Published: Sunday, Sept. 23 2012 12:00 a.m. MDT
If we got our medical costs down to the level of the rest of the developed
world, it would solve almost all of the problems this editorial discusses.
Almost all of our long term deficit projections would be made manageable by this
The demographics, the economic growth and the culture changed? Yes, and people
in business and our government changed the demographics and culture. Now the
poor will be punished?Our birthrate was at a 35 year high in 2007,
by 2011 the rate had fallen due to the recession. People out of work were
responsible by holding of until they were on better financial footing.Immigration isn't down, it's been over 1 million each year for the
past ten years. Our country was at 100 million in 1920, by 1970 it was 200
million, 2010 300 million. We are growing faster than any time in history. Maybe we need to enforce immigration laws, cut programs to foreign
citizens, and cut back on the 3.5 million that come each year on visa and
residency until we can aford to take care of the people we have.
This is an excellent article. I applaud the author. However, I would add more
than "uneven family formation" in describing the adverse impact of the
breakdown of the traditional family unit. It is a self-evident truth that
unless we can fix families, we will not be able to fix anything else, and this
vexing family-failure problem cannot be fixed by the government. Government
programs merely entrench the problems by throwing money at them in an effort to
avoid the natural consequences of people's bad choices. Government
programs stand in the way of creating healthy families, at best whittling away
at the branches and never striking at the roots. Until we as a people
re-enthrone the sanctity of marriage and the honorable rearing of children at
the center of our social fabric and "compact," we will witness continued
deterioration of every worthwhile institution.
The question is this: How do you put the toothpaste back in the tube?
Certainly more costly programs is not the answer. From student loans to
windmills, the politicians are stumping for more perks. None dares talk of
cutting back for fear of voter backlash. No one since Reagan has dared to call
out welfare queens.Where's the candidate willing to tell us the hard
Romney is absolutely right and should never apologize for his comments even if
off the cuff. I watch the foodstamp crowd while in-line at the grocery store
buy expensive food that I cannot afford. I watch them drive off in expensive
cars that I could not afford. I see their expensive jewelry and dress that I
could not afford. I guess that's okay because I'm just a dumb tax
paying citizen without any smarts on how to beat the system.
Posters please read the article before commenting. I have no doubt many are
convinced that 47% are all freeloaders and prefer to live off the government
than work. The problem is the tax code not that people are lazy and
unmotivated. The 47% includes seniors collecting social security, college
students trying to obtain an education, and people with disabilities. My
ex-wife had a serious mental illness and collected social security disability.
She had served an LDS mission and did her best to get an education and strive to
be self sufficient. Tom Brokaw referred to our seniors as the greatest
generation. Romney called them freeloaders. Everyone agrees that gov't
spending is out of control and entitlement reform is needed. I just don't
undertand how insulting people is a good strategy to win an election.
1. You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealth out
of prosperity2. What one person receives without working for, another
person must work for without receiving3. The government cannot give to
anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else.4. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it.5. When half of the people
get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to
take care of them, and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to
work, because somebody else is going to get what they work for, that is the
beginning of the end of any nation.
The greatest entitlement burden to our family budget is the out-of-control cost
of health care. My husband is a teacher and our public employee premium is now
$24,000 a year, with a $5,000 deductible. We pay 25% of the premium -- $500 a
month or 17% of our take-home pay. No government tax comes close. I am
offended both as a consumer and as a taxpayer, by the medical monster who has
the economy by the throat.
It wasn't just that Romney said there were 47%. It's how he described
them. This really isn't about the inelegant use of language (with which
Romney seems to have serious problems with), it's about an attitude which
was revealed and which most of us find offensive. And other things were said on
topics which were also disturbing. It better revealed the man. I don't buy
your campaign driven rationalization and excuse making on his behalf. A
discussion of the topic is fine, but come to the table in good faith, and put
welfare for the rich up for discussion as well. When the Republicans do that,
I'll take them, and this GOP paper, more seriously.
The wealth gap is the real problem--the fact that inequality is at unprecedented
levels is really what is killing the 47% on the bottom. It is just
as the Savior taught, you have fat cats sitting at a table full of more food
than they could possibly use before it spoils, but they are still doing all they
can to keep even crumbs from falling to the floor where those poor, undeserving
beggars can get them. After all, the beggars need to quit being victims take
more personal responsibility for themselves!
