I
isadore
Posts: 7,762
Feb 26, 2014 8:11am
you would prefer to see poor families suffer from lack of food, clothing, shelter and healthcare?WebFire;1584688 wrote:I think that is the point everyone is making, isn't it? That government got involved and made being poor easy with not much consequence.
rrfan
Posts: 1,922
Feb 26, 2014 8:11am
They suffer until they get motivated to change it. Can't get up at 11:00 am, smoke a pack of Cigs, play some cards, watch some TV....and expect to get a job. I am not saying that government can't help some, but to many sandbaggers that have no motivation to do anything in life. I am tired of paying for those people!isadore;1584539 wrote:before the federal government took action
1. The poverty rate was much higher
2. The suffering of the poor was much greater
I
isadore
Posts: 7,762
Feb 26, 2014 8:25am
most of "those people" on tanf are children. let them sandbagging kids suffer.rrfan;1584696 wrote:They suffer until they get motivated to change it. Can't get up at 11:00 am, smoke a pack of Cigs, play some cards, watch some TV....and expect to get a job. I am not saying that government can't help some, but to many sandbaggers that have no motivation to do anything in life. I am tired of paying for those people!
rrfan
Posts: 1,922
Feb 26, 2014 8:27am
That is BS and you know it!isadore;1584704 wrote:most of "those people" on tanf are children. let them sandbagging kids suffer.
Devils Advocate
Posts: 4,539
Feb 26, 2014 8:35am
Not really. One welfare momma that has 4 kids with 4 different daddies make up a 4-1 child v parent ratio.rrfan;1584707 wrote:That is BS and you know it!
Oh and isatard, If the parents at least make the effort to send the kids to school. they will at least get 2 meals a day.
They might be hungry, but they won't starve.
I
isadore
Posts: 7,762
Feb 26, 2014 8:37am
"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."rrfan;1584707 wrote:That is BS and you know it!
"Almost half of TANF families had no adult recipients. "
http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/ofa/resource/character/fy2010/fy2010-chap10-ys-final
gosh what a bunch of sandbaggin kids
rrfan
Posts: 1,922
Feb 26, 2014 8:46am
I never said the kids were sandbagging. So what motivates the adults to get off of the gravy train??? Serious question.
W
WebFire
Posts: 14,779
Feb 26, 2014 8:48am
Of course not. But gov't assistance should be just that...assistance. Temporary. Not a lifestyle.isadore;1584695 wrote:you would prefer to see poor families suffer from lack of food, clothing, shelter and healthcare?
I
isadore
Posts: 7,762
Feb 26, 2014 8:49am
A few examples of what would isrrfan;1584716 wrote:I never said the kids were sandbagging. So what motivates the adults to get off of the gravy train??? Serious question.
1. Raise the minimum wage
2. Provide free post secondary academic and vocational education
rrfan
Posts: 1,922
Feb 26, 2014 8:53am
So you want to raise the minimum wage and put people out of work??? Logical Obama Fan!isadore;1584720 wrote:A few examples of what would is
1. Raise the minimum wage
2. Provide free post secondary academic and vocational education
They would have to be motivated to do any academic education...so what gets them motivated? That is the same question I asked you before if you care to answer it.
I
isadore
Posts: 7,762
Feb 26, 2014 8:59am
you got people working full time now, whose incomes are so low it puts them below poverty level.rrfan;1584721 wrote:So you want to raise the minimum wage and put people out of work??? Logical Obama Fan!
They would have to be motivated to do any academic education...so what gets them motivated? That is the same question I asked you before if you care to answer it.
and the government ends up paying the difference in SNAP, EIC and other benefits
basically your taxes paying so that businesses can under pay their workers
Raise the minimum wage
The post secondary education offered would not just be academic but vocational.
Those type programs would help lift many out of poverty.
majorspark
Posts: 5,122
Feb 26, 2014 9:03am
isadore;1584693 wrote:Businesses chose to take on that responsibility starting during WWII. They became the major provider of healthcare for working people as part of their terms of employment.
A choice made because of the actions of the federal government. Wage freezes on employers during WWII accelerated the spread of employer provided health care. Employers unable by law to attract workers by paying more, were allowed to improve their benefit packages by adding health care.
rrfan
Posts: 1,922
Feb 26, 2014 9:07am
Let me ask you guys a question. If you are on government assistance and you work for current minimum wage do you need less assistance? YES! However, that is not what is happening to many. They take the assistance and sit at home, which is much more expensive.
Your argument is they don't work because they don't make enough? How much do they make sitting at home?
Your argument is they don't work because they don't make enough? How much do they make sitting at home?
I
isadore
Posts: 7,762
Feb 26, 2014 9:09am
a war time measure which they chose to continue to offer after price control were ended soon after WWII and which expanded to more and more business.majorspark;1584725 wrote:
A choice made because of the actions of the federal government. Wage freezes on employers during WWII accelerated the spread of employer provided health care. Employers unable by law to attract workers by paying more, were allowed to improve their benefit packages by adding health care.
