Don't hold out your hand if you don't need to.
A couple nights ago, my wife and I planned out a preliminary budget for our life post-graduation. I graduate in two months (wait, did I write that correctly? I graduate in two months. Yeah, say it again. I gradu-, okay.) and we are looking to buy a home. Starting with the expenses side of our monthly budget, we listed things like a mortgage, health insurance, car insurance, utilities, groceries, and more. Once we tallied up how much we thought we would spend in a month, we tackled the revenue side. First I estimated how much I thought my salary would be working full time and then I divided that by 12 months. Next we listed off side projects that bring in little bits of monthly revenue. With some estimates we were barely breaking even and with others we were under by a bit. Then we remembered the $8,000 home buying credit that was just approved in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. We added it to the list and watched as our monthly budget took on a nice surplus. Then we promptly removed the credit from our budget. Why?
Government handouts are not revenue. We do not want to become dependent on the government to pay our monthly bills. There are many ways for people to receive assistance from the government:
- Medicaid
- Unemployment
- Medicare
- Welfare
- Pell grants and subsidized student loans
- Other grants
Those are just a few that come to mind immediately. Just because the government provides ways to receive help, does not mean they are meant to sustain our way of living. They are meant as temporary boosts when we are down on our luck. Hopefully you can make it through your life and never need any one of those. Maybe you end up needing help once, that’s cool. What worries me is that more Americans every year show up as dependents on Uncle Sam’s tax return.
I will be the first to admit that I have received help in one of those areas. Pell grants and subsidized loans have helped to pay for college. I worked part time every semester I went to school and also worked full time over the summers; however, it was necessary for me to take out some loans that I will most certainly pay back. We had the opportunity to take on medicaid and some other items, but didn’t feel right about it. Just because the government makes the help available, does not mean that I need to take it. It’s all the unnecessary taking that adds fuel to these programs.
If the people who really didn’t need government assistance stopped taking it, government spending on those programs would drop. Suddenly the government would find itself with a big surplus and hopefully drop all of our taxes. Lower taxes make it easier for you to sustain life without government assistance.
America, stop depending on the government to balance your budget. My wife and I have made a goal to balance our own budget. If times get rough, we will go to family, church, friends, and other places before we ever go back to the government.
How about you? How do you plan on paying your monthly bills?
P.S. I don’t think people who receive government assistance are evil and bad.
Last 3 posts by Mark
- Seriously?! - February 17th, 2010
- Current Government Flowchart - January 29th, 2010
- Obama Facebook - December 9th, 2009
This can definitely be a touchy subject - as I’ve learned - so I appreciate your insights behind your decision making.
I recently read a blog that discussed couples who were going on welfare during college so that the mom could be a stay-at-home-mom with the kids. A very heated discussion followed, but I really left with one impression… I do not believe that welfare or an entitlement program should be a part of anyone’s “plan.” The worst, but usual, justification was that they felt like welfare was “taking out a no-interest loan that they would be paying back through their future taxes when employed.”
I’ve always felt that government assistance should be short-term/temporary and only for emergencies. It is not a loan. It should not be a part of anyone’s “plan” regardless of how “good” the intent. If someone had to use these programs temporarily, I do not think they are bad. These programs just seem to violate an idea of getting something for nothing.
To get through school debt-free, I worked 45+ hours a week in a program that required you to work less than 10. I was given an exception so I could maintain health insurance. Additionally, my first semester was partially paid by a pell grant, and several summer terms were partially covered by private scholarships. I was often very jealous of friends who always seemed to have more time to study, make friendships, etc while I was working.
Hope no one thinks I’m a jerk. BTW - here is a cool article which I think covers more of the intent of welfare programs.
http://www.drlaurablog.com/category/mormons/
Mark and Eric, I really liked the way you expressed your thoughts. I feel the same way, but have never been able to express these feelings in such a way as the both of you have.
I enjoyed reading this, as well as the artical Eric linked. I love me some Dr. Laura. Home girl knows what she’s talking about.
