People buy food from public sector supermarkets and other public sector businesses, clothes from public sector businesses, pay rent to private landlords, pay for public sector energy and water companies.
How does welfare money not circulate in the public sector?
Read my post again.
I never said that money doesn't circulate in the pulic sector. I said money is taken out of the private sector.
The private sector is people's pockets. The public sector is the economy in general.
If a robber takes your money the money still circulates in the public sector. But it does you no good.
Social charges are taken out of the private sector. In other words from people who work. Some of the money is then given back to other people as various forms of welfare. But a lot is also used to run the big expensive, corrupt, and wasteful social bureaucracy.
Of course all that money, no matter who gets it, remains in the "public" sector (the economy in general). But it is taken out of the "private" sector in that it is no longer in the possession of the people who did the work that created the value attatched to the money in the first place.
Thus, the private sector has reduced capacity to invest in new activity that could generate more jobs. And less incentive to do so because the increased costs make it less likely that their investment will be profitable.
So what happens in an overly socialized economy is that a lot of the capital leaves the country to seek more profitable opportunities and the remaining companies find themselves having to bear an ever greater share of an ever increasing social burden. Big Brother then steps in to seize and take over industry and it evolves deeper and deeper into soviet style collectivism. Everybody is on welfare, even the people who work. Of course nobody is motivated to work very hard and productivity and quality go down the tubes.
The money remains in the "public" sector but the "private" sector dies.
When you retire, instead of a monthly Social Security check you'll get SS shares that you can either sell immediately at whatever the market price happens to be, or you can save them up and sell them later when the price goes up.
Two moral values be there that can keep a country strong. Support for what is right. Disdain for what is wrong. As long as these two values are respected things go well. But when they are neglected everything will go to hell.
I agree that there's no link between corruption and race or religion and that even the best society has bad apples.
But there are indeed societies that have become so thoroughly corrupt that falsehood has become the basic rule rather than the exception. Of course they still hypocritically pretend to promote good values, but they don't practice what they preach.
Do you mean the fake sort of terrorism where a few carefully selected patsies get blamed for staged violence, or the real sort of terrorism in which entire populations of innocents get bombed in their own homes in order to justify the fact that trillions of dollars are being stolen from taxpayers by corporate entities in the guise of massive military/industrial projects.
Of course the two sorts of terrorism are entirely co-dependant. You can't have one, you can't have none, you can't have one without the other.
Fake terrorism keeps the sheeple compliant. Real terrorism transforms them into wool and mutton.
As it turns out, the whole thing was staged. They are professional actors and the same girl was on a different episode of the same program with the same car at the same pump of the same gas station a couple of years earlier. And it was certainly staged that time as well.
You can't believe anything you see on TV nowadays. Everything is staged, from the cartoons to the news, to the documentaries, to the supposed candid cameras. They just don't do genuine reality anymore.
Yes, but I don't think we can really blame "the Kosovans".
Kosovo is not independent. It is a protectorate entirely controlled by puppets whose loyalty is to US oil companies.
Way back in the days of Reagan, Bush Sr., and Clinton, The US was already at work engineering the breakup of Yugoslavia by funding and arming nationalist movements in the various Balkan republics (on the condition that they declare independence from Belgrade).
The US intentionally created the war to break up Yugoslavia in order to prevent the planned trans-Balkan pipeline project that would have created a strong economic co-dependence between Europe and Russia.
US companies wanted to replace that pipeline project with another almost identical one called the Albanian-Macedonian-Bulgarian Oil Pipeline which would be built and controlled by US companies and guarded by US military bases.
So the Balkan wars were needed as a justification for the invasion and occupation of the region.
Because, like in a lot of other cases, the US has brought in covert mercenary fighters from other countries (in this case mostly Afghans and Kurds) , armed them, trained them, and instructed them to conduct a terrorist type war that targets not only the government but also civilians. Then, as always, the US blames the government for the bloodshed and calls for regime change.
If they thought they could get away with it the western powers would form a military coalition and invade the country and to set up a puppet dictator as they have done in other countries. But in the case of Syria, countries such as Iran, China, and Russia would come to Syria's aid if the US invaded. And the US is extremely vulnerable economically. So the west can not overtly participate in the terrorist campaign but can only continue to covertly finance the "contras".
- About 2 million dead men, women, and children. - A ruined economy. - A shattered infrastructure. - Tons of depleted uranium dust that will keep on killing people in Iraq for a million years. - A permanent hatred for the US and its allies. - Several trillion dollars worth of wasted time, effort, and material.
RayfromUSA Forum Posts (6,611)
RE: Does welfare promote laziness?
[quote=jac379Where does that welfare money go?
People buy food from public sector supermarkets and other public sector businesses, clothes from public sector businesses, pay rent to private landlords, pay for public sector energy and water companies.
How does welfare money not circulate in the public sector?
Read my post again.
I never said that money doesn't circulate in the pulic sector.
I said money is taken out of the private sector.
The private sector is people's pockets.
The public sector is the economy in general.
If a robber takes your money the money still circulates in the public sector. But it does you no good.
Social charges are taken out of the private sector. In other words from people who work. Some of the money is then given back to other people as various forms of welfare. But a lot is also used to run the big expensive, corrupt, and wasteful social bureaucracy.
Of course all that money, no matter who gets it, remains in the "public" sector (the economy in general). But it is taken out of the "private" sector in that it is no longer in the possession of the people who did the work that created the value attatched to the money in the first place.
Thus, the private sector has reduced capacity to invest in new activity that could generate more jobs. And less incentive to do so because the increased costs make it less likely that their investment will be profitable.
So what happens in an overly socialized economy is that a lot of the capital leaves the country to seek more profitable opportunities and the remaining companies find themselves having to bear an ever greater share of an ever increasing social burden. Big Brother then steps in to seize and take over industry and it evolves deeper and deeper into soviet style collectivism. Everybody is on welfare, even the people who work. Of course nobody is motivated to work very hard and productivity and quality go down the tubes.
The money remains in the "public" sector but the "private" sector dies.