How Liberal Policies Keep People in Poverty

[thanatos144]

Basically, nothing there except the general and minimal fraud the provides anechdotal evidence of a "conspiracy" for the paranoid delusional.

No it is just the results that give us our proof you fucking blind fool.

 

[Pete7469]

I know this will make the far left have a collective seizure, but it's true that liberal policies that encourage the breakup of families and a nanny state are the main reasons that people do not pull themselves up. The left only sees two extremes, the super wealthy and the dirt poor. The reason they never bring up the middle class is because it's in the way of their plans. They are systematically destroying middle class and they'd rather people forgot it even exists. All we hear is taking more from the rich and giving to the poor with no expectations of people involved in their own progress. Of course, it's middle class they take from, but the media isn't about to look too hard at what liberal policies actually achieve. They only report on the intentions, not the disastrous results.

Encouraging dependency also encourages single parenthood and a lack a concern about community. The entitlement mentality keeps people focused on what government can do for them, not what they can do for themselves, their families or their communities. That responsibility was turned over to government long ago. Over 50 years of welfare and government programs and the result is more people lined up for help and fewer climbing out of poverty. It's more than a failed system. It's by design and that makes it far worse.

Obama Disregards What Hispanics and All Americans Need to Achieve American Dream

Ordinary bed wetters will not even absorb your post, they're programmed to reject allowing information that corrupts their knee jerk reactionary "thought" process. So there will be few seizures. I myself would hope for aneurysms, since the fatality rate is much higher, but their complete inability to think independently protects them from such stress.

Now the leadership on the left, who are indeed criminally insane authoritarian sociopaths, there is no illusion that the policies that are founded on marxist dogma are beneficial to anyone besides fellow criminally insane authoritarian sociopaths. These assholes have no qualms about liquidating tens of millions of people, since human beings are a "labor resource". Stalin, Mao, Hitler, Pol Pot, and the Kim Dynasty in North Korea are enough proof that leftists give not a shit about individual human life, they will purge millions of people that can not be managed if they see fit. The asinine rants from the mindless bed wetters in this forum who whine about "rights" that don't even exist in The US Constitution are clearly only concerned about their own rights, and give not a fuck about anyone else's rights that are enshrined in the COTUS as long as their masters oppose it.

Furthermore to illustrate just how insipid ordinary bed wetters are, and just how evil their masters are one merely needs to consider the compounding effects their policies have on the "victims" of their capitalist enemies.

Bed wetters have stolen the independence of millions of people who live in the one country that has provided the greatest means for upward mobility. In the 200+ years since the founding of this nation we have surpassed the standards of nations and people who have had established themselves 1000's of years ago. In spite of increasing competition and government regulation we have created innovations that have changed humanity so incredibly that some nations and cultures can not seem to cope with it.

The bed wetters have destroyed the foundation of society by marginalizing the family structure.

The bed wetters have enslaved millions of people and removed the incentive to earn.

As far as I'm concerned the KKK foundation of the modern democrook party won. It's just that instead of enslaving minorities, they've enslaved us all.

 

[Clementine]

I shouldn't be surprised that the liberals here completely avoided the real subject, which is changing the welfare system to prompt the able-bodied to seek employment and get themselves out of poverty.

Yes, there has been welfare fraud, not that anyone is looking too hard for it since the policy seems to be write the check now and ask questions later. A major drug dealer who was just caught had been on food stamps. Yes, we can do better.

By making people too comfortable being taken care of and removing the incentives for them to go it alone, we have created a permanent class of dependents, who are now farther away from any hope of becoming self-sufficient.

Giving them more and more will not ever get them out of poverty. If people don't get an education and start at the beginning (meaning minimum wage, low-skilled jobs) and work their way up, they are doomed to a life of handouts and we will forever have politicians vowing to increase alms to help them. No one can help a person who doesn't help themselves.

Job-killing policies, like Obamacare and some of the unreasonable new rules handed down by the EPA, are going to ruin more businesses. Breaking the current system and installing a more socialist one is the plan and the left may as well admit it. They are finally being honest about their hatred of capitalism, military and America being a super power. There is no doubt they want things destroyed because it's the only way they can introduce socialized, single-payer medicine and a host of other wealth redistribution ideas. It's not a temporary thing either. Once the wealth redistribution is underway, they'll make it permanent and we will continue on with part of the people working and part of the people taking until the whole country collapses, like many countries before us.

