Community | April 16, 2011 | 58 comments

U.S. Ranks Dead Last In Overall Social Spending

Image
bundlebear
This report from the OECD and the business insider, could not have come at a more crucial time in our national debate regarding the federal budget and the course the Republicans have chosen to take.

The conservative pundits are trying to frame this debate along the lines that the deficit and debt of the United States was created by the liberal, nanny state programs. This is an outright lie they have drummed into the heads of the American people. Unfortunately, some of the pundits are trusted sources of information for millions of people.

The United States currently ranks thirty-fourth(34th) out of the thirty-four(34) members of the OECD in regards to spending on social programs, DEAD LAST.

The amount the United States spends is currently only 7.2% of our gross domestic product on programs that make up our social contract with the American people.

Remember a year ago when the conservative deficit hawks were warning that if the United States doesn’t start looking at our social programs we would end up like Greece?

They told us the reason Greece was in financial trouble was due to their social programs and if we, the United States didn’t want to become like Greece, we needed to cut back on our social expenditures. Well Greece spends 21.3% on social programs, 14.1% more than the United States does. That is a big difference!

Canada currently spends 26% of their GDP on social programs, yet their national debt is very small compared to the United States, it is about 50% of GDP. So is spending on social programs the real problem in America? According to these figures and data, the answer is no. It is a fabricated lie by those who seek to abolish the social contract and the new deal created almost 100 years ago.

Here is other comparisons between the USA and Germany. Currently Germany spends 21% of their GDP on social programs.

Population below 50% of median income

USA: 17%
GER: 8.4%

child poverty

USA: 22.4%
GER: 10.7%

infant mortality rate

USA: 7.8
GER: 5.4

Homicide rate

USA: 5%
GER: 0.86%

Life expectancy

USA: 78.3
GER: 79.4

White people:

USA: 65.4%
GER: 81% (not as much difference as i thought)

Unemployment rate

USA: 8.8%
GER: 6.3%

Exports per capita

USA: $3,375
GER: $14,169

Industrial sector as part of GDP

USA: 21.9%
GER: 26.8%

Industrial growth

USA: 3%
GER: 9%

There needs to be a real, non political discussion regarding our national debt. If spending on social programs isn’t the problem, it is either a spending problem in other government areas or it is primarily a revenue problem. Unfortunately our politicians do not look at this issue as non-political. At least we know now that the current budget put forward by the Republicans is really an ideological budget rather than a problem solving budget.

The bottom line is our social safety net is not part of the overall spending problem and that needs to be part of the debate and told to the American public.

http://www.politicususa.com/en/u-s-ranks-dead-last-in-overall-social-spending
  1. groups:
    Community,   Politics,   US Politics,   US News,   6 more
  2. tags:
    Social Services Loser last
  3.     
    |

58 comments // U.S. Ranks Dead Last In Overall Social Spending

  • publichousingstories
  • Ian_Judge_Lord
    • 0
      Ian_Judge_Lord  
    • Taxes in the United States are lower than they have been at any time since the 1950′s.

      At the same time the United States spends more on its Department of Defense each and every year than all of the money every single other developed industrial nations COMBINED in the world spend on all of their military armed forces PUT TOGETHER.

      If we slash the budget for the DOD to 5% (1/20) of what we currently presently spend,

      (We would still quite easily be more than capable to have an maintain what is an would continue to be by far and away the most technologically advanced and best trained armed fighting force in the known recorded history of our developed and industrialized western civilization) and at the same time restore tax rates to where they were they were in the mid-1950′s and early 60′s (taxes did not start to plummet until the 1970′s).

      We would have enough tax revenue, and enough of an annual budget surplus that we would not have to worry about not having enough money for the Departments of Education and Health and Human Services.

      (That is, until the 2050′s or 2060′s at the very least)

      The public Educational system in this nation, as first proposed by Benjamin Franklin and Thomas Jefferson at the turn of the 19th Century, is the very definition of a successful government program, by far and away the most successful in the history of the United States of America.

