moonbattery logo

Feb 18 2012

Voting for a Living Pays Much Better Than Working

What is the point of the working class working in an entitlement state like the USSA? It’s mostly a matter of pride, a vestigial remnant left over from when we were Americans. Within a generation or two this will die out completely because it no longer makes sense, as this graphic from Zero Hedge illustrates:


You can bring in about as much money working one week per month at minimum wage as you can slaving away all year for a $60K salary.

As The Right Scoop notes,

And this is in Mississippi, not California. Who knows how much more they are getting there.

Again it is revealed that the objective of socialism is to keep the rich rich, the poor poor, and to squeeze everyone in between out of existence.

If the difference in economic benefit between earning $3,625 and $60,000 is $2,736, people will inevitably ask themselves, why bother? They can just sit home and watch moonbatty rubbish on TV, so long as they don’t forget to vote Democrat to keep the debt-financed gravy train rolling along.

On a tip from Shawn.

8 Responses to “Voting for a Living Pays Much Better Than Working”

  1. Ghost of FA Hayek says:

    If the difference in economic benefit between earning $3,625 and $60,000 is $2,736, people will inevitably ask themselves, why bother?
    Because it is the net result of “shared sacrifice”

    BTW Joe the plumber was ridiculed for asking this very question

  2. IslandLifer says:

    The impending doom of the middle class hard working American. Steal from them, give it to the poor. Steal from them, give it to the rich.

  3. IslandLifer says:

    Exactly Ghost. I guess we are the fools.

  4. Falconsword says:

    One of the founders said our republic will only last as long as until the people realize they can vote themselves goodies from the treasury. Well, the game is up. My estimate is we’ll pass less than 50% paying taxes at this point, and there is no going back. Been a nice republic while we had it. Yay, democracy! Time to reap what you sow.

  5. Bill T says:

    As the pain at the pump goes up, bathhouse barry screws us again!
    Obama’s giveaway: Oil-rich islands to Russia

  6. octa bright says:

    A system that can not be sustained will not be sustained. In the very near future the unproductive people will not have the benefits because the society will not produce enough to grant them. The productive enterprises will go under ground and the feds can either cut back of hyper inflate. If they cut back, riots. If they hyper inflate, better learn to goose step.

  7. big-pete says:

    Can services not rendered or used be considered income if the beneficiary does not receive cash compensation for the benefits not used? I find the implication that a family bringing in 3K cash a year somehow ends up with 30K cash in discretionary income. Maybe I am missing something?

    Bottom line. I’m no bleeding heart. Some people need help. Other need a kick in the ass. But let’s be honest about real, spendable income vs. potential benefits for specific services that cannot be translated into other goods or services.

  8. Joe says:

    Well, there’s always this:

    People find ways around those limitations sometimes.

Alibi3col theme by Themocracy