We are sorely lacking tax payers right now and the burden will be too much to bear for those of us still paying taxes. They will not go after the super wealthy people. The last ones to be brought down will be upper middle class.

This isn't about taking care of people in wheelchairs or the elderly. It's about getting to young people by making changes in the system that require them to start making smarter decisions to avoid becoming part of the problem. Only a liberal could object to that. Many of us were told by our parents and teachers that if we didn't keep our act together, we'd end up being miserable. We knew that our future depending on our own actions, or lack thereof, and we acted accordingly. At the very least, we could expect to find a decent job and make a living without taking from others. If more people did that, we'd all be better off. As it is, we have people draining us and we just can't keep going this way and expect to survive.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Compassion? Since when does compassion involve compulsory giving?

 

[Pete7469]

Compassion? Since when does compassion involve compulsory giving?

Since when does compassion include establishing "charities" that distribute less than %30 of their contributions to the needy? Since when does "compassion" mandate that propaganda campaigns spend valuable resources to manipulate people into giving to "charities" that have administrative personnel making as much or more than "evil" corporate executives? Since when does "compassion" mean forcing everyone else to fund endeavors through the threat of violent force via a government agency?

That's not "compassion"...

It's theft, con artistry and bullshit.

 

[NYcarbineer]

It's not about doing away with welfare, it's about changing things and expecting people to do more in order for their lives to improve. Taking the welfare to work requirement out of the system is just one way that liberals help ease people into dependency permanently.

There is proof that the liberal way doesn't work. Doubling welfare rolls and few getting out of poverty means that either they suck at helping people or they are intentionally encouraging people to stay on welfare.

I recall one woman who was on welfare and had a few children. She found a job and intended to become self-sufficient. The welfare office told her that she would immediately lose all benefits if she did that. Then they told her that if she stayed on welfare longer, they would help pay for child care. If that type of thing isn't enticement, then I don't know what is.

If a person chooses to get a job, the system doesn't help ease them out of welfare, it spits them out if they get big ideas about making it on their own. It's crazy that the longer they are on it, the more bennies they get. Many might pass on the job opportunity simply because it's smoother sailing to stay put.

Liberals keep saying that welfare doesn't offer enough, though in some states it would take at least a $45,000 salary to fund the housing, food, medical, free cell phones and other benefits they receive. It's clear that liberals want people totally comfortable on welfare and there is absolutely no incentive to leave that for a job that wouldn't afford them the same standard of living.

My son, who graduated college last year, makes less than half of what it would take to pay for one small family on welfare. He still pays taxes, lives in a tiny apartment and started at minimum wage for a good company. He has already gotten a raise and promoted to a higher position. Long way to go, but he's doing things the old fashioned way. I'm sure he'd like to live in a bigger home, have cheaper healthcare, more money for food and no charge for his cell phone. He has too much pride to take from others and would rather go without until he earns it. Most of us were that way years ago. Yet, the liberals see my son as a tax payer who needs to pay his fair share and the people who get twice as much as he does without working as more worthy of his earnings. Why do they punish those who work and still say they aren't doing enough while those idle people just keep having more kids and expect a bigger check for their trouble?

How many lifetime, 5th generation welfare recipients even graduated high school? How many would even qualify for a decent job or have the skills to move up? What is their incentive to leave the liberal plantation and do with less until they earn a higher salary?

The left knows exactly what they are doing. Welfare rolls have doubled on Obama's watch as jobs disappeared and more young people headed to the welfare office instead of school. And they want to keep going down this path knowing that it doesn't work. Able-bodied people should have to work for welfare. There are plenty of jobs they could do that would save local tax payers money. If they knew they had to work to obtain any kind of welfare, they'd probably just get a job to begin with and not look to welfare as a first choice for survival. It should be a last resort. Knowing that work was in the future one way or the other, young people would opt to stay in school and increase their chances of getting a better job instead of just having kids to get a check.

