Is the country of the USA a social and historical experiment?

[krimster2]

Jone,

I've never read of this, it seems to me unlikely, considering the small size of the Jewish population in colonial America, maybe it's British propaganda blaming the Revolutionary War on the Jews (ha,ha)

but if you have a source I'd like to read it??

[jone]

Here you go ....

http://mosaicmagazine.com/picks/2015/01/the-jewish-banker-who-financed-the-american-revolution/

While this is a Jewish periodical, I originally read about this guy in college and had only remembered, vaguely, the references.  It was fun to look him up again.

[krimster2]

thanks, interesting story, someone I never heard of...

[Gator]

it’s pretty simple to ignore the things you don’t want to see...(1)

David Duke

is an example of a patriotic American anti-semite, who has praised the historical founding of America... what’s so difficult about comprehending his beliefs of “ein Volk”, of transfiguring the glorification of the White Christian leadership that constituted the founding fathers into a reason for glorifying whites themselves and to serve as an example of racial superiority, don’t you see how easy it is to pervert history? this is fascism 101...

To explain my views are ignorant, you of course select the example of a lowlife American dwelling under a rock  I don't know Duke's beliefs, yet I imagine he might proclaim Jews are the lenders to the oppressors.  The key point is David Duke is not symbolic of mainstream Americans.   What is the number of his following?  Why not judge your country by the common man and its prominent citizens?

I guess someone could talk about Dutch Schultz and Bernie Madoff.  I instead look at the examples of musicians such as Irving Berlin and Robert Zimmerman, Senators Sanders and Lieberman, entertainers Marx Brothers and Woody Allen, athlete Sandy Koufax, or Jonas Salk who may have saved your life and my life.   Or the untold number of Nobel Laureates. 

America has been good to me.  America is not perfect, yet it is a great country and its citizens are good people.  Rejoice!

[krimster2]

Gator,
   You are the one who asked the question, “If Luda were anti-Semitic, why would she proclaim her love for America?” What followed was my attempt to reason a response to your question, using David Duke as an easily identifiable public personality who is both anti-semitic and a strong believer in the “founding fathers” and American “exceptionalism”, and who doesn't find these mutual beliefs contradictory.  I am in full agreement with your statement regarding the immense contribution of the Jewish community to our nation.  However, they did so in Germany as well...  I do believe that anti-semites are a minority in America, but I’ve personally met quite a few in my life time.

This country has also been good to my family, my paternal grandparents arrived here as small children after the Odessa Pogrom, to seek “the Mother of Exiles, her lamp beside the golden door”.  Almost all of my relatives who remained in Odessa perished in the holocaust, except one was executed by Stalin in 1937.  Babi Yar is a family cemetery to me... I DO honor this country, I wore my country’s uniform (as has almost every man in my extended family) and swore an oath “to defend the constitution of the United States...and bear true faith and allegiance to the same”. What higher standard is there than that?

[fathertime]

Please describe (and be specific) an example about welfare going to the
rich for self indulgence with public money.

Before I add to what Krimster already stated, and stated well, are you really of the opinion that corporate welfare doesn't benefit the rich in certain cases? 


Fathertime! 

[Gator]

I do believe that anti-semites are a minority in America, but I’ve personally met quite a few in my life time.

I don't envision you as someone who hangs out with the Klan, so let me guess the typical anti-Semite you met: got outsmarted in a business deal by someone who happened to be Jewish......doesn't like New Yorkers......not a patron of the arts.....  I don't see them;   however, there is a lot I miss these days as my Give a Shit probe hasn't worked in years.    When it worked I detected some sensitivity among my Jewish clients and partners yet never explored.   

I DO honor this country, I wore my country’s uniform (as has almost every man in my extended family) and swore an oath “to defend the constitution of the United States...and bear true faith and allegiance to the same”. What higher standard is there than that?

You do well in the civic test.  There are other tests.  If describing your wife, and I am sure she is glorious, would you dwell on her few imperfections? 

[fathertime]

     If describing your wife, and I am sure she is glorious, would you dwell on her few imperfections?

Sounds like this 'patriot' is advocating of lies by omission.





Fathertime! 

[krimster2]

Gator,
appropriately enough in Hebrews 12:6, it says (sorta), “for the lord chastens whom he loves”, this echos my sentiment about this nation.

