- This topic is empty.
-
AuthorPosts
-
July 31, 2013 at 5:29 pm #794604
WFMemberlook no further than the recent library levy in seattle seaopgal
(in OR they spend a significantly higher % of their budget on Education 50% versus 44% in WA and have kept college tuition about 25% lower. OR spends ~35% on social services and WA spends ~43%)
and do not forget the recent street maintenance levy.
and the king county parks levy …………..
AND JOB i am not disagreeing with you on the top 1% (5%) need to pay more. all i am saying is stop de-funding the basics that are needed to keep this country competitive in the world economy. infrastructure and education are key to competitiveness.
it would be far better to require social service providers to step to the plate every few years and argue in front of the voters for levy funding; this ensures transparency and would force them to prove their value to the voters! what is unreasonable about this JOB?
July 31, 2013 at 7:02 pm #794605
JoBParticipantWF..
repairing potholes will do far less to keep our country competitive than will investing in this nation’s children.
you do know that kids educational scores go up when they are fed and have reliable housing, don’t you?
July 31, 2013 at 8:51 pm #794606
elikapekaParticipantWFHooper,
Where does your 44% number come from?
I refer you to http://www.leg.wa.gov/Senate/Committees/WM/Documents/2013%20CGTB.pdf.
This is the Citizen’s Guide to the Washington State Budget for 2013.
Page 7 – “Human Services, such as medical and public assistance, long-term care, other health care, and prisons, represents 33.7% of total budgeted expenditures. Most human services programs are partnerships between the state and the federal government, with the federal government providing about half of the money and the state providing the rest. The state provides human services to one out of every three citizens, including services to over one million children residing in Washington.” So this figure includes things like prisons, the Medical Quality Assurance Board, and other expenses that have nothing to do with “welfare” as you use the term.
Next to page 9 – the state spends “$4.8 billion in the Health Care Authority (HCA), as payments to hospitals and other service providers for medical assistance; and $3.8 billion in the Department of Social and Health Services (DSHS), as welfare, child care, and other social service payments.”
The total state budget is listed at 76.8 billion dollars. So it looks to me, upon my cursory reading of the document, that the percentage of social service spending that concerns you is at most a little more than 10 percent of the budget, and that’s if you put all the medical payments in there.
So your source, please? And what is your source for your repeated statements that other services have had monies diverted from them to social services?
August 1, 2013 at 12:11 am #794607
seaopgalParticipantWF: I’m with elikapela that your #151 doesn’t really provide evidence for your concerns that funds are being diverted to social services. So much of your argument relies on the assumption that infrastructure, libraries, and parks are “basic” government functions but that social welfare is not. Anecdotal evidence (citing this year’s King Co Park levy, but not mentioning previous years’ housing, veterans, and social service levies) is not persuasive.
August 1, 2013 at 12:18 am #794608
WFMemberelikapeka its what the government does, it’s called supplanting. they fund services less likely to be approved via levy and then put items to vote that are more likely to be approved. the library is a prime example. instead of cutting the library budget and then going to the voters to supplant the cuts with levy money they could have cut other government programs.
the 43% value was obtained from the state budget and included DSHS and Health Services spending.
August 1, 2013 at 12:37 am #794609
elikapekaParticipantWF, what state budget figures? Where did they come from? The budget document I cited to you comes nowhere close to either your 43 or 44 percent claim. Citation, please.
And you are mixing apples and oranges here. City and county levies have nothing to do with the state budget. Do you have something to show that the state used to fund these things and has now shifted that burden to the cities and counties?
