The Lie That Obama Keeps Repeating

[PoliticalChic]

Crumbs are given to the poor to enslave them and buy their votes. To add anything further to the debate is a lie.

Assistance is given to the poor because almost a century ago the nation made a decision that the whole of the country had an obligation and duty to help the vulnerable. The decision has been re-affirmed and reinforced ever since. It is what the American people decided to do in the 20th Century. There have always been imperfections and complaints about how the system works or doesn't work, but the only solution that has ever been found is related to access to jobs. That is the only solution that works to relieve the assistance rolls and lists.

False.
Are you ignorant or simply lying???

Franklin Roosevelt, bosom-buddy of Joseph Stalin, removed it from the private to the public.

Remarkable lack of success has been on display since.


1. "[Hoover] was heartened by the work of private charities in handling the overwhelming number....As of the fall of 1931, and into 1932, Americans raised over $100 million for charity..."
"Federal Aid for Relief (Columbia University Studies in the Social Sciences), "by Edward A. Williams, p. 33.
2. The pressure from Congress to federalize relief- by the summer of 1932 almost 16 million were unemployed! But charities, like the Red Cross, opposed federal intervention, because they knew that it would result in the end of support by citizens for private charities. In 1932, Hoover and the Congress sharply raised the income tax, leaving citizens with less ability to aid the needy.
a. The result was Hoover ended the American tradition of private relief. " The Emergency Relief and Construction Act(ch. 520, 47 Stat. 709, enacted July 21, 1932), was the United States's first major-relief legislation, enabled under Herbert Hoover and later adopted and expanded by Franklin D. Roosevelt as part of his New Deal." Emergency Relief and Construction Act - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia



"....adopted and expanded by Franklin D. Roosevelt as part of his New Deal."

 

[rightwinger]

a. There is nothing in the Constitution banning Congress from helping people who need help

2. You are welcome to show a single court case that proclaims charity is not a government function

You're as dumb as a Liberal....oh...wait....


The authorized functions of the federal government are clearly listed in article 1, section 8, you dope.


More remedial education:

• “I cannot find any authority in the Constitution for public charity. [To approve this measure] would be contrary to the letter and spirit of the Constitution and subversive to the whole theory upon which the Union of these States is founded.” —President Franklin Piece (1804-1869)

• “I can find no warrant for such an appropriation [for charity relief] in the Constitution, and I do not believe that the power and duty of the General Government ought to be extended to the relief of individual suffering which is in no manner properly related to the public service or benefit.” —President Grover Cleveland (1837-1908)

c. I see you failed to come up with that court case on constitutional powers

1. Personal opinions have no relevance. I also laugh in that you are the only person I have ever seen quote something that Franklin Pierce believed. Perhaps our worst President in history

Court case??????

So...you stand shoulder to shoulder with the Dred Scott Decision?

b. Until conservative scumbags win a case that claims welfare is unconstitutional, it will remain a function of government

And there it is!

The Liberal white flag!

Time and again, when folks realize they have been skewered, their language falls to the vulgar. It's one of those hard to hide psychological tells....your anger at being bested leaks out as vulgarity.

Thats the way it works

a. You prove charity is unconstitutional in a court of law and it is unconstitutional

2. What are you waiting for?

 

[jknowgood]

a. Is the welfare system there to 'offer a hand up, not a hand out,' i.e., to help move folks out of poverty.....
or...
b. to redistribute wealth from earners to takers, an keep the 'poor' feeding at the public trough?A or B?

Actually, our welfare system does both

We want to provide a safety net of food, shelter and healthcare
We also want to provide educational opportunities, jobs programs and incentives for businesses who provide jobs in impoverished areas

Education? Now that's funny!

?

Keep minorities uneducated, then they will forever be dependent on government. The democrat belief, without it liberals wouldn't have any power.

I am going to have to see documentation on that or just assume you are a flaming retard

Then why are democrats against school choice?

 

[rightwinger]

Crumbs are given to the poor to enslave them and buy their votes. To add anything further to the debate is a lie.

