When Poverty Attacks!

[NYcarbineer]

I would like to see how children's free lunches and free breakfasts calculate in the food alottment that is already given to the people on welfare.

The amount of your taxes that goes to feed poor kids is easily covered by the amount of money you make on your job when you're fucking off when you're supposed to be working.

So stop crying about it.

 

[koshergrl]

3. "Today, Lopez gets by on a combination of cash assistance ($138 a month), food stamps ($210 a month), Medicaid (about $300 a month for Nolan’s medication), and Supplemental Security Income ($740 a month). She is still unable to work, because Nolan often can’t go to school or must be retrieved early..... “So I’m not working. I worry about money every day. It’s that kind of life.... some fifty million people in the United States, or about one in seven, are now living below the official poverty line — which, for a single parent of one child, means earning less than about $16,000 a year —.” Fickle Fortunes | Summer 2014 | Columbia Magazine


"...earning..."?????




But...if one actually works and earns a living.....

a. ...A companion piece to this sad tale is this, from Wyatt Emerich of 'The Cleveland Current,' who "... analyzes disposable income and economic benefits among several key income classes and comes to the stunning (and verifiable) conclusion that "a one-parent family of three making $14,500 a year (minimum wage) has more disposable income than a family making $60,000 a year." And that excludes benefits from Supplemental Security Income disability checks."
In Entitlement America, The Head Of A Household Of Four Making Minimum Wage Has More Disposable Income Than A Family Making $60,000 A Year | Zero Hedge



So....Liberal welfare policies actually provide more disposable income that actually working????

And they claim said policies are designed to move people out of welfare???




(You came to catch)
You thought I'd be naive and tame
(You met your match)
But I beat you at your own game, oh

(Who's zoomin' who?)
Take another look and tell me, baby
(Who's zoomin who?)
Who's zoomin' who?
(Who's zoomin who?)
Now the fish jumped off the hook, didn't I, baby?
(Who's zoomin who?)
Yeah
ARETHA FRANKLIN LYRICS - Who's Zoomin' Who


Of course, the tune doesn't apply to Liberals.....

The medicaid actually runs approx $800 per head..because the state pays monthly premiums to the insurance providers.

 

[Care4all]

FYI to all

A misleading chart on welfare spending - The Washington Post

regarding the figures used in zerohedge's chart in the link provided in the first post....3 Pinocchio's they say...

 

[koshergrl]

Beware of catching poverty. It's almost as impossible to predict as those horrific killer babies that we need to kill....

 

[Jackson]

I would like to see how children's free lunches and free breakfasts calculate in the food alottment that is already given to the people on welfare.

The amount of your taxes that goes to feed poor kids is easily covered by the amount of money you make on your job when you're fucking off when you're supposed to be working.

So stop crying about it.

You mistake me for a union employee.

 

[PoliticalChic]

FYI to all

A misleading chart on welfare spending - The Washington Post

regarding the figures used in zerohedge's chart in the link provided in the first post....3 Pinocchio's they say...

"The chart concludes that welfare spending “equates” to $168 in cash per day for each household in poverty, which it says exceeds the median income by 20 percent. Alternatively, as Sessions put it at the hearing, this amounts to $60,000 per year, compared to a median income of $50,000 in 2011."
From the link

and...

" We then went on to explain that if “the $1 trillion spent on federal welfare programs [were] converted into cash and divided exclusively among the 16.8 million households who lived beneath the federal poverty line last year, the government would be able to mail each of those households an annual check for $60,000.” The release concluding by saying that “this figure underscores the fragmented, inefficient nature of welfare in this country.”

Actually, $61,320....beats working, huh?

 

[PoliticalChic]

I would like to see how children's free lunches and free breakfasts calculate in the food alottment that is already given to the people on welfare.

1. We start ‘em young in dependency.. at the breakfast table!
Principals responsible for increasing the numbers!!! Teach dependency, right up there with reading, math, discipline, and graduation rates.

a. “In a locally unprecedented move, the School District of Philadelphia will hold principals accountable for the number of students eating breakfast in their schools. Breakfast participation will be part of the report card that rates principals each year, along with categories such as attendance and math and reading performance.” In city schools, breakfast's now on the principal The head of each school will be held responsible for ensuring that students are well-fed. - Philly.com



2. School breakfast is now a universal freebie….regardless of need or family income!

a. “In Pueblo, school officials take a counterintuitive approach: They offer free breakfast to all children regardless of income, so no one is embarrassed to be eating it. In most schools here, breakfast is served right in the classrooms. …Feeding free breakfast to students who can afford to pay avoids the stigma for students who can't but don't want everyone to know. Serving breakfast in class means kids don't have to get there early to be fed, Kidd and other school nutrition directors say. Bus schedules, parents' work schedules, and, for high school students, the desire to sleep as late as possible make getting to school early for breakfast difficult.”
Breakfast in class: Fight against kids' hunger starts at school - USATODAY.com


b. Did you get the part about not worrying about being late?


c. The winner in the food lottery is New Mexico, where some 63% of students eat two meals a day in school.

