A recent news article reports “The ratio of government handouts to wages and salaries in the United States is now at an all-time high. According to TrimTabs Investment Research, government handouts have reached a level that is equivalent to 35 percent of all wages and salaries in the United States. Considering the fact that this figure was only 21 percent back in the year 2000 and only 10 percent back in 1960 that is very frightening. The sad truth is that today the American people are more dependent on direct government payments than they ever have been before. What this does is that it takes formerly independent Americans and transforms them into “sheeple” and pets of the government. Today we have tens of millions of Americans that eagerly await the crumbs that the federal government tosses them each month. This is one reason why our national debt is exploding, but our politicians like this system because it enables them to buy votes.”

I don’t mind helping working families who have fallen on hard times (and a large number of Whites would be employed if their jobs were not stolen by quota-hires or outsourced to China thanks to certain traitors in Congress). A huge percentage of government hand outs go to multi-generational minority parasites, who should have been sterilized in the 1970s so we wouldn’t be burdened with millions of their descendants with their 70 point IQs.

35 percent of our wages go to hand outs, and another 18 percent goes to pay for debt, which has accumulated because we kept paying for hand outs when we couldn’t afford them. Our politicians also squandered a trillion dollars on unnecessary wars in Iraq and Afghanistan based on a terrorist attack that was an “inside job” and rumors of WMDs that were all lies.

Instead of giving unemployed Blacks and Latinos free apartments in cities like Los Angeles, I’d like to see the government put them in tent cities alongside a railroad line in New Mexico and just bring them excess farm produce every couple days. We could reduce welfare, Section 8 housing and food stamp spending by 99 percent.

This may sound a little extreme, but isn’t the government taking 53 percent of your wages to give to people who become a bigger burden every year a little more extreme? Besides we’ll have to do this eventually. The fact that we’ve built up so much debt so quickly shows that we can’t afford the current hand out programs.

It should be a privilege to live in a city like L.A. –reserved for people who can pay their own way.

this is so much mixed misinformation, I hardly know where to start

how about facts:

quota hiring is illegal, unless specifically mandated by a JUDGE as corrective measure to PROVEN past discrimination


no adult in america has an IQ of 70, whatever race they are, unless they are clinically retarded


those HAND OUTS come from a fund that was and will also be contributed to by those who are the recipients (so noone is taking from me to give to someone else, they are taking from EVERYONE to keep funds on hand in case ANY of us needs help)


welfare has already been reduced in the form of reform, which REQUIRES work related activity to receive assistance, that comes at NO COST to those companies that participate in the programs and pays an equivalant of less than half the minimum wage in 'handouts'

there is also a growing ELDERLY population which saw their retirements and IRA's ERADICATED in the past one or two decade who are adding to the numbers who need 'handouts'

What a bunch of white racist garbage!!!

First off the welfare rolls and foodstamps go to mostly whites since our population in this country is mostly white.

Only ignorant folks are stupid enough to buy into this garbage.

I hope there is only one on this site in that predicament.

Dragoness, you read my mind. I fully agree with your sentiment.

I would further add that my federal taxes typically are between 15% and 25%, including FICA and Medicare.

Secondly, what the author of the article doesn't state is what he considers hand-outs. Bank and auto bail-outs? Social Security? Medicare and Medicaid? How about government subsidies and grants? Foreign aid? Does this percentage factor in the current rise of unemployment? How about prevailing wage contracts where a person can earn perhaps $6-$8 more per hour than his employer normally pays him? There are all sorts of ways to skew the numbers to favor a bias. Hell, if someone wanted to be extreme, he could claim free public education is nothing but a hand-out because it is offered to everyone in this country, regardless of race, ethnicity, or income level.

The article clearly has an agenda, hence why it does not mention specifics, offering numbers, generalizations, and accusations instead. It even subtly proposes that there is a hidden political conspiracy. It's designed to be a play on ignorance, and the OP seems to have allowed the author to succeed in his case.

Ummmm, go join your buddy David Duke. While you're at it, join Hitler and David Lynch.

You're saying that there should be no whites in these 'tent cities'? Because you think that white's aren't sponging off of what was MEANT to HELP, or you actually live in a closet and are really THAT much misinformed?

