Ten myth busting facts about welfare

[David_42]

Fromthe link:

The poverty rate increased from 11 percent in 2000 to 15 percent in 2011.

So poverty increased despite (because of) 8 years of Democrat rule.
Democrat policies fail to lift people out of poverty. They fail every time.

What happened in 2008? Welfare programs are shown to reduce poverty and lift people out of it, social security keeps millions out of poverty.

Idiot.
Your link says the exact opposite: TANF is not designed to lift people out ofpoverty. IT's right there in what you posted. Did you bother to read it?
We arent talking about 2008. We're talking about 2011, supposedly after 3 years of expansion under Obama.
Dem policies deliver failure.

Welfare programs shown to reduce poverty in America
Remember 2008. Idiot.

War on poverty: US spent $15 trillion over 5 decades
January 8, 2014 6:24 PM MST

Months after JFK's assassination, Lyndon Johnson told congress and the nation that he was declaring "an unconditional war on poverty in America." Five decades and $15 trillion later, that war is lost.

Taxpayers have been bilked trillions of dollars.

Back in 1964, America's poverty rate was 19 percent. Today, it's 15 percent and the number is rising thanks to failed programs. The government borrowed money and forced taxpayers to spend $15 trillion in anti-poverty programs. However, bureaucrats and politicians have not been held accountable for squandering America's wealth.

With such a massive sum, all the $15 trillion in taxpayers' money did was establish a welfare state in which a victom mentality was rewarded with handouts, government cheese, extended jobless benefits, food stamps, free healthcare, subsidized housing, and other entitlements that encourage leeches to be lazy.

War on poverty: US spent $15 trillion over 5 decades

Welfare programs shown to reduce poverty in America
How the War on Poverty Succeeded (in Four Charts) - The New Yorker
Social Security Keeps 22 Million Americans Out Of Poverty: A State-By-State Analysis | Center on Budget and Policy Priorities

 

[Rotagilla]

not everyone can get trained and employed in 99 weeks. in any case, why set up an arbitrary and capricious limit instead of being more rational in the choices offered labor in any at-will employment State.

That's BS. If you really want to work you can find a job. There are 11 million illegals who prove that everyday.

Who get hired because they'll work for less then minimum wage to struggle and provide for their families..

Life is a struggle. Get over it. No one promised you a life on a bed of roses, where you get everything you want, without working for it.

I've worked 3 jobs at the same time before. Your telling me that me, without any college degrees, or skills or abilities of any kind, can manage to find 3 jobs to pay my bills, but other people can't?

Fact is, illegals are able to find work. But born bred Americans who can read and write English, are unable to? Bull. You just are flat out full of crap.

Life is an unnecessarily difficult struggle in America compared to other countries.

hilarious!
you're a naive youth, in college, supported by mom and dad, with no life experience and no clue about how the real world works.
I doubt you've ever BEEN to "other countries". Never mind telling me how much easier it is to live in one.
It's ok..I thought I knew everything too when I was a kid...You'll grow out of it.

Congratulations, you worked 3 jobs and were lucky enough to find them/have the time to work them, people have kids, people to take care of, school to focus on.

When you grow up you'll be able to do some of those things, too. Patience.

Illegals can find work, and they work their asses off in undesirable jobs to provide for themselves. I am not full of crap, I am a realist.

Here's some reality for you, mr. "realist".

Illegals don't BELONG in this country...they're breaking the law.

 

[Andylusion]

That's another funny thing, people want to tell these people in poverty, after they cut all "socialist" welfare programs, that they just need to go get a 4 year degree from a college and get a job. Oh, by the way, they should be working 3 jobs while managing their school work.

I'm not asking anyone to do anything that I have not done myself.

Life is hard. Life tough.

And how is having 4th generation welfare recipients any better?

Did you know that more than half of all McDonald company owned stores, the store managers started off as hourly crew?

And a large portion of the owned franchises, are owned by people who started off as hourly crew.

The CEO of Walmart started off as a part-time hourly worker unloading trucks at a Walmart warehouse.

Here's the kicker.... you can work your way up the ladder, unless you get on the bottom rung of the ladder.

In early 2000s, I worked retail at an auto-part store. Starting wage, $7 an hour. The assistant manager there, had started off as a part time shelf stocker. After I left, they opened up a new store, and they put him as store manager over the store.

You can advance your career without a degree, without working 3 jobs.

But you can't do that on unemployment and welfare and food stamps.

See, you want a future where people start off making a middle class income. That doesn't happen usually. You start off at the bottom, and work your way up.

At the company I'm at now, we have 3 software engineer interns. They are paid very low wages. But the point is, they learn experience and have a work history, and start climbing the ladder. You don't just walk out of college, with a bit of paper that says (I R SMRT), and land a $100,000 a year engineering job.

You start at the bottom, and work your way up.