August 1, 2013 at 1:26 am #794610
WFMemberhttp://leap.leg.wa.gov/leap/Budget/Detail/2013/soAgencyDetail_0627.pdf
DSHS – $11.9B
Other Human Services – $16.8B
Total operating budget $66.5B
(11.9 + 16.8)/66.5 = 43%
August 1, 2013 at 3:03 am #794611
elikapekaParticipantWFHooper, you need to read a little further. Please look at Page 5 and see what’s included in “Other Human Services” in the document you referenced:
Washington Health Care Authority
Human Rights Commission
Board of Industrial Insurance Appeals
Criminal Justice Training Commission
Department of Labor & Industries
Department of Health
Department of Veterans’ Affairs
Department of Corrections
Department of Services for the Blind
Employment Security Department
If you then go to DSHS on the next page and look at the further breakdown, you will see that Children and Family Services payments, which is what you’ve been complaining about, is a whopping
1B and change. Nowhere near 43%. More like a blip.
August 1, 2013 at 3:16 am #794612
WFMemberi said dshs and human services budget was 43%. children and family services is a subset of this total.
the elephant in the spending is spending on health care and on elderly folks who failed to save during their working years.
43% of the budget spent on social services is too high, oregon spends about 35% and 50% on schools. washington spend 44% on education.
it is time washington reduce the % of its budget spent on social services and increase spending on education. increase education spending to 50% and reduce social service spending to 35% and put 2% into parks.
August 1, 2013 at 3:51 am #794613
JoBParticipantWhoop
good lord.. you’ve now moved from those pregnant teens to health care and the elderly… but you missed the blind.. and vets. we spend money on them too.
not to mention that pesky department of corrections which consumes a substantial part of our budget.
of course, if we actually spent more on education and job training and jobs creation we wouldn’t have to spend so much on corrections…
but who’s counting?
take the night off whoop..
go spend some time with the sunset or something
August 1, 2013 at 4:40 am #794614
WFMemberjob i agree we spend too much money on corrections!
the issue is the state spends 43 cents of every dollar on social services that is too much and crowds out other state spending; in particular education spending. and yes how social service money is spent is an issue onto itself. THERE IS NOT INFINITE RESOURCES JOB; and 43% is much higher than neighboring Oregon spends.
the cycle of poverty needs to be stopped; BC and ADOPTION.
yes it has been a long day
August 1, 2013 at 5:08 am #794615
elikapekaParticipantI give up. Your entire thread is about teenage pregnancy and the “enabling” government programs. When it’s pointed out to you that the numbers you’re quoting don’t support your conclusions, you change the subject to cast a wider net. I don’t even know what you’re talking about when you drag elderly people who have failed to save enough money into the equation.
I don’t know if you don’t understand the programs that fall under the umbrellas of “Human Services” or if you’re being deliberately obtuse. But either way, you’re trying to make the facts fit your opinion instead of letting the facts speak for themselves. Good luck with that.
August 1, 2013 at 6:30 am #794616
CaitParticipantNot to mention the same person posting two new topics in a week involving hot button issues and seemingly not seeking out new information/discussion.
August 1, 2013 at 2:20 pm #794617
miwsParticipantAugust 1, 2013 at 2:43 pm #794618
JoBParticipantAugust 1, 2013 at 3:00 pm #794619
WFMemberjob – teenage pregnancy is a problem and costs society in the perpetuation of the poverty cycle.
i admit the cost of this element of social service spending is not as much as spent on other elements that are far more costly. and re-directing the social service spending to the young away from other social service spending (that is already too high as a % of government spending, 43% that needs to be reduced) may improve the benefit/cost ratio.
Cait – what was the other hot button issue?
August 1, 2013 at 3:18 pm #794620
JoBParticipantwhoop..
from Elikepeka’s post # 158
Human Services
Washington Health Care Authority
Human Rights Commission
Board of Industrial Insurance Appeals
Criminal Justice Training Commission
Department of Labor & Industries
Department of Health
Department of Veterans’ Affairs
Department of Corrections
Department of Services for the Blind
Employment Security Department
“Children and Family Services payments, which is what you’ve been complaining about, is a whopping
1B and change.”
isn’t it time you took a look at the rest of the budget?
i am sure you could find other hot button issues that we could actually agree on..
August 1, 2013 at 4:04 pm #794621
miwsParticipantisn’t it time you took a look at the rest of the budget?
i am sure you could find other hot button issues that we could actually agree on..
