O'Rielly statistics

[davekc]

Whether you like him or not doesn't matter. But I found these statistics he put out as alarming.

66.1 on government assistance of some sort. Counting welfare and all programs.
21.2 rely on government for employment.

Total 87 million people tied to government.
109.3 million working in the private sector.

The 21.2 likely are paying some type of tax but those numbers are interesting.

Fox News - Breaking News Updates | Latest News Headlines | Photos & News Videos

 

[OntarioVanMan]

Whether you like him or not doesn't matter. But I found these statistics he put out as alarming.

66.1 on government assistance of some sort. Counting welfare and all programs.
21.2 rely on government for employment.

Total 87 million people tied to government.
109.3 million working in the private sector.

The 21.2 likely are paying some type of tax but those numbers are interesting.

Fox News - Breaking News Updates | Latest News Headlines | Photos & News Videos

21.2 rely on government for employment. ?? is this the military employment?...Printers? Cleaning staff?....government services?....what...

Total 87 million people tied to government.

Again...no breakdown?..military contractors?...what?.....

 

[Tennesseahawk]

21.2 rely on government for employment. ?? is this the military employment?...Printers? Cleaning staff?....government services?....what...

Total 87 million people tied to government.

Again...no breakdown?..military contractors?...what?.....

Military contractors are not government employees. He did break it down, btw.

If you didn't know, the government union is the largest union in the world. They should have no union. Thank JFK for that. The US gubmint is also the largest employer in the world. Thank FDR for that.

 

[davekc]

Military personel would be a yes it is counted. A military contractor wouldn't be.

 

[layoutshooter]

What 'government union'? SOME government employees, at the federal level belong to one of several unions. They should not be allowed but there is no 'government union' as far as I know. Please explain.

Raw stats are not useful other than to point out trends. For the stats to be of real value one would have to take out all needed government employees and those who earned government 'benefits'. Like Social Security, disabled vets etc.

There are, how ever, far too many people sucking up monies that they did not earn and will never earn. They are parasites. Like mold. They serve no purpose and are a drain on the country. They should be made to carry their own weight.

 

[OntarioVanMan]

but it said 87 million TIED to the government....that could include all contractors....as they are directly TIED to government

 

[OntarioVanMan]

What 'government union'? SOME government employees, at the federal level belong to one of several unions. They should not be allowed but there is no 'government union' as far as I know. Please explain.

Raw stats are not useful other than to point out trends. For the stats to be of real value one would have to take out all needed government employees and those who earned government 'benefits'. Like Social Security, disabled vets etc.

There are, how ever, far too many people sucking up monies that they did not earn and will never earn. They are parasites. Like mold. They serve no purpose and are a drain on the country. They should be made to carry their own weight.

Thank you...

 

[layoutshooter]

Military personel would be a yes it is counted. A military contractor wouldn't be.

Military contractors, while not government employees, are part of the 87 million that are 'tied' to the government. Their jobs only exist because of government spending. Same goes for ANY government contractor, like as expediter that runs government loads. On those loads they too are 'tied' to government.

 

[OntarioVanMan]

Did you know that......
1 in 200 men are direct descendants of Genghis Khan..he raped and had so many wives....how is that for a stat......????

 

[davekc]

A breakdown for this purpose isn't the main point. There will be some variables but the point is having 87m tied some way to government, verses 109m tied to the private sector.
The point being that government is too BIG, rather than whether someone is deserving or entitled to a specific benefit.

 

[layoutshooter]

A breakdown for this purpose isn't the main point. There will be some variables but the point is having 87m tied some way to government, verses 109m tied to the private sector.
The point being that government is too BIG, rather than whether someone is deserving or entitled to a specific benefit.

That is correct. The problem is that when government cuts they tend to cut from those who earned rather than from those who did not. They also seldom downsize in any real way. They SHOULD start by eliminating entire departments, like Education, Energy, EPA and BAFTE for a start. Then have drastic cut backs in regulations. They should be cutting THEIR pay and benefits before those on Social Security. Just some thoughts.

Government is FAR too big.

 

[davekc]

There are so many places to cut it isn't funny. I am just amazed we spend week after week talking about taxing the rich which covers eight days of debt when the problem is too much government and spending.
Yesterday the Senate (specifically Harry Reid) wasted half a day talking about changing rules so they could eat popcorn while watching the movie Lincoln at the Capital auditorium. Are you kidding me?

 

[layoutshooter]

There are so many places to cut it isn't funny. I am just amazed we spend week after week talking about taxing the rich which covers eight days of debt when the problem is too much government and spending.
Yesterday the Senate (specifically Harry Reid) wasted half a day talking about changing rules so they could eat popcorn while watching the movie Lincoln at the Capital auditorium. Are you kidding me?