 

[PoliticalChic]

I guess it's a tribute to some sort of creativity that one poster can find 50 different ways to start the same thread.

How very wise of you not to try to argue the point of the thread, but to side-step same.

Obviously even you realize that I've hit the nail on your head.



And, I always bask in the glow of a post about moi.

 

[NYcarbineer]

I guess it's a tribute to some sort of creativity that one poster can find 50 different ways to start the same thread.

How very wise of you not to try to argue the point of the thread, but to side-step same.

Obviously even you realize that I've hit the nail on your head.



And, I always bask in the glow of a post about moi.

I've demolished all your points in the other fifty threads you started on this topic.

What specifically, would you like to debate? There, I can't be more gracious than that...

 

[PoliticalChic]

1. “Means-tested welfare spending or aid to the poor…(non-welfare programs provide benefits and services for the general population)…in 2008, total government spending on means-tested welfare or aid to the poor amounted to $714 billion. This high level of welfare spending was the result of steady permanent growth in welfare spending over several decades rather than a short-term response to temporary economic conditions…$522 billion (73 percent) was federal expenditures, and $192 billion (27 percent) was state government funds.”
Obama to Spend $10.3 Trillion on Welfare: Uncovering the Full Cost of Means-Tested Welfare or Aid to the Poor


a. By 2008, total welfare spending amounted to $16,800 per person in poverty, four times as much as the Census Bureau estimated was needed to eliminate all poverty in America- that would be $50,400 for a family of three!!
Ibid.


b. Over the ten-year period from 2009 to 2018, federal and state welfare spending will total $10.3 trillion.
Ibid.


c. This does not include ObamaCare.

 

[PoliticalChic]

I guess it's a tribute to some sort of creativity that one poster can find 50 different ways to start the same thread.

How very wise of you not to try to argue the point of the thread, but to side-step same.

Obviously even you realize that I've hit the nail on your head.



And, I always bask in the glow of a post about moi.

I've demolished all your points in the other fifty threads you started on this topic.

What specifically, would you like to debate? There, I can't be more gracious than that...

And each time I've pointed out that if lying were eliminated, you'd be mute.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Like cancer or a broken fibula, poverty knows no bounds! One can be ambling along, whistling a happy tune....when "BAM"!
Poverty!


Yup....I learned that from the featured article in the most recent Columbia Magazine, thanks to the tireless efforts of Columbia University School of Medicine.....no, wait,...it's the Columbia University School of Social Work, Contemporary Urban Problems Department. [http://magazine.columbia.edu/features/summer-2014/fickle-fortunes]




1. We learn of Jessica, "A thirty-year-old high-school dropout" and "and her four-year-old son," ..."In November, Nolan began having tantrums so violent he had to be hospitalized. Doctors said he had a combination of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, oppositional defiant disorder, and mixed receptive-expressive language disorder. [Gee....good thing we have Ouija- board psychologists around!]...Lopez, with no help from Nolan’s imprisoned father, was forced to quit her job to care for her son."




2. And that's the biographical info provided....but not as a cautionary tale, warning of mistakes and poor choices leading to the unenviable situation, but as a "see what could happen to any of us," an emotional appeal that, actually, is quite effective as most folks want the best for their fellow citizens.

Do you imagine that the story discussed these questions?

Should Jessica have dropped out of high school?
Should she have had a child outside of marriage?
Should she have made a better choice in sperm-donors?
To what degree did her parenting skills result in her child's behavior?

Seems that those of the Liberal persuasion are not allowed to turn the spotlight on those queries....



a. These are the questions asked in this Columbia study:

"Have you missed a rent or mortgage payment lately?
Have your utilities been turned off?
Have you or your children gone without food?
Is anyone in your family seriously ill, and if so, has he or she received medical attention? Some questions were more personal: Have you been depressed lately?
Are you worried about money?
How satisfied are you with your family’s situation overall?"


Why?

These only deal with events occurring once one has journeyed down the poverty path....or has been suddenly 'stricken with poverty...'


