Study: 44% of social security users say "No, I have not used a gov. social program."

[a completely inoffensive name]

Study here: http://tucsoncitizen.com/mark-evans/files/2011/08/submergedstat_mettler.pdf

I am starting to think that the problem might not be with the extremists in America blocking compromises...our citizens just don't live in reality.

To be honest, I don't what a 529 or Coverdell is so I can't say if the 64.3% of respondents who claimed they have not used government social programs are idiots or not.

However, 43.1% of pell grant and 53.3% of student loan users say they don't use government social programs? Seriously? I knew people my age are stupid, but come on.

The chart is on page 7 for those who don't want to read the entire article.

EDIT: Also, biggest LOL for 25% of food stamp users saying they have not used a government social program. I have to laugh, otherwise I would cry.

EDIT 2: OH GOD SOMEONE HOLD ME

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yTwpBLzxe4U

[Strike For The South]

People don't understand how important government is nor do they understand what the stabilty the government provides brings in

The rest of the AAA credit ratings, you know the ones that are the safest to invest in? Are all in Social democracies.

People don't think those things are government programs becuase the extremists have succefuly boogeymanned the governement and its aid into evil incarnate. They have built a fantasy world where there are people living high on the hog, starting with Reagan and his welfare mother with a cadalliac

[PanzerJaeger]

I didn't read the study, but I think people probably confuse 'social program' with 'welfare'. Most see Social Security as just getting money back that has been paid in, regardless of the fact that it is not an exact exchange and can be very one-sided depending on income and livespan. The same goes with student loans. Since people are required to pay them back, they don't consider themselves on welfare. Obviously both are 'social programs', but that may be where some of the denial is coming from.

[ICantSpellDawg]

This fact makes me furious. I see all around me how these old fogies retired at 60 and began collecting social security as soon as possible, all while working another job. They have the audacity to suckle at the dole and then join the tea party and complain about taxes being too high. Our grandparents are too stupid to care about their kids. Social security is for people like the woman who lives in my house. After having 6 kids, her husband ran off to Florida with his mistress when she was in her mid 70s. She is now in her 80s with a terrible back and no income. Social security keeps her from starving to death. On the flip side, john mccain recieves it. My other neighbor pulls in 200k and relieves it. The people who accept social security when they don't need it should be ashamed of themselves. We need to really bost the ages. There will always be 66 year olds who qualify based on hardship, but this thing has become gambling money for already rich americans.

[Ronin]

KEEP THE GOVERNMENT OUT OF MY MEDICARE! GOD DAMN IT!


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z1NagON189g
tea baggers actually cheering for the credit downgrade and their role in it.

are these people even aware of what they are cheering for?

a basic IQ and minimal knowledge test before you are allowed to vote is starting to look pretty good right now...
not complicated stuff.....I´m betting 'what year are we in?' would stump some of these Einsteins.

[Vladimir]

You're from Portugal right? Do you understand I take anything you say regarding debt and spending with a considerable amount of salt?

If you're a small group and your enemies credit you for something huge and coin a phrase after you, I'd celebrate too.

[Adrian II]

You're from Portugal right? Do you understand I take anything you say regarding debt and spending with a considerable amount of salt?

If you're a small group and your enemies credit you for something huge and coin a phrase after you, I'd celebrate too.

Whoah, at least the Portuguese know how to go bust in style. These Tea Baggers haven't a clue as to what's what, all they know is Obama is a mooslim and gubmint is ur worst enema. Man oh man, what a bunch of morons.

AII

[Vladimir]

Whoah, at least the Portuguese know how to go bust in style. These Tea Baggers haven't a clue as to what's what, all they know is Obama is a mooslim and gubmint is ur worst enema. Man oh man, what a bunch of morons.

AII

Sadly yes. :shame:

Go big or go home.

[Ronin]

You're from Portugal right? Do you understand I take anything you say regarding debt and spending with a considerable amount of salt?


at least I know the situation we are in is bad.......

if ignorance is bliss those people are in heaven.

P.S. - and you can listen to me as a Portuguese citizen that pays his taxes and puts in more than what he takes out of the state.
I´ll take responsibility for mine if you do for yours.