Our government, from Obama down, is a farce. Voting them all out is the ONLY answer out there, peaceful answer that is.

 

[Humble2drive]

Originally should have been said by Davekc. . .

Whether you like him or not doesn't matter. But I found these statistics he put out as alarming, IF TRUE!

Fixed it for you. You forgot the disclaimer.

 

[davekc]

Fixed it for you. You forgot the disclaimer.

Thanks for the fix! Haven't seen anything so far that says they aren't factual or within reason.
Maybe you have something that says otherwise? But I doubt it.
The scary part is as the "baby boomers" fall out of that 109m number they will be adding to the other. Those are some serious numbers that are out of balance are they not?
Heard something similar with regards to California. Something along the lines of for every person working, there are 136 that aren't and recieve some type of government support.
Again, doesn't mean people aren't entitled to it, it is a matter of how sustainable is.

 

[layoutshooter]

"Again, doesn't mean people aren't entitled to it, it is a matter of how sustainable is."

They KNEW it was unsustainable decades ago and did NOTHING to fix it! They were only interested in insuring their reelections. That goes from Obama down. The majority of American's knew it, did not care, and continued to reelect them as long as THEIR share of the freebie pie was brought home.

We had better hope that the "Star Trek" idea of no longer using money works, because there is no more to be had. Crunch time as arrived. Governments answer? More of the same, tired and failed Marxists ideas.

When are people going to figure out that government is NOT their friend. Government is their owner.

 

[davekc]

"Again, doesn't mean people aren't entitled to it, it is a matter of how sustainable is."

They KNEW it was unsustainable decades ago and did NOTHING to fix it! They were only interested in insuring their reelections. That goes from Obama down. The majority of American's knew it, did not care, and continued to reelect them as long as THEIR share of the freebie pie was brought home.

We had better hope that the "Star Trek" idea of no longer using money works, because there is no more to be had. Crunch time as arrived. Governments answer? More of the same, tired and failed Marxists ideas.

When are people going to figure out that government is NOT their friend. Government is their owner.

It will become a reality at some point when those things that people depend on from the government get cut back or eliminated all together. Look at Europe. They didn't think anything would happen there. Surprise! It will be much slower here but the basic problem of government is too big is the same.

 

[Humble2drive]

Military contractors are not government employees. He did break it down, btw.

He did not break it down. That was intentional because it would show that his statement is misleading. That is what "commentators" do. Broad based statistics with no reference or breakdown makes it easier to misrepresent an issue in a biased manner.

O'Reilly stated: (if true):

66.1 on government assistance of some sort. Counting welfare and all programs.

Of some sort? What sorts? And all programs? Where is the breakdown?

A breakdown would show a reasonable person that while many people make use of some Government programs, they are not "tied" to the Government and certainly are not dependent on the Government as O'Reilly often suggests.

To use a previous example: 47 million people receive food stamps. That is one of the programs that would show up on a breakdown. A certain percentage of these people are gainfully employed yet they make lower than average wages. A family of three can earn $24,000.00 per year, own a home and often a car (depending on the state) and get food stamp assistance of approximately $86.00 per month. They are not what a reasonable person would consider to be "tied" to the Government. They are taking advantage of a certain program simply because it is there and available. Stop making it available and they would survive just fine because they are not "dependent" like those on SSI, Medicaid, etc.
The Republican puppet Romney made the mistake of buying into generalized broad statistics and when they were broken down by the fact checkers he lost credibility.
A Quick Guide to Food Stamp Eligibility and Benefits — Center on Budget and Policy Priorities

I agree, our Government is way too big and too many people are tied to it! That fact does not need to be misrepresented and exaggerated by blow hards like O'Reilly who make all conservatives look manipulative and petty. The truth is bad enough and stands on it's own.

The US gubmint is also the largest employer in the world. Thank FDR for that.

Yes and No. Definitely the largest employer but not all due to FDR as we would like to believe.
If you completely eliminated all Government jobs with the exception of those under the Dept. Of Defense we would still be the largest employer. The Dept. Of Defense alone is the largest employer. FDR didn't do that.
The 10 Biggest Employers In The World - Business Insider

 

[davekc]

So what is the rational to provide $86.00 dollars in food stamps if according to you, they don't need it? Ah...maybe they are somewhat dependent? Would those likely be the same people that get alot of those other "gifts" as well?.

 

[Turtle]

I think it should be pointed out that you can be "tied" to something without necessarily being "dependent" on it. For example, the "Certain percentage" of the 47 million on food stamps who can do without them, I, being a reasonable person, would not consider them "dependent" on the government, but would, absolutely, consider them "tied" to the government. And I wouldn't be exaggerating anything by doing so.