The War On Poverty: Lost

[Conservative65]

Let me ask this, see if anyone knows...

...when they count the number of Americans below the poverty line, do they factor in the monetary value of the assistance they receive?

It's not assistance. It's a HANDOUT.

It's quite apparant in cases I've seen that they don't count the money they have either. If someone receives a handout to buy their food, they are saying they don't have enough money to buy their own. Explain to me why so many have enought to buy beer, cigarettes, and lottery tickets.

 

[zeke]

Let me ask this, see if anyone knows...

...when they count the number of Americans below the poverty line, do they factor in the monetary value of the assistance they receive?

It's not assistance. It's a HANDOUT.

It's quite apparant in cases I've seen that they don't count the money they have either. If someone receives a handout to buy their food, they are saying they don't have enough money to buy their own. Explain to me why so many have enought to buy beer, cigarettes, and lottery tickets.

I can tell you really want to know the answer to your question. I am sure that you live in an area where you can find poor people getting food stamps and such.

Why in the fuck don't you just ASK them to explain to you how they can buy beer, cigs and lotto tickets. Just walk right up to them after they've made those purchases and ask how they do that.

I am sure they will be glad to explain. Sound like a good idea?

 

[Conservative65]

Let me ask this, see if anyone knows...

...when they count the number of Americans below the poverty line, do they factor in the monetary value of the assistance they receive?

It's not assistance. It's a HANDOUT.

It's quite apparant in cases I've seen that they don't count the money they have either. If someone receives a handout to buy their food, they are saying they don't have enough money to buy their own. Explain to me why so many have enought to buy beer, cigarettes, and lottery tickets.

I can tell you really want to know the answer to your question. I am sure that you live in an area where you can find poor people getting food stamps and such.

Why in the fuck don't you just ASK them to explain to you how they can buy beer, cigs and lotto tickets. Just walk right up to them after they've made those purchases and ask how they do that.

I am sure they will be glad to explain. Sound like a good idea?

Actually, I have. One said it was none of my business. Not only were they leeches they were wrong. Never did get an explanation because there isn't a valid one to give.

On another occassion I couldn't understand the foreign language they spoke.

Sounds to me as if you think it's OK for them to lie about being unable to buy thier food so they can buy the other necessities. Am I correct?

 

[Conservative65]

What will it take for folks to realize that, just like the title, big government is a loser?

If you think the war is lost then you must believe that the war must end.

Therefore you must believe that Medicaid, food stamps, housing assistance, EIC, fuel and energy assistance, educational assistance, and all other programs that effectively represent the war on poverty should be ceased.

After that is done, how long before we win the war on poverty, using your plan of no programs for the poor?

Exactly what the close minded Romneybots are wanting.....

Letting those of us forced to fund such programs keep more of what WE'VE EARNED is a far better idea than thinking someone else has a right to something they didn't earn. What I wasn YOU to do is if you see such a need, buy their food, pay their power bill, fund their kid's school, and pay the premium for their healthcare. Both thing involve each of us getting what we want. Different between that and now is the bleeding hearts would actually have to fund what they support totally with their own money voluntarily rather than finding ways to have others forced to do it.

 

[Conservative65]

Maybe the author of this thread should explain to her readers that although she insists Medicaid is a failure,

she doesn't want to get rid of it.

The entire war on poverty is a failure yet you retard Liberals want to keep doing what hasn't work for the past 50 years. Explain that.

 

[zeke]

Let me ask this, see if anyone knows...

...when they count the number of Americans below the poverty line, do they factor in the monetary value of the assistance they receive?

It's not assistance. It's a HANDOUT.

It's quite apparant in cases I've seen that they don't count the money they have either. If someone receives a handout to buy their food, they are saying they don't have enough money to buy their own. Explain to me why so many have enought to buy beer, cigarettes, and lottery tickets.

I can tell you really want to know the answer to your question. I am sure that you live in an area where you can find poor people getting food stamps and such.

Why in the fuck don't you just ASK them to explain to you how they can buy beer, cigs and lotto tickets. Just walk right up to them after they've made those purchases and ask how they do that.

I am sure they will be glad to explain. Sound like a good idea?

Actually, I have. One said it was none of my business. Not only were they leeches they were wrong. Never did get an explanation because there isn't a valid one to give.

On another occassion I couldn't understand the foreign language they spoke.