[PanzerJaeger]

You're from Portugal right? Do you understand I take anything you say regarding debt and spending with a considerable amount of salt?



:laugh4:

[Papewaio]

There is the aged pension (and disability and widows and etc) in Aus.

Most of us however pay 9% on top of our income into Superannuation for when we retire... so essentially after 40 years of income one should have at least 4 years plus compounding interest to live off at retirement.

[Jolt]

You're from Portugal right? Do you understand I take anything you say regarding debt and spending with a considerable amount of salt?

A man from a country who runs into the dozens of trillions of debt (With full monetary control!) says that anything coming from a man of a country whose finances were destroyed by the markets for no reason other than speculation, is to be discredited from the get go. Funny. :grin:

[Centurion1]

A man from a country who runs into the dozens of trillions of debt (With full monetary control!) says that anything coming from a man of a country whose finances were destroyed by the markets for no reason other than speculation, is to be discredited from the get go. Funny. :grin:

First dozens of trillions of debt is a hyperbole. There are not multiple dozens of trillions of debt.

Your telling me your economically suffering purely because of speculation in the markets.......... I daresay that portugal is in quite a bit more trouble than wht arose from market speculation.

http://www.economist.com/node/17902815

The US is in dire straits yes but a bail out (which would be impossible) is not needed.

[Centurion1]

This fact makes me furious. I see all around me how these old fogies retired at 60 and began collecting social security as soon as possible, all while working another job. They have the audacity to suckle at the dole and then join the tea party and complain about taxes being too high. Our grandparents are too stupid to care about their kids. Social security is for people like the woman who lives in my house. After having 6 kids, her husband ran off to Florida with his mistress when she was in her mid 70s. She is now in her 80s with a terrible back and no income. Social security keeps her from starving to death. On the flip side, john mccain recieves it. My other neighbor pulls in 200k and relieves it. The people who accept social security when they don't need it should be ashamed of themselves. We need to really bost the ages. There will always be 66 year olds who qualify based on hardship, but this thing has become gambling money for already rich americans.

The real problem is

A. the people who think you are supposed to be able to live on it comfortably which quite a few elderly try to do

B. the people who factor in social security into their retirement plans. It was devised as an emergency supplement not never ending golden goose........

[Papewaio]

BTW why would university loans count as social welfare? or university scholarships for that matter?

If that is the case then 100% of the nation is on or has had some sort of social welfare i.e. schools, roads, hospitals, police, army, firemen all have a component of tax money in it.

[Centurion1]

they are given for financial reasons perhaps?

they are loans not scholarships. Huge difference between the two.

[Papewaio]

Hang on so if a loan is welfare:

Do pensioners pay back?
Do unemployed pay back?

Are all the bank loans out there social welfare?

[Centurion1]

i just stated something to clear up the distinction between a loan and a scholarship.


however a government student loan is giving purely for financial reasons and is not merit based like a scholarship which has requirements but no pay back.

Pensioners are unique in that they pay IN which is a a form of paying back. Unemployment welfare collectors do not pay in or ever pay back. They take. Social security is paid INTO by everyone who collects a paycheck. Obviously some people pay more than others.

[Papewaio]

a government student loan is giving purely for financial reasons and is not merit based like a scholarship which has requirements but no pay back.


Actually a lot of disability pensions are based on criteria ie do they merit it. That would make the student loan, just a loan not welfare, but the scholarship a kind of welfare... which is what it is because they were supposed to be there to allow good students in who cannot otherwise afford it.

[Centurion1]

Actually a lot of disability pensions are based on criteria ie do they merit it. That would make the student loan, just a loan not welfare, but the scholarship a kind of welfare... which is what it is because they were supposed to be there to allow good students in who cannot otherwise afford it.

let us clear something up. The government in the USA of america do not hav government scholarships for university.

That being said scholarships are to reward students and are not welfare because financial stauts has notihng to do with them. Their purpose is to reward not to support financially otherwise poor students.

