Amerika

Posts Tagged ‘benefits’

The Real Privilege In Amerika Is Helplessness

Wednesday, August 2nd, 2017

We are held hostage by idiots. Most people are not particularly useful. Some of these are not useful at all, and they know it, and so they demand that we swear upon the graves of our grandmothers that we will pay for their survival, forever and ever, amen. These people reek of detestable entitlement.

What these people want is life without any responsibility. This is not restricted to lower class minorities. Everyone who can think of a new gimmedat thinks they are entitled. If you ask them what their contributions are, they will point to a successful career of inventing new free stuff from government and claim that they “gave” you what you were “owed.”

This stems from the fundamental goal of Marxism. Karl Marx’s bumpersticker quote is “From each according to their abilities. To each according to their needs.” This is getting played out in the West via demotism. It doesn’t take the individual long to figure out what gets rewarded and what gets taxed. Soon these individuals form the crowd and press their needs upon the producers in synonymy. This overwhelms the ability of the state to function in a rational and strategic manner. We can thus get the following surreal results.

Venezuelan resident and Twitter user @KalebPrime first made the discovery July 14 and tweeted at the time that on the Venezuela’s black market — now the most-used method of currency exchange within Venezuela according to NPR — you can get $1 for 8493.97 bolivars. Meanwhile, a “WoW” token, which can be bought for $20 from the in-game auction house, is worth 8385 gold per dollar.

This is what socialism gets you in the end. It only leads to death. President Maduro has all but admitted Venezuelan Socialism has miserably failed. He has held a sham referendum to claim a democratic mandate to rewrite his country’s constitution. Technically, it still exists, but Maduro’s party picks all the members of the body set up to rewrite the document. Constitution Fetishists take note: whether the document is a Magna Carta or a Masta Charga, it only just says what the strong people with guns tells it to. The biggest gang with the guns in Venezuela are the people demanding gimmedats that Venezuela will never be able to deliver.

But this is just Venezuela. Any good Alt Righter will disparage the genetic stock in question and therefore doubt that it’s really socialism at work here. To which I ask them, how about the genetic stock of Connecticut? Here’s what 24/7 Wall Street tells us about Connecticut.

A typical Connecticut household earns $71,346 in a year, considerably higher than the national median income of $55,775. With such high incomes, residents are better able to afford more expensive homes. Connecticut’s median home value of $270,900 is among the highest nationwide. A portion of every state’s population is extremely wealthy, and the share of such high earners is especially large in Connecticut. More than one in 10 households earn $200,000 or more a year. Connecticut’s relatively high education attainment rate partially accounts for the high incomes in the area. More than 38.3% of adults have at least a bachelor’s degree compared to 30.6% nationally.

So how is this working out for them?

Connecticut, the richest state in the nation, has racked up $74 billion in debt. Its finances have more in common with Puerto Rico than Massachusetts, as the home of America’s financial wizards struggles to pay off its massive obligations big as the bills come due on decades of mismanagement.

While ballooning payments for public employees’ guaranteed pension and health benefits for public employees and teachers are the main cause of Connecticut’s fiscal misery, the state continued borrowing with the abandon of a teenager let loose in a Forever 21 with her parent’s credit card. Jobs lost during the recession have not returned. Its youth and future tax base is fleeing for New York and Boston. Fortune 500 companies are following them out of town.

A belief in Marxism’s fundamental tenet will kill any economy. You cannot tax productive innovation and hard work at the expense of privileged helplessness. People learn how to become more and more helpless. People with higher g-loading will just figure this scam out faster. The shaved monkeys are depraved when it comes to doing whatever gets them more bananas and an occasional gold star on the tips of their noses.

It doesn’t matter what people start out as. You can tell me that Connecticutters are way smarter, better and whiter than Venezuelans all day. None of it matters; none of it will make Marxism work. In the end, we are all going where Connecticut and Illinois already are. Connecticut and Illinois will probably go where Venezuela currently is. The real privilege in Amerika is helplessness. This leads to socialism. Socialism leads to death. We all know where it will take us after we are gone.

