Is the Tea Party mostly retired people, rich people and unemployed people?

Yes, and most of them are out there protesting while eating off the government’s nickel (social security) and using Medicare!

The irony is not lost on me, but apparently is on them.

They’re also white – I haven’t seen a black person in there yet.

@Judi: I found an article about the demographics – it isn’t really in depth, but it’s something.

I also wonder if some of them are paid protestors? It would be great if a news agency did a story on the demographic of a Tea Party protestor.

@troubleinharlem So I wasn’t just seeing things. I thought I saw no minorities. I read somewhere that 79% of tea partiers where caucasian and yet everytime I see the protest, I never noticed the other 21% being in the crowds.

Would I be shocked to learn that the Tea Party is a stealth initiative by right-wing rich folk, run by the likes of Karl Rove’s operatives on the DL and paid for by the Koch Brothers, but that they want the public to believe it’s a spontaneous, grassroots movement by concerned citizens who just happen to be mostly white and who do seem to have an inordinate amount of time on their hands to protest and “ask the tough questions”? Nope.

They need to watch Bob Roberts again, though. Glenn Beck was terrible. If Tim Robbins makes for a more appealing and believable conservative, then “ur doin it rong”.

Granted, I’m as wary as anyone over some of the things I’ve seen go down in Obama’s administration thus far, but the “birther” crap and “Obama = Hitler” meme and the “death panels”? Sensationalist smokescreens.

In other words, the middle and working classes of white America are being snookered if they fall for this. Wisconsin, Indiana and Ohio are the canaries in the coal mine!

@Judi: Here’s another demographic chart that I thought was interesting.

@Pandora: I saw a humorous clip on how they should hire black people once on the Colbert Report. It has some profanity, though, as far as I know.

@aprilsimnel “In other words, the middle and working classes of white America are being snookered if they fall for this. Wisconsin, Indiana and Ohio are the canaries in the coal mine!”
LOVE IT. LOL

This is what amazes me most about many of the conservatives I know! They tend to be feeding at the government trough, believing they deserve every single crumb, and railing against the “horrifying” powers that be. As far as I am concerned many of the conservative voices being heard right now don’t have the best interest of the country at heart. I am also amused that these folks never seem to remember who got the country in this mess to begin with, a certain puppet by the name of George W. Bush.

@aprilsimnel Oh, btw, Donald Trump has joined that whole birth certificate crap. I heard on CNN that he said he was going to investigate it himself. WOW! Is all I can say. And IDIOT!
@troubleinharlem Loved the clip!

@SuperMouse They didn’t forget. They just keep ignoring it because they figure if they throw enough curve balls we will all suddenly suffer from amnesia.

@aprilsimnel and @Pandora: Here’s a clip about Trump joining the presidential race – it’s from Jon Stewart, but I found that funny as well. xD

@troubleinharlem OMG, That almost put me on the ground. I loved his closing arguement. America the turd with gold seams and being sold to the Chinese.

I do not believe the Tea Party is made up of only rich/retired/unemployed white people. I think they are typically the only members of the party you will see at political rallies because the others are probably at work.

Prior to it being hijacked by Republicans and Fox news, the Tea Party was a very distinct movement backed by the Libertarians. It has become the circus it is today thanks to being driven into the ground by the “old fashioned” Conservative “Stalwarts” who saw it as nothing more than another vehicle to drive their rhetoric and propaganda. That’s why you see so many of the smaller Tea Party movements and older ones break ties off with the “national” level, because they have realized their movement has been hijacked.

@tedd If that is the case then why don’t they break off. Became Tea Party II for Libertarians instead of sticking around. They probably stick around because what is left is probably paid protesters as @Judi suggested. But in the end, it doesn’t matter what they started as but rather what are they now.

Most of them are hard right Republicans who don’t find the GOP to be reactionary enough.
A good test case is to look at their reaction to Governor Jerry Brown. Here is a guy who drives his own car, lives in his own apartment, rather than the Governor’s Mansion, and has taken cell phones away from most State of California employees. He is tight with money, but most tea partiers reject him because he supports many democtratic positions, like abortion.

You guys are incredibly biased! What about all the Wisconsin teachers who not only took time off from their teaching jobs, but actually brought some of the STUDENTS with them to the Capital to occupy the rotunda and riot about being asked to pay the same thing that virtually ALL private employers have to pay?

The Tea Party is composed of Americans from virtually every walk of life, every age group, every gender, and every race. Anyone who has attended one of their rally’s ( as opposed to watching the highly biased news reports ) would be able to see that clearly for themselves. And besides, just because one is retired does NOT mean that we have no say in the political arena. We vote and are involved in politics because we have spent our entire lives trying to support our Nation and our families. That, in MY opinion, is worth fighting to preserve!