[Papewaio]

So student loads aren't welfare because they get paid back.
Scholarships are positive merit based and are hence not welfare.


let us clear something up. The government in the USA of america do not hav government scholarships for university.

Well over $200 million of US Federal Government money on scholarships is spent per year.

[Centurion1]

So student loads aren't welfare because they get paid back.
Scholarships are positive merit based and are hence not welfare.



Well over $200 million of US Federal Government money on scholarships is spent per year.

Public Universities. Fair point I suppose but Public universities are not really government run in the same way that say Social Security is.

Edit: It shouldn't be federal money though. I think that public universities are run by the state and not Washington.

[Major Robert Dump]

LOL Student Loans are not welfare. You have to pay them back, the interest rates are not exactly bargain, and there is NO WAY out of them unless you have some sort of catastrophic health issue. I say again, NO WAY OUT. Not even bankruptcy.

I could not get my student loans consolidated because the cards were stacked against me, so I had to pay three lenders back because OU thought it wise to borrow from multiple lenders for reasons that still dumfound me. Well, they all came calling at the same time and I was faced with 3 payments instead of 1. Bewteen late fees and interest increases my 18k loan went to 30k in around 1 year. I actually had to get my Senator involved to stop this.

Anyone who says a student loan is welfare is crass. Giving someone undeserving of credit (or their parents) a loan they will be paying back for the next 20 years in exchange for an education benefits the government far more the laon recipient.

When you defualt on a student loan guess what? You still have to pay it back, and now your credit is shot. The Man will garnish your paychecks and your IRS return. The government will get their money, unless you disappear and work under the table.

[Papewaio]

Student loans in Australia are from the government. You have to pay them back once you start earning over a threshold amount and for most the interest is indexed ie CPI only.

[a completely inoffensive name]

Anyone who says a student loan is welfare is crass.

Just to clarify I never thought that pell grants/student loans were welfare. But they are government social programs, which is the wording of the question in the study. It's a government loan program, targeting a specific group of society in order to try and support them. The payback might be stringent, but it does fall under the broad wording of "government social program", which is why I was surprised so little said they never used one.

[Tellos Athenaios]

Student loans are welfare, even if they are not a gift. They're an investment from society into itself which is what welfare is all about: a system of rules that taps riches from its individuals (taxes) to redistribute them as an investment in itself. Be that to prevent people from starving/going hungry (food stamps) to student loans which are much more akin to how a venture capitalist bankrolls a start up. You have to remember that these loans are to be had even for people who would otherwise never persuade any financial institution to lend them equivalent amounts of money.


Student loans in Australia are from the government. You have to pay them back once you start earning over a threshold amount and for most the interest is indexed ie CPI only.

Here it's 2 years after you end your studies, with a monthly amount calculated over your tax-able income 2 years prior. Thus if you earned virtually nothing (i.e. student job) you start with something like €100,- a month. When you get a manage to maintain a proper job, 2 years later you will find the monthly amount to be something like say €500. It may be that in the USA the interest rates are comparatively harsh (here it's 2.4%), and you are liable until the day you die (here the remainder might be waived after 10 or so years I think).

For reference, IIRC a bachelor's programme is about €1800,- a year after subsidy and a master's program can be about €5000,- after subsidy a year to pay the institution alone (but you only have to pay a single institution thus if you attend two you only owe one of them a fee if you can provide a proof of enrollment to the other) that is quite some loan: the actual costs of a University for students outside of the EU could be about €10K a year for a bachelor's programme.

[Major Robert Dump]

Welfare by definition does not have to be paid back. Student loans do. Student loans make some peoples lives significantly more difficult than had they not gotten the loans or the education. The loans are not always subsidized by the fed and the " guarantee" only comes into play of the borrower defualts, at which point the fed buys the loan from the lender and then the fed comes after the borrower. Giving a high risk borrower a line of credit is not welfare. The lenders don't lose. Calling a student loan welfare is like calling a high risk borrower credit card with 35% interest welfare

[Strike For The South]

Wait.....

IT HAS TO GET PAID BACK

[Slyspy]

I would say that a student loan absolutely is welfare if the capital sum comes from a government source. The fact that it has to be paid back is irrelevant IMO. You don't have the money, the government provides the money.