(Cue Toccata and Fugue in D minor)

Right or wrong, you are advocating for eugenics,

which, according to Merriam-Webster is

a science that tries to improve the human race by controlling which people become parents

 

[NYcarbineer]

How very wise of you not to try to argue the point of the thread, but to side-step same.

Obviously even you realize that I've hit the nail on your head.



And, I always bask in the glow of a post about moi.

I've demolished all your points in the other fifty threads you started on this topic.

What specifically, would you like to debate? There, I can't be more gracious than that...

And each time I've pointed out that if lying were eliminated, you'd be mute.

Calling someone a liar isn't a refutation, it's an accusation.

I see though that you are tacitly declining my offer to debate you on any of the specifics of your OP.

 

[NoTeaPartyPleez]

When I was a kid the point of the story would be "Don't let this happen to you". Now it's as you pointed out "This could happen to anyone!".

My Uncle said as much about 20 years ago: "Hey man, we're all just a paycheck away from being homeless" and I said "No, not you. You've always had that self-sufficient attitude. You never complain and you are always looking for solutions".

He's been running his own Alarm Installation company for more than 30 years and is still doing just fine.

Perhaps I've misunderstood...but I hope you aren't buying the "This could happen to anyone!".


"Brookings whittled down a lot of analysis into three simple rules. You can avoid poverty by:
1. Graduating from high school.
2. Waiting to get married until after 21 and do not have children till after being married.
3. Having a full-time job.
If you do all those three things, your chance of falling into poverty is just 2 percent. Meanwhile, you’ll have a 74 percent chance of being in the middle class."
Three rules for staying out of poverty | members.jacksonville.com

Number 3 became a problem for millions of people from 2008 to 2010:
September 2008 – 432,000 jobs lost
October 2008 – 489,000 jobs lost
November 2008 – 803,000 jobs lost
December 2008 – 661,000 jobs lost
January 2009 – 818,000 jobs lost
February 2009 – 724,000 jobs lost
March 2009 – 799,000 jobs lost
April 2009 – 692,000 jobs lost
May 2009 – 361,000 jobs lost
June 2009 – 482,000 jobs lost
July 2009 – 339,000 jobs lost
August 2009 – 231,000 jobs lost
September 2009 – 199,000 jobs lost
October 2009 – 202,000 jobs lost
November 2009 - 64,000 jobs created
December 2009 - 109,000 jobs lost
January 2010 - 40,000 jobs lost
February 2010 - 35,000 jobs lost

That doesn't take into account millions of people whose jobs were downsized to part-time, or who took salary/pay cuts.

So number 3 alone on your stupid list kicked their ass. What do you suggest they do if they cannot recoup their losses and slip into poverty?

Now take a $1,300,000 medical bill for your average American family, full employed. That can happen. It happened to me and my late spouse. Empire Blue picked and chose what they thought worthy to reimburse over 3.5 years of chemo and surgery for him. So when the dust settled I was left with a $285,000 balance.

Can you write a check for that? Why don't you instead just STFU.

You live in a world of unreality and should live more, read less.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Like cancer or a broken fibula, poverty knows no bounds! One can be ambling along, whistling a happy tune....when "BAM"!
Poverty!


Yup....I learned that from the featured article in the most recent Columbia Magazine, thanks to the tireless efforts of Columbia University School of Medicine.....no, wait,...it's the Columbia University School of Social Work, Contemporary Urban Problems Department. [http://magazine.columbia.edu/features/summer-2014/fickle-fortunes]




1. We learn of Jessica, "A thirty-year-old high-school dropout" and "and her four-year-old son," ..."In November, Nolan began having tantrums so violent he had to be hospitalized. Doctors said he had a combination of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, oppositional defiant disorder, and mixed receptive-expressive language disorder. [Gee....good thing we have Ouija- board psychologists around!]...Lopez, with no help from Nolan’s imprisoned father, was forced to quit her job to care for her son."




2. And that's the biographical info provided....but not as a cautionary tale, warning of mistakes and poor choices leading to the unenviable situation, but as a "see what could happen to any of us," an emotional appeal that, actually, is quite effective as most folks want the best for their fellow citizens.

Do you imagine that the story discussed these questions?

Should Jessica have dropped out of high school?
Should she have had a child outside of marriage?
Should she have made a better choice in sperm-donors?
To what degree did her parenting skills result in her child's behavior?