Go on with your baddass bias. We’re not going to shut up and go away!

The Tea Party rallies that I’ve been to cover the entire demographic spectrum. It is worth noting that many minorities are strongly partisan in the other direction, lured with the promise of handouts.

@Pandora The few Tea Partier’s I know have in fact broken off, or otherwise disavowed the national movement. They are very Libertarian in nature. As for many of those that don’t split off, they are probably the band wagoners who jumped on the movement after it was hijacked, and are followers of the “new” message.

@CaptainHarley Please continue to speak your voice in protests, rallies or what not. Even though I don’t agree with you, its your right, and by voicing your opinion and me voicing mine, we eventually find common ground and compromise. I must say though that the students of those teachers came of their own accord, and most the protesters in Wisconsin were protesting the removal of their Union rights…. they by in large agreed with taking pay cuts for the sake of balancing the budget.

@Nullo I think many of the minorities favor the Democratic party because they are often the subject of ridicule, target of harsh legislation, and in some extreme cases downright racism. Do you blame them for going to the party that doesn’t have members crying about how they were born and raised here and speak English and have American culture? Also, minorities are typically in lower income levels, and Democrats typically fight for legislation that benefits lower income levels… I think regardless of race the lower income people would be stupid to not try and boost their own situation…. Rich people do the same thing when they vote for a Republican who says he’ll lower their taxes.

I cannot comment on the racial mix of the Tea Party, as I’ve never been to a rally or anything like that. I have heard there is a mix of all races, but that it is predominantly a Caucasian group (not that that’s necessarily a bad thing).

@tedd

Fine with me. I just wonder how much time I’ll have in which to protest before Obama’s “death panel” catches up with me? : )

@CaptainHarley; don’t worry. Your insurance companies death panel will get you first. Treating old age related illness is not profitable.

@Judi

I have Medicare and Tricare Prime ( the insurance for Army veterans ). Plus, should I want to utilize it, I can go to a Veterans Administration hospital and get treated there for free, although you have to pick the hospital with care, since some of them are virtual death traps in and of themselves.

@Nullo “many minorities are strongly partisan in the other direction, lured with the promise of handouts” – oh this is swell. Really.

@Simone_De_Beauvoir

Oh, this is true… that some people ( whether minority or not! ) will do or say virtually anything for money. You know it, Nullo knows it, and I know it!

@CaptainHarley Except your statement has the non-racist (one hopes) disclaimer of ‘minority or not!’

@CaptainHarley Yeah, I wouldn’t hold out for Tricare Prime to be there forever. Military Medical facilities are closing down everyday and everyone who is no longer a military member is being sent to local hospitals because the hospitals on base are full and medical staff is being cut back. It took my husband 2 months of seeing different doctors (one to refer him, 2nd doctor to determine if surgery was needed, 3rd doctor to actually do the surgery before he had a lump removed and we got to find out if it was cancer or not. We also have Tricare Prime. If we didn’t go out of town we would’ve had to go see a doctor at a military facility and they said it would’ve been 4 months before he could even be seen by a military doctor to determine whether it was something that needed to be removed. Probably would’ve taken longer for the surgery to happen.
If it was cancer he probably would’ve been dead from it.
And medicare is certainly no better. More hospitals are become private to get away from having to do with medicare and when they do take medicare patients they basically bandage you up and send you on your way to a county runned hospital that is extremely understaffed.

I don’t believe for a second that “Obama has a ‘death panel’”. I could believe it about Bush… oh wait, there was that “deck of cards” of terrorists the US military were supposed to kill.

However, when I hear what people who support the Tea Party are saying, I start thinking that it’d be better to have an Obama death panel than a Tea Party death panel (oh yeah, the right-wing kooks these days do tend to talk about killing liberals as patriotic duty…).

I think there’s some massive miscommunication going on (it’s hilarious that web browser spell checkers don’t know the word miscommunication, BTW). Most Tea Party people seem to be well-meaning and upset about various principals, traditions, and/or fears, but have been sucked into this political fiasco supposedly led by people like Sarah Palin (omg airhead) but who in turn are clearly being directed by more sinister people/corporate-strategists taking advantage of those opinions, and letting it be an insane Us vs Them bullshit fest.

Anything to avoid paying taxes or being subject to environmental regulations. Grr.

@Zaku LOL, I remember seeing those cards.
I feel your right about some kooks being in there. Same can be said about any group these days but have them sponsered by corporate strategists as you say and all goes to hell. Especially Unions. ( I use to believe they were a good thing in the past but the unions have gotten worse over the years. They are more about lining their own pockets than taking care of their members or even about justice. You can be screwed with them or without them.)