Assistance is given to the poor because almost a century ago the nation made a decision that the whole of the country had an obligation and duty to help the vulnerable. The decision has been re-affirmed and reinforced ever since. It is what the American people decided to do in the 20th Century. There have always been imperfections and complaints about how the system works or doesn't work, but the only solution that has ever been found is related to access to jobs. That is the only solution that works to relieve the assistance rolls and lists.

False.
Are you ignorant or simply lying???

Franklin Roosevelt, bosom-buddy of Joseph Stalin, removed it from the private to the public.

Remarkable lack of success has been on display since.


1. "[Hoover] was heartened by the work of private charities in handling the overwhelming number....As of the fall of 1931, and into 1932, Americans raised over $100 million for charity..."
"Federal Aid for Relief (Columbia University Studies in the Social Sciences), "by Edward A. Williams, p. 33.
2. The pressure from Congress to federalize relief- by the summer of 1932 almost 16 million were unemployed! But charities, like the Red Cross, opposed federal intervention, because they knew that it would result in the end of support by citizens for private charities. In 1932, Hoover and the Congress sharply raised the income tax, leaving citizens with less ability to aid the needy.
a. The result was Hoover ended the American tradition of private relief. " The Emergency Relief and Construction Act(ch. 520, 47 Stat. 709, enacted July 21, 1932), was the United States's first major-relief legislation, enabled under Herbert Hoover and later adopted and expanded by Franklin D. Roosevelt as part of his New Deal." Emergency Relief and Construction Act - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia



"....adopted and expanded by Franklin D. Roosevelt as part of his New Deal."

The reliance on private charities during the Depression was a major disaster

It showed why we needed government to step in

 

[Camp]

1. If one is an inveterate Liberal, one is relieved of the necessity of actually thinking.
In no area is this more evident than in welfare policy.

Let's, remember, first of all, that Liberalism/Progressivism is centered on the idea that bureaucrats, technocrats, invested with the power of an all knowing central government, are there to do the thinking for the herd, the mob, the 'reliable Democrat voters.'


Their voters never have to consider the function of the welfare system...but let's force the issue:

a. Is the welfare system there to 'offer a hand up, not a hand out,' i.e., to help move folks out of poverty.....
or...
b. to redistribute wealth from earners to takers, an keep the 'poor' feeding at the public trough?

A or B?

After presenting your opinion you are trying to confirm it is valid by asking loaded and restrictive questions that can only reinforce your fraudulent and misrepresentative views. The reasons for welfare are far more complicated, guantitative and complex than you present. You fail to include what happens when basic assistance is not distributed in some form to masses of poor or destitute people when they become desperate for what they perceive are necessities or genuine factual necessities such as food, clothing and shelter.

Thats the PC way.

She is stuck with using methods of disinformation perfected by conservative and right wing writers of the 90's. It worked for a few years until enough challengers figured out how to debunk the writings as bullshit trickery and a disinformation technique. Disinfromation differs from misinformation in that the goal with disinformation is to purposely misinform to create a false impression. There is a malicious intent. PC thinks everyone still falls for her dopey method of disinformation

 

[PoliticalChic]

You're as dumb as a Liberal....oh...wait....


The authorized functions of the federal government are clearly listed in article 1, section 8, you dope.


More remedial education:

• “I cannot find any authority in the Constitution for public charity. [To approve this measure] would be contrary to the letter and spirit of the Constitution and subversive to the whole theory upon which the Union of these States is founded.” —President Franklin Piece (1804-1869)

• “I can find no warrant for such an appropriation [for charity relief] in the Constitution, and I do not believe that the power and duty of the General Government ought to be extended to the relief of individual suffering which is in no manner properly related to the public service or benefit.” —President Grover Cleveland (1837-1908)

c. I see you failed to come up with that court case on constitutional powers

1. Personal opinions have no relevance. I also laugh in that you are the only person I have ever seen quote something that Franklin Pierce believed. Perhaps our worst President in history

Court case??????

So...you stand shoulder to shoulder with the Dred Scott Decision?

b. Until conservative scumbags win a case that claims welfare is unconstitutional, it will remain a function of government

And there it is!

The Liberal white flag!

Time and again, when folks realize they have been skewered, their language falls to the vulgar. It's one of those hard to hide psychological tells....your anger at being bested leaks out as vulgarity.

