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.

 

Trump is right. Poor people should be lifted out of poverty.

page: 2
9
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 21 2017 @ 08:24 AM
link   
a reply to: allsee4eye

Seven months into the presidency and with a congress that hasn't produced much of anything that doesn't resemble diarrhea, I don't think that you can attribute very many economic numbers at this point to Trump directly. Yes, his approach to business and taxes (at least in theory, as much hasn't been accomplished that he's talked about, yet) may be having a subconscious positive effect on the job market, but to claim that it's all due to Trump is not a very provable thing at this point.

Please understand that I think many of his ideas, if ever implemented, would have a positive effect overall, I'm just saying that at this point, it's not a reflection of his accomplishments just yet.
edit on 21-7-2017 by SlapMonkey because: (no reason given)




posted on Jul, 21 2017 @ 08:57 AM
link   
a reply to: allsee4eye

So you think that the majority of Americans who are on welfare are poor? That's really amusing. No....the people who are poor in America are the ones who don't qualify for any assistance, so they work two or three jobs and hold their # together with ramen noodles and prayers. I know a lot of people on welfare, and only two of them actually need the assistance. By contrast, I know just as many people who desperately need assistance...because despite working multiple jobs; existing on a pittance, they are still going hungry...and do not qualify.

One of the hardest working people I know is a single mom with four children. She almost never sees her kids because she works every day at one full-time job and then goes straight to her second full-time job. She doesn't qualify for financial assistance because she makes five dollars too much each month. Five. Bucks. That five bucks also prevents her from receiving enough food assistance to feed her family. This situation is far more common than your fantasy of a bunch of poor people screwing it up for everyone else. That doesn't even begin to approach logic in the first place.

In fact, the only way your particular brand of reality makes sense is if the people on welfare are not actually poor at all. It would only make sense if the people on welfare are deliberately scamming the system. If they are receiving assistance that they do not truly deserve.

Fun fact: poor people don't actually like being poor, and they certainly don't want to remain that way. People who are truly struggling do not sit at home in abject poverty and refuse to work so they can just continue to go hungry. That is just asinine. Welfare does not make people poor. It does the exact opposite.

Now if you're trying to say that some Americans are receiving welfare when they really shouldn't be, and making free money off all these aggrieved wealthy folks on the pretense that they are in need of assistance, and refuse to work because it's easier to just take handouts, then you would be absolutely correct. There are indeed people like that living in America, and they shouldn't be allowed to continue doing it. Because they're not actually poor at all. So all of the single moms and dads, the disabled, the hungry and homeless, the elderly...all of those folks who only qualify for a tiny bit of assistance or none at all, are forgotten and lost in the mix. Those are the truly poor people in America, and there are probably just as many of them as there are of the aforementioned welfare recipients, if not more.

What the President is really talking about are the people who are receiving assistance and cannot pull themselves out of that situation because if they got a job making even one dollar more per hour, they would no longer qualify for adequate assistance or lose their benefits entirely...like my friend. And that extra dollar an hour wage is not enough to offset existing expenses, much less existing expenses with the buffer of food assistance removed. Welfare programs use the gross family income rather than the net, and do not account for rent, transportation, phone service or any extraneous debt. The only extra things they factor in are water and electricity/gas.

They don't care that most jobs require the employee to have a working phone and reliable transportation, neither of which are free. They don't care that employers require uniforms and do not provide them for free. They don't care about your car breaking down or sudden unavoidable expenses that are perpetuating the financial distress. And if you make five dollars too much, or are not disabled or within a certain age group, they don't care if you and your family starve.

He wants people off welfare because too many people are taking advantage of it, leaving people who are truly in a desperate situation without any hope of relief. He wants to fix the system so that it is not working against the very people who need it most, while giving funds to people who do not actually need help at all. He's not mocking people for being poor or condemning them for not being able to "become middle class". He's talking about helping the people who need it the most, by giving them a real shot at helping themselves. And I agree with him 100%.

When people are doing things like selling $500 in food stamp credit to other people for $250 cash money...and they most definitely are, routinely...they are not poor. They don't need the EBT cards because they don't need food. When a lady sporting acrylic nails, a fresh pedicure and a $300 hair color with three kids in the grocery store; all wearing name brand clothes and shoes and carrying an iPhone, whips out the Lone Star EBT card at the checkout before loading everything into her shiny black Escalade parked outside, it's pretty safe to assume that she probably doesn't really need that food assistance. Particularly when the food she purchased was shrimp, lobster, steaks...and five bottles of wine and two cases of imported beer, which totaled almost $100 by itself and which she paid for with a crisp new bill that she pulled out of a stack of more bills. Yet those are the people who qualify for benefits...when the elderly lady with a cane behind them in line is counting change for a loaf of white bread and a package of cheap processed cheese.

