, the ashtray is full. 

Fri, 09/30/2011 - 15:12 | 1727012 Schmuck Raker
Schmuck Raker's picture

" in the SUV, the ashtray is full. "


Fri, 09/30/2011 - 13:13 | 1726451 lasvegaspersona
lasvegaspersona's picture


I have read enough of your comments to believe that you are too full of hate to be worth engaging. You will continue to bleed anti white, anti American and anti success drivel but you are not here to have a dialogue, you are just here to complain. Sorry but that is I how I have come to see you.

Fri, 09/30/2011 - 19:04 | 1727775 BigJim
BigJim's picture

What gauntlet? Every Empire in history has oppressed its subjects. That's definitional. Whenever they attempted to justify what they did, they'd spout some sanctimonious horseshit about bringing civilization, culture, pax, you name it. Or that they were 'historically' entitled to the land (China/Tibet, Zionists/Palestine).

Either that or they just denied their human commonality with the people they were robbing/enslaving/killing.

Americans are just the most recent/successful bunch of exploiters. They were no different from the Romans in this respect; the Americans said it was ok to enslave blacks because they weren't really human, the Romans said exactly the same thing (they just pronounced 'human' as 'Roman')

The only thing new is we're doing it through the petrodollar. Now THAT is an innovation in the sad history of enslavement.

Fri, 09/30/2011 - 19:06 | 1727778 BigJim
BigJim's picture

And I notice you never tell us what nationality/ethnicity YOU are, AnAnnonymous. Anyone might think maybe 'your' people haven't been angels throughout recorded history, either.

Fri, 09/30/2011 - 11:19 | 1725878 Cynical Sidney
Cynical Sidney's picture

cultural relativism of the weak and unproductive? maybe you forgot to mention that this country was founded on christian values, cause last i checked no 'indian' or 'negro' culture became world super powers.


as far as this relativism BS goes, here's some food for thought:

lazy parasites produces nothing of value living off the biggest social safety net created in the history of mankind, vs

immoral financial criminals who produces nothing of value syphoning public funds defrauding the people;

that's how they killed the middle class.



Fri, 09/30/2011 - 12:06 | 1726084 AnAnonymous
AnAnonymous's picture

cause last i checked no 'indian' or 'negro' culture became world super powers.

And that plays to their favour.

These people have never enjoyed the level of power US citizens have enjoyed so it is impossible to draw any inferement on their deep nature.

But US citizens, it is another story. Who prevents US citizens? Nobody. They are what they are.

And the picture is amazing: duplicitous, deceitful, propagandist, bully, unable to bear any kind of responsibility, robber, unjust etc...

Have US citizen any human quality that would redeem them? Please name one.

Fri, 09/30/2011 - 12:27 | 1726200 Prisoners_dilemna
Prisoners_dilemna's picture

We're not mooooslem.

We've produce the finest artists, ie. Katy Perry.

Our prisoners dont eat cockroaches to survive.

Jesus loves us!

Twinkies and hohos.

Uhmurika fuck yeah!


Fri, 09/30/2011 - 12:53 | 1726323 Moe Howard
Moe Howard's picture

you forgot guns baby guns. 


Funny how the weak hate America. Eat our shit, shithead third worlder! Hahhahha.

Quit crying.

Fri, 09/30/2011 - 13:23 | 1726494 lasvegaspersona
lasvegaspersona's picture

I'll name a few dad and his generation gave up their lives to fight the Nazis...I was long ago and it wasn't those of us alive today but THAT kind of sacrifice is the way most Americans view themselves as being willing to make. Yes along the way we trusted leaders who promised to continue our tradition of altruistic world leadership. We have been betrayed. It still does not change what is in the heart of the average American. Sure there are plenty of jerks and loafers but when I look back on a life in America the good far outnumber. If this country were governed by the average man rather than the sick psychos who desire and gain power perhaps you'd have a better opinion...

Fri, 09/30/2011 - 15:12 | 1727016 MiddleMeThis
MiddleMeThis's picture

Well, it's certainly not for lack of trying!  Native American special interest groups (i.e. the elite) donate HUNDREDS of MILLIONS of dollars to political candidates while their "people" live in squalor.  Apparently the "deep nature" of the ELITE Native Americans is to rise to power and leave the common man living in filth.  Extensive money and power corrupts, plain and simple; regardless of race, religion, sex, etc., etc.

And frankly, someone like you, who viciously spews hate and has a general disregard for ALL americans, is not qualified to be the moral police.

Fri, 09/30/2011 - 11:27 | 1725927 tmosley
tmosley's picture

Point of information, Indians didn't own land, as they refused to recognize property rights, either among members of their own tribes, nor between their tribes, and certainly not those of the whites.  This is why they were almost totally wiped out.  Go to Latin America, and you find a different story.  There they recognized property rights, and as a result, survived the invasion of Europeans.

US citizens were not entitled to african labor, though they used it because they felt that humans could give up their right to self ownership (foolishly).  Note that whites purchased slaves from BLACKS.  White slavers were exceedingly rare.

Further, whites didn't think they "deserved" superior status, simply for being white.  If that were the case, they neve would have discriminated against Irish and Southern Europeans.  They rightfully ascribed their suberior status to their adherence to free markets, and their freedoms, something generally lacking in those places where the discriminated against hailed from originally.

Why so butthurt?

Fri, 09/30/2011 - 11:54 | 1726027 Jack Burton
Jack Burton's picture

The native indians were wiped out by diseases carried by the civilized Europeans. Many of these diseases came from the close cohabitation of farm animal and humans in the European agricultural society.

Most Indians died having never laid eyes on a White Man. The diseases spread that fast. The survivors were no match for the large immigrations that followed.


Fri, 09/30/2011 - 11:59 | 1726051 European American
European American's picture

Humans are the Invasive Species on this planet.

Fri, 09/30/2011 - 12:01 | 1726060 AnAnonymous
AnAnonymous's picture

Most Indians died having never laid eyes on a White Man. The diseases spread that fast. The survivors were no match for the large immigrations that followed.


Sure, sure. In the US ideology, it would have happened anyway is a classical trick to deny and dilute their own responsibility.

Alas for them, Indians were still even numerous to set their case about their right to the land of their ancestors, have it acknowledged by SC and denied by president Jackson.