Thanks for your comments, Eric B. I’ve been reluctant to write this post for a while because of how touchy this subject can be. I have many close friends who feel differently than I do about this. I don’t think they are bad people, I just have a very different opinion. I…..yeah….I need to stop there.
Let’s let the government get back to doing what it was created for: Protecting us from invasion, sustaining the rule of law, and providing late night shows with plenty of material. It was not meant to be our financial support.
Rachel - I wanted to write this post for a couple months, but couldn’t figure out how to say it without coming off as a complete a-hole. Finally I decided that I just need to write it and let people get offended.
Thanks for all your comments, too. You’re a regular on here.
I have received some government assistance in getting my education, but I do not view it as a no-interest loan. I will pay a lot more money into social security than will ever be distributed to me at the back end. I may not need the distributions when that time comes, but I plan to take them.
With medicare it is the same thing, you will pay in a lot more than you will ever take out (assuming it is for a short period of time). That sounds more like a 200 - 300 percent loan to me.
I would prefer that these programs did not exist or that you could opt out of paying medicare if you promise to never ask for it (much like the California opt-out of unemployment benefits), but I can’t blame someone for taking benefits that they qualify for when they’re FORCED to pay for those benefits 50 or 100 times over later on.
Yes, but I would be FORCED to pay less if people stopped taking assistance when they didn’t need it. I would love to opt out if I could. The attitude of “taking it because I’m already paying for it” only makes the problem worse. I will pay what they force me to, but the more I take, the more I have to pay.
I agree to an extent. You would be forced to pay less if the people who didn’t need it never paid it back.
If everyone paid back more than they paid in than there would be a huge surplus in the medicare accounts. It would work like any other loan program and the government would be making money on medicare. We all know that isn’t the case. Welfare would be self-sustaining and no one would have to pay anything in for it to keep functioning.
It would be like the government borrowing at 4% and then lending that out at 30% or whatever. They would be making a killing on it and would not need a dime of taxpayer money.
The problem with the welfare system lies in the growing number of people who qualify for it, but yet never pay back in what they take out. There are so many people dependent on welfare that surplus from the people taking it out and paying more in cannot cover those who don’t pay it back.
Mark I’m glad you ended up deciding to put your thoughts down on here. I personally know other people who feel the same and have been wanting to blog their thoughts but have held off for the same reasons you have. I’ve since directed said friends to this post, and they were impressed with the way you clearly portrayed your opinion in such a pc way.
Good work.
Amen, amen, amen.
You’re right, this is a touchy subject. But thank you for opening the can of worms. When I worked in the film business and a show or film was coming to an end (wrapping up, done shooting, aka: time to find a new job), I was shocked to discover that everyone filed for Unemployment 2 weeks before the show ended so they wouldn’t see a loss in salary. Often these were people that made good money and could afford to take a couple weeks off (such as a higher-up Line Producer). I don’t have a problem with unemployment if you really need it or are suddenly laid off from your job, etc. But when you knowingly work in an industry that runs on a “free-lance” basis, and you know that your job is short-term, filing for unemployment seems to cross the line.
You said it perfectly: if the government had less people to support, we’d likely see lower taxes for everyone.
I didn’t know that happened in the film industry. That’s pretty sick, Chubs. That’s exactly the attitude that disgusts me. So, I wonder then….when the strike was happening last year, were they all on unemployment? Makes me feel less sorry for them.
Yeah, I agree with what you’re saying. That’s the mindset that is slowly taking over our nation. Someone will take care of me; I don’t need to worry about it; I have the right to the assistance; I’m entitled to it.
Yea, good call Mark. Maybe there WERE on unemployment last year during the strike. Crappy.
I meant “they” not “there”
I didnt read this one when you posted it. Just saw it now. My question is what is the difference between taking unemployment if you really don’t need it and taking the federal housing credit? I don’t think there is a difference. Based on how I read the post, you think we should not take government handouts that go outside of what we believe government should do such as “Protecting us from invasion, sustaining the rule of law, and providing late night shows with plenty of material.” It seems like you are saying that we shouldn’t be taking government assistance like unemployment, but you still plan on taking the $8K credit. Maybe I’m reading it wrong, are you not going to take the $8K credit?