# Debaser, you've never been poor. Can't say the same about "presumptuous cockweed", though **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [October 19, 2013, 2:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/debaser-youve-never-been-poor-cant-say-the-same-about-presumptuous-cockweed-though/671651 "2013-10-19T14:02:41Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 17\ **Page:** 11
**Author:** ![Sparky812](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/eb9ed0/32.png) [@Sparky812](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sparky812)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2013, 1:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/debaser-youve-never-been-poor-cant-say-the-same-about-presumptuous-cockweed-though/671651/201 "2013-10-22T13:26:09Z")
> [@cornopean](#): > > lax regulations?? no govt oversight? which planet do you live on? This govt has so many regulations and laws that businesses have to hire people to sort thru it all. > Furthermore, the govt caused the housing bubble by insuring banks and allowing Fannie/Freddie to make possible subprime lending. WTF? Now you’re just being completely assinine. It’s the government’s fault because they didn’t regulate and oversee the banks enough?! How does this support your argument for a free economy? ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2013, 2:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/debaser-youve-never-been-poor-cant-say-the-same-about-presumptuous-cockweed-though/671651/202 "2013-10-22T14:10:24Z")
> [@aNewLeaf](#): > > It’s the duty of everybody to help everybody, to some extent. True? No, I’m not prepared to accept that as true in this discussion. Certainly it’s a tenet of Christian thinking, but I assume the vast majority of thinkers here reject Christianity as a valid source of public policy. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2013, 2:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/debaser-youve-never-been-poor-cant-say-the-same-about-presumptuous-cockweed-though/671651/203 "2013-10-22T14:12:03Z")
Maybe I missed the point of that discussion, but I don’t think anyone here would reject public policy merely because it’s consistent with a Christian tenet. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2013, 2:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/debaser-youve-never-been-poor-cant-say-the-same-about-presumptuous-cockweed-though/671651/204 "2013-10-22T14:15:51Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > Maybe I missed the point of that discussion, but I don’t think anyone here would reject public policy merely because it’s consistent with a Christian tenet. No, but that wasn’t quite what I said. _It’s the duty of everybody to help everybody, to some extent. True?_ I’m saying, in effect, “Cite?” And then I am forestalling one possible cite, by pointing out that you cannot prove this proposition (here, anyway) by appealing to the Christian abjuration to help “the least of My brethern.” ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2013, 2:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/debaser-youve-never-been-poor-cant-say-the-same-about-presumptuous-cockweed-though/671651/205 "2013-10-22T14:24:22Z")
I see. I don’t know why you’d bother, though. It’s pretty much a universal belief (at least for values of “universe” that don’t include Ayn Rand). ---
**Author:** ![Filbert](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/filbert/32/3433_2.png) [@Filbert](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Filbert)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2013, 3:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/debaser-youve-never-been-poor-cant-say-the-same-about-presumptuous-cockweed-though/671651/206 "2013-10-22T15:21:07Z")
> [@DragonAsh](#): > > Good god. Can people really be _this_ stupid? How does \*\*cornopean \*\*get dressed in the morning?! Objection your honour- assumes facts not in evidence. ---
**Author:** ![kaylasdad99](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kaylasdad99/32/3398_2.png) [@kaylasdad99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kaylasdad99)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2013, 4:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/debaser-youve-never-been-poor-cant-say-the-same-about-presumptuous-cockweed-though/671651/207 "2013-10-22T16:06:04Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > The underlying idea with Social Security is that it’s the responsibility – the moral duty, in a sense – of the top 10% to assist the 90%. If you accept that as true, then the returns issue is totally irrelevant anyway. I’m not sure I’m prepared to endorse that. It could be argued that the underlying idea with Social Security is that it is in the overall best interests of all concerned for the top 10% to assist the bottom 90%. It could also be argued that the “moral duty” selling point was considered to be more appealing to a majority-Christian population than the “eat your broccoli, it’s good for you” approach would have been. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2013, 4:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/debaser-youve-never-been-poor-cant-say-the-same-about-presumptuous-cockweed-though/671651/208 "2013-10-22T16:29:30Z")
> [@kaylasdad99](#): > > I’m not sure I’m prepared to endorse that. It could be argued that the underlying idea with Social Security is that it is in the overall best interests of all concerned for the top 10% to assist the bottom 90%. > > It could also be argued that the “moral duty” selling point was considered to be more appealing to a majority-Christian population than the “eat your broccoli, it’s good for you” approach would have been. Yes, both of those things could be argued. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2013, 7:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/debaser-youve-never-been-poor-cant-say-the-same-about-presumptuous-cockweed-though/671651/209 "2013-10-22T19:10:22Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > > [@](#): > > > > Now answer my question: If I took the money I spend on home, auto, and health insurance, and invested it in a conservative mutual fund, wouldn’t I have more money when I retire? True, or false? > > Almost certainly. Whoa – you’re saying that it is “almost certain” that I will not suffer significant financial losses due to illness, earthquakes, fires, storms, floods, or negligence? That’s a remarkable statement, and I’d love to see the actuarial models you use to come up with your conclusion. > [@](#): > > I’ll note no such thing: because, as yet, there is no reasoning process. It seems quite obvious to me that if a group of people eliminated all their insurance policies and instead attempted to save or invest all the premiums, that some unknown (but almost certainly significant) number will experience financial ruin, compared to a group which maintains insurance. My view is that it is not a reliable conclusion that people would retire with more money if they did not participate in the Social Security income insurance program, because insurance protects people from financial risk in a way that mere savings cannot. In fact, I think you’ve phrased the original question in the most deceptive way possible: you asked if senior citizens would have done better with private investments. This is like asking if good drivers would do better with less expensive car insurance: you’ve already stacked the deck by asking about a particular group. In your question, you’ve already excluded disabled individuals or their dependents who clearly would not fare better with privatized accounts. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2013, 7:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/debaser-youve-never-been-poor-cant-say-the-same-about-presumptuous-cockweed-though/671651/210 "2013-10-22T19:13:27Z")
Since their suffering is directly associated with their needlessly extended life span, that last point is arguable. ---
**Author:** ![YogSothoth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/8edcca/32.png) [@YogSothoth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/YogSothoth)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2013, 8:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/debaser-youve-never-been-poor-cant-say-the-same-about-presumptuous-cockweed-though/671651/211 "2013-10-22T20:44:33Z")
> [@Chimera](#): > > Well, first you’d have to find a like minded derpist employer who would hire someone who wore nothing but rabbit furs and bark shoes, and who smelled like ass from not bathing. Otherwise you don’t have any money to save. A real conservative would say you don’t need an employer, what’s wrong with selling those furs and meat on the streets to earn money? Why, that’s how WalMart got started! Only lazy bums refuse to do that ---
**Author:** ![kaylasdad99](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kaylasdad99/32/3398_2.png) [@kaylasdad99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kaylasdad99)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2013, 8:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/debaser-youve-never-been-poor-cant-say-the-same-about-presumptuous-cockweed-though/671651/212 "2013-10-22T20:56:58Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > The underlying idea with Social Security is that it’s the responsibility – the moral duty, in a sense – of the top 10% to assist the 90%. If you accept that as true, then the returns issue is totally irrelevant anyway. > [@kaylasdad99](#): > > I’m not sure I’m prepared to endorse that. It could be argued that the underlying idea with Social Security is that it is in the overall best interests of all concerned for the top 10% to assist the bottom 90%. > > It could also be argued that the “moral duty” selling point was considered to be more appealing to a majority-Christian population than the “eat your broccoli, it’s good for you” approach would have been. > [@Bricker](#): > > Yes, both of those things could be argued. Yes, they could; thank you for conceding as much. And, absent testimony from someone