Buried deep on the website of the U.S. Census Bureau is a number every American citizen, and especially those entrusted with public office, should know. It is 86,429,000.
That is the number of Americans who in 2012 got up every morning and went to work — in the private sector — and did it week after week after week.
These are the people who built America, and these are the people who can sustain it as a free country. The liberal media have not made them famous like the polar bear, but they are truly a threatened species.
It is not a rancher with a few hundred head of cattle that is attacking their habitat, nor an energy company developing a fossil fuel. It is big government and its primary weapon — an ever-expanding welfare state.
First, let's look at the basic taxonomy of the full-time, year-round American worker.
In 2012, according to the Census Bureau, approximately 103,087,000 people worked full-time, year-round in the United States. "A full-time, year-round worker is a person who worked 35 or more hours per week (full time) and 50 or more weeks during the previous calendar year (year round)," said the Census Bureau. "For school personnel, summer vacation is counted as weeks worked if they are scheduled to return to their job in the fall."
Of the 103,087,000 full-time, year-round workers, 16,606,000 worked for the government. That included 12,597,000 who worked for state and local government and 4,009,000 who worked for the federal government.
The 86,429,000 Americans who worked full-time, year-round in the private sector, included 77,392,000 employed as wage and salary workers for private-sector enterprises and 9,037,000 who worked for themselves. (There were also approximately 52,000 who worked full-time, year-round without pay in a family enterprise.)
At first glance, 86,429,000 might seem like a healthy population of full-time private-sector workers. But then you need to look at what they are up against.
The Census Bureau also estimates the size of the benefit-receiving population.
This population, too, falls into two broad categories. The first includes those who receive benefits for public services they performed or in exchange for payroll taxes they dutifully paid their entire working lives. Among these, for example, are those receiving veteran's benefits, those on unemployment and those getting Medicare and Social Security.
The second category includes those who get "means-tested" government benefits — or welfare. These include, for example, those who get Medicaid, food stamps, Supplemental Security Income, public housing, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, and Women, Infants Children.
Let's examine this second category first, which the Census Bureau reports as "anyone residing in a household in which one or more people received benefits from the program."
In the last quarter of 2011, according to the Census Bureau, approximately 82,457,000 people lived in households where one or more people were on Medicaid. 49,073,000 lived in households were someone got food stamps. 23,228,000 lived in households where one or more got WIC. 20,223,000 lived in households where one or more got SSI. 13,433,000 lived in public or government-subsidized housing.
Of course, it stands to reason that some people lived in households that received more than one welfare benefit at a time. To account for this, the Census Bureau published a neat composite statistic: There were 108,592,000 people in the fourth quarter of 2011 who lived in a household that included people on "one or more means-tested program."
Those 108,592,000 outnumbered the 86,429,000 full-time private-sector workers who inhabited the United States in 2012 by almost 1.3 to 1.
This brings us to the first category of benefit receivers. There were 49,901,000 people receiving Social Security in the fourth quarter of 2011, and 46,440,000 receiving Medicare. There were also 5,098,000 getting unemployment compensation.
And there were also, 3,178,000 veterans receiving benefits and 34,000 veterans getting educational assistance.
All told, including both the welfare recipients and the non-welfare beneficiaries, there were 151,014,000 who "received benefits from one or more programs" in the fourth quarter of 2011. Subtract the 3,212,000 veterans, who served their country in the most profound way possible, and that leaves 147,802,000 non-veteran benefit takers.
The 147,802,000 non-veteran benefit takers outnumbered the 86,429,000 full-time private sector workers 1.7 to 1.
How much more can the 86,429,000 endure?
As more baby boomers retire, and as Obamacare comes fully online — with its expanded Medicaid rolls and federally subsidized health insurance for anyone earning less than 400 percent of the poverty level — the number of takers will inevitably expand. And the number of full-time private-sector workers might also contract.
Is it not possible someone could fall into both categories - a full time worker who also receives some type of federal benefit?
And no suggestions of how to fix the poorly defined problem?
This is an emotional hit piece to rabble rouse the likes of CC,WC, Snakeboy and TSA.
And ing link your bull and stop being embarrassed of your sources. Let me guess, fox Forbes or WSJ?
So we got the numbers of people who get up and work 86,000,000.
but...
In the last quarter of 2011, according to the Census Bureau, approximately 82,457,000 people lived in households where one or more people were on Medicaid. 49,073,000 lived in households were someone got food stamps. 23,228,000 lived in households where one or more got WIC. 20,223,000 lived in households where one or more got SSI. 13,433,000 lived in public or government-subsidized housing.?
So these are numbers given per household? Why not just count the number of people that get food stamps like workers were counted? Why not just count the number on Medicaid? So 3 kids live in a household where grandpa gets Medicaid and the parents both work. Right there you have 6 people from one household tied to Medicaid? 6 that are apart of that 82,000,000. When only ONE person is on Medicaid.
Am I really reading this blatant misuse of statistics? Seriously, I gotta be missing something. A little help over here please.
Last edited by pgardn; 04-17-2014 at 08:46 AM.