@CaptainHarley is paid by the government. He has a military pension and benefits and he deserves them both. However, I disagree with his politics… and so would my father, who was in the same situation as @CaptainHarley. @CaptainHarley just lacks compassion for those less fortunate than himself and wants to make sure he gets the pie piece and not some single mother who has been beaten and raped by her husband or that her kids deserve a decent education. Some people just don’t like to share.

Most of the ones I know are rich, retired & republican.

@cazzie

LMAO! You are SO misinformed! You really should try coming out of your little shell once in awhile to sample what it’s like out in the real world. It’s the absolute height of arrogance to presume that someone lacks compassion without any supporting evidence.

@CaptainHarley I live in the real world. Where do you live? or better yet… What colour is the sky in your world, Baldric….

@cazzie

Sure, sure, Cazzie. We’ll take your word for it. [ rolls eyes ]

@CaptainHarley prove me wrong… how have you served the under trodden.?

Oh and convince me that everyone in your situation does the same.

@cazzie

I have no intention of proving anything to you or to anyone else. What I do, or have done, is my own business and the business of those with whom I interact. If you’re that interested in how I spend my time, talk to some of my friends. I’ll even give you a small list, just to get you started.

And I am hardly responsible for anything others do. I view that as totally specious.

@CaptainHarley you receive public money… why shouldn’t you be responsible to tell us how it is spent?

@cazzie I am sure @CaptainHarley can fight his own battles. But a retirement check from the military is NOT public money. It was earned not freely gifted.

@optimisticpessimist I fully agree, but the party he claims to represents holds no such honorarium so I must press the point.

@optimisticpessimist It was earned – and just like the tea partiers who think healthcare isn’t earned, I don’t think military benefits that go on and on and on are earned either – it’s all ideological, isn’t it?

@cazzie By that token, anyone who receives a paycheck from the federal government or any kind of assistance must show how they assist the under trodden?

@Simone_De_Beauvoir How exactly is health care earned? By being born American? Military benefits do not go on forever.

@optimisticpessimist I’m saying people say it isn’t earned. I don’t think it’s earned but I think it should be a right. I don’t think military benefits are earned but I’m anti-current wars, etc. and much of our other wars. Point is, government benefits are just that, who gets to decide whether it’s earned or not.

@Simone_De_Beauvoir I do not understand your logic. Health care should be a right. I assume that means free for everyone. However, according to your own words, “I don’t think military benefits are earned,” so people who would willing die for your rights and freedom do not earn their benefits? Just because you do not agree with the war(s) does not mean the benefits were not earned. They were just earned for a purpose you do not agree with.

@optimisticpessimist It doesn’t matter whether you agree with wars, I can disagree if those benefits were earned. And it doesn’t matter if healthcare should be accessible, Tea Partiers disagree with it. That’s what I’m saying – neither military benefits or healthcare are inherently, unquestionably anything – it’s all about who thinks deserves what. But if you’re getting government payouts for what you consider was ‘worthy’ service, then leave people alone who want something they too think they’re worthy of, like healthcare.

@Simone_De_Beauvoir I am not getting any payouts. I did my time and got out. Everyone thinks they are worthy of something. Where is the line? Obviously, for you, it ends somewhere after health care. By the way, I never said I did not agree with health care. I never stated any position on that. I said the military personnel who gets theirs earned it.

@optimisticpessimist I wasn’t making any assumptions about you. Sorry if it sounded like that. The ‘you’ in my last statement was not YOU, specifically.

@Simone_De_Beauvoir Okay, no problem.

With respect here, Fluther is not a longitudinal cross section of the US population, but is heavily skewed (very heavily skewed, in fact) toward the left. I’m not saying that in a pejorative or accusatory way, and I’m not saying that honestly held progressive-liberal views are necessarily wrong, but… just because one person (here) says “the teabaggers are a bunch of this-es or thats” and five people laugh, jump up and applaud the statement doesn’t necessarily make it so.

I’m not a Tea Party member or likely to be I have been a “capital L” Libertarian, although I’m not a member of any party now so it hardly matters to me personally what people’s opinion is of that party or any other. The “stated aims” of the Tea Party, as near as I’ve gotten to studying them admittedly, ‘not very near’ are generally libertarian, as @tedd, @Nullo, and @CaptainHarley have mentioned. I’m neither rich, retired nor unemployed, but the “stated aims” of the movement to align government more closely with the US Constitution resonate with me – and with many others on Fluther who simply get tired of trying to swim against a current that seems to flow predominantly one way: strongly to the left.

So, think and say what you want about Tea Party members (or teabaggers, as some persist in denigrating them), or Republicans or Democrats themselves, but one could certainly wish for more ‘thoughtful’ criticisms than some of the tiresome same old same old ones we see here day in and day out.