Sounds to me as if you think it's OK for them to lie about being unable to buy thier food so they can buy the other necessities. Am I correct?

All those millions of people you call leaches out there and you could only find TWO that were buying things you felt they shouldn't buy.

Sounds to me like you didn't try hard enough to find the answer to your question.

Since when is beer, cigs and lotto tickets "other necessities"? And no, I do not want SNAP funds to be used to buy ANYTHING that is not on the SNAP approved list of items to be purchased with SNAP coupons.

But I also am smart enough to understand that SOME recipients of SNAP will abuse those vouchers.

But if there are thousands in your area and you could only find TWO, that seems to be within the acceptable realm.

Not all people are as perfect as you think you are.

 

[PoliticalChic]

There will always be people in poverty we should do what we can to help them get out of it but we must also accept the fact there are some for whatever the reason or reasons will not accept that help or do what is necessary to get themselves out of poverty.

Couldn't be more so.

But somehow the folks who believe in Karl Marx and Santa Clause can't get beyond the idea that there should be and can be material equality.

I kinda liked this essay...


What if everyone starts off with the same amount of money?


“….by the end of the first year, some people will have more than others.Guaranteed. Some people, you see, will be careful with what they have. Others won’t. Some people will gamble, others will save. Some will spend lavishly, others will be frugal.

Besides that, some people simply have more of the kind of wealth that can’t be redistributed. Intelligence; education; ambition. Drive, as opposed to: aw, we’re gonna get what we’re gonna get anyway, so let’s just stay on the couch and watch TV. Some people will put a little giddy-up in their get-alongs, and will find ways to improve their own lives.

Some of that will be “unfair,” because some people have more and better resources to tap. Intelligence; talent; family. Even accounting for such differences, though: some people will turn what they have into more, while others will not. Therefore, by the end of the very first year (not to mention the first five or ten) “haves” and “have-nots” will appear.

I know what you’re thinking.Crap.I thought we had it this time.Fairness! And this return to economic inequity will happen, I daresay, even under the strictest Communist policies.

I’ll come back to that.

After ten, twenty, thirty years, those discrepancies will widen. A middle class will form. An upper economic class, and a lower economic class. These classes will not be dead ends: people will be able to move from one to another and back again. But they’ll reappear, despite the original, radical redistribution of wealth.

So: let’s take this exercise further.Rather than a one-time redistribution of wealth, let’s redistribute every year. Every April 23 – Michael Moore’s birthday – all wealth is redistributed. All wages set by Central Command. Everyone is as equal as it’s possible to make them. Even individual advantages are nullified.

Not really, but we’ll come back to that, too.

Obviously, that system does away with any incentive to create. It removes any incentive to save; to be frugal; to work hard. Because no matter what you do, what you get is predetermined.

And yet, by April 22 of the following year, some people will still have more than others. And they’ll keep it.

How can that be? Simple. Even state-enforced economic “equality” did not –cannot – make everyone “equal.” It can only change the attributes that are most important to getting ahead.

Sucking up to your superiors becomes more important than working hard.Figuring out which bureaucrats can do the most for you, and ingratiating yourself to them.

Using the power of government to get you ahead, instead of creating, making, building, selling. Improving technical or academic skills? What for? Improving political skills.That’s what makes a difference.

You may recognize a little of our current system there. More and more, becoming a “have” in our society requires entering the bureaucracy, or getting the bureaucracy on your side.

Even the hard working entrepreneurs and innovators among us increasingly need the bureaucracy’s help. Vast mazes of regulations give bureaucracies vast power over both you and your competitors. Government can make or break an industry. Make or break a company. It can increase the cost of entry beyond plausibility, or it can make that cost go away.

In the free market, wealth comes from work. The closer we move toward socialism, the more wealth comes from power. That’s the difference. The similarity: wealth still exists in relatively few hands.”
What if we just gave everybody the same amount of wealth John Hawkins Right Wing News

 

[PoliticalChic]

Let me ask this, see if anyone knows...

...when they count the number of Americans below the poverty line, do they factor in the monetary value of the assistance they receive?

It's not assistance. It's a HANDOUT.

It's quite apparant in cases I've seen that they don't count the money they have either. If someone receives a handout to buy their food, they are saying they don't have enough money to buy their own. Explain to me why so many have enought to buy beer, cigarettes, and lottery tickets.