And on top of that..... people don't have to start off working Wendy's. You can mow lawns. You can earn $30,000 a year, mowing lawns. I know a guy right that started mowing lawns in high school, and was pulling down $500,000 before he got out of college.

Read this one.....

Meet the 15-year-old babysitting boss poised to make millions

This 15-year-old chick is making $375K a year...... setting up baby sitting.

You are telling me, that adults are completely incapable of going and making a living, but this 15-year-old still in braces, is making top 1% cash?

See, just stop the excuses. Just quit. You are the one holding people back. I'm the one telling everyone they can win. I'm want to help people to succeed. You hold people down with your "you can't get ahead, you need a union or your doomed" mentality.

You harm people with your lies.

See, the funny thing about you guys, you have this ridiculous idea that socio-economic conditions are exact in all areas when making these ridiculous assumptions. Yes, people work up the ladder, but people fall into poverty all the time, you do know those MCD managers rely on welfare? Trust me, I used to work there.

What the heck are you talking about?? 0.o

Half of all store managers started off as hourly crew.

A store manager is making an average of $65,000 a year.

You are telling me that McDonald store managers are living off of welfare when they are earning $65K? That is proof that we need to end welfare!

 

[David_42]

That's another funny thing, people want to tell these people in poverty, after they cut all "socialist" welfare programs, that they just need to go get a 4 year degree from a college and get a job. Oh, by the way, they should be working 3 jobs while managing their school work.

I'm not asking anyone to do anything that I have not done myself.

Life is hard. Life tough.

And how is having 4th generation welfare recipients any better?

Did you know that more than half of all McDonald company owned stores, the store managers started off as hourly crew?

And a large portion of the owned franchises, are owned by people who started off as hourly crew.

The CEO of Walmart started off as a part-time hourly worker unloading trucks at a Walmart warehouse.

Here's the kicker.... you can work your way up the ladder, unless you get on the bottom rung of the ladder.

In early 2000s, I worked retail at an auto-part store. Starting wage, $7 an hour. The assistant manager there, had started off as a part time shelf stocker. After I left, they opened up a new store, and they put him as store manager over the store.

You can advance your career without a degree, without working 3 jobs.

But you can't do that on unemployment and welfare and food stamps.

See, you want a future where people start off making a middle class income. That doesn't happen usually. You start off at the bottom, and work your way up.

At the company I'm at now, we have 3 software engineer interns. They are paid very low wages. But the point is, they learn experience and have a work history, and start climbing the ladder. You don't just walk out of college, with a bit of paper that says (I R SMRT), and land a $100,000 a year engineering job.

You start at the bottom, and work your way up.

And on top of that..... people don't have to start off working Wendy's. You can mow lawns. You can earn $30,000 a year, mowing lawns. I know a guy right that started mowing lawns in high school, and was pulling down $500,000 before he got out of college.

Read this one.....

Meet the 15-year-old babysitting boss poised to make millions

This 15-year-old chick is making $375K a year...... setting up baby sitting.

You are telling me, that adults are completely incapable of going and making a living, but this 15-year-old still in braces, is making top 1% cash?

See, just stop the excuses. Just quit. You are the one holding people back. I'm the one telling everyone they can win. I'm want to help people to succeed. You hold people down with your "you can't get ahead, you need a union or your doomed" mentality.

You harm people with your lies.

See, the funny thing about you guys, you have this ridiculous idea that socio-economic conditions are exact in all areas when making these ridiculous assumptions. Yes, people work up the ladder, but people fall into poverty all the time, you do know those MCD managers rely on welfare? Trust me, I used to work there.

What the heck are you talking about?? 0.o

Half of all store managers started off as hourly crew.

A store manager is making an average of $65,000 a year.

You are telling me that McDonald store managers are living off of welfare when they are earning $65K? That is proof that we need to end welfare!

"The typical salary for a McDonald's Store Manager ranges from$27,545-$57,966, with an average salary of $43,389. Salaries estimates based on 56 salary submitted anonymously to Glassdoor by McDonald's Store Manager employees."
I also misread your post, I thought you were referring to shift managers and the like, now, they are grossly underpaid.

 

[Andylusion]

Who get hired because they'll work for less then minimum wage to struggle and provide for their families..

That is BS too. Illegals do not work for less. They are savvy enough to know about how much to get paid. Sheesh do you think they are ignorant?

Answer: Yes. Most left-winger assume everyone is ignorant and stupid. That's why they try and control every aspect of life. It's part of their ideology.

That's hilarious, I'd like to see what "left wingers" believe this. People on the left, the left that sprung from FDR's era, believe in utilizing the state to help everyone and encourage equality.

Intentions don't matter. Results are what matter. FDR, and the leftists of today, to the exact opposite of what you claim. They harm everyone, and destroy equality.

Yeah, results do matter, which is why FDR was elected 4 times, and why welfare has been proven to reduce poverty, same with social security.

Yeah, proven to keep people in poverty.