If there aren't some kind of consequences for stupid decisions, there is nothing to stop young people from making them.

Nothing you said addressed what I said.

Yes, I did. I thought I was clear in saying we don't end welfare programs, just change them to actually be effective, and that mean taking out some the added policies that liberals put in.

Ending welfare for citizens isn't the answer because there are people in need who have no choice. We have always had a safety net, one that people only turned to as a last resort and because it didn't provide anything other than basic necessities, it wasn't something people wanted to stay on any longer than they had to.

Liberals and some idiot Repubs slowly changed it over the years to make people more comfortable and help them settle in for the duration of their lives. The incentive for getting off welfare has all but been removed. That is what I mean when I say liberal policies are bad. They encourage people to stay on welfare rather than improve themselves and get off of it. By improve, I mean make themselves more desirable to employers. That generally means at least obtaining a GED and perhaps using the available programs to attend trade school. Programs do everything from help pay tuition to provide money for daycare if you have kids.

Many of these programs have been around forever and they are good because they offer the chance for people to climb out. When benefits keep increasing, there is no incentive to attend school just to get a job that doesn't afford the same standard of living that welfare does. If people suddenly find themselves employed and off welfare, they are expected to pay for some of the things, like health care or phones, that they now get for free. Of course, many would still qualify for some aid, but they would have to earn money and pay other bills themselves. For many, it would currently be a step down to become employed and there is no incentive to add working to their day without upgrading their standard of living.

Even those who live in states where they get just enough aid to get by would find that after working 40 hours a week at starting wages, they would still have just enough to get by. People have come to expect that putting in that much effort should improve their situation, but don't stop to think that they should do that anyway. The left has insured that there is no longer any shame in able-bodied people living off others because they've pushed the entitlement mentality. I don't want people to feel bad if they truly need help, but given the mind blowing number of able-bodied people on the doles, I think they are taking the easy way out because they know they could never get a good job with their history, so they wait for more and more aid to keep them going.

Changing the rules to forcing able-bodied people to work would mean no free ride and it would prompt young people to take their future more seriously and prepare better for it by getting an education. Liberals seem to be against any consequences for bad choices, at least when it comes to their base.

The liberal policy that needs to stop is handing over billions of tax payer dollars with no explicit plan to make people get off their butts and do their part. They need to work in exchange for aid. Just like parents sometimes need to give their kids a firm, but loving, kick in the butt to get them motivated, the government needs to let the able-bodied idle people know that there is no such thing as a free lunch and don't allow them to get too comfy on the liberal plantation.

Get back to basics. No spending money. No spending EBT money on cigarettes, alcohol, pot or anything that isn't absolutely necessary. People caught misusing funds should have the amount of the illegitimate expenses removed from their monthly stipend. That way people will know if they abuse it, they lose it. We need to bring back welfare to work and start with at least 30 hours of community service each week until the person finds a permanent job. Gradually reduce the amount of aid they get until they are on their feet.

A person with a fulltime job at minimum wage is still poor.

P.S. stop filibustering and try to make a point or two briefly and coherently. If I wanted to hear a daft woman jabber on ad nauseum about nothing I'd have stayed married.

 

[thanatos144]

Nothing you said addressed what I said.

Yes, I did. I thought I was clear in saying we don't end welfare programs, just change them to actually be effective, and that mean taking out some the added policies that liberals put in.

Ending welfare for citizens isn't the answer because there are people in need who have no choice. We have always had a safety net, one that people only turned to as a last resort and because it didn't provide anything other than basic necessities, it wasn't something people wanted to stay on any longer than they had to.

Liberals and some idiot Repubs slowly changed it over the years to make people more comfortable and help them settle in for the duration of their lives. The incentive for getting off welfare has all but been removed. That is what I mean when I say liberal policies are bad. They encourage people to stay on welfare rather than improve themselves and get off of it. By improve, I mean make themselves more desirable to employers. That generally means at least obtaining a GED and perhaps using the available programs to attend trade school. Programs do everything from help pay tuition to provide money for daycare if you have kids.