I’m fully in favor of strong opinions and criticism of ideas when they are fairly and honestly represented by those doing the criticism, but when people merely set up straw men as a basis for “this is what they think, so clearly they are wrong and evil” it’s not only useless as valid commentary and argument, but irksome to boot.

The question itself was okay (only borderline snarky) but some of the responses are simple ad hominems, albeit popular because they happen to be in Fluther. From what I’ve seen here, I know we can do better.

Is the Tea Party mostly retired people, rich people and unemployed people?

No. I’ve come across some old high school buddies recently thanks to Facebook. I was surprised to find out the majority of them are Republican, and support the Tea Party. These people are not retired (they are 40), they are not rich (they are middle class) and not unemployed. They are very intelligent, educated, hard working people. psst, and they aren’t all caucasian

@WasCy wish I could give you more than one great answer. well said

I have been a “member” of the TEA Party since April 2009 whrn they held the first meeting in my area. I am neither retired, rich nor unemployed and as sure as I’m typing nobody ever paid me to go to the rallies and meetings. That is hilarious! I have seen and talked to TEA Party people of all ages, skin colors and walks of life and the only real common denominator that I have seen is that they are all Americans…...just sayin’ :~)

@WasCy

Excellent! Couldn’t have said it any better myself. : ))

Unemployed, retired, or rich? Thats not the tea party, thats America in general.

@Pandora
You began by saying, “I was watching the news.”
Just curious, what news do you generally watch?
Do you ever question their agenda?

Thanks, @CaptainHarley.

I speak for myself as an American citizen who leans left politically.

I believe our people’s legitimate grievances are being hijacked. I believe that people’s baser instincts are being appealed to, what with the birthers and the sentiments about illegal immigrants, and the godforsaken circus that are the Becks and Limbaughs of the airwaves. The truth of the matter is, in the name of maximizing profits, corporations are destroying us, and they don’t care, as long as they get theirs. And Washington is cashing in. I’ve no doubt that Obama will spend at least double the 20 million that he did in 2008, so I’m not patting him on the back either. These people love to see us fight for the crumbs. Why are we providing them with sport?

I’m not trying to force people to become atheists and have gay marriages (and what adults do is in their personal lives is nobody’s business, anyway), pay out 90% of their income to welfare cheats nor have illegal immigrants come in and steal someone’s job. But in all the hoopla, no one’s getting down to brass tacks about anything. It’s all a bunch of rhetoric.

What do we want as a nation, here? What do we really want? In what ways can we be fucking UNITED so that we’re not invading other countries when we’re not being attacked, jacking up the costs of health care, everyone has a living wage and there’s some cooperation going on? This “Move over, Jack, I’m getting mine and to hell with you” isn’t working. It’s not working. It’s bad enough that that’s the CEOs attitude. We all have to look out for each other. I don’t care where you lean politically, and I’m tired of this shit.

We are all trying to make a decent living, raise our families, and live in peace with our fellows, aren’t we? So what’s the next step if we don’t have enough money to lobby Congress ourselves and can’t offshore or incomes?

@chris6137 I watch the news on any channel I happen to flip on. I don’t just watch any one channel but mostly local stations. Occasionally I will go to CNN for news around the world. Mostly to see how Japan is recovering, for now. It wasn’t their agenda that first got me wondering. Its just that every time they show the tea partiers on the steps of Washington protesting I started to wonder, why did they all seem to be primarily white and how is it they seem to have all this time to stand out there for hours, then followed by what are they really up too.
@aprilsimnel Bravo! Your point is well spoken. Thats how I feel. Everyone is out for themselves and doesn’t seem to give a rats ass about the nation as a whole. So long as I get mine is what I hear from all these special interest party. They don’t seem to get that if we all stand divided than United we will fall.

@aprilsimnel

We do what people have done since the dawn of time… hunker down and do our best to protect ourselves and our families.

TL;DR

It may seem that way since:
– The Tea Party is undoubtedly Conservative
– Many in the upper brackets stand to gain from having Conservatives in office
– Many older people tend to be more Conservative
– Most of your retired people tend to be either old or rich
– Many of the unemployed are pissed that the Obama administration allowed this to happen and thus are quite willing to go to the other political extreme (The Tea Party) in order to see if they can do better

I can’t say for sure if your observations are actual fact, though I wouldn’t doubt that there is at least a pretty large gain of truth to them.