      The only reason that the rest of the countries in the industrialized developed world routinely beat the snot out of us to a bloody pulp on a predictably regular basis in every single last quantifiable measurement of academic proficiency is that each and every last one of the governments (SOCIALIST DEMOCRACIES, I might add) of the nations in the Western developed “civilized” world spends significantly substantially, exponentially more on their public educational systems than we ever have, And it’s for no other reason because their governments have more money to spend on such things as their Education and Health and Human Services systems Because the taxes that the citizens in those Western developed nations pay to their government are what tax rates in the Unites states were back at the end of the Second World War.

      The unavoidable conclusion being that the difference between the worlds BEST public educational system.

      (Those in the Socialist Democracies of Northern and Western Europe [Greenland, Iceland, Sweden, Norway, and Denmark all have literacy rates between 75% in Denmark and 100% in Iceland])

      And the failing public educational system (which is not next-to-last, but is instead rather DEAD LAST according to every single last quantifiable measure of academic achievement and proficiency) is precisely the exact same thing that makes the difference in every other sector of our society, MONEY.

      More specifically, the revenue generated by higher tax rates paid by citizens to their government.

      Just as an example of what it is that I am talking about:

      For one-fourth of the annual budget appropriation allocated each year for the Department of Defense at the Pentagon, we could eliminate university tuition and provide free college education to every high school graduate incoming freshmen for a number of several decades.

    • 1 year ago
  • musicjohnny
    • +1
      musicjohnny  
    • Image
    • Hey I already posted this below, but others have posted after I did so people probably aren't seeing the original post, but basically if you go to the OECD website right here:
      http://www.oecd.org/document/24/0,3746,en_2649_37419_2671576_1_1_1_37419,00.html

      and look at the numbers, it never says that we spend the least (as this article claims). It says we're 25th...not 34th. Still not great, but better than many.

      So basically whoever posted this is not using a credible source and obviously has some sort of agenda. Why else would they post something that claims something that blatantly isn't true?

      So check out the orignal OECD data, it's pretty interesting. Also, it's only current through 2007 and obviously in the past 4 years our social spending has increased even more so really the data doesn't reflect the current state of social spending anyway.

      Moral of the story....CHECK THE SOURCE! People lie and claim ridiculous 'facts'!

    • 1 year ago
  • Schnookums
    • +1
      Schnookums  
    • This is not making an apples to apples comparison. The figures for the US are looking at 'top line' federal spending and not including the various separate funding streams or state, county, and local benefits. Other countries don't have nearly the amount of separate income streams as the US does, and are thus all inclusive (much more efficient that way).

      7.2% of GDP is $1,052,640,000,000 yet outlays for Social Security of $641,540,609,916 in 2010 and Medicare of $458,273,721,511 alone add up to more than that number.

    • 1 year ago
  • kennymotown
  • BrushwithDeathToothpaste
  • musicjohnny
  • aj727b
  • sammykatz
    • +2
      sammykatz  
    • We all know the real cause of the deficit problem is not unbridled spending (except perhaps the military budget), it is the lack of revenue being generated by continued reduction in taxes, subsidies, and write offs to the large corporations and top 2% in our country..

    • 1 year ago
  • Ian_Judge_Lord
    • +5
      Ian_Judge_Lord  
    • the SOCIALIST nations of Northern, Central, and Western Europe are, on a regular basis, roundly trouncing the United States of America in every measurable qualification of economic, social, and governmental success

      The United Kingdom of Great Britain, Italy, Germany, France, Switzerland, The Netherlands, Denmark, Sweden, Finland, and Norway

      just to name a few of the many more

      if you combine the populations of every single nation in all of Western Europe, you would arrive at a number approximately comparable to the current present population of the United States of America

