Talk:Entitlement

message: Isn't an "entitlement program" supposed to be in the pejorative? I've never heard of anyone refer to it positively. CartoonDiablo (talk) 03:48, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: No I don't believe so. Have you sources rather than hearsay? Dmcq (talk) 14:37, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

text: Clearly one cannot take a purely historical definition of a word or concept as new meanings evolve over time. The term "entitlement" has clearly been politicized in the context of contemporary discussion. The term "right" could easly be used as a synonym for "entitlement". 
However, the article is unquestionably biased agaimst "entitlements" as something "not earned".
Substituting a "right to Social Secutity" does not carry the same bias, as "rights' should not be eliminated.
I had hoped to find a list of the "entitlements" that the more conservative members of Congress are determined to cut or limit in order impact the deficits and national debt. "Cutting entitlements" has become the countermeasure to increased taxes, especially on the "super rich" who are, of course, "entitled" to their wealth because, presumably, they have "earned" it. But this presumption is not necessarily true.
Much wealth is inherited, received from little or no effort (banking), received as tax-avoidance "gifts", "earned" disproportionately from the amount of effort expended (patent), winning the lottery, 'homesteading", finding valuable if unexpected mineral deposits under real estate (oil), etc. Consequently, much wealth is acquired  through no effort by the recipient, rather like a "title" in royalty.
Much of this wealth gets exceptional treatment under tax laws. However, "earned income" is fully taxed. Seems somewhat punitive.
Clearly "entitlements" vs "wealth" has redefined the former. The assumption that "wealth" is earned (and thus an entitlement) while budgetary 'entitlements" are "welfare" or unearned "hand-outs", solely because they are distributed by government.
A classification of what the conservative wing defines as 'entitlements" would certainly enlighten the debate. Work and earnings are prerequisites of unemployment compensation. Contributions based on earnings is a prerequisite of Social Security and Medicare. GI benefits are the result of "service".
So what are 'entitlements' in the current context?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.232.0.143 (talk) 17:34, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

text: Articles need to be based on WP:Reliable sources not on the musings of editors. Dmcq (talk) 18:16, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Clearly the term is frequently used in a pejorative sense. I've added a few references to the claim in the header. However, this whole article could be significantly improved by talking about its legal meaning, use in a positive way in Great Society programs, and how that relates to the use in psychology (which as of this writing is the bulk of the article. Matthew Miller (talk) 15:53, 3 May 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pejorative? 

message: Social security is not an entitlement program. The source cited for that sentence is from an extremely short and quickly written news article, and is not a sufficient source.   —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.5.145.114 (talk) 04:57, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wrong 

message: One sentence, that entitlement began during the Johnson administration, is irrelevant and untrue.  This article concerns the legal concept of entitlement in the abstract, not specific entitlement programs.  It does not cover Medicare, Social Security, or other specific programs commonly referred to as entitlements.  Many entitlement programs began before Johnson in any case.  I am deleting. --Bridgecross (talk) 21:53, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Johnson Administration?? 

message: I read that the shift in meaning of "entitlement" in American politics began with Reagan ( p79). Mightn't it be appropriate in this article to discuss the change in denotation of the word? Thmazing (talk) 22:55, 1 November 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes. See https://www.npr.org/2012/08/14/158756957/with-ryans-ascent-a-few-thoughts-on-entitlement for one discussion on this change. Matthew Miller (talk) 15:53, 3 May 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reagan 

message: Why is such a bias subsection being allowed in the entitlement area? Not everyone in the united states would argue that Social Security and Welfare (etc) are entitlement programs.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.186.252.171 (talk) 15:40, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: And how exactly is it biased? -- O.Koslowski (talk) 15:42, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps it could had been perceived as biased and/or POV by some. I added other cites -- as well as a bit of history about the concept -- to address any perceived biased. My name is Mercy11 (talk) 04:24, 16 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Politically? 

