Republicans are ignorant about the most basic FACTS about welfare in this country

[FA_Q2]

There is such a thing as "corporate" welfare--and public individual welfare--both which most Republicans don't really care for.

The most recent abuse of corporate welfare--was Solyndra--who received their welfare check for 500 million and then went bankrupt--as did other solar corporate welfare companies in total going bankrupt for about 1 billion dollars. THIS WAS OBAMA'S way of getting green energy working in the United States. THE PROBLEM--these companies were also large donors to his campaign.

Shhhh...

This was supposed to be about how conservatives dont know anything - not about the asinine lies from the left. Funny that he complains that the republicans support welfare to the rich when the left certainly is no less guilty of such policies. I find that they are actually much WORSE.

You know I find it interesting none of you have the balls to even acknowledge the facts I presented about SNAP.

What facts do you want addressed? The fact that SNAP represents a FRACTION of personal welfare and has almost nothing to do with the overall picture? The fact that several of your points are complete misrepresentations of reality or that you still have not acknowledged the difference in a subsidy, tax break and welfare payouts? Or that you have ignored any point brought up against your ‘facts?’

Your talking points are barely worth mention PARTICULARLY when you are railing on the right for supporting ‘wealthy’ when you support the same shit policies as long as they go to your parties favored cronies. Bullshit like Solyndra as pointed out by Oreo are shining examples of the cronyism that you support. The true payouts to the wealthy.

 

[Claudette]

I have to say that your definition of what is truly a subsidy and what is not is substantially weak.

I'm not sure you do. Go ahead. Educate me.

To say subsidies come in the form of tax breaks only is complete bullshit. My source proves that.

But I didn't say that subsides come in the form of tax breaks. Tax breaks are tax breaks, not subsidies.

Subsidies are in-kind payments to do or not do something, regardless of your tax situation.

Your source lies on purpose.

Yup. Big difference between a tax break and a subsidy.

A subsidy is giving someone someone elses hard earned money.

A tax break is giving the payee a break on taxes.

Apples and oranges. Of course Billybigmouth doesn't see it that way.

Oh wait. I forgot. He's an idiot. Never mind.

 

[Billy000]

Shhhh...

This was supposed to be about how conservatives dont know anything - not about the asinine lies from the left. Funny that he complains that the republicans support welfare to the rich when the left certainly is no less guilty of such policies. I find that they are actually much WORSE.

You know I find it interesting none of you have the balls to even acknowledge the facts I presented about SNAP.

What facts do you want addressed? The fact that SNAP represents a FRACTION of personal welfare and has almost nothing to do with the overall picture? The fact that several of your points are complete misrepresentations of reality or that you still have not acknowledged the difference in a subsidy, tax break and welfare payouts? Or that you have ignored any point brought up against your ‘facts?’

Your talking points are barely worth mention PARTICULARLY when you are railing on the right for supporting ‘wealthy’ when you support the same shit policies as long as they go to your parties favored cronies. Bullshit like Solyndra as pointed out by Oreo are shining examples of the cronyism that you support. The true payouts to the wealthy.

Ok well here's what your dumbass isn't getting. People on welfare are not on all programs simulataneously. Most are only on one and very few are on two. Do you even know what the other welfare programs are?

Where is this isse coming from about what I say about subsidies? Nothing I have said about these subsidy programs is false and you know it. Oh, and Solyndra was a half of a billion dollar program. The fact that you cons still bring it up is pathetic. It's a start up that failed. It happens. There was no fraud involved. In fact republicans probably spent just as much money investigating it.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Billy, oh Billy. You can't expect to make arguments and call people "dumbass."

There are 79 types of means tested Welfare programs, and I doubt you've memorized them yourself, I haven't so I Googled them for you.

http://budget.house.gov/uploadedfiles/rectortestimony04172012.pdf

Moreover, Billy, you're floundering.

Solyndra is one of over at least 50 energy companies that failed whilst being subsidized by the government:

Up to 50 Obama-backed energy companies financially troubled | The Daily Caller

 

[Billy000]

Billy, oh Billy. You can't expect to make arguments and call people "dumbass."