I am utterly disgusted by some of the Tea Party’s statements and posters, for example one depicting Obama as Hitler promoting the ‘Final Solution’ for health care comparing this with sending Americans to the gas chambers in Auschwitz. There are many examples like that and there are frequent reports about it in German newspapers and magazines, e.g.

http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,724418,00.html

I don’t understand how decent conservative people of all ages and skin colors join ultra-radical people carrying these utterly despicable posters walking along with them. I am aware that many of the Tea Party members are decent, but frustrated people. But this frustration cannot entail radical polemics and poisoning of the political culture in America. And they have to speak out when unacceptable posters are created, which most of the time they don’t. The same goes for all kinds of dubious conspiracy theories like Barack Obama being a Muslim. This is not democracy. Democracy is about competing ideas. Debate. Fairness. Mutual respect. I don’t see any of that supported by the Tea Party. And many Europeans are appalled by this. America used to be the shining beacon of democracy and freedom inspiring millions of people around the globe.

I still keep wondering when decent conservatives are taking back their Republican Party.

Have I just missed all of your expressions of outrage at the same depictions of Bush as Hitler, @mattbrowne?

It’s not that I’m a Bushie or a Republican, but I do believe in equal bashing of lunacy. So I agree with your disgust as expressed above, but… something seems to be missing.

Radical lefties have depicted Bush as Hitler and it’s equally outrageous and I’m equally disgusted by it. Was there a Fluther question about this I missed? In this thread I shared my views on the Tea Party. It’s not fair to imply that I have double standards.

Any lunacy of the radical left doesn’t make lunacies of the radical right any better.

Liberals and conservatives should work together and reinstate democracy and a healthy political culture. Which is about competing ideas. Debate. Fairness. And mutual respect.

I’m not sure how strong the radical left influences the Democrats. But in my opinion the influence of the ultra conservatives in the GOP is getting out of hand.

The reason I brought it up, @mattbrowne – not to accuse you of double standards – was simply to get that acknowledgement. From December 2009 when I first joined Fluther I’ve seen rivers of vitriol directed toward Bush – even though his party had lost the White House a full year earlier. I never supported many of his policies, either, but the crowd here was so anti-Bush that little more volume was required on that side of any argument, so I didn’t generally add my “me too” opinions when I felt them. Even now, after a new President has been in office for 3 years and is preparing for his re-election campaign, there’s still more attention directed at Bush and what he has not been doing for the past three years than what the current Administration is doing. Or not.

I’m no more anti-Obama now than I was anti-Bush then, and I don’t mind being on the record as more or less anti-both-of-them. That’s my idea of balance.

It’s good to have the acknowledgement that you dislike lunacy on both sides. I would expect no less from you, in fact. But it’s good to have that out there from time to time. Better to have it out there more often rather than less.

Fair enough @WasCy. The response to nasty polemics should never be nasty polemics. I believe in breaking vicious cycles. Discourse has become so sharply polarized. I sincerely hope that Americans are able to overcome their divisions.

We should speak out when the Tea Party resorts to nasty polemics.

We should speak out when the radical left resorts to nasty polemics.

We can still disagree. But we should talk about competing ideas. Like what is the best way to deal with national debt. Like what is the best way to help people to get access to good health care.

Hear, hear!

It is a crazy concept. It would require going back in time, when people fought ideas respectfully. How I truly wish it was possible.

I think it’s generally possible to discuss ideas instead of vilifying those who hold contrary ones – @mattbrowne does it often, and I try to – but it’s not what we’ve come to expect from public pronouncements and ‘debate’ between politicians and their partisan hangers-on. It’s not the kind of thing that translates into bumper stickers, slogans, placards, chants or 10-second sound bytes. These days, if it doesn’t play on the news, then when would most of us hear it? Even C-Span, which televises proceedings direct from the floor of the House of Representatives, is loaded with tons of chaff for every ounce of wisdom expressed – and how many of us watch that for very long?

I’ve been re-watching the wonderful PBS special on the American Civil War, and I continue to be struck by the thoughtfulness and nuance in even public pronouncements by Lincoln, Lee, Grant and some others in positions of political and military power. In fact, I’m extraordinarily appreciative of the content of some of the surviving letters from private soldiers, most of whom did not have anywhere near the education that even today’s most basic inductees would be presumed to have. But they often exhibit wonderful sensitivity, nuance and thought.

I hate it when a fluther question haunts me in real life. @CaptainHarley , you have been on my mind. You are the exact person that I don’t understand. You support an agenda that wants to dismantle the benefits you receive now. You are the very reason government programs are in place, to protect Vetrans and the disabled, but you support an agenda against your own interest. I am not judging, because I believe you are sincere, I just don’t understand why someone who receives so much benefit from government programs would be opposed to it? I really want to understand. I am not looking for an argument or a debate, just what your thinking is.

