70% Of U.S. Spending Is Writing Checks To Individuals

When you rob Peter to pay Paul, you will always have the eternal gratitude of Paul.




70% Of U.S. Spending Is Writing Checks To Individuals

http://news.investors.com/031014-692704-us-government-payments-to-individuals-70-of-budget.htm#ixzz2vl4eZMPY

Buried deep in a section of President Obama's budget, released this week, is an eye-opening fact: This year, 70% of all the money the federal government spends will be in the form of direct payments to individuals, an all-time high.

In effect, the government has become primarily a massive money-transfer machine, taking $2.6 trillion from some and handing it back out to others. These government transfers now account for 15% of GDP, another all-time high. In 1991, direct payments accounted for less than half the budget and 10% of GDP.

What's more, the cost of these direct payments is exploding. Even after adjusting for inflation, they've shot up 29% under Obama.

Where do these checks go? The biggest chunk, 38.6%, goes to pay health bills, either through Medicare, Medicaid or ObamaCare. A third goes out in the form of Social Security checks. Only 21% goes toward poverty programs — or "income security" as it's labeled in the budget — and a mere 5% ends up in the hands of veterans.

Interestingly, despite Obama's frequent pledges to reduce income inequality, the share of direct payments going toward "income security" has dropped from 25% in 2009 to 20% in 2014. (The average share from 1980 to 2008 was 25.4%.)

Obama's Fiscal Year 2015 budget calls for this share to drop to just 17% by 2019, as his programs devote more and more federal tax money to middle-class entitlement programs such as ObamaCare.

Here's another way to look at it: If all these federal direct payments went only to the poor, every person living in poverty today would receive an annual check worth $55,900.

The 1% Handouts

Instead, a surprisingly large amount of federal money is handed out to wealthy Americans through Social Security, Medicare, farm subsidies, unemployment benefits, conservation programs, disaster payments and other programs.

An IBD analysis found that the richest 1% of Americans, in fact, receive roughly $10 billion each year in federal checks.

Outgoing Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., who exposed these vast payment programs available to the rich, said "this reverse Robin Hood-style of wealth distribution is an intentional effort to get all Americans bought into a system where everyone appears to benefit."

The White House normally releases the Historical Tables section of the budget — where these direct payment numbers are detailed — along with the rest of the budget documents. But while Obama released the main parts of his 2015 budget last week, he delayed the release of this little-noticed section until this week.

I would hardly call receiving benefits from Social Security and Medicare robbing Peter to pay Paul, and it's quite obvious that if we could keep healthcare spending in line with regular inflation and the CPI we would be in much better shape. That was an interesting article!

I agree with NB about this. For once in my life I expect to get SS and Medicare until I die. I paid plenty for it and was not told it was a tax to give to someone else. I was told I would get it at retirement until I died. If they want to give me a lump sum of what I have paid in over my lifetime that is ok too. I have a feeling though, it will be taken away eventually.

Excerpt:

"Based on government and private reports, polling and statements from administration officials, the report, to be sent to pro-union members in Congress, charges that low-wage workers are taking the hit under Obamacare, while wealthy insurance companies fatten up on government subsidies.

Union head Donald “D.” Taylor, in a note also being sent to Congress, demands changes and admits to being reluctant to bash a president his union supported.

The administration is putting union health care into a “death spiral.”

It endorsed criticism that employers will move workers to part-time status to avoid the requirement that those working 30 hours or more a week be provided health insurance — or else the company pays a penalty. And it says the Affordable Care Act will shift workers from union insurance to the more expensive Obamacare health exchanges, costing them up to half of their pay to cover premiums.
http://bigpinekey.com/



What about all those "Green Corporations" that have failed under Obama?



Mosques being rejuvenated?




.

News Buzzard wrote:I would hardly call receiving benefits from Social Security and Medicare robbing Peter to pay Paul, and it's quite obvious that if we could keep healthcare spending in line with regular inflation and the CPI we would be in much better shape. That was an interesting article!

What else could it possibly be though?

There is no "trust fund account", current obligations are being paid by direct taxation.

So, if I were to refuse to pay that taxation, ultimately, men with guns will come and visit violence upon my person and take it from me.

Robbery.

Now, don't get me wrong, I'm in the same boat as everybody else, and feel for those who were promised a return on this.

But so were pensioners in the USSR.