the rich get richer

• gut

  I think we should give these fools the European socialism they want - let them see just how "bad" they really have it. Already getting a taste with Obamakare - I think next we should bump FICA 50% to pay for our healthcare.
• isadore

  gut;1575152 wrote:I think we should give these fools the European socialism they want - let them see just how "bad" they really have it. Already getting a taste with Obamakare - I think next we should bump FICA 50% to pay for our healthcare.

  gosh from your mouth to God's ear.
• gut

  isadore;1575210 wrote:gosh from your mouth to God's ear.

  yes.....I totally pray that you get what you deserve
• Belly35

  

  isadore;1575042 wrote:question-did your family receive government aid?

  Yes I was given away at birth to my aunt, single parent with no father child support. We lived in trailer park, in a trailer in the back of my grandma farm my mom got a job in the city and the project housing was the only place we could afford, we also got food stamps. Mom worked at WT Grants.
  I worked from the age of 9 years old picking berries, pumping gas, washing cars and stock boy. My mom told me that this is not going to be home or would this be a life style she would settle for.
  
  I've seen the curroption, seen the manipulation, seen how the poor work the system, seen how many of the poor are happy living this way and except what is give because it easy. The governmen support helped my mom and I for 5 years but for some it becomes a trap of dependency.
  
  That is why I say "poor people are poor because they what to be poor"
  they choose to do nothing, they continuously hurt their oppertuities to better themself for fear of losing welfare, the system takes the insentive to achieve, self confidence, and motivation way from individuals, they let it happen. I've seen second and third generation of welfare families believing that this is a good living and do whatever it takes to stay in the system.
  
  Goverment support is a needed service but it is not a life time dependency program.
  i understand that some handcap, mental challenge may require ongoing support that is a needed service. However third time felons, multi famlies living together, individual unwilling to help themself or their children, un married couples living in public house, fathers with multiple child not paying child suppor the list of fraud is endless.
  
  The goverment does not have to cut present Social programs all that is required is to do is clean up the fraud, department corruption and scams. Classify each individual receiving welfare, place then on a plan program to get them off social programs. There is no plan or program that is required to achieve to get off welfare. There are lots of options out there but what many do is abuse those option to get addition funds and never have the intention of succeeding. This is a learned and taught behavior of the social welfare class.
  
  i know of individual that sign up for community college, get federal money, go to three classes and never show up again and receive 6 weeks of additional goverment money, never to repay anything. When doing hiring, back ground check is done, some have multiple student loans where the system continues to approve past offenders.
  
  simple put abuse the system lose the option of all goverment support...
  
  Would my mom and I survived without goverment aid..??? It proved a widow of oppertuities not a open door of dependency
• believer

  

  ^^^bravo!
• Al Bundy

  The story that Belly shared is exactly how public assistance should be used. It is temporary help to get through a rough situation. It is sad that people like isadore want to keep people on it permanently so that they can control those people politically.
• isadore

  Well at least you are ready to support government aid when it helps you Mr. Belly Bundy. Well it is not 1963 anymore.
  The broad facts of income inequality over the past six decades are easily summarized:
  

  • The years from the end of World War II into the 1970s were ones of substantial economic growth and broadly shared prosperity.
    • Incomes grew rapidly and at roughly the same rate up and down the income ladder, roughly doubling in inflation-adjusted terms between the late 1940s and early 1970s.
    • The income gap between those high up the income ladder and those on the middle and lower rungs — while substantial — did not change much during this period.

  • Beginning in the 1970s, economic growth slowed and the income gap widened.
    • Income growth for households in the middle and lower parts of the distribution slowed sharply, while incomes at the top continued to grow strongly.
    • The concentration of income at the very top of the distribution rose to levels last seen more than 80 years ago (during the “Roaring Twenties&#8221.
    • Wealth (the value of a household’s property and financial assets net of the value of its debts) is much more highly concentrated than income, although the wealth data do not show a dramatic increase in concentration at the very top the way the income data do.Data from a variety of sources contribute to this broad picture of strong growth and shared prosperity for the early postwar period, followed by slower growth and growing inequality since the 1970s. Within these broad trends, however, different data tell slightly different parts of the story (and no single source of data is better for all purposes than the others).
      http://www.cbpp.org/cms/?fa=view&id=3629
• Con_Alma

  Your credibility is nonexistent when you makes claims and don't follow through on your declaration.
• Al Bundy

  isadore;1575561 wrote:Well at least you are ready to support government aid when it helps you Mr. Belly Bundy. Well it is not 1963 anymore.
  The broad facts of income inequality over the past six decades are easily summarized:
  

  • The years from the end of World War II into the 1970s were ones of substantial economic growth and broadly shared prosperity.
    • Incomes grew rapidly and at roughly the same rate up and down the income ladder, roughly doubling in inflation-adjusted terms between the late 1940s and early 1970s.
    • The income gap between those high up the income ladder and those on the middle and lower rungs — while substantial — did not change much during this period.