message: The perjorativeness of the term is entirely US-specific, due to its use in US government welfare programs. By comparison, in Australia and other countries, the accrued leave a worker has earned in the course of their employment is called their Entitlements. If a business goes bankrupt, or they sack an employee, they must legally pay out those entitlements, and in no way would a worker consider it a charity. They earned them and are entitled to them. 124.169.71.27 (talk) 05:14, 7 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Overly US-specific

message: If this is the definition of a government entitlement:
:An entitlement is a government program guaranteeing access to some benefit by members of a specific group and based on established rights or by legislation.
Then there are a number of other entitlement programs, for example, to the oil industry, to farmers, to renewable resource companies, and many others we are probably not even aware of. These groups are not government agencies but private actors that get this government money because of their belonging to a specific group that has been given the money through legislation and just try to take it away and you can see how entitled they feel. 
:The Oil Entitlements Program and Its Effects on the Domestic Refining Industry, by Stephen W. Chapel (1976)
::http://www.rand.org/pubs/papers/P5717.html
:"Support under the Basic Payment Scheme is available to farmers who are allocated payment entitlements.
:You can apply for entitlements based on the land you farm and the activity you undertake."
::Scottish Government pages. https://www.ruralpayments.org/publicsite/futures/topics/all-schemes/basic-payment-scheme/
:UNCAPPED ENTITLEMENT IS BAD FOR AGRICULTURE AND HOLDING UP THE NEW FARM BILL, April 12, 2014, National Sustainable Agricultural Coalition
::http://sustainableagriculture.net/blog/farm-bill-needs-payment-reform/
Yes, these programs represent government policy toward certain goals, but so do social security and all the other things we normally think of as an entitlement. Ileanadu (talk) 18:50, 23 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  What about the other Entitlements/Entitlement Programs? 

message: This page talks about multiple concepts which have nothing to do with each other. Would it be a better to split the contents of the page up into multiple pages and provide a disambiguation page?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alvint69 (talk • contribs) 17:08, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Theoretically yes - the US specific stuff could be in a separate "entitlement program" article. Hopefully in time more text will be written to make this idea more viable.--Penbat (talk) 17:45, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Split has now been done. I discovered that social programs in the United States probably covers the same ground as the US-specific stuff here so I have placed it in that article's talk page for now.--Penbat (talk) 12:58, 28 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Disambiguation Page? 

message: This article is currently about two things at once:
* The psychological or social phenomenon of entitlement
* The legal concept of entitlement (sometimes called subjective or positive rights)
I suggest it be split, or the parts about the legal concept added to the article Positive and negative rights. --BurritoBazooka Talk Contribs 01:02, 14 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Articles should only be about one subject. 

message: Looking at the talk section about the word "entitlement" I am discouraged and dismayed.  So much of the use of the term in psychology seems to take the term "presumed entitlement" and cut it down to "entitlement."  So many who write about Social Security are sure it is not an entitlement.  But it is the best example of an entitlement; earned and paid for.  I do suspect there has been a long term effort to show that an entitlement is a gift and can be reduced or even cut as we can end a gift.  And that seems to have been successful.  Even past work in Wikipedia have been altered to the point of being a disaster.  Some go back to Royal entitlements as reason to doubt them.  I prefer to start with Social Security in the USA and move forward to retain its reasons to exist and to continue without the idea it is a gift.
This should be reformed or deleted.  As it is now it is a false statement.  It may mislead and can not educate anyone.
Gary4books (talk) 20:28, 19 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Entitlement a word under attack for some time now. 

message: Why is this fellow Sam Vaknin even being cited? He does not seems trustworthy nor seems to bear any reputable credential or experience. 2804:14C:6588:848B:844A:ABB0:D491:BAE6 (talk) 05:56, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sam Vaknin? 

message: The lead appears to be primarily about a legal concept (although it mentions psychology in the second paragraph) whereas the body is almost entirely about a psychological topic. This should either be about one topic, or split into two, or converted into a Broad concept article. Mathglot (talk) 18:32, 5 June 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unfocused