FOR JUST A LITTLE BIT MORE
Before we begin today, let me give a big hand and extend a Extra Appreciation Award to a Super Loyal Minion for a very generous donation. I have Loyal Minions who have given more, by donating a bit here and a bit there until it really adds up and I feel a tear forming because it finally appears that somebody actually does love me all signs to the contrary, but for the biggest single contribution I have to acknowledge Eugene. Thanks a lot. You are a gentleman and a scholar and there are few of us left. Of course, I would never assume he was so generous because he is a fellow Nevadan while the rest of you are living in putrid dens of Socialism.
*
As I was reading the comments section from my bike article I was a bit disheartened to realize that I have failed to communicate to you the One Great truth of The Bison Way. Allow me to enlighten those of you still dwelling in the darkness. You can't keep saying, "for just a little bit more". This is the path that leads to ruin. The path of plastic shrouded semi-automatic battle rifles, eating 70 cent rounds of ammunition fed from twenty dollar magazines. The path to $6 meals of MRE's. The path to $30 cans of freeze dried mystery meat. The path of quarter million dollar retreats, reachable with fifty thousand dollar SUV's. What you need to be thinking is, "what is the cheapest way to provide the tools I need to survive". I do not teach how to live in comfort after the Apocalypse, how to maintain the Yuppie lifestyle after PODA ( Peak Oil Dark Ages- trademark pending ). I teach how to live as cheap as possible and how to prepare to survive as cheap as possible.
*
I don't throw caution to the wind, advising a space blanket, a few bags of white flour and a .22 rifle as all you need to survive the collapse. The cheapest POSSIBLE way to survive. I'm not advising the dollar store hammer as the tool you need, but rather the cheapest required size of hammer even if it is made in China. In a lot of cases, the cheapest is the best, such as cast iron grain grinders or bolt action military surplus rifles. In some cases, it doesn't pay to be as cheap as possible. Such as using non food grade buckets to store grains, or using nothing but steel cased ammunition. But I will give you the cheapest way to safely survive ( well, to increase the odds of your survival anyway ). I have trained myself to seek the cheapest way to do everything. Sometimes it is a curse. Most times I have something to contribute to help you out. Let's face it, I don't receive such generous donations and sales because you like me. It is because I am giving you value added advice. You save you a heck of a lot more than you send me. Or, at the very least, I talk trash in an entertaining manner.
*
When you start saying, "it's much better to do it this way, and it only costs a little bit more" you defeat the whole frugal survive method. I'm not saying I am the final authority. Readers comments help me to be a lot less of an idiot than I normally would be. Your criticisms are essential. I never understood the saying that the best teachers learn from their students until recently. And that is thanks to my loyal minions. You help me be better by your knowledge, since I will be the first to tell you I don't know much of anything. And there are instances where "for just a little bit more" are valid. Such as a french coffee press versus sun brewed coffee. Sun brewed is free, french pressed is a $20 tool. You save some energy doing the sun brewed, but it really does taste like crap. Buying the press gives much better coffee. If you look at it as a luxury, that is fine as an upgrade. Just don't make the mistake of treating it as an essential.
*
Survival can't be about continuing your present lifestyle and still remain cheap to accomplish. It has to truly be about nothing more than surviving. The cheapest food that will deliver calories and nutrients. The cheapest way to defend yourself ( listening to most authors it is a wonder any white men survived with single shot rifles while the natives had short range rapid fire weapons ). The cheapest shelter situated on the cheapest land. The cheapest tools to do the bare minimum. As soon as you adopt this philosophy you not only quickly accomplish your emergency stockpiling, you can free up funds to buy even more since your everyday living expenses are drastically lowered ( I bought land by only spending half my take home pay during one period ). It is not about luxury or comfort. It is about getting the tools you need. Even on very slim wages. If your spouse or friends don't complain that you squeak when you walk because you are so tight, you are not doing it right. Get out of the trap of looking for the perfect tool. You need to look for the minimally adequate tool.
END
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
15 comments:
Glad to read that you are being showered with riches, as you deserve!
I have to agree with the Mousse, and thanks to Eugene for showering our illustiuos host with the riches he deserves.
Oldfart
I can give you a good example of a little more.
Animal traps-
Many survivalists stock up on snares when for a little more you can get a couple legholds that will last forever(for the most part)compared to using cheap disposable snares that you will run out of supplies for.
