It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Republicans can’t stop comparing food stamp recipients to wild animals on Facebook

page: 16
31
<< 13  14  15    17  18  19 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 19 2015 @ 12:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: Harte

Perhaps the take-away from the poll you cited is that Republicans don't tell the truth on surveys?

The "cycle of dependency" was broken in August 1996, when the Congress passed and President Clinton signed the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act (PRWORA). How is it that so many right-wingers are unaware of the reality of this fact? This was touted as a grand success of the "Republican Contract with America" as well as a win for States Rights.

From the Washington Post: How Obama has Gutted Welfare Reform

Harte




posted on Jul, 19 2015 @ 12:59 PM
link   
Hmmm ...

If a ice cream parlor is only selling $20 an hour in ice cream, it's probably already in trouble, regardless of what the employees are paid.

Worth. Now there's an interesting concept. I run and have partial ownership in a real estate brokerage. I've had employees with me for an average of 10 years. I've provided reasonable raises each year, made sure they had healthcare and other benefits, and I haven't lost an employee in years. They're all highly skilled and highly motivated, and the benefits to my bottom line FAR OUTWEIGH the additional cost of reasonable salaries and benefits.

Big corporations tend to sacrifice workers for volume, and have no interest in the impact on the local economy other than their own profits. Many smaller businesses drain the highest profits possible at the expense of additional productivity.

I guess it all has to do with the business model involved.



posted on Jul, 19 2015 @ 01:00 PM
link   
a reply to: Harte

Sorry, I don't read tabloids.

Did Obama Gut Welfare Reform?




Work requirements are not simply being “dropped.” States may now change the requirements — revising, adding or eliminating them — as part of a federally approved state-specific plan to increase job placement.

And it won’t “gut” the 1996 law to ease the requirement. Benefits still won’t be paid beyond an allotted time, whether the recipient is working or not.


Sooo ... the President, in a time of economic CRISIS, acted to allow STATES to ease some requirements if needed ... sounds like a win for State's Rights to me.
edit on 13Sun, 19 Jul 2015 13:04:35 -050015p012015766 by Gryphon66 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 19 2015 @ 01:02 PM
link   
Why would they compare them to wild animals? Wild animals at least work for their food.

Food Stamp recipients typically don't, although many of them do.

People who are just temporarily out of work requiring assistance should get all the help they need.

People who NEVER contributed anything and are welfare mooches should be cut off. And there are PLENTY of people who feel that they shouldn't have to work, because the Government will just feed them, clothe them, and put a roof over their heads. Those are the people I have the biggest problem with.

In the animal kingdom, those who don't contribute are left behind to die.

I firmly believe that the welfare system should be a safety net, not a lifestyle choice. There should be a minimum amount of time you can claim, after which you're cut off.

In British Columbia, Canada, you can only claim welfare three out of every five years, after a new law just recently passed in the last few years. There are exceptions, such as medical exemptions. I also think those on medical exemptions should have to get at least three doctor's opinions, and then those doctors should be held accountable if someone is convicted of fraud, meaning doctors would be very reluctant to sign paperwork.

edit on 19-7-2015 by babybunnies because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 19 2015 @ 01:05 PM
link   
a reply to: babybunnies

Any idea about the so-called "welfare mooches" that you're opining about?

Any actual stats, studies, personal experience?



posted on Jul, 19 2015 @ 01:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
Hmmm ...

If a ice cream parlor is only selling $20 an hour in ice cream, it's probably already in trouble, regardless of what the employees are paid.

Worth. Now there's an interesting concept. I run and have partial ownership in a real estate brokerage. I've had employees with me for an average of 10 years. I've provided reasonable raises each year, made sure they had healthcare and other benefits, and I haven't lost an employee in years. They're all highly skilled and highly motivated, and the benefits to my bottom line FAR OUTWEIGH the additional cost of reasonable salaries and benefits.

Big corporations tend to sacrifice workers for volume, and have no interest in the impact on the local economy other than their own profits. Many smaller businesses drain the highest profits possible at the expense of additional productivity.

I guess it all has to do with the business model involved.


Good for you, although comparing treatment of highly skilled real estate sellers to minimally skilled fast food work is a bit of a stretch.

I bet if you look around most real estate offices, the staff are highly paid (albeit on commission only - you only have to pay them if they make a sale so it's win - win for you), and there are few people leaving any real estate office because one sale has them set for three month's salary for the average person.



posted on Jul, 19 2015 @ 01:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: Xtrozero


It is funny that the poor around the world work, eat and live a generally happy life. If someone can't work the community takes care of them, if someone refuses to work, but are capable, they starve...