  • Beginning in the 1970s, economic growth slowed and the income gap widened.
    • Income growth for households in the middle and lower parts of the distribution slowed sharply, while incomes at the top continued to grow strongly.
    • The concentration of income at the very top of the distribution rose to levels last seen more than 80 years ago (during the “Roaring Twenties&#8221.
    • Wealth (the value of a household’s property and financial assets net of the value of its debts) is much more highly concentrated than income, although the wealth data do not show a dramatic increase in concentration at the very top the way the income data do.Data from a variety of sources contribute to this broad picture of strong growth and shared prosperity for the early postwar period, followed by slower growth and growing inequality since the 1970s. Within these broad trends, however, different data tell slightly different parts of the story (and no single source of data is better for all purposes than the others).
      http://www.cbpp.org/cms/?fa=view&id=3629

  I didn't take government aid, so why would it help me? You like to talk about it not being the 60's anymore, and I agree. If someone has not been able to adjust their skill set in the past 50 years to provide a good or service that someone is willing to pay for then they are either 1) dumb, 2) lazy, 3) have no incentive to work because of all of the free handouts, or 4) all of the above.
• isadore

  Al Bundy;1575634 wrote:I didn't take government aid, so why would it help me? You like to talk about it not being the 60's anymore, and I agree. If someone has not been able to adjust their skill set in the past 50 years to provide a good or service that someone is willing to pay for then they are either 1) dumb, 2) lazy, 3) have no incentive to work because of all of the free handouts, or 4) all of the above.

  America has changed. The manufacturing sector which was a source of opportunity has been much diminished. The rich get richer, while income and opportunity decline for the large majority of Americans.
  Programs that would help the poor and unemployed like free post secondary education those who follow the philosophy I got mine, screw you. Let’s pull up the ladder of opportunity.
• Belly35

  

  isadore;1575662 wrote:America has changed. The manufacturing sector which was a source of opportunity has been much diminished. The rich get richer, while income and opportunity decline for the large majority of Americans.
  Programs that would help the poor and unemployed like free post secondary education those who follow the philosophy I got mine, screw you. Let’s pull up the ladder of opportunity.

  Isadore you ask me a question and I was honored to answer. I have a question
  
  QUESTION: For an individual who is perfectly health, has had the same free public education as his or her classmate who are presently employed or college grads. How long (time period) should this individual be on Federal Government Entitlement programs such as housing, food and medical support?
  
  The manufacturing sector of America is ever expanding and evolving in different area IMO.
  
  For conversation we will take your comment “America has changed. The manufacturing sector which was a source of opportunity has been much diminished”. The question here is why? Unions, Federal Government Intrusion and Taxes …. Democrat Demons to American Prosperity
  
  
  “Free post secondary education” The continues dummying down the present educational system by Liberals and Democrats have lowered the standard of learning. Only the dedicated individuals that want to achieve will take advantage of the “free” public educational system to learn and further their education.
  
  The &#8220ull up the ladder of opportunity” the ladder of education should be raised from Elementary thru High school. Those who wishes to achieve and prosper for this higher standard will, those that can’t reach those higher standards will still be better prepared for the work force and those that wished to piss away the “free” of public education … will learn that “opportunity” to achieve was “free” .
  
  Fraud, corruption, incompetence, lack of planning, scamming and favoritism has never gone away over the past 50 years just expanded to a higher level of a broken program, broken families and dependencies. Which have lead to a Society of Entitlement Takers…
• isadore

  Belly35;1575730 wrote:Isadore you ask me a question and I was honored to answer. I have a question
  
  QUESTION: For an individual who is perfectly health, has had the same free public education as his or her classmate who are presently employed or college grads. How long (time period) should this individual be on Federal Government Entitlement programs such as housing, food and medical support?
  
  The manufacturing sector of America is ever expanding and evolving in different area IMO.
  
  For conversation we will take your comment “America has changed. The manufacturing sector which was a source of opportunity has been much diminished”. The question here is why? Unions, Federal Government Intrusion and Taxes …. Democrat Demons to American Prosperity
  
  
  “Free post secondary education” The continues dummying down the present educational system by Liberals and Democrats have lowered the standard of learning. Only the dedicated individuals that want to achieve will take advantage of the “free” public educational system to learn and further their education.
  
