Those in favor of welfare, consider this

[TemplarKormac]

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.

Facts are a Liberal's Kryptonite. Efforts in educating them in reality are wasted.

 

[depotoo]

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.

your statement it is "horseshit" has been disproven. Want to apologize or are you going to evade that issue?
Smile also made the statement that noone receives $30 grand a year in benefits. That has also been proven to be wrong. Wonder if he will apologize as well?

It was also stated the CBO

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.”

disproving Jones comment "It is consequently a myth that public assistance has the effect of a ‘deterrent’ to work or advancement in one’s employment"

Will any of these individuals now admit there is a problem with a system that encourages the use of welfare, even if not truly needed-

Federal policy seeks expanded welfare enrollment as an explicit goal—regardless of need.

 

[depotoo]

Unbiased, I want to thank you for this post and also say welcome to the forum!

I do need to call you out on inserting color of skin within your post, though, as there simply was no need.

Once again, welcome, and hope to see you around more.

 

[UnbiasedAmerica]

Unbiased, I want to thank you for this post and also say welcome to the forum!

I do need to call you out on inserting color of skin within your post, though, as there simply was no need.

Once again, welcome, and hope to see you around more.

Had to, in order to show that those groups that participate most in welfare show significant demographic differences than those that do not. And blacks were the group that have highest participation rate.

 

[Bfgrn]

Here is your (former) Pennsylvania Secretary of Public Welfare...he stepped down.

February 05, 2013
Corbett's welfare secretary leaving

Gary Alexander, who oversees a department charged with helping 2.1 million elderly, poor and disabled Pennsylvanians, will be leaving his $149,000 post by the end of the month.

Alexander's department also faced sharp questions about children being dropped from Pennsylvania's Medicaid rolls. Between August 2011 and January of last year, about 130,000 people - including 89,000 children - were dropped from Medicaid rolls, leading some advocacy groups to cry foul. The number was so high that the Obama administration stepped in, seeking detailed information to determine whether anyone had been wrongfully struck from the rolls.

Separate from his policy decisions, the secretary also came under fire last year for hiring Robert W. Patterson, the editor of an ultraconservative faith-based journal, as a top aide. In his writings, Patterson had condemned birth control, working women, and some of the programs assisting the poor that the department was responsible for administering. And last December, Alexander faced criticism again, following a report from Harrisburg online news service PA Independent, that said he had been driving a state-owned car from Harrisburg to his home in Rhode Island dozens of times a year, raising questions about the costs to taxpayers and his presence in the state capital.

Corbett's welfare secretary leaving - Philly.com

 

[UnbiasedAmerica]

Bfgrn, how does that change the facts concerning welfare? How does that change the structured disincentive for welfare recipients to accept raises and promotions? How does that change the financial incentive welfare creates to remain a single parent?

 

[Bfgrn]

Bfgrn, how does that change the facts concerning welfare? How does that change the structured disincentive for welfare recipients to accept raises and promotions? How does that change the financial incentive welfare creates to remain a single parent?

It gives us an insight into the author, a piece of human excrement with a VERY extreme agenda. I don't believe anything social Darwinists says. They should be barred from any government position.

 

[UnbiasedAmerica]

Then how about I only use government statistics, and you can confirm them at your leisure?

GROUP A
Population = 197 million
Welfare participation rate = 16.9%
Median Household Income (census) = $55,000
Unemployment Rate (BLS) = 6.7%
Children Living in Single Parent Homes (census) = 22%
Children Born Out of Wedlock (census) = 29%
Never Married, 45 Years Old+ (census) = 8%
Percent of Managers in America (EEOC) = 80.9%, despite comprising only 65% of total population. That's a nearly 25% over-performance.

GROUP B
Population = 39 million
Welfare participation rate = 46.9%
Median Household Income (census) = $32,000
Unemployment Rate (BLS) = 13.5%
Children Living in Single Parent Homes (census) = 55%
Children Born Out of Wedlock (census) = 73%
Never Married, 45 Years Old+ (census) = 20%
Percent of Managers in America (EEOC) = 6.3%, despite comprising 12% of total population. That's a nearly 50% under-performance.


SOURCES:
http://www.census.gov/prod/2012pubs/p70-130.pdf – Census figures for welfare participation

Table A-2. Employment status of the civilian population by race, sex, and age – Employment figures from the Bureau of Labor Statistics

2011 Job Patterns for Minorities and Women in Private Industry (EEO-1) – Management data from the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

 

[Againsheila]

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'm in favor of "a" welfare system. Just not the welfare system we currently have.