They both have there place in your preps though.
Still clinging to my God and my guns
Randy
From YESTERDAY'S (Monday's) comment section:
Old Fart said:
"Jim, Thanks for allowing me to spew and I apologize for using your dime with out paying you for this site."
Thank *you*, O.F., for such a quick and intelligent response.
If Jim is smart, (he is), and if he can also keep it *rational* instead of *emotional*, (we'll see), his readership (and INCOME) could easily QUADRUPLE (or more) in a very short period of time with a truly CONTROVERSIAL, philosophical debate between genuine 'opposing' viewpoints on such an important topic.
If Jim wants me gone I am GONE. This is HIS blog, and HIS bread-and-butter. I wouldn't do anything to interfere with another man's rightful livelihood.
Of course, just *anybody* could post in the *comment* section claiming to be Jim, and asking me to leave. If he truly wants me gone, a SINGLE LINE saying this in his *regular* posts will do. (Hopefully I'll actually see it.)
I might not even be posting here much longer anyway, because there's (apparently) just too few 'philosophical' types hanging around such as yourself.
By the way, I think 'www.blogger.com' is FREE to Jim to host his blog and comments on, but still, I'll be 'going' if *Jim* just can't stand upholding the principle of Free Speech for those he may strongly disagree with.
Old Fart said:
"I am not saying and I do not think Ayn Rand or even John Galt or Hank Reardon(sp) or Dagney Taggert would even think of allowing the child to hit the concrete nor would I."
No, *you* wouldn't. John Galt wouldn't either. But Ayn Rand *WOULD*. Go read that URL link by Murray Rothbard I put in my prior post near the bottom.
Rothbard was Ayn Rand's associate for a time. He also co-founded modern Libertarianism, was a renowned economist, and was repeatedly mentioned for the Nobel Prize by numerous heavyweights for decades.
Whether or not one agrees with his views, Rothbard KNEW Ayn Rand close-up, and you actually need to read what he has to say to grasp just how frigging EVIL she was, and how TWISTED the whole 'Objectivist' facade was, behind which the TRUTH is very, VERY SHOCKING.
Checkout that link. It's a somewhat 'longish' read, but nothing like 'Atlas Shrugged', lol.
Heck, I'll post the link again right here:
http://www.lewrockwell.com
/rothbard/rothbard23.html
And now to respond a little bit to the 'meat' of your kindly return post...
Old Fart said:
"I am about 60 and read Atlas Shrugged and everything else Ayn Rand has written about 30 years ago. I had a nice and successful career until about 6 years ago. I have withdrawn my considerable intellect and ability to produce from thier system. I make only enough money to survive and feed my wife and myself. I do not work in any field that allows "them" to have the benefit of my ability to create wealth."
O.F., I *DEEPLY RESPECT* what you have done. *You* are basically the REAL John Galt. Though Ayn Rand herself had 'feet of clay' in real life, that takes nothing away from what she created in 'Atlas Shrugged', and also nothing away from your sacrifice, which I *salute*.
Look, practically NOBODY, or at least no one with any HONOR (a much smaller number, maybe), wants *coercive* contributions from you or anyone else. Yes, we've a bunch of *politicos* that couldn't tell the difference between honor and an old tree stump, but that's still beside the main point.
It's like this. Say you spend three long years burning the midnight oil to create an amazingly innovative piece of software, and it truly breaks new ground and solves a critical and unmet need for a vast number of people.
Then you post it to the Internet as a 'FREE' download, and all you ask is ANY CONTRIBUTION WHATSOEVER to your electronic 'Tip Jar' IF, AND ONLY IF, people find that your software GREATLY helps them in their lives, especially economically.
Hey, YOU ALREADY KNOW how this story ends, right? A year later there have been seven MILLION downloads of your 'free' software, the Internet blogs are *alive* with how happy and wealthy people have become from your amazing software invention...
...AND, you've got maybe $3.07 max in that TOTALLY VOLUNTARY electronic Tip Jar.
In an IDEAL world we could do it the John Galt Way. In the REAL world that we live in, you'd have endless starving BABIES (and etc.) lining the roads, chronic DISEASES across the land, and just endless amounts of other absolute MISERY that defies adequate description...
At 60, and with *your* level of intelligence, you've seen it all, or at least enough to KNOW what's what. You KNOW that the BAD drives out the GOOD in this world. You KNOW the rest of it too. Far too much to explicate here.