Thats the way it works

a. You prove charity is unconstitutional in a court of law and it is unconstitutional

2. What are you waiting for?

The United States Constitution....."the law of the land."


Except to Liberals, of course.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Crumbs are given to the poor to enslave them and buy their votes. To add anything further to the debate is a lie.

Assistance is given to the poor because almost a century ago the nation made a decision that the whole of the country had an obligation and duty to help the vulnerable. The decision has been re-affirmed and reinforced ever since. It is what the American people decided to do in the 20th Century. There have always been imperfections and complaints about how the system works or doesn't work, but the only solution that has ever been found is related to access to jobs. That is the only solution that works to relieve the assistance rolls and lists.

False.
Are you ignorant or simply lying???

Franklin Roosevelt, bosom-buddy of Joseph Stalin, removed it from the private to the public.

Remarkable lack of success has been on display since.


1. "[Hoover] was heartened by the work of private charities in handling the overwhelming number....As of the fall of 1931, and into 1932, Americans raised over $100 million for charity..."
"Federal Aid for Relief (Columbia University Studies in the Social Sciences), "by Edward A. Williams, p. 33.
2. The pressure from Congress to federalize relief- by the summer of 1932 almost 16 million were unemployed! But charities, like the Red Cross, opposed federal intervention, because they knew that it would result in the end of support by citizens for private charities. In 1932, Hoover and the Congress sharply raised the income tax, leaving citizens with less ability to aid the needy.
a. The result was Hoover ended the American tradition of private relief. " The Emergency Relief and Construction Act(ch. 520, 47 Stat. 709, enacted July 21, 1932), was the United States's first major-relief legislation, enabled under Herbert Hoover and later adopted and expanded by Franklin D. Roosevelt as part of his New Deal." Emergency Relief and Construction Act - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia



"....adopted and expanded by Franklin D. Roosevelt as part of his New Deal."

The reliance on private charities during the Depression was a major disaster

It showed why we needed government to step in

Resulting in the major disaster ever since.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Let's get back to the most powerful lying-Liberal.

As per the title of this thread.....

5. "The Lie Obama Keeps Repeating About the Poor in America

The best anti-poverty program is a job. Obama said this at a recent conference on poverty.

But he continues to repeat a falsehood over and over. This is the claim that the poor work just as hard as the rich do. .... the average poor family doesn’t work nearly as much as the rich families do. And that’s a key reason why these households are poor.


.... Census Bureau data on household incomes document the importance of work. Census sorts the households by income quintile, and we will label those in the highest quintile as “rich,” and those in the lowest quintile as “poor.” The average household in the top 20 percent of income have an average of almost exactly two full-time workers. The average poor family (bottom 20 percent) has just 0.4 workers.

This means on average, roughly for every hour worked by those in a poor household, those in a rich household work five hours.

The finding that six out of 10 poor households have no one working at all is disturbing. Since they have no income from work, is it a surprise they are poor?" The Lie Obama Keeps Repeating About the Poor in America




Obama: "... the poor work just as hard as the rich do..."

Clearly not the case.

Another winner in the "Lie of the Year" contest???

 

[Camp]

Let's get back to the most powerful lying-Liberal.

As per the title of this thread.....

5. "The Lie Obama Keeps Repeating About the Poor in America

The best anti-poverty program is a job. Obama said this at a recent conference on poverty.

But he continues to repeat a falsehood over and over. This is the claim that the poor work just as hard as the rich do. .... the average poor family doesn’t work nearly as much as the rich families do. And that’s a key reason why these households are poor.


.... Census Bureau data on household incomes document the importance of work. Census sorts the households by income quintile, and we will label those in the highest quintile as “rich,” and those in the lowest quintile as “poor.” The average household in the top 20 percent of income have an average of almost exactly two full-time workers. The average poor family (bottom 20 percent) has just 0.4 workers.

This means on average, roughly for every hour worked by those in a poor household, those in a rich household work five hours.

The finding that six out of 10 poor households have no one working at all is disturbing. Since they have no income from work, is it a surprise they are poor?" The Lie Obama Keeps Repeating About the Poor in America




Obama: "... the poor work just as hard as the rich do..."