Dude, are you seriously that delusional? Have you actually ever really bothered to learn anything about the real world beyond your own borders? The poor around the world, unless they live in some European socialist wonderland, do NOT "work, eat and have happy lives". They spend most of their often short, sad lives trying to stave off starvation while not avoiding the notice of whatever religious, political, social, or economic tyranny is wielding power in their lands. People so poor they sell excess children and family members into slavery, that is, if the local drug cartel, warlord, religious cult, or terrorist cell doesn't just come and take whoever it pleases. And they certainly don't take care of each other, it's much more a dog eat dog world.

People work everyday and still starve.



posted on Jul, 19 2015 @ 01:09 PM
link   
a reply to: babybunnies

Here's my personal experience: I know a lot of folks who are on various forms of public assistance. All of them except maybe 2 absolutely need it to help feed themelves and their kids. The same folks who go to church's for food (we have a few churchs who also function as an independant food bank).

While I am not happy about a lot of the welfare system...I cannot say I am unhappy to spend my $5 a year to make sure that those folks aren't going hungry. Even if it means 3% of them are "moochers". The other 97%....outweigh it.



posted on Jul, 19 2015 @ 01:11 PM
link   
a reply to: babybunnies

Real Estate agents are not typically employees; they're independent contractors.

I don't include my agents in my list of employees, which include front desk personnel, bookkeepers, support personnel.

Try again?


edit on 13Sun, 19 Jul 2015 13:11:59 -050015p012015766 by Gryphon66 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 19 2015 @ 01:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: Skadi_the_Evil_Elf

Dude, are you seriously that delusional? Have you actually ever really bothered to learn anything about the real world beyond your own borders?


Been to 70 plus countries...What you speak of is over populated areas where, yes, people having nothing, live in cardboard boxes by the millions, starve etc...that is not the poor, that is the destitute.






edit on 19-7-2015 by Xtrozero because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 19 2015 @ 01:22 PM
link   
Something else to consider: the role of a corporation is to return value to its shareholders. This is the "fiduciary responsibility" aspect of running a business. You can actually be sued to recover value lost, and I've been through that kind of deal in a prior corporation I worked in (the executive staff were being sued by the shareholders, and those of us in management had to be deposed for the suit).

Somewhere along the way, there were studies done (and many repeated afterwards) that pointed to the poor investment pay increases were. Long story short: once the pay increase was absorbed back into the household budget, the newfound motivation faded away. This is actually common sense: humans are a result of our neurochemicals. As bonds age, they weaken, memory fades, and connection dissipates. Financial bonuses are a poor investment when viewed from this angle, because your time/money is better spent on "Employee Motivation Programs". I.e.: your manager will walk around with vouchers or "Recognition Certificates" to hand out.

The flip side: it was determined that a better investment was to play on your need for ego boosting. So trash and trinkets and manufactured awards became en vogue. The thought: when you go home with a $20 gift card, that is absorbed into the household immediately and no one notices it. But if you come home with this super swell trophy (that only cost the company $15), you now had something to garner an ego boost from those in your personal life.

Maybe its just the adult version of the "Participants Ribbon". You are being rewarded with a piece of mass produced nonsense that is meant to only support your ego. I dunno. But thats how it is.
edit on 7/19/2015 by bigfatfurrytexan because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 19 2015 @ 01:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: Skadi_the_Evil_Elf

Dude, are you seriously that delusional? Have you actually ever really bothered to learn anything about the real world beyond your own borders?


Been to 70 plus countries...What you speak of is over populated areas where, yes, people having nothing, live in cardboard boxes by the millions, starve etc...that is not the poor, that is the destitute.




Look under a few bridges in America if you think that is restricted to "overpopulated areas."

Sadly, the folks we're talking here about the "lucky ones," not the homeless, who have somehow managed to hold on with basically NOTHING to live on.
edit on 13Sun, 19 Jul 2015 13:27:06 -050015p012015766 by Gryphon66 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 19 2015 @ 01:31 PM
link   
Literally Millions of Google Results that Demonstrate that Pay Increases are Smart Investments

Choosing one out of those millions ...




If average Americans don't get paid living wages, they can't spend much money buying products and services. And when average Americans can't buy products and services, companies that sell products and services can't grow. So the profit obsession of America's big companies is, ironically, hurting their ability to grow.

One solution is for big companies to pay their people more — to share more of the vast wealth that they create with the people who create it.

Big American companies have record profit margins, so they can certainly afford to do this.

But, unfortunately, over the past three decades, what began as a healthy and necessary effort to make our companies more efficient has evolved into a warped consensus that the only purpose of a corporation is to "maximize earnings."

This view is an insult to anyone who has ever dreamed of having a job or company that is about more than money. And it is a short-sighted and destructive view of capitalism, an economic system that sustains not just this country but most countries in the world.

This view has become deeply entrenched, though.


Business Insider



posted on Jul, 19 2015 @ 01:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
Were you depressed?


