I’m sure most people realize that the tea party members in congress, elected by these same people, are now enjoying taxpayer funded healthcare ( congress men have EXCELLENT coverage) for life. I wonder how many of said congressmen have refused this coverage for themselves and families while refusing a universal health care for the average American citizen.

Problem is the people who need to read this article most don’t read the anything else. They listen to Fox News.

Its pretty pathetic how republicans vote against their own interests…

More proof on how ignorant Republicans truly are!!

Did the NYT’s get this information from their tax free research arm ” Media Matters? ” This coming from the company run by a democrat that lost $40 million last year?

This article is a great example of how liberals ‘just don’t get it’.  I have to admit I was slack jawed reading this propaganda crap.  Its like when a liberal insists the tax deduction homeowners get for interest on their home is a ‘benefit received’ from the government.   Only a liberal could think a person walking down the road with $20 in their pocket is happy when a bandit demands $7.50 instead of $8.50  to continue on their way.  If the bandit would stop hosting parties for his/her buddies he could extort $3 instead of $7.50, that’d be progress towards make conservatives happy… Of course, what would truly make them happy is if the bandit only demands money for services rendered, not for their own greed and pet projects of their friends.

Nope. They actually talked to folks there. But the research doesn’t come from there. As I mentioned in the article in comes from the Kauffman Foundation and Tax Foundation, both of which are nonpartisan. 

Didn’t you get the memo? Your Media Matters talking point expired yesterday. Sorry to break the news, but it died on arrival. Couldn’t live outside the Faux News media bubble.

Serously? Why not read the Times article if you are interested?

 So it is not true that quite frequently the people quickest to criticize big government & government handouts are also the first in line to eagerly accept government benefits?

Hmm…I’m trying to wrap my head around your analogy but am having trouble. Actually a tax deduction on your home is a benefit received. Because you saved money on your taxes just for buying a house. In other words, the government subsidized your home purchase just because you bought a house and did so with an interest-bearing mortgage. There isn’t a similar deduction for renters, home or otherwise. 

Its not the details that are wrong, its the NYT liberal interpretation of them that are.  During the health care fight many liberals used the absurd argument that since conservatives used health care they were hypocrites for opposing health care.  The real story was they weren’t opposing ‘health care’, which is moronic, they were opposing the (then known) terms of Obama Care.

Well, this is surprising to whom exactly? Stupid people who rely on the state bash the state. You know why? Because they are stupid. Stupid people buy the garbage about government making people poor. You know why? Because they are too stupid to ask a simple question: ‘Is it true’? They can look at places like Sweden, Norway, Denmark, Switzerland, The Netherlands, etc and find that what they believe is total nonesense fed to them by people who want to keep them down.

People are pathetic. They are stunningly easy to screw. These are the same morons who actually believe Glenn Beck and people like that actually care about them. They make parasites like Beck rich and then go home to pay their bills on government handouts. They then bitch about the government. It is just base stupidity.

When I read that New York Times article, I was disgusted. These rednecks are allowing rich leeches to screw the country over while they vote cynics and greedy bastards who don’t give a damn about them.

Yes, but what the government is doing is saying we will take less of your money, but they still take money.  Buying a house does benefit for the homeowner and the community (in a sense), and there certainly is good cause for the government to encourage home ownership, but the money they are “giving back” isn’t there’s in the first place.  The government takes money from those who pay taxes, it doesn’t give it except in the form of services.  They don’t give me money for buying a house, they agree to steal less from my wallet, hence my perhaps clumsy Robin Hood bandit reference.  There’s reason for the Robin Hood bandit to tax travelers, but he’s still a bandit and if his work is to be considered a benefit to all he should then do it responsibly and represent both the travelers and the community he supports.  Conservatives, and Tea Party groups specifically, are dissatisfied with the amount of taxes we pay because of how the government spends it.  I have no problem paying taxes, I do have a problem when I have to suffer because I don’t have enough money, and I see politicians and union leaders living the high life on money they extorted from citizens like me.

 It is a myth to suggest that only conservatives & tea partiers have a beef with taxes and how the government spends money.

John, you outline circumstantial evidence of your claim but show no direct correlation between these circumstances and your assertion that the federal dollars sent to these states are responsible for the entrepreneurial activity that you point to… There is nothing in your article that shows a direct relationship, it is weak at best.  

Then you move on to the your dependency theory about how nearing the the age of social security and medicare benefits should slow one’s economic activity….  why should one’s economic activity slow up just because they are approaching an age where social security and medicare kick in?  That makes no sense whatsoever?  Why stop?  They are either making much more than retirement will provide them or they are trying to save to supplement the retirement income that they will receive, or they may not want to stop as sitting around the house really is not very stimulating and they find joy, worth, and social structure in their work.  