I can tell you really want to know the answer to your question. I am sure that you live in an area where you can find poor people getting food stamps and such.

Why in the fuck don't you just ASK them to explain to you how they can buy beer, cigs and lotto tickets. Just walk right up to them after they've made those purchases and ask how they do that.

I am sure they will be glad to explain. Sound like a good idea?

Actually, I have. One said it was none of my business. Not only were they leeches they were wrong. Never did get an explanation because there isn't a valid one to give.

On another occassion I couldn't understand the foreign language they spoke.

Sounds to me as if you think it's OK for them to lie about being unable to buy thier food so they can buy the other necessities. Am I correct?

All those millions of people you call leaches out there and you could only find TWO that were buying things you felt they shouldn't buy.

Sounds to me like you didn't try hard enough to find the answer to your question.

Since when is beer, cigs and lotto tickets "other necessities"? And no, I do not want SNAP funds to be used to buy ANYTHING that is not on the SNAP approved list of items to be purchased with SNAP coupons.

But I also am smart enough to understand that SOME recipients of SNAP will abuse those vouchers.

But if there are thousands in your area and you could only find TWO, that seems to be within the acceptable realm.

Not all people are as perfect as you think you are.

Nor is government.

Compare private charity vs. government bureaucracies......

Marvin Olasky, in "The Tragedy of American Compassion," explains that human needs were taken care of in earlier times by other human beings-not by bureaucracies.

The important difference was that the latter may take care of food and shelter...but the former also dealt with the human spirit and behavior.

Welfare programs today, are Liberal….conservatives don’t look for material solutions, but understand that changing values is what solves the problem of poverty..

 

[zeke]

Maybe the author of this thread should explain to her readers that although she insists Medicaid is a failure,

she doesn't want to get rid of it.

The entire war on poverty is a failure yet you retard Liberals want to keep doing what hasn't work for the past 50 years. Explain that.

How can the war on poverty be the failure people like you claim it is, when you all are saying all the time that our poor have it better than most of the people of the world?

Big screens, housing, phones etc etc. How in the hell is that a failure?

What does success look like to you? People living under bridges and dying in the streets?

Define your idea of successful poor people.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Maybe the author of this thread should explain to her readers that although she insists Medicaid is a failure,

she doesn't want to get rid of it.

The entire war on poverty is a failure yet you retard Liberals want to keep doing what hasn't work for the past 50 years. Explain that.

Didn't I ask you? How will the poor be better off if we end Medicaid? How will the elderly be better off if we end the portion of Medicare that is not paid for by the payroll tax?

How will the poor be better off if we end public school education's availability regardless of one's ability to pay?

How will low income Americans be better off if we end energy assistance for such things as home heating?

Convince all of those people will be better off without that help.

 

[zeke]

Maybe the author of this thread should explain to her readers that although she insists Medicaid is a failure,

she doesn't want to get rid of it.

The entire war on poverty is a failure yet you retard Liberals want to keep doing what hasn't work for the past 50 years. Explain that.

Didn't I ask you? How will the poor be better off if we end Medicaid? How will the elderly be better off if we end the portion of Medicare that is not paid for by the payroll tax?

How will the poor be better off if we end public school education's availability regardless of one's ability to pay?

How will low income Americans be better off if we end energy assistance for such things as home heating?

Convince all of those people will be better off without that help.

I don't believe the conservative guy gives a fuck if the poor people are better off. He thinks HE will be better off if those poor people didn't get his tax money.

Don't know why he feels that way. The government is not going to send him a welfare rebate check.

 

[Conservative65]

Maybe the author of this thread should explain to her readers that although she insists Medicaid is a failure,

she doesn't want to get rid of it.

The entire war on poverty is a failure yet you retard Liberals want to keep doing what hasn't work for the past 50 years. Explain that.

How can the war on poverty be the failure people like you claim it is, when you all are saying all the time that our poor have it better than most of the people of the world?

Big screens, housing, phones etc etc. How in the hell is that a failure?

What does success look like to you? People living under bridges and dying in the streets?

Define your idea of successful poor people.

The program had the mindset of giving a hand up. That's what the bleeding heart Liberals tell us. When it began in the mid 1960s, the poverty rate was just about what it is now. The difference is the amount of money spent that did nothing to alleviate poverty.

