←back to thread

95 points gmays | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
anon291 ◴[] No.41084545[source]
Okay... That'll fund like what.. An hour of governance?

Why more Americans Are not mad at the complete waste of our tax money is beyond me

For a billion dollars, other countries are successfully building entire transit systems, high speed rails, other infrastructure, or running massive welfare programs.

We should be getting so much more.

replies(5): >>41084564 #>>41084574 #>>41084625 #>>41084787 #>>41084828 #
s1artibartfast ◴[] No.41084828[source]
It is extremely clear why when you look at the outlays. [1] 75%+ of revenue is spent on welfare of various kinds.

https://www.cbo.gov/publication/59727

replies(1): >>41084933 #
bobmcnamara ◴[] No.41084933[source]
Where are you seeing that? Or are you counting taxpayer funded and taxpayer paying programs as welfare?
replies(1): >>41086681 #
s1artibartfast ◴[] No.41086681[source]
im counting everything. If the question is "what do we get for 4.5 trillion in taxes, and 6 trillion is spending", the answer is largely "welfare programs".
replies(2): >>41088525 #>>41089021 #
bobmcnamara ◴[] No.41089021[source]
It's also one of the largest revenues, and in most countries non-means tested, self funded programs wouldn't be considered welfare. It's been this was since the 30s and only recently have the terms been spun in the US as some wonky wHoA SaY-NO-To-CoMmUniSm!
replies(1): >>41089292 #
s1artibartfast ◴[] No.41089292{3}[source]
I'm not really interested in debating different definitions. The point stands that the discretionary budget for building and maintaining public infrastructure is a small part of government, with the vast majority going to alleviating the hardships of poverty.
replies(1): >>41089676 #
1. bobmcnamara ◴[] No.41089676{4}[source]
Your point is senselessly blunt without context, doubly so with incorrect context.