MyGovCost News & Blog

John Stossel’s Freeloaders TV Special Unmasks the Hypocrisy of the U.S. Welfare State

Monday March 28th, 2011   •   Posted by David Theroux at 12:11am PDT   •   37 Comments

John Stossel at Fox Business recently hosted a superb one-hour program, “Freeloaders,” that brings up to date another program he did on the same subject at ABC’s “20/20″ in 2006. In the new program, he critiques the welfare state in America and takes on major corporations, millionaire entertainers, panhandlers, Indian Reservations, and anyone on the dole. Stossel notes that:

In America today, who are the biggest freeloaders? Panhandlers? Poor people?

You may be surprised that some of America’s biggest recipients of handouts are rich people, and well-connected corporations. The biggest corporate freeloaders may be the biggest industrial corporation in the world: General Electric.

Here is the segment on General Electric and other major corporations that push for and line up for enormous federal subsidies:

Here also is the program’s segment on how federal government controls and welfare statism have destroyed the lives of native Americans living on government reservations:

And here is the segment on the Pigford race discrimination case against by the U.S. Department of Agriculture in which 97,000 black “farmers” have applied to receive $50,000 each in the settlement even though according to the U.S. Census, there are only 18,000 black farmers:



37 Responses to “John Stossel’s Freeloaders TV Special Unmasks the Hypocrisy of the U.S. Welfare State”

  1. Steve Ponton says:
    March 28, 2011 at 6:11 am

    Mr. Stossel:

    While I admire some of your work, your piece on Native Americans showed how the American education system has failed you and displayed your considerable ignorance on the subject.
    1. You are living on stolen land that was stolen outright by the dominant culture or wrestled away by lopsided treaties.
    2. The Indians gave up their land and in return the US pledged certain things via treaties.
    3. Treaties are exactly on par with the highest law of the land, the US Constitution.
    4. You are absurd in your statements of, “Why no Bureau of Irish Affairs”? Why? Because the Irish did not occupy and roam freely over North America like the Indians did before their land was stolen. Either did the Italian, Germans, etc. Only the Natives!! That’s why there is a BIA, Tribal sovereignty, protected water rights, etc., enshrined in the Constitution itself and various US Supreme Court cases. Clearly, you need to take some history courses...
    5. Native life and culture was turned upside down by the dominant culture. It takes generations to adapt to some drastic changes. How would you adapt, and how many generations would it take, if you were forced to completely change your life, culture, religion, etc??? All, after having given up most of your prime land to an alien culture using force?
    6. Kids in US schools spend weeks or even months studying Greek City States and Euro-centric topics, but almost no time at all studying Native history right here on this continent.
    7. The lady did not give very good answers to your questions. I wish you would have ask me those questions.
    8. This may have been your worst piece ever, except maybe when years ago you appeared to have never heard of the ACLU. A good organization, by the way, that supports the Bill of Rights in the Constitution. You should join.
    GOOD LUCK

  2. David Theroux says:
    March 28, 2011 at 11:59 am

    Steve, You are of course correct that native Americans (NAs) had land taken from them, but this was not uniquely done by European immigrants but indeed happened for thousands of years in North America by other NAs to each other. Indeed, rival NA tribes practiced slavery and massacres against each other on a recurring basis.

    But let’s limit the matter to the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) which appears to be what you seek to defend. The BIA is a corrupt socialist system that has kept NAs in a system of poverty, disease, spousal and drug abuse, ignorance, and far more for generations. It is an utter failure and a disgrace and should be abolished, along with the Indian Health Service and all agencies run by the U.S. government that pertain to NAs. Yes, let’s allow NAs to establish sovereignty and in the process end any tax support for and mandates from the U.S. government on them. Many NAs had systems of property rights and market enterprises, but federal involvement has obliterated this great and essential tradition.

    Here are some references to examine:

    “The Culture of Violence in the American West: Myth versus Reality,” by Thomas J. DiLorenzo (The Independent Review, Fall 2010)

    “Sovereign Nations or Reservations? An Economic History of American Indians, by Terry Anderson,” reviewed by Ronald Trosper (The Independent Review, Fall 1997)

    “The Not So Wild, Wild West: Property Rights on the Frontier, by Terry L. Anderson and Peter J. Hill,” reviewed by Lee J. Alston (The Independent Review, Fall 2005)

    “The Feds versus the Indians,” by Thomas J. DiLorenzo

  3. sharon smith says:
    March 29, 2011 at 9:00 am

    Superb!

