Hey cons: if your solution to the min wage issue is to tell those people...

[HappyJoy]

The question was could you guarantee the people cheating the system didnt have another source of unreported income?

They don't need one if they're being paid by the government. So, if the income you receive from the government is sufficient enough to keep you out of poverty, you are not poor.

Just to chime in here The poverty line is not an indicator of if one is poor or not. If you hit the poverty line, you are beyond poor.

 

[Asclepias]

The question was could you guarantee the people cheating the system didnt have another source of unreported income?

They don't need one if they're being paid by the government. So, if the income you receive from the government is sufficient enough to keep you out of poverty, you are not poor.

Not the point. Your claim was that people on welfare bought frivolous things. If you cant prove everyone did it then you lack credibility.

 

[Markle]

Reputable charities have made inroads that I wouldn't on my own and can target donations to those most in need and be there when geographically the individual can't, be it due to a natural disaster or an economically impacted zone.

Donating money to charities I know will get it to where it needs to be is one thing. Donating to a random charity I know zero about is another. That's like giving a drunkard 20 bucks and hoping he doesn't buy more drinks with it.

Charity Navigator - Your Guide To Intelligent Giving | Home

 

[TemplarKormac]

Not the point. Your claim was that people on welfare bought frivolous things. If you cant prove everyone did it then you lack credibility.

I posted a link proving my case. You dismissed it and chose to redefine "frivolous." If you can buy lingerie with EBT cards, I guarantee that there are people buying it.

If you can't acknowledge my proof, you, yes you, lack any credibility.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Just to chime in here The poverty line is not an indicator of if one is poor or not.

Interesting...

 

[HappyJoy]

Not the point. Your claim was that people on welfare bought frivolous things. If you cant prove everyone did it then you lack credibility.

I posted a link proving my case. You dismissed it and chose to redefine "frivolous." If you can buy lingerie with EBT cards, I guarantee that there are people buying it.

If you can't acknowledge my proof, you, yes you, lack any credibility.

How many people?

 

[HappyJoy]

Just to chime in here The poverty line is not an indicator of if one is poor or not.

Interesting...

And true.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Not the point. Your claim was that people on welfare bought frivolous things. If you cant prove everyone did it then you lack credibility.

I posted a link proving my case. You dismissed it and chose to redefine "frivolous." If you can buy lingerie with EBT cards, I guarantee that there are people buying it.

If you can't acknowledge my proof, you, yes you, lack any credibility.

How many people?

I don't know. Do I look like a statistician to you?

 

[Asclepias]

Not the point. Your claim was that people on welfare bought frivolous things. If you cant prove everyone did it then you lack credibility.

I posted a link proving my case. You dismissed it and chose to redefine "frivolous." If you can buy lingerie with EBT cards, I guarantee that there are people buying it.

If you can't acknowledge my proof, you, yes you, lack any credibility.

Your link didnt prove your case. As a matter of fact it highlighted the fact you had no case at all since you cant prove everyone on welfare buys frivolous things. I dismissed it because it failed to meet the burden of proof required to support such a wild claim.

 

[HappyJoy]

Not the point. Your claim was that people on welfare bought frivolous things. If you cant prove everyone did it then you lack credibility.

I posted a link proving my case. You dismissed it and chose to redefine "frivolous." If you can buy lingerie with EBT cards, I guarantee that there are people buying it.

If you can't acknowledge my proof, you, yes you, lack any credibility.

How many people?

I don't know. Do I look like a statistician to you?

How much fraud do you think is taking place?

 

[TemplarKormac]

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/19/us/food-stamp-fraud-in-the-underground-economy.html

 

[TemplarKormac]

Your link didnt prove your case.

You didn't want it to.

As a matter of fact it highlighted the fact you had no case at all since you cant prove everyone on welfare buys frivolous things.

Of course it does. If a lingerie store takes EBT, then any store or retailer can. That guarantees there are people at any given time buying frivolous things with their EBT cards.

 

[Asclepias]

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/19/us/food-stamp-fraud-in-the-underground-economy.html

From your link.

"“It’s a small percentage of the program, but I don’t tolerate it, and I worry about it because I don’t want the American public to unfairly paint the millions of people who play by the rules,” said Kevin Concannon, the Department of Agriculture under secretary who oversees the program."

 

[Asclepias]

Your link didnt prove your case.

You didn't want it to.

As a matter of fact it highlighted the fact you had no case at all since you cant prove everyone on welfare buys frivolous things.

Of course it does. If a lingerie store takes EBT, then any store or retailer can. That guarantees there are people at any given time buying frivolous things with their EBT cards.

Why would I want it to prove something it didnt prove? You submitted the link to prove something to me. Its not my job to help you make your point.

So you are claiming that because people on welfare buy lingerie with EBT cards everyone is doing it?

 

[TemplarKormac]

“It’s a small percentage of the program, but I don’t tolerate it, and I worry about it because I don’t want the American public to unfairly paint the millions of people who play by the rules,” said Kevin Concannon, the Department of Agriculture under secretary who oversees the program."

So?

 

[TemplarKormac]

Why would I want it to prove something it didnt prove?

I've got you tripping over yourself. Mission accomplished.

Good night.

 

[Asclepias]

“It’s a small percentage of the program, but I don’t tolerate it, and I worry about it because I don’t want the American public to unfairly paint the millions of people who play by the rules,” said Kevin Concannon, the Department of Agriculture under secretary who oversees the program."

So?

So its not everyone like you claimed.

 

[TemplarKormac]

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/19/us/food-stamp-fraud-in-the-underground-economy.html

From your link.

"“It’s a small percentage of the program, but I don’t tolerate it, and I worry about it because I don’t want the American public to unfairly paint the millions of people who play by the rules,” said Kevin Concannon, the Department of Agriculture under secretary who oversees the program."

From the link:

"To that end, the department has been getting tough on the food stamp black market. In 2012, more than 100 Food and Nutrition Service investigators reviewed more than 15,000 stores and conducted nearly 4,500 undercover investigations. The effort brought 667 indictments, about 10 percent more than the year before.

I rest my case.

 

[Asclepias]

Why would I want it to prove something it didnt prove?

I've got you tripping over yourself. Mission accomplished.

Good night.

I've got your running. Mission accomplished. Peace out.

 

[TemplarKormac]

“It’s a small percentage of the program, but I don’t tolerate it, and I worry about it because I don’t want the American public to unfairly paint the millions of people who play by the rules,” said Kevin Concannon, the Department of Agriculture under secretary who oversees the program."

So?

So its not everyone like you claimed.

Did I say "everyone"?