      The number of gun-related deaths in western Europe each year can be measured in the thousands
      the same number in the United States is measured in the HUNDREDS of thousands, if not the millions
      The same basic rule applies in every conceivable measure of the strength, health, and well-being of a society anyone can think of, from math and science education to disease, from teen pregnancy to drug and alcohol abuse, from literacy to higher education admissions and graduations

      The disagreements and arguments that we have in this country over subjects such as the so-called quote-en-quote “War on Drugs”, Equal Rights for Homosexual individual, female’s reproductive rights to the freedom of choice,

      not to mention, to say nothing of, by far and away above and beyond all others the uniquely and quintessentially American contrivance of the mass-delusion known as “Intelligent Design”, which is widely considered to be the punch-line to many a very quite humorous and funny joke and practical prank in most, if not all, other parts of the English-speaking world.

      The lack of unity and hypocrisy that we as Americans display publicly on these issues, among many, many others, utterly confounds and mystifies most of the rest of the developed industrialized world, as most, if not all, of the most successful and prosperous nations in the world have already long-since resolved any and all such trivial and ultimately utterly meaningless deliberations
      the fact that we have not flabbergasts and astounds most of the people of Western Europe in particular

      WHY?

      Because they have social systems, such as those for education and health care, which prevent any such conflicts from ever having arisen anywhere in their respective nations

      and they predictably beat us to a pulp on a pretty regular basis in every single last quantifiable measurement of success and prosperity.

      with any proper education beyond an Elementary School level, the question of “does evolution occur in the natural world, becomes childish

      and yet we here in America have significantly substantial fractions and percentages of our young people “graduating” from Twelfth-Grade High Schools all over throughout our country who are utterly incapable of knowing how to read or write their own names

      In any adequate health care system, the issue of whether or not a woman should have the right to decide whether or not to have children she does not want should never even exist

      yet in the right here in the good-old US of A we have Medical doctored murdered and assassinated (shot) on a depressingly regular and disturbingly predictable basis, of about one every ten years or so, who are killed BECAUSE they are ready, willing and able to perform a fairly uncomplicated, efficient and expedient medical procedure which has been, and is (for the present moment, at the very lest, still perfectly legal under the code of law that govern this country and we have a whole entire multi-media corporate conglomerate empire which is solely and sincerely dedicated in its entirety to lionizing the individuals who carry out these brutal slayings as “true American Heroes”

      Is it, indeed, any wonder that the nations of the English-speaking world, and of Western Europe in particular, look upon the United States of America, the origin, birthplace, and cradle of modern democracy as we know it, as a global worldwide pariah, desperately lacking in even the most basic of societal infrastructure, and sorely trailing distantly far behind the rest of its global competitors throughout the globe in ever conceivable measurable standard of development and social sustainability?

      Why is it, then, when the vast majority of the most successful and prosperous nation in the world are sustainably societally strong SOCIALIST Democracies, with societal infrastructure far superior to any the Americas has ever devised, that there is an entire corporate media conglomeration ([the so-called, quote en quote Republican "Tea Party" GOP and its Public Relations division, the Australian-billionaire and Saudi-Prince own Faux "News network]) wholly devoted and committed to the singular purpose turning the word “Socialist” into something approaching an unutterable curse?

    • 1 year ago
  • twinite
  • August_K
  • musicjohnny
    • 0
      musicjohnny  
    • Ian_Judge_Lord:

      One really quick thing....the number of gun related deaths in the last reported year (2007) was actually just over 75,000...nowhere close to millions lol. Check your facts! Great post otherwise.

    • 1 year ago
  • Ian_Judge_Lord
  • EmperorThan
    • +2
      EmperorThan  
    • Just more proof that we're being taken over by Socialists! GAH! When will you people see these signs!!!

      *resumes watching Glenn Beck* *drools on lapel*

    • 1 year ago
  • Richard_Wyatt
  • musicjohnny
    • +5
      musicjohnny  
    • Image
    • Hey everybody! Guess what? If you go back and find the data on the OECD website (a bit hard to locate, but it's here: http://www.oecd.org/document/24/0,3746,en_2649_37419_2671576_1_1_1_37419,00.html just scroll down to Section 6 labeled social spending and you can download the pdf)

      you'll see something interesting....