 

[David_42]

That is BS too. Illegals do not work for less. They are savvy enough to know about how much to get paid. Sheesh do you think they are ignorant?

Answer: Yes. Most left-winger assume everyone is ignorant and stupid. That's why they try and control every aspect of life. It's part of their ideology.

That's hilarious, I'd like to see what "left wingers" believe this. People on the left, the left that sprung from FDR's era, believe in utilizing the state to help everyone and encourage equality.

Intentions don't matter. Results are what matter. FDR, and the leftists of today, to the exact opposite of what you claim. They harm everyone, and destroy equality.

Yeah, results do matter, which is why FDR was elected 4 times, and why welfare has been proven to reduce poverty, same with social security.

Yeah, proven to keep people in poverty.

I've literally shown you this is bullshit, and even if some people abuse the system, the overall positive gains are undeniable.

 

[Andylusion]

That's another funny thing, people want to tell these people in poverty, after they cut all "socialist" welfare programs, that they just need to go get a 4 year degree from a college and get a job. Oh, by the way, they should be working 3 jobs while managing their school work.

I'm not asking anyone to do anything that I have not done myself.

Life is hard. Life tough.

And how is having 4th generation welfare recipients any better?

Did you know that more than half of all McDonald company owned stores, the store managers started off as hourly crew?

And a large portion of the owned franchises, are owned by people who started off as hourly crew.

The CEO of Walmart started off as a part-time hourly worker unloading trucks at a Walmart warehouse.

Here's the kicker.... you can work your way up the ladder, unless you get on the bottom rung of the ladder.

In early 2000s, I worked retail at an auto-part store. Starting wage, $7 an hour. The assistant manager there, had started off as a part time shelf stocker. After I left, they opened up a new store, and they put him as store manager over the store.

You can advance your career without a degree, without working 3 jobs.

But you can't do that on unemployment and welfare and food stamps.

See, you want a future where people start off making a middle class income. That doesn't happen usually. You start off at the bottom, and work your way up.

At the company I'm at now, we have 3 software engineer interns. They are paid very low wages. But the point is, they learn experience and have a work history, and start climbing the ladder. You don't just walk out of college, with a bit of paper that says (I R SMRT), and land a $100,000 a year engineering job.

You start at the bottom, and work your way up.

And on top of that..... people don't have to start off working Wendy's. You can mow lawns. You can earn $30,000 a year, mowing lawns. I know a guy right that started mowing lawns in high school, and was pulling down $500,000 before he got out of college.

Read this one.....

Meet the 15-year-old babysitting boss poised to make millions

This 15-year-old chick is making $375K a year...... setting up baby sitting.

You are telling me, that adults are completely incapable of going and making a living, but this 15-year-old still in braces, is making top 1% cash?

See, just stop the excuses. Just quit. You are the one holding people back. I'm the one telling everyone they can win. I'm want to help people to succeed. You hold people down with your "you can't get ahead, you need a union or your doomed" mentality.

You harm people with your lies.

See, the funny thing about you guys, you have this ridiculous idea that socio-economic conditions are exact in all areas when making these ridiculous assumptions. Yes, people work up the ladder, but people fall into poverty all the time, you do know those MCD managers rely on welfare? Trust me, I used to work there.

What the heck are you talking about?? 0.o

Half of all store managers started off as hourly crew.

A store manager is making an average of $65,000 a year.

You are telling me that McDonald store managers are living off of welfare when they are earning $65K? That is proof that we need to end welfare!

"The typical salary for a McDonald's Store Manager ranges from$27,545-$57,966, with an average salary of $43,389. Salaries estimates based on 56 salary submitted anonymously to Glassdoor by McDonald's Store Manager employees."
I also misread your post, I thought you were referring to shift managers and the like, now, they are grossly underpaid.

http://www.glassdoor.com/Salary/McDonald-s-Corporate-Store-Manager-Salaries-E432_D_KO11,34.htm

Can you not read? "Corporate Store Manager".

CORPORATE

Contrary to popular belief, the corporate stores and employees are routinely paid more than the independent franchises for a number of reasons.

I have to spoon feed you everything. Ok.... here you go... open wide.....

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Fromthe link:
So poverty increased despite (because of) 8 years of Democrat rule.
Democrat policies fail to lift people out of poverty. They fail every time.

What happened in 2008? Welfare programs are shown to reduce poverty and lift people out of it, social security keeps millions out of poverty.

Idiot.
Your link says the exact opposite: TANF is not designed to lift people out ofpoverty. IT's right there in what you posted. Did you bother to read it?
We arent talking about 2008. We're talking about 2011, supposedly after 3 years of expansion under Obama.
Dem policies deliver failure.

Welfare programs shown to reduce poverty in America
Remember 2008. Idiot.

War on poverty: US spent $15 trillion over 5 decades
January 8, 2014 6:24 PM MST

Months after JFK's assassination, Lyndon Johnson told congress and the nation that he was declaring "an unconditional war on poverty in America." Five decades and $15 trillion later, that war is lost.

