Those in favor of welfare, consider this

[UnbiasedAmerica]

If you're in favor of our welfare system, please consider this.

Today, a single black mother in Philadelphia, for example, making $29,000 is eligible for nearly $30,000 in benefits, resulting in a total of about $57,000 to pay her bills.

Now what if we offer her a 10% raise at work? Now she’s making $31,900 in wages… but she is no longer eligible for $7,000 in housing assistance, and her food stamp benefits are cut by $3,000. Thus as a result of a 10% raise, she ends up with $49,900 in wages and welfare to pay her bills. A 10% raise REDUCED her proceeds by more than $7,000!

Okay, what if the same woman is a natural leader at work, and we decide to promote her to the manager position and give her a 50% raise? Now she’s making about $45,000 in wages. But she’s lost almost $30,000 in government aid! Amazingly, as a result of this promotion and huge raise, she now has only $42,000 to pay her bills! IN FACT, FINANCIALLY SHE’D BE BETTER OFF IF SHE QUIT HER JOB ALTOGETHER, WITH WELFARE OF $47,000 FOR THE JOBLESS!!!

This incredible fact has resulted in a society in which those groups most affected by welfare are financially encouraged NOT to advance to leadership positions, NOT to compete for better jobs, and in some situations, NOT to work at all!

 

[LilOlLady]

If you're in favor of our welfare system, please consider this.

Today, a single black mother in Philadelphia, for example, making $29,000 is eligible for nearly $30,000 in benefits, resulting in a total of about $57,000 to pay her bills.

Now what if we offer her a 10% raise at work? Now she’s making $31,900 in wages… but she is no longer eligible for $7,000 in housing assistance, and her food stamp benefits are cut by $3,000. Thus as a result of a 10% raise, she ends up with $49,900 in wages and welfare to pay her bills. A 10% raise REDUCED her proceeds by more than $7,000!

Okay, what if the same woman is a natural leader at work, and we decide to promote her to the manager position and give her a 50% raise? Now she’s making about $45,000 in wages. But she’s lost almost $30,000 in government aid! Amazingly, as a result of this promotion and huge raise, she now has only $42,000 to pay her bills! IN FACT, FINANCIALLY SHE’D BE BETTER OFF IF SHE QUIT HER JOB ALTOGETHER, WITH WELFARE OF $47,000 FOR THE JOBLESS!!!

This incredible fact has resulted in a society in which those groups most affected by welfare are financially encouraged NOT to advance to leadership positions, NOT to compete for better jobs, and in some situations, NOT to work at all!

Then take it up with state government. THere used to be job training programs for welfare recipients and the radical right took it away. So stop you whining or stop electing the Radicals. Use to be job training for high school grads that did not want to go to collage but needed a skill but the Radical took that away also. THey make it hard for those that cannot go to college to get a job so they are created for a welfare state program. Most people on food stamps and subsidized housing are the elderly and they are white. Most people on welfare are white and those programs were created by whites and such program was created for Romney's grandfather and his concubine and children. Fundamentalist Mormons are a big welfare recipient. No one complains and Obama did not create it.

There are people that do not quality for skilled jobs and need help. Illegal immigrants has created millions of americans who are unemployed. Black at the head of the line. So they use Big Brother and crime.

That single mother has little choice. Tell her to stop having sex when there are no birth control available?

 

[zeke]

If you're in favor of our welfare system, please consider this.

Today, a single black mother in Philadelphia, for example, making $29,000 is eligible for nearly $30,000 in benefits, resulting in a total of about $57,000 to pay her bills.

Now what if we offer her a 10% raise at work? Now she’s making $31,900 in wages… but she is no longer eligible for $7,000 in housing assistance, and her food stamp benefits are cut by $3,000. Thus as a result of a 10% raise, she ends up with $49,900 in wages and welfare to pay her bills. A 10% raise REDUCED her proceeds by more than $7,000!

