9 Fucking Cents out of every dollar the Fed spends...

[busterbrown]

Is what republicans call “Excessive Entitlement Spending”. Money that is spent on the poor who can’t
help themselves...Holy Fuck! What are we.”a European Nation”.
Every selfish cheap mother fucker who claims that this 9 cents is ruining the country should take the below graph and shove it up their collective asses!!



BY Esoteric.. A retired military Blogger..

I HAVE BEEN MEANING TO WRITE this hub for awhile but kept forgetting, I hate old age. Recently a report on CNN's Cafferty's File that brought to mind again. An e-mail sent in based on one of Cafferty's questions regarding raising taxes on the wealthy got a response that went something like this: "Why should the money the wealthy worked hard for be transferred to the poor, who hardly work at all." Actually, it wasn't that cut-and-dried but that was the implication. Notice there was nothing in the response about helping fellow American's brought low because of the unethical conduct of many of those same wealthy tax payers. But I digress; that is fodder for a different hub.

I hope you understand, and just to be clear, the title to this Hub is a bit of sarcasm directed at those who don't believe in the Christian maxim of being your brother's keeper. Back on track, I took a look at the 2012 Federal Budget actuals for 2010 to calculate what percentage of your taxes go toward which parts of the budget. The table below presents my findings which are show how many cents of your tax dollar go what expenditure area.

REVENUE SOURCE OR EXPENDITURE AREA
DISTRIBUTION OF YOUR TAX $$



ORIGINAL 2010 ACTUALS
12/12/2012 CORRECTION
2011 ACTUALS
Income and Payroll Tax
-$1.00
-$1.00
-$1.00
Interest on the Debt
$ .06
$0.06
$0.06
Security Programs
$ .24
$0.21
$0.21
non-Welfare Related Social Secuity
$ .20
$0.24
$0.23
non-Welfare Related Medicare
$ .13
$0.13
$0.14
TARP (returned funds)
-$ .03
-$0.03
-$0.04
non-Security Programs
$ .24
$0.27
$0.27
Mandatory Welfare Related Programs
$ .09
$0.12
$0.13
You Should Be Able To See The Obvious ...

... but I have some remarks anyway.

I made a slight math error (subtracting 3 cents instead of adding it) in the original calculation. For consistancy, in case you are a returning reader, I left the original numbers intact. Further, I found a better table that let me categorize things a bit better, which accounts for the other changes.
If you consider TARP being considered a form of welfare, and most do, then only 9 cents out of every tax dollars goes toward providing welfare services to those who can't provide for themselves. If you don't, the figure increases all the way up to ... 12 cents
The other $ .88 or 88% of your taxes go support the operations of the government or defense. You ultimately get the Social Security and Medicare back.
Individual income taxes only provide 25 cents of the revenue dollar needed to fund the 2010 expenditures. 24 cents from payroll taxes, 12 cents came for other revenue sources and the last 39 cents was borrowed.
In 2011, the distribution is 30 cents from income taxes, 22 cents from payroll taxes, 11 cents from other sources, and 37 cents was borrowed.
Betcha' haven't seen it presented that way before, have you? I just love being a cost analyst. Here you thought your tax dollar was such a big deal, lol. To tell the truth, I was floored when I finished my spreadsheet, I had no idea; but it sure does open the door to a whole lot of new opportunities for discussion and lines of logic, doesn't it. (Does anybody know if you put question marks after rhetorical questions?)

I am going to have to think about my discovery (about an hour ago). But, in the meantime, what should be obvious to all, and I mean all, even the Conservatives who complain the loudest, is that the amount of your taxes paid each year that go toward helping the temporarily helpless is pathetically small! To listen to the Conservative rhetoric regarding this issue however, you would think that if we could somehow cut this portion of expenditures out ot the budget, you could cut the tax rate in half; not.

This isn't the hub, of course, to get into the moral aspects of whether or not the wealthy should or should not contribute more of their disposable income than those who have no disposable income but, to only point out that if their taxes were increased most of it would be used to support programs such has Defense, Intelligence, Dept of State, Homeland Security, and the like. The portion going to welfare is almost unnoticeable and certainly not worth the sky-is-fallng rhetoric that accompanies any mention of a tax hike on the wealthy.

You remember the old phrase "Hey mister, can you spare dime?" Well, after 100 years of inflation the best that can be mustered today is "Hey mister, can you spare six cents?" Says something about American society, doesn't

[Mnemosyne]

1. Very enlightening, buster, thanks! K&R nt

[My Esoteric]

2. Copyrighted Material

While I appreciate the vote of confidence in using my copyrighted Hub as yours (and almost giving me the credit ... it is My Esoteric), I would ask for two things in the future.
1) Ask me first.
2) Please use much milder profanity. The words you use, while it is certainly your right to use them, diminish both my work and your point. What I mean by that is you sound, first like an extremist and second, like someone from the far-Right.

[cyberswede]

5. Admin contact info

Here:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=contact

Or you could alert on your OP above - the alert message will go straight to Admins.

[My Esoteric]

7. Thank you

Thank you.

[uppityperson]

6. You can edit or self delete this 2 year old post

The post is 2 yrs old, maybe you forgot? You can edit it to add credit since there was a reply to it or self delete it. If you didn't post it, contact admin by alerting on the OP and sending a note to them, by DU pm or by email.

[My Esoteric]

4. Copyrightes Material

I don't know, Hubpages simply notified me of it and gave me the link. A different hub was copied to a different site, w/o any attempted at attribution. The same one was used a third time, but this time it only supplied a timeline and subjects, the narrative for each was not mine; so I suppose that is alright, just wish they had listed the source.