  4. Mavis Kingbird says:
    March 29, 2011 at 9:53 am

    Boozhoo...you’ll have to remember that treaties are the supreme law of land. You’ll hae to take some courses in Indian History, Federal Indian Law, and perhaps Indian Literature too.

    I am very disturbed by your total ignorance of my Native American culture and more disgusted with your knowledge base of who we really are as the first Americans on this beautiful continent.

    My ancestors were here for centuries and lived a life free of contamination and ignorance. Today, we have to struggle with
    many issues plus still fight for our freedoms and our rights to culture and traditions.

    Remember, we are here to stay. This is my ancesters homeland and I cherish every inch of what they tried to save for all the generations yet to come.

    I think you need to be more versed in your knowledge before you make
    such crazy remarks about my people.

    Study guy!

  5. David Theroux says:
    March 29, 2011 at 4:47 pm

    Mavis, You are kidding yourself if you believe that native American people historically “lived a life free of contamination and ignorance”. Of course, we must first recognize the great diversity among such people regarding social organization, legal systems, etc., as some were hunter-gatherers, others had agricultural communities, etc. Nevertheless, child mortality rates averaged 50% for such pre-modern cultures (as was the case worldwide), disease was widespread and life expectancy was very low.

    Today, as socialist operations supported and regulated by the federal government, Indian reservations are dominated by the grim reality of widespread alcoholism, drug abuse, suicide, poverty, illiteracy, poor housing and unemployment.

    I have given you above references regarding the effects of statism on oppressing native Americans, but it is up to you to examine these objectively.

  6. S. Erbert says:
    March 31, 2011 at 9:30 pm

    There are numerous treaties between the US and Native American Nations. Mr. Ponton, what specifically are you referring to, and in which treaties, that promises an everlasting dole from the US to various Indian tribes?

    For example, there is no mention whatsoever of dole payments or any other form of financial support of any kind within the Treaty with the Chocktaw, nor the Delaware.

    You can’t simply pronounce the word ‘treaty’ as if it were a magic word that automatically legitimizes freeloading.

  7. Kerry Holton says:
    April 1, 2011 at 6:14 am

    S. Erbert there are references of annuities in Delaware treaties. However treaties are nothing more than documented scams that the U.S. created never intended to uphold although they shall.
    The Delaware Nation signed more treaties than any other Nation with promises of being the 14th State in the Union, a seat in congress, never to be relocated, education money for future generations. I can fill multiple pages. You are correct in Delaware treaties “there is no mention whatsoever of dole payments”. So where is the state, the seat, the lands that would never be relocated? Monetary compensation is the only way to fulfill today those eternal promises of yesterday. It is owed!! Treaty is not a magic word it is a very powerful word that today is not understood, obviously misconstrued and has never been upheld. Learn the treaties, the treaty process and most importantly how the treaties have tried to deminish a people…unsuccessfully. Now that Tribal Nations have a treaty instead of there lands, resources and way of life. The treaty now becomes the resource for survival, existance and in some instances a way of life. Created by the U.S.

    There is little truth in the program. Sensationlized TV programming misses more than it recognizes. The Lumbees as a “State Recognized Tribe” HAVE received federal assistance, could not build a casino and cannot be called a Nation or a government. They have not been recognized legitimately, state recognition is illegal and yet it carries with it access to as many federal programs and financial aid as a properly federally recognized Nation. This is the real scam! Presented in a different light to create a hollow arguement.
    I do agree that Tribal Nations must and should be proactively working to seperate itself completely from the U.S. government and be self sufficient/self governing. This will not forgive all indebtness that the U.S. owes. Of course as that day of self suffiency approaches it just adds to John Stossels point that fortunate people are “Freeloading”. John it’s called paying your bills, atoning for what is owed. Would you suggest that all debts are forgiven once success is achieved. Where is that in the treaty?

    Kerry Holton
    President
    Delaware Nation

  8. David Theroux says:
    April 1, 2011 at 12:12 pm

    Kerry, Thank you for your note. However, the first point you overlook is that the citizenry of the U.S. is not responsible for the thefts of lands from people a hundred+ years ago and there is no moral basis for them to be forced to pay reparations in the form of welfare statism to the Delaware Tribe’s government, which in turn abuses it for its own internal purposes (just as do foreign governments that receive U.S. foreign aid). By definition, no citizenry is its government nor are individuals responsible for the evil deeds of others in or out of government. In addition, no contract entered into by certain individuals is an obligation to others who did not consent to such an agreement, and this pertains to treaties by government officials alive or deceased. To support reparations from innocent people to pay for the crimes of others is simply support for society-wide slavery. Where land thefts did occurred, title searches should be made to determine what was stolen and from whom and by whom (especially including living government officials who maintain the BIA system) in order to determine any possible just outcome of restitution. But, a blanket claim based on race, ethnicity, religion, language, or any other collectivist concept is nonsense and in fact tyrannical. This indeed was the exact basis for the Nazi’s collectivist claims.