I
isadore
Posts: 7,762
Feb 26, 2014 9:12am
gosh since most of the people we are talking about are children they are sitting at school.rrfan;1584728 wrote:Let me ask you guys a question. If you are on government assistance and you work for current minimum wage do you need less assistance? YES! However, that is not what is happening to many. They take the assistance and sit at home, which is much more expensive.
Your argument is they don't work because they don't make enough? How much do they make sitting at home?
Or if they are too young at home, with no supervision if we are shipping their single mothers off to work. Because who was receiving the large bulk of tanf benefits children and their single mothers.
rrfan
Posts: 1,922
Feb 26, 2014 9:15am
I am not talking about the children...you are. Those children came from the birds and the bees. Ask you dad to explain it to you. It is on the adults to raise the kids...if it is a single mother I would be for helping with child care FOR THEM TO GO TO WORK!isadore;1584730 wrote:gosh since most of the people we are talking about are children they are sitting at school.
Or if they are too young at home, with no supervision if we are shipping their single mothers off to work.
I
isadore
Posts: 7,762
Feb 26, 2014 9:22am
with adequate child carerrfan;1584733 wrote:I am not talking about the children...you are. Those children came from the birds and the bees. Ask you dad to explain it to you. It is on the adults to raise the kids...if it is a single mother I would be for helping with child care FOR THEM TO GO TO WORK!
to a job that paid a living wage and\ or receiving a post secondary education that would provide a chance at upward social mobility.
rrfan
Posts: 1,922
Feb 26, 2014 9:25am
isadore you must be in politics because you never answer a question. Keep dodging and it will go away right Obama!
Devils Advocate
Posts: 4,539
Feb 26, 2014 9:28am
isadore;1584736 wrote:with adequate child care
to a job that paid a living wage and\ or receiving a post secondary education that would provide a chance at upward social mobility.
I
isadore
Posts: 7,762
Feb 26, 2014 9:29am
you asked what would motivate them to leave I suggested those programs.rrfan;1584737 wrote:isadore you must be in politics because you never answer a question. Keep dodging and it will go away right Obama!
some of other seem to think starving their children would work better.
"the let them eat cake" view.
I
isadore
Posts: 7,762
Feb 26, 2014 9:33am
based on old wives' taleDevils Advocate;1584742 wrote:
feed a cat
starve a beaver
rrfan
Posts: 1,922
Feb 26, 2014 9:37am
I never said anything about starving a Child! I asked what would motivate the "adults" to work. I think your suggestions would do nothing to get them to work. They would not be motivated to work when they can sit at home and still have what they need. It is a slippery slope but it is real.isadore;1584743 wrote:you asked what would motivate them to leave I suggested those programs.
some of other seem to thing starving their children would work better.
"the let them eat cake" view.
I have properties all over NE Ohio. I recently switched one of my duplex to low income housing. Government pays 90% of the rent each month and the renter has a Lincoln navigator SUV. HOW IS THAT POSSIBLE?
I
isadore
Posts: 7,762
Feb 26, 2014 9:58am
My suggestions have everything to do with getting them to go to work. They are offering them a true opportunity to better themselves and provide for their families.rrfan;1584749 wrote:I never said anything about starving a Child! I asked what would motivate the "adults" to work. I think your suggestions would do nothing to get them to work. They would not be motivated to work when they can sit at home and still have what they need. It is a slippery slope but it is real.
I have properties all over NE Ohio. I recently switched one of my duplex to low income housing. Government pays 90% of the rent each month and the renter has a Lincoln navigator SUV. HOW IS THAT POSSIBLE?
Lets see what do you want to do:
throw them off government support, let them and their families sink or swim, eat or starve
maybe just take their children away from them.
but then they would just have more, well then maybe required abortions for them. US has had some experience with eugenics.
Why don't you ask that person about his\her particular situation and then you can find out why?
rrfan
Posts: 1,922
Feb 26, 2014 10:04am
I did and the answer is that she does not have to work to get what she wants. Nice place to live, food on the table, car to drive...not motivated to work. You can make minimum wage whatever you want to and it will not change that. Don't cut the gov't assistance off in a day, but there has to be a timeline so they know it will end.isadore;1584767 wrote:My suggestions have everything to do with getting them to go to work. They are offering them a true opportunity to better themselves and provide for their families.
Lets see what do you want to do:
throw them off government support, let them and their families sink or swim, eat or starve
maybe just take their children away from them.
but then they would just have more, well then maybe required abortions for them. US has had some experience with eugenics.
Why don't you ask that person about his\her particular situation and then you can find out why?
I am not kidding with my question...I don't know what would motivate them. Money does not because they get what they want now and don't have to work 9-5 or more like most of us.
majorspark
Posts: 5,122
Feb 26, 2014 10:08am
The choice is not made in a vacuum of government. Policies enacted by government during war time can have an impact beyond the duration of the war. See the revenue acts of 1939 and 1954. The federal government is involved before and after the war. Excluding employer contributions and costs from taxation of income as a deductible business expense.isadore;1584729 wrote:a war time measure which they chose to continue to offer after price control were ended soon after WWII and which expanded to more and more business.