The only part of the article that makes any sense is the part about the biggest beneficiaries of government spending….  ie seniors are the same that are complaining about the size of government while demanding that their benefits not be touched…  much of this we can thank the democrats for with their indecent display of throwing Granny over the cliff last year…..  I still have images in my mind of Debbie Wasserman Schultz coming onto the TV decrying how Ryan was threatening the benefits of Social Security recipients for the benefit of the Koch bros…  the fact of the matter is that in the 2013 budget proposed by the president Social Security, Medicare, and Medicad alone will consume more than $1.625 trillion…  The administration has not educated our seniors to the fact that this is entirely unsustainable unless taxes are raised or benefits are cut!  It seems that our seniors seem to think that there is something akin to a trust fund as our government has not educated them to the fact there is no trust fund, that federal spending can not simply be reduced without effecting their benefits…  

Here is an interesting article explaining that we should not really count intergovernmental debt as debt… It would actually be humorous if it were not about such an important issue as what is really a national pension fund….  it is talking about the IOU’s between different governmental agency and why it is not calculated when determining debt….  those IOU’s that the director is talking about is the special class of treasury securities that the government has forced SSI trust fund to buy over the years….  Seniors do not fully realize that their benefits are fully paid for out of current tax receipts.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/blog/09/04/07/IOUanExplanation

Jack, I don’t assert entrepreneurship is sparked by government benefits. I assert that if Republicans were right two things would happen:

(1) The more gov’t benefits that flow into a state, the less entrepreneurship we would see. Why? Because Republicans claim gov’t benefits sap the ability of individuals to either maintain or become motivated to attain self-sufficiency. 

(2) If Republicans’ claims were true, folks would be settling down as they approach retirement, not starting businesses that research shows most fail within 5 years.

So the point is to show that gov’t benefits don’t affect our society in the way Republicans claim they do.

Even though I may not have correctly read your story I still don’t see any direct correlation, I live in Florida, and what happens in the Panhandle hardly effects what is happening in South Beach…. Unless you can show the demographics of the government spending and how it may or may not effect the populations receiving it you have done little more than throw out an unsubstantiated hypothesis. This story in my estimation is little more than fluff… Just so you know I generally look forward to reading your stories, I’m just not buying this one…

Wouldn’t want to suggest that, but as a platform Democrats never met a tax they didn’t like, and never fail to find new programs to spend people’s money on, so the generalization of Democrats being pro government nanny and high taxes and Republicans being for  individual rights and low taxes is valid.

Republicans should be sent to some Laogai to be re-educated through labor !

Just give it a scary name or the presidents name so they will fear it, but in reality it will benefit the conservatives the most.  These are the tactics the conservatives have to use, to get the sheep to follow them.

what a fraud, you libs are stupid, this foundation found that over 500,000 new businesses were created each month in 2010 yet the unemployement rate increased dramatically, where is that possible, fantasy lib land, where else?, your liberal math doesn’t equate, you morons

It’s like trying to describe color TV to someone who only sees in black and white; it’s very hard to do.  To a lot of people your article would make no logical sense.  

Right, it doesn’t make sense that people would lose their jobs then start their own sole proprietorships. Get a grip. Entrepreneurship increases during a recession. That’s been the case for quite some time. 

Good post – and that should be all everybody should be talking about. 

Yo john….

I believe you just threw a cow in the piranha pond.The water is slightly troubled.

Nice..

*drink*

“Mediaite is the site for news, information and smart opinions about print, online and broadcast media, offering original and immediate assessments of the latest news as it breaks.”

Some may wonder what those unpleasant insults against Republicans have to do here on Mediaite. I would add that the tone of  John S. Wilson is not neutral, it is a partisan piece, using labels against his enemies (he has to remember us that Heritage Foundation is “conservative”), and providing weak correlations only to confuse us. It is a unilateral opinion, which ignores and ridicules the “defense”, without any link to the usual content of this website. My guess is that it is only a distraction to avoid to talk about the Obama budget.

I’d agree with that statement.  During the buildup of the Tea Party I recall recently out of work people avoiding taking unemployment benefits because they felt they didn’t need it enough since they had family to lean on, and they’d never in their lives taken money they hadn’t earned.

You don’t see many conservatives getting arrested for demanding their nuggets at McDonalds.   The entitlement culture is a phenomenon of the left.

Having democrats as experts in business and entrepreneurship is very similar to having democrats in charge of teacher unions.  The results are ALWAYS mediocre.     

How many times did Reagan increase taxes? Eleven times?  How many Republicans are at those yellow tape cutting ceremonies?  How many taxes did Exxon pay?  They’re using roads, police, fire too.  

Excellent piece Mr. Wilson. I have been telling this to my conservative friends for awhile. 