If I were Russian, I’d love my country to, and have nothing but the DEEPEST SCORN for Putin and the oligarchs and the various policies that have been implemented solely for their benefit at the expense of the Russian people.  This is EXACTLY the same way I feel about this country and was hoping you’d understand this...

BTW, my wife’s only imperfection is her perfection

[Boethius]

If Luda were anti-Semitic, why would she proclaim her love for America?

If she is not, why would she go off on a tangent of American Jews being slave owners, when no one brought up the subject, and at that time, Jews were an even tinier minority of the US population than they are today?

[LiveFromUkraine]

Before I add to what Krimster already stated, and stated well, are you really of the opinion that corporate welfare doesn't benefit the rich in certain cases? 


Fathertime!

FT, what do you consider corporate welfare? 

[GQBlues]

FT, what do you consider corporate welfare?

LFU,

Allow me...

CW come in many forms:
 
a) Tax Breaks/Cuts (CEO Bonuses, Luxury Indulgences, Capital gains),
b) Government Subsidies (Oil/Energy, Agriculture, Pharma, Banking)
c) Federal grants to State and Local governments (health care, transportation, income securities, education, social services, community development, environmental protection),
d) Federal Contractual Provision Mandate ( Small/Minority Business Enterprising)
e) Direct Governmental Project Contracting (from infrastructure to import/export ventures to enterprising to *foreign investment* re: $40 million Joe Biden hand-delivered to Ukraine during the crisis which opened the doors for son Hunter and DC Lobbyist named: ML Strategy - USAID)

Then there are also such periodic nuances like what we witnessed just this past decade:

a) Bailouts (Union rescue can either be in this section, or maybe its own slot above, since it seems a dozen or more goes *broke* as an annual ritual)
b) TARP
c) Stim Bill ( the jury is still out on this one because frankly, no one can really tell you what happened to that $ 787 Billion)

Many if not most of them are commonly, or loosely, referred to as *pork barrel* spending. Many recipients are the very same players that pump hundreds of millions unto a politician's election campaign we commonly know as *SuperPACs*. Off election periods, we simply lump them up as *Wall Street*

In a funny way, in every election run you'll keep hearing politicians damning the very same *group* that are 'actively financing their campaigns'. In a capsule, think of how big Hillary's campaign coffer was and you'd have an idea how engaged these players were to Hillary winning the election. Both Donald and Bernie, for all intent and purposes, were financing their own campaigns and/or getting public donation help. Bernie's campaign was railroaded by the DNC/Democrats. Donald's campaign was bashed by both the Dems and Republicans' SuperPACs.

The payback happens when the corridors of the Capitol become littered with lobbyists once the politicians begin their respective terms as *public servants*. They legislate numerous bills, and if passed, the payback completes the cycle.

Here's a really good example of this. Sen. Nanci Pelosi was heavily financially supported for her senatorial campaign. When she became the Speaker of the House, she lobbied to put S-ChiP (Insurance for Uninsured Children) on a ballot in 4 different states (you guessed it, all BLUE states). But it was voted down - 4x. Then she tried to pass it through Congress as a 'bill'. Bush vetoed it twice. Citing he can't approve a bill when it was voted down 4x.

Obama got elected in 2008, S-ChiP was one of the first, if not the first, signed into 'law' despite the ugly head of 'Obamacare" was already starting to roll.

Remember when Obama was campaigning back in 2008 and one of his more famous platform was that he was going to *stop* pork barrel spending? That was one of the biggest 'issue' at that time. Bush *vetoed* the Omnibus Bill 'twice' before leaving office despite enormous pressure from largely Democrats (Chris Dood / Barney Frank) and some Republicans (notably Alan Specter). Obama signed it 6 months after his inauguration, IIRC, citing despite knowing it's the mother-of-all pork barrel ($ half-a-trillion), he's signing it because it was *Bush's unfinished business*.

With the exception of the Bailout, TARP, Stim Bill, Beltway lobbyists generated (i.e. cost the US taxpayers) somewhere around $1.5 Trillion/yr between 2007-2012.   

If you'd like a much more detailed spreadsheet, you have the right to sue Washington under the FOIA.

[LiveFromUkraine]

GQ, thanks for the solid post.  I can't say I disagree. 


