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.
Originally posted by kaylaluv
Obama's challenge is to convince everyone that it's okay to move forward. One way he can do that is by lowering the deficit, by cutting government spending and building revenue, which I believe is his plan.
This is frightening. To quote Dr. Who - "Stay Calm. Don't blink". Seriously .. we can't even afford to blink.
Originally posted by FlyersFan
Originally posted by kaylaluv
Obama's challenge is to convince everyone that it's okay to move forward. One way he can do that is by lowering the deficit, by cutting government spending and building revenue, which I believe is his plan.
Obama's not 'moving forward' .. he's just a repeat of the last two years of Bush43.
He isn't lowering the deficit nor is he cutting government spending.
He claims that 's his plan .. but what he says is the exact opposite of what he's doing.
Obama .. Bush43 ... (D) ... (R) .... they are all part of the problem.
The number of people on food stamps has gotten much larger and it continues to grow.
So neither Bush43 nor Obama had a viable plan to get people off government assistance.
Again .. my question ... is this ineptitude by Washington DC or is it part of a larger
plan by TPTB (higher up than Bush or Obama) to make people depend on government so
those people can be controlled??
Originally posted by kaylaluv
My whole argument is that the reason for the huge rise in food stamp users is due to the economic collapse that began in 2007.
What caused that economic collapse and how can we stop it from happening again? Regulate the banking and investment industry, because they caused the collapse and got rich on it.
This is my answer to the OP's assertion that either the government is inept or is trying to "control the masses". The real problem is the government's ineptness (or unwillingness) in clamping down on the unbridled greed that has caused and is still causing our economic problems.
How do we fix the problem of so many unemployed and under-employed right now? Very difficult and very complicated problem. From what I have read and heard, the economy is making a slow but steady comeback. The problem is - the confidence of the people and employers just isn't there yet. While businesses may actually be doing better, they are afraid to start hiring. And people who have money are afraid to really spend it. Low confidence in the economy helps to perpetuate the problems in the economy.
Obama's challenge is to convince everyone that it's okay to move forward. One way he can do that is by lowering the deficit, by cutting government spending and building revenue,which I believe is his plan. Cutting government spending does NOT mean cutting out social services.
Look at how Iceland did it. They got rid of their corrupt bankers, cut government spending while keeping social services intact, and took more taxes from the very rich, while helping out the poor and middle class. I see Obama attempting (or beginning to attempt) to do all these things, EXCEPT getting rid of the corrupt bankers. That is a mistake, IMHO.
Originally posted by jibajaba
i am so tired of legislative thievery - stealing from me and mine to pay for you and your lazy @ss.
-maybe- just maybe -
we should all quit working - this would stop the monster in the east.
Originally posted by FlyersFan
Again .. my question ... is this ineptitude by Washington DC or is it part of a larger
plan by TPTB (higher up than Bush or Obama) to make people depend on government so
those people can be controlled??
Originally posted by FlyersFan
The number of people on food stamps has gotten much larger and it continues to grow.
So neither Bush43 nor Obama had a viable plan to get people off government assistance.
My suggestion to all struggling is to redirect focus away from corporations and governments and to building confidence in self.
Originally posted by FlyersFan
This is frightening. To quote Dr. Who - "Stay Calm. Don't blink".
Seriously .. we can't even afford to blink.
A representative of the liberal Pension Rights Center, Rebecca Davis, testified that the government needs to get involved because 401k plans and IRAs are unfair to poor people.
She demanded the Obama administration set up a "government-sponsored program administered by the PBGC (the governments’ Pension Benefit Guarantee Corporation)."
Originally posted by curiouswa
It's not so much unemployment, but people are paid to not work. I despise public assistance in this form. It's not up to the government to feed you! Short term unemployment is fine. But as an employer, I can tell you that more than 75% of those applying for a job, don't even return calls for interviews. What does that say! It means they are applying out of necessity than the desire to get a job.
Originally posted by orbitbaby
I have a question. Not trying to be a smart*ss. I'm no economist I don't understand
how some of this works. But if people are losing their jobs left and right, partially due
to so many jobs being outsourced overseas and partially because of what's been done
to our economy, the FEDS printing into infinity, etc., then what do you think a better
answer is? I'm not saying foodstamps are a good answer either. Definitely not long
term. Just wondering what you think a better answer is for these people. What do you
think they should do instead?
Originally posted by SeenMyShare
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
The elderly are not the problem! The people claiming Social Security who never paid into the system are the problem. The people who are drawing Social Security who have no actual right to it are the problem and the Government who keeps "permanently borrowing" from the fund are the problem.
www.ssa.gov...=12
If you have not worked or do not have enough Social Security credits and you are married, you may be eligible for Social Security benefits as a result of your husband’s work. You and your children (younger than age 18 or younger than age 19 if still in secondary school or disabled before age 22) have Social Security protection through your husband’s work. When he retires, or if he becomes disabled, you could be eligible for benefits as early as age 62. If you are caring for your child who is younger than age 16 or disabled and entitled to benefits, you could receive benefits at any age.