      WHAT THE ARTICLE CLAIMS ISN'T TRUE! It would appear that we actually rank 25th out of the listed countries which admittedly isn't great, but it's also not last as whoever posted this article claimed. In addition, in terms of out total net social (not as a percentage of gdp but just in terms of how many dollars we spend compared to others) we're actually third. just Also, the OECD data says that between 1982 and 2007 the amount of social spending in the U.S. went up 2% of our GDP. Once again that's not a lot, but compared to 11 other countries (including Canada) who over that same time period either spent exactly the same or decreased their percentage, its not bad. It's also worthwhile to point out that although the OECD publication is from this year, the data the used was only through 2007. Obviously, since then we passed the Healthcare Reform legislation which means we're spending a good bit more now that didn't make it in to the data they used.

      So to whoever posted this article....great job on not checking your facts. To everybody else, go click the link and download the Excel spreadsheet to check out the real data. It's way more interesting than this bogus article.

    • 1 year ago
  • kvb1
    • +2
      kvb1  
    • musicjohnny:

      You cannot look at the total dollars spent and do a comparison. We are so much larger than other countries, we would spend more. However, how much you spend and the quality you get for the dollars spent is another thing. Our system is wholly inefficient, and many of the dollars we spend goes to profits, where in other OECD countries it goes to actual care and other social programs. No one gets enriched by sending someone to college or going to the doctor.

      Much of the money that we spend, in terms of tax credits or subsidies for healthcare never makes it to the system. It goes right to the top to huge corporations that divy the money up between corporate management and Wall St. You doctor and especially nurses get less and less of that pie.

      We also spend billions on new technology that does not improve the outcomes of health care or education. However, it makes us feel better that we have the next "great" thing.

      What makes Europe so much better in their health outcomes is that they have nationalized integrated and coordinated healthcare. If you want to see anything like that in this country, you need to look at the Veterans Health Administrations. It is one of the Best systems in the world, a leader in electronic medical records, coordinated care and one of the best systems for keeping costs down. And they have one of the most difficult medical populations to deal with: older patients that suffer from age related health issues as well as mental health and cancers related to warfare. Yet the VHA provides better care at lower cost than any other healthcare system in the country.

      If we spent like other OECD countries on real health care and education, not on profits, we would have a better society, period.

    • 1 year ago
  • musicjohnny
    • 0
      musicjohnny  
    • kvb1:

      Yeah obviously you can't look at total dollars (even though it is interesting) my point was that the data says that we're not last even as a percentage of GDP (which is what the article claims).

    • 1 year ago
  • totally_dilapidated
    • +4
      totally_dilapidated  
    • Shewww... I had to go through 2 websites to find out OECD is:
      The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development

      With a graph of social spending against military spending, it ought to make a shockingly good image...

    • 1 year ago
  • stubones
  • stubones
    • 0
      stubones  
    • stubones:

      And yes, until we put an end to these totally senseless wars, tax the uber rich and corporations and above all go after wall street for the stolen money, then I guess election reform and K-street bribery will have to wait, or should that come first?

    • 1 year ago
  • nanac
    • +2
      nanac  
    • The fact that the US ranks last in Social Spending is not by accident, it's by design..Republicans primary goals, dating as far back as Ronald Reagan, were to abolish most or all Social Programs, and cut taxes for the Rich...