US citizens cant put up with their own history. They have to invent a fabled past to make sense of their present propaganda.

Fri, 09/30/2011 - 12:39 | 1726259 ElvisDog
ElvisDog's picture

Methinks you are being selective, AnAnonymous. Indians widely practiced slavery amongst themselves long before they had any contact with Europeans. Your whole "noble Indian, evil White Man" riff is either ignorant or disengenious.

Fri, 09/30/2011 - 12:45 | 1726277 Hook Line and S...
Hook Line and Sphincter's picture

Here's a little quote for you... “Kill every buffalo you can, for every buffalo dead is an Indian gone”. Colonel, R. I. Dodge, 1867 But, back to the history, not the fabled past AnAnonymous…the U.S. Government was at war with the Native People, and they were not about to be defeated. Thereby began a deliberate and systematic program of extermination and subjugation that began with the buffalo. Now the systematic slaughter of the buffalo began in early on. By 1864 over 4 million buffalo had been killed, and by 1883 the huge herds first written about by Meriwether Lewis 78 years earlier had disappeared. At the end of the 19th century, after tens of millions had been slaughtered, only 23 wild buffalo had survived. Europeans valued riches and land. Their attitude was to “take everything you can”, even what you don’t need, and thus began the giant “land grab” and the migration westward. The only thing that stood in the way of the settlers were Indians. As we all know, it was all about money and power, and the Indians simply frustrated the early colonists’ desire for a local commodity that the Europeans desperately wanted: land.

These Native peoples may not have always been on the best terms with their neighbors, but they were always in sync with nature. They didn’t kill off their food source, weren't active ZH posters, didn't contaminate their waters with toxins and radiation, like we find today, nor did they go on campaigns to exterminate adjacent tribes. U. S. officials, intent on moving more and more settlers west, were determined to eliminate the Indians. The indigenous people were seen as “disposable” since they offered no reliable labor force and had no valuable commodities to offer in commerce. Many referred to the Native People as “heathens” and “animals”, dehumanizing them and thereby justifying their annihilation. Government and military leaders knew that without food, even the strongest army can be brought to its’ knees. They also knew that the most effective way of dealing a deadly blow to the Indians was to destroy their food supply, the buffalo.

Fri, 09/30/2011 - 13:01 | 1726358 ElvisDog
ElvisDog's picture

These Native peoples may not have always been on the best terms with their neighbors, but they were always in sync with nature

But were the native peoples in sync with nature because of some innate nobility or because they had to be because they lacked the technology to abuse nature? Europeans in the Dark Ages were also in sync with nature because if they weren't they would starve to death. I think the situation was similar for the Indians. It was only when the Europeans developed metalurgy, steam power, and so on that they could generate the surplus food that allows one to abuse nature. If the Indians had similar technology would they have acted differently? Who is to say, but it's a little like the working class guy saying "I would never kill myself by taking too much cocaine and driving my Maserati into a tree". He doesn't have the resources to do it, so who can say if he would or wouldn't if he did?

Sat, 10/01/2011 - 11:34 | 1728928 trav7777
trav7777's picture

you idiot...the natives were not in sync with nature.

They extincted every large land mammal in this hemisphere.  The injuns used to drive whole heards of buffalo off of cliffs...the animal survived only because the injun lacked the technology to live long and multiply sufficiently to extinct them too!

You're also a moron for believing that every injun was a plains injun feeding on buffalo...ROTFL.  What kind of stereotyping rayciss are you?

Fri, 09/30/2011 - 12:56 | 1726335 Moe Howard
Moe Howard's picture

There were huge plagues that swept mesoamerica before Columbus & Cortez, wiping out millions of native americans.

Your so-called knowledge needs to be updated.

Fri, 09/30/2011 - 23:05 | 1728156 Bicycle Repairman
Bicycle Repairman's picture

Native Americans were largely bred out of existence and assimilated.  I think if you went to a large public gathering and asked for a show of hands to the question "Who here has native American blood?" if people were honest, I think you'd be surprised at the number raising their hands.

The 'red' man is a part  of many 'white' and 'black' Americans.

Fri, 09/30/2011 - 11:58 | 1726044 AnAnonymous
AnAnonymous's picture

Another brilliant session of innovation by a US citizen. US citizens are such innovators they cant improve of their cheap propaganda.

But it shows that the US citizen nature is eternal.

The way the Indians perceived property is irrelevant.

What mattered is what US citizens stated. And US citizens stated that human beings had a natural right to property. US citizens denied that right to Indians who were human beings.

So US citizens went against a creed they set up for themselves and that was not imposed on them but by themselves.

Telling that Indians did not acknowledge property is also blatantly not historical. If that was the case, they would not have sued to get their property rights acknowledged by the SC and denied by the true friend to the Indians, Andrew Jackson.

Cheap propaganda.

Self ownership in the 1800s? I hope that you are aware that the self ownership concept was an additional propaganda bit to fill the cap in some neocapitalist drivel thesis, that had that everyone could make a capital thrive. So when some objected that every man did not start with a capital, the gap was filled by claiming that a person owned oneself, so everyone had a capital.

Again cheap propaganda.

In the great construction of the white tribes, at start, as it was impossible to deny some blatant facts, there were several groups in the white race, ordered from top to bottom, anglo saxons/aryan topping the hierarchy.

Discrimination against inferior white people was natural and part of the racist system.

But according to the racist creed, even the lower white person deserves freedom and had not to be held as a slave. They were entitled to a superior status because of their whiteness.

US historical revionism is so cheap. Their US propaganda is so cheap.

Hey, here, another entitlement typical to US citizens: the feeling that they deserve more for an equal or lower work output.

Every US citizen in spite of their blatant nullity think they deserve every single cent they make even though they earn most of their wages on the mere fact of being US citizen.

This US citizen and his shining by their worthiness comment are a perfect example.

Fri, 09/30/2011 - 12:43 | 1726274 ElvisDog
ElvisDog's picture

AnAnonymous, you are one racist motherfucker. Or are you so racist that you think racism against white people doesn't count as racism?