Okay, what if the same woman is a natural leader at work, and we decide to promote her to the manager position and give her a 50% raise? Now she’s making about $45,000 in wages. But she’s lost almost $30,000 in government aid! Amazingly, as a result of this promotion and huge raise, she now has only $42,000 to pay her bills! IN FACT, FINANCIALLY SHE’D BE BETTER OFF IF SHE QUIT HER JOB ALTOGETHER, WITH WELFARE OF $47,000 FOR THE JOBLESS!!!

This incredible fact has resulted in a society in which those groups most affected by welfare are financially encouraged NOT to advance to leadership positions, NOT to compete for better jobs, and in some situations, NOT to work at all!

NO NO NO. I read where this same single black woman is entitled to 100,000 dollars of welfare and housing assistance. And NEVER has to work. And that her company tried to make her the CEO. Yep that's what I read.

You might want to check your "facts" again and post your source of info for right wing scrutiny. Something doesn't seem quite right.

 

[UnbiasedAmerica]

NO NO NO. I read where this same single black woman is entitled to 100,000 dollars of welfare and housing assistance. And NEVER has to work. And that her company tried to make her the CEO. Yep that's what I read.

You might want to check your "facts" again and post your source of info for right wing scrutiny. Something doesn't seem quite right.

Comes directly from the Pennsylvania Secretary of Public Welfare. This forum doesn't allow us to provide links until we've posted 15 times. So google Pennsylvania welfare cliff, and look at the image results. It's the very first one that comes up.

 

[UnbiasedAmerica]

Most people on welfare are white and those programs were created by whites

The group most affected by welfare is, by far, African-Americans, with 46.9% of blacks participating in one of the major means-tested programs in 2009, compared with just 16.9% of whites. In other words, because welfare financially penalizes those of its participants who get raises and promotions, nearly half of all African-Americans are being subjected to incentives not to compete with whites!

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

If you're in favor of our welfare system, please consider this.

Today, a single black mother in Philadelphia, for example, making $29,000 is eligible for nearly $30,000 in benefits, resulting in a total of about $57,000 to pay her bills.

Now what if we offer her a 10% raise at work? Now she’s making $31,900 in wages… but she is no longer eligible for $7,000 in housing assistance, and her food stamp benefits are cut by $3,000. Thus as a result of a 10% raise, she ends up with $49,900 in wages and welfare to pay her bills. A 10% raise REDUCED her proceeds by more than $7,000!

Okay, what if the same woman is a natural leader at work, and we decide to promote her to the manager position and give her a 50% raise? Now she’s making about $45,000 in wages. But she’s lost almost $30,000 in government aid! Amazingly, as a result of this promotion and huge raise, she now has only $42,000 to pay her bills! IN FACT, FINANCIALLY SHE’D BE BETTER OFF IF SHE QUIT HER JOB ALTOGETHER, WITH WELFARE OF $47,000 FOR THE JOBLESS!!!

This incredible fact has resulted in a society in which those groups most affected by welfare are financially encouraged NOT to advance to leadership positions, NOT to compete for better jobs, and in some situations, NOT to work at all!

No one’s ‘in favor’ of public assistance.

It’s a necessary, pragmatic, and appropriate component of a modern, industrialized, and civilized capitalist society.

Consider instead the fact that the vast majority of Americans who receive public assistance do so for only a short period of time, never to return. Over the decades the many public assistance programs have worked successfully and as intended, protecting the more vulnerable members of our society.

The anecdotal incident referred to in your OP is not representative of public assistant recipients in general, rendering your argument a hasty generalization fallacy.

It is consequently a myth that public assistance has the effect of a ‘deterrent’ to work or advancement in one’s employment, as there are many other factors which come into play, such as lack of education or marketable skills, background issues, health issues, as well as practical barriers such as inadequate housing and lack of transportation, especially in rural areas.

 

[Mr Natural]

What's a single white mother in Philadelphia entitled to?

 

[DiamondDave]

What's a single white mother in Philadelphia entitled to?

Nothing, IMHO.. just like a single black mother in Little Rock, a married arab with no kids in SanPedro, a married eskimo with 12 kids in Chicago, a lesbian native american in Phoenix, or anyone else...