The problme with the items you listed is that if someone can have those, the money spent on their needs really didn't need to be spent. Seems they had enough money and the problem was with money management. If someone can afford non need items then claims they have no money to buy needed ones, they are a liar, a poor money manager, or a combination of both.

A successful program would be one where people like you, when you saw a need, would reach into your own pocket to buy the items for people which taxpayer funds currently fund.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Let me ask this, see if anyone knows...

...when they count the number of Americans below the poverty line, do they factor in the monetary value of the assistance they receive?

It's not assistance. It's a HANDOUT.

It's quite apparant in cases I've seen that they don't count the money they have either. If someone receives a handout to buy their food, they are saying they don't have enough money to buy their own. Explain to me why so many have enought to buy beer, cigarettes, and lottery tickets.

I can tell you really want to know the answer to your question. I am sure that you live in an area where you can find poor people getting food stamps and such.

Why in the fuck don't you just ASK them to explain to you how they can buy beer, cigs and lotto tickets. Just walk right up to them after they've made those purchases and ask how they do that.

I am sure they will be glad to explain. Sound like a good idea?

Actually, I have. One said it was none of my business. Not only were they leeches they were wrong. Never did get an explanation because there isn't a valid one to give.

On another occassion I couldn't understand the foreign language they spoke.

Sounds to me as if you think it's OK for them to lie about being unable to buy thier food so they can buy the other necessities. Am I correct?

All those millions of people you call leaches out there and you could only find TWO that were buying things you felt they shouldn't buy.

Sounds to me like you didn't try hard enough to find the answer to your question.

Since when is beer, cigs and lotto tickets "other necessities"? And no, I do not want SNAP funds to be used to buy ANYTHING that is not on the SNAP approved list of items to be purchased with SNAP coupons.

But I also am smart enough to understand that SOME recipients of SNAP will abuse those vouchers.

But if there are thousands in your area and you could only find TWO, that seems to be within the acceptable realm.

Not all people are as perfect as you think you are.

Nor is government.

Compare private charity vs. government bureaucracies......

Marvin Olasky, in "The Tragedy of American Compassion," explains that human needs were taken care of in earlier times by other human beings-not by bureaucracies.

The important difference was that the latter may take care of food and shelter...but the former also dealt with the human spirit and behavior.

Welfare programs today, are Liberal….conservatives don’t look for material solutions, but understand that changing values is what solves the problem of poverty..

Poverty was far worse in 'earlier' times.

 

[PoliticalChic]

What will it take for folks to realize that, just like the title, big government is a loser?

The problem wasn't that the war on poverty was lost.

The problem was that the big corporations that pull your strings destroyed the middle class.

Happy to have straightened that out for you, but you can go home thinking you are superior to those "other minorities".

I certainly think I am superior to those that constantly whine about imaginary corporations stealing their opportunities.

Get a grip.

 

[Conservative65]

Maybe the author of this thread should explain to her readers that although she insists Medicaid is a failure,

she doesn't want to get rid of it.

The entire war on poverty is a failure yet you retard Liberals want to keep doing what hasn't work for the past 50 years. Explain that.

Didn't I ask you? How will the poor be better off if we end Medicaid? How will the elderly be better off if we end the portion of Medicare that is not paid for by the payroll tax?

How will the poor be better off if we end public school education's availability regardless of one's ability to pay?

How will low income Americans be better off if we end energy assistance for such things as home heating?

Convince all of those people will be better off without that help.

I don't believe the conservative guy gives a fuck if the poor people are better off. He thinks HE will be better off if those poor people didn't get his tax money.

Don't know why he feels that way. The government is not going to send him a welfare rebate check.

If I get to keep more of what I've earned, I am better off.

That's right, I won't get a rebate check. I actually want to EARN what I have not have it handed to me.

 

[zeke]

Maybe the author of this thread should explain to her readers that although she insists Medicaid is a failure,

she doesn't want to get rid of it.

The entire war on poverty is a failure yet you retard Liberals want to keep doing what hasn't work for the past 50 years. Explain that.

How can the war on poverty be the failure people like you claim it is, when you all are saying all the time that our poor have it better than most of the people of the world?

Big screens, housing, phones etc etc. How in the hell is that a failure?

What does success look like to you? People living under bridges and dying in the streets?

Define your idea of successful poor people.

The program had the mindset of giving a hand up. That's what the bleeding heart Liberals tell us. When it began in the mid 1960s, the poverty rate was just about what it is now. The difference is the amount of money spent that did nothing to alleviate poverty.