Fri, 09/30/2011 - 12:48 | 1726286 Smiddywesson
Smiddywesson's picture

And what gives you a right to pass judgement on US citizens, or the rights of native americans, or history, without identifying where you live?  What country are you in? 

Let us all see if you answer that little question, or if you hide behind some disingenuous answer like it doesn't matter, or you are a citizen of humanity or some other cowardly bullshit, while you throw rocks at others.

It wouldn't be that bastion of human rights, China, would it?

Fri, 09/30/2011 - 12:27 | 1726198 JoeSexPack
JoeSexPack's picture

I agree with most of that, but wait, there's more...


Smallpox virus killed over 90% of N American tribes, they had no genetic defense. S American tribes had more resistance to smallpox, so more lived. Syphilis went from them to Euro's, but that's another story.


Slavery is a constant of history, from Mesopotamia to now. Millions of whites from S & E Europe were enslaved in N Africa & Ottoman Turkey unitl the 1800's. Slavery currently exists in high #'s in Africa. Over 95% of African slaves going to the New World went to S America & Carribean, they had better immunity to tropical diseases like yellow fever & malaria that killed most whites. Whites were actually among the first to stop slavery.


Many native cultures in Africa, Asia & S America feel they are 'superior' to others, which is partially required for group survival, meaning if they don't feel their group is partially better than others they will leave or change their group. Of course, today only whites are stigmatized for this, same with slavery, 'war crimes' & 'hate'-crimes.


Obviously much of this is sour grapes, or envious resentment. I don't let it ruin my weekend.

Fri, 09/30/2011 - 12:51 | 1726300 ElvisDog
ElvisDog's picture

If AnAnonymous thinks racism is concentrated among white people, then he clearly hasn't traveled to Asia. Chinese, Japanese, Korean, Thai people all think they are far superior to every other ethnic group on Earth and they don't even try to hide it with western, liberal, PC bullshit. The typical Japanese thinks that the typical American is an uncouth, genetically inferior barbarian. They think worse about the Chinese.

Fri, 09/30/2011 - 19:14 | 1727795 BigJim
BigJim's picture

Kind of ironic AnAnonymous looks down on white people because they have a history of... looking down on other people.

Fri, 09/30/2011 - 12:56 | 1726321 Smiddywesson
Smiddywesson's picture

It is very difficult to raise the human condition.  The most important aspect of BEING superior is believing you are superior and acting in a superior fashion.  Some people can't tell the difference between that quest and a bluff.  That intimidates them and they want everbody brought down to the same level.  Thus, superiority became forbidden, and the results are apparent for everyone to see. 

The quest to better yourself is a morally good thing, not a morally bad thing.  You have to believe to make it happen,  and it is morally wrong to criticize others for trying.

Fri, 09/30/2011 - 11:32 | 1725940 DOT
DOT's picture


Fri, 09/30/2011 - 13:54 | 1726504 Kobe Beef
Kobe Beef's picture

@ AnAnonymous:

It's not "whiteness" that made them superior. It was intelligence, work ethic, and cooperation that made Western Civilization possible. It's not about skin color, but applied intelligence & willingness to get along.

Yet you propose that the outcome of superior effort, intelligence, and ruthlessness in dealing with an intractable inferior is "entitlement"? Western Civilization, though bloody, is an accomplishment born of industry and ingenuity.

Amerindians & Africans had accomplished exactly what before European contact? Cannibalism? check. Human Sacrifice? check. Constant tribal warfare, slavery, and mass rape? check.

Architecture? nope. Written language? nope. Any kind of engineering beyond the Stone Age? nope. Not even the wheel. Clearly, the African & Amerindian cultures were inferior, and that is why they were replaced.

Go cry over the Lost World of Homo Erectus, you PC-Marxist piece of shit, and take your tired "Blame Whitey" bullshit with you.


Fri, 09/30/2011 - 15:42 | 1727140 Smiddywesson
Smiddywesson's picture

Well said.

It is probably safe to say as a generalization that any stone age culture running up against an expanding technological culture, anytime in the history of man, was doomed from the start.  It's irrelevant what color or nationality the two groups belong to, the winner is preordained.

Fri, 09/30/2011 - 18:06 | 1727670 Lord Koos
Lord Koos's picture

Why is this always about individual Americans when the biggest welfare recipients in the world on are Wall Street?  Seems to me it's the rich that feel "entitled" to anything they want, including your commons, resources and money.

Fri, 09/30/2011 - 23:17 | 1728172 Bicycle Repairman
Bicycle Repairman's picture

Well the rich have a superior technology and culture, so I guess we've got this coming.

Fri, 09/30/2011 - 11:36 | 1725956 thefedisscam
thefedisscam's picture

No, it is NOT human nature! It is American Nature! here are some examples.


  • A guy in a lab coat with a stethoscope around his neck (you can't see his face) holds a sign saying: "Ivy League medical student over 100,000 in debt committed to a life of helping the homeless and mentally ill. We are the 99%."
  • Another girl holds a sign saying: "They say you can be anything you want if you work hard enough. The truth is you can only be what you want if you can pay enough. Only 20 and already drowning in debt because I want to follow my dreams. I am the 99%."
  • Another woman holds up a sign saying: "I'm a single mom of four, college graduate 3.6 GPA, shelf stocker, I go hungry daily, I am the 99%. Occupy Wall Street. "

    MOST People from other cultures or other parts of the world, do NOT take anything for granted, but MOST of Americans DO! They think they deserve ANYTHING! and those who do not, will borrow beyond their means, will feel being Victimized!  Yes, they think they are ENTITLED for ANYTHING they want. MOST People from other cultures or other parts of the world know they need to work HARD to get what they want!  Yes, this is the DIFFERENCE!
    Fri, 09/30/2011 - 12:58 | 1726346 Smiddywesson
    Smiddywesson's picture

    Your punctuation hasn't changed at all Ananonymous, so why play games and switch handles?

    Fri, 09/30/2011 - 13:01 | 1726362 Moe Howard
    Moe Howard's picture

    Those aren't Americans, those are examples of Liberals. Not the same thing. They hate America.