But they have the right to try, to apply to do what they want, to succeed or fail all on their own like adults

 

[Smilodonfatalis]

If you're in favor of our welfare system, please consider this.

Today, a single black mother in Philadelphia, for example, making $29,000 is eligible for nearly $30,000 in benefits, resulting in a total of about $57,000 to pay her bills.

Now what if we offer her a 10% raise at work? Now she’s making $31,900 in wages… but she is no longer eligible for $7,000 in housing assistance, and her food stamp benefits are cut by $3,000. Thus as a result of a 10% raise, she ends up with $49,900 in wages and welfare to pay her bills. A 10% raise REDUCED her proceeds by more than $7,000!

Okay, what if the same woman is a natural leader at work, and we decide to promote her to the manager position and give her a 50% raise? Now she’s making about $45,000 in wages. But she’s lost almost $30,000 in government aid! Amazingly, as a result of this promotion and huge raise, she now has only $42,000 to pay her bills! IN FACT, FINANCIALLY SHE’D BE BETTER OFF IF SHE QUIT HER JOB ALTOGETHER, WITH WELFARE OF $47,000 FOR THE JOBLESS!!!

This incredible fact has resulted in a society in which those groups most affected by welfare are financially encouraged NOT to advance to leadership positions, NOT to compete for better jobs, and in some situations, NOT to work at all!

I call BS on your claim. Nobody is eligible for $30,000 worth of federal welfare benefits every year. You do not know what you are talking about.

Post a link that supports your baseless assertions or shut up.

Obviously, you don't have any idea what it's like to be poor. People don't make more money by not working.

 

[UnbiasedAmerica]

I call BS on your claim. Nobody is eligible for $30,000 worth of federal welfare benefits every year. You do not know what you are talking about.

Post a link that supports your baseless assertions or shut up.

Obviously, you don't have any idea what it's like to be poor. People don't make more money by not working.

Google Pennsylvania Welfare Cliff. Read the very first link that comes up. This is directly from Pennsylvania's Secretary of Public Welfare!

 

[UnbiasedAmerica]

Consider instead the fact that the vast majority of Americans who receive public assistance do so for only a short period of time, never to return. Over the decades the many public assistance programs have worked successfully and as intended, protecting the more vulnerable members of our society.

The anecdotal incident referred to in your OP is not representative of public assistant recipients in general, rendering your argument a hasty generalization fallacy.

It is consequently a myth that public assistance has the effect of a ‘deterrent’ to work or advancement in one’s employment, as there are many other factors which come into play, such as lack of education or marketable skills, background issues, health issues, as well as practical barriers such as inadequate housing and lack of transportation, especially in rural areas.

There is real evidence that groups who participate most in welfare end up suffering its perverse consequences.

The group most affected by welfare is, by far, African-Americans, with 46.9% of blacks participating in one of the major means-tested programs in 2009, compared with just 16.9% of whites.

If I'm correct, welfare's financial disincentives against work advancement would create higher unemployment, lower income, and fewer blacks in management compared to whites:

Median Household Income (census) = $55,000 White vs. $32,000 Black
Unemployment Rate (BLS) = 6.7% White vs. 13.5% Black
Managers (EEOC) = 80.9% White vs. 6.3% Black

Likewise, single mothers are given the highest financial benefits in welfare. This disincentive has lead to a dramatic increase in single parent families since the advent of welfare:

Children Living in Single Parent Homes (census) = 22% White vs. 55% Black
Children Born Out of Wedlock (census) = 29% White vs. 73% Black
Never Married, 45 Years Old+ (census) = 8% White vs. 20% Black

You can skirt the issue all you want. But welfare policies are tearing black families apart and disenfranchising minorities from the powerful decisions made in the boardrooms and offices of our economy. The wealthy white majority is being protected at the expense of minorities. And economic misfeasance is replacing racism as the tool of oppression. Wake up and demand change.

 

[Pogo]

If you're in favor of our welfare system, please consider this.

Today, a single black mother in Philadelphia, for example, making $29,000 is eligible for nearly $30,000 in benefits, resulting in a total of about $57,000 to pay her bills.

Horseshit.

