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

Why you negative nelly, what happens if they succeed?

I was just slinging some hypothetical BS anyway, just a little cheese for all those that seem so offended by the idea of welfare

Capitalism a mugs game, anyone figured that out yet? lol:mickey:

 

LOL...foam a little? :devil:

 

Supporting welfare has nothing to do with disrespecting minorities.

Anyone of any race who qualifies can (generally, and always SHOULD be able to) apply for and get welfare, and anyone of any race can choose not to.

Your very connection with increasing welfare to disrespecting minorities shows you have no respect for minorities, or for any sort of honest discussion.

 

When people get welfare-money and food stamps from the government-(us),the end result is that the money helps those that manufacture/grow products from TVs to food to clothing. It circulates,obviously. It's little enough that has been given-is given to those for whom the so-called "american dream" never really materialized. The vast ghettoes of the american cities have been ignored forever by all (or most)politicians and it seems the welfare programs that the inhabitants of these forgotten places receive, are not much more than well thought out pacification programs.( Of course there are other areas that have suffered and still do,such as areas of appalachia.) It's a wonder to me that those places have not burned to the ground with the people therein marching/walking,to washington on a permanant basis to redress the grievances they righfully should have.

Now it's not only those in long neglected areas that are feeling the results of rampant dog eat dog capitalism. I think we all know what has/is happening to the dreams of more and more people ,with hundreds of thousands(maybe millions) of folks losing their jobs,their houses,their hope of regaining what they have worked for much of their lives. Is the government going to add these people to welfare rolls? How long before people demand the end of tax loop-holes? How long before people demand that american companies that use overseas labor bring those companies home or face prohibitive tarriffs? (jobs for us)How long before people demand the end to corporate personhood? The end to endless war?? The waste in government?? Medical care for all citizens?? Free schooling for all that deserve it and can handle it?? Do they just keep the pacification programs going ,and adding more and more people that are falling thru the chasm into poverty?? When does this all end and what can we,as thinking citizens do about this?? Can poverty ever be eliminated within the system to which we here are all born into and to which we are subjected?? Should ALL safety nets be eliminated to see what the results would be?? Would this be a better country if no one got any help from the government??

 

LOL, don't I wish...

Scratcho said it right...much bigger shits wrong...

Even discounting the cheating and corruption of wall street and the ineptitude of the whitehouse, capitalism's proven an epic fail for the 99%

 

And once again, Ron Paul is correct. How much longer will he continue to be ahead of his time until the rest of America finally wakes up?

Stupid, stupid, stupid....

He won't win, but at least the movement is strong and will continue to grow.

 

Letlovin

Here is an interesting view by professor of law Kaaryn Gustafson in “"The Criminalization of Poverty"

Poor families usually turn to the welfare system only when they are in desperate need and cannot find employment to provide their most basic needs. However, the cash benefits available under [TANF, a federal program] are too low to sustain a family. The gap between resources and need often leads welfare recipients to seek income to supplement their welfare benefits and to hide that income from the welfare office…According to welfare officials, welfare fraud measures are designed to achieve several goals: to catch welfare cheats, to deter would-be and actual welfare cheats, and to reduce governmental costs. The first goal, catching cheats, is one that the system is certainly achieving. The problem, however, is that the vast majority of welfare recipients are technically welfare cheats. If they were not, they would be unable to survive."(my bold)

 

Letlovin

I agree with a lot of what you are saying but you have to understand that assistance for left wingers is not about letting people live in idleness but to help them out of idleness for the betterment of them and the community at large.

For those on the left there were (are) five "Giant Evils" afflicting the working class, identified as "Want, Disease, Ignorance, Squalor, and Idleness" (William Beveridge) now it must be remembered that when they said "Idleness" they meant unemployment, ‘and hence the starvation of the worker and his/her family. It was not then a pejorative term. Unemployment benefit, as well as national insurance and hence state pensions, were introduced by the 1945 Labour government’ (Francis Beckett).

It was a social contract between people and state – the people would work and the state would strive for full employment to work toward creating the conditions were people had good decent jobs with living wages that allowed people to improve their lot.

But then neoliberal ideas that many right wingers support began to take hold in the 1970’s onward and they are not about seeking full employment (as the Keynesian based models are), it is about having unemployment because that is one of the means of driving down wage prices. It is the same reason why so many neoliberals oppose organised labour movements and social programmes because their removal would also increase the possibility for exploitation, as in work or starve.