I'll agree that government 'hand-outs' are GREATLY abused and needs to stop. However, I'd like to see actual numbers on how and who they are distributed to. I guarantee that there's just as many whites as blacks and hispanics taking advantage of the system. Whether it be food stamps, Sect 8, unemployment, etc. I personally know 100's of whites who feed off of the government every way that they can. Physically and mentally able to, but have hardly worked a day in their life. Living in nice houses/apartments, driving new cars, flat screen TV's all over, etc. Many of which who are baby factories and collect even more every time they 'pop one out'. Sure, some of the people do work, but part time and have become experts on loopholes. I have no problem with people receiving assistance if they TRULY need it, but there really does have to be more regulation and investigation into the people who receive/apply for it. I wouldn't mind being one of the people who do investigate it!

I have to agree with everyone about the overtones of racism, I hope the OP was just blowing off steam and posted without reading what he wrote.

The only way I can see 35% of taxes as a handout is if you include SS in that figure. I am sorry I am receiving such a handout for something I paid into all my life from the age of 15. I guess I wasn't supposed to use it!

I agree some abuse the system and we need to be more careful, but moving folks to tents and such is a little radical to me.

I'd much rather put them to work building their own city. They could learn valuale skills to make a living and be able to move elsewhere when done if they pleased. And of course not just blacks and latinos as the OP seems to be suggesting.

Well if you included social security and Medicare shouldn't it be more than 35%. Aren't those 2 things alone close to 40%?

40% of what?

Yes, 40% of revenues the Fed gets.

the op article mixed the terms , talking about percentage of taxes and switching to percentage of wages,,,

thats what was inconsistent, we all know what percentage of our wage we pay,,lol, few are paying anywhere near 58 percent..lol

Nobody pays 58%. The rich pay about 17% because most of their income is capital gains at 15%. The rest of us pay about 21%.

That shows how stupid it is to inject some form of racial component into a pretty serious issue.

I think you can read this CNBC article and get the gist of the problem without the racial divisions.


Welfare State: Handouts Make Up One-Third of U.S. Wages


Government payouts—including Social Security, Medicare and unemployment insurance—make up more than a third of total wages and salaries of the U.S. population, a record figure that will only increase if action isn’t taken before the majority of Baby Boomers enter retirement.

Even as the economy has recovered, social welfare benefits make up 35 percent of wages and salaries this year, up from 21 percent in 2000 and 10 percent in 1960, according to TrimTabs Investment Research using Bureau of Economic Analysis data.

“The U.S. economy has become alarmingly dependent on government stimulus,” said Madeline Schnapp, director of Macroeconomic Research at TrimTabs, in a note to clients. “Consumption supported by wages and salaries is a much stronger foundation for economic growth than consumption based on social welfare benefits.”

The economist gives the country two stark choices. In order to get welfare back to its pre-recession ratio of 26 percent of pay, “either wages and salaries would have to increase $2.3 trillion, or 35 percent, to $8.8 trillion, or social welfare benefits would have to decline $500 billion, or 23 percent, to $1.7 trillion,” she said.

“You’ve got to cut back government spending and the Republicans will run on this platform leading up to next year’s election,” said Joe Terranova, Chief Market Strategist for Virtus Investment Partners and a “Fast Money” trader.

Beyond the money

Terranova noted some sort of opt out for social security or even raising the retirement age.

But the country may not be ready for these tough choices, even though economists like Schnapp say something will have to be done to avoid a significant economic crisis.

A Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll released last week showed that less than a quarter of Americans supported making cuts to Social Security or Medicare in order to reign in the mounting budget deficit.

Those poll numbers may be skewed by a demographic shift the likes of which the nation has never seen. Only this year has the first round of baby boomers begun collecting Medicare benefits—and here comes 78 million more.

Social welfare benefits have increased by $514 billion over the last two years, according to TrimTabs figures, in part because of measures implemented to fight the financial crisis. Government spending normally takes on a larger part of the spending pie during economic calamities but how can the country change this make-up with the root of the crisis (housing) still on shaky ground, benchmark interest rates already cut to zero, and a demographic shift that calls for an increase in subsidies?


http://www.cnbc.com/id/41969508

I don't see where the article mentioned the expanded unemployment wage benefits and how that affected the ratio. It would be interesting.

I'd give back 5% of my SS BUT they need to raise retirement ages too and flatten the tax rate so all pay an equal share out of their piece of pie! Of course the ones close would be grandfathered like last time?

The do both of these and SS takebacks have to go against the debt!