Towards Removing The Diversity That Is Destroying Oregon

Thursday, June 22nd, 2017

So why would anyone immigrate from abroad and come to The Great State of Oregon? Umm, it ain’t for the piney woods.

In a report that has national implications, almost half of the illegal immigrants held in Oregon jails in May faced serious sex crimes including rape, abuse and sodomy. Of 969 illegals held in jail for that one month, 461 have been charged with the three sex crimes. A majority are being held in Portland and Salem area jails, according to the report from immigration expert David Olen Cross, whose report is based on statistics from Oregon’s Department Corrections and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement detainers. Most, over 83 percent, were from Mexico….

This, of course, is nothing new. In any nation with open borders and a higher standard of living than the neighbors, a certain proportion of those who flood in will be human detritus that would never make it under a truly Darwinistic set of conditions. Offer a generous welfare state, and the flood can drown you. At that point the prison system becomes a high-pass filter that takes out the worst of the diaspora.

The issue has become so serious that President Trump is proposing the following legislation to stop it in its tracks.

President Donald Trump said in a speech here Wednesday night he would soon introduce legislation that immigrants to America should not receive welfare benefits for at least five years. The new measure will stipulate that “those seeking admission into our country must be able to support themselves financially and should not use welfare for a period of at least five years,” Trump said as the crowd of thousands at the campaign-style rally exploded into extended applause.

In response, our “Conservative media” does the predictable tergivorate cuck-dance on the end of its Black Dragon Dildo. We first get reminded of the severeness of the author’s hard-ass, Dirty Harry Conservatism.

I’ve been called an “immigration hawk” on more than one occasion and far worse by liberal detractors. I support building the wall, want tougher vetting of new arrivals and I believe that every single person who is in this country illegally is a criminal and merits deportation if they are identified and apprehended, even if they’re “not doing anything else wrong.”

But….

But if someone has come here legally with noble intentions and aspirations and they are following the rules, they may need some temporary assistance from time to time just as regular citizens do.

In other words, posture like you’re all gangsta and hard. Show us your severe Conservatism. Then, after establishing that you’ve not only opposed Leftism, but have even hurt their feelings, you stab a real Conservative, offering a real-world proposal right in the frikking back. Everybody is a Severe Conservative until its actually time to pack down in the scrum against real-world problems caused by utopian socialism.

You see, back in the 1950s, in addition to having to be from Western Europe, no immigrant could legally come to the United States who would constitute a public charge. This verbiage still remains in the current USC. The government explains below:

Public charge has been part of U.S. immigration law for more than 100 years as a ground of inadmissibility and deportation. An individual who is likely at any time to become a public charge is inadmissible to the United States and ineligible to become a legal permanent resident.

But…we then get the following raft of gibberish designed to reopen the borders and bring in the flood.

In determining inadmissibility, USCIS defines “public charge”as an individual who is likely to become “primarily dependent on the government for subsistence, as demonstrated by either the receipt of public cash assistance for income maintenance, or institutionalization for long-term care at government expense.” See “Field Guidance on Deportability and Inadmissibility on Public Charge Grounds,” 64 FR 28689 (May 26, 1999). In determining whether an alien meets this definition for public charge inadmissibility, a number of factors are considered, including age, health, family status, assets, resources, financial status, education, and skills. No single factor, other than the lack of an affidavit of support, if required, will determine whether an individual is a public charge.

In fact, here’s a list of welfare that doesn’t really count as welfare.