Taxpayers have been bilked trillions of dollars.

Back in 1964, America's poverty rate was 19 percent. Today, it's 15 percent and the number is rising thanks to failed programs. The government borrowed money and forced taxpayers to spend $15 trillion in anti-poverty programs. However, bureaucrats and politicians have not been held accountable for squandering America's wealth.

With such a massive sum, all the $15 trillion in taxpayers' money did was establish a welfare state in which a victom mentality was rewarded with handouts, government cheese, extended jobless benefits, food stamps, free healthcare, subsidized housing, and other entitlements that encourage leeches to be lazy.

War on poverty: US spent $15 trillion over 5 decades

Welfare programs shown to reduce poverty in America
How the War on Poverty Succeeded (in Four Charts) - The New Yorker
Social Security Keeps 22 Million Americans Out Of Poverty: A State-By-State Analysis | Center on Budget and Policy Priorities

Nope, wrong again:

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/money/2011...erty_rate_income/chart-census-poverty.top.jpg

 

[David_42]

What happened in 2008? Welfare programs are shown to reduce poverty and lift people out of it, social security keeps millions out of poverty.

Idiot.
Your link says the exact opposite: TANF is not designed to lift people out ofpoverty. IT's right there in what you posted. Did you bother to read it?
We arent talking about 2008. We're talking about 2011, supposedly after 3 years of expansion under Obama.
Dem policies deliver failure.

Welfare programs shown to reduce poverty in America
Remember 2008. Idiot.

War on poverty: US spent $15 trillion over 5 decades
January 8, 2014 6:24 PM MST

Months after JFK's assassination, Lyndon Johnson told congress and the nation that he was declaring "an unconditional war on poverty in America." Five decades and $15 trillion later, that war is lost.

Taxpayers have been bilked trillions of dollars.

Back in 1964, America's poverty rate was 19 percent. Today, it's 15 percent and the number is rising thanks to failed programs. The government borrowed money and forced taxpayers to spend $15 trillion in anti-poverty programs. However, bureaucrats and politicians have not been held accountable for squandering America's wealth.

With such a massive sum, all the $15 trillion in taxpayers' money did was establish a welfare state in which a victom mentality was rewarded with handouts, government cheese, extended jobless benefits, food stamps, free healthcare, subsidized housing, and other entitlements that encourage leeches to be lazy.

War on poverty: US spent $15 trillion over 5 decades

Welfare programs shown to reduce poverty in America
How the War on Poverty Succeeded (in Four Charts) - The New Yorker
Social Security Keeps 22 Million Americans Out Of Poverty: A State-By-State Analysis | Center on Budget and Policy Priorities

Nope, wrong again:

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/money/2011...erty_rate_income/chart-census-poverty.top.jpg

2008, anybody?

 

[David_42]

What happened in 2008? Welfare programs are shown to reduce poverty and lift people out of it, social security keeps millions out of poverty.

Idiot.
Your link says the exact opposite: TANF is not designed to lift people out ofpoverty. IT's right there in what you posted. Did you bother to read it?
We arent talking about 2008. We're talking about 2011, supposedly after 3 years of expansion under Obama.
Dem policies deliver failure.

Welfare programs shown to reduce poverty in America
Remember 2008. Idiot.

War on poverty: US spent $15 trillion over 5 decades
January 8, 2014 6:24 PM MST

Months after JFK's assassination, Lyndon Johnson told congress and the nation that he was declaring "an unconditional war on poverty in America." Five decades and $15 trillion later, that war is lost.

Taxpayers have been bilked trillions of dollars.

Back in 1964, America's poverty rate was 19 percent. Today, it's 15 percent and the number is rising thanks to failed programs. The government borrowed money and forced taxpayers to spend $15 trillion in anti-poverty programs. However, bureaucrats and politicians have not been held accountable for squandering America's wealth.

With such a massive sum, all the $15 trillion in taxpayers' money did was establish a welfare state in which a victom mentality was rewarded with handouts, government cheese, extended jobless benefits, food stamps, free healthcare, subsidized housing, and other entitlements that encourage leeches to be lazy.

War on poverty: US spent $15 trillion over 5 decades

Welfare programs shown to reduce poverty in America
How the War on Poverty Succeeded (in Four Charts) - The New Yorker
Social Security Keeps 22 Million Americans Out Of Poverty: A State-By-State Analysis | Center on Budget and Policy Priorities

Nope, wrong again:

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/money/2011...erty_rate_income/chart-census-poverty.top.jpg

That number would be even higher without welfare programs like medicaid/medicare/wic/food stamps/social security..

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Idiot.
Your link says the exact opposite: TANF is not designed to lift people out ofpoverty. IT's right there in what you posted. Did you bother to read it?
We arent talking about 2008. We're talking about 2011, supposedly after 3 years of expansion under Obama.
Dem policies deliver failure.