I *happen* to be a Good Guy. Sounds like you are too. So? In the John Galt World, if you, as a Good Person, actually helped some poor, deserving soul out, what happens next?
You KNOW that too. It *immediately* puts you at a MASSIVE COMPETITIVE DISADVANTAGE versus every single *EVIL* person on the planet, who will of course donate exactly ZERO DOLLARS to *anyone*, EVER.
Being a Capitalist Society, you KNOW what having lesser capital than your competitors generally means, and NOT just in the business sense either. In EVERY aspect of ALL realms of existence.
And because you're SMART, as well as GOOD, you will KNOW that you can NOT help anyone else out, because it would slant the playing field against you to the point of DOOM to do so, regardless of how much you might want to.
The ONLY way to keep that playing field level is for EVERYONE to contribute their 'fair' share.
Sure, we can argue until the cows come home just what 'fair' is gonna mean. But that's quibbling and ducking the Main Issue. Hell, we could just say TEN PERCENT of one's DISPOSABLE INCOME, and be DONE with it. It's not the amount, as you well know, it's whether there should be REQUIRED contributions at all.
Easy to say 'no'. Real easy to SAY it. But it's *also* basically PERPETUAL GENOCIDE of the WEAK. It never, EVER ends...
That's my beef with my 'fellow' Libertarians. They're smart enough to figure all that out. No doubt about it. And these are NOT evil men and women, in general.
They just don't want to GROW UP, FACE REALITY like a MAN, and shoulder their 'fair' share of the load, whatever that share happens to turn out to be.
And because *other* people are reading this post, I will spell out (once again) the *obvious*. Without coercion, IT JUST WON'T WORK. Just like with the electronic Tip Jar. The voluntary contributions will be DRIVEN to ZERO by ultra-harsh Natural Selection, and the GENOCIDE of the WEAK will NEVER END...
The sociopaths will say, "So? So what?" They will be PROUD to say this. Mass GENOCIDE of the totally INNOCENT means NOTHING to them.
That's why things are the way they are. It's not that Good People want to perpetually 'reach into your pockets' for that which is not theirs.
It's that THERE'S NO OTHER CHOICE EXCEPT HELL ON EARTH.
Which, of course, is just what Bad People WANT.
Tough SH-T!!
(Not *you*, O.F., the EVIL ONES.)
Alright, I'll post this reply now. Try checking out that link if you have the time. It's a REAL eye-opener.
Again, thanks for the intelligent response, truly. I *do* respect your position, and even AGREE with it, STRONGLY.
It's just too bad that the *gap* between the Ideal and the Real is so very, very large.
Dumbazz
Dumbazz,
I just want to know why it is MY resonsibility when two blind people get married and wantme to help pay for the raising of the children? Why am I responsible?
Why am I responisible for the unwed mother, who has never been married, has three children, each one by a different man and a fourth one shacking up with her, why again am I responisble for paying for her childrens raising? Why is it right and proper to take MY money to put food on her table?
It is not, you know it and I k now it.
Panhandle Tex
Agree - an inexpensive but well-made tool in-hand trumps an expensive tool on lay-a-way.
"Why am I responisible for the unwed mother, who has never been married, has three children, each one by a different man and a fourth one shacking up with her..."
Gee, TEX, while i must say that 'welfare mothers' and 'illegals' are problematic; I would think that all the big corporations getting 'no-bid' defense contract subsidies, the really really fat cat politicians, and the bond traders and their $150,000k champange celebrations, THAT WE ALL ARE PAYING THRU THE NOSE for ought to be of more concern than a few losers getting food stamps...
see, there, your just listening to the elite's propaganda, telling you it's the POOR people who are stealing all your money and not the ruling class...
back to prepping, i'll comment on my solar lighting fiasco when i get it worked out. it seems fabulously expensive for the results, but, heh, life's not fair.
as to snares randy. i would assume their impractical for city and suburban folk, which means just about everyone. and how are you going to learn to use them in a survival scenario ?
isn't that sort of like getting a date with a welfare mom and forgetting to use a condom, and waking up one morning to child support payments ? :>)
I agree with you, Jim. Your whole blog thrust has been towards reducing expense to what is barely needed. Most people are not trained that way... "must have the best" and all that. I believe the whole country will have to learn on how to get by with less. A cheap hammer is better than none. Cheap food is better than no food. A cheap bicycle is better than no transportation.