•Medicaid and other health insurance and health services (including public assistance for immunizations and for testing and treatment of symptoms of communicable diseases, use of health clinics, short-term rehabilitation services, prenatal care and emergency medical services) other than support for long-term institutional care
•Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP)
•Nutrition programs, including the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP)- commonly referred to as Food Stamps, the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children (WIC), the National School Lunch and School Breakfast Program, and other supplementary and emergency food assistance programs
•Housing benefits
•Child care services
•Energy assistance, such as the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP)
•Emergency disaster relief
•Foster care and adoption assistance
•Educational assistance (such as attending public school), including benefits under the Head Start Act and aid for elementary, secondary or higher education
•Job training programs
•In-kind, community-based programs, services or assistance (such as soup kitchens, crisis counseling and intervention, and short-term shelter)
•Non-cash benefits under TANF such as subsidized child care or transit subsidies
•Cash payments that have been earned, such as Title II Social Security benefits, government pensions, and veterans’ benefits, and other forms of earned benefits
•Unemployment compensation

To understand why this is an unmitigated fail, compare the fortunes and contributions of immigrant groups who come here as guest workers rather than partake in our dysfunctional version. To understand how US immigration should work, compare Nigerians that come to the US to Nigerians that stay in Nigeria (See countries with lowest average IQ).

Nigerian immigrants have the highest levels of education in this city and the nation, surpassing whites and Asians, according to Census data bolstered by an analysis of 13 annual Houston-area surveys conducted by Rice University. Although they make up a tiny portion of the U.S. population, a whopping 17 percent of all Nigerians in this country held master’s degrees while 4 percent had a doctorate, according to the 2006 American Community Survey conducted by the U.S. Census Bureau. In addition, 37 percent had bachelor’s degrees. In comparison To put those numbers in perspective, 8 percent of the white population in the U.S. had master’s degrees, according to the Census survey. And 1 percent held doctorates. About 19 percent of white residents had bachelor’s degrees. Asians come closer to the Nigerians with 12 percent holding master’s degrees and 3 percent having doctorates.

This means that Nigerians who emigrate are among the most motivated of their people. They avoid ever qualifying as a “Public Charge.” They’d go road rage on your ass if you accused them of ever wanting to be one. That Uber or the taxi you may have caught this morning was quite possibly driven by a 1st generation Nigerian immigrant.

His kids, meanwhile are getting straight A’s or else they won’t be happy little second generation Nigerian Americans when Daddy parks the cab for the night. Intelligence, you see, is the smallest part of education once you hit an age where the amount of homework you perform every night starts making a statistical difference.

Meanwhile, the newer diasporas are told Amerikans are just racist white people that owe them a living. What do you do with these racists? In Oregon, you apparently fvck ’em and tear out their eye sockets. At least that’s what the crime stats would leave me to believe. So what do?

You go full Trump this problem and build the wall. Not just physically, but metaphorically as well. The US does well with immigrants who come here to earn a living and then go back home. These are too busy busting sod to yell “Allah Ackbar!” and stab the airport cops in Flint, MI. The people who come here as guests will be glad to take their wealth and new skills back to their homelands as those stabilize.

If we want to stop playing the stupid diversity game, we need to move from a mentality of inviting people to come stay here forever as guests of our welfare system, and instead adopt a policy of having guest workers. This is more politically competent, and allows us to take little baby steps toward ending diversity entirely. You will always get what you tolerate. Oregon is tolerating too darn much. The results of this tolerance show us the future of the diversity cult.

Stop playing DR3 and the Magic Dirt/Proposition Nation game. The cucks won’t ever miss their Public Charges if we stop letting them in to begin with. At that point, President Trump or one of his successors will have a much easier time ending diversity, which threatens our existential survival, than he would by attempting to stop immigration entirely at this very moment.

Why We Suffer Multiculturalism

Friday, May 5th, 2017

Many have wondered why the West would adopt such an obviously suicidal policy as multiculturalism and for it to go virtually uncontested. We know that those who desire permanent power tend to import foreigners, as Plato recounted, in order to have allies who keep them in power. But why did everyone else go along with it?

The answer, as usual in human concerns, is prosaic as it is crazy: pensions. The West shifted to multiculturalism in the mid-1960s, which was the point when the “greatest generation” were hitting their mid-forties and thinking about retirement. Government outlays were heading toward the fifty-percent point in the budget and it was clear that in the future, most money would be spent on entitlements.