    Fri, 09/30/2011 - 12:45 | 1726275 MacGruber
    MacGruber's picture

    This article is a bit disappointing. I usually like Mr. Smith's stuff. I think this article is more of the same harming nonsense that seems so in vogue these days. Namely that fierce individualism and "boot-strapping" will be the thing that brings us all happiness. It's not. If history has taught us anything is that the more collective we act the better off we are. I'm sure some will read that as socialism, but in reality a little bit of socialism is a good thing, it gives us economies of scale that we can use to our benefit.

    Examples: I personally don't want to squabble with f*cking health insurance companies (which I have experience doing). I personally would like to be fulfilled in my job and know that I won't be homeless if I lose it (because some greed banker or "capitalist" f*cked my industry). I personally would like to know that when I get older I won't have to work at Walmart to eat.

    The problem is not entitlements in our country. The problem is people in America forgetting that we stand together. It can mean something to be an American. It means we take care of our own, it means we give each other opportunities. It means we take care of our sick and our old. I seriously hate the notion that our country should be an unaffiliated group of individuals all struggling against each other. I wish people would help the welfare dude, feel good that they give to social security - its profoundly selfish to say I want to be an American, but don't help other Americans.

    That's most of the reason these programs are so messed up, greedy self interest in pursuit of "free" taxpayer money, while saying screw everyone else, I got mine.

    Fri, 09/30/2011 - 13:03 | 1726378 Moe Howard
    Moe Howard's picture

    You are a bit disappointing. You see government as the answer, if we would just do it right and didn't have bad people.


    You are the problem!

    Fri, 09/30/2011 - 14:29 | 1726803 MacGruber
    MacGruber's picture

    Your personal attack conveyed in such shitty sentence structure comes as a compliment.

    If not the government, then who? Should we dissolve the VA hospital system? Disband the Army? Privatize highways, the electrical grid, waterways, airways, space access, border control? Maybe negotiate treaties through General Electric? Good luck with that.

    Governments don't intrinsically ruin things, people ruin things. Governments are made by people and we can choose what government we have.

    I hope you'll stand by your words and not accept your SS check, and definitely take a private insurer over Medicare. We don't want your entitled free riding ass sucking from the system. That money can be better spent on the F-35.


    Fri, 09/30/2011 - 19:30 | 1727815 BigJim
    BigJim's picture

    Governments are made by people and we can choose what government we have.

    Really? That's interesting. My reading of history is that the vast majority of 'governments' were actually roving bands of mafia-like marauders who decided to settle down and 'farm' the locals. To do this more effectively they expanded the paths the locals had made themselves, set up better defenses so another roving band of mafia-like marauders didn't do to them what they had done to the locals, and then settled down and took a cut of every economic activity as 'protection' money.

    Yes, over the years, the locals have wrested more rights from their overlords... but unless they revolted and instituted an entirely new government, they certainly don't 'choose' what government they have.

    The US had one such revolution... back in 1776. Since then, the government has grabbed more and more power. When you vote, you don't 'choose what government' you have. You choose a few puppets. And even if they aren't puppets, the government they are slotting into is a hundreds year old monolith of people who will defend their turf at your expense. And that is exactly what we see every election. We install a few new people but the government is largely unchanged, and, indeed, unchangeable.

    PS - expecting Moe not to take advantage of some of the programs he's been forced to pay at gunpoint is a bit rich, isn't it? Not to say irrelevant.

    Fri, 09/30/2011 - 21:46 | 1728054 monoloco
    monoloco's picture

    Entitlements are the bread, TV's the circuses. Welcome to the last days of the American empire.

    Fri, 09/30/2011 - 10:44 | 1725751 SheepDog-One
    SheepDog-One's picture

    Entitlement Nation is Marxism, what will soon be thrown over is not only passengers baggage, but the passengers themselves.

    Fri, 09/30/2011 - 11:40 | 1725982 thefedisscam
    thefedisscam's picture

    You do NOT know what is the Maxism!  The people in the U.S. are the #1s who think they are ENTITLED for anything they desired to. That is why majority of people in this country are feeling victimized and borrowed beyond their means.


    Fri, 09/30/2011 - 12:16 | 1726145 adr
    adr's picture

    Don't lump all Americans into the entitlement camp. What you describe is the mindset of most liberals and the fools that follow them for the handout. The elites bribed the foolish in order to maintain their power. A great number of Americans, who are mostly silent, don't expect a handout of any kind. The real Tea Party individuals don't expect handouts and only expect the right to have the opportunity to succeed.

    My grandfather flew a B17 in WWII and flew 42 missions when he could have gone home at 25. He didn't expect a handout when he got home, just like milions of others. Then the spoiled generation came along and decided to complain about every rule and expected to be handed prosperity. The boomers created ways to generate wealth without working, with a lot of help from a certain segment o the population itching to regain control. Welath was promised without work, the great society was eneacted, and the downward spiral picked up steam. 

    If you talk to true conservatives and libertarians in the middle of the country, almost all of them would say, drop every entitlement and we'll take care of our family members that need help. We just want the government to get out of the way and let the parasites fail so new smaller corporations can be created that care more about employees than market cap.

    Fri, 09/30/2011 - 10:44 | 1725753 RSloane
    RSloane's picture

    The problem arises when groups of people in a binary political environment try to define "excess baggage".

    Fri, 09/30/2011 - 10:45 | 1725755 marsdefIAnCe
    marsdefIAnCe's picture

    "5. An upper-middle class lifestyle for everyone who does what the Status Quo expects: get a graduate-level university degree, sacrifice for the corporation, remain politically silent/passive, etc. The idea that toeing the line will not result in a big-bucks secure profession/career is somehow a violation of the social/financial contract of Corporate America--once again, a right or an entitlement that is implicit in the American psyche."


    This is the key problem.  Those who feel most deserving of rewards are precisely those who constitute the bottom of the barrel.

    Fri, 09/30/2011 - 13:08 | 1726413 Kobe Beef
    Kobe Beef's picture

    How are people who get university degrees & work for a living the bottom of the barrel? Misguided, perhaps, but these people worked hard to get their little reward in life.

    I propose the lazy, violent, welfare-entitled shit-heads to be the bottom of the barrel. Throw them overboard instead.

    Fri, 09/30/2011 - 10:45 | 1725757 Bastiat
    Bastiat's picture

    Beyond these "I paid into them" entitlements are the "welfare" entitlements of Medicaid, Section 8 Housing, SNAP/food stamps, etc., which are paid out of general tax revenues and which are available to anyone who qualifies, regardless of their status as taxpayers.