    But the further point that you avoid is the grinding fact that the BIA and the various tribal governments that are complicit in this disgraceful system have been responsible for the destruction of the lives of native Americans on a gigantic scale and in every respect (e.g., health, eduction, crime, substance abuse, spousal and child abuse, corruption, suicide, housing, employment, etc.). Indeed, this system is Exhibit A in how NOT to treat people and how NOT to organize a society and an economy, especially for the most disadvantaged. Socialism is an abject failure and all aspects of the this nightmare should be ended now with all assets privatized to individual tribal members. All individuals need their rights to own and peacefully use private property respected and protected so that they can pursue their own choices to improve the lives of themselves and others.

    There is a wealth of superb analysis of this issue, and we hope that you will take the time to examine it. Here again are just some samples:

    “The Culture of Violence in the American West: Myth versus Reality,” by Thomas J. DiLorenzo (The Independent Review, Fall 2010)

    “Sovereign Nations or Reservations? An Economic History of American Indians, by Terry Anderson,” reviewed by Ronald Trosper (The Independent Review, Fall 1997)

    “The Not So Wild, Wild West: Property Rights on the Frontier, by Terry L. Anderson and Peter J. Hill,” reviewed by Lee J. Alston (The Independent Review, Fall 2005)

    “The Feds versus the Indians,” by Thomas J. DiLorenzo

  9. Ni says:
    April 2, 2011 at 11:09 pm

    David....

    Any attempt to reframe treaties as anything other than what they are—legally binding statutes which are the supreme law of the land—is an attempt to engage in dishonest deliberation. What Indians have “gained” in treaties is no more “reparations” than those things the government (and by extension you) has gained in turn from being the other party to these ententes.

    And that’s part of the problem here: You, nor most others, never seem to calculate your own benefits from these things as U.S. citizens. It just never seems to occur to you. Instead, the narrative is that everything the United States has, seemingly, is by natural right, and what the Indians get is being “taken” from that.

    This really is some otherworldly, parallel universe ****, David. It takes a special kind of dedicated, institutionalized cognitive dissonance to come up with this manner of rationale for the order of things as they are. In a way, I will never understand it. Yet in a sense, I do.

    Governments are continuous representative bodies; they do not become “different” in any manner simply because either those whom they represent or those running them move on in any manner (any more than you become a different person with complete cell turnover in your body). That’s just absurd. And it appears to me you’re intelligent enough certainly to realize that. (Maybe a civics lesson on what republicanism in representation entails is necessary along with history, though. And we can certainly have that discussion, as well. But I do have to think you know better.)

    Complete privatization, or dissolution of tribal lands (see: U.S. termination policies), has been tried before (and fairly recently) and nothing has had worse effect on Indian peoples in recent times. It was merely another land and resource grab, with the same underlying cause. Nothing changes...... only the supporting rhetoric.

    It’s not that BIA is wonderful (although it certainly is close to a 180 from earlier times), but, yes, much in the system is indeed broken. Always has been. It was never truly intended for the best benefit of the Indian in the first place, and so, how could it succeed? This doesn’t mean everything needs to be scrapped, though.

    Unless you get a new car every time yours no longer gets you where you need to go effectively. Then I can understand that.

  10. David Theroux says:
    April 4, 2011 at 11:43 am

    Ni, A treaty for those who did not consent to it has no standing on those who did not agree because such an agreement depends on whether the parties involved have a right to the property they are including in the contract, and they have no claim on others who did not agree. For example, a contract by a slave owner to sell persons he/she owns, even if recognized by a government, is void because such property claims are counter to natural-law tenets against slavery. The slave owner has no just claim of the person enslaved and cannot justly make obligations for this person. Anyone who understands the history of native Americans should know the special relevance of this point, especially since native people were repeatedly taken, enslaved, and sold by both rival tribes and European immigrants. Here are just some sample references refuting the argument from Hegel and Rousseau that you are using for the “social contract” view that justice is based on the might-makes-right view of government power:

    “Property Rights and the Theory of Contracts,” by Murray Rothbard

    “’Human Rights’ as Property Rights,” by Murray Rothbard

    “Consent of the Governed,” by Robert Higgs

    “A Libertarian Theory of Contract: Title Transfer, Binding Promises, and Inalienability,” by N. Stephan Kinsella

    “Justice and Property Rights: The Failure of Utilitarianism,” by Murray Rothbard

    “Toward a Reformulation of the Law of Contracts,” by Williamson Evers

    “The Anatomy of the State,” by Murray Rothbard

    No Treason: The Constitution of No Authority, by Lysander Spooner

    Nullification, by Thomas Woods, Jr.