who participated in the creation of the various Depression-era initiatives, including Social Security, I find myself thinking that those arguments are more persuasive than the assertion you made, and which I quoted at the top of this post. ---
**Author:** ![cornopean](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/8c91f0/32.png) [@cornopean](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cornopean)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2013, 12:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/debaser-youve-never-been-poor-cant-say-the-same-about-presumptuous-cockweed-though/671651/213 "2013-10-23T00:33:17Z")
> [@Evil\_Economist](#): > > The long depression was also quite…long. Which shits on your claim that it was the social security programs created in the '30s that made depressions last so long. My claim was that all the govt programs made the depression long, not just SS. Hoover passed Smoot-Hawley which was devastating. FDR was even worse. ---
**Author:** ![Budget\_Player\_Cadet](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/budget_player_cadet/32/205_2.png) [@Budget\_Player\_Cadet](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Budget_Player_Cadet)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2013, 7:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/debaser-youve-never-been-poor-cant-say-the-same-about-presumptuous-cockweed-though/671651/214 "2013-10-23T07:59:04Z")
> [@cornopean](#): > > My claim was that all the govt programs made the depression long, not just SS. Hoover passed Smoot-Hawley which was devastating. FDR was even worse. Well then state which government programs and what effect they had. I’ve already explained quite thoroughly why government interaction or not, the great depression was a completely different beast from the depression of 1921, but if you want to make the claim that government intervention made it worse (as opposed to the claim that government intervention is the reason the great depression was worse to begin with, which I have shown to be demonstrably _false_). ---
**Author:** ![Budget\_Player\_Cadet](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/budget_player_cadet/32/205_2.png) [@Budget\_Player\_Cadet](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Budget_Player_Cadet)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2013, 8:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/debaser-youve-never-been-poor-cant-say-the-same-about-presumptuous-cockweed-though/671651/215 "2013-10-23T08:18:10Z")
> [@Budget\_Player\_Cadet](#): > > Well then state which government programs and what effect they had. I’ve already explained quite thoroughly why government interaction or not, the great depression was a completely different beast from the depression of 1921, but if you want to make the claim that government intervention made it worse (as opposed to the claim that government intervention is the reason the great depression was worse to begin with, which I have shown to be demonstrably _false_). Err, correction: but if you want to make the claim that government intervention made it worse (as opposed to the claim that government intervention is the reason the great depression was worse to begin with, which I have shown to be demonstrably _false_), go right ahead. But actually fucking _argue it_. Don’t just assert it. ---
**Author:** ![Don\_t\_Call\_Me\_Shirley](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/f4b2a3/32.png) [@Don\_t\_Call\_Me\_Shirley](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Don_t_Call_Me_Shirley)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2013, 2:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/debaser-youve-never-been-poor-cant-say-the-same-about-presumptuous-cockweed-though/671651/216 "2013-10-23T14:16:23Z")
> [@cornopean](#): > > Not sure which opinion of mine you are referring to. ? Unemployment went way down after the 30s b/c of war production. What the hell do you think “war production” is, you moron? It’s government intervention! You’re saying that the government spent a shit ton of money and created a shit ton of jobs, and that pulled us out of the depression! You’re arguing against yourself here. You are in way over your head. You need to work on your critical thinking skills, seriously. ---
**Author:** ![rogerbox](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/76d3ee/32.png) [@rogerbox](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rogerbox)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2013, 3:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/debaser-youve-never-been-poor-cant-say-the-same-about-presumptuous-cockweed-though/671651/217 "2013-10-23T15:47:15Z")
In conservia land, govt spending isn’t bad and therefore is no longer govt spending once it goes towards the noble cause of killing furriners instead of giving handouts to Cadillac driving welfare queens. I’m serious. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/debaser-youve-never-been-poor-cant-say-the-same-about-presumptuous-cockweed-though/671651.md?page=10)