I do wonder, however, when tax breaks and subsidies become corporate welfare... or if they are always a form of welfare. 


I'm not talking about the special interests bs our political system seems to ooze.  I'm talking more about incentivizing behavior through taxes. 

I remember reading Elon Musk received around 4 to 5 billion in government subsidies.  He seems to enjoy the subsidy bandwagon for many of his ventures.

Are we better off letting demand dictate what comes to market or should our government play a role with tax breaks and subsidies?

[krimster2]

well stated GQBlues! I would like to add to your list the debacle surrounding the Epi-Pen (the price of this corporate welfare is paid by every school tax paying American citizen), and the entire pharmaceutical industry, who have made it illegal for medicare to negotiate prices, resulting in the USA paying higher prices for American made pharmaceuticals than say Britain’s NHS, which actually has a committee that engages in price negotiations, the pharmaceutical industry lobbied to make it illegal for Americans to re-import lower price medications, and so on and so on, and who to top it off, are now locating their businesses to tax shelter countries like Ireland, yes USA please protect our profits in your courts, but sorry we will be paying taxes to Ireland now...

[GQBlues]

GQ, thanks for the solid post.  I can't say I disagree. 

I do wonder, however, when tax breaks and subsidies become corporate welfare... or if they are always a form of welfare. 
I'm not talking about the special interests bs our political system seems to ooze.  I'm talking more about incentivizing behavior through taxes.

I remember reading Elon Musk received around 4 to 5 billion in government subsidies.  He seems to enjoy the subsidy bandwagon for many of his ventures….

Tax breaks/cuts, subsidies, in its primal intent ( let us put abuses aside for a minute), are for the most part, to spur/inspire/ incentivize business growth. The intended end result was to be a multipronged economic capital growth for the government, businesses and ultimately, the general population. An investment unto one’s own society.

Re: taxes - My whole scope on how this actually can be considered 'corporate welfare' is somewhat limited when it comes to how bonuses, luxury indulgences, etc. actually become to what we define as ‘welfare’. My wife have a much better understanding on the intricacies of this as this in her professional wheelhouse today.

In a nutshell, bonuses, indulgences, client relations, R&D, business development, etc…are *business expense*. Just as payroll is. Large CEO bonuses, whether we like it or not, falls in this category.

Take a guy who went above and beyond his ‘payscale’ and caused any company massive windfall, or in excess of projection. The company rewards the lucky dude with a big bonus. At face value, the system worked. The wrinkle in this is how the system was setup and in how this is ultimately handled – we know this as *loopholes*. Limitation being one of them.

You watched a good rendition of this when GM and Chrysler went to Congress asking for a ‘bailout’. Ron Gettlefinger, UAW’s rep, went along with them and they all arrived in lush, luxurious jet. They got the money they came for, and even before the dust settled, Ron Gettlefinger retired soon after with a handsome $60 million dollar bonus. To make matters worst, our government decided to add insult to injury and enacted a program called: ‘Cash for Clunkers’ supposedly to help spur the auto market.

The *intent* is no different than subsidy programs. You mentioned Tesla. Elon’s initial entrance into the market fell upon a government subsidized incentive for alternative energy R&D. Much of his initial venture was federally *subsidized*. Today, that subsidy continues in the form of Federal subsidy program that grant a buyer a Federal income credit of $7,500.00 for any hybrid/electric car purchased after 2010.

You asked:

… Are we better off letting demand dictate what comes to market or should our government play a role with tax breaks and subsidies?

That’s the heart of the current chaos. I do not know the answer to that question. Our nation’s existence, and its rise to economic prominence was rooted from promotion of opportunities to innovate. Somewhere between this ideology, we also introduced ‘representation’, we call our ‘politicians’, for appropriation. The rest is history and we're all living this reality today.

[GQBlues]

well stated GQBlues! I would like to add to your list the debacle surrounding the Epi-Pen (the price of this corporate welfare is paid by every school tax paying American citizen), and the entire pharmaceutical industry, who have made it illegal for medicare to negotiate prices, resulting in the USA paying higher prices for American made pharmaceuticals than say Britain’s NHS, which actually has a committee that engages in price negotiations, the pharmaceutical industry lobbied to make it illegal for Americans to re-import lower price medications, and so on and so on, and who to top it off, are now locating their businesses to tax shelter countries like Ireland, yes USA please protect our profits in your courts, but sorry we will be paying taxes to Ireland now...