The problme with the items you listed is that if someone can have those, the money spent on their needs really didn't need to be spent. Seems they had enough money and the problem was with money management. If someone can afford non need items then claims they have no money to buy needed ones, they are a liar, a poor money manager, or a combination of both.

A successful program would be one where people like you, when you saw a need, would reach into your own pocket to buy the items for people which taxpayer funds currently fund.

SAY WHAT? The government ALREADY reaches into my pocket for poor people. It's called the income tax.
Do you pay any income tax? I am a taxpayer. Are you?

 

[NYcarbineer]

Maybe the author of this thread should explain to her readers that although she insists Medicaid is a failure,

she doesn't want to get rid of it.

The entire war on poverty is a failure yet you retard Liberals want to keep doing what hasn't work for the past 50 years. Explain that.

Didn't I ask you? How will the poor be better off if we end Medicaid? How will the elderly be better off if we end the portion of Medicare that is not paid for by the payroll tax?

How will the poor be better off if we end public school education's availability regardless of one's ability to pay?

How will low income Americans be better off if we end energy assistance for such things as home heating?

Convince all of those people will be better off without that help.

I don't believe the conservative guy gives a fuck if the poor people are better off. He thinks HE will be better off if those poor people didn't get his tax money.

Don't know why he feels that way. The government is not going to send him a welfare rebate check.

Of course he doesn't.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Maybe the author of this thread should explain to her readers that although she insists Medicaid is a failure,

she doesn't want to get rid of it.

The entire war on poverty is a failure yet you retard Liberals want to keep doing what hasn't work for the past 50 years. Explain that.

How can the war on poverty be the failure people like you claim it is, when you all are saying all the time that our poor have it better than most of the people of the world?

Big screens, housing, phones etc etc. How in the hell is that a failure?

What does success look like to you? People living under bridges and dying in the streets?

Define your idea of successful poor people.

The problem is that you accept the Leftist definition of 'poverty.'

It has become the buying-votes industry.

Poverty means no food, no heat, no home.

 

[zeke]

Maybe the author of this thread should explain to her readers that although she insists Medicaid is a failure,

she doesn't want to get rid of it.

The entire war on poverty is a failure yet you retard Liberals want to keep doing what hasn't work for the past 50 years. Explain that.

Didn't I ask you? How will the poor be better off if we end Medicaid? How will the elderly be better off if we end the portion of Medicare that is not paid for by the payroll tax?

How will the poor be better off if we end public school education's availability regardless of one's ability to pay?

How will low income Americans be better off if we end energy assistance for such things as home heating?

Convince all of those people will be better off without that help.

I don't believe the conservative guy gives a fuck if the poor people are better off. He thinks HE will be better off if those poor people didn't get his tax money.

Don't know why he feels that way. The government is not going to send him a welfare rebate check.

If I get to keep more of what I've earned, I am better off.

That's right, I won't get a rebate check. I actually want to EARN what I have not have it handed to me.

And who is it in the Federal government that has given you the idea that you will keep more of your money if there were less poor people needing help?

Sounds to me like you need to get a better paying job if you aren't earning enough to do what you want to do.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Maybe the author of this thread should explain to her readers that although she insists Medicaid is a failure,

she doesn't want to get rid of it.

The entire war on poverty is a failure yet you retard Liberals want to keep doing what hasn't work for the past 50 years. Explain that.

Didn't I ask you? How will the poor be better off if we end Medicaid? How will the elderly be better off if we end the portion of Medicare that is not paid for by the payroll tax?

How will the poor be better off if we end public school education's availability regardless of one's ability to pay?

How will low income Americans be better off if we end energy assistance for such things as home heating?

Convince all of those people will be better off without that help.

I don't believe the conservative guy gives a fuck if the poor people are better off. He thinks HE will be better off if those poor people didn't get his tax money.

Don't know why he feels that way. The government is not going to send him a welfare rebate check.

If I get to keep more of what I've earned, I am better off.

That's right, I won't get a rebate check. I actually want to EARN what I have not have it handed to me.

A third of what the federal government spends you're not being required to pay for now. It's being borrowed. And the GOP wants to spend even more on defense.

What you want is not smaller government; you just want the other guy's government smaller. You want what the GOP wants,

cut the social programs, spend more on the military.