Social welfare as a way to undermine religion.

[germanyt]

(08-12-2012 09:17 PM)Janus Wrote:  

(08-12-2012 08:58 PM)germanyt Wrote:  What? Are you disputing the fact that the US spends an absurd amount of money on social programs?

It's a matter of perspective.
And you need to compare apples with apples. So absolute amounts are irrelevant. Relative percentages of GDP, or spendings per thousand tell a whole different story when compared to, say, Scandinavia, Finland, the low countries, Germany, Austria, or Switzerland.

62% of US GDP, the largest GDP on the planet, is spent on social programs/entitlements. Perhaps you have no idea what you are talking about.

[Chas]

(08-12-2012 09:28 PM)germanyt Wrote:  

(08-12-2012 09:17 PM)Janus Wrote:  It's a matter of perspective.
And you need to compare apples with apples. So absolute amounts are irrelevant. Relative percentages of GDP, or spendings per thousand tell a whole different story when compared to, say, Scandinavia, Finland, the low countries, Germany, Austria, or Switzerland.

62% of US GDP, the largest GDP on the planet, is spent on social programs/entitlements. Perhaps you have no idea what you are talking about.

I dispute you 62% number.

However, I seriously dispute people bitching about the cost of entitlements.

They are called entitlements for a reason. We're entitled to them BECAUSE WE FUCKING PAID FOR THEM.

[germanyt]

(08-12-2012 10:13 PM)Chas Wrote:  

(08-12-2012 09:28 PM)germanyt Wrote:  62% of US GDP, the largest GDP on the planet, is spent on social programs/entitlements. Perhaps you have no idea what you are talking about.

I dispute you 62% number.

However, I seriously dispute people bitching about the cost of entitlements.

They are called entitlements for a reason. We're entitled to them BECAUSE WE FUCKING PAID FOR THEM.

One would argue that since we deficit ourselves 1.2 Trillion dollars per year that we didn't actually pay for ALL the entitlements/defense spending we have. And dispute away, 62% of every federal dollar spent is on entitlements/welfare. The rest is defense and discretionary spending.


Edit. I said gdp but meant federal budget

[amav.eram]

(08-12-2012 01:01 PM)Logica Humano Wrote:  

(08-12-2012 12:39 PM)amav.eram Wrote:  So in the USA, is each state able to institute its own welfare initiatives...or is it all controlled through social security?
I think some of it is education...I heard something about being able to pull kids out of evolution classes for religious reasons in the states...is that true??
I also think that most people will believe in whatever will help them get food...reason why communism works so well.

You will find several states that teach creationism within its biology class. The United States, in this regard, is as backwards as shit.

Communism does not work well at all.

I was being cynical about Communism...its system of systematically brainwashing and starving achieves the goals of serving its corrupt leaders very well.

[germanyt]

(09-12-2012 12:21 AM)amav.eram Wrote:  

(08-12-2012 01:01 PM)Logica Humano Wrote:  You will find several states that teach creationism within its biology class. The United States, in this regard, is as backwards as shit.

Communism does not work well at all.

I was being cynical about Communism...its system of systematically brainwashing and starving achieves the goals of serving its corrupt leaders very well.

It's too bad I can only rep one person per day.

[amav.eram]

(08-12-2012 03:11 PM)FZUMedia Wrote:  "The way I see it...my own country, New Zealand, as well as nations such as Canada and England have very comprehensive "nanny-states"...good education, free healthcare, low-entitlement unlimited dole, public superannuation, compulsory employment benefits etc...we are all countries with higher than average levels of Atheism. "

If someone takes a percentage of your income, and gives it back in benefits- it's not free. A 4 year old could tell you that.

The way you present the argument for state intervention on complex socio-economic issues is just as faithfully blind as a theist; You speak of these benefits as if it falls from the sky- you literally used the word "free". So anyone that disagrees with you is against free stuff or against the poor, etc. by default. It's a form of bullying really without any degree of rational thinking.

Okay...fair point.
I had no intention to set the argument up such a way, it was a bad choice of words.
You are right...it is not free...but it is available at no/low cost to the poor, and is paid for by a high-tax system for those who work. Naturally I am for such a system, however I don't think state-intervention is necessarily the best. The argument I was putting forward for discussion was simply that state-intervention has a direct influence on levels of religiosity. I am not trying to bully you at all FZUmedia, and I would be interested to hear your point of view.
Regards.

[earmuffs]

I don't think the coalition is between social spending and religion.

I think the coalition is between levels of education.
And hence a coalition between poverty levels. (poor tends to equal less educated and vise versa)

So, because there tends to be a coalition between education and poverty, it can then flow on to social spending in the sense that the government spends more (via welfare) on the poor.

ie: Look at New Zealand. The Maori and Islanders tend to be the more religious then whites.
Destiny Church for example, that cult is very religious but it's people associated with it are overwhelmingly poor compared to the general public (or well certainly become poor once they enter that shit storm..).
Maori and Islanders also make up the majority of poverty in NZ and tend to be less educated (though this tends to level out once you get out Shit-hole-land (Auckland)).


If you look at America blacks are very religious but also tend to be poorer and less educated then their white counter parts.
Africa is extremely poor and shitty but the whole continent is extremely religious (South Africa may be an exception).
The vast majority of Catholics on the planet are Mexican and south American (yet even though Latinos make up a HUGE percentage of Catholics and are VERY religious, there has never been a Latino pope... WTF Catholicism...) but that whole region is poor compared to say America.

I think interesting part of the world to look at would be East Europe. Ex-USSR countries may provide you with much more of the data you are looking for.

[Logica Humano]

[Carlo_The_Bugsmasher_Driver]

(08-12-2012 05:43 AM)Dom Wrote:  I would agree too. The bible belt is a perfect example.

It seems that in places where there is a low standard of living, there is also a low standard of education. And in my experience, the less educated people are, the more superstitious they are. Prone to believe all kinds of things.

It seems the human brain looks for rules and patterns to use as base for decisions. These can be delivered either by education and facts, or by hear say and superstitions.

+1 Dom. I have lived in Alabama for a while as well as traveled through Mississippi and Central Florida. Those are some of the most progressively retarded regions of the United States. Unemployment, poverty, violent crime, prison populations, drug abuse, teen pregnancy, high school dropout rates, disease epidemics, and illiteracy are rampant in this region of the country. And it is directly attributable to religious fundamentalism, ignorance, and stubbornness on the part of the locals which keeps them shackled in an endless cycle of inertia. They can never seem to break free of it.

[germanyt]

(09-12-2012 05:26 AM)Logica Humano Wrote:  

Dunno where you got his pie from. We spend as much in social security and medicare as we spend on the military.