Seattle wants to spend $5M for homeless tent

[lenny flank]

The US has never spent a trillion on homeless people. The only thing we spend a trillion on is blowing people up by dropping bombs on them. "Helping the homeless" is, was, and likely always will be a minuscule part of the budget. As a society, we long ago made the decision that we simply don't give a shit what happens to the homeless, so long as they're not cluttering up our sidewalks.

 

[John61CT]

unless the bottom falls out of this false economy, there is no way to actually create permanent dwellings for thousands of individuals.

100% untrue.

Where there's a will there's a way.

Fact is, compassion for the weakest most vulnerable of our "communities" is just a very very low priority for the average American, not to metion the average millionaire politician.

 

[QinReno]

The US has never spent a trillion on homeless people.

Not homeless, rather handouts to the "poor". There are only 2-3-million homeless, but 40-million ranked as poor in this country. There are about 80 gommint programs, Medicaid is the most costly. You can see the breakdown here.
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_programs_in_the_United_States
  "TOTAL cost in (billions) (2011)  $927"

You can see the growth in spending over the years. Integrate under the curve and it's close to $25-T. That curve does *not* include SS and Medicare, which are basically self-funded.
- https://atlassociety.org/sites/default/files/total-welfare-spending-obama.jpg

Something is just wrong here, when they bitch about a couple of million $$$ here and there.

 

[lenny flank]

Meh, all of those "handouts to the poor", in total, cost less than ONE SQUADRON of F-35 fighter-bombers.

The argument "we can't afford it, boo hoo hoo" is silly. The US is the wealthiest society that has ever existed in all of human history. Richer than the Roman Empire. Richer than the Spanish Empire. Richer than the British Empire. Richer than all three of them put together.

We can well afford to help the poor and homeless. We simply don't WANT to.

 

[QinReno]

It's $25-Trillion over the years, not $25-Billion.

 

[lenny flank]

We spend more on our military than the entire rest of the world put together.

"Handouts to the poor" is a drop in the bucket.

We can afford it. We just don't want to do it.

 

[John61CT]

Ayn Rand's Objectivism as an actual political-economic philosophy, now that is funny.

Not.

 

[QinReno]

Look at the numbers, Lenny, it's $1-Trillion a year, which **is** comparable to defense spending. $1-T is not a drop in the bucket. Obviously the problem is not the amount of money, but how it is allocated.

 

[John61CT]

We spend more on our military than the entire rest of the world put together.

not actually true, but close

Of course add in the black budgets, surveillance and "homeland" apparatus domestically would bump it up a lot.

Spending graph, from radical left wing Forbes

 

[lenny flank]

^^ There are also the costs of dealing with veterans, as well as that part of the interest on the national debt that came from financing the "War on Terror".

 

[QinReno]

Ayn Rand's Objectivism as an actual political-economic philosophy, now that is funny.

Not.

If you've ever read Atlas Shrugged, you know her idea was that the "so-called" competent movers and shakers and builders, and the rich, should go live in a gated community in the Colorado mountains, and let the system representing the other 99% "collapse under its own weight". Selfishness is Good to paraphrase Gordon Gecko.

 

[John61CT]

Hopefully also includes our contributions financing the militaries of Israel, Egypt, Pakistan, Jordan etc

 

[QinReno]

^^ There are also the costs of dealing with veterans, 

That's about $200-billion of the total annual $1-T cost of the military. Prior to 2001, the VA cost only $40-B a year.

 

[lenny flank]

 

[lenny flank]

If you've ever read Atlas Shrugged, you know her idea was that the competent movers and shakers and builders, and the rich, should go live in a gated community in the Colorado mountains, and let the system representing the other 99% collapse under its own weight. Selfishness is Good to paraphrase Gordon Gecko.

The rich would quickly learn two things: (1) they're not as independent as they think they are, and (2) they're not as indispensable as they think they are.

I prefer the old Roman "secessio", in which all the "commoners" would pack up and leave town, allowing the aristocrats to do everything for themselves. Since the aristocrats can't even do their own laundry in the morning, they were crying within days to have all the commoners come back.

 

[John61CT]

Selfishness is Good to paraphrase Gordon Gecko.

Greed is good.

Yes, was meant to horrify as sarcasm, spoof on criminal outlaws and bandits like Ivan Boesky,

not to be taken as a motivational HowTo for the moral bankruptcy of our entire civilization.

 

[QinReno]

That pie chart indicates that Safety Net alone is 9% or about $300-B, not counting the VA which is in the 8% piece of pie.

The pie chart doesn't break it down properly, the way the wikipedia page does. Both SS and Medicare are largely or wholly self-funding, and the money for these two programs does **not** come out of the general funds. Medicare (self-funded) is lumped with Medicaid (total handout). A major problem is, SS and Medicare get lumped together with everything else, so it's easy to flim-flam people about "spending" priorities.

But if you add up $400-B for Medicaid and $300-B for Safety Net, plus the rest coming from the States, you get the $1-Trillion right there in your chart.

 

[QinReno]

The rich would quickly learn two things: (1) they're not as independent as they think they are, and (2) they're not as indispensable as they think they are.

Well, it was obviously meant as a Philosophical Manifesto to fan the egos of the rich.

 

[lenny flank]

OK, if you wanna add State spending on "handouts to the poor", then that gets compared to the total of all the rest of the State spending--which again makes it a mere drop in the bucket.

Oddly, most other nations, with nothing near the economy we have, are able to deal with these issues much better than we do.

We could well afford to spend enough to deal with all of our social problems. We simply don't want to.

 

[lenny flank]

not to be taken as a motivational HowTo for the moral bankruptcy of our entire civilization.

The oldest task of philosophy: to attempt to turn selfish greed into a social virtue.