Panhandle Tex said:
"Why am I responisible for the unwed mother, who has never been married, has three children, each one by a different man and a fourth one shacking up with her, why again am I responisble for paying for her childrens raising? Why is it right and proper to take MY money to put food on her table?"
Yes, that is the KEY question, Panhandle Tex. Thanks for 'jumping in' on this and helping to get some clarity on the 'issue'.
First, just let me say that situations like these REALLY aggravate the H-LL out of *ME*. I feel *exactly* the same way that you do about it:
OUTRAGED!!
The *reasons* that I'm outraged about it are *two-fold*:
One, it's simply outrageous on its face. This 'DUMB BROAD' needs to get some *major* RESPONSIBILITY in her life, not to mention some 'tube tying' or something in there (okay, contraception, *IF* she can somehow actually HANDLE that *puny* level of responsibility, WHICH I HEAVILY *DOUBT*!)
Two, I'm even *more* outraged because this kind of thing *MASKS* the *real* issue, and also gives 'political COVER' to the Bad Guys, who only want to ditch paying all (or mostly all) t-xes, no matter WHAT the consequences, and will use virtually *any* underhanded EXCUSE to do so.
(*NOT* talking about *you*, Tex. You're obviously OUTRAGED at the unbelieveable lack of *responsibility* here, combined with YOU being *forced* to pick up the slack. I absolutely do understand this. Yes, you posed the question *perfectly*: WHY YOU???)
The answer 'sounds' wrong at first, so stick with it to hear the whole thing.
Here's the 'wrong sounding' part:
It's *you* that's gotta pay because it's *you* (and your fellow Americans) who VOTED the lame-brained *politicos* in there who make these totally *absurd* laws.
(Note: if you didn't vote, that's also *your* choice too. You're still a CITIZEN, and you still get to abide by the LAWS of the land, just like everybody else.)
Okay, that's kind of tough to swallow, but hey, it is also FACT. We have a REPRESENTATIVE GOVERNMENT in this country, a democracy, voted in by the PEOPLE, and it is the PEOPLE'S WILL that the current 'crop' of politicos be our representatives and make these laws.
If we don't like it, we have the POWER to VOTE them out and put somebody else in there who will make a different set of laws.
It just so happens that the American People CHOOSE to put in and KEEP in those politicians who make EXACTLY these laws. That's just what it IS.
That was the *first* part of the answer. The part that's hard to swallow (because it's hard to understand HOW American Voters can want that kind of thing, and keep voting it in), but nevertheless the completely NON-controversial part of the answer. We all KNOW we have the VOTE, and we all know that this *crap* happens because politicians do what the VOTERS want in order to KEEP THEIR JOBS.
Now to answer the REAL question you have, which is WHY is it **MORAL** for *YOU* to have to pay for somebody else's IRRESPONSIBILITY???
Well, it ISN'T!
Luckily, that's *not* what you're paying for.
Sure, the loose-legged bimbo above *does* end up benefiting, but that is NOT the goal, but an UNINTENDED and truly *adverse* SIDE EFFECT of trying to get that money where it SHOULD be going.
Now you will be thinking, "Hey, that money SHOULD be going exactly NOWHERE, because it's already in its rightful place, MY POCKET!"
Nope.
Sorry, but 'NO'.
You were born and raised in this SOCIETY. You spent ALL OF YOUR LIFE *receiving* the AMAZING BENEFITS of living here. You were protected by public police, educated in public schools, vaccinated by public doctors, given access to public roads, bridges, highways, parks, libraries, the Internet, hospitals, sewage systems, electricity, language, culture, and on and on, and also, of course, protected by a publicly paid-for military too.
You got ALL of that, and practically EVERYTHING ELSE in your LIFE too, including whatever your parents gave you, since *they* also got all of the above goodies too to help *them* out.
And you did *WHAT* to actually *EARN* any of this???
Well, other than pay your t-xes, for *most* people the answer is: pretty much NOTHING.
*THAT* is why you get to pay t-xes.
WHAT *your* politicians choose to spend that money on is YOUR responsibility. You don't like it? Then VOTE THEM OUT!
As long as you've got the VOTE, you've got the POWER, and the CONTROL. It is the AMERICAN PEOPLE who choose their politicians. They keep putting the people in power who make these laws because that is what the MAJORITY of the American People actually WANT.