    The Politics of Obedience: The Discourse of Voluntary Servitude, by Etienne de la Boetie

    As for the issue of “privatization”, it is socialism that has and is oppressive and utterly destructive to the economic and social well-being for those forced to live under any form of statism. The references in my comments above provide a refutation of this matter pertaining to native Americans and it is socialism (in this case, welfare statism) that continues to keep so many native Americans in such destitution, NOT what happened to them 150 years ago. There are countless examples of ethnic groups who have experienced far, far more repression who have risen up to establish themselves with economic well-being, long lifespans, and individual worth and dignity, and in every case, this has happened by privatization/marketization and eliminating government control over their lives. I would hence recommend the following books as blueprints of what native Americans should do now instead of continuing the disgraceful nonsense of BIA and other forms of collectivism:

    Making Poor Nations Rich: Entrepreneurship and the Process of Economic Development, by Benjamin Powell

    Lessons from the Poor: Triumph of the Entrepreneurial Spirit, by Alvaro Vargas Llosa

  11. Sharon Bennett says:
    April 6, 2011 at 4:25 pm

    I missed part of this news report on freeloaders and also the rebroadcast of it. Is there anywhere to obtain the show for viewing? What I did see was most interesting.

  12. Ni says:
    April 8, 2011 at 12:03 am

    Thanks for the links, but I’m not actually making that argument, and can’t imagine how you took that from it.

    My point still stands about not seeing the benefit(s) you’ve gained in turn from these treaties, and that the discussion is always framed as one-sided where such “benefits” are regarded. If Indians must give up that which was agreed to in treaties, then it seems the other party must do so as well (since Indians at present never gave their consent, either); the point at which one abrogates a contract, their own entitlements through the agreement end as well. And I don’t think you’d have any argument about a reversal there from Indians. You would be able to see, for once, who really receives the greatest benefit.

    Your premise is pretty strange, though. Essentially, no one is subject to laws which preceded them. Huh? Even still, direct consent, for those able to give such, isn’t typical under our system of governance anyway. Were it, we’d never get much accomplished. That’s why we have representatives. Is that what we’re arguing against? I just want to make sure you’re on the right page with yourself. We can’t even begin to entertain abstractions like “natural law” if we can’t first recognize what is in fact concrete. I just have to think you’re trying to see what you can get away with, though. It’s too bizarre.

    And I’m not sure what you’re going on about socialism for. But your premise is flawed here, too. Take a look at the world’s top economies. Not a one isn’t mixed. Seems like a balance, as in all things, is necessary to prosper economically. Tell us what solutions the free market has provided in Somalia. Surely they are evident, as this is the world’s most perfect incubator of eliminating government and allowing the market to dictate terms – all those things you seem to be advocating as a panacea.

    But yes, Indians would like more freedom. You need to reflect on a point I made earlier about the system never being set up to help Indians to begin with. It was simply about controlling a problem. Under such structure, success can only ever be seen by one party, to the detriment of the other.

    Though you and others would rather not bother, it seems, it is the obligation and duty of the United States to rectify this. Scrapping it is just letting folks off the hook.

    Where’s the accountability? It’s being passed along.

  13. Violet S. says:
    April 9, 2011 at 1:00 pm

    Our country needs to stop giving out all handouts, without a contract that has ramification of imprisonment and death if falsified by the applicant. Because I believe in my sole it is unconstitutional and discriminatory to the less fortunate who are truly in need of help.

    I am sickened by the pictures and stories of families who are losing homes and ending up in shelters in, hello….. AMERICA!

    Give me a break….handouts need to help get these families back to work and on their feet so they become productive citizens again.

    Also we need health care…….Open our Military Base hospitals to all American Civilians…..We own these Military Bases and we should have free access to Health Care at them.

    But when you look at greed in this country look at Bill Gates, he tried to have a clean business and give out free software so that everyone could enjoy the computer……..Oh my said the Government we can’t have that, let’s sue him and make him plead and beg his case in congress. So Bill Gates is forced to become one of the creeps in Washington and now his lobbyist take care of him so the good old creeps in Washington get their cut and the hell with the struggling families in America.