That person walking down the road has to pay for that road and upkeep on that road.  You want to be able to use the road and not pay for it?  After you buy a house you get a tax deduction, but other people using that road who don’t have a home don’t. Your taxes you have been paying are at the lowest they have been in 50 years.  Maybe your employer is not paying you a good wage?    

But if you look at who gets entitlements you will have to look at the right too.  Most of the tea party were getting government entitlements.  I know you don’t like facts to get in your way.  

Here is a Republican key word “ALWAYS” and they capitalize it.  This is a symptom of seeing things in black and white, it’s either all this or all that.   They don’t look at the issue which is school funding.

“Folks like Mr. Gulbranson largely feel guilty for their dependence on
government because they’ve bought into a woefully unsupported Republican
concept: the more that individuals consume government benefits, the
less motivation they have to seek self-sufficiency.”

What stereotypical tripe!

So generational welfare really doesn’t exist? – or are you saying it’s only Democrats who feed at the government trough, and remain dependent on the trappings of taxpayer-funded support throughout their lives?

How can you be friend to those racist idiots ?

 The fatherless household rate and government spending on welfare programs – in all their myriad incarnations – was virtually non-existent when compared to the levels of today.
Back then, it was still a safety net, not a vote getting Plantation of dependency!

 I’d say that comment is racist.

Funny enough, but welfare is the least of the concerns when it comes to government benefits. It’s been overshadowed by Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid. Those three account for over 50% of the budget, btw.

I never suggested that. Article doesn’t say that either.

Point is that homeowners are getting a benefit that other folks don’t get. You can talk about government putting their hands in your pocket all they want, but they’re putting their hands in homeowners’ pockets less than others. That’s the point.

Conservative is not a race.

You really are an idiot.

 Try telling that to Warren Buffett, Bill Gates, and yes, George Soros.

 Do you have statistics to back that up?

didnt read the article but love the title…repubs dont know anything about businesses…we need more people like pelosi and harry reid  to make this country great….i mean remember how it was before republicans got majority of congress in 2010…cash for clunkers…all the stimulus loans/spending…i mean everyone was getting paid….now the money has dried up….bring back the dems!

Read the article next time. 

1.Could it possibly be when people get laid off and need to find ways to make money and don’t like living off the public dole they decide to try going into their own business.These people were laid off from jobs where they were working for somebody else and figure their best prospects when people aren’t hiring is to open their own business. As a franchisee of a major chain I had hundreds of people inquiring what it took to buy in to their own business.
2. If you lost your retirement funds and your life expectancy is over 80 why would you settle down? They could raise Social Security to 75 for my 2 little ones and they’ll have no problem working to their retirement.
There is common sense to all that has happened and your BS spin is just that BS.

My friend just met a chocolate man on Blackwhitemeet.COMit’s where for men and women looking for interracial’ship for a fabulous lifestyle
It’s a nice place for black white sing’les, to interact with each other…no bounds or extremes in front of true love.

Are you serious? They pay property taxes that fund schools and police and fire personnel. 
The measly write-off they get from interest doesn’t compare.
What school are you attending? I’ll make sure my 2 little ones don’t go there.  

lol. And you don’t think apartment complexes pay property taxes and build that cost into the rent that renters pay? Oh ok. 

Precisely.. magical correlations, analysis by wishing

It rains more in Seattle than it does in San Diego therefore San Diego is a has excessive rainfall because it is on the west coast.  It is easy, it is fun, it is a cornucopia of non sequitors.

I’m sure average Mediaiters will eat this up hook line and sinker, because it says what they want to hear.  

Oh and the Tea Party is racist, don’t forget that

you do realize that standing in the unemployment line or the welfare line is not a job right?

And even though homeowners pay property taxes that doesn’t entitle them to a tax break. All of what I’m saying was mentioned in the Simpson-Bowles Commission Report. Home interest deduction is a loser. Eventually the government will have little choice but to limit the subsidy. 

I’m not talking about jobs. I’m talking about entrepreneurs. Big difference.

I think you mistook what I said. I present no correlation between receiving gov’t benefits and entrepreneurship. In fact, my whole point is in showing that there is no correlation, which means Republicans are wrong when they say gov’t dependency kills self-sufficiency. 

I think you mistook what I said. I present no correlation between receiving gov’t benefits and entrepreneurship. In fact, my whole point is in showing that there is no correlation, which means Republicans are wrong when they say gov’t dependency kills self-sufficiency. As I pointed out in the article, entrepeneurship blooms in states that have a lot of gov’t dependency. 
Thanks for reading. And I do enjoy the dialogue.

 That’s six of one, and you know the rest.

Dependency is dependency, and the financial costs pale in comparison to the pernicious effects it has on the human psyche and spirit.

