Obama: "We're responsible for each other". Really? Since when?

[Big Fitz]

And of course God has selected YOU to be their "Judge", right?

I can just see you judging Jesus for eating and drinking with sinners and forgiving the adulteress.

You not only "don't give a fuck for political correctness", you have shown you don't give a fuck about the poor, needy, disabled and crippled.

.

Well, admittedly, he has shown a certain intolerance for your brand of retarded posting.

allergies. But I take Zyrtec, so it's not as bad as it once was.

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Samson again.

 

[DaGoose]

I paged back about 10 pages and saw what invariably I knew I'd see...some bullshit about how lazy minorities are breaking the back of the government.

Living in Alabama, one of the amazing bits of rhetoric I get to hear over and over is "I'm payin' for all these laze abouts to just sit there and not work." The corollary is often "If people really wanted a job, they can find one." Really? Seriously? Wow.

With certain legislators axing the extension of unemployment benefits - one of the defenses I've heard has been a retreat to that "lazy bum" drivel.

Let me hit you with something that might seem counter-intuitive: increasing unemployment benefits actually creates jobs.

That's the exact rationale for having automatic stabilizers like unemployment insurance that kick in during these kinds of fiscal downturns. From that CBO report:


Extending additional unemployment benefits would directly help those who would otherwise exhaust their unemployment benefits between March and December of this year. Households receiving unemployment benefits tend to spend the additional benefits quickly, making this option both timely and cost-effective in spurring economic activity and employment. A variant of this option would extend assistance with paying health insurance premiums, which would allow some recipients to maintain health insurance coverage they would otherwise have dropped. This variant would result in increased demand for health care services, and it would increase the income available to purchase other goods and services for recipients who would have purchased insurance even without this special assistance. Both policy options could dampen people’s efforts to look for work, although that concern is less of a factor when employment opportunities are expected to be limited for some time.

CBO estimates that the policies would raise output cumulatively between 2010 and 2015 by $0.70 to $1.90 per dollar of total budgetary cost. CBO also estimates that the policies would add 8 to 19 cumulative years of full-time-equivalent employment in 2010 and 2011 per million dollars of total budgetary cost.



Economies are based on people buying good and services. For example, that's why deficit spending on food stamps during downturns has similar effects to unemployment compensation and for a similar reason. Empirical data shows that every additional $5 spent on them--through emergency spending--spurs up to $9.20 in economic activity. Moreover, as Hanson and Golan conclude in that brief:


Ultimately, whether growth in the Food Stamp Program stimulates economic activity depends on the funding mechanism—emergency financing stimulates economic activity in a recession, while budget-neutral financing does not. However, in either scenario, the increase in FSP expenditures raises the budgets of food stamp recipient households, stabilizing recipients’ food consumption and their well-being during economic downturns. Both scenarios also result in increased demand and production in the agriculture and food sectors, stabilizing economic activities in these key rural sectors during downturns in the economy.



Exactly the reason why stimulus (emergency funding) contained a large amount of money for food stamps:


Today, USDA Under Secretary Kevin Concannon marked the one year anniversary of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (AARA) of 2009, also known as the stimulus or recovery package, by announcing that ARRA invested more than $8 billion in local economies to feed the hungry through the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), formerly the Food Stamp Program with approximately $830 million more invested each month. In addition, through the Emergency Food Assistance program, States received an additional $150 million to support local food banks, food pantries and soup kitchens.



So extending programs like this during a recession has VALUE.

Here's more evidence in chart form. Red staters...pardon the use of the color Blue.

The attempts to play on stereotypes is class warfare that serves NO ONE. That goes for both sides. Trying to paint a group as lazy and unwilling to work? That's bull. Trying to paint the rich as evil and uncaring. That's bull too.

Come on people. We can be better critical thinkers than these stereotypes.

Good post.

.

 

[Big Fitz]

I paged back about 10 pages and saw what invariably I knew I'd see...some bullshit about how lazy minorities are breaking the back of the government.

Living in Alabama, one of the amazing bits of rhetoric I get to hear over and over is "I'm payin' for all these laze abouts to just sit there and not work." The corollary is often "If people really wanted a job, they can find one." Really? Seriously? Wow.