Seems that those of the Liberal persuasion are not allowed to turn the spotlight on those queries....



a. These are the questions asked in this Columbia study:

"Have you missed a rent or mortgage payment lately?
Have your utilities been turned off?
Have you or your children gone without food?
Is anyone in your family seriously ill, and if so, has he or she received medical attention? Some questions were more personal: Have you been depressed lately?
Are you worried about money?
How satisfied are you with your family’s situation overall?"


Why?

These only deal with events occurring once one has journeyed down the poverty path....or has been suddenly 'stricken with poverty...'


(Cue Toccata and Fugue in D minor)

Right or wrong, you are advocating for eugenics,

which, according to Merriam-Webster is

a science that tries to improve the human race by controlling which people become parents

"...you are advocating for eugenics,..."

Quite a combination...but which are you more of...liar, or moron?

 

[PoliticalChic]

I've demolished all your points in the other fifty threads you started on this topic.

What specifically, would you like to debate? There, I can't be more gracious than that...

And each time I've pointed out that if lying were eliminated, you'd be mute.

Calling someone a liar isn't a refutation, it's an accusation.

I see though that you are tacitly declining my offer to debate you on any of the specifics of your OP.

I don't debate, I simply explain why I am correct.

...as this thread indicates.

 

[PoliticalChic]

When I was a kid the point of the story would be "Don't let this happen to you". Now it's as you pointed out "This could happen to anyone!".

My Uncle said as much about 20 years ago: "Hey man, we're all just a paycheck away from being homeless" and I said "No, not you. You've always had that self-sufficient attitude. You never complain and you are always looking for solutions".

He's been running his own Alarm Installation company for more than 30 years and is still doing just fine.

Perhaps I've misunderstood...but I hope you aren't buying the "This could happen to anyone!".


"Brookings whittled down a lot of analysis into three simple rules. You can avoid poverty by:
1. Graduating from high school.
2. Waiting to get married until after 21 and do not have children till after being married.
3. Having a full-time job.
If you do all those three things, your chance of falling into poverty is just 2 percent. Meanwhile, you’ll have a 74 percent chance of being in the middle class."
Three rules for staying out of poverty | members.jacksonville.com

Number 3 became a problem for millions of people from 2008 to 2010:
September 2008 – 432,000 jobs lost
October 2008 – 489,000 jobs lost
November 2008 – 803,000 jobs lost
December 2008 – 661,000 jobs lost
January 2009 – 818,000 jobs lost
February 2009 – 724,000 jobs lost
March 2009 – 799,000 jobs lost
April 2009 – 692,000 jobs lost
May 2009 – 361,000 jobs lost
June 2009 – 482,000 jobs lost
July 2009 – 339,000 jobs lost
August 2009 – 231,000 jobs lost
September 2009 – 199,000 jobs lost
October 2009 – 202,000 jobs lost
November 2009 - 64,000 jobs created
December 2009 - 109,000 jobs lost
January 2010 - 40,000 jobs lost
February 2010 - 35,000 jobs lost

That doesn't take into account millions of people whose jobs were downsized to part-time, or who took salary/pay cuts.

So number 3 alone on your stupid list kicked their ass. What do you suggest they do if they cannot recoup their losses and slip into poverty?

Now take a $1,300,000 medical bill for your average American family, full employed. That can happen. It happened to me and my late spouse. Empire Blue picked and chose what they thought worthy to reimburse over 3.5 years of chemo and surgery for him. So when the dust settled I was left with a $285,000 balance.

Can you write a check for that? Why don't you instead just STFU.

You live in a world of unreality and should live more, read less.

You Liberal idiot...oh, was that redundant??

Losing a job does not preclude getting another.....or creating one.


Lots of folks who aren't as lazy or as inept as you are do just that.

 

[NoTeaPartyPleez]

Perhaps I've misunderstood...but I hope you aren't buying the "This could happen to anyone!".


"Brookings whittled down a lot of analysis into three simple rules. You can avoid poverty by:
1. Graduating from high school.
2. Waiting to get married until after 21 and do not have children till after being married.
3. Having a full-time job.
If you do all those three things, your chance of falling into poverty is just 2 percent. Meanwhile, you’ll have a 74 percent chance of being in the middle class."
Three rules for staying out of poverty | members.jacksonville.com

Number 3 became a problem for millions of people from 2008 to 2010:
September 2008 – 432,000 jobs lost
October 2008 – 489,000 jobs lost
November 2008 – 803,000 jobs lost
December 2008 – 661,000 jobs lost
January 2009 – 818,000 jobs lost
February 2009 – 724,000 jobs lost
March 2009 – 799,000 jobs lost
April 2009 – 692,000 jobs lost
May 2009 – 361,000 jobs lost
June 2009 – 482,000 jobs lost
July 2009 – 339,000 jobs lost
August 2009 – 231,000 jobs lost
September 2009 – 199,000 jobs lost
October 2009 – 202,000 jobs lost
November 2009 - 64,000 jobs created
December 2009 - 109,000 jobs lost
January 2010 - 40,000 jobs lost
February 2010 - 35,000 jobs lost

That doesn't take into account millions of people whose jobs were downsized to part-time, or who took salary/pay cuts.

