Brad DeLong and Theories of the moocher class
Brad DeLong notices the vagaries of the theories of the mooschers class:
Now politicians like Paul Ryan who used to say things like:
Right now about 60 percent of the American people get more benefits in dollar value from the federal government than they pay back in taxes. So we’re going to a majority of takers versus makers…
are saying, instead:
No one is suggesting that what we call our earned entitlements–entitlements you pay for, like payroll taxes for Medicare and Social Security–are putting you in a ‘taker’ category. No one would suggest that whatsoever.”
How long will it be before the likes of Veronique de Rugy stop denouncing Social Security, Medicare, Unemployment Insurance, etc. as programs that have turned us into “a nation of takers”, and stop denouncing these programs beneficiaries as “moochers”?
It is in some ways very odd. It used to be that critics of the welfare state pointed to high net marginal tax rates and argued that they had high deadweight losses. Sometimes they had a point. Then, after bipartisan reforms, we got to a point where there were few high net marginal tax rates large enough to induce large deadweight losses.
And then, in the blink of an eye, the problem became not public-finance deadweight losses but, rather, the moocher class, the nation of takers, etc.
(Dan here…the Veronique de Rugy quote is over at Brad DeLong’s site)
For those who may be unfamiliar with the names Veronique de Rugy or the Mercatus Center where she is a “senior research fellow” here is a description of that Center from Wikipedia. “The Mercatus Center was founded by Rich Fink as the Center for the Study of Market Processes at Rutgers University. After the Koch family provided more than thirty million dollars[2] to George Mason University, the Center moved to George Mason in the mid-1980s before assuming its current name in 1999. The Mercatus Center is a 501(c)3 non-profit and does not receive support from George Mason University or any federal, state or local government, but rather is entirely funded through donations, including some from companies like Koch Industries[3] and ExxonMobil,[4] individual donors and foundations. As of 2011, the Center shows that 58% of its funding comes from foundations, 40% from individuals, and 2% from businesses”
So she is on the payroll of an organization founded and funded by corporate America and the reactionary right as best represented by Koch brothers cash. It’s always encouraging to know that someone is well paid for the ideas they are able to support through research.
Thank you Jack for the background. It fills out the narrative.
To deny that we are a nation of takers is to be in denial.
A painful truth isn’t any less true.
Yeah Pete,
A nation of takers that happens to produce $14 trillion in goods and services a year.
Just how does the economic profession explain that?
Peter
I don’t think I like you very much. Fortunately there is no chance you will realize the error of your ways, so I don’t have to try to be nice to you.
Perhaps you’d care to try to explain just exactly what it means that “we are a nation of takers.”
Do you mean that we “formed a more perfect union” in “for the general welfare” and we “take” that which we created for that purpose?
are are you claiming that god gives people who “make money” a right to keep it against the claims of the country that made it possible?
that there is no benefit to those high earners that comes from providing government services and even “welfare” when it is needed?
OR are you simply one of those people too stupid to understand that workers pay for their own Social Security? And what happens to your “nation of takers” when you adjust the equation for that?
In case Peter is still around
and not off admiring himself in his favorite mirror
I am by no means one of those who says “tax the rich” to solve every problem, but that “nation of takers” is a sign of a damaged mind and an evil soul.
I do not like you Peter.
well, peter is off.
i wonder if his nation of takers includes disabled vets.
or the children of poor people who grow up to join the army to defend the children of the rich.
Dale
You’re being harsh in regards to Peter. I can certainly say that I am a “taker” and proud of it. I take a pay check each work for the work that I do. I take a Social Security check each month in return for paying into the system for the past fifty years. And I continue to pay into that system because I still work. I take a NY state pension check each month because I earned a retirement benefit, small though it is, by working at sub standard wages for 24 years. Take, take take because I earned, earned and earned some more.
And while I take what I have earned I am not reluctant to see those who have been less fortunate than I take what little the government allows for their survival. Does the ass Peter understand that the median income of American workers is barely $30,000? It is the corporate elite that keep taking far beyond what they earn. They take from their workers by paying substandard wages.
Jack
i agree with you. can’t see how that makes me harsh with respect to Peter.
i only wish i could hurt his feelings enough for him to take another look at himself.
I was being a bit sarcastic about being too harsh because you were not being harsh enough to a clown who can only aspersions without factual corroboration.