Clearly not the case.

Another winner in the "Lie of the Year" contest???

You a an idiot. I would like to see you work at harvesting vegetables and fruit or pushing a wheel barrel full of concrete or carrying shingles onto a roof or doing landscaping all day in the hot sun or spreading black top in 98% temperature or standing in front of a commercial dishwasher and lifting bins of dirty dishes. Many people who do these kinds of back breaking and life shortening jobs live in poverty or on the edge of it. Only people who have never worked at hard labor mock hard labor.

 

[Camp]

Let's get back to the most powerful lying-Liberal.

As per the title of this thread.....

5. "The Lie Obama Keeps Repeating About the Poor in America

The best anti-poverty program is a job. Obama said this at a recent conference on poverty.

But he continues to repeat a falsehood over and over. This is the claim that the poor work just as hard as the rich do. .... the average poor family doesn’t work nearly as much as the rich families do. And that’s a key reason why these households are poor.


.... Census Bureau data on household incomes document the importance of work. Census sorts the households by income quintile, and we will label those in the highest quintile as “rich,” and those in the lowest quintile as “poor.” The average household in the top 20 percent of income have an average of almost exactly two full-time workers. The average poor family (bottom 20 percent) has just 0.4 workers.

This means on average, roughly for every hour worked by those in a poor household, those in a rich household work five hours.

The finding that six out of 10 poor households have no one working at all is disturbing. Since they have no income from work, is it a surprise they are poor?" The Lie Obama Keeps Repeating About the Poor in America




Obama: "... the poor work just as hard as the rich do..."

Clearly not the case.

Another winner in the "Lie of the Year" contest???

You a an idiot. I would like to see you work at harvesting vegetables and fruit or pushing a wheel barrel full of concrete or carrying shingles onto a roof or doing landscaping all day in the hot sun or spreading black top in 98% temperature or standing in front of a commercial dishwasher and lifting bins of dirty dishes. Many people who do these kinds of back breaking and life shortening jobs live in poverty or on the edge of it. Only people who have never worked at hard labor mock hard labor.

People who have educated themselves and learned skills deserve to make good money and have jobs that don't require sore muscles and aching backs at the end of the day are fortunate and deserve the benefits of their positions. To imply that those less fortunate don't work hard is just disgusting self aggrandizing and aristocratic crap.

 

[edthecynic]

"Conservatives say if you don't give the rich more money, they will lose their incentive to invest. As for the poor, they tell us they've lost all incentive because we've given them too much money."

- George Carlin

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

So, you can produce Constitutional authority for public charity? Have at it.

Article 1 Section 1 of the Constitution

You'll have to explain that one -

Article 1, Section 1:
"All legislative powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives."

Where is the authority for public charity?

 

[PoliticalChic]

Let's get back to the most powerful lying-Liberal.

As per the title of this thread.....

5. "The Lie Obama Keeps Repeating About the Poor in America

The best anti-poverty program is a job. Obama said this at a recent conference on poverty.

But he continues to repeat a falsehood over and over. This is the claim that the poor work just as hard as the rich do. .... the average poor family doesn’t work nearly as much as the rich families do. And that’s a key reason why these households are poor.


.... Census Bureau data on household incomes document the importance of work. Census sorts the households by income quintile, and we will label those in the highest quintile as “rich,” and those in the lowest quintile as “poor.” The average household in the top 20 percent of income have an average of almost exactly two full-time workers. The average poor family (bottom 20 percent) has just 0.4 workers.

This means on average, roughly for every hour worked by those in a poor household, those in a rich household work five hours.

The finding that six out of 10 poor households have no one working at all is disturbing. Since they have no income from work, is it a surprise they are poor?" The Lie Obama Keeps Repeating About the Poor in America




Obama: "... the poor work just as hard as the rich do..."

Clearly not the case.

Another winner in the "Lie of the Year" contest???

You a an idiot. I would like to see you work at harvesting vegetables and fruit or pushing a wheel barrel full of concrete or carrying shingles onto a roof or doing landscaping all day in the hot sun or spreading black top in 98% temperature or standing in front of a commercial dishwasher and lifting bins of dirty dishes. Many people who do these kinds of back breaking and life shortening jobs live in poverty or on the edge of it. Only people who have never worked at hard labor mock hard labor.