Many of these programs have been around forever and they are good because they offer the chance for people to climb out. When benefits keep increasing, there is no incentive to attend school just to get a job that doesn't afford the same standard of living that welfare does. If people suddenly find themselves employed and off welfare, they are expected to pay for some of the things, like health care or phones, that they now get for free. Of course, many would still qualify for some aid, but they would have to earn money and pay other bills themselves. For many, it would currently be a step down to become employed and there is no incentive to add working to their day without upgrading their standard of living.

Even those who live in states where they get just enough aid to get by would find that after working 40 hours a week at starting wages, they would still have just enough to get by. People have come to expect that putting in that much effort should improve their situation, but don't stop to think that they should do that anyway. The left has insured that there is no longer any shame in able-bodied people living off others because they've pushed the entitlement mentality. I don't want people to feel bad if they truly need help, but given the mind blowing number of able-bodied people on the doles, I think they are taking the easy way out because they know they could never get a good job with their history, so they wait for more and more aid to keep them going.

Changing the rules to forcing able-bodied people to work would mean no free ride and it would prompt young people to take their future more seriously and prepare better for it by getting an education. Liberals seem to be against any consequences for bad choices, at least when it comes to their base.

The liberal policy that needs to stop is handing over billions of tax payer dollars with no explicit plan to make people get off their butts and do their part. They need to work in exchange for aid. Just like parents sometimes need to give their kids a firm, but loving, kick in the butt to get them motivated, the government needs to let the able-bodied idle people know that there is no such thing as a free lunch and don't allow them to get too comfy on the liberal plantation.

Get back to basics. No spending money. No spending EBT money on cigarettes, alcohol, pot or anything that isn't absolutely necessary. People caught misusing funds should have the amount of the illegitimate expenses removed from their monthly stipend. That way people will know if they abuse it, they lose it. We need to bring back welfare to work and start with at least 30 hours of community service each week until the person finds a permanent job. Gradually reduce the amount of aid they get until they are on their feet.

A person with a fulltime job at minimum wage is still poor.

P.S. stop filibustering and try to make a point or two briefly and coherently. If I wanted to hear a daft woman jabber on ad nauseum about nothing I'd have stayed married.

So stop supporting regulations and high taxes that stunt growth that helps minimum wage earners to be promoted up.

 

[auditor0007]

I know this will make the far left have a collective seizure, but it's true that liberal policies that encourage the breakup of families and a nanny state are the main reasons that people do not pull themselves up. The left only sees two extremes, the super wealthy and the dirt poor. The reason they never bring up the middle class is because it's in the way of their plans. They are systematically destroying middle class and they'd rather people forgot it even exists. All we hear is taking more from the rich and giving to the poor with no expectations of people involved in their own progress. Of course, it's middle class they take from, but the media isn't about to look too hard at what liberal policies actually achieve. They only report on the intentions, not the disastrous results.

Encouraging dependency also encourages single parenthood and a lack a concern about community. The entitlement mentality keeps people focused on what government can do for them, not what they can do for themselves, their families or their communities. That responsibility was turned over to government long ago. Over 50 years of welfare and government programs and the result is more people lined up for help and fewer climbing out of poverty. It's more than a failed system. It's by design and that makes it far worse.

Obama Disregards What Hispanics and All Americans Need to Achieve American Dream

What a crock. Of course there are more poor people. That's because there are more people period. There are also many more wealthy people. Should we blame that on social programs for the poor also? If you want to know what it's like in countries with fewer safety net programs, look at countries like India, and most countries in South America. The poor are dirt poor, and there are a hell of a lot more of them than here in the US. You are clueless.

 

[KNB]

Assuming that "trickle down" economic theory works, shouldn't poor people be making more money since there are a record number of billionaires on Earth today? When does the wealth trickle down from the record number of billionaires to the record number of poor people?

 

[thanatos144]

Assuming that "trickle down" economic theory works, shouldn't poor people be making more money since there are a record number of billionaires on Earth today? When does the wealth trickle down from the record number of billionaires to the record number of poor people?

how is that going to happen when there are record number of regulations t to employing people?

 

[RDD_1210]

Assuming that "trickle down" economic theory works, shouldn't poor people be making more money since there are a record number of billionaires on Earth today? When does the wealth trickle down from the record number of billionaires to the record number of poor people?