It's called the 'Social Contract', and it is IMPLICIT from the day you are born.
By the way, the REASON that the American People choose 'Welfare' and such is because *everyone*, sooner or later, takes a fall. You, me, everybody. This is the SOCIAL SAFETY NET that the American People WANT, not just to be magnanimous (though there is that too), but also for when *their* unlucky number comes up. It's a form of SOCIAL INSURANCE.
It's also a form of SOCIAL MORALITY too, which is the part that *rankles* people with exactly ZERO CONSCIENCE.
There's more to this, as it's a complex subject, but there's enough in this post to put the ball FIRMLY back in the court of those who would DESTROY the social safety net simply for the sake of paying low or no t-xes, only AFTER, of course, having *themselves* received the benefits of everybody else's t-x contributions for all of their entire lives.
You've spent an entire LIFE receiving the social benefits of everybody else's t-xes.
Now it's *your* turn at bat.
Pay your FAIR SHARE.
Dumbazz
I'll let the current readers in a little secret - those Dakin DVDs and PDF files of books are easily worth three times the cost, for the information given. If you have anyone you want to give some good information who are new but are getting uneasy about current political situation, you could do a lot worse than sending them a copy of them. This morning, internet provider wasn't doing their job, so I was reading one of the
PDFs (think it was the Bison Newsletter) - GREAT STUFF!
James, if you're looking at minimal expense for calories, what about canned dog food? The stuff I buy for my dogs ranges 45 - 65 cents for a 14oz(?) can. It's not like cat food -- it smells pretty good and isn't gross. The 45 cent stuff reminds me of canned stew. The 65 cent stuff is a concentrate which would be great as a sandwich spread and would make maybe 6 sandwiches.
"If we don't like it, we have the POWER to VOTE them out and put somebody else in there who will make a different set of laws."
NO you don't, because the hoards are ready to sell your freedoms out so their kiddies can "go to a good school....".
"You were protected by public police, educated in public schools, vaccinated by public doctors, given access to public roads, bridges, highways, parks, libraries, the Internet, hospitals, sewage systems, electricity, language, culture, and on and on..."
I want a refund. Of course it's TOO LATE, because "THE GREATEST COUNTRY EVER" is DEFUNCT, KAPUT, OBSOLETE, BANKRUPT...
'7:27 AM' said:
"NO you don't [have the POWER to VOTE them out and put somebody else in there], because the hoards are ready to sell your freedoms out so their kiddies can "go to a good school...."."
Yes, what you say is true. The panicky hordes will *also* sell out practically ALL of our freedoms for transient/apparent 'security', as the aftermath of 9/11 proved only too well.
So, point well taken, and THANK YOU for bringing this hard truth out in the open to be discussed.
I had to think awhile before attempting to answer this one, because it hits so close to 'home'. The loss of so many Civil Liberties, and the *threatened* loss of almost ALL of them, really 'wound my clock' for the last few *years*, lol.
Easy to laugh *now*, sort of. But my G-d, what an incredible NIGHTMARE for so very long. And the American People are *still* asleep at the helm on this.
Heck, probably 99 percent of them have never even *heard* of 'Pr-sid-ntial Signing Statements', or have any slightest clue that until we finally BAN them we are not-so-technically living in a society that is a 'democratic DICTATORSHIP', with exactly ZERO exaggeration there.
Or how about your electric meter-reader man? Does the American Public realize that meter-readers are now REQUIRED BY LAW to S-P-Y on all of their 'customers', and REPORT to the 'authorities' anything 'suspicious'?
Same deal with 'truckers'. Over 400,000 of them on American highways are now trained to S-P-Y on ALL other travelers, and REPORT (on their CB radios) on anything 'suspicious' that they 'think' they see to the 'authorities'.
How about when 'they' (Republicans) tried, over and Over and OVER again, to push through a law for FAMILY members to be required (and *rewarded*) BY LAW to REPORT on EACH OTHER anything 'suspicious' (or non-legal.)
Exactly *how* did the American People sleep through *that* one???
Or the knock-down, drag-out fight just to retain the 'right' to be charged with a crime. No kidding. (Rather than just 'disappeared', with no charges, no lawyer, no court appearance, nothing, EVER.)
They 'slept' through that one too.
And on and On and ON...