How to fix this situation? Expand the tax base. This program was only increased under the Baby Boomers who realized that as the largest generation on record, they could expect fewer taxpayers to fund their pensions, social security, welfare, medicare/aid, and health insurance pools. We are still fighting over these benefits and how to fund them today:

Some view the search for new options as a result of Trump’s refusal to set clear parameters for his plan and his exceedingly challenging endgame: reducing tax rates enough to spur faster growth without blowing up the budget deficit.

…One [proposal] circulating this past week would change the House Republican plan to eliminate much of the payroll tax and cut corporate tax rates. This would require a new dedicated funding source for Social Security.

The change, proposed by a GOP lobbyist with close ties to the Trump administration, would transform Brady’s plan on imports into something closer to a value-added tax by also eliminating the deduction of labor expenses. This would bring it in line with WTO rules and generate an additional $12 trillion over 10 years, according to budget estimates. Those additional revenues could then enable the end of the 12.4 percent payroll tax, split evenly between employers and employees, that funds Social Security, while keeping the health insurance payroll tax in place.

This odd wrangling only makes sense if you look at the sources of government income and how through payroll taxes, the government indirectly raises the money it needs for these expensive retirement programs:

Almost half of all federal revenue (47 percent) comes from individual income taxes. The income tax is generally progressive: higher-income households pay a larger share of their income in income taxes than lower-income households do.

Another 33 percent of revenue comes from payroll taxes, which are assessed on the wage or salary paychecks of almost all workers and used to fund Social Security, Medicare Hospital Insurance, and unemployment insurance. By law, employers and employees split the cost of payroll taxes, but research has shown that employers pass their portion of the cost on to workers in the form of lower wages.

Now take a look at the debt of European nations. Pursuing the socialist idea of the welfare state and cradle-to-grave benefits, they have spent themselves into oblivion and now need to find new income sources.

As many commentators have mentioned, the purpose of “open borders” is to bring in a new labor force to be taxed in order to pay for the benefits paid to native Europeans. In the same way, in the United States, we have opened our borders to the world. We are destroying tomorrow in order to pay for the benefits promised yesterday which have come due today, and since this has failed, are heading for default instead.

How First World Governments Have Bribed Their Citizens Into Compliance

Thursday, May 5th, 2016

good_dog_with_cheeseburger

Over at The Conversation, important research reveals the reason that modern citizens seem to grumble all the time but never take any action to substantially change their situation: they have been bribed into silence. This is how government, evolving like a tapeworm, has solved the problem of recessions, flagging loyalty and keeping itself in power.

The researchers make an important point. Thanks to government benefits raising the lower and high taxes lowering the higher, people without wealth can afford to live like wealthy people. Here’s the most relevant part of the research in graphical form:

unequal_spending

This graph shows how people in the lowest 80% of the population have their spending boosted by social welfare benefits, and how the highest lose about a third of their spending power thanks to taxation. I imagine the graph is similar in Europe because similar methods are applied there.

The authors write:

[S]pending inequality – what we should really care about – is far smaller than wealth inequality…The fact that spending inequality is dramatically smaller than wealth inequality results from our highly progressive fiscal system, as well as the fact that labor income is distributed more equally than wealth.

The top 1 percent of 40-49-year-olds face a net tax, on average, of 45 percent. This means that the present value of their spending is reduced by the fiscal system to 55 percent of the present value of their resources…For the bottom 20 percent, the average net tax rate is negative 34.2 percent. In other words, they get to spend 34.2 percent more than they have thanks to government policy…

Governments guarantee permanent stability (of government) through this model. The people most likely to revolt, namely the lower 80%, are bought off with the wealth of the higher 20%, who are not taxed so much that they cannot still enjoy a good life. This means that any attempt to remove the current system from order will meet with squeals of protest from the lower who fear their benefits going away, and the higher who see that their customer base will fall if the spending powers of the lower are curtailed.

Benefits (“bennies”) have always been bribes in disguise, presumably to keep the proles from rioting. Now they are a way the population is held hostage. It can keep a good life, so long as it keeps voting for the usual gang of incompetents, because while they’ll screw everything up, they’ll keep the bennies coming.