There are 79 types of means tested Welfare programs, and I doubt you've memorized them yourself, I haven't so I Googled them for you.

http://budget.house.gov/uploadedfiles/rectortestimony04172012.pdf

Moreover, Billy, you're floundering.

Solyndra is one of over at least 50 energy companies that failed whilst being subsidized by the government:

Up to 50 Obama-backed energy companies financially troubled | The Daily Caller

I'm not denying Obama made bad investments. Of course, that isn't even the issue.

 

[FJO]

Billy000, how about you and me go out and try to find a job.

You go to the people who are taking advantage of SNAP.

I will go to the people who you refer to as corporate welfare bums (pardon me if I don't quote you verbatim).

Lets see who will get a job first.

 

[Billy000]

Billy000, how about you and me go out and try to find a job.

You go to the people who are taking advantage of SNAP.

I will go to the people who you refer to as corporate welfare bums (pardon me if I don't quote you verbatim).

Lets see who will get a job first.

Oh gee you got me there. My entire argument has fallen apart.

 

[FJO]

Billy000, how about you and me go out and try to find a job.

You go to the people who are taking advantage of SNAP.

I will go to the people who you refer to as corporate welfare bums (pardon me if I don't quote you verbatim).

Lets see who will get a job first.

Oh gee you got me there. My entire argument has fallen apart.

Thank you!

It is nice to see a liberal with enough sense to admit defeat.

 

[HelenaHandbag]

The truth of the matter is that the wealthy receive enormous gov assistance through subsidies. The poor on the other hand get peanuts.

Let's start with the poor and SNAP (food stamps).

The average SNAP recipient receives $133 a month. The average SNAP recipient has a gross income of $744 a MONTH per household. 76% of households have at least one dependent living there. 83% of households receiving SNAP are below the poverty line. The other 17 are at the poverty line or make 130% of the poverty line. And despite what you cons like to believe, food stamps fraud is RARE.

All the sobering facts on food stamps are here.

SNAP (Food Stamps): Facts, Myths and Realities

Now the wealthy. Oh boy.

1) corporations receive $80 billion a year through state and local subsidies.

2) Federal subsidies for corporations cost TAX PAYERS 100 billion a year.

3) The official tax rate for corporations is 35%. However, because of tax breaks, corporations only pay 13% a year in taxes.

4) wealthy hedge fund managers cost tax payers 83 billion a year.

5) subsidies for fast food companies cost tax payers 243 billion a year.

6) deductions for mortgage cost tax payers 70 billion a year. 77% of this funding goes to income earners of 100,000 a year or more.

Top Ten Examples of Welfare for the Rich » CounterPunch: Tells the Facts, Names the Names

The more facts we learn, the more realize just how much bullshit republicanism really is.

There is such a thing as "corporate" welfare--and public individual welfare--both which most Republicans don't really care for.

The most recent abuse of corporate welfare--was Solyndra--who received their welfare check for 500 million and then went bankrupt--as did other solar corporate welfare companies in total going bankrupt for about 1 billion dollars. THIS WAS OBAMA'S way of getting green energy working in the United States. THE PROBLEM--these companies were also large donors to his campaign.

Shhhh...

This was supposed to be about how conservatives dont know anything - not about the asinine lies from the left. Funny that he complains that the republicans support welfare to the rich when the left certainly is no less guilty of such policies. I find that they are actually much WORSE.

He then has the nerve to call others ignorant.

 

[KNB]

When do job creators start creating jobs with their record corporate profits?

 

[bedowin62]

liberals are comical morons; they LIE about welfare stats; use DEBUNKED talking points; then have the gall to accuse others of being ignorant on the matter

but what do you expect from mindless left-wing losers that call record welfare and food stamps "forward progress"?


libs are losers who lie to THEMSELVES

 

[bedowin62]

When do job creators start creating jobs with their record corporate profits?

yawn
WHY ARE YOU LWNJs asking where jobs you claim to have already created are?

obama claims to have created 7 MILLION jobs

libs are losers who lie to themselves

 

[HelenaHandbag]

Found it!