Anyway, I *know* I'm 'off-topic' here, but by G-d *someone* needs to rant about this, dang-it! MOST of those evil LAWS are still in full force, and there are HUNDREDS of them just like this and even WORSE, no joke!
Okay, I'll try and get back on point now.
(Wipes drool from chin somewhat sheepishly.)
Alright, 'technically' and in point of FACT you DO have the VOTE, and even if the hordes outnumber you/us, we are at least (somewhat) protected by the Constitution under the rubric of 'Majority rule, minority rights'.
Also, you can just pickup and leave if the grass looks greener across the waters somewhere.
And if you want a *complete* break, then you'll need to file paperwork before leaving renouncing your citizenship. A pretty extreme move, but hey, you 'can' get that total FREEDOM you're seeking if you *really* want it. (Better be *sure* though, 'cause I doubt they'd let you change your mind afterwards.)
So you DO have the VOTE, you *can* LEAVE if you don't like the Majority's rule-making, and you *can* cut all ties too, legally, if that's what you really want.
So if you can't get 'them' out, worse comes to worst you can at least get 'yourself' out.
'7:27 AM' quoted this:
"You were protected by public police, educated in public schools, vaccinated by public doctors, given access to public roads, bridges, highways, parks, libraries, the Internet, hospitals, sewage systems, electricity, language, culture, and on and on..."
'7:27 AM' then responded to this quote as follows:
"I want a refund. Of course it's TOO LATE, because "THE GREATEST COUNTRY EVER" is DEFUNCT, KAPUT, OBSOLETE, BANKRUPT..."
Well, you were kinda/sorta right on the first point, but here you are just flat wrong. (Yeah, 'I be blunt'.)
Why in the world would you think that you're *owed* a 'refund'???
Hey, you were **GIVEN** all of those benefits listed above, starting from BIRTH.
You know: public police protection, public schooling, public roads, public libraries, public Internet, public hospitals, public sewage, public electricity systems, your entire language and culture, and on and On and ON...
Hey, when you are **GIVEN** stuff, you are not 'owed' anything, and you are certainly not 'owed' a 'refund' on incredible, unending gifts given to you starting at your BIRTH. Just the opposite.
*You* OWE.
Yep.
*You*.
Luckily, this debt is *entirely* discharged by simply paying your FAIR SHARE of the social t-x burden, JUST LIKE EVERYBODY ELSE.
Nobody really wants to hear that, of course, because everybody just wants everything for FREE, after everybody else already paid for all the benefits *you* received ALL of *your* entire LIFE with *their* t-x dollars.
(And then demand a *REFUND* too, on top of a lifetime of freebies!!)
Once again, the solution is simple, if unpalatable...
Wake up, grow up, MAN up, and pay up.
Pay your FAIR SHARE.
Dumbazz
I'd liketo point out: in reference to what we have"recieved":
i.e. "You were protected by public police, educated in public schools, vaccinated by public doctors, given access to public roads, bridges, highways, parks, libraries, the Internet, hospitals, sewage systems, electricity, language, culture, and on and on..."
So has welfare Wendy!, in essence the balance sheet is zero! now she expects to profit from our skills motivation and efforts???
"you can't have a tax cut; You wouldn't spend it right"!
OFF WITH HER HEAD!
omg that "burns my britches". theft is theft.
'4:02 PM' said:
"So has welfare Wendy! [received public benefits all her life, starting from birth], in essence the balance sheet is zero! now she expects to profit from our skills motivation and efforts???"
Good thinking. You bring up a subtle point. Here is the subtle answer:
If you buy fire insurance for your home, your monthly payments are lumped in with all other payments from other folks who purchase fire insurance from the same insurance company.
There is a big pool of money there held by the insurance company that (hopefully) grows larger and larger over time, with deductions occasionally taken out when one of the insured folk's homes happens to catch fire.
Now, *YOUR* home may NEVER catch fire in your entire life. Yet you 'happily' (or at least consistently) continue to pay your fire insurance premiums to the insurance company every month, even though only other people ever seem to receive insurance settlements from these funds.
Why do you do this? Do you actually get NO BENEFIT from owning a fire insurance policy, even if it never pays out to you in your entire life?
In other words, are you a COMPLETE IDIOT for paying for fire insurance on your home, even though your home may never catch fire?
No, you're not an idiot. In fact, you're SMART to pay for and own a fire insurance policy on your home. That insurance policy acts as a SAFETY NET for you, just in case something bad (in this case a fire) happens to your home.