The system is overrun by people like that, and it's been this way for decades. If those folks had been cut off a long time ago, we wouldn't have such an imbalance. People who actually need temporary assistance and are in fact working and still struggling would be able to benefit from a hand up...not a handout, as the system was meant for in the first place. Reform does nothing because it's like putting a bandaid on a broken leg and expecting it to heal all by itself. The only way to fix this jacked up mess is to demolish it and start over.

If he can do that and implement a system that gives the truly needy a chance at a better life and more solid future for themselves and their families, then that's something I can get behind. Poverty is not synonymous with laziness, and it is that very attitude that enables those who created the system. They equate the two, and people simply accept it as fact, when it is nowhere near the truth of the situation. The lazy ones who are dragging everyone else down are not poor at all. They're taking what is offered freely, simply because they can.

We Americans are living in a world where everything is out of balance. We've got obese people with so much excess of everything, and starving people who are barely able to survive, living side by side in this country. There is something very wrong with that. There is something seriously awry when people's first instinct is to judge, condemn and vilify the poor rather than extend a helping hand. To treat other human beings like they are somehow inferior because they lack a certain amount of income. Like they're beneath contempt simply because they don't make as much money as the guy living two houses down on the same street.

Money does not make one person any better or give their life more value or meaning than anyone else. I doubt very seriously that our POTUS was insinuating any such thing...no matter how much you or anyone else try to twist it. Society shouldn't be dominated by the poor, or by the rich or middle class, either. It should be balanced.



posted on Jul, 21 2017 @ 09:02 AM
link   

originally posted by: allsee4eye
Poor people should work and become middle class instead of staying home and live off welfare paid for by tax on the rich. Society should be dominated by the middle class, not by the poor. If Democrats had their way, it would be like socialism and society would collapse after tax becomes more than 50% of income and the poor become majority of society. Michigan unemployment rate already down to turn of the of millennium level, all thanks to Trump.


This is just incoherent rambling. I mean, it makes sense linguistically, but not in any other way.



posted on Jul, 21 2017 @ 09:10 AM
link   
a reply to: JoshuaCox

Something I finally agree with you on!

I've been saying this for a couple of years now. We are quickly reaching what I call the post-occupational Era.
People won't really be needed to perform work anymore.

As much as I don't like the sound of it. We'll need some type of socialist system to function moving forward. I think it's inevitable.



posted on Jul, 21 2017 @ 09:11 AM
link   
a reply to: ErrorErrorError

True, I know people way better off on welfare and I work a full time job.

The more money you make the more it gets drained by the government and expenses.

I'll be paying off my student debt til the end of time.

The system the rigged



posted on Jul, 21 2017 @ 09:24 AM
link   
a reply to: allsee4eye

Average pay for all those employed?

And let's not get too teary eyed about taxes on the rich.



posted on Jul, 21 2017 @ 09:27 AM
link   
Trump is just another republican "trickle down economy" model neo con. Give all the benefits to the wealthy and corporations and the money will trickle down to the poor people.

When has that ever worked in the past?

Trump is just pissing on your leg and telling you it's raining. covfefe up you peons. Rich people hoard their money, that's why they're rich.






edit on 21-7-2017 by olaru12 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 21 2017 @ 09:36 AM
link   
a reply to: midnightstar

Refreshing to read a reply here that has historical perspective. To me it seems that much of the context used by our ''Trump can do it'' crowd is limited to viewing the world in light of only the last decade, that is blaming the democrats from 08 onwards. Not all of course but many.

In a way this is good in that it demonstrates that people are realizing there are major problems that we are facing and that we the people need to become pro active in determining the future of our democracy. But this needs to be done with an awareness of just how our problems have come about and not just blaming it all on Obama and the Clintons and the rest of the democrats, not that they do not share in part of the blame. Rather than making changes to better suit the future it seems that all the democrats have managed while in power was little more than riding the old power train that the high tech bubble produced while Slick Willy was in office.



posted on Jul, 21 2017 @ 09:53 AM
link   
a reply to: MichiganSwampBuck

Part of the problem with starting a business is all the regulatory and licensure fees. It's a huge gateway, and half of it is there because the very largest know that while it does hurt them, they can afford to take the hit and it bars new competition from entering their market.

That's what half the fuss over services like Lyft and Uber are about - the cab companies have a nice, cozy racket set up and bars other competition from entering the market without a ton of capitol to back them. It keeps the number of competitors down to where everyone can more or less make nice and keep the racket cushy for everyone without someone finding a way to undercut the market.