I agree Krimster. Epi-pen, IMHO, is a good example of how this was a major rip-off against the population. See my post to LFU above. The Pharma industry is one of the biggest abysss of corporate welfare gone amok. Defense, is another.

I think it was refreshing when Donald balked at hearing a new Air Force One would cost the government $4.1 billion. To which, Boeing now says that'll review their spreadsheet and was confident this cost will actually go down.

I'm not trying to make this sound partisan. Far from it. I just think and believe we, Americans, deserve some DC rattling and change.

[2tallbill]

Before I add to what Krimster already stated, and stated well, are you really of the opinion that corporate welfare doesn't benefit the rich in certain cases? 

Fathertime!

FT, some people refer to things in the very abstract. I wanted a couple of specific
cases so that I know what you are referring to. They don't give EBT cards to
corporations for example.

Generally speaking I am against 99.9% of special favors for people or corporations.
It tends to breed corruption both between the politicians and the businessmen.

The way to end corruption is to have a simple system with low taxes and low regulations,
then you won't have companies jockeying for special breaks. The current high tax, high
regulation system, causes companies to spend a significant portion of their money paying
lobbyists to protect them.   

[GQBlues]

Bill-

Is it (CW) really corruption? Would 'abuse' be a better word to define this?

The reason I say this is simply because we, the people, appointed and trust, our 'politicians' to appropriate and decide all of these 'spending'. If, by technicality, they conformed within the confines of the rule of law - legislation, ballot/propositions - and appropriated these spending; then where exactly is the *corruption*?

Wouldn't corruption only apply had someone actually circumvent the lawful process and enable transfer of funds?

What's your take on this?

[Boethius]

The way to end corruption is to have a simple system with low taxes and low regulations,
then you won't have companies jockeying for special breaks. The current high tax, high
regulation system, causes companies to spend a significant portion of their money paying
lobbyists to protect them.   

Were this true, there would be a correlation between low taxation and lack of corruption, and conversely, high taxation and corruption.


Here is a link to the transparency index -


http://www.transparency.org/cpi2015


Here is a link to countries ranked by taxation -


http://www.worldatlas.com/articles/countries-with-the-highest-taxes-in-the-world.html

[fathertime]

LFU,

Allow me...

CW come in many forms:
 
a) Tax Breaks/Cuts (CEO Bonuses, Luxury Indulgences, Capital gains),
b) Government Subsidies (Oil/Energy, Agriculture, Pharma, Banking)
c) Federal grants to State and Local governments (health care, transportation, income securities, education, social services, community development, environmental protection),
d) Federal Contractual Provision Mandate ( Small/Minority Business Enterprising)
e) Direct Governmental Project Contracting (from infrastructure to import/export ventures to enterprising to *foreign investment* re: $40 million Joe Biden hand-delivered to Ukraine during the crisis which opened the doors for son Hunter and DC Lobbyist named: ML Strategy - USAID)

Then there are also such periodic nuances like what we witnessed just this past decade:

a) Bailouts (Union rescue can either be in this section, or maybe its own slot above, since it seems a dozen or more goes *broke* as an annual ritual)
b) TARP
c) Stim Bill ( the jury is still out on this one because frankly, no one can really tell you what happened to that $ 787 Billion)

Many if not most of them are commonly, or loosely, referred to as *pork barrel* spending. Many recipients are the very same players that pump hundreds of millions unto a politician's election campaign we commonly know as *SuperPACs*. Off election periods, we simply lump them up as *Wall Street*

In a funny way, in every election run you'll keep hearing politicians damning the very same *group* that are 'actively financing their campaigns'. In a capsule, think of how big Hillary's campaign coffer was and you'd have an idea how engaged these players were to Hillary winning the election. Both Donald and Bernie, for all intent and purposes, were financing their own campaigns and/or getting public donation help. Bernie's campaign was railroaded by the DNC/Democrats. Donald's campaign was bashed by both the Dems and Republicans' SuperPACs.

The payback happens when the corridors of the Capitol become littered with lobbyists once the politicians begin their respective terms as *public servants*. They legislate numerous bills, and if passed, the payback completes the cycle.