    It seems like  you got the quotes in the wrong place: instead of "welfare" entitlements,  it should be: welfare "entitlements"  since they are clearly welfare and only called "entitlements."  Where has the welfare recipient purchased the "title" so as to become "entitled?" 

    Fri, 09/30/2011 - 10:54 | 1725793 snowball777
    snowball777's picture

    The quotes signify a disbelief that they actually contribute to our welfare (it was a commonly used noun long before being co-opted as a pejorative term, look it up...perhaps in the Constitution); the assumption is that the recipient "purchased" them with their citizenship (and taxes).


    Fri, 09/30/2011 - 11:05 | 1725832 Bastiat
    Bastiat's picture

    The quotes signify a disbelief that they actually contribute to our welfare

    Then don't take the money.

    Fri, 09/30/2011 - 11:32 | 1725946 snowball777
    snowball777's picture

    "Then don't take the medicine / food / shelter" - Bastiat

    Fri, 09/30/2011 - 12:50 | 1726309 Bastiat
    Bastiat's picture


    Look I happen to agree that the Johnson's Great Society, the real expansion of our welfare state was a social catastrophe for many it was intended to help, if that's your point above.  But if if anyone feels it's too much of an ongoing burden to take the welfare money,  then don't. 

    Fri, 09/30/2011 - 22:49 | 1728130 snowball777
    snowball777's picture

    Oh, please. The continued rape of the American middle class by bankers, corporations, and the politicians they buy has been the "social catastrophe".

    You think the millions of uneducated minorities (white or otherwise) would have been better served by maintaining the status quo for the 50 years prior to LBJ? (yessuh, I'z be gettin' them bagz fo ya massa!)

    You really think I was a latch-key kid because my mom felt "empowered" to work for minimum wage checking power meters to make ends meet instead of baking away in some fantasy that only exists in your pointy Austrian head?

    Perhaps I could point out the really obvious...that I'm one of the people those programs helped escape poverty! From the "socialist" AirForce base where I went to elementary school, to my "communist" hot lunches, to my dad's VA loan-funded education, to my Stafford Loan. Never mind the fact that he and I have paid more in taxes since then than they ever spent "doling" out assistance to help me do so.

    Multiply my story tens of million times over and then sit back and pretend that UE insurance doesn't end up in corporate tills that would otherwise be empty and that foodstamps don't keep farmers from ending up taking advantage of the former.

    The biggest advantage that Austrian economics has going for it is that it's never actually been put to the test! But keep dreaming on paper and ignore every part of history that contradicts the fairytales you concoct and proliferate, if it helps you feel like a righteous little paper tiger.

    Fri, 09/30/2011 - 11:19 | 1725869 Smiddywesson
    Smiddywesson's picture

    It seems like  you got the quotes in the wrong place: instead of "welfare" entitlements,  it should be: welfare "entitlements"  since they are clearly welfare and only called "entitlements." 

    Bastiat is right and that is why they can't fix these programs.  They have mixed welfare with entitlements based on merit.  They need to split social security between the charity cases and those who are drawing on money they paid in (plus a fair return on principal).  Anyone who outlives the money they paid in should be shunted to the other program, a program called what it is, CHARITY.  If you are receiving money that you didn't pay in, you should submit to means testing to receive what you are receiving: charity.

    If I hear one more 90 year old geezer talking about "my money" when he outlived the money he paid in decades ago, I'm going to lose it. 

    Fri, 09/30/2011 - 11:24 | 1725909 X.inf.capt
    X.inf.capt's picture


    Fri, 09/30/2011 - 13:12 | 1726446 Smiddywesson
    Smiddywesson's picture

    greened for being an infantry captain

    Fri, 09/30/2011 - 13:36 | 1726559 X.inf.capt
    X.inf.capt's picture

    thanks, wesson

    and thank you for your service, too!

    Fri, 09/30/2011 - 11:31 | 1725943 karzai_luver
    karzai_luver's picture

    there is and can be no "fair" return on principle.


    You are just crying for someone else to make you whole in your "fair" mind.


    A joke you are , you obviuosly suck at the gvt teat , but you whine it isn't fair.


    fair is a clown term of the progresive marxist you imbecile.


    Fri, 09/30/2011 - 11:51 | 1726018 DOT
    DOT's picture

    Junked for not proposing an alternative definition.

    How do you come to agreement on any hedonic issue?



    Value for Value plus agreement with-out coersion leads to fairness.


    Fair enough?

    Fri, 09/30/2011 - 12:01 | 1726063 Cugel
    Cugel's picture

    Recognize that the money that was taken from you is already lost.


    Fri, 09/30/2011 - 13:17 | 1726466 Smiddywesson
    Smiddywesson's picture

    That is obvious.  My point is they can't just throw everyone out on the street and they can't fix the system without dividing it into seperate groups and priortizing matters.  That's it, it's not rocket science.  There is absolutely no logical reason that people of means, who have received a return on their money, plus principal, are still drawing a paycheck based on a Ponzi promise that will destroy a broken system.  It is crazy

    Fri, 09/30/2011 - 14:52 | 1726924 Cugel
    Cugel's picture

    If it's obvious, why do you expect to get the principal + interest back? The money you paid in was "invested" in the most unproductive people in society -- the old and disabled. Those people spent it and now it's gone. The only way the government can obtain this "fair" return you want is to grab it from other productive people. Rather than perpetuating this nonsense, just take the hit and write it off.

    Nobody is arguing against means testing. The problem is that you feel that since somebody reached into your pocket and took from you, that you now have the right to reach into a third guy's pocket and take what you lost plus interest. Because that's all you're doing.

    Fri, 09/30/2011 - 16:18 | 1727299 Smiddywesson
    Smiddywesson's picture

    Hey, how did I become the champion of the parasites by calling for reform?  I have not even discussed the issue of whether we should have social security or not (we shouldn't), and whether I believe the program is moral.  (It isn't.  )

    You are putting words in my mouth saying I want to rob you and future generations.  I don't want that, but the reality of the situation is we created this mess and now we have to deal with it.  The former Soviet Union went through the same process.  The result there was multiple pension reforms and pensioners living far below the poverty line.  We are likely to see that here, or worse. 