1. Well...an imbecile who sees the statistics that prove that the poor are poor because they don't work.....
....and simply changes the subject.

"Only people who have never worked at hard labor mock hard labor."
No, you imbecile......they DON"T WORK!!!!
The HAVE NO JOBS!!!!

"The finding that six out of 10 poor households have no one working at all is disturbing. Since they have no income from work, is it a surprise they are poor?"
The Lie Obama Keeps Repeating About the Poor in America


2. Now, as far as "....harvesting vegetables and fruit or pushing a wheel barrel full of concrete or carrying shingles onto a roof or doing landscaping all day in the hot sun or spreading black top in 98% temperature or standing in front of a commercial dishwasher and lifting bins of dirty dishes."...

....I'd simply hire someone with your level of skill to do those jobs.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Let's get back to the most powerful lying-Liberal.

As per the title of this thread.....

5. "The Lie Obama Keeps Repeating About the Poor in America

The best anti-poverty program is a job. Obama said this at a recent conference on poverty.

But he continues to repeat a falsehood over and over. This is the claim that the poor work just as hard as the rich do. .... the average poor family doesn’t work nearly as much as the rich families do. And that’s a key reason why these households are poor.


.... Census Bureau data on household incomes document the importance of work. Census sorts the households by income quintile, and we will label those in the highest quintile as “rich,” and those in the lowest quintile as “poor.” The average household in the top 20 percent of income have an average of almost exactly two full-time workers. The average poor family (bottom 20 percent) has just 0.4 workers.

This means on average, roughly for every hour worked by those in a poor household, those in a rich household work five hours.

The finding that six out of 10 poor households have no one working at all is disturbing. Since they have no income from work, is it a surprise they are poor?" The Lie Obama Keeps Repeating About the Poor in America




Obama: "... the poor work just as hard as the rich do..."

Clearly not the case.

Another winner in the "Lie of the Year" contest???

You a an idiot. I would like to see you work at harvesting vegetables and fruit or pushing a wheel barrel full of concrete or carrying shingles onto a roof or doing landscaping all day in the hot sun or spreading black top in 98% temperature or standing in front of a commercial dishwasher and lifting bins of dirty dishes. Many people who do these kinds of back breaking and life shortening jobs live in poverty or on the edge of it. Only people who have never worked at hard labor mock hard labor.

People who have educated themselves and learned skills deserve to make good money and have jobs that don't require sore muscles and aching backs at the end of the day are fortunate and deserve the benefits of their positions. To imply that those less fortunate don't work hard is just disgusting self aggrandizing and aristocratic crap.

"To imply that those less fortunate don't work hard..."

DON'T WORK AT ALL!!!!
Can't you read, you moron???

"The finding that six out of 10 poor households have no one working at all is disturbing. Since they have no income from work, is it a surprise they are poor?"
The Lie Obama Keeps Repeating About the Poor in America

 

[Uncensored2008]

Actually, our welfare system does both

We want to provide a safety net of food, shelter and healthcare
We also want to provide educational opportunities, jobs programs and incentives for businesses who provide jobs in impoverished areas

Yes, but providing jobs to impoverished areas of China and India as Obama does, harms the lower echelons of our own economy.

 

[PoliticalChic]

"Conservatives say if you don't give the rich more money, they will lose their incentive to invest. As for the poor, they tell us they've lost all incentive because we've given them too much money."

- George Carlin

I've listed FACTS in this thread.

Care to try to dispute any of 'em?



Or, for everyone's amusement.....go back to claiming that George Bernard Shaw wasn't a totalitarian who wanted to annihilate all those who 'couldn't justify their being alive.'

I get such a kick out of that one.

 

[rightwinger]

c. I see you failed to come up with that court case on constitutional powers

1. Personal opinions have no relevance. I also laugh in that you are the only person I have ever seen quote something that Franklin Pierce believed. Perhaps our worst President in history

Court case??????

So...you stand shoulder to shoulder with the Dred Scott Decision?

b. Until conservative scumbags win a case that claims welfare is unconstitutional, it will remain a function of government

And there it is!