    It is time for Americans to wake up and start marching against all this greed and finger pointing.

  14. David Reynolds says:
    April 9, 2011 at 7:14 pm

    I never had an idea of the breadth and depth of unadulterated government handouts. The more I investigate the more obvious it has become what a pathetic group of totally useless socialists we are breeding in the United States of America. It’s like a tidal wave of locust devouring everything in their path. We’re handing out BILLIONS and BILLIONS of dollars to corporate and individual FREELOADERS. It makes you wonder how we could have degenerated to such a point of mindless depravity. When you consider how this country was created and all the sscrifices our founding fathers made, it has to make you sick to your stomach.

  15. Randy says:
    April 10, 2011 at 1:58 am

    In all honesty, this ploy about treaties with such out of date terms and repercussions is a poor strawman at best. They are history and nothing relevant with the BIA or modern problems within Tribes. That they are the source of all problems today on reservations is a bogus argument so many years as we are into the future.

    Stossel’s premise that freeing up these people from government handouts as the best course of action is not only solid, but practical as well. Trying to bleed a turnip dry for the sake of history is just plain stupid. If the Native Americans can find their way to prosperity no treaty or agreement with the Federal Government is ever going to get them there. Time to open your eyes and look for real solutions, not victim rhetoric. Stop letting the Federal Government treating you like slaves would be a great start.

  16. Whitney M says:
    April 11, 2011 at 8:32 am

    Your piece is promoting capitalism as a cure to the supposed handout by the federal government. First, the Treaty signed by the federal government guarantees the provision of health and education. There can be a long debate regarding the impact of the Homestead Act, but the bottom line is this was used to steal land. Land was further stolen through tax deeds. The subsequent loss of revenue and potential revenue is in the billions, and the federal and state governments have reaped the benefits.

    Often times, when tribal governments have developed an economic venture, we are encountered with over-regulation that prohibits expansion. The obvious example is tribal gaming with the National Indian Gaming Act that requires compacts with states. Thus, the states can limit expansion. Another example is the PACT act which again is limiting trade amongst tribal governments.

    Each Tribe is unique, and to use the Lumbee’s as capitalistic success is an example of a slanted prospective. Any business venture requires a targeted market. And you can find that most successful tribal business ventures are located in larger population bases. Native people in smaller areas obviously will not own mansions. But we do need to take pride in our homes and take care of these homes.

  17. David Theroux says:
    April 11, 2011 at 12:03 pm

    Ni, You are confusing positive or statute law with universal natural law (and common law). The latter is the basis for the rule of law, including natural rights (e.g., property rights) and no one is obligated to rules that circumvent natural law standards. Indeed, it is natural law that forms the basis for our judging whether any positive law is just or not and what obligations (a la contract law) are true or false. For you to say that whatever exists as “law” must be obeyed is to say that individuals have no say regarding the obligations they are subject to. Such a “social contract” theory is simply a rationale for slavery.

    Perhaps you should read the short book, The Law, by Frederic Bastiat (also available free online).

  18. David Theroux says:
    April 11, 2011 at 12:17 pm

    Whitney, You are indeed correct that property rights are key and that this is THE issue since we are talking about the THEFT of property in land and then THEFT through tax measures. Native Americans necessarily had property rights arrangements for such societies to function and have any concept of justice. Some systems were more complete than others, just as modern societies also differ in the extent of property rights.

  19. David Wagle says:
    April 12, 2011 at 10:11 am

    The very fact that we talk about ‘handouts’ instead of social and community responsibility shows that we, as a society don’t get it. We don’t exist as a collection of stalwart individuals who are unaffected by what happens to others.

    People who are not achieving their potential through no fault of their own impoverish the entire society by depriving all of us of the benefits of whatever success they might have otherwise achieved.

    Social safety-nets save far more in real dollars than they cost when they are well-managed and well-policed. It is almost impossible to spend too much on public health, housing assistance, nutritional assistance, educational assistance, and so on. But if we insist on framing discussions about how to properly frame our policy to minimize the always present unintended consequences present in any policy decision as stopping “handouts,” and thus demonizing those who are precisely the people the policy intends to help, we can never get anywhere.

  20. US deficit up 15.7% in first half of fiscal 2011 - Page 2 - U.S. Politics Online: A Political Discussion Forum says:
    April 13, 2011 at 4:38 pm

    [...] new job's czar. If you buy into that–I imagine about anyone could convince you of anything. http://www.mygovcost.org/2011/03/28/...welfare-state/ [...]