Welfare programs shown to reduce poverty in America
Remember 2008. Idiot.

War on poverty: US spent $15 trillion over 5 decades
January 8, 2014 6:24 PM MST

Months after JFK's assassination, Lyndon Johnson told congress and the nation that he was declaring "an unconditional war on poverty in America." Five decades and $15 trillion later, that war is lost.

Taxpayers have been bilked trillions of dollars.

Back in 1964, America's poverty rate was 19 percent. Today, it's 15 percent and the number is rising thanks to failed programs. The government borrowed money and forced taxpayers to spend $15 trillion in anti-poverty programs. However, bureaucrats and politicians have not been held accountable for squandering America's wealth.

With such a massive sum, all the $15 trillion in taxpayers' money did was establish a welfare state in which a victom mentality was rewarded with handouts, government cheese, extended jobless benefits, food stamps, free healthcare, subsidized housing, and other entitlements that encourage leeches to be lazy.

War on poverty: US spent $15 trillion over 5 decades

Welfare programs shown to reduce poverty in America
How the War on Poverty Succeeded (in Four Charts) - The New Yorker
Social Security Keeps 22 Million Americans Out Of Poverty: A State-By-State Analysis | Center on Budget and Policy Priorities

Nope, wrong again:

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/money/2011...erty_rate_income/chart-census-poverty.top.jpg

That number would be even higher without welfare programs like medicaid/medicare/wic/food stamps/social security..

No, it would be lower. Why?

Because these social programs encourage people to stay on them. The way to stay on them is to limit your income. I've experienced this several times myself. Perhaps you read my post of tenants I had to evict because they were late with rent and getting later all the time. I suggested that the female of the household work a part-time weekend job to supplement her boyfriends income. She dismissed the suggestion. Why? Because she was getting $200.00 a month in food stamps.

Without food stamps, they would be forced to increase their income. Because of food stamps, they were pressured into keeping their income limited. To make a long story short, I did evict them. It's on their record now and it will be very difficult for them to find nice rentals in the future.

for every instance where you could prove that these social programs helped somebody, I could find five where they hurt people instead.

"If you pay people not to work, don't be surprised when they don't."
Rush Limbaugh

 

[David_42]

Welfare programs shown to reduce poverty in America
Remember 2008. Idiot.

War on poverty: US spent $15 trillion over 5 decades
January 8, 2014 6:24 PM MST

Months after JFK's assassination, Lyndon Johnson told congress and the nation that he was declaring "an unconditional war on poverty in America." Five decades and $15 trillion later, that war is lost.

Taxpayers have been bilked trillions of dollars.

Back in 1964, America's poverty rate was 19 percent. Today, it's 15 percent and the number is rising thanks to failed programs. The government borrowed money and forced taxpayers to spend $15 trillion in anti-poverty programs. However, bureaucrats and politicians have not been held accountable for squandering America's wealth.

With such a massive sum, all the $15 trillion in taxpayers' money did was establish a welfare state in which a victom mentality was rewarded with handouts, government cheese, extended jobless benefits, food stamps, free healthcare, subsidized housing, and other entitlements that encourage leeches to be lazy.

War on poverty: US spent $15 trillion over 5 decades

Welfare programs shown to reduce poverty in America
How the War on Poverty Succeeded (in Four Charts) - The New Yorker
Social Security Keeps 22 Million Americans Out Of Poverty: A State-By-State Analysis | Center on Budget and Policy Priorities

Nope, wrong again:

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/money/2011...erty_rate_income/chart-census-poverty.top.jpg

That number would be even higher without welfare programs like medicaid/medicare/wic/food stamps/social security..

No, it would be lower. Why?

Because these social programs encourage people to stay on them. The way to stay on them is to limit your income. I've experienced this several times myself. Perhaps you read my post of tenants I had to evict because they were late with rent and getting later all the time. I suggested that the female of the household work a part-time weekend job to supplement her boyfriends income. She dismissed the suggestion. Why? Because she was getting $200.00 a month in food stamps.

Without food stamps, they would be forced to increase their income. Because of food stamps, they were pressured into keeping their income limited. To make a long story short, I did evict them. It's on their record now and it will be very difficult for them to find nice rentals in the future.

for every instance where you could prove that these social programs helped somebody, I could find five where they hurt people instead.

"If you pay people not to work, don't be surprised when they don't."
Rush Limbaugh

Don't try to push this lie onto me, they don't encourage people to stay on them, do you know how much the average amount in food stamp benefits is? Who receives them? The number of employed people on welfare? What constitutes welfare? Quoting rush? LOL.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

War on poverty: US spent $15 trillion over 5 decades
January 8, 2014 6:24 PM MST

Months after JFK's assassination, Lyndon Johnson told congress and the nation that he was declaring "an unconditional war on poverty in America." Five decades and $15 trillion later, that war is lost.