The Liberal white flag!

Time and again, when folks realize they have been skewered, their language falls to the vulgar. It's one of those hard to hide psychological tells....your anger at being bested leaks out as vulgarity.

Thats the way it works

a. You prove charity is unconstitutional in a court of law and it is unconstitutional

2. What are you waiting for?

The United States Constitution....."the law of the land."


Except to Liberals, of course.

Very true

Article 1 Section 1 establishes a Congress an empowers them to make laws. Those laws provided prograqms like Social Security, Medicare and Obamacare. If you think those laws are unconstitutional, you are free to challenge them in court

 

[rightwinger]

Actually, our welfare system does both

We want to provide a safety net of food, shelter and healthcare
We also want to provide educational opportunities, jobs programs and incentives for businesses who provide jobs in impoverished areas

Yes, but providing jobs to impoverished areas of China and India as Obama does, harms the lower echelons of our own economy.

Those jobs were sent by your friends....The Capitalists

 

[PoliticalChic]

1. If one is an inveterate Liberal, one is relieved of the necessity of actually thinking.
In no area is this more evident than in welfare policy.

Let's, remember, first of all, that Liberalism/Progressivism is centered on the idea that bureaucrats, technocrats, invested with the power of an all knowing central government, are there to do the thinking for the herd, the mob, the 'reliable Democrat voters.'


Their voters never have to consider the function of the welfare system...but let's force the issue:

a. Is the welfare system there to 'offer a hand up, not a hand out,' i.e., to help move folks out of poverty.....
or...
b. to redistribute wealth from earners to takers, an keep the 'poor' feeding at the public trough?

A or B?




2. Two hard facts to offer toward the conclusion:

a. "In fact, since President Obama took office, federal welfare spending has increased by 41 percent, more than $193 billion per year. Despite this government largess, more than 46 million Americans continue to live in poverty. Despite nearly $15 trillion in total welfare spending since Lyndon Johnson declared war on poverty in 1964, the poverty rate is perilously close to where we began more than 40 years ago. Throwing money at the problem has neither reduced poverty nor made the poor self-sufficient."
Scribd


b."This week, the U.S. Census Bureau is scheduled to release its annual poverty report. The report will be notable because this year marks the 50th anniversary of the launch of President Lyndon Johnson’s War on Poverty. In his January 1964 State of the Union address, Johnson proclaimed, “This administration today, here and now, declares unconditional war on poverty in America.”[1]

Since that time, U.S. taxpayers have spent over $22 trillion on anti-poverty programs (in constant 2012 dollars). Adjusted for inflation, this spending (which does not include Social Security or Medicare) is three times the cost of all military wars in U.S. history since the American Revolution. Despite this mountain of spending, progress against poverty, at least as measured by the government, has been minimal."
War on Poverty After 50 Years Conditions of the Poor in America



So...what do the facts tell you?
a. Is the system there to 'offer a hand up, not a hand out,' i.e., to help move folks out of poverty.....
or...
b. to redistribute wealth from earners to takers, an keep the 'poor' feeding at the public trough?

A or B?


What does Obama say?

1. If one is an inveterate Liberal, one is relieved of the necessity of actually thinking.
In no area is this more evident than in welfare policy.

Let's, remember, first of all, that Liberalism/Progressivism is centered on the idea that bureaucrats, technocrats, invested with the power of an all knowing central government, are there to do the thinking for the herd, the mob, the 'reliable Democrat voters.'


Their voters never have to consider the function of the welfare system...but let's force the issue:

a. Is the welfare system there to 'offer a hand up, not a hand out,' i.e., to help move folks out of poverty.....
or...
b. to redistribute wealth from earners to takers, an keep the 'poor' feeding at the public trough?

A or B?