  The &#8220ull up the ladder of opportunity” the ladder of education should be raised from Elementary thru High school. Those who wishes to achieve and prosper for this higher standard will, those that can’t reach those higher standards will still be better prepared for the work force and those that wished to piss away the “free” of public education … will learn that “opportunity” to achieve was “free” .
  
  Fraud, corruption, incompetence, lack of planning, scamming and favoritism has never gone away over the past 50 years just expanded to a higher level of a broken program, broken families and dependencies. Which have lead to a Society of Entitlement Takers…

  Personally I do not believe any American should go unfed, unclothed, sick and without shelter.
  But those people that worry you so much are a small minority. I would guess the largest number of that group would be single mothers with children. Is that who you want to throw off tanf, wic and snap
  This is who is really collecting most of our entitlements
  　
  http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2012/09/18/who-receives-benefits-from-the-federal-government-in-six-charts/
  
  
  
  In fact, it's the 86%. After you add veteran benefits and college assistance, 70% of individuals -- and 86% of households -- receive a government benefit of some kind. Put differently, one in seven households doesn't receive assistance from the federal government.
  http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2012/12/7-facts-about-government-benefits-and-who-gets-them/266428/
• isadore

  I, Belly, I do not think the stats support your statement about manufacturing
  
  
  IMO American manufacturing for two major reasons, one of which was unavoidable. At the end of WWII we had an enormous advantage in manufacturing because the industrial base of many nations friend and foe
  had been decimated by the war. But those nations rebuilt that industrial base as we can see with Germany and Japan. The other major problem was the incompetence, complacency and greed of the corporate leaders of America. As a group they did not keep up with innovation, they did not keep up with R
  +D. Many of them up to the present are only interested in short term profit.
  The dummying down of our schools. If our Post Secondary education is so horrible, why are there so many foreigner in our colleges and universities?
• Al Bundy

  isadore;1576008 wrote:Personally I do not believe any American should go unfed, unclothed, sick and without shelter.
  But those people that worry you so much are a small minority. I would guess the largest number of that group would be single mothers with children. Is that who you want to throw off tanf, wic and snap
  This is who is really collecting most of our entitlements
  　
  http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2012/09/18/who-receives-benefits-from-the-federal-government-in-six-charts/
  
  
  
  In fact, it's the 86%. After you add veteran benefits and college assistance, 70% of individuals -- and 86% of households -- receive a government benefit of some kind. Put differently, one in seven households doesn't receive assistance from the federal government.
  http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2012/12/7-facts-about-government-benefits-and-who-gets-them/266428/

  You are mixing together programs that people pay into their entire lives with purely entitlement programs to create misleading statistics.
• isadore

  Al Bundy;1576214 wrote:You are mixing together programs that people pay into their entire lives with purely entitlement programs to create misleading statistics.

  gosh a ruddies, try to rethink your definition of entitlement programs.a government program providing benefits to members of a specified group; also : funds supporting or distributed by such a program
  http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/entitlement
  The kind of government program that provides individuals with personal financial benefits (or sometimes special government-provided goods or services) to which an indefinite (but usually rather large) number of potential beneficiaries have a legal right (enforceable in court, if necessary) whenever they meet eligibility conditions that are specified by the standing law that authorizes the program.
  http://www.auburn.edu/~johnspm/gloss/entitlement_program
  
• Belly35

  

  isadore;1576392 wrote:gosh a ruddies, try to rethink your definition of entitlement programs.a government program providing benefits to members of a specified group; also : funds supporting or distributed by such a program

  this conversation was about a specified group the poor on welfare entitlement, not veterans, medicaid , medicare, social security, disabled..... That specified group that have been dependent on the federal program of welfare for years. Food, bill paying, project housing, medical perfectly healthy individual but to lazy to work, to dependent on government to try. Producing nothing to benefit society but taking want some other needy individual would prosper from. That is poor on poor greed..
• isadore

  Belly35;1576402 wrote:this conversation was about a specified group the poor on welfare entitlement, not veterans, medicaid , medicare, social security, disabled..... That specified group that have been dependent on the federal program of welfare for years. Food, bill paying, project housing, medical perfectly healthy individual but to lazy to work, to dependent on government to try. Producing nothing to benefit society but taking want some other needy individual would prosper from. That is poor on poor greed..