@Judi

I can’t answer for @CaptainHarley, but I can tell you that the closer I approach retirement age (nominal retirement age, that is, because I don’t expect that I’ll be able to retire “comfortably”), the more I hate Social Security, and more and more want to dismantle it and junk it entirely.

It’s an evil, vicious fraud. Not only is it a fraud that’s going to cost me a “good” retirement, but it’s going to cost my kids and their kids more, and return less, if it’s still in existence.

All of my working life I’ve paid into “Social Security”, and my employers have matched my “contribution”. This means that I have paid both sides – the employer doesn’t pay anything “on my behalf” that I didn’t earn. (It’s diabolically clever the way this was hidden from taxpayers, however. Sheer evil genius.) Had I been allowed to invest those “contributions” the way I’ve invested my IRA and 401(k) contributions then I could have had a decent nest egg built up. Moreover, I’d have ownership of the assets and an ability to pass them on to heirs, which Social Security doesn’t permit.

The “fact” that I’ll get more “out of” Social Security within the first several years of retirement than I ever “contributed” is the other part of the evil genius: I paid in “smaller amounts” in years gone by when money itself had more value. If you understand what inflation has done to the value of currency over the decades of my career, then you’d understand that my “Social Security income” (when and if I receive it) is far less valuable than what I contributed decades ago.

Worst of all, of course, as if the foregoing wasn’t bad enough, is the fact that the “Social Security Trust Fund” is filled with nothing more than IOUs from the rest of the government, and the backing for the IOUs (the “full faith and credit of the United States government”) is… based on their ability to tax us for the money.

@WasCy God bless you if you’re well enough off that you don’t need social security. My grand parents were the same way. Grandfather was a dentist, saved his own money and invested it and built himself a nice little nest egg. Actually they went to rallies against social security.

That is…. until the stock market crashed. Their bank account bottomed out….. and their only source of income became…. social security.

You have a far more pessimistic view of social security than it deserves. Its not a perfect system, it could use an overhaul. But the money it provides can often be the difference between whether or not millions of people have money to eat after they pay their bills off what they’ve saved, or pay their bills at all. The money you’ll get out of SS has gone up as inflation has gone up, its not like you’re still getting the same dollar amount handed out in 1950…........ Social Security is not enough for you to live comfortably off of, it was never meant to be. It was meant to be enough for you to live, without your relatives or the government having to house you and take your entire burden.

@tedd

You misunderstand. “Not being able to have a ‘comfortable’ retirement” means that I certainly will “need” Social Security. The government’s plan to take care of me has ensured that I will need the government to take care of me if I lose the ability to work, and I expect to “work” in some capacity for the rest of my life.

Yeah, I lost a lot in various stock market crashes, but if my investment portfolio had had the benefit of the “Social Security contributions” that I’ve been making (directly and via my employers) for the past 35 – 40 years or more, then I’d be far ahead, even with various corrections in the market. (So would you and every other American, in fact, benefit from my investments. But politicians don’t like to believe in the invisible hand: they want to give the handouts directly.)

@WasCy You’re assuming that every American would take those SS contributions and invest them. Also assuming they would invest them wisely. What keeps your regular person from just spending that money on food, or wasting it gambling or something? And ok even if they do invest it themselves, what happens when they invested all their money in Bear Sterns Bank? Suddenly they find themselves living on the streets.

Social Security was put in place because be it simply from bad luck, or from poor investment choices with their money, large numbers of people were ending up living off the streets, or on the backs of younger-still-employed-relatives… and it was hurting everyone involved.

@tedd

Simply, that people should be taking care of themselves and their own families, assuming they are competent to do so. If other people don’t want to take care of themselves, then that’s an issue for them. The United States didn’t become a great nation by “taking care of” everyone, regardless of whether or not they needed it. But it will fall from the ranks of great nations by attempting to do so.

You’re younger than I am; presumably you’ll see it happen. Your presumed reason that Social Security was put in place is largely a myth. In fact, when it was first instituted, most people didn’t even live to “retirement age”. The intent of the program was to encourage those who did live to such a ripe old age to retire and make way for younger workers.

@WasCy I guess the American Indians should have just left those colonists to all die that winter, rather than help feed them and teach them to plant corn. If they couldn’t take care of themselves, that should have been an issue for them.

@WasCy I see where you’re coming from, and there’s merit to it. If people are so stupid as to piddle away their money then it is in fact their own fault. The problem is that they will fall back then on relatives, or a government institution (prison, poor house, asylum), or living on the streets and likely dying from it. To me social security is just that, security that we are a better civilization than to let even the incompetent burden their families or die for no good reason.

they don’t just become a burden on their families or conveniently die. Ever hear that expression ‘desperate times lead to desperate measures’? It’s true. Ensuring everyone has access to GOOD education and medical care, ensuring that addicts have a place to be treated, the mentally ill have a safe place to be cared for, the victims of accidents and disease are treated, healed and rehabilitated… these things ensure for a more socially secure civilisation.