But Ubar and Lyft found ways to get around all that and did undercut the cab markets, and those big cab industries were getting hurt and started squealing and complaining that those services should be subjected to all the same rules and regs, meaning they had to join the club and play nice and likely raise their rates to cab racket rates at the same time.

These things bar entry, and it's the exact same impulse that has cops coming along and shutting down corner lemonade stands because some poor little kid didn't buy and license and isn't compliant.



posted on Jul, 21 2017 @ 10:18 AM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: MichiganSwampBuck

Part of the problem with starting a business is all the regulatory and licensure fees. It's a huge gateway, and half of it is there because the very largest know that while it does hurt them, they can afford to take the hit and it bars new competition from entering their market.


Imagine, people being asked to operate their businesses in a responsible manner. What an imposition.



posted on Jul, 21 2017 @ 10:22 AM
link   

originally posted by: ConscienceZombie
I don't know what "class" your in but it's a lot easier looking down from somewhere high. I'm a "low-middle class" and I'm surprised I'm not one of the poor.

We can't take these half percent points as a win. Just because people are working doesn't make them better off. The cost of living is so high. I'm in small counties and it's like major city living. It's terrible.

Don't celebrate yet. There's a lot more hurt coming before there's healing.


You need to look at what would take you into middle class, and then upper middle class...Most likey decades of good planning and execution.

i think the OP is correct in if we do not support people to lift themselves up out of poverty they will always live a life of poverty. Subsistence living sucks no matter what...but it is easy...



posted on Jul, 21 2017 @ 10:31 AM
link   
It's called equal opportunity and with equal opportunity you don't need Trump!



posted on Jul, 21 2017 @ 10:53 AM
link   
a reply to: Nytol

You need to define what equal opportunity is.



posted on Jul, 21 2017 @ 11:56 AM
link   
This could all be possible if only wages kept up with inflation.
Purchasing power has dropped at least 10% per decade since the 1990's.
That's only 1% inflation annually which I think is a very low estimate.
That's 25% less purchasing power since 1990 at a minimum.
Some of that is foreign competition but a good deal of it is plain greed by the stockholders.



posted on Jul, 21 2017 @ 12:00 PM
link   
a reply to: tigertatzen

This is the problem with the system though. It creates dependence. Your mother who $5 too much is a prime example. You can do nothing and be kept because most people aren't going to be able to break into work entry level and make ends meet, or you can struggle and never quite get ahead.

It's all or nothing. The system is deliberately designed that way to trap people on it and make them dependent. You are comfortable and kept like a dog and dependent or you struggle and are dirt poor and both sides resent it and both are ready vote getters because they resent those who have more for various reasons.

The system is the problem and should be different than it is if we were really interested in helping people out of it.



posted on Jul, 21 2017 @ 12:07 PM
link   
I 100% with trump.


He is right. Welfare unless you are disabled should not be a long term career.


I am kinda a fan of Trumps domestic stances.......just a shame i despise him as a human being and think he is a idiot at international relations.



posted on Jul, 21 2017 @ 12:19 PM
link   
a reply to: watchitburn

I don't think enough people understand this possibility and what it really means.

I am of the mind that an entirely new paradigm would be the most effective, but in the end, things are going to change drastically in the next few decades and beyond. Eventually, I hope that the conversation will finally evolve in the face of an entirely novel situation.

I think that one step would be shifting from continuing monetary support to providing tools to gain self-sufficiency. It addresses a lot of issues all at once.

For example, instead of food stamps, a family would be provided the tools for a fully automated aquaponics system and access to the knowledge to make it work. It might cost more than a single installment of EBT, but that changes quickly and it also has numerous benefits for the nation at large instead of solely a money sink.

Of course, there are reasons for things being the way they are, but those that currently benefit (as recipients or otherwise) from the paradigm are repeatedly shooting themselves in the foot. I wonder if large financial institutions are benefitting from storing all these "numbers.."



posted on Jul, 21 2017 @ 12:21 PM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko

Would you class people in jobs as "salary dependent"? How about those working two or more jobs? Have they picked up a serious work addiction, and need some kind of intervention? No, no-one would ever argue such a daft thing, would they.

I love the idea that the welfare system is a sinister method of enslavement. I mean, rather than being a pretty threadbare safety net that means the average US worker isn't stepping over fly-blown corpses while on the way to work each day.



posted on Jul, 21 2017 @ 01:08 PM
link   
Video is only 10 minutes, but Milton Friedman breaks down the issues with welfare and how it breaks up families and traps people in poverty.




posted on Jul, 21 2017 @ 01:21 PM
link   


Trump is right. Poor people should be lifted out of poverty.



Then why is trump cutting job education programs for the poor and unemployed? His lies are so transparent...





money.cnn.com...
edit on 21-7-2017 by olaru12 because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
9
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join