This fossil-fuels-more-subsidised-than-renewables meme has been spread, inter alia, by the Guardian's ludicrous Damian Carrington; by Labour MP Barry "Dork Brain" Gardiner (Vice President of the sinister GLOBE international); by green pressure groups; by the Overseas Development Institute; and by the IMF which, impressively, has put global energy subsidies at $1.9 trillion – the majority of these, apparently, for fossil fuels…

Now the bit that interests me is that weasel phrase "There is no single internationally agreed definition of what constitutes energy subsidy".

Do you see what they just did there? Let me explain.

Not so long ago – and indeed for the first five hundred and fifty odd years of its recorded usage – a subsidy was something quite clearly understood by everyone to mean a cash incentive.

Here, for example, is the online Merriam-Webster definition:

Money that is paid usually by a government to keep the price of a product or service low or to help a business or organization to continue to function.​

Here is the one from my Chambers dictionary:

Aid in the form of money; a grant of public money in aid of some enterprise, industry etc; or to support or keep down the price of a commodity, or from one state to another.​

This is certainly the sense in which I have always understood the word. I would suspect the same is true for most of you. So I would argue that there is something slippery and disingenuous about that claim above that there is no "internationally agreed definition of what constitutes energy subsidy." Yes there is. Everyone – every normal, reasonably well-educated, English-speaking person, at any rate – would know instantly what constitutes "subsidy", regardless of whether or not the word "energy" is put in front of it. It means a cash incentive.

What it definitely doesn't mean is a tax reduction. Why doesn't it mean this? Well, let's examine the logic for a moment. Suppose I were to mug you in the street and steal, say, £100 from you. But then, in a fit of generosity, I decided to hand you back a tenner so you could get a cab home. Could that tenner be reasonably described as a "gift" or a "donation"? Well, yes, I suppose at an enormous stretch, it could just about. "Dono" means "I give" in Latin, so, yes, when I give you back that "tenner" it could be construed as a gift or a donation.

But only by someone lacking in any kind of moral responsibility, or intellectual consistency, or understanding of sense, context and nuance. No sensitive user of the English language would ever employ the word "gift" or "donation" in such a perverted way.

The same applies to this new usage of "subsidy" – as endorsed above by the Environmental Audit Committee, by the Guardian's Damian Carrington, by the Sunday Times's Jonathan Leake, by Barry "Dork Brain" Gardiner, by the Overseas Development Institute, by Bloomberg New Energy, by the IMF and so on. Every one of these people and institutions is using it in the novel sense "being granted a tax reduction by the state." So, for example, if you are a fracking company which would normally be taxed at say 20 per cent, but the government decides to kick start your industry by reducing the tax rate to, say, 15 per cent you are – according to this new tortured definition of the word – receiving a subsidy. But how can this be? If the government takes less of your money in tax it is not actually giving you that money, any more than I was giving that tenner a moment ago just after I mugged you.

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/j...eral-lefts-orwellian-assault-on-our-language/

Conclusion: Tax credits and deductions are not subsidies.

If anyone is displaying their ignorance for the world to see, it is the OP.

 

[bedowin62]

SHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!

dont tell left-wing nutjobs; but this is the 8th straight year of Progressive Majority rule;
and the rich AND ONLY THE RICH have gotten MUCH RICHER; while the Middle Class and poor have gotten poorer


enter your excuse for PROGRESSIVE FAILURE here______________________

 

[FJO]

The truth of the matter is that the wealthy receive enormous gov assistance through subsidies. The poor on the other hand get peanuts.

Let's start with the poor and SNAP (food stamps).

The average SNAP recipient receives $133 a month. The average SNAP recipient has a gross income of $744 a MONTH per household. 76% of households have at least one dependent living there. 83% of households receiving SNAP are below the poverty line. The other 17 are at the poverty line or make 130% of the poverty line. And despite what you cons like to believe, food stamps fraud is RARE.