Why would I be depressed? I had less spending power at the end of their term than I did at the beginning. Made less and the dollar didn't go very far...



Was the state of the economy that any of these other President's faced as abyssmal as what we saw in 2008? Described as the "Great Recession" to demonstrate that this was the second greatest "crash" of the American Economy since 1929?


Great propaganda points! Living and working through both I would say Reagan's 3.50 per gallon gas (15 today) 18%+ interest rates on car/house, 2 hour waits at the pump, triple in cost of living etc etc was a little worst than what Obama was handed.



Did any of those other Presidents face an opposition party that made it their TOP GOVERNING PRIORITY to "ensure that Obama is a one-term President" (with that gruesome smile on McConnell's saggy mug /shiver) by making it their sole political goal to stop, stymie, restrict, repress and derail ANY effort the Administration made to do anything?


Now you are just quibbling and showing just how inept Obama has really been. Just like how Obama has thrown gas instead of water on Bush's war deficit he has also thrown gas on bipartisanship, his way or the highway mentality.

Not sure what you were thinking voting in a less than two year Senator whose only real job in life was "community organizer" (what the hell is that anyways) so don't quibble over how ineffective he has been by blaming it on others...



My favorite point? Why do you want to ignore it, because it doesn't serve your agenda? Am I wrong about the Reagan Deficit? Am I wrong about Bush II's philosophy that "deficits don't matter?"


We talked about this, I explained my point so I'm not sure what else you want me to say?



The President was personally handing out money then? Sorry, that's foolish generalization. Also, have you forgotten when TARP started?


A trillion dollars was wasted, Billions dumped into "green" companies that folded before the end of his first term, huge chunks of that trillion is not counted for in anyway... If you can't even see this one point through your rose colored glasses we are most likely done. "foolish generalization" geez...



Let's start with the gross waste in "Defense," corporate welfare, tax breaks for the super-rich, and so forth before we go after food stamps, education and healthcare ... whaddya say?


My healthcare went up 4x under Obamacare, and the poor can not afford the out of pocket cost of the Bronze plan, so not a very good direction for one that Obama did...lol

One of the problem with people like you is you want to blame it all on "corporate welfare, tax breaks for the super-rich" when the US has the highest corporate tax in the world and if we taxed the super rich 100% it would still be a drop in the bucket.

I'm all for a flat tax, make everyone pay and reduce at least IRS down to about 3 people.



edit on 19-7-2015 by Xtrozero because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 19 2015 @ 01:46 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66

Sadly, the folks we're talking here about the "lucky ones," not the homeless, who have somehow managed to hold on with basically NOTHING to live on.


And coming up on 7 years it is still Bush's fault... Show me what Obama has done to create Jobs in the private sector? He is in charge, it is on his watch, and he has been totally ineffective in so many ways, hence the people under the bridge...



posted on Jul, 19 2015 @ 01:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: Gryphon66

Sadly, the folks we're talking here about the "lucky ones," not the homeless, who have somehow managed to hold on with basically NOTHING to live on.


And coming up on 7 years it is still Bush's fault... Show me what Obama has done to create Jobs in the private sector? He is in charge, it is on his watch, and he has been totally ineffective in so many ways, hence the people under the bridge...


We still have issues before but the American economy has improved in all metrics since he took office. Keep in mind that this was a giant world recession that Obama helped steer us out of...in some countries, like Greece in my opinion, it was a depression. So to somehow still blame Obama for American's lack of jobs or prosperity is really short sighted.

If you take a longer harder look, you must ask yourself if Romney or MCCain would have done any better, especially if you look at what the Republicans have done in the last 7 years....What have they done? basically nothing.
edit on 19-7-2015 by amazing because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 19 2015 @ 01:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: Harte

Sorry, I don't read tabloids.

Did Obama Gut Welfare Reform?




Work requirements are not simply being “dropped.” States may now change the requirements — revising, adding or eliminating them — as part of a federally approved state-specific plan to increase job placement.

And it won’t “gut” the 1996 law to ease the requirement. Benefits still won’t be paid beyond an allotted time, whether the recipient is working or not.


Sooo ... the President, in a time of economic CRISIS, acted to allow STATES to ease some requirements if needed ... sounds like a win for State's Rights to me.


What is the time limit on food stamps?
Harte



posted on Jul, 19 2015 @ 01:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
Financial bonuses are a poor investment when viewed from this angle, because your time/money is better spent on "Employee Motivation Programs". I.e.: your manager will walk around with vouchers or "Recognition Certificates" to hand out.


I think my whole life it has been said that base income is the worst motivator. A person doesn't work harder after a raise, as example. My company does year end bonuses at about 20% of a person's yearly salary. This is a big motivator to meet company projections.