Taxpayers have been bilked trillions of dollars.

Back in 1964, America's poverty rate was 19 percent. Today, it's 15 percent and the number is rising thanks to failed programs. The government borrowed money and forced taxpayers to spend $15 trillion in anti-poverty programs. However, bureaucrats and politicians have not been held accountable for squandering America's wealth.

With such a massive sum, all the $15 trillion in taxpayers' money did was establish a welfare state in which a victom mentality was rewarded with handouts, government cheese, extended jobless benefits, food stamps, free healthcare, subsidized housing, and other entitlements that encourage leeches to be lazy.

War on poverty: US spent $15 trillion over 5 decades

Welfare programs shown to reduce poverty in America
How the War on Poverty Succeeded (in Four Charts) - The New Yorker
Social Security Keeps 22 Million Americans Out Of Poverty: A State-By-State Analysis | Center on Budget and Policy Priorities

Nope, wrong again:

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/money/2011...erty_rate_income/chart-census-poverty.top.jpg

That number would be even higher without welfare programs like medicaid/medicare/wic/food stamps/social security..

No, it would be lower. Why?

Because these social programs encourage people to stay on them. The way to stay on them is to limit your income. I've experienced this several times myself. Perhaps you read my post of tenants I had to evict because they were late with rent and getting later all the time. I suggested that the female of the household work a part-time weekend job to supplement her boyfriends income. She dismissed the suggestion. Why? Because she was getting $200.00 a month in food stamps.

Without food stamps, they would be forced to increase their income. Because of food stamps, they were pressured into keeping their income limited. To make a long story short, I did evict them. It's on their record now and it will be very difficult for them to find nice rentals in the future.

for every instance where you could prove that these social programs helped somebody, I could find five where they hurt people instead.

"If you pay people not to work, don't be surprised when they don't."
Rush Limbaugh

Don't try to push this lie onto me, they don't encourage people to stay on them, do you know how much the average amount in food stamp benefits is? Who receives them? The number of employed people on welfare? What constitutes welfare? Quoting rush? LOL.

That's just one instance of a personal experience I'm posting here. There are dozens from other sources that concur.

Welfare now pays better than the average working job if you consider taxes and all benefits. Of course this is if you are using every possible welfare program offered.

Nobody wants to give up free money. Free money is an incentive to continue getting that free money. If you are getting $250.00 per month in various benefits, and you have an opportunity to get $300.00 more in wages, are you going to take that opportunity of a wage increase if it only means fifty bucks to you after taxes? Of course not. Nobody would. You'd be better off working less hours and making less money than to make 50 bucks more a month.

 

[David_42]

Welfare programs shown to reduce poverty in America
How the War on Poverty Succeeded (in Four Charts) - The New Yorker
Social Security Keeps 22 Million Americans Out Of Poverty: A State-By-State Analysis | Center on Budget and Policy Priorities

Nope, wrong again:

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/money/2011...erty_rate_income/chart-census-poverty.top.jpg

That number would be even higher without welfare programs like medicaid/medicare/wic/food stamps/social security..

No, it would be lower. Why?

Because these social programs encourage people to stay on them. The way to stay on them is to limit your income. I've experienced this several times myself. Perhaps you read my post of tenants I had to evict because they were late with rent and getting later all the time. I suggested that the female of the household work a part-time weekend job to supplement her boyfriends income. She dismissed the suggestion. Why? Because she was getting $200.00 a month in food stamps.

Without food stamps, they would be forced to increase their income. Because of food stamps, they were pressured into keeping their income limited. To make a long story short, I did evict them. It's on their record now and it will be very difficult for them to find nice rentals in the future.

for every instance where you could prove that these social programs helped somebody, I could find five where they hurt people instead.

"If you pay people not to work, don't be surprised when they don't."
Rush Limbaugh

Don't try to push this lie onto me, they don't encourage people to stay on them, do you know how much the average amount in food stamp benefits is? Who receives them? The number of employed people on welfare? What constitutes welfare? Quoting rush? LOL.

That's just one instance of a personal experience I'm posting here. There are dozens from other sources that concur.

Welfare now pays better than the average working job if you consider taxes and all benefits. Of course this is if you are using every possible welfare program offered.

Nobody wants to give up free money. Free money is an incentive to continue getting that free money. If you are getting $250.00 per month in various benefits, and you have an opportunity to get $300.00 more in wages, are you going to take that opportunity of a wage increase if it only means fifty bucks to you after taxes? Of course not. Nobody would. You'd be better off working less hours and making less money than to make 50 bucks more a month.

You can't abuse welfare in the way you're describing, it's virtually impossible.

 

[The Rabbi]

Nope, wrong again:

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/money/2011...erty_rate_income/chart-census-poverty.top.jpg

That number would be even higher without welfare programs like medicaid/medicare/wic/food stamps/social security..

No, it would be lower. Why?