Just like everything else they claim to believe in, there is no actually evidence or real world examples of this working in real life. These people live in a bubble invented by their corporate overlords who tell them what to think and have convinced them to hope they can catch the scraps from their table.

 

[RDD_1210]

Thanantos - works as a convenience store clerk
Templar - Unemployed and living at home

and the list goes on....

These people are advocating for people who don't give a shit about them. They are the poor and lower middle class of our country and yet they have actually been brainwashed to blame themselves for the problem of our country. Yet, they for some reason can't see what's happening.

 

[thanatos144]

Thanantos - works as a convenience store clerk
Templar - Unemployed and living at home

and the list goes on....

These people are advocating for people who don't give a shit about them. They are the poor and lower middle class of our country and yet they have actually been brainwashed to blame themselves for the problem of our country. Yet, they for some reason can't see what's happening.

I am a manager of a convenience store fuck nugget . If your going to make fun of my job get the title correct welfare queen.

 

[KNB]

I've wondered about the Conservative members here always railing against poor people sitting around sucking off the government tit or whatever, and yet it's the same Conservatives sitting around on an internet messageboard all day.

Is this what Conservatives do with their success? Once they have enough money to sit around all day, they just type on online forums about how everyone else needs to pull themselves up by their own bootstraps? Are all of these Conservatives just a bunch of teenagers who aren't old enough to work? Or maybe they're all old people sucking off the government tit?

 

[Contumacious]

How Liberal Policies Keep People in Poverty

Of course, they do....by design.

Welfare state politicians want power, they get power by being electable, they become electable by making people addicted to easy money and benefits.

.

 

[RDD_1210]

Thanantos - works as a convenience store clerk
Templar - Unemployed and living at home

and the list goes on....

These people are advocating for people who don't give a shit about them. They are the poor and lower middle class of our country and yet they have actually been brainwashed to blame themselves for the problem of our country. Yet, they for some reason can't see what's happening.

I am a manager of a convenience store fuck nugget . If your going to make fun of my job get the title correct welfare queen.

Nothing I said was incorrect. How much could you make $35k? Tops. You are the working poor and yet you advocate for policies that would directly affect you negatively. You're an idiot.

 

[Plasmaball]

Thanantos - works as a convenience store clerk
Templar - Unemployed and living at home

and the list goes on....

These people are advocating for people who don't give a shit about them. They are the poor and lower middle class of our country and yet they have actually been brainwashed to blame themselves for the problem of our country. Yet, they for some reason can't see what's happening.

I am a manager of a convenience store fuck nugget . If your going to make fun of my job get the title correct welfare queen.

Ok you have a badge and poor. ..

 

[Contumacious]

Thanantos - works as a convenience store clerk
Templar - Unemployed and living at home

and the list goes on....

These people are advocating for people who don't give a shit about them. They are the poor and lower middle class of our country and yet they have actually been brainwashed to blame themselves for the problem of our country. Yet, they for some reason can't see what's happening.

I am a manager of a convenience store fuck nugget . If your going to make fun of my job get the title correct welfare queen.

Nothing I said was incorrect. How much could you make $35k? Tops. You are the working poor and yet you advocate for policies that would directly affect you negatively. You're an idiot.

But and your ilk want to destroy that system because you favor parasitism. I like his his honesty and adherence to the work ethic.

.

 

[GreenBean]

Cloward and Pliven pointed out that the number of Americans subsisting on social services probably represented less than half the number who were actually eligible for full benefits. They proposed a "massive drive to recruit the poor onto the welfare rolls." Cloward and Piven presented calculations that persuading even a fraction of potential welfare recipients to demand what they viewed as entitlements would bankrupt the system. The result, theoretically would be "a profound financial and political crisis" - basically an initiating domino that would eventually lead to the economic collapse of the USA and leave Humanity ripe for the ensuing onslaught of Marxism or other illogical derivatives of it. Rudolph Giuliani, while serving as NY City Mayor attempted to expose Cloward-Pliven in the late 1990s. As part of his drive for welfare reform he accused the militant scholars by name and cited their 1966 manifesto as evidence that they had engaged in deliberate economic sabotage.