    You are saying the system in its present form can't be fixed.  I agree, that's why the program has to be broken up.  Which parts do we save?  Well that's your point of contention.  You are angered that the retired and soon to be retired will get anything at all.  I can understand your anger, because they continued to vote for the politicians who squandered their money.  But, the reality of the situation is that SS will be replaced with another system, the old and the infirm are not going away, and shouting down any calls for reform is unproductive, because the old people are rapidly gaining the votes to yoke the productive workers in this country.  So yes, I agree, we are in trouble.   

    Fri, 09/30/2011 - 13:24 | 1726503 karzai_luver
    karzai_luver's picture

    Yes that is fair. I didn't think it need to be spelled out.



    Fri, 09/30/2011 - 13:11 | 1726431 Smiddywesson
    Smiddywesson's picture

    Return on pricipal, not of principal.  The program is called "OASDI."  What part of old age savings don't you understand, troll?

    There's absolutely nothing Marxist about splitting up the program.  That is politically neutral.  There's nothing Marxist about demanding people get repaid the money they paid in (if that is possible at this late date). 

    In fact, a Marxist would be quite happy with a program that steals from everyone for the government's personal use.  Social Security is a disfunctional collossus that treats our vets the same as some fat bastard that claims he is disabled because he refuses to stop eating.  If you are defending that system, I think we can do better.

    Fri, 09/30/2011 - 13:28 | 1726522 karzai_luver
    karzai_luver's picture

    It is not possible to pay back what you have aalready spent.


    Not without forcing someone else to pay it back to YOU.


    I want NONE of it back if others have to pay.


    If it would have been invested/saved whatever and it still existed then you could get it back.


    You can't gt it back, the system you supported won't support it unless you WISH to make others pay for it.


    I don't wish to force others to pay for it anymore.


    Once facts change I change. That system is not viable under the current facts as I see them. thus I say you may not get "back" everything you paid in as it has been a tax and been SPENT for things you have already consumed.




    Fri, 09/30/2011 - 16:21 | 1727320 Smiddywesson
    Smiddywesson's picture

    No, don't be sorry.  I agree 100%

    Unfortunately, I don't think either of us is going to get what they want.

    Fri, 09/30/2011 - 11:36 | 1725963 snowball777
    snowball777's picture

    If you considered the inflation-adjusted value of the money they "put in", and the difference in costs of what they spend it on (COLA?, CPI? LOL!), would they still be receiving "charity" or just be another victim of the Ponzi?

    I'm all for means-testing (seen tooo many SS recipients "in Cadillacs"), but compare apples to apples.

    Fri, 09/30/2011 - 13:34 | 1726531 karzai_luver
    karzai_luver's picture

    ss was/is a TAX and it was spent for things that were consumned that were not paid for and then we borrowed the diff.


    Thus now what was paid in was spent PLUS more.


    Thus YOU can't get back anything, YOU already got it.


    You can force someone else to pay you back , I choose not to.


    Victim of the PNZI is where we disagree, the victims want to be made whole now with another Ponzi. I don't agree with that all over again.


    Some day once the party is over you have to pay the piper. You just want someone else to pay the piper with devalued bucks, I guess.

    I don't agree.



    Fri, 09/30/2011 - 11:40 | 1725977 Bob
    Bob's picture

    And then there are the really expensive entitlements that nobody talks about because they're so busy hating on the "losers" over the unearned food they're putting in their mouths:


    Fri, 09/30/2011 - 13:06 | 1726407 Moe Howard
    Moe Howard's picture

    Good points.

    Fri, 09/30/2011 - 10:45 | 1725758 BrocilyBeef
    BrocilyBeef's picture

    buy sliver! just bought silver buff rounds when silver was at $29.99 this morning. If/when prices drop I'll move onto American, Canadian and Australian gov mints. I'd like to see mid-twenties though in sliver price.




    Fri, 09/30/2011 - 10:56 | 1725797 snowball777
    snowball777's picture

    See that boat out in the harbor? You missed it.

    Fri, 09/30/2011 - 11:11 | 1725850 BrocilyBeef
    BrocilyBeef's picture

    I'm not done yet. :-)

    Fri, 09/30/2011 - 11:02 | 1725819 SheepDog-One
    SheepDog-One's picture

    Just picked up a few hundred rounds of Silvertip .45 ammo.

    Fri, 09/30/2011 - 11:12 | 1725851 BrocilyBeef
    BrocilyBeef's picture

    got plenty of .45 ACP

    Fri, 09/30/2011 - 11:21 | 1725887 Smiddywesson
    Smiddywesson's picture

    Don't forget the .223 green tips for those Bartertown trips.

    Fri, 09/30/2011 - 12:41 | 1726269 chubbar
    chubbar's picture

    Got me a couple hundred more rounds of Hornady 168gr BTHP 308 rounds along with some extra mags and other assorted gear. I'm just trying to tie up loose ends while I can.

    This whole back and forth about entitlements/whiteness hating/ US citizen hating/pro marxist ranting (or whatever it is, can't quite make out the position they are taking) is making me consider ordering some more even though I have several thousand rounds spread out over various calibers. Lots of haters out there are going to be going hungry and we all best be prepared to defend ourselves against those losers.

    Fri, 09/30/2011 - 11:04 | 1725826 johnQpublic
    johnQpublic's picture

    i'm not buying any more sliver...i get enuf slivers woodworking

    Fri, 09/30/2011 - 13:21 | 1725762 DaveyJones
    DaveyJones's picture

    when do I get MY .25 interest entitlement along with my free jail pass? Do I have to fuck up first?

    Fri, 09/30/2011 - 10:57 | 1725763 X.inf.capt
    X.inf.capt's picture

    OH NO!

    this story's comment section is going to be bloody...

    wheres my kevlar when i need it.....

    Fri, 09/30/2011 - 10:48 | 1725767 TheGoodDoctor
    TheGoodDoctor's picture

    I hope Charles Hugh Smith will do an article about the entitlement attitude of big business corporations, TBTF, and those that need bailouts. Or how the IMF uses our tax base as their own personal slush fund. I'm glad he can pop open an umbrella to encompass all of us out here. Some of us merely want a job.