2. Two hard facts to offer toward the conclusion:

a. "In fact, since President Obama took office, federal welfare spending has increased by 41 percent, more than $193 billion per year. Despite this government largess, more than 46 million Americans continue to live in poverty. Despite nearly $15 trillion in total welfare spending since Lyndon Johnson declared war on poverty in 1964, the poverty rate is perilously close to where we began more than 40 years ago. Throwing money at the problem has neither reduced poverty nor made the poor self-sufficient."
Scribd


b."This week, the U.S. Census Bureau is scheduled to release its annual poverty report. The report will be notable because this year marks the 50th anniversary of the launch of President Lyndon Johnson’s War on Poverty. In his January 1964 State of the Union address, Johnson proclaimed, “This administration today, here and now, declares unconditional war on poverty in America.”[1]

Since that time, U.S. taxpayers have spent over $22 trillion on anti-poverty programs (in constant 2012 dollars). Adjusted for inflation, this spending (which does not include Social Security or Medicare) is three times the cost of all military wars in U.S. history since the American Revolution. Despite this mountain of spending, progress against poverty, at least as measured by the government, has been minimal."
War on Poverty After 50 Years Conditions of the Poor in America



So...what do the facts tell you?
a. Is the system there to 'offer a hand up, not a hand out,' i.e., to help move folks out of poverty.....
or...
b. to redistribute wealth from earners to takers, an keep the 'poor' feeding at the public trough?

A or B?


What does Obama say?

Here's what I say: Your source, cleverly hidden, is the: CATO Institute, a think tank of arch conservative and libertarian propaganda.

One once fully funded by the - drum roll please - Koch's. Here is a link to Forbes which gives some history and an effort to distance the benefactors from the beneficiary.

The Kochs Aren t the Only Funders of Cato

You decide if their is a conflict of interests, or simply good guys trying to make the our nation safe for democracy.

"Your source, cleverly hidden,...

You haven't been right since disco died.

1. Although I am clever, I never hide anything. Everything I post has a clear and evident perspective.....and I always give the source, links and documentation.

You are simply too stupid to recognize same.


2. And, since this thread deals in facts and well supported conclusions, you fit in like a Pork BBQ pit in Mecca.


If you plan to read the rest of the thread.....be certain to have several handfuls of antacids and your blood pressure meds in that feeding trough.

 

[Camp]

Let's get back to the most powerful lying-Liberal.

As per the title of this thread.....

5. "The Lie Obama Keeps Repeating About the Poor in America

The best anti-poverty program is a job. Obama said this at a recent conference on poverty.

But he continues to repeat a falsehood over and over. This is the claim that the poor work just as hard as the rich do. .... the average poor family doesn’t work nearly as much as the rich families do. And that’s a key reason why these households are poor.


.... Census Bureau data on household incomes document the importance of work. Census sorts the households by income quintile, and we will label those in the highest quintile as “rich,” and those in the lowest quintile as “poor.” The average household in the top 20 percent of income have an average of almost exactly two full-time workers. The average poor family (bottom 20 percent) has just 0.4 workers.

This means on average, roughly for every hour worked by those in a poor household, those in a rich household work five hours.

The finding that six out of 10 poor households have no one working at all is disturbing. Since they have no income from work, is it a surprise they are poor?" The Lie Obama Keeps Repeating About the Poor in America




Obama: "... the poor work just as hard as the rich do..."

Clearly not the case.

Another winner in the "Lie of the Year" contest???

You a an idiot. I would like to see you work at harvesting vegetables and fruit or pushing a wheel barrel full of concrete or carrying shingles onto a roof or doing landscaping all day in the hot sun or spreading black top in 98% temperature or standing in front of a commercial dishwasher and lifting bins of dirty dishes. Many people who do these kinds of back breaking and life shortening jobs live in poverty or on the edge of it. Only people who have never worked at hard labor mock hard labor.

People who have educated themselves and learned skills deserve to make good money and have jobs that don't require sore muscles and aching backs at the end of the day are fortunate and deserve the benefits of their positions. To imply that those less fortunate don't work hard is just disgusting self aggrandizing and aristocratic crap.

"To imply that those less fortunate don't work hard..."

DON'T WORK AT ALL!!!!
Can't you read, you moron???

"The finding that six out of 10 poor households have no one working at all is disturbing. Since they have no income from work, is it a surprise they are poor?"
The Lie Obama Keeps Repeating About the Poor in America

Good example of how you distort facts. Single mothers make up a large portion of those households. The largest percentage of them are white teenage girls. Having babies in the home makes it difficult to get or hold a job for these girls who are kids themselves.