With certain legislators axing the extension of unemployment benefits - one of the defenses I've heard has been a retreat to that "lazy bum" drivel.

Let me hit you with something that might seem counter-intuitive: increasing unemployment benefits actually creates jobs.

That's the exact rationale for having automatic stabilizers like unemployment insurance that kick in during these kinds of fiscal downturns. From that CBO report:


Extending additional unemployment benefits would directly help those who would otherwise exhaust their unemployment benefits between March and December of this year. Households receiving unemployment benefits tend to spend the additional benefits quickly, making this option both timely and cost-effective in spurring economic activity and employment. A variant of this option would extend assistance with paying health insurance premiums, which would allow some recipients to maintain health insurance coverage they would otherwise have dropped. This variant would result in increased demand for health care services, and it would increase the income available to purchase other goods and services for recipients who would have purchased insurance even without this special assistance. Both policy options could dampen people’s efforts to look for work, although that concern is less of a factor when employment opportunities are expected to be limited for some time.

CBO estimates that the policies would raise output cumulatively between 2010 and 2015 by $0.70 to $1.90 per dollar of total budgetary cost. CBO also estimates that the policies would add 8 to 19 cumulative years of full-time-equivalent employment in 2010 and 2011 per million dollars of total budgetary cost.



Economies are based on people buying good and services. For example, that's why deficit spending on food stamps during downturns has similar effects to unemployment compensation and for a similar reason. Empirical data shows that every additional $5 spent on them--through emergency spending--spurs up to $9.20 in economic activity. Moreover, as Hanson and Golan conclude in that brief:


Ultimately, whether growth in the Food Stamp Program stimulates economic activity depends on the funding mechanism—emergency financing stimulates economic activity in a recession, while budget-neutral financing does not. However, in either scenario, the increase in FSP expenditures raises the budgets of food stamp recipient households, stabilizing recipients’ food consumption and their well-being during economic downturns. Both scenarios also result in increased demand and production in the agriculture and food sectors, stabilizing economic activities in these key rural sectors during downturns in the economy.



Exactly the reason why stimulus (emergency funding) contained a large amount of money for food stamps:


Today, USDA Under Secretary Kevin Concannon marked the one year anniversary of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (AARA) of 2009, also known as the stimulus or recovery package, by announcing that ARRA invested more than $8 billion in local economies to feed the hungry through the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), formerly the Food Stamp Program with approximately $830 million more invested each month. In addition, through the Emergency Food Assistance program, States received an additional $150 million to support local food banks, food pantries and soup kitchens.



So extending programs like this during a recession has VALUE.

Here's more evidence in chart form. Red staters...pardon the use of the color Blue.

The attempts to play on stereotypes is class warfare that serves NO ONE. That goes for both sides. Trying to paint a group as lazy and unwilling to work? That's bull. Trying to paint the rich as evil and uncaring. That's bull too.

Come on people. We can be better critical thinkers than these stereotypes.

If we break enough windows, we can employ everyone and improve the economy. Color me highly dubious.

 

[Samson]

So extending programs like this during a recession has VALUE.

Here's more evidence in chart form. Red staters...pardon the use of the color Blue.

The attempts to play on stereotypes is class warfare that serves NO ONE. That goes for both sides. Trying to paint a group as lazy and unwilling to work? That's bull. Trying to paint the rich as evil and uncaring. That's bull too.

Come on people. We can be better critical thinkers than these stereotypes.

I appreciate the sentiment, but wonder if you know how anyone determined that "Increasing Aid to the Unemployed" created 19 "Years of Full-Time-Equivalent Employment per Million Dollars of Total Bugetary Cost."



'Suse me, but it sounds like a bunch of handwaving crappola in light of the sustained number of people filing unemployment claims holding at 9%

 

[Mr Liberty]

forced wealth transfer payments, stealing the labor of one to give to the parasitic behavior of another is simply immoral


Democrats are truly evil

You want to deny help to the crippled and infirm and you say I'M the evil one.

Oh yeah.....Jesus would agree with YOU on that.

.