    I just love how some folks have to lecture us on how it should be or the former Wall Streeters that suddenly find religion after they have made their millions and can afford to have their opinions heard.

    Fri, 09/30/2011 - 10:50 | 1725776 swiss chick
    swiss chick's picture

    Totally agree with you

    Fri, 09/30/2011 - 10:53 | 1725790 pazmaker
    pazmaker's picture

    well said Good doctor!

    I'll gladly forego collecting SS if you give me back all the money I've paid into it, otherwise don't lecture me about entitlement mentality

    Fri, 09/30/2011 - 11:07 | 1725817 TheGoodDoctor
    TheGoodDoctor's picture

    Same here my friend. I forgot to mention the politicians that get their salary every year after they retire (even for serving one term), full high end health benefits, gravy train jobs after "serving the public" by letting the lobbyists write the laws and rape the taxpayers, etc. etc. etc.

    Fri, 09/30/2011 - 11:07 | 1725836 johnQpublic
    johnQpublic's picture

    absolutely right

    i've been bitching about that for years

    millionaires entitled to a free ride for life for going along with the stripping of our rights in a thousand different ways...for as little as a 2 year term of employment "serving" the people (up on a platter)

    Fri, 09/30/2011 - 11:25 | 1725914 DaveyJones
    DaveyJones's picture

    it's cause they work so hard going to lunch with rich people

    Fri, 09/30/2011 - 15:03 | 1726977 Zero Debt
    Zero Debt's picture

    Term limits in congress would help a lot

    Fri, 09/30/2011 - 11:09 | 1725840 sdmjake
    sdmjake's picture

    I'll gladly forego collecting SS AND you can keep the 25 years of payments I've made if you'll let me "opt out" on a go forward basis. (Ditto Medicare)

    Fri, 09/30/2011 - 11:19 | 1725877 X.inf.capt
    X.inf.capt's picture

    great point, jake

    i dont remember being givin' a choice to pay ssn, etc, on my paychecks, buts that cool...

    want to get rid of these? im game...

    just give me my money back...

    and ill take care of myself, thank you...

    oh yeah, they stole it in the 80's....

    Fri, 09/30/2011 - 11:37 | 1725968 karzai_luver
    karzai_luver's picture

    You had a choice when you choose to stay and contribute.


    You had a choice you just didn't have the guts to take the option you had.


    You sucked the cock of the criminal system for whatever benefits you could get, don't wonder how they screwed you, you bent over and spread 'em.


    You bought the bullshit, tough.


    Fri, 09/30/2011 - 23:42 | 1728207 tickhound
    tickhound's picture

    Shanna... They bought their tickets, they knew what they were getting into.  I say, let 'em crash.

    It was a joke then, but its just fucking stupid now.

    Fri, 09/30/2011 - 11:35 | 1725959 karzai_luver
    karzai_luver's picture

    We will give you back all you paid into "it" as soon as you return all the lives you took using your "it".


    You sound like ALGore , IT was spent to prop up things you wouldn't have paid for otherwise and you voted for the clowns that did it to you.


    YOU don't deserve ANYthing BACK, you have spent it on things you seemed to want.


    You are typical liberal marxist clown.


    You are owed nothing, you paid for services consumed.



    Fri, 09/30/2011 - 12:51 | 1726315 Oquities
    Oquities's picture

    quick question - how DO you get internet service in that mud hut?

    Fri, 09/30/2011 - 13:37 | 1726560 karzai_luver
    karzai_luver's picture

    I moved out from under the rock once you moved in next door.

    service is great.




    i gave you a greenie.

    Fri, 09/30/2011 - 11:58 | 1726043 DOT
    DOT's picture

    Applause for the doc. also, but as with all taxes......

    Fri, 09/30/2011 - 10:58 | 1725806 AnAnonymous
    AnAnonymous's picture

    Wall Streeters, big corporations, businesses... are US citizens. No cause to distinguish among them.

    They are all US citizens and the US has been a story of entitlements.

    The very fact that the planet's resources are no longer enough to maintain a rising level of entitlements, getting some US citizens to slip out of the bowl, is a major cause of US citizens' resentment, getting them to wish to kill people who are starving so they steal food from them and secure their US citizen entitlements.

    US world order.

    Fri, 09/30/2011 - 10:59 | 1725810 TheGoodDoctor
    TheGoodDoctor's picture

    You must not be from the US you troll.

    Fri, 09/30/2011 - 11:26 | 1725929 SoNH80
    SoNH80's picture

    He/she/it (computer program? random word generator?) is from the People's Republic of China, which is neither governed by the People, nor a Republic... may be a Public Security Bureau functionary, posting on smoke breaks, after a hard evening of beating a detainee with an electric cord..... read the wrong book, said the wrong thing, pissed off the wrong Party drone, you know, "crimes against public order and harmony and decency".

    Hey "AnAnonymous", as we Typical U.S. Citizens say, "suck it," mmkay?

    Fri, 09/30/2011 - 11:42 | 1725991 karzai_luver
    karzai_luver's picture

    the u.s not only beats with cords but sodomises little boys while photo are taken and now under the great and glorious fed gvt kills it's own citizens anythere in the world without a peep from any on the whim of a fascist POTUS.


    Can't wait for the drones to take out a few of you that are branded terrorist on the secret order of a clown POTUS.




    Typical us cit is beyond help as they cant' even live up to their own bullshit about human rights.

    clown show runn by fascist lunatics.



    Fri, 09/30/2011 - 12:15 | 1726132 AnAnonymous
    AnAnonymous's picture

    The relentless association of facts and the requirement to be part of one specific group to acknowledge the facts keeps amazing me.

    For US citizens, one has to be a Chinese or a non US citizen to acknowledge facts.

    It is terrible crap.

    I state this often to people I know: thinking that because you are born in the US and have papers showing US citizenship, you are a US citizen is a terrible mistake.

    Being a US citizen is first and all a state of mind and being born in the US is no guarantee you have it.

    If you do not connect automatically facts and groups of people, if you dont think that the statement of a fact does not imply forcefully that you are a member of this or that group, then it is time for you to reassess your US citizenship.