 

[TemplarKormac]

If you're in favor of our welfare system, please consider this.

Today, a single black mother in Philadelphia, for example, making $29,000 is eligible for nearly $30,000 in benefits, resulting in a total of about $57,000 to pay her bills.

Horseshit.

Prove it. You can't go around calling someone's statements "horseshit" without explaining why.

 

[Pogo]

If you're in favor of our welfare system, please consider this.

Today, a single black mother in Philadelphia, for example, making $29,000 is eligible for nearly $30,000 in benefits, resulting in a total of about $57,000 to pay her bills.

Horseshit.

Prove it. You can't go around calling someone's statements "horseshit" without explaining why.

The fuck I can't.

Ain't my burden of proof there, Aristotle. I didn't make the claim. This clown puts up an undocumented horseshit premise and then cops out with "Go google it". That's bullshit.

A statement doesn't become a fact solely on the absence of disproof. There is no planet where things work that way.

Watch this:
"TemplarKormac eats babies".

-- by your logic that statement is now fact until you disprove it.

Shhhhhheeeeeesh. Failure doesn't get more basic than this.

Obviously this OP is a minefield of fallacies, which is why I clicked in ("those in favor of welfare"... "a single black mother"...).
This is just the most basic one. If it doesn't jump right out at you, you have no business being in a debate.

 

[UnbiasedAmerica]

First of all, Pogo, ditch the attitude if you want to discuss this. We both have the same goal, which is to help the less fortunate. If you refuse to consider that a policy might be hurting them, then you are part of the problem.

Look at this chart from the Pennsylvania Secretary of Public Welfare, and then let me know if you're still in denial.

 

[depotoo]

Horseshit.

Prove it. You can't go around calling someone's statements "horseshit" without explaining why.

The fuck I can't.

Ain't my burden of proof there, Aristotle. I didn't make the claim. This clown puts up an undocumented horseshit premise and then cops out with "Go google it". That's bullshit.

A statement doesn't become a fact solely on the absence of disproof. There is no planet where things work that way.

Watch this:
"TemplarKormac eats babies".

-- by your logic that statement is now fact until you disprove it.

Shhhhhheeeeeesh. Failure doesn't get more basic than this.

A paper presented at the American Enterprise Institute by the Pennsylvania Secretary of Public Welfare found that because of the stacking of welfare benefits, many individuals receiving welfare stand to lose financially by increasing their income. In one example, the study demonstrated how a single parent with two children earning $29,000 would have a net income, including welfare benefits, of $57,000. Therefore, the individual would need annual earnings to jump from $29,000 to $69,000 (pre-tax) to maintain the same standard of living without welfare benefits.The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) also recently published a report calculating the amount of increased taxes paid—and federal means-tested benefits lost—as earnings increase for low- and middle-income households. CBO found that, because these households are moving from a situation in which their financial means (welfare benefits) are not taxed to one where their income is, the additional taxation that occurs at the margin is significant.
For example, the CBO study found that households with incomes just above the poverty line—or between $23,000 and $29,000 for a family of four in 2012—stand to lose 60 cents of every additional dollar to either taxes or lost federal benefits. In the face of such a high penalty, many low-income people choose either not to work or, as CBO finds, “put in fewer hours or be less productive.”

http://www.budget.senate.gov/republ...?File_id=b5c0680b-d78d-4e00-b4f7-00b5d2a8816a

 

[TemplarKormac]

Horseshit.

Prove it. You can't go around calling someone's statements "horseshit" without explaining why.

The fuck I can't.

Ain't my burden of proof there, Aristotle. I didn't make the claim. This clown puts up an undocumented horseshit premise and then cops out with "Go google it". That's bullshit.

A statement doesn't become a fact solely on the absence of disproof. There is no planet where things work that way.

Watch this:
"TemplarKormac eats babies".

-- that statement is now fact until you disprove it.

Shhhhhheeeeeesh.

Wow. How mature.

Are you so lazy that you can't even come up with one iota of proof other than for calling it "horseshit"? The burden of proof falls on the person who refers to any statement or argument as "horseshit" without proving it. And yes, Google is a good place for you to start, Einstein.