  21. David Theroux says:
    April 13, 2011 at 10:12 pm

    David, You have no right to the products of another person’s efforts unless he/she consents. To believe otherwise is to support slavery.

    In addition, there is no evidence to support your claim that the welfare state saves “far more in real dollars than they cost when they are well-managed and well-policed.” The point here is that a government bureaucracy necessarily is inefficient, inept, and corrupt because government agencies are insulated from the supply and demand of what consumers seek. Governments are shielded from being accountable because governments receive their income by force, regardless of how they perform. Indeed, when such entities fail, the arguments is made that they need even greater revenues, as if the failure is not a sign of inherent, self-serving waste. In contrast, a private firm succeeds only to the extent it can attract individuals to voluntarily associate with is and pay for its goods and services.

    Please see the following:

    The Law, by Frederic Bastiat (also available free online here)

    Beyond Politics: Markets, Welfare and the Failure of Bureaucracy, by William Mitchell and Randy Simmons

    Against Leviathan: Government Power and a Free Society, by Robert Higgs

  22. tom roderick says:
    April 13, 2011 at 10:34 pm

    to David Theroux 4-4-11 comments: well done and many thanks for the references!!!

  23. Ni says:
    April 17, 2011 at 2:24 am

    David, I’m not confusing anything, I’m just not delving into abstractions really (other than your rationale here).

    What I am doing is pointing out that you can’t use that line of reasoning to only strip one party of its “benefits” while the other still receives theirs, as per terms of the agreement(s). If these treaties are abrogated on the basis you suggest they should be, then conditions should return to what they were prior to their ratification, for everyone.

    We don’t need to discuss the tenets of “natural law” to address the seeming unequal application of it in this instance all the same.

    Is that wrong? I understand you’re saying no one should be obligated to this kind of “law,” it just seems that you’ve made a grand exception in enforcing that.

  24. frank says:
    April 23, 2011 at 6:07 pm

    steve ponton
    OMG
    We ALL come into this world owning NOTHING, doesn’t matter what race, color, or creed!!
    Stop depending on others and do for yourself!
    Your hearing from a white protagee who lives in a basement studio apt. who works 50 hours plus to get by.
    IF YOUR NOT HAPPY WHERE YOU LIVE,,,,,THEN MOVE or will that take away all your government money??

  25. frank says:
    April 23, 2011 at 6:21 pm

    WTF ever happened to responsibility??
    Communism,,,,,here we come.
    GOD (oh ho, did I really say that....someone sue me) save us all,
    STOP IT!!!!!!!

  26. frank says:
    April 25, 2011 at 5:16 pm

    WELL?

  27. Bert says:
    April 29, 2011 at 11:54 am

    I don’t really care who ends up with the promissory payola, I just want to know where I can go, and set up my tent for cheap, or even for free, when the whole (cr)apparatus goes belly-up due to fiscal mismanagement.

  28. Allan says:
    May 15, 2011 at 7:50 pm

    Isn’t it time people stop living in the past? Why are we still paying out to those who are in the present? I will agree that some of our ancestors did not always make the best choices, nor did they act on behalf of all, they were simply thinking about how to better themselves, unfortunately at the expense of others. We now live in a time of opportunity with a recognition of those who, in the past were done wrong. It’s about time people stop holding out their hand(s) and get a grip on what they should be responsible for in their own lives. You can continue to be dumbed down for nothing, or you can raise yourself up as many others have done & be a success. There are many success stories for our great nation... I was born here and I am now a native American, not of Indian descent, its about time we all just say we are AMERICANS...regardless of color, class, religion or any other qualifying class that people insist on being in. The USA is a melting pot.... in truth, it always has been & always will be....follow the ancestry back a thousand years and prove me wrong. Having said all that...where do I sign up for the freebies myself....I’m being left behind.

  29. Kristen says:
    June 21, 2011 at 12:54 pm

    I believe folks are ignoring the OBVIOUS. It is your OWN native American who is acting alike an American and prospering hugely. Don’t listen to anyone posting here if you don’t want to, it is your own people who are proving that the way to true freedom again is to fend for yourself. Socialism produces laziness and so does communism. Societies have proved it over and over, yet Obama is pushing for socialism in this great capitalistic market that makes a way for everyone who wants to participate.

  30. Laura says:
    August 9, 2011 at 3:20 pm

    @Frank: Congratulations on being “a white protagee who lives in a basement studio apt. who works 50 hours plus to get by,” although I believe you mean protege. That is what most of us had to do early on in our careers. It’s called life.