Because these social programs encourage people to stay on them. The way to stay on them is to limit your income. I've experienced this several times myself. Perhaps you read my post of tenants I had to evict because they were late with rent and getting later all the time. I suggested that the female of the household work a part-time weekend job to supplement her boyfriends income. She dismissed the suggestion. Why? Because she was getting $200.00 a month in food stamps.

Without food stamps, they would be forced to increase their income. Because of food stamps, they were pressured into keeping their income limited. To make a long story short, I did evict them. It's on their record now and it will be very difficult for them to find nice rentals in the future.

for every instance where you could prove that these social programs helped somebody, I could find five where they hurt people instead.

"If you pay people not to work, don't be surprised when they don't."
Rush Limbaugh

Don't try to push this lie onto me, they don't encourage people to stay on them, do you know how much the average amount in food stamp benefits is? Who receives them? The number of employed people on welfare? What constitutes welfare? Quoting rush? LOL.

That's just one instance of a personal experience I'm posting here. There are dozens from other sources that concur.

Welfare now pays better than the average working job if you consider taxes and all benefits. Of course this is if you are using every possible welfare program offered.

Nobody wants to give up free money. Free money is an incentive to continue getting that free money. If you are getting $250.00 per month in various benefits, and you have an opportunity to get $300.00 more in wages, are you going to take that opportunity of a wage increase if it only means fifty bucks to you after taxes? Of course not. Nobody would. You'd be better off working less hours and making less money than to make 50 bucks more a month.

You can't abuse welfare in the way you're describing, it's virtually impossible.

Happens every single day.
THe marginal cost to a welfare recipient to get a job is enormous.

 

[David_42]

That number would be even higher without welfare programs like medicaid/medicare/wic/food stamps/social security..

No, it would be lower. Why?

Because these social programs encourage people to stay on them. The way to stay on them is to limit your income. I've experienced this several times myself. Perhaps you read my post of tenants I had to evict because they were late with rent and getting later all the time. I suggested that the female of the household work a part-time weekend job to supplement her boyfriends income. She dismissed the suggestion. Why? Because she was getting $200.00 a month in food stamps.

Without food stamps, they would be forced to increase their income. Because of food stamps, they were pressured into keeping their income limited. To make a long story short, I did evict them. It's on their record now and it will be very difficult for them to find nice rentals in the future.

for every instance where you could prove that these social programs helped somebody, I could find five where they hurt people instead.

"If you pay people not to work, don't be surprised when they don't."
Rush Limbaugh

Don't try to push this lie onto me, they don't encourage people to stay on them, do you know how much the average amount in food stamp benefits is? Who receives them? The number of employed people on welfare? What constitutes welfare? Quoting rush? LOL.

That's just one instance of a personal experience I'm posting here. There are dozens from other sources that concur.

Welfare now pays better than the average working job if you consider taxes and all benefits. Of course this is if you are using every possible welfare program offered.

Nobody wants to give up free money. Free money is an incentive to continue getting that free money. If you are getting $250.00 per month in various benefits, and you have an opportunity to get $300.00 more in wages, are you going to take that opportunity of a wage increase if it only means fifty bucks to you after taxes? Of course not. Nobody would. You'd be better off working less hours and making less money than to make 50 bucks more a month.

You can't abuse welfare in the way you're describing, it's virtually impossible.

Happens every single day.
THe marginal cost to a welfare recipient to get a job is enormous.

You're telling me someone can get on every single welfare program in existence at the same time without any checks being done? Do you know how long it took my father to get disability?

 

[Misty]

Answer: Yes. Most left-winger assume everyone is ignorant and stupid. That's why they try and control every aspect of life. It's part of their ideology.

That's hilarious, I'd like to see what "left wingers" believe this. People on the left, the left that sprung from FDR's era, believe in utilizing the state to help everyone and encourage equality.

Intentions don't matter. Results are what matter. FDR, and the leftists of today, to the exact opposite of what you claim. They harm everyone, and destroy equality.

Yeah, results do matter, which is why FDR was elected 4 times, and why welfare has been proven to reduce poverty, same with social security.

Yeah, proven to keep people in poverty.

I've literally shown you this is bullshit, and even if some people abuse the system, the overall positive gains are undeniable.

Positive gains? I didn't see any proof of that. We have more entitlement programs than ever. And it isn't the government paying for them.

 

[Misty]

No, it would be lower. Why?

Because these social programs encourage people to stay on them. The way to stay on them is to limit your income. I've experienced this several times myself. Perhaps you read my post of tenants I had to evict because they were late with rent and getting later all the time. I suggested that the female of the household work a part-time weekend job to supplement her boyfriends income. She dismissed the suggestion. Why? Because she was getting $200.00 a month in food stamps.

Without food stamps, they would be forced to increase their income. Because of food stamps, they were pressured into keeping their income limited. To make a long story short, I did evict them. It's on their record now and it will be very difficult for them to find nice rentals in the future.

for every instance where you could prove that these social programs helped somebody, I could find five where they hurt people instead.