Ignorance of welfare rights can be attacked through a massive educational campaign Brochures describing benefits in simple, clear language, and urging people to seek their full entitlements, should be distributed door to door in tenements and public housing projects, and deposited in stores, schools, churches and civic centers. Advertisements should be placed in newspapers; spot announcements should be made on radio. Leaders of social, religious, fraternal and political groups in the slums should also be enlisted to recruit the eligible to the rolls. The fact that the campaign is intended to inform people of their legal rights under a government program, that it is a civic education drive, will lend it legitimacy. - Cloward and Piven - The Weight of the Poor

Cloward- Pliven Strategy

Obama is no fool. He is not as incompetent as he seems, or at least his handlers aren't. To the contrary, they are brilliant. They know exactly what they're doing. Purposely overwhelming the U.S. economy to create systemic failure, economic crisis and social chaos -- thereby destroying capitalism and our country from within

1966? Interesting but 48 years old. And the cited stats for the article are from 1959. That is 55 years ago, more than half a centrury. Then you make a deluded leap to Obama in 2014.

The anti-liberals see only two extremes, "absolute freedom" and "absolute socialism". And, regularly, they post made up pictures as if it had some bearing on reality.

Obama and his regime have created a vast and rapidly expanding constituency of voters dependent on big government; a vast privileged class of public employees who work for big government; and a government dedicated to destroying capitalism and installing themselves as socialist rulers by overwhelming the system.

Barack Hussein Obama is no fool. He is not incompetent. On the contrary, he is brilliant. He knows exactly what he's doing. He is purposely overwhelming the U.S. economy to create systemic failure, economic crisis and social chaos thereby destroying capitalism and our country from within. Barack Hussein Obama was my college classmate.(Columbia University, class of '83)

He is a devout Muslim; do not be fooled. Look at his czars... Anti-business anti-American. As Glenn Beck correctly predicted from day one, Barack Hussein Obama is following the plan of Cloward & Piven, two professors at Columbia University... they outlined a plan to socialize America by overwhelming the system with government spending and entitlement demands.

Add up the clues below. Taken individually they're alarming. Taken as a whole, it is a brilliant, Machiavellian game plan to turn the United States into a Socialist/Marxist state with a permanent majority that desperately needs government for survival... And can be counted on to always vote for even bigger government. Why not? They have no responsibility to pay for it.

State of the Union: Obama's Cloward-Piven Strategy - henrymakow.com

 

[Political Junky]

yep... the goal of the left elites is to destroy the middle class.....and create a dependent underclass...

it's why liberals focus on 'minimum wages' for the bottom barrel jobs instead of robust business development that would create good jobs and more more middle class workers....

it's why liberals focus on 'gay marriage' and sexual 'liberation' instead of real marriages and family values that would prevent abortions and all those poor dependent mothers living off government handouts....

So there were no abortions before Roe vs Wade?

after RvW the number of abortions soared drastically.....the sheer enormity of the number of abortions makes that obvious and also proves that women are not using abortion as just a 'last choice'.....since 1973 there have been 55 million abortions....

http://guardianlv.com/2014/02/abortion-rates-at-all-time-low/

Abortion rates are at an all time low since the procedure first became legal by the U.S. Supreme Courts over Roe v. Wade in 1973. USA Today reports that according to a recent data analyst report, abortions rates in terms of the amount of abortions that took place during the years of 2008 and 2011 are at 13 percent drop from previous years records. The authors of this report believe this decline is probably due to the recession and recent long-lasting contraceptives which decrease the chance of pregnancy and are currently made more available nation wide.

This past Monday, January 27, an issue was reported by Guttmacher Institute located in New York which found the 2011 rates to be on a decline of 16.9 abortions for every 1,000 women in between the ages of 15 and 44. This decline comes in second to the 1973 abortion rates which were at a 16.3 for every 1,000 women. The report shows the declines to be present in all states except for the following six: Alaska, Wyoming, Maryland, New Hampshire, West Virginia and Wyoming. These states either had no change in the rate of decline or reported an increase concerning abortion rates. Rachel Jones, one of the authors and senior researcher of this study, told press associates that it is unusual to see such a significant decrease over a three-year period.
<more>