    @Allan: To say that “some of our ancestors did not always make the best choices” is pushing the grossest limits of understatement. For many of us (myself included) our ancestors did not do anything TO the native tribes–the government did it, and it was unconscionable (look up the Trail of Tears or General Custer or children being taken from their families and “Americanized”)–but they did benefit FROM what was done to the native tribes. Your ancestors included.

    Half my family came here because they were starving to death from a famine in Ireland and the other half because my Italian great-grandfather wanted to make his own way in the world, somewhere that he could start fresh. And although I respect their courage, their fortitude, and their determination–and I hope that they did not know of the bloodshed caused to create the USA–the fact remains that they were able to do those things because somewhere along the line, other Europeans had pushed the indigenous people out. Furthermore, they entered a melting pot, knowing that they would be doing so, willing to make that adjustment in return for a better life. Indigenous peoples did not have that choice. Europeans came to their world and invaded, not the other way round. They never volunteered to let go of their own culture in order to acclimate to another; change was thrust upon them.

    I lived and worked on a reservation in the Northwest for two years after college (before living in the basement apt with the old car and the pittance salary), and I found that what I thought I knew about Native Americans was largely piffle from the media. I also found that the way my hosts saw the world was very different from the way European Americans do. Although we had certain things in common (love our families, listen to music, passionate about our sports teams), we did not always understand one another’s perspectives on life, community, self. It was like living in a foreign country where the natives are friendly, and try to meet you halfway, but where some of the differences are too intrinsic to explain; even when you’re both speaking English, you’re still speaking a different language. You can’t just take a people who see many of life’s basics differently and say, “Hey, sorry that your values are different from mine, but suck it up and become a success in MY world, by MY rules.”

    It is no surprise to me that Mr. Stossel, who is plain-spoken about his libertarian views and his support of greed and competition as motivators, would not be speaking the same language as many Native Americans. Although I abhor his interviewing and reporting style, which I find condescending and close-minded, I am not questioning his personal beliefs about government. I am saying that in my experience with Native American friends, John Stossel sitting down to speak with an elder on the res would not be akin to two people from different countries trying to understand one another; it would be akin to creatures from two different planets. Not a productive equation for two people having a healthy exchange of ideas. Not an equation for a fairly-balanced story.

  31. Robert G says:
    August 21, 2011 at 6:34 am

    Steve makes no mention of the FACT that in the northeastern portion of the North American Continent, there were anthropological sites found from EUROPEANS that PREDATE the Laurentide ice sheet. The so-called Native-Americans are fighting any attempt by anthropologists to study this site because it jeopardizes their 200 YEAR OLD WELFARE CLAIM!!

  32. Charlene Esposito says:
    August 21, 2011 at 7:27 pm

    I have been to a festival for Indian tribes here in the south. St.Bernard, La. to be exact. What I noticed was, they were dressed in their native dress, which I was very interested in. I am not prejudiced to any group in particular. I did notice that they did not seem to be CLEAN. ALSO, my husband & I frequent a Casino in South La. owned and operated by another Indian tribe. At first the casino did a booming business and the food was plentiful, reasonable and awesome. We recently returned to the casino after about five years and the business might as well close.

    We were told on the QT (we don’t know for sure) that a drinking problem was part of the problem. HOWEVER, I don’t think Mr. Stossel was trying to point out ONE PARTICULAR RACE but to point out a TOTAL LACK OF GOVERNMENT CONTROL IN SPENDING AND HANDOUTS. The AMERICANS who toiled this land (Indian or not) and kept their wits about them, went to war to protect this land are now the ones left at the BOTTOM OF THE TOTEM POLE!!!! We should be the next race on the list to get government handouts, just because!!!! Just like all the other races in this country ‘believe’ they have the ‘right’ to get everything for nothing because they did not want to strive to get it themselves. I am a 64 yr.old woman and worked 2 JOBS FOR 22 YEARS. WHAT IS ANYBODY GIVING US??? We are ‘supposed to feel ‘LUCKY’, because we get to eat ground meat once or twice a week, chicken if we are lucky. Seafood?? Yeah, we saw it, when we were kids!!! I ‘had’ health insurance, once upon a time. Now, ‘our’ government lets ins. companies like blue cross sell us useless ‘catastrophic’ ins. which ‘does not’ pay for chemo or radiation. They don’t tell you this up front, either. You find out from your friends. Quit crying about your damn life, and suck it up like the rest of us have to!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  33. Zilnahonilin says:
    August 22, 2011 at 12:19 am

    Our world would of been so much better if the damn infected Europeans never came here.