Maybe its just the adult version of the "Participants Ribbon". You are being rewarded with a piece of mass produced nonsense that is meant to only support your ego. I dunno. But thats how it is.


We have this too, called "Spot Awards", but there is money as part of it, from 400 to 5000 bucks as part of the award.



posted on Jul, 19 2015 @ 01:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: Dfairlite

I'd ask if you are serious, but I know the answer.

Let's use your metaphor and take it another step. The guy who fishes for the fish company, how long do you think he can be a successful, profitable, fisherman if the fish company takes all his catch and gives him heads, tails and fish-guts as his "wage"?

He's going to become less and less effective, his health will decline, and eventually, he will be unable to fish.

Of course, the fish company knows that there are ALWAYS more fisherman, so what do they care? But, when all the fisherman in the village are either starving or dead, tell me, who is going to buy the fish from the fish company?

This is called "cutting off your nose to spite your face."

As to the rest of your ... logic ... show us how after eating at the hamburger stand three times day, they're supposed to pay for a car (or bus fare), a home, utilities, insurance, clothing, etc. ... you know, what most of us refer to as "the basics"?

Enthrall us with your acumen!


Oh my hell I've been through this so many times. Mathematically it works out just fine. Of course it depends on where you are at, but being that the minimum wage is just that, let's go with the minimum. Let's say you work for minimum wage in the evil state of texas, and the town of irving. Let's say you work at the evil empire of mcdonalds, too. (My hell, is there anything worse!? You live in evil republican texas working for evil mcdonalds, and getting paid that terrible minimum wage!)

Ok, here's the budget:

I make 1208 month (7.25hr/40hr's week)
I owe zero income taxes
I pay 6.2% FICA leaving me with 1133 per month
I can rent a room for $340 month link
This room is 0.8 miles from my job, so no car needed I can walk. It's only 15 minutes.
Natural gas bill is $20
Electric bill in the summer is $80
Cell phone bill $60 unlimited everything from t-mobile
Big mac meals every meal (except breakfast) 390
A few boxes of cereal and some milk and snacks $50

Alright so far we have:
Food = $450
Shelter = $440
Cell phone = $60

That puts us at $950/month, leaving us with $183 surplus for saving, entertainment, clothes, etc. And this is with a food budget that is 75% of what I spend on a family of 5.

Now let's make a couple adjustments.
Let's go with the $30 straight talk phone plan and instead of big mac meals let's go with dollar menu meals (burger, drink, fries) for $270. And this is still much more than it would cost me to feed myself three meals a day.

Now instead of $183 surplus we have a $323/ month surplus, with that I can now afford the all important health insurance (don't want to be a leech on society using medicaid) which will cost me $180/month according to ehealth, and if I take the government handout from obamacare (AKA a subsidy) I can get it for $22/month.

So let's see, no handouts and still a surplus of $143.
Now, I'm sick of walking so let's buy a car. It's a beater, but it'll do for $1500. I spread that over two years and didn't get a great rate so that's a payment of $67

So now I've got 76 dollars per month for fuel and clothing. I think I'll make it!

Throughout this experiment I tried to think of ways to waste money, like not taking subsidies, eating out more than any rational being does, etc. and yet here I am with a surplus still.

If I missed anything, there is plenty of wiggle room in the budget. (e.g., eat out less, buy a bus pass, save for a car instead of financing, etc)
Moral of the story: is minimum wage comfortable? No, but it's not inhumane or anything. It is a livable wage.
edit on 19-7-2015 by Dfairlite because: (no reason given)


ETA: This is all based on 50 weeks of work, because I may get sick or decide it's time for a week or two vacation.
edit on 19-7-2015 by Dfairlite because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 19 2015 @ 02:03 PM
link   
a reply to: Xtrozero

Depression sometimes causes us to perform personally behind the economy as a whole. /shrug

You posited that you personally did more poorly during Democratic Administrations, while the economy, in both cases you mentioned was growing rather than receding. How do I know? Perhaps the industry you work in/the business sector you own in wasn't doing as well compared with the rest of the economy? Possibilities abound, which is why personal anecdotes have limited value in a conversation about trends in a national economy, no offense intended.

Propaganda? The crash of 2007-2008 was worse than any other in American history except the crash of '29. You cannot be disputing that fact; if you are, you're mistaken.

More anecdotes.

Quibbling? Are you kidding? The Republican Party has made it their sole governing point to thwart President Obama for the last six years. Multiple admissions from Republican operatives reinforce this fact. I quoted Senator McConnell. I submit you're blind to the facts.

Save the personal comments. I Disagreeing with you and pointing out the facts (that you refuse to address) doesn't indicate any flaw on my part. Again, TARP? Reagan Deficit? Bush II "Deficits Don't Matter" Philosophy




top topics



 
31
<< 13  14  15    17  18  19 >>

log in

join