    Fri, 09/30/2011 - 16:36 | 1727394 Smiddywesson
    Smiddywesson's picture

    LOL, hey AnAnonymous, how's that "Century of China" going for you?  Having a ball over there?  Enjoy. 

    Fri, 09/30/2011 - 11:39 | 1725973 karzai_luver
    karzai_luver's picture

    obviously as he has some truth left in his postings unlike you asswipes.


    Fri, 09/30/2011 - 11:04 | 1725828 SheepDog-One
    SheepDog-One's picture

    No youre wrong theyre NOT 'US citizens' at all, you miss the real facts by a mile.

    Fri, 09/30/2011 - 11:10 | 1725843 AnAnonymous
    AnAnonymous's picture

    The real facts? First point, facts are real by nature or they are not facts. A minor point but though...

    Lets guess about the 'real' facts: one is that it is not a US world order but a british crown world order, right?

    Alas for them, in the real world, what US citizens call 'real' facts is merely cheap propaganda.

    Fri, 09/30/2011 - 11:27 | 1725931 DaveyJones
    DaveyJones's picture

    you want big corporations to have the same rights a "citizens?" Isn't the problem that they have that and much more so? 

    Fri, 09/30/2011 - 12:16 | 1726140 AnAnonymous
    AnAnonymous's picture

    Corporations are US citizens by law. They were granted personhood.

    It is not about what I want, it is about what it is.

    Fri, 09/30/2011 - 12:05 | 1726075 DOT
    DOT's picture

    It's a minor point.

    From a minor intellect.

    Fri, 09/30/2011 - 11:33 | 1725951 Smiddywesson
    Smiddywesson's picture

    Wall Streeters, big corporations, businesses... are US citizens. No cause to distinguish among them.

    I read your reply above so I know you conceed that this is par for the course in the later stages of an empire's life, but I had to disagree with you once more. 

    The one thing that IS different this time is the Wall Street types, big corporations, and the businesses that are screwing us have no citizenship or allegiance to a nation or its people.  Globalism has made the exploitation of the masses a worldwide thing. 

    So no, it's not just US citizens this time that are to blame because its a US empire.  That's the way things used to work.  It's a lot worse than that.  TPTB know no country, reject all citizenship, and move through the world like locust, feeding upon people and casting off the hollow husks of their nations.  Things are much worse than ever before and viewing it from a citizenship perspective takes your eye off the ball. 

    Best regards.

    Fri, 09/30/2011 - 11:46 | 1726001 Bob
    Bob's picture

    Exactly.  Fighting yesterday's battles, however brilliant the rhetoric, makes you no more than a has-been of a genius. 

    Not to say that's it's all untrue . . . but it's increasingly irrelevant and even counter-productive. 

    Fri, 09/30/2011 - 12:19 | 1726159 AnAnonymous
    AnAnonymous's picture

    The US is the result of globalism. The US has been one of the first product of globalism.

    No, globalism did not start in the 1970s.

    US citizenism is different from US citizenship.

    US citizenism (or more commonly but inappropriately named Americanism) is first a state of mind.

    When somebody speaks about Americanism, you think of citizenship? So cheap.

    Fri, 09/30/2011 - 12:42 | 1726270 Bob
    Bob's picture

    Do you have a platform beyond bitch slapping fat psychopathic Americans? 

    Or would that be unfair for an American to expect?

    Fri, 09/30/2011 - 16:42 | 1727429 Smiddywesson
    Smiddywesson's picture

    So what's your answer?  Where do you live?  You are pretty free with your opinions about everybody else, but you hide your nationality. 

    No answer?  Cat got your tongue?  Still won't answer?

    Fri, 09/30/2011 - 13:03 | 1726375 SilverRhino
    SilverRhino's picture

    We got the biggest guns and we're at the top of the hill.   You want it, put on your big girl panties, pick up a rifle and try and knock us off.  

    Till then suck it. 

    Fri, 09/30/2011 - 13:42 | 1726581 karzai_luver
    karzai_luver's picture

    no big girl panties left all you metro sexuals have them on backorder.


    No guns will be needed you are rotting from within.


    The sane can only hope enough of you will understand that before you engulf everyone in your nonsense.


    Fri, 09/30/2011 - 10:50 | 1725773 Greenhead
    Greenhead's picture

    Bastiat wrote about the problem in "The Law" in 1849. 

    Fri, 09/30/2011 - 10:51 | 1725779 Ruffcut
    Ruffcut's picture

    Social insecurity was running a surplus for years. The crooks stole it.

    We the people are "ENTITLED" to some justice here. I am also entitled to all that is afforded to me in the constitution.

    Fri, 09/30/2011 - 10:51 | 1725782 Watauga
    Watauga's picture

    You seem to misunderstand that nature of military retirements.  They fit squarely into the category of "I paid into them" benefits.  Keep in mind that the serviceperson foregoes tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars in income by accepting the low levels of pay the military offers.  Also, keep in mind that his 24/7, 6-10 month deployments are things that, in the civilian world, boost pay by two or three times.   In the military, there is no increase in pay for this.  All of the family sacrifice, inherent risk, and time/energy investment made by the military serviceperson in a 20+ year career are eventually compensated, partly, in retirement.  In short, military retired PAY is pay for services rendered, and is merely deferred PAY.  It is not an "entitlement."  Rather, it is earned income.

    Fri, 09/30/2011 - 10:54 | 1725792 X.inf.capt
    X.inf.capt's picture


    well said, brother...

    Fri, 09/30/2011 - 11:20 | 1725885 johnQpublic
    johnQpublic's picture

    ...and if they would be kind enuf to deal with all the soldiers who got agent orange issues, and at least say whats really going on with gulf war syndrome, that would be nice

    the latter one for me

    dont expect them to fix it, but if they'd fess up to whats going on i'd be happy enuf

    20 years later and i still feel the effects and still have no real answers

    Fri, 09/30/2011 - 11:39 | 1725972 Ponzi Unit
    Ponzi Unit's picture

    depleted uranium, for example? So much for gov respecting commitments to troops.

    Fri, 09/30/2011 - 11:43 | 1725993 X.inf.capt
    X.inf.capt's picture

    dont forget the chem. exposure

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