I think he would. This is a link to his parable of the talents.
The Parable of the Talents
It's a blog; however, the story is about increasing wealth. Jesus condemns one of the servants, as being wicked and lazy. I think he would condemn the entitlement system as evil. He stands up for the poor. He does not stand up for those who don't try to improve their condition.

 

[Vanquish]

So Big Fitz, that's a non-answer?

At least Samson did better (as he always 99.9% of the time) than "nanny nanny boo boo" "I'm rubber you're glue..."

Samson: It's a CBO metric. Not a brand-new cockamaymey graph-filler.

Do a search and you'll find multiple reports where it's been used: here

 

[Vanquish]

forced wealth transfer payments, stealing the labor of one to give to the parasitic behavior of another is simply immoral


Democrats are truly evil

You want to deny help to the crippled and infirm and you say I'M the evil one.

Oh yeah.....Jesus would agree with YOU on that.

.

I think he would. This is a link to his parable of the talents.
The Parable of the Talents
It's a blog; however, the story is about increasing wealth. Jesus condemns one of the servants, as being wicked and lazy. I think he would condemn the entitlement system as evil. He stands up for the poor. He does not stand up for those who don't try to improve their condition.

But you can't equate everyone that needs help with laziness!!! There are good people...who due to unforeseen circumstances...and low-paying jobs...need help. They're not lazy or stupid...just caught by the circumstances of life.

 

[Big Fitz]

So Big Fitz, that's a non-answer?

At least Samson did better (as he always 99.9% of the time) than "nanny nanny boo boo" "I'm rubber you're glue..."

Samson: It's a CBO metric. Not a brand-new cockamaymey graph-filler.

Do a search and you'll find multiple reports where it's been used: here

Oh yes... because government data is always perfect and impeccable. How about that IPCC? Climategate affect that much?

I am neither inclined nor interested in wasting my time searching for sources to debunk something that doesn't pass the sniff test. I've better ways to entertain myself and have no reason to disprove something of dubious quality for your edification.

Take this as you will.

 

[Samson]

So Big Fitz, that's a non-answer?

At least Samson did better (as he always 99.9% of the time) than "nanny nanny boo boo" "I'm rubber you're glue..."

Samson: It's a CBO metric. Not a brand-new cockamaymey graph-filler.

Do a search and you'll find multiple reports where it's been used: here

I linked, I read, but remain confused by the desrepency between what apprears to be a resounding confirmation that spending to increase aid to the unemployed is the best SPENDING option, and the fact that unemployment remains higher than average.

I'm guessing that this is where the, "Unemployment would be so much WORSE, if we did not Spend more in aid" arguement comes in handy.

How does aid to unemployed decrease unemployment? Logically it seems contradictory, since you are "rewarding" behaviour that is undesireable.

 

[Mr Liberty]

You want to deny help to the crippled and infirm and you say I'M the evil one.

Oh yeah.....Jesus would agree with YOU on that.

.

I think he would. This is a link to his parable of the talents.
The Parable of the Talents
It's a blog; however, the story is about increasing wealth. Jesus condemns one of the servants, as being wicked and lazy. I think he would condemn the entitlement system as evil. He stands up for the poor. He does not stand up for those who don't try to improve their condition.

But you can't equate everyone that needs help with laziness!!! There are good people...who due to unforeseen circumstances...and low-paying jobs...need help. They're not lazy or stupid...just caught by the circumstances of life.

Life isn't fair and you cannot make it fair. When we try make it fair we make the situation worse. I am not oppose to giving people a hand up. I am oppose to it being done at the federal level. It should be done at the lowest level of government. It should also give a person only physiological needs, food and shelter. It is reasonable to expect something in return, like labor.

 

[Big Fitz]

Life isn't fair and you cannot make it fair.

Truer words have never been spoken.

 

[Big Fitz]

DaGewse... I'm not reading your PMs. Please keep 'pwning' me in the thread you wuss. Maybe then with a few more good tugs we can pull your head out of your ass.

 

[DaGoose]

You want to deny help to the crippled and infirm and you say I'M the evil one.

Oh yeah.....Jesus would agree with YOU on that.

.