If dependency is dependency then, again, why is that entrepreneurship has increased in states where gov’t benefits have flowed?

I guess the principle, interest, insurance, maintenance, property taxes is such on incentive that home ownership is actually down. Seems that small deduction BENEFIT is NOT driving people to get into underwater housing.
People bought houses because that was the American Dream. It’s like owning your own business. You get all the headaches but it gives you some pride.
If I don’t pay for 6 months the bank forecloses and I lose everything while a renter lives 6 months free and loses nothing.
BTW some States do give tax deductions to renters if you fit certain requirements 

Yeah, teapartiers are all hypocrites.  The rich folk that advocate higher taxes on the rich yet hire a stable of accountants to avoid every penny of tax that they can – even as they advocate higher taxes on themselves! – are patriots.

I just condensed half of Mediaite’s posts into two sentences!

The article is fine, but the title of the article is false, partisan and juvenile.  Even if you’re right about the link between entrepeneurship and entitlement programs, one person or a handful of people in one party who hold one incorrect belief about that relationship does not mean that all people know nothing about all aspects of entrepeneurship. 

The author appears to have badly over-played his hand and showed his lack of fairness while doing so.

The article is fine, but the title of the article is false, partisan and juvenile.  Even if you’re right about the link between entrepeneurship and entitlement programs, one person or a handful of people in one party who hold one incorrect belief about that relationship does not mean that all the people in the party know nothing about all aspects of entrepeneurship.  

The author appears to have badly over-played his hand and showed his lack of fairness while doing so.

LOL… you and I are not communicating well today… may be my fault because I am better with math and logic than I am with words… When I read your article what jumped off the page at me was that you point out that entrepreneurship is doing well in states that have a lot of government assistance or as your article states dependency. My assertion is that your reverse correlation if you will, the logic you use in your article is flawed, that populations and communities in a state are so diverse that unless you choose a population receiving those benefits and drill down to see if those benefits are having an effect on the length of unemployment of those receiving benefits and produce statistical data then no real assumptions can be proven. The simple comparison you make means for me means nothing really, its kinda like saying that there are more rich people in West Palm Beach than most communities, so no one in West Palm Beach then is having a hard time economically, one has no bearing on the other. It would then also follow that when republicans make the claims that the extended benefits lead to longer unemployment and loss of job skills one may safely assume that they possibly are drawing their own conclusions without having statistical data available, even though that claim is somewhat more reasonable to me than is yours. It does stand to reason that when someone is paid to do nothing, then offered a job that only pays $100 more a week than they can get for not working, then they view the financial reward of working that 40 hr work week as only the $100 instead of the full paycheck that they will receive. If they don’t take that job it can lead to other problems that will make it even harder down the road for them to return back to work.

At any rate, a community may have both high rates of government assistance in one demographic, and a high rate of entrepreneurship in another demographic, and the two may never really interact or have influence upon one another and are statistically independent of each other, that was my point, that as logical as your statement may sound to you, it does not lend credibility to the argument against the republican statements being made. But without statistical data, their statements are really only conclusions they draw from logical leaps of faith.

I’m not suggesting there is a link between entrepreneurship and entitlement programs. I’m suggesting there is no correlation whatsoever and that entrepreneurship at times, many times, flows in areas with high prevalence of entitlement programs. 

Moreover, the title isn’t juvenile. Your reaction to it is. This is an opinion piece where the goal is to present a thesis then prove it in a conclusion. Nothing objective about that process. 

John, States are geographic areas, the people within those areas are not all alike, Wyoming is almost completely federally funded, but their are actual individuals who live by their own hands and minds their, even though most live off the low hanging fruit/federal vote bribes.

Social programs are not a “way out” of poverty, they lock people into their current strata.   The welfare state is literally internment, and much more insidious and disingenuous than what FDR did to the Japanese in WWII (which should not be justified by any means)

Giving people hope and opportunity and giving someone a check are completely polar opposites

I never said or assumed that people within an area were all alike. Step back for a second and first understand what I am saying in this article:

(1) Republicans claim that greater dependency on the federal government has an effect of lessening the amount of self-sufficiency in our society.

(2) If Republicans’ claims were true there should evidence of this in the number of people who seek to start their own businesses (this is a great measure of self-sufficiency). 

(3) If Republicans’ claims were true then those on the precipice of retirement (and guaranteed benefits) would have less — not more — incentive to start their own businesses. 

(4) I chose to disprove these claims with the information I have presented. 

Feel free to disagree with how I did, why I did, or that I did it. But please don’t tell me I did something that I didn’t in fact do. 

 That’s fine if that is your argument; it doesn’t change that your thread title is juvenile.  The fact that you did not address the second half of my comment proves this.  Your parroting my calling out your immaturity is further proof of your immaturity.