The contract was broken those in control of the state were not trying for full employment they were not striving to better the lot of the majority of individuals or the community they were working in the interests of a few to drive down wages or assisting them in outsourcing jobs. It wasn’t about creating long term decent jobs it was about the short term maximisation of profit for a few.

Assistance was never meant to be long term and it shouldn’t be needed by people who are working - an employer should be paying a living wage not been subsidized by the tax payer to pay low wages. Those things have only appeared because the contract was broken and the priority of the managers of government shifted from helping the majority to helping the few.

But the appearance of long term assistance and the supposed ‘benefits culture’ they have created is now used by them to attack the system for not working and call for its reduction or removal to ‘incentivise’ people into low paid jobs that end up only benefiting the few.

So to both these I’d ask – why the hell are they on welfare why haven’t they a job with a decent living wage?

 

While Lyndon Johnson saw an opportunity to attack poverty with the Great Society, no political science expert before or since has thought that eradication of poverty a possibly here or anywhere on the planet.

But that does not mean we do not need to feed the hungry, shelter the homeless, and train those who can do better with some help.

The social safety net in the US is one of the smallest in the western democracies. It is entirely insufficient to shift large masses of people beyond their class levels.

Many who receive some form of social support are simply in a transition, not long term dependent on social help. A majority are single mothers and their children and white.

Unfortunately, in recent years in America it has become, in conservative circles, popular to demonize the poor and lionize the rich, a peculiar idea given that poverty is not so desirable anyone actually seeks it as a lifestyle.

We are a better people than those who would blame the poor for their hunger.

 

Yes, people on welfare, from applachian whites who have not had a non-inbred kid in the family in generations, to violent inner city ghettos, do have it hard.

One reason is that because of people like you pushing against it, there is not enough-again, any time someone does NOT need it, they are free to not take it.

Who are "they"? are you saying you're only racist towards blacks? because that's who "minorities" seems to refer to, coming from you. Do you think any ghetto would get better without welfare? I think the business that have been clinging on on foodstamp sales and such will go away, the liquor store and loan shark will be the only businesses with a store front, and everything will get worse.

There are two things that every community on welfare needs: more welfare, and the war on drugs ended. That's what's tearing apart poor black, white, mexican, vietnamese, ect, areas-organized crime because of drug prohibition and because they don't have enough to get along without it.

When you say you're interested in evolving humans, it's pretty clear you're a social darwinist and are basically saying that you want people on welfare to die when it's removed...... as you surely know that this is how natural selection and evolution work.

Your ad hominem attacks on me don't have ANY basis in what I wrote, I don't think you even read my post(s).

 

I hear ya!! I like you I prefer a minimalist lifestyle too. In many ways I think it is more fun and certainly makes me more creative. Being poor is not a disease or something to wage war on and some people do not mind it at all. What makes being poor really hard is when the money you have can not buy the most basic comforts. I wish I could live on a hundred dollars a week but I can't. I do hate the corporate game it totally cramps my style. I just can't give up my toilet paper though....

 

So a biased right wing think tank does a study that confirms their biased right wing views...

Does anyone believe this "study" is impartial? If yes, please explain.

 

At first glance it sounded like this was a study about the money the U.S. spent on Iraq welfare. But that dollar amount was more like one trillion and that country is actually worse off than before the money was spent.

 

I read MOST of your post.

I can't help but notice you see the world in terms of skin colour.

So you're saying that, like with american blacks (and anyone who's not white, who's been america more than a half century family-wise) or european jews, if you spend hundreds or thousands of years jamming people into a nasty mold, you get a culture that takes time to change when you stop randomly murdering and herding them like cattle?

You understand what a european ghetto was, right? a prison village that you couldn't leave without business outside of it, or after dark, etc, and you still might be killed or something if you needed to. It was NOT welfare.

Regardless of all the horrible histories (and current reality of) welfare, education, etc, I could give a rat's tiny puckered ass...... I want things to get better, not to avoid what needs doing because other people have done it wrong.

 

LoL thank you Sarah Palin...:rofl:

 

FOX "News" defined:

 

Good point

 

If the rich pukes that are trying to destroy welfare actually supplied the jobs they claim the millionaire tax cuts provide, their argument to end it might have a little justification. Not much, but a little. But they'd also have to provide child care along with it, while the mothers went to the jobs that are a fantasy.

 

Jeff Gordon feeds the elderly. =]
I like that man.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UqgvyQrI-ZI


right?!