So number 3 alone on your stupid list kicked their ass. What do you suggest they do if they cannot recoup their losses and slip into poverty?

Now take a $1,300,000 medical bill for your average American family, full employed. That can happen. It happened to me and my late spouse. Empire Blue picked and chose what they thought worthy to reimburse over 3.5 years of chemo and surgery for him. So when the dust settled I was left with a $285,000 balance.

Can you write a check for that? Why don't you instead just STFU.

You live in a world of unreality and should live more, read less.

You Liberal idiot...oh, was that redundant??

Losing a job does not preclude getting another.....or creating one.


Lots of folks who aren't as lazy or as inept as you are do just that.

With unemployment at 6.2% as opposed to 10% in October 2009, it looks like many people did.

But the questions are:
1. How long they were unemployed before finding a new job.
2. Difference in salaries
3. Full or part-time work

A wobble in any of these areas can alter the resources and capabilities of anyone, and in the case of the last 6 years, more people are making less and working more hours, as well as two jobs to compensate.

Thanks for your rhetorical response. It shows your true ignorance when faced with the facts behind the opinions of people who live in glass houses.

And if and when you ever have a catastrophic illness, I hope you end up in absolute financial devastation. You deserve nothing more.

 

[NoTeaPartyPleez]

And each time I've pointed out that if lying were eliminated, you'd be mute.

Calling someone a liar isn't a refutation, it's an accusation.

I see though that you are tacitly declining my offer to debate you on any of the specifics of your OP.

I don't debate, I simply explain why I am correct.

...as this thread indicates.

Even Ted Cruz knows it's a debate, so your arrogance exceeds his. That's clinical delusion, toots.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Number 3 became a problem for millions of people from 2008 to 2010:
September 2008 – 432,000 jobs lost
October 2008 – 489,000 jobs lost
November 2008 – 803,000 jobs lost
December 2008 – 661,000 jobs lost
January 2009 – 818,000 jobs lost
February 2009 – 724,000 jobs lost
March 2009 – 799,000 jobs lost
April 2009 – 692,000 jobs lost
May 2009 – 361,000 jobs lost
June 2009 – 482,000 jobs lost
July 2009 – 339,000 jobs lost
August 2009 – 231,000 jobs lost
September 2009 – 199,000 jobs lost
October 2009 – 202,000 jobs lost
November 2009 - 64,000 jobs created
December 2009 - 109,000 jobs lost
January 2010 - 40,000 jobs lost
February 2010 - 35,000 jobs lost

That doesn't take into account millions of people whose jobs were downsized to part-time, or who took salary/pay cuts.

So number 3 alone on your stupid list kicked their ass. What do you suggest they do if they cannot recoup their losses and slip into poverty?

Now take a $1,300,000 medical bill for your average American family, full employed. That can happen. It happened to me and my late spouse. Empire Blue picked and chose what they thought worthy to reimburse over 3.5 years of chemo and surgery for him. So when the dust settled I was left with a $285,000 balance.

Can you write a check for that? Why don't you instead just STFU.

You live in a world of unreality and should live more, read less.

You Liberal idiot...oh, was that redundant??

Losing a job does not preclude getting another.....or creating one.


Lots of folks who aren't as lazy or as inept as you are do just that.

With unemployment at 6.2% as opposed to 10% in October 2009, it looks like many people did.

But the questions are:
1. How long they were unemployed before finding a new job.
2. Difference in salaries
3. Full or part-time work

A wobble in any of these areas can alter the resources and capabilities of anyone, and in the case of the last 6 years, more people are making less and working more hours, as well as two jobs to compensate.

Thanks for your rhetorical response. It shows your true ignorance when faced with the facts behind the opinions of people who live in glass houses.

And if and when you ever have a catastrophic illness, I hope you end up in absolute financial devastation. You deserve nothing more.

The real difference is whether one is willing to sit and wait for help to arrive, or paint houses, walk dogs, mow lawns, .....

Liberals, the former.