"It is not a rancher with a few hundred head of cattle that is attacking their habitat, nor an energy company developing a fossil fuel. It is big government and its primary weapon — an ever-expanding welfare state."
right-wing, boiler-plate, talking point, checkbox, VRWC/1%/UCA bull .
no mention of corporate welfare?
no mention of the avg tax paid by companies is 12% or that taxes on the super wealthy are highly regressive, stopping at about 20%?
no mention that the number of people of public assistance is so high because the jobs, good jobs, have been destroyed for profits?
etc, etc, etc.
right-wing, boiler-plate, talking point, checkbox, VRWC/1%/UCA bull .
Now that the VRWC/1%/UCA has achieved incredible wealth by not paying their fair share of taxes, the govt at all levels is in deficit, so the VRWC/1%/UCA solution is just everybody, schools, the environment, everything (so the VRWC/1%/UCA can keep their taxes low)
Go yourself
The numbers are the numbers
I posted the article without editorial comment
I'm not being "rabble roused" you arrogant little prick.
What do you think about your own post, CC?
Are government workers worthless parasites?
As a businessman, do you really believe you could do without government, that it provides nothing valuable or necessary and is the an hesis of freedom per se?
The numbers are bull . Is it possible that someone falls in both categories? A full time worker (which the author seems to love) and a person who also receives say foods stamps (which the author seems to hate). The author is pitting the two against each other, to play on your emotions, when they could in fact be the same person, but you appear to be too stupid to ferret that out.
And source your bull .
cns news. No wonder you're embarrassed to link your bull . You just love reading that confirms you biases.
denigrating, even criminalizing the poor, esp the (full time) working poor, esp the non-Euro-Americans, to justify not helping them (socialism!) is fundamental to the strategy of the oligarchs to justify them not paying their fair share of taxes.
prime example: ALL of Ryan's budgets.
are folks on public relief worthless parasites who contribute nothing to society and therefore deserve nothing?
what do you think, CC? do you have an opinion about your own OP, or are you content to hide behind its skirts like a coward?
I said no such thing.
However, the ratio of private sector workers (which produce GDP) to all others logically will continue to shrink as the baby boomers retire. I certainly plan to be receiving a big fat check every month from you guys in ten years and sucking my fair share off the medicare .
The ratio should concern you.
So we got the numbers of people who get up and work 86,000,000.
but...
In the last quarter of 2011, according to the Census Bureau, approximately 82,457,000 people lived in households where one or more people were on Medicaid. 49,073,000 lived in households were someone got food stamps. 23,228,000 lived in households where one or more got WIC. 20,223,000 lived in households where one or more got SSI. 13,433,000 lived in public or government-subsidized housing.?
So these are numbers given per household? Why not just count the number of people that get food stamps like workers were counted? Why not just count the number on Medicaid? So 3 kids live in a household where grandpa gets Medicaid and the parents both work. Right there you have 6 people from one household tied to Medicaid? 6 that are apart of that 82,000,000. When only ONE person is on Medicaid.
Am I really reading this blatant misuse of statistics? Seriously, I gotta be missing something. A little help over here please.
And again? I must be missing something? Anyone?
the public sector contributes to GDP, does it not?
Personally, I don't have time to research the raw census numbers.
If you think the article misrepresented the numbers you are certainly free to research and dispute them.
I honestly don't know. Can you give me an example?
hmmmm...
I misused GDP. "Private sector production"? "Original source of government revenue"?The monetary value of all the finished goods and services produced within a country's borders in a specific time period, though GDP is usually calculated on an annual basis. It includes all of private and public consumption, government outlays, investments and exports less imports that occur within a defined territory.
GDP = C + G + I + NX
where:
"C" is equal to all private consumption, or consumer spending, in a nation's economy
"G" is the sum of government spending
"I" is the sum of all the country's businesses spending on capital
"NX" is the nation's total net exports, calculated as total exports minus total imports. (NX = Exports - Imports)
I think you get the drift of the ratio.
government salaries and spending are per se contributions to GDP.
pretending government and government spending are economically unproductive is piffle.
maybe we need more young immigrants paying into the system. birth rate won't go up all on its own.
Agreed.
Point being, if I pay you a dollar, you then pay Fred a dollar, Fred then pays George a dollar, George then pays Mary a dollar, Mary then pays Sally a dollar....iIt's not five dollars....t's still just one dollar of value that had to be originally produced by someone...
but, barring a new wave of immigration or a e in the birth rate, the burden on younger folks will be heavy. no doubt about it.
kicking everyone off the dole and cancelling everyone's health insurance would ease that burden for sure. is that what you're for?
There is no research needed.
Read my example with grandpa. Why does ONE person count as Six?
I don't get it. 86,000,000 work. That's individuals...
And 82,000,000 live in households that are tied to Medicaid.
Why did they count the foodstamps, Medicaid, etc... To the Household BUT NOT WORKERS?
So let's say we did tie the 86,000,000 workers to a household. Let's say dad works, and mom and the two kids live with dad.
that makes 86,000,000 x 4 tied to households with a worker.
Thats 344,000,000 people tied to workers. So everything is hunky dory?
The population of the US is around the 320,000,000. We got workers crawling from under rocks...?
Last edited by pgardn; 04-17-2014 at 09:38 AM.
for example, CC, in what sense can you have private property rights without functioning, accessible courts? do interstate highways tangibly benefit free markets? do food, water and health regulations have any effect on productivity? are there social goods associated with education? this whole idea that government is a social parasite (that only benefits parasites) at a very basic level, is bull .
Last edited by Winehole23; 04-19-2014 at 04:01 AM.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