'Welfare' is a SOCIAL SAFETY NET. The portion of t-xes you pay for this are your 'insurance premiums', so that you too are covered by this safety net.
It is possible that you may get lucky in life and never happen to fall through the cracks. But just in case you do, it is very wise of you to have this social safety net under you, so that you don't take the Long Fall with nothing down there to catch you.
'Welfare' is just Social Insurance. *You* benefit too, every single day of your life, just as you benefit every single day of your life by owning a fire insurance policy on your home.
By the way, I want everyone reading this to take a *FUN* little self-test. Be absolutely honest here, as only *you* get to know the results anyway.
The one-question test is:
What percentage of the Federal Budget would you guess is allocated towards paying for Welfare?
A) 20 percent.
B) 30 percent.
C) 40 percent.
D) 50 percent.
Now, NO CHEATING! Pick either A,B,C or D first BEFORE you glance at the answer.
Well, if I recall correctly MOST people *surveyed* across the nation guessed that Welfare was around 40 or 50 percent of the Federal Budget.
However, in the national survey it was *not* a multiple choice test. Instead, they simply asked people what percentage of the Federal Budget they thought was allocated towards Welfare, then tallied the results.
Okay, have you picked A,B,C or D yet? Well, get with it! It's either 20, 30, 40, or 50 percent, so take your best guess NOW, right NOW, and then we'll head on over to the answer.
Okay, class, the answer is: None of the above.
Yep, trick question.
You see, Republicans have been SCREAMING about Welfare spending for so long that they've got people convinced that they're getting SOAKED.
Meanwhile, the total percentage of the Federal Budget allocated to Welfare is:
(Drum roll...)
About ONE percent.
You read that right.
ONE.
*That* is what all the screaming about Welfare spending by **REPUBLICAN** politicians has been about.
ONE percent.
About ONE PENNY on every t-x dollar goes to fund Welfare.
THAT is what you pay to 'help' the poorest of the poor.
Now guess who it is that has REALLY tricked you all these years...
ONE percent.
Thanks a LOT, Republican politico LIARS.
Lots of people think that people on Welfare 'live the high life'. Well, here's a quote for you about Welfare living standards:
"Despite increased program spending, the average monthly family benefit, measured in 1995 dollars, fell from $713 in 1970 to $377 in 1995, a 47 percent drop. In 26 states, AFDC benefits alone fell 64 percent short of the 1996 poverty guidelines, and the addition of food stamps only reduced this gap to 35 percent (Staff of House Committee on Ways and Means, 1996)."
So, $377 a month, in 1995 dollars.
Not exactly the 'Cadillac Queens' that Republican politicos PRETENDED they were, are they.
Here's another little tidbit quote:
"Children, not women, are the largest group of people receiving public assistance. Less than 5 million of the 14 million public assistance recipients are adults, and 90 percent of those adults are women (U.S. Bureau of Census, 1995). The majority of the recipients are White (38 percent)..."
Here's a bit more info that was HIDDEN from you by Republicans:
"The belief that single women are promiscuous and have large families to receive increased benefits has no basis in extant research, and single-parent families are not only a phenomenon of the poor (McFate, 1995). In fact, the average family size of welfare recipients has decreased from four in 1969 to 2.8 in 1994 (Staff of House Committee on Ways and Means, 1996)."
And just in case you had any doubts that you've been led down the garden path:
"In 1994, 43 percent of welfare families consisted of one child, and 30 percent consisted of two children. Thus, the average welfare family is no larger than the average nonrecipient's family, and despite considerable public concern that welfare encourages out-of-wedlock births, a growing body of empirical evidence indicates that welfare benefits are not a significant incentive for childbearing (Wilcox, Robbennolt, O'Keeffe, & Pynchon, 1997)."
And finally, this:
"A prevalent welfare myth is that women who received AFDC became permanently dependent on public assistance. Analyses indicate that 56 percent of AFDC support ended within 12 months, 70 percent within 24 months, and almost 85 percent within 4 years (Staff of House Committee on Ways and Means, 1996)."
Anyway, I guess the Republicans can go back now to screaming about that ONE BIG PENNY on every t-x dollar that they're FORCED to pay at g-npoint (!) to help out the needy.
Oh, the BURDEN...
Dumbazz
Post a Comment