First of all Romneys comments were not an opening for a discussion of
entitlements. His comments were simply what they appeared to be bigoted hateful
distain for half of America.Secondly, entitlement programs are
always open for discussion and improvement as part of a civil societies social
compact. The crisis mode displayed by this article is faux political
partisinship. There is only one party wanting to destroy rather than improve
and sustain the social compact. Hidden in the body of the article is proof of
this desire.."that replace expectations of entitlement with opportunities
for ownership.". A civil and moral society creates a social
saftey net not as a replacemnt for personal responsibility..as the above quote
intimates..but rather as a response to a wealthy socieites attempt to care for
those who can't care for themselves. If that compact is broken by some,
fix it as best as possible, but turning the plight of the needy into a bad
chapter of Atlas Shrugged is immoral.
I'm seeing the abiding respect for those affected more in the President
Roland Keyser is right. Run the numbers. I'd add that the numbers of food
stamps issued will inevitably go down as we increase employment. Passing the
President's jobs bill would help there. And raising the ceiling for
payroll taxes would make Medicare and Social Security solvent.
I think this is an article that provides a fair assessment of the core issue,
but I think we need to consider some other facts. As the article notes, Romney
and his conservative friends arrive at their numbers by including people who get
favorable tax treatment such as the Child Tax Credit. Yet nothing is
said about the favorable tax treatment of dividend income that allows
millionaires like Mitt Romney to pay less in taxes than school teachers,
construction workers, police, the military, and others who have earned
income.Perhaps Romney and his allies should take a hard look at that
"entitlement" before attaching such harsh words to those on Social
Security, disabled veterans, and the working poor.
I think the real truth about taxes is that only consumers pay taxes. And all
people are consumers, rich, poor, business, and just people. Business pays no taxes, any taxes they remit to the government were part of
the price of the product they sold to a consumer. Any profits that they pay
income taxes on came from the price of their product paid by a consumer. Assuming that all Americans eat, drink and wear clothes and that those
things are only available through some sort of commerce (business), there are no
people in America that do not pay income taxes to support our government.
Except, perhaps, only those individuals who sleep in cardboard boxes in
alleyways and eat from garbage cans.It is the shame of America and
to all Americans that we permit our economic system to prevent so many Americans
from benefiting from the prosperity of America. Politicians often
rant about the symptoms (food stamps, welfare, no income tax) of poverty but are
not willing to do any thing about the cause of those symptoms.
Nosea, that is a great comment. Thanks.
Most people are just plinking around the edges of the problem. Mandatory
spending - "entitlements" and interest on the debt - are currently
consuming all tax receipts. The bulk of the federal government, including
national defense, is paid for by future generations in the form of borrowing.
The Fed apparently believes the solution lies in devaluing the dollar so the
debt can be paid back with cheaper dollars. Our sitting president believes the
answer is to borrow more money to hire teachers and policemen and throw money at
energy scams. How does that help? We need a turn-around expert. We need Mitt
Re Esquire and Pramitist, Mr. Romney's comments were not hateful nor were
they dismissive as has been indicated in many commentaries even in this quality
article. They simply reflect the difficult fact that through extensive
pandering the Democrat party has locked in "approximately" 47% of the
vote. Entitlements, government employment, corrupt contracting, needed programs
during difficult times all are used to maintain a dictatorial grasp on power
even when the result is to hold the very groups that are supposed to be helped
to quote the Vice-President "in chains". Why else with total failure in
domestic and foreign policy would this President consistently poll so high-46%
to 48%. Romney is simply recognizing this fact and noting that to win he has to
get those that are not locked in to this President no matter what and get them
to vote for him. He was and is right. Difficult task to do, but he seems to be
holding close to accomplishing this.
I am now drawing Social Security, and I do not consider it to be an Entitlement,
because of all the years I paid into it. There are parts of Social Security that
could be considered entitlements such as payments to dependents and those unable
to work, but if you consider Social Security an insurance company, then benefits
received are the same as any insurance benefits received. Medicare is an added
benefit to Social Security, to help people on Social Security, and it could be
an entitlement. Both Social Security and Medicare are needed programs, but like
everything the government touches, the management of both are screw up and need
reformed. Every American deserves affordable and effective medicare, and
we need to reform the system. Entitlements are one of the major problem in
America today, and they effect both ends of Te class system. The Upper Class
have been taught to believe they are entitled to all they can get no matter who
it hurts or kills. In the early 1900's business schools taught that there
was an ethically acceptable profit a business could make. There is no such thing
as ethics in business anymore.
Per Nosea's comment, did Jesus condemn truckle down all those years ago?
DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.— About comments