We also see how multiculturalism is made to work on paper in the West. The third world people who are imported are poorer, so they are given government benefits, which generally pacifies them so they mostly limit their violent crimes to the ghettos in which they are stored. The bennies allow them to have a good life, but in return, they buy the products — iPhones and Louis Vuitton and health insurance — that the higher earners produce. This inflates the value of the economy and the take-home of the higher earners, despite it being essential as circular ponzi scheme that is using permanent Keynesianism to suggest the economy is healthier than it actually is.

This shows us the origin of the ugliest form of consumerism: it is how governments pay for the increased taxes that make the bribes to citizens possible. The upper fifth is not buying much of the fast food, gadgets and entertainment as they have better things to do and different priorities. The subsidized people are, which increases demand for money, allowing government to claim positive economic effects from what ultimately will be a deleterious practice.

How well does welfare work?

Sunday, November 22nd, 2015

chaos_magic_ritual_involving_videoconferencing

If I were Joe Cocaine and needed the nose-candy to even bother getting out of bed to use the can rather than idly soiling my bedsheets, my government could help me. They could help me avoid bankruptcy. They could help me avoid the abject humiliation of pooping where I go nite-nite. All they’d have to do is buy me enough free cocaine to get me through the trials of the day ahead. Wouldn’t you just love to see those tax dollars you spend every year hard at work? Oh come on, guys! Have a heart.

So the conundrum of the hypothetical cocaine kobold and his crippling need for Bolivian Marching Powder described above raises a couple of socially vital questions. We’ll start with the mechanical one. Could Uncle Sugar Daddy fix this problem and turn Old Unatoker into a better member of society? A group of people in Oregon actually had the guts to ask such a valid question in a complicated social research study that attempted to quantify how much recipients gained from Medicaid per dollar expended. The results are not heartwarming for the poor family member still washing Joe’s sheets as he turns 42 this April.*

Megan McArdle tells us how little government can help even a well-intentioned but unfortunate tosser who won’t help himself.

Here’s what they came up with: “Our baseline estimates of the welfare benefit to recipients from Medicaid per dollar of government spending range from about $0.2 to $0.4, depending on the framework, with a relatively robust lower bound of about $0.15.” You read that right: 15 cents of value for every dollar spent.

QED. You perhaps can’t save those who can’t or won’t save themselves. This could very well have nothing to do with either you or with them. Medicaid is probably one of the most ethical and genuinely altruistic welfare programs going and its effectiveness is probably less than 1/3 of every dollar going towards the fight of making the poor more healthy. Perhaps even the mythical moral and decent welfare state is attempting to do the impossible. A nastier and harder question then becomes, would you want a welfare state to save these people if it absolutely could while doing nothing to improve either their behavior or ratiocination?

Thus maybe, if you misinterpret probability for fun and personal edification, you can theoretically save 15 to 40 out of an arbitrary sample of 100. The old joke then becomes “What do you do with them? Collect them and trade them with your friends?” I shouldn’t laugh. They elect people in Chicago that way. Herbert Spencer famously answered that to shield man from his folly was to populate the world with fools. I’m sure Martha Stewart would tell us that this is not a good thing.

This is not a good thing for several reasons. What does the world do to people who are “saved” via this method? Historical accounts of life in workers’ paradises such as Maoist China and Stalinist Russia don’t bode well. At some point you just have too many being supported by too little. At that point, someone has to get voted off the survivor island.

And that fundamental paradox of the welfare state is why so many look for the safe space. It is why they don’t want to be the ones excluded. The zebras stay close to the rest of the herd. As the resources are expended and are never replenished. As only $0.30 of risk is assuaged for every dollar set on fire and burned by the welfare state mystic spirit guides. There eventually comes the day when there isn’t enough to go around. It’s at this point we learn the true reason for the safe space. Everybody not therein has lost life’s most cutthroat game of musical chairs.

*-OK, so I’m taking literary license while I make this stuff up.

Recommended Reading