All the sobering facts on food stamps are here.

SNAP (Food Stamps): Facts, Myths and Realities

Now the wealthy. Oh boy.

1) corporations receive $80 billion a year through state and local subsidies.

2) Federal subsidies for corporations cost TAX PAYERS 100 billion a year.

3) The official tax rate for corporations is 35%. However, because of tax breaks, corporations only pay 13% a year in taxes.

Top Ten Examples of Welfare for the Rich » CounterPunch: Tells the Facts, Names the Names

Umm, just a simple math question here but how is it people on welfare not paying anything into the tax system somehow get less in subsidies than the people actually paying into the system?

So you're saying people actually paying into the system getting a few dollars back is somehow hurting people that pay nothing and rely on the system for their lively hood?

Subsidies to corporations (which aren't subsidies they are tax breaks for expanding or research) to the tune of 100 billion a year. After they paid the tax revenue of 1.5 trillion is somehow worse than someone paying in nothing and getting $133.00 per month. By the way, there are several million taking the $133.00 a month and not so many paying the taxes to support that.

Here's your homework for the evening.

Work out the math of how many can possibly survive on just a few people paying to support them. Even if you take 100% of these corporations money you still lose not only an employer and their employees but all the revenue you so desperately desire for the poor.

Look it over and let me know what you come up with.

I have to say this is a very feeble argument. Food stamps cost 75 billion a year which is nothing compared to what the wealthy get. Do you honestly believe that corporations need all of this assistance?

Oh and anyone making $766 a month shouldn't pay taxes. If you want them to, raise the minimum wage. Everybody wins.

For the 75 billion in food stamps the country gets back NOTHING.

For the subsidies given to corporations, the country gets back JOBS.

If you believe in fairness and equality - as liberals claim to do as long as it suits them - you should agree that EVERYONE should pay the same rate in taxes. If those on $766 are unhappy with their station in life, let them get an education, work harder and look in the mirror to see their own worth.

 

[zeke]

SHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!

dont tell left-wing nutjobs; but this is the 8th straight year of Progressive Majority rule;
and the rich AND ONLY THE RICH have gotten MUCH RICHER; while the Middle Class and poor have gotten poorer


enter your excuse for PROGRESSIVE FAILURE here______________________

Republican obstruction and Republican lies. That about covers it I think.

 

[ScienceRocks]

There is such a thing as "corporate" welfare--and public individual welfare--both which most Republicans don't really care for.

The most recent abuse of corporate welfare--was Solyndra--who received their welfare check for 500 million and then went bankrupt--as did other solar corporate welfare companies in total going bankrupt for about 1 billion dollars. THIS WAS OBAMA'S way of getting green energy working in the United States. THE PROBLEM--these companies were also large donors to his campaign.

Shhhh...

This was supposed to be about how conservatives dont know anything - not about the asinine lies from the left. Funny that he complains that the republicans support welfare to the rich when the left certainly is no less guilty of such policies. I find that they are actually much WORSE.

You know I find it interesting none of you have the balls to even acknowledge the facts I presented about SNAP.

They hate the safety net. Personally I'd focus more on the education part of it and fix our college system that charges up the ass.

 

[bedowin62]

SHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!

dont tell left-wing nutjobs; but this is the 8th straight year of Progressive Majority rule;
and the rich AND ONLY THE RICH have gotten MUCH RICHER; while the Middle Class and poor have gotten poorer


enter your excuse for PROGRESSIVE FAILURE here______________________

Republican obstruction and Republican lies. That about covers it I think.

of couse it covers it.........................who expects anything else from lame progressive idiots and weak-minded left-wing losers who cant admit they have failed?

 

[bedowin62]

"safety net"

is that what the Left calls their goal of making as many Americans as possible dependant slaves of the Government?

 

[KNB]

Iraq. You can't admit that Republicans failed.

"Democrats voted for it, too!" is your only response. You failed to the tune of thousands of lives and trillions of dollars. YOU FAILED and that is why the majority of normal people on Earth want the GOP to fuck itself deep and hard.