I think he would. This is a link to his parable of the talents.
The Parable of the Talents
It's a blog; however, the story is about increasing wealth. Jesus condemns one of the servants, as being wicked and lazy. I think he would condemn the entitlement system as evil. He stands up for the poor. He does not stand up for those who don't try to improve their condition.

But you can't equate everyone that needs help with laziness!!! There are good people...who due to unforeseen circumstances...and low-paying jobs...need help. They're not lazy or stupid...just caught by the circumstances of life.

Truer words have never been spoken on this issue. And compassionate Americans are not opposed to giving them a hand up whether it's on the state or federal level.

.

 

[DaGoose]

DaGewse... I'm not reading your PMs. Please keep 'pwning' me in the thread you wuss. Maybe then with a few more good tugs we can pull your head out of your ass.

Uh-huh. Yeah, right. Whatever you say.

.

 

[Samson]

I think he would. This is a link to his parable of the talents.
The Parable of the Talents
It's a blog; however, the story is about increasing wealth. Jesus condemns one of the servants, as being wicked and lazy. I think he would condemn the entitlement system as evil. He stands up for the poor. He does not stand up for those who don't try to improve their condition.

But you can't equate everyone that needs help with laziness!!! There are good people...who due to unforeseen circumstances...and low-paying jobs...need help. They're not lazy or stupid...just caught by the circumstances of life.

Life isn't fair and you cannot make it fair. When we try make it fair we make the situation worse. I am not oppose to giving people a hand up. I am oppose to it being done at the federal level. It should be done at the lowest level of government. It should also give a person only physiological needs, food and shelter. It is reasonable to expect something in return, like labor.

But, my back hurts, and I have ADD.

 

[Big Fitz]

DaGewse... I'm not reading your PMs. Please keep 'pwning' me in the thread you wuss. Maybe then with a few more good tugs we can pull your head out of your ass.

Uh-huh. Yeah, right. Whatever you say.

.

So now you're going to deny sending me PMs? Or that your head can be pulled out of your ass.

I can cut and paste the record that the PMs DID occur you idiot.

 

[Samson]

DaGewse... I'm not reading your PMs. Please keep 'pwning' me in the thread you wuss. Maybe then with a few more good tugs we can pull your head out of your ass.

Uh-huh. Yeah, right. Whatever you say.

.

I refuse to keep tugging: I'm convinced you have a birth defect that has fused your ears to your anus.

 

[Big Fitz]

wait... holy shit! denying PMs.....

Corndog? Is that you? You went through Reintardation or something?

 

[Big Fitz]

Oh this is going into lolcat territory. Fun fun!

 

[DiamondDave]

I think he would. This is a link to his parable of the talents.
The Parable of the Talents
It's a blog; however, the story is about increasing wealth. Jesus condemns one of the servants, as being wicked and lazy. I think he would condemn the entitlement system as evil. He stands up for the poor. He does not stand up for those who don't try to improve their condition.

But you can't equate everyone that needs help with laziness!!! There are good people...who due to unforeseen circumstances...and low-paying jobs...need help. They're not lazy or stupid...just caught by the circumstances of life.

Truer words have never been spoken on this issue. And compassionate Americans are not opposed to giving them a hand up whether it's on the state or federal level.

.

'SUPPOSED to' 'required to' or 'forced to' are key terms... there should be no forced participation in such things.. through any level of government...

But I call on people continually to VOLUNTARILY give of their own income, efforts, time, goods, etc to help those who fall on hard time, who need a leg up, or who just need a boost in some way... that is a call to charity... not a call to forced redistribution for the sake of governmental power and legislated morality on the issue of 'need'.... but funny, the leftists sure like to legislate morality when it comes to causes that are near and dear to their hearts... not realizing that when they give government this power, it is not just to be used when it is in their favor.. that when the pendulum swings, it can and will come back the other way... but they sure as hell will complain about it then... because of their very subjective stance..

Me... I personally support keeping that power away from government and in the hands of the individuals who are supposed to benefit from the freedom our country affords... that freedom coming with both positives and negatives for every person... but I will certainly take that freedom over the shackles of increasing government control