 

[Bfgrn]

Then how about I only use government statistics, and you can confirm them at your leisure?

GROUP A
Population = 197 million
Welfare participation rate = 16.9%
Median Household Income (census) = $55,000
Unemployment Rate (BLS) = 6.7%
Children Living in Single Parent Homes (census) = 22%
Children Born Out of Wedlock (census) = 29%
Never Married, 45 Years Old+ (census) = 8%
Percent of Managers in America (EEOC) = 80.9%, despite comprising only 65% of total population. That's a nearly 25% over-performance.

GROUP B
Population = 39 million
Welfare participation rate = 46.9%
Median Household Income (census) = $32,000
Unemployment Rate (BLS) = 13.5%
Children Living in Single Parent Homes (census) = 55%
Children Born Out of Wedlock (census) = 73%
Never Married, 45 Years Old+ (census) = 20%
Percent of Managers in America (EEOC) = 6.3%, despite comprising 12% of total population. That's a nearly 50% under-performance.


SOURCES:
http://www.census.gov/prod/2012pubs/p70-130.pdf – Census figures for welfare participation

Table A-2. Employment status of the civilian population by race, sex, and age – Employment figures from the Bureau of Labor Statistics

2011 Job Patterns for Minorities and Women in Private Industry (EEO-1) – Management data from the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

Is there a point you're trying to make BIAS American right wing turd?

 

[FuzzyCat]

The racial breakdown of the USA (2010 census) is:

63.7% White
16.4% Hispanic (presumably mostly mestizo or Amerindian)
12.6% Black

The racial breakdown of welfare recipients is:

Of those on welfare, 33.3% are black, 31.2% are white, and 28.8% are Hispanic.

So, clearly whites are drastically underrepresented in welfare recipients, while blacks and Hispanics are both overrepresented. Contrary to the illusion presented by the MSM, both in total numbers and proportionally more blacks are on welfare than whites.

SocioBiological Musings: Statistics on race and welfare for the USA

The percentages those on welfare by race as of 2011 are listed below in descending order by percentage.
Black-39.8%
White-38.8%
Hispanic-15.7%
Other-3.3%
Asian-2.4%

What is the race percentage for welfare recipients

However, if you are REALLY concerned about "welfare"....check out all the subsidies that corporations get....check out all the tax breaks that corporations get....check out who is paying the lobbyists who either donate to campaigns or pay our Congress persons in some way for their ear & their time.
Just see which group is actually getting more in benefits....corporations or welfare people.

 

[UnbiasedAmerica]

Is there a point you're trying to make BIAS American right wing turd?

You seem to be unable to discuss matters objectively. I presented numbers from them Pennsylvania Secretary of Public Welfare, and you attacked him. So I presented government numbers, and you attacked me. I guess some people care more about their egos than they do about actually solving problems.

 

[depotoo]

par for the course around here.

 

[Bfgrn]

Is there a point you're trying to make BIAS American right wing turd?

You seem to be unable to discuss matters objectively. I presented numbers from them Pennsylvania Secretary of Public Welfare, and you attacked him. So I presented government numbers, and you attacked me. I guess some people care more about their egos than they do about actually solving problems.

I too want to solve America's problems. So, I would send all you right wing social Darwinists to go live in an ultra conservative nation where you belong...

Russia...

Fiscal policy is buttressed on a low, flat rate of income tax (13%), and there is virtually no social safety net, with spending on unemployment security, medical provision, disability aid, infrastructure, the environment, and urban regeneration far lower, in both absolute terms and as a percentage of GDP, than its G8 contemporaries.

Similarly, military spending is high in comparison — and growing — medical care is available free in theory, but requires private insurance or additional cash payment in practice, and businesses are in reality pretty un-regulated.

 

[francoHFW]

OP- Pubcrappe- And EVERYONE would rather have a good job.. On planet Earth, could Pubs get the feck out of the way of a recovery from THEIR 2nd Great World Depression?

 

[auditor0007]

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!

Please show us proof of this. Your word alone does not make this true. BTW, someone else's chart of what is possible in some fantasy world doesn't count. Give us some real die hard examples of people making $29,000 per year who actually receive another $30,000 in benefits.