Oh, but it’s so much easier for those with the mindset of WFhoop to blame the less fortunate, who are pretty much defenseless, and only give occasional, passing acknowledgment of facts such as corporate welfare, and then only if one of us brings it up.
Pure laziness.
Mike
August 1, 2013 at 4:08 pm #794622
JoBParticipantAugust 1, 2013 at 5:54 pm #794623
miwsParticipantThat’s one of the things I respect about you, JoB; you are much more forgiving than I am.
If WFhoop were a relatively new commenter, that hadn’t hashed and re-hashed, and re-re-hashed over and over again over the years, the same topics, that show so little compassion for folks that he doesn’t even know the personal stories of, with a few different “personas”, I would be more forgiving.
But in this case, I dunno….. :-(
Mike
August 1, 2013 at 7:52 pm #794624
WFMembermiws where is your compassion to students from middle class families who have been forced to borrow up to the hilt (or parents who have to stop saving for retirement) because the state is not funding higher education as was done in the past? students have accumulated over $1T in debt.
where is your compassion to the middle class when the city supplants its taxes with levies for services such as infrastructure maintenance, libraries, parks that should be paid for first by tax resources.
and what is wrong with the expectation that able bodied/minded people take care of themselves (save money, delay children, buy insurance et al). too many people are on the dole simply because they failed to save, delay children and buy insurance.
in particular many elderly of my parents generation failed to adequately save even though their SS tax rates where on average 5% lower than they are today. if these folks had simply saved that 5% over their working years they would have set up a decent nest egg. many of them didn’t and it is their fault they didn’t and it is not fair to future generations to pay for their failure to save!
some time ago i happened to see my son’s gf’s mom’s W2, not one bloody cent was put aside for retirement but she has money to buy cigs! there are too many people just like this who run out of $ in retirement and frankly it is their fault and i am sorry i DO NOT feel that government should bail them out!
August 1, 2013 at 8:30 pm #794625
miwsParticipantI have compassion for the Middle Class.
I also have compassion for those who have been dealt an unfortunate lot in life.
I don’t have compassion for the faction of very wealthy people, and corporations that avoid paying their fair share of taxes and such, to keep our Country, States, and Cities functioning.
(I realize there are some socially responsible wealthy individuals, and corporations out there.)
The thing is, you seem to make these blanket statements of people that may have addiction issues, whether it being cigarettes, booze, drugs, or any combination, or that otherwise make “poor choices”, when none of us know each individual circumstances.
We don’t know what mental and emotional issues they may have been born with, or acquired through an incident that was absolutely no fault of their own.
Some people’s addiction and/or mental/emotional issues can be attributed to to serving our Country.
Now, I’m sure that you’ll point to some of these folks I’ve characterized here as not being at fault for their behavior related to the points I’ve mentioned, but you start these threads, and repeatedly comment throughout them, with a blanket commenting style that suggests they are all at fault for their current life situations.
Mike
August 1, 2013 at 9:52 pm #794626
JoBParticipantwell said miws
August 1, 2013 at 9:53 pm #794627
JoBParticipantWF..
i don’t know how you saw your son’s gf’s mother’s W-4
but i am quite certain, she would not appreciate you making any information from it public
August 1, 2013 at 10:19 pm #794628
LindseyParticipantBut you DO feel that government should help you pay for your kid’s college costs? If you hold yourself to the same rigid standards of pre-baby preparation that you expect of everyone else, then why didn’t you save for your child’s college costs?
Why do you expect government to pitch in when it comes to your kid’s post-secondary education, but you don’t want government to pitch in when it comes to feeding somebody else’s kid?
I think it’s because you don’t care about someone else’s kid, period. I can tell, because you keep referring to the aid as belonging to the parent. It’s not. The aid is for the little innocent baby, whose only crime in life was being born to the wrong (unprepared, poor) parents. You think that baby should starve to punish his parents for not having the foresight to give him up, abort, or prevent him from happening.
Jesus Christ.
No really, Jesus Christ. There’s a guy who was born to some woefully unprepared parents.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.