"If you pay people not to work, don't be surprised when they don't."
Rush Limbaugh

Don't try to push this lie onto me, they don't encourage people to stay on them, do you know how much the average amount in food stamp benefits is? Who receives them? The number of employed people on welfare? What constitutes welfare? Quoting rush? LOL.

That's just one instance of a personal experience I'm posting here. There are dozens from other sources that concur.

Welfare now pays better than the average working job if you consider taxes and all benefits. Of course this is if you are using every possible welfare program offered.

Nobody wants to give up free money. Free money is an incentive to continue getting that free money. If you are getting $250.00 per month in various benefits, and you have an opportunity to get $300.00 more in wages, are you going to take that opportunity of a wage increase if it only means fifty bucks to you after taxes? Of course not. Nobody would. You'd be better off working less hours and making less money than to make 50 bucks more a month.

You can't abuse welfare in the way you're describing, it's virtually impossible.

Happens every single day.
THe marginal cost to a welfare recipient to get a job is enormous.

You're telling me someone can get on every single welfare program in existence at the same time without any checks being done? Do you know how long it took my father to get disability?

6 months?

 

[Misty]

That number would be even higher without welfare programs like medicaid/medicare/wic/food stamps/social security..

No, it would be lower. Why?

Because these social programs encourage people to stay on them. The way to stay on them is to limit your income. I've experienced this several times myself. Perhaps you read my post of tenants I had to evict because they were late with rent and getting later all the time. I suggested that the female of the household work a part-time weekend job to supplement her boyfriends income. She dismissed the suggestion. Why? Because she was getting $200.00 a month in food stamps.

Without food stamps, they would be forced to increase their income. Because of food stamps, they were pressured into keeping their income limited. To make a long story short, I did evict them. It's on their record now and it will be very difficult for them to find nice rentals in the future.

for every instance where you could prove that these social programs helped somebody, I could find five where they hurt people instead.

"If you pay people not to work, don't be surprised when they don't."
Rush Limbaugh

Don't try to push this lie onto me, they don't encourage people to stay on them, do you know how much the average amount in food stamp benefits is? Who receives them? The number of employed people on welfare? What constitutes welfare? Quoting rush? LOL.

That's just one instance of a personal experience I'm posting here. There are dozens from other sources that concur.

Welfare now pays better than the average working job if you consider taxes and all benefits. Of course this is if you are using every possible welfare program offered.

Nobody wants to give up free money. Free money is an incentive to continue getting that free money. If you are getting $250.00 per month in various benefits, and you have an opportunity to get $300.00 more in wages, are you going to take that opportunity of a wage increase if it only means fifty bucks to you after taxes? Of course not. Nobody would. You'd be better off working less hours and making less money than to make 50 bucks more a month.

You can't abuse welfare in the way you're describing, it's virtually impossible.

Happens every single day.
THe marginal cost to a welfare recipient to get a job is enormous.

The taxpayers foot 2 billion dollar bill for welfare. That's sick.

 

[The Rabbi]

No, it would be lower. Why?

Because these social programs encourage people to stay on them. The way to stay on them is to limit your income. I've experienced this several times myself. Perhaps you read my post of tenants I had to evict because they were late with rent and getting later all the time. I suggested that the female of the household work a part-time weekend job to supplement her boyfriends income. She dismissed the suggestion. Why? Because she was getting $200.00 a month in food stamps.

Without food stamps, they would be forced to increase their income. Because of food stamps, they were pressured into keeping their income limited. To make a long story short, I did evict them. It's on their record now and it will be very difficult for them to find nice rentals in the future.

for every instance where you could prove that these social programs helped somebody, I could find five where they hurt people instead.

"If you pay people not to work, don't be surprised when they don't."
Rush Limbaugh

Don't try to push this lie onto me, they don't encourage people to stay on them, do you know how much the average amount in food stamp benefits is? Who receives them? The number of employed people on welfare? What constitutes welfare? Quoting rush? LOL.

That's just one instance of a personal experience I'm posting here. There are dozens from other sources that concur.

Welfare now pays better than the average working job if you consider taxes and all benefits. Of course this is if you are using every possible welfare program offered.

Nobody wants to give up free money. Free money is an incentive to continue getting that free money. If you are getting $250.00 per month in various benefits, and you have an opportunity to get $300.00 more in wages, are you going to take that opportunity of a wage increase if it only means fifty bucks to you after taxes? Of course not. Nobody would. You'd be better off working less hours and making less money than to make 50 bucks more a month.

You can't abuse welfare in the way you're describing, it's virtually impossible.

Happens every single day.
THe marginal cost to a welfare recipient to get a job is enormous.

You're telling me someone can get on every single welfare program in existence at the same time without any checks being done? Do you know how long it took my father to get disability?

Reading is fundamental.