    • 1 year ago
  • twinite
    • +5
      twinite  
    • Yet we're #1 in military expenditures

      Rank Country Military expenditure, 2010[2] % of GDP, 2009

      1 United States 687,105,000,000 4.7%

      2 People's Republic of China 114,300,000,000 2.2%
      3 France 61,285,000,000 2.5%
      4 United Kingdom 57,424,000,000 2.7%
      5 Russia 52,586,000,000 4.3%
      6 Japan 51,420,000,000 1.0%
      7 Germany 46,848,000,000 1.4%
      8 Saudi Arabia 42,917,000,000 11.2%
      9 Italy 38,198,000,000 1.8%
      10 India 34,816,000,000 2.8%
      11 Brazil 28,096,000,000 1.6%
      12 South Korea 24,270,000,000 2.9%
      13 Canada 20,164,000,000 1.5%
      14 Australia 19,799,000,000 1.9%
      15 Spain 15,803,000,000 1.1%

    • 1 year ago
  • artemis6
  • rustyred
    • +6
      rustyred  
    • Blame the right-wing Republicans because they just HATE social services. They do not want their taxes helping the less fortunate, especially since they believe this is mostly minorities including women and children. If one believes in helping others then the Republicans call him or her a Socialist.

    • 1 year ago
  • Warren_Merrill
    • -12
      Warren_Merrill  
    • The US spends less on social programs than socialistic countries. Go figure! Was someone paid to do this research? Next they will research the sun sets in the west.

    • 1 year ago
  • RaceBannon
  • timetide
  • totally_dilapidated
  • totally_dilapidated
    • +3
      totally_dilapidated  
    • RaceBannon:

      I was in Australia for a number of years.
      It is not a socialist country. But they do have great social services woven into their society.
      As an example, they have a 2-tier medical system. A private and a public. Works like a charm.

      It looks like usa medical is moving toward that system.

    • 1 year ago
  • David_H
  • totally_dilapidated
  • Warren_Merrill
  • ahiguy
  • August_K
    • +2
      August_K  
    • Warren_Merrill:

      "The reason Democrats have no interest in solving poverty is they would lose their constituency. It's why Democrats are into redistribution of wealth."

      It's kind of hard to pull people out of poverty when the GOP keeps cutting taxes for the top earners and then expects the middle class and poor to pay for the GOP created revenue deficits.

      CNN pointed out in a recent budget quiz that corporations currently contribute ONLY 1/10 of governments revenue.....got that? they only contribute one tenth!

      But the top 400 hold more wealth than 155 Million people ***combined**** who work for a weekly paycheck.

      And YOU think that it's the Democrats fault that we have a growing income divide and poverty?

      Please, take your "the rich will save us and provide lots of jobs if we just give them more tax cuts" bullshit and shovel it somewhere else.

    • 1 year ago
  • August_K
  • ibrake4rappers13
    • 0
      ibrake4rappers13  
    • August_K:

      You say the poor pay for the deficits, when in fact more than half of the governments revenue comes from the top 5% alone.And some in the bottom 50% actually get a tax refund.

      I dont know where you get your numbers, but i would suggest somewhere other than cnn.

    • 1 year ago
  • eden49
  • Mark701
    • +2
      Mark701  
    • Warren_Merrill:

      Warren, with all due respect, you have your head up your ass. Why is it when the rich and multi-billion dollar corporations receive trillions of dollars in tax breaks, and bailouts conservo's like yourself say nothing. But when the poor receive money from the US government, it's socialistic.

      It's all money the federal government pays OUT. The only difference is one method is a direct payment, the other indirect.

    • 1 year ago
  • Mark701
    • +1
      Mark701  
    • Warren_Merrill:

      I guess the democrats have prevented the uber-rich and multi billion dollar corporations from raising us out of poverty. If they were just allowed to run things like they do in China, Mexico, India, Bangladesh, etc., everything would fix itself....oh wait.

    • 1 year ago
  • madammarsh
    • 0
      madammarsh  
    • ibrake4rappers13:

      The fact that, as you say, some in the bottom 50% get a tax refund, means nothing, other than that earners who have more tax withheld than they will owe, will get the overage refunded. The federal gov't gets to use those people's money as an interest-free loan until it's refunded. It has nothing to do with the tax rate of the earners in question. Personal finance specialists recommend that if you are getting a big refund every year, you are having too much withheld and you can/should reduce your withholding, to avoid giving the gov't that interest-free loan.