Here's a really good example of this. Sen. Nanci Pelosi was heavily financially supported for her senatorial campaign. When she became the Speaker of the House, she lobbied to put S-ChiP (Insurance for Uninsured Children) on a ballot in 4 different states (you guessed it, all BLUE states). But it was voted down - 4x. Then she tried to pass it through Congress as a 'bill'. Bush vetoed it twice. Citing he can't approve a bill when it was voted down 4x.

Obama got elected in 2008, S-ChiP was one of the first, if not the first, signed into 'law' despite the ugly head of 'Obamacare" was already starting to roll.

Remember when Obama was campaigning back in 2008 and one of his more famous platform was that he was going to *stop* pork barrel spending? That was one of the biggest 'issue' at that time. Bush *vetoed* the Omnibus Bill 'twice' before leaving office despite enormous pressure from largely Democrats (Chris Dood / Barney Frank) and some Republicans (notably Alan Specter). Obama signed it 6 months after his inauguration, IIRC, citing despite knowing it's the mother-of-all pork barrel ($ half-a-trillion), he's signing it because it was *Bush's unfinished business*.

With the exception of the Bailout, TARP, Stim Bill, Beltway lobbyists generated (i.e. cost the US taxpayers) somewhere around $1.5 Trillion/yr between 2007-2012.   

If you'd like a much more detailed spreadsheet, you have the right to sue Washington under the FOIA.

Superb answer and thanks for posting it. 
Sorry LFU, I've been completely swamped with work day and night, but I couldn't do better than the response GQ made.


Fathertime! 

[fathertime]

FT, some people refer to things in the very abstract. I wanted a couple of specific
cases so that I know what you are referring to. They don't give EBT cards to
corporations for example.

Generally speaking I am against 99.9% of special favors for people or corporations.
It tends to breed corruption both between the politicians and the businessmen.

The way to end corruption is to have a simple system with low taxes and low regulations,
then you won't have companies jockeying for special breaks. The current high tax, high
regulation system, causes companies to spend a significant portion of their money paying
lobbyists to protect them.   

yeah, but EBT cards are small potatoes in the scheme of things...a little food for the poor, who cares...let them eat, we have some much extra it is ridiculous...you should see the how much tasty food is leaving through the back door in the mornings at places like costco around 5am...it is unreal...


Fathertime! 

[BillyB]

With the benefits Trump had to give companies to keep jobs from moving to Mexico, I have a feeling Corporate Welfare will be taken to a whole new level. Don't think Trump is convincing these companies to stay without giving something in return such as huge tax breaks.

[2tallbill]

yeah, but EBT cards are small potatoes in the scheme of things...a little food for the poor, who cares...let them eat, we have some much extra it is ridiculous...you should see the how much tasty food is leaving through the back door in the mornings at places like costco around 5am...it is unreal...


Fathertime!

If you can't answer that's fine.

[GQBlues]

This is actually a good thread for my fellow Americans to discuss. Too bad there isn't much interest in the subject.

The top 4 US expenditure are as follows: Pension, Healthcare, Defense, Welfare from 2012 to 2014.

Pension averages out to $875 Billion/yr, while Defense is at $868 Billion/yr.

If you add both Healthcare & Welfare, it is by far the single biggest expense. It is at the average combined cost to taxpayers at $ 1.357 Trillion/yr. There are over 70 million folks on Medicaid recorded in 2015/6. I do not know why since 68% of Obamacare were previously on Medicaid. That includes 'subsidized' coverage.

We pay approximately $220+/- Billion/yr just on interest alone during the years shown. Yearly spending @ $3.8 Trillion, with deficit on each of these years @ an average of $965 billion.

I don't really care about helping needy folks at all. Poor folks. But the thing that bothers me is the effect these handouts actually do to people. The other thing that bothers me is the demographic share. The two most vocal complainers about not being treated *equally* by society, also happens to be the biggest recipients of our social system. It's a paradox. One I care not to rationalize.

Citation: http://www.statisticbrain.com/united-states-federal-budget/

[fathertime]

If you can't answer that's fine.

it has already been answered by someone else, and is a bore to take a lot of time to rehash...
bottom line to me is those that complain incessantly about the poor getting handouts, without also addressing the rich in chosen industries/countries living off the government teat in another form of welfare are talking out of both sides of their mouth.


Fathertime!