[Papewaio]

Well if you go for a broad definition then every Australia who successfully scores high enough to get into a course (without paying to do so if they scored too low) will have used welfare... as not only do you get the loan which is CPI... you are only paying a portion of the total course costs (not the whole) as such you have a subsidy and therefore are on welfare.

Essentially the student has to pay a percentage of the course costs back in the form of a CPI load and the rest of the course is payed out right by the Federal government. Then again it's expected the increased overall tax base more then makes up for this.

=][=

The other option until 2009 was if you're a dumb lazy fire truck with rich parents then you can pay a full fee and get into the course of your choice.

[Ronin]

Tea Party embraces keynesianism now (http://www.salon.com/technology/how_the_world_works/index.html?story=/tech/htww/2011/08/05/the_rise_of_tea_party_keynesianism)


The Rise of Tea Party Keynesianism
Spending money on defense is good because it creates jobs and stimulates the economy -- wait, what?!

the corporate masters that started the whole thing have pulled the leash it seems.

[Major Robert Dump]

I would say that a student loan absolutely is welfare if the capital sum comes from a government source. The fact that it has to be paid back is irrelevant IMO. You don't have the money, the government provides the money.

It doesn't come from a government source. Student Loans come from banks, like Sallie Mae, not the government. The government just "backs" the loan up by promising the bank they will buy the debt if the borrower turns out to be a doucehbag, therefore the bank is more likley to give the loan to undeserving borrowers because there is little or no risk involved for the bank.

That's what people seem to not understand about the US Governement: They don't pay for stuff like this themselves, they always include a bank, that way some honest, hardworking, starving banker can make some money. Obamacare doesn't pay for people's healthcare, Obama pays insurance companies to pay for somoenes healthcare, that way some honest, hardworking, starving insurance agent can make some money. Stimulus funds work the same way.

[Slyspy]

It doesn't come from a government source. Student Loans come from banks, like Sallie Mae, not the government. The government just "backs" the loan up by promising the bank they will buy the debt if the borrower turns out to be a doucehbag, therefore the bank is more likley to give the loan to undeserving borrowers because there is little or no risk involved for the bank.

That's what people seem to not understand about the US Governement: They don't pay for stuff like this themselves, they always include a bank, that way some honest, hardworking, starving banker can make some money. Obamacare doesn't pay for people's healthcare, Obama pays insurance companies to pay for somoenes healthcare, that way some honest, hardworking, starving insurance agent can make some money. Stimulus funds work the same way.

So without the government backing the student loan would be unavailable or on less friendly terms?

Edit:

Has Sallie Mae always been a private company?

[Tellos Athenaios]

It doesn't come from a government source. Student Loans come from banks, like Sallie Mae, not the government. The government just "backs" the loan up by promising the bank they will buy the debt if the borrower turns out to be a doucehbag, therefore the bank is more likley to give the loan to undeserving borrowers because there is little or no risk involved for the bank. Ah. So that is different from student loans as we know it over here, which are directly paid out by the government, and likewise the interest on the borrowed money ends up on the government balance sheets. And no, I don't see why anyone would do it any other way. Seems like it merely serves to introduce overhead, and make the whole thing worse by going through the private sector for this. :shrug:

[Tuuvi]

It doesn't come from a government source. Student Loans come from banks, like Sallie Mae, not the government. The government just "backs" the loan up by promising the bank they will buy the debt if the borrower turns out to be a doucehbag, therefore the bank is more likley to give the loan to undeserving borrowers because there is little or no risk involved for the bank.

That's what people seem to not understand about the US Governement: They don't pay for stuff like this themselves, they always include a bank, that way some honest, hardworking, starving banker can make some money. Obamacare doesn't pay for people's healthcare, Obama pays insurance companies to pay for somoenes healthcare, that way some honest, hardworking, starving insurance agent can make some money. Stimulus funds work the same way.

Actually, the US government ended the Stafford loan program and replaced it with Direct loans, which come directly from the government. They also bought up any stafford loans that had been taken out before they started doing Direct loans.