  gosh now you're specifying your hatred of those in need. It is usually more generalized. It believe All Americans should be clothed, fed, housed and provided with healthcare. Now for the families you hate so much, not surprisingly most of them are from ethnic minorities.
  TANF Families
  The average monthly number of TANF families was 1,847,155 in FY 2010. The estimated average monthly number of TANF recipients was 1,084,828 adults and 3,280,153 children.
  Ohio ranked third with a monthly average of 103, 000.
  The average number of persons in TANF families was 2.4, including an average of 1.8 recipient children
  Less than eight percent of families had more than three children. The average number of children in closed-case families was 1.8.
  Almost half of TANF families had no adult recipients. About 49 percent of TANF families had only one adult recipient, and 5 percent included two or more adult recipients.
  Eighty-two percent of TANF families received SNAP benefits in FY 2010, which is consistent with previous levels. These families received average monthly SNAP benefits of $378. In addition, 97 percent of TANF families received medical assistance in FY 2010. Of closed-case families, 81 percent received SNAP benefits in the month of closure and 95 percent received medical assistance in the month of closure.
  2010 families 31.8% white. 31.9% black 30% Hispanic
  Most TANF adult recipients were women, as men only represented 14.8 percent of adult recipients. Ninety percent of adult recipients were the head of the household. There were about 94,800 teen parents whose child also was a member of the TANF family, representing 12 percent of recipients aged 13-19. Fourteen percent of adult recipients were married and living together. The number of married adult recipients was low because many States moved two-parent families to SSF or SSP-MOE programs.
  In FY 2010, work participation was mandatory for three of every five adult recipients. Overall, 41.6 percent of all TANF adult recipients participated in some type of work activity during the reporting month. Eleven percent of TANF adult recipients met work activity requirements by either being a teen parent attending school or being a single parent with a child under 6 participating for 20 hours per week (parents with children ages 6 and over are required to participate for 30 hours per week). Additionally, ten percent of adult recipients were disregarded from work participation because they were single custodial parents with a child less than 12 months old. 1.6 percent were exempt because of a sanction, 12.6 percent were exempt because of a good cause exception (e.g., disabled, in poor health, or other), and two percent of adult recipients were exempt from the work participation requirements because they were single custodial parents with a child under age six who did not have access to child care
  Among all TANF adult recipients twenty-nine percent worked in unsubsidized or subsidized jobs, 10.9 percent were engaged in job training or educational activities, 8.1 percent participated in job search activities, and another 4.1 percent were engaged in other statutorily listed work activities. Some TANF adults were involved in two or three work activities. Those participating did so for an average of 23.3 hours per week, and some adults participated even though they were work exempt.
  TANF Children
  More than seventy four percent of recipient children were under 11 year-old. Sixteen percent under two years of age, while 28 percent were between the ages of two and five. Less than 10 percent of the children were 16 years of age or older
  The average monthly amount of assistance for TANF recipient families was $392 in FY 2010. Monthly cash payments to TANF families averaged $327 for one child, $412 for two children, $497 for three children, and $594 for four or more children. Some TANF families who were not employed received other forms of assistance such as child care, transportation and other supportive services.
  http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/ofa/resource/character/fy2010/fy2010-chap10-ys-final
  
• Al Bundy

  Isadore,
  
  If I decide that I am tired of going to work every day. Do you think I should just be able to collect a check from the government for my housing, food, medical, cell phone, etc?
• isadore

  Al Bundy;1576438 wrote:Isadore,
  
  If I decide that I am tired of going to work every day. Do you think I should just be able to collect a check from the government for my housing, food, medical, cell phone, etc?

  hopefully the free post secondary option would allow you to be retrained for a job that might be of value to your family and your fellow Americans. A job that will finally give you peace of mind.
• Con_Alma

  isadore;1576461 wrote:hopefully the free post secondary option ....

  It's not going to happen.
• isadore

  Con_Alma;1576464 wrote:It's not going to happen.

  as was said by the nay-sayers before every step forward by mankind.
• Con_Alma

  isadore;1576471 wrote:as was said by the nay-sayers before every step forward by mankind.

  I'll champion the cause when you show proof of registering at the College which provides full loan payments to graduates that are not employed at defined income levels like you so boldly declared you would.
• isadore

  Con_Alma;1576473 wrote:I'll champion the cause when you show proof of registering at the College which provides full loan payments to graduates that are not employed at defined income levels like you so boldly declared you would.

  why would we want someone to champion our cause who has such a superficial commitment to it.
• Con_Alma

  isadore;1576477 wrote:why would we want someone to champion our cause who has such a superficial commitment to it.

  
  I don't know that you do...but then again your declarations have no weight behind them if we look at your track record on this thread.
• Al Bundy

  isadore;1576461 wrote:hopefully the free post secondary option would allow you to be retrained for a job that might be of value to your family and your fellow Americans. A job that will finally give you peace of mind.

  What if I have no interest in education? If I just don't feel like working anymore, should I be able to collect a check from the government to cover all of my needs?