@cazzie You’ll get no argument that those things will help civilization more overall. But the simple fact of the matter remains that some people will be ignorant or simply unlucky with their money, and become a burden. What if they’re 75, no family, crippled and can’t work, and lost all their money in a market crash? What is that person supposed to do? And yes we have asylums and rehab centers and etc…. But do we need to put more burden on those systems than they already have? They’re all pretty drastically under-funded themselves as it is.

@WasCy And that is why we are on our way to becoming a Third World nation. It would be different if trickle-down worked well enough for everybody who was able and willing to work to support themselves could do so, but there are too many working poor and unwillingly unemployed people for me to agree with you.
My cost of living is too high compared to my income to ever be able to stop working under any circumstances, and I am far from alone in that. But so long as corporations are setting records with profits and CEO bonuses are also at an all-time high, who cares?

@tedd are you trying to say that the US is less of a country than little old France, or Norway and aren’t smart enough or have enough GDP to generate the funds to look after the less fortunate?

@cazzie I don’t understand what you are asking? I’m saying SS is a good thing because it helps the less fortunate and even the stupid (and secondarily because it keeps people in their own care rather than forcing them to fall back on already over-stretched systems like homeless shelters or rehab facilities).

Yes, @tedd SS needs to be a real deal for those who have paid into it and those with no other option. What I thought was you were saying what others were saying here and that SS was also a waste of money. Law of the jungle. ‘Every man for themselves because there’s not enough to go around and you can’t have my money because my kids want the new upgrade to Wii and I need gas for my Hummer.’ (But I exaggerate for comedic effect and amuse myself.)

@cazzie
Not to change the topic, but…

If you ever read the real history of the Pilgrims’ landing at what is now Plymouth, Massachusetts, you’d know that the Natives and Pilgrims helped each other through that first winter. One of the primary reasons the Natives didn’t throw them back into the ocean on Day 1 was that their own ranks had been very well decimated already by the importation of diseases of European origin.

The Pilgrims were the first European “settlers” in current New England, but they weren’t the first European “visitors”. Fishermen and shipwrecked sailors had been landing there with some regularity (one of the reasons why Squanto spoke English, after all) and smallpox had reduced Native populations by more than half in the year or two prior to the landing.

@WasCy and still they helped their fellow human beings.

… and they did it without the current Federal government, Social Security, welfare, HUD, Medicare, Medicaid, block grants and housing subsidies.

I wonder how in the world they managed?

@WasCy I guess it’s called ‘having a heart and compassion’ .

@WasCy Those programs are merely codified and modernized versions of the sort of aid that communities used to give. The Native Americans did pretty well without Congress and courtrooms, and I don’t think they had lawyers or investment bankers either.

@WasCy Yes, the Indians did it without all that. But I doubt we are going to go back to building our log cabins and the Indians are going to pick the land for us and teach us how to hunt with the bow and arrow. My point is there is no point in comparing the two different time errors. There isn’t a profit big enough for farmers today. The government has to help many struggling farmers to stay afloat during hard times. Without that, many would shut down and food prices would rise even more. More people struggling to get by wouldn’t have the money to purchase food.

The first settlers and Indians also didn’t have to pay rent.
Back then, you ate what you grew and what you hunted. Could you see whole cities going out to hunt. There would be nothing left in a short while.
You are also giving too much credit to todays society. Most people today only think about their own survival.
I remember and old woman in S.C. She lived alone and couldn’t do much for herself. She had family close by but her family barely came to see her and when they did it wasn’t to help her cut the grass or anything. They claimed they were too busy. Apparently they never seemed to get a day off. She was a sweet old woman who did get the help of one neighbor, but he was a military guy. He would eventually move and she would be left with the same neighbors who didn’t help and the same children who were too busy to help care for her.
You know eventually she would end up in some home where cost to tax payers would be even hirer.
My mom and dad both worked all their lives and SS still doesn’t pay (my mom) the only survivor that much as it is. But even if they had invested, they may have still lost money. My sister invested for 20 years and lost all her investment. She wasn’t foolish with her money. The market is only meant for the very rich, not the people who have very little to save because they barely make enough. She made enough but she also lived in NYC where things there are expensive. Now she lives in a much cheaper town where cost is low on everything as well as pay.
There is no way now she can set anything much aside.

@WasCy For President. Great comments and right on target starting with: Fluther is not a longitudinal cross section of the US population, but is heavily skewed (very heavily skewed, in fact) toward the left.

