Study: More Than Half a Trillion Dollars Spent on Welfare But Poverty Levels Unaffect

Yes, we know what it's called.

 

LLTH:
In case you missed it, this is the comment Individual was responding to:

How is that not related to the thread topic?

 

I agree, perhaps outthere2 will inform us?
Gee, could it be I was enslaved for over 40 years without even knowing?

 

How is that not related to the thread topic?

 

What's it got to do with massive increased spending on welfare programs being ineffective in reducing poverty? Who's being enslaved? Those working AND paying taxes?

 

The govt. made a lot of money off the loans to Chrysler and are still making big interest dollars from GM. I think Chrysler paid theres off. How much did the banks pay back? $0

Even if they were not loans they were grants based on alternate energy. Had the Chinese not flooded the market with cheap solar panels some of those companies would be competitive.

The largest banks were given free money so they would stay open and hopefully keep lending. Same with insurance companies. Obama wanted them to stop foreclosing and help homeowners but the Fed. overruled him and gave the banks billions to use as they wish. Anything to keep the market from crashing further and 401Ks from being worthless.

 

Please read the post again.

 

Study: More than a half a trillion dollars spent on welfare but poverty remains the same.

Slavery.

I fail to see a link.

Maybe if you're referring to "forced labor" that was discussed some time ago in this thread it would make some sense. Balbus seems to think of that as slavery. But you haven't given any indication as to what you're referring to.

 

I think you have it backwards, I won't post the file, but it's over 50 pages long listing all the banks who received a disbursement whether they needed it or wanted it or not, and how much they received, along with how much they have paid back. Essentially $236,200,000,000 was disbursed to the banks, with $223,900,000,000 returned, as well as an additional $32,000,000,000 accounting for interest, dividends, and other fees charged, for a total return of $255,900,000,000 which amounts to $19,700,000,000 more returned than originally disbursed. And there are still some banks that have not yet returned all or any of the money they were given, although they are a small number and the amounts owed are much smaller. Not quite $0 paid back is it?

 

How are you trying to equate reasoning to be the application of force enslaving someone?

 

Oh, and then there's Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac who received $187,000,000,000 and has repaid only $45,000,000,000 AIG who received $67,000,000,000 and has repaid $45,000,000,000 the auto companies who received $61,000,000,000 and have repaid $34,000,000,000 with most of the remainder being the shares of GM held by government which could only be sold at a loss presently as is the case with AIG also.

Now, how about getting back to "Study: More than a half a trillion dollars spent on welfare but poverty remains the same." as LetLovinTakeHold has suggested several times.

 

Well, you jumped into the middle of a conversation and you can't understand context? I can't help you on that one.

 

Your twisting words. Quote me.

 

"Reasoning that enslaves the poor for the benefit of wealth is fundamentally selfish and therefore unsound (and unsustainable). "

The reasoning being?

 

How about morality?

 

The reasoning between your ears which is a result of lack of "soul" or concern for the poor.

Refer to post 977

 

So a right wing think tank does a study that confirms their biases. What a surprise!

The OP article is an example of wealth (The Cato Institute) beating up on the poor.

 

I think you are confused. You're still not making any sense.

 

Ha ha... you funny

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uPuZjzf4ILU"]What if charities fail to provide for the poor? - YouTube
I liked this