A statement is true unless it can be disproven, genius. And as far as I can see you didn't. On no planet does the retort you used ever qualify as disproof.

The real "horseshit" is what you assaulted my eyes with just now.

 

[Pogo]

Prove it. You can't go around calling someone's statements "horseshit" without explaining why.

The fuck I can't.

Ain't my burden of proof there, Aristotle. I didn't make the claim. This clown puts up an undocumented horseshit premise and then cops out with "Go google it". That's bullshit.

A statement doesn't become a fact solely on the absence of disproof. There is no planet where things work that way.

Watch this:
"TemplarKormac eats babies".

-- that statement is now fact until you disprove it.

Shhhhhheeeeeesh.

Wow. How mature.

Are you so lazy that you can't even come up with one iota of proof other than for calling it "horseshit"? The burden of proof falls on the person who refers to any statement or argument as "horseshit" without proving it. And yes, Google is a good place for you to start, Einstein.

A statement is true unless it can be disproven, genius. And as far as I can see you didn't. On no planet does the retort you used ever qualify as disproof.

The real "horseshit" is what you assaulted my eyes with just now.

This ^^ is what they call an "epic fail".
As I said, if you think things work that way you have no business trying to debate. There was no claim documented, therefore there is nothing to disprove.

Bon appetit on those babies. I hear they're good with barbecue sauce.

 

[TemplarKormac]

The fuck I can't.

Ain't my burden of proof there, Aristotle. I didn't make the claim. This clown puts up an undocumented horseshit premise and then cops out with "Go google it". That's bullshit.

A statement doesn't become a fact solely on the absence of disproof. There is no planet where things work that way.

Watch this:
"TemplarKormac eats babies".

-- that statement is now fact until you disprove it.

Shhhhhheeeeeesh.

Wow. How mature.

Are you so lazy that you can't even come up with one iota of proof other than for calling it "horseshit"? The burden of proof falls on the person who refers to any statement or argument as "horseshit" without proving it. And yes, Google is a good place for you to start, Einstein.

A statement is true unless it can be disproven, genius. And as far as I can see you didn't. On no planet does the retort you used ever qualify as disproof.

The real "horseshit" is what you assaulted my eyes with just now.

This ^^ is what they call an "epic fail".
As I said, if you think things work that way you have no business trying to debate.

Bon appetit on those babies. I hear they're good with barbecue sauce.

I see. Depotoo just blew you out of the water. And this pile of tripe is pathetic. If you think calling an argument "horseshit" automatically disproves it, I have a plot of solid land on Jupiter I'd like to sell you.

You must be sick to think up twisted insults like that, Pogo. I hope you aren't as bad with kids as Kermit Gosnell turned out to be.

Moron.

 

[UnbiasedAmerica]

The fuck I can't.

Ain't my burden of proof there, Aristotle. I didn't make the claim. This clown puts up an undocumented horseshit premise and then cops out with "Go google it". That's bullshit.

A statement doesn't become a fact solely on the absence of disproof. There is no planet where things work that way.

Watch this:
"TemplarKormac eats babies".

-- that statement is now fact until you disprove it.

Shhhhhheeeeeesh.

Wow. How mature.

Are you so lazy that you can't even come up with one iota of proof other than for calling it "horseshit"? The burden of proof falls on the person who refers to any statement or argument as "horseshit" without proving it. And yes, Google is a good place for you to start, Einstein.

A statement is true unless it can be disproven, genius. And as far as I can see you didn't. On no planet does the retort you used ever qualify as disproof.

The real "horseshit" is what you assaulted my eyes with just now.

This ^^ is what they call an "epic fail".
As I said, if you think things work that way you have no business trying to debate. There was no claim documented, therefore there is nothing to disprove.

Bon appetit on those babies. I hear they're good with barbecue sauce.

Pogo, START READING THE OTHER POSTS. WE ARE PROVIDING EVIDENCE.

Look at this chart from the Pennsylvania Secretary of Public Welfare, and then let me know if you're still in denial.