@Judi You support an agenda that wants to dismantle the benefits you receive now.
Lyndon B. Johnson is the rascal that put that agenda in place and a huge proportion of the population didnt want them in place at the time. It just so happens that the year that Medicare was passed,1965, is also the year that medical costs turned from a very gradual line of increase to a 45 degree skyward rocket that has been gaining speed and angle for 40+ years.

@cazzie A dollar that is run through the federal system has nothing to do with “a heart and compassion”. It’s called buying votes and lines the pockets of the rich (government employees) first.

@plethora Government employees are rich? Wrong. http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2011/02/wisconsin_public_unions

I’ve got no argument against Libertarians and Tea Party members, as long as they go build themselves their own government somewhere else, preferably a secluded island nation where their jungle mentality can play itself out in it’s ‘Lord of the Flies’ fashion. That is not what America is. America is not Sparta that throws its ‘undesirables’ over a cliff.

@cazzie Try to fire a public sector employee, starting with the Civil Service. The value of their unbreakable tenure is conveniently not mentioned in your reference. Not that it should be extended to the private sector. Unbreakable tenure leads to mediocrity and inability to compete.

Should I assume by your last comment that government is the last bastion of compassion?

@plethora for many, a government agency is the last resort when faced with healthcare payments, job loss, housing loss. Have you ever spoken to anyone working at the coalface of this? My sister works for a social services office in Wisconsin. I have several friends (very NOT rich) who are teachers and professors.

The leading cause of mediocrity and inability to compete is underfunding. You talk about competition? If the public sector paid teachers and social workers what the job was really worth, the job would actually attract the right standard of people and keep them.

You think the tenure problem is unbreakable? There is a good reason for the system and it’s not to feather nests. Teachers and other public servants serve at the pleasure of the State. The ‘State’ gets elected every 2–4 years. If a right or left wing State gets elected in, they would have the right to fire ALL public servants who are on record of disagreeing with the agenda of that government, and then substituting in those people who agree with their agenda. We need people, of all thought and politics, in the public service. If they were all right wing, there would be no one there to check their dogma, and if they were all left wing, there would be no one to pull in the reigns of that dogma. Abolishing the tenure system by a government is the equivalent of telling academics, ‘Don’t you DARE disagree with us’.

The tenure system was abolished in England under the Thatcher government. Perhaps you should look at the state of English schools and see if you really want to emulate that.

How about we talk about the CEO golden parachutes? Talk about a waste of money. That system is broken.

@cazzie I own a small business whose income is totally dependent on my own efforts and the excellent support of two employees, so you will get no argument from me about golden parachutes. Also no argument about the way government runs schools. Sounds like a good reason to take the schools away from the government.

@cazzie what does a CEO’s golden parachute have to do with a teacher’s union? What elected officials have the right in Wisconsin to fire public school teachers at whim? I had never heard that before. How interesting.

@bkcunningham @cazzie Nor Have I ever heard of any state where elected officials could fire teachers.

@plethora So, we should go backwards and see that there is not free education anymore?

and I never said that they could fire public servants at whim, I said they should NOT be able to.

@cazzie Education is not free, especially when it is being run through the coffers of government, which has far more constituents to serve than the student.

@plethora The founding fathers disagreed with you, since they started the whole “Public education in the US” thing.

Apparently, public education, while not free, is essentially “worthless”, judging by some of the comments here. @plethora‘s valid point has been missed entirely.

@tedd Please give me details on the founding fathers starting the whole public education in the US thing. It was not written into the Constitution or the Bill of Rights. Public education began in Massachusetts way before the Declaration of Independence was even written.

The founding fathers (or more specifically the first few congresses and presidents) passed a lot of legislation to fund or kick start public schools (both at the federal and state level). Thomas Jefferson in particular was very devoted to this cause, writing the Public Education Bill for Virginia and pushing the cause when he became president.

@tedd Notwithstanding, education is still not free. It costs somebody something. Running the cost through the government coffers produces a wholely different kind of education than the genuine kind of free education, at a higher cost.

It would be decidedly misleading to take our public “education” and even begin to compare it with the intents of the early proponents of genuine education.

Should you wish to do so, let’s start with the disciplines actually taught in those early schools.

@plethora Hey I’ll be the first to agree that our public education system needs a lot of work….... But regardless of the cost, it being offered for free and it being a better education than much (obviously not all) of the world…...is one of the things that makes our country so great and keeps our country in the #1 spot.

@tedd; as far as education goes, we lost the number 1 spot a long time ago.

@Judi Right you are….in spades

@Judi I meant #1 as a country, not education. Yah we lost that title a while ago… (if we ever had it to begin with).

But there is no arguing that we still are one of the most educated countries on the planet.