    • 1 year ago
  • Warren_Merrill
    • 0
      Warren_Merrill  
    • August_K:

      "It's kind of hard to pull people out of poverty when the GOP keeps cutting taxes for the top earners and then expects the middle class and poor to pay for the GOP created revenue deficits."

      This is baloney. 45% of tax payers (those below a certain income level) aren't paying federal income taxes. So what is it they are paying for if they aren't paying anything? All they have to do is stop complaining and improve their situation. Unfortunately liberals tell them there's nothing they can do about their situation and it's someone else's fault.

      Why don't you stop worrying what someone else has and start concerning yourself with your own welfare? Take care of yourself. Then take care of others. If everyone did this there would be a lot less poverty.

      I've never concerned myself with people who have more than me. I concerned myself with what I needed to secure security for myself and my family. Once I did that I started helping others. Even my charitible and professional jobs are about helping people who want to get somewhere achieve it.

    • 1 year ago
  • UtopianSky
  • UtopianSky
  • timetide
  • KB723
    • +1
      KB723  
    • swindled by Goldman-Sachs and the like... BenjaminDover, Greece Portugal and Spain were not the only ones.... They also ransacked our economy as well... Hmmmm I wonder what religion the folks at Goldman-Sachs practice???

    • 1 year ago
  • August_K
    • +2
      August_K  
    • KB723:

      Murdoch also owns a publishing company and it publishes a book called Satan's Bible.
      I'm guessing Murdoch sent them all complimentary copies of the latest edition.

    • 1 year ago
  • KB723
  • BenjaminDover
    • +6
      BenjaminDover  
    • The only problem with Greece, Portugal,Spain and the rest is they were swindled by Goldman-Sachs and the like, then bond traders decided that if they could crash the economies of these countries they could make money on the deals. Fucking banksters playing masters of the universe, destroying the social contracts of sovereign nations and our allies.
      I've got a shovel and I know how to use it, let's put these banksters in their place.
      End the Plutocracy!

    • 1 year ago
  • Milieu
    • +3
      Milieu  
    • This need to be shoved into the faces of Every Republican Mafia Member and their Masters, as well as force fed, with size 900 needles, if needed, into every member of Tea Baggers skulls.

    • 1 year ago
  • David_H
  • totally_dilapidated
    • +1
      totally_dilapidated  
    • David_H:

      here is the base of your succession:

      Republican agenda: lower taxes, have middle class pay for country services
      Democrat agenda: raise taxes, have everyone pay for country services

      Republicans: united as one
      Democrats: splintered with Blue Dogs

      Republicans get their agenda forwarded more often

      that is the continuous state of affairs...

    • 1 year ago
  • David_H
  • totally_dilapidated
  • August_K
    • 0
      August_K  
    • David_H:

      Really? Then why are the GOP/teapublicans trying to cut funding to the Consumer Financial Protection agency that Elizabeth Warren is trying to put together?

      And why is the GOP trying to kill off the (already too weak) Dodd–Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act ?

      It sure seems like the GOP is leading the charge to make sure that banks and wall street get to continue playing their reckless games......

    • 1 year ago
  • madammarsh
    • 0
      madammarsh  
    • David_H:

      I was guilty of not paying enough attention during much of Clinton admin., but I knew I didn't like the smell of NAFTA one bit. I agree with most of what you say here. Look back to just before the 2010 election--how many Democratic incumbents were trying their damnedest to look like Republicans. Of that group, it would be instructive to see the votes on/sponsorship of legislation by those who did get reelected.

    • 1 year ago
  • KB723
    • +2
      KB723  
    • I am going out on a limb here bundlebear... Throwing in the Old SP pun on words... "Pundints!!!!" Had to get that out!!!! =)

    • 1 year ago
more from Community:

top videos