  34. Awhitney says:
    August 22, 2011 at 7:37 am

    We forget that change is inherent in life. Many people and nations and tribes have been forced to change by many factors over the course of human history, and so with the Native Americans (of which I am one). We must remember that part of the European response to the Native American tribes was due to the fact that the tribes were always warring – not only with the Europeans settlers, but also with each other, making for a very dangerous (and therefore unacceptable) living arrangement. Something had to change, and it had to be the Native American way of life. Had they consented to live with and as part of the communities established (or even peacefully alongside) I doubt there would have been the clash that led to the treaties having been attempted or reservations established, etc.

    The fact that we now have a society (outside of the socialism of the reservations) in which an individual can rise on the merits of his or her own industry is one for which we should all be grateful – and one of which we should all take advantage. To remain forever on the reservation bemoaning a lost way of life (which was just as destructive to the Native American as it was to those seeking to relocate to the North American continent) is to submit to the notion that the Native American is incapable of the intelligence required to take care of himself. A notion which I thoroughly reject. In America today, as it has been throughout human history, you grow, you change, you assimilate, or you fall by the wayside. I believe the Native American can be a proud member of the modern American society, capable of standing on his/her own feet. But to do this, he/she must discard this entitlement mentality. We are not owed more than any other American. All we are owed is the opportunity to make good on our own efforts: the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

  35. Judge Harold Lee (Retired) says:
    September 15, 2011 at 7:40 pm

    I am currently being prosecuted by the BIA gambling cartel, attempting to protect their banished slot machine empire.

    What the Native Americans are entitled to is for the government to follow the law of the land handed down by the Supreme Court in Cherokee Nation vs. State of Georgia! The executive and congressional branches of government need to halt their coup over the Majority opinion handed down by the Marshall Court in that case.

    The BIA is the result of the BIA’s 180 year old insurgency over the Supreme Court, which was launched by President Jackson and his Interior Department via the crime invested Bureau of Indian Affairs. Last year this criminal empire confessed to having pilfered 2.5 billion dollars from the tribal trust.

    The BIA created their own slot empire and had Congress order the state governments with reservation lands to provide them victims to fleece with impunity. Arizona’s poker players are fighting back and the media is suppressing the story because they are being paid millions of dollars to do so.

    Please visit http://www.icgpa.org and help spread the word that the BIA are nothing more than insurgents.

    What the tribes need are freedom to handle their own affairs and title to the paltry amount of land left in what was promised to them in the first instance. All of it having been coerced by agreements made under the threat of human genocide.

  36. 5 Myths That Need to Come Out of the Closet says:
    November 9, 2011 at 11:14 pm

    [...] John Stossel, who did an extensive report on this topc, says it’s easy for those “freeloaders” to bank over $23,000 a year…tax [...]

  37. Martin Griffith says:
    December 9, 2011 at 8:14 am

    I think a lot of people missed the point that Stossel was trying to make entirely. Aside from treaties, acts, bureaus, land-grabs and all the rest he was using the NA position as part of a larger picture that demonstrated that government is the problem, not the solution.

    I’ve been to a few reservations across Texas and in the northeastern part of the U.S. and have seen what he’s talking about firsthand. Those who are enslaved by the government handouts don’t thrive, they wither and become dependent on the government handouts to survive. Our government did more to take away the dignity of NA nations by making them economic slaves than by any other act they committed. It is shameful and reprehensible but it can’t be undone overnight...that’s not to say that it shouldn’t be undone at all.

    The old saying “if you give a man a fish he can survive today, but if you teach him to fish he can survive for a lifetime” comes to mind. Sorry if I didn’t word it exactly right but you get the point. If we had allowed, or in the future do allow NA nations to regain their self-respect by rising up and becoming successful in their own right instead of being slaves to government handouts then they will thrive and become great again. Maybe not in the way they did before, but as a part of our larger society. In the context of the overall story by Stossel it shows just how much damage government over-involvement can be and why socialism and communism do not work.

Leave a Comment

Twitter Facebook Youtube RSS

Search


By linking to Amazon.com from this page, The Independent Institute earns referral fees of 4% to 15% from whatever you buy. Bookmark the above link and you can support the Institute when you do your normal shopping!


TIR

Recent Posts

Recent Comments

RSS Recent Posts on The Independent Institute’s Other Blog, The Beacon

Blogroll

Categories

Archives

 

March 2011
S M T W T F S
« Feb   Apr »
 12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
2728293031