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 ThirdEyeofHorus
reply to post by Xtrozero
It's the Progressive agenda to grow govt more and more and create dependence. When those in Hollywood make huge huge bucks in entertainment, they go on to support big govt Progressive ideologies, even though they themselves made it big in the private sector.
From 2005 to 2009, the average black household's wealth fell by more than half, to $5,677, while white household wealth fell 16 percent to $113,149, according to the Pew Research Center. In 2009, 24 percent of black households had no major assets other than a vehicle, compared with 6 percent of their white counterparts.
Originally posted by syrinx high priest
one last thing
the potus does not control the economy
if they did, everything would come up roses all the time and he would be beloved and re-elected
it is a massively complex thing with influences from all corners of the globe
blaming it on one man, republican or democrat, is ignorant
Under the new policy, states can now seek a federal waiver from work-participation rules that, among other things, require welfare recipients to engage in one of 12 specific “work activities,” such as job training. But, in exchange, states must develop a plan that would provide a “more efficient or effective means to promote employment,” which may or may not include some or all of the same work activities. States also must submit an “evaluation plan” that includes “performance measures” that must be met — or the waiver could be revoked.
Originally posted by WaterBottle
reply to post by Libertygal
He didn't nix Clintons welfare "reform".
He gave states more power over their work requirement programs.
Under the new policy, states can now seek a federal waiver from work-participation rules that, among other things, require welfare recipients to engage in one of 12 specific “work activities,” such as job training. But, in exchange, states must develop a plan that would provide a “more efficient or effective means to promote employment,” which may or may not include some or all of the same work activities. States also must submit an “evaluation plan” that includes “performance measures” that must be met — or the waiver could be revoked.
www.factcheck.org...
I stopped read there because you really have no clue what you are talking about and are still repeating talking points from Romney attack ads. loledit on 23-2-2013 by WaterBottle because: (no reason given)
Under the guise of helping unemployed Americans in a tough
economy, the Obama administration and its congressional allies
are reversing the 1996 welfare reforms that have been lauded as
an overwhelming success by Republicans and Democrats alike
for lifting millions of Americans from poverty.
Despite its success, or perhaps because of it, President Obama
and his allies are doing all they can to destroy welfare reform.
Mr. Obama’s $862 billion stimulus package essentially abolished welfare reform
expansion of welfare rolls. The federal government now pays
states 80 percent of the cost for each new family they add to
their welfare rolls, a move that eliminates states’ incentive to
push welfare recipients into the job force.
A major public policy success, welfare reform in the
mid-1990s led to a dramatic reduction in welfare
dependency and child poverty. This successful
reform, however is now in jeopardy: Little-noted
provisions in the U.S. House of Representatives and
U.S. Senate stimulus bills actually abolish this historic
reform.
The House and Senate stimulus bills will overturn the
fiscal foundation of welfare reform and restore an
AFDC-style funding system. For the first time since
1996, the federal government would begin paying
states bonuses to increase their welfare caseloads.
Originally posted by Libertygal
Originally posted by WaterBottle
reply to post by Libertygal
He didn't nix Clintons welfare "reform".
He gave states more power over their work requirement programs.
Under the new policy, states can now seek a federal waiver from work-participation rules that, among other things, require welfare recipients to engage in one of 12 specific “work activities,” such as job training. But, in exchange, states must develop a plan that would provide a “more efficient or effective means to promote employment,” which may or may not include some or all of the same work activities. States also must submit an “evaluation plan” that includes “performance measures” that must be met — or the waiver could be revoked.
www.factcheck.org...
I stopped read there because you really have no clue what you are talking about and are still repeating talking points from Romney attack ads. loledit on 23-2-2013 by WaterBottle because: (no reason given)
Too bad you didn't read closely enough.
1. I SAID I am NOT a Romney supporter. Lol
2. Labels suck. Lol
3. I said he ended Clinton Welfare Reform with the stimulus Bill. Lol
4. That was 2009/2010. Lol
5. For those with short term memories, that was pre-Romney. Lol
6. I have never seen a Romney attack add. Lol
7 Fact Check? Lol
8. Did I mention, labels suck? Lol
m.washingtontimes.com...
Under the guise of helping unemployed Americans in a tough
economy, the Obama administration and its congressional allies
are reversing the 1996 welfare reforms that have been lauded as
an overwhelming success by Republicans and Democrats alike
for lifting millions of Americans from poverty.
(Snip)
Despite its success, or perhaps because of it, President Obama
and his allies are doing all they can to destroy welfare reform.
Mr. Obama’s $862 billion stimulus package essentially abolished welfare reform
expansion of welfare rolls. The federal government now pays
states 80 percent of the cost for each new family they add to
their welfare rolls, a move that eliminates states’ incentive to
push welfare recipients into the job force.
www.heritage.org...
A major public policy success, welfare reform in the
mid-1990s led to a dramatic reduction in welfare
dependency and child poverty. This successful
reform, however is now in jeopardy: Little-noted
provisions in the U.S. House of Representatives and
U.S. Senate stimulus bills actually abolish this historic
reform.
(Snip)
The House and Senate stimulus bills will overturn the
fiscal foundation of welfare reform and restore an
AFDC-style funding system. For the first time since
1996, the federal government would begin paying
states bonuses to increase their welfare caseloads.
Ok, I proved I do my own fact checking based on the topic, not a straw man argument that has zero to do with it. I proved what I was saying with fact, did you? Oh, I forgot, you brought nothing to the discussion but an attempt to derail with partisan attack and a straw man argument, and then attempted to use personal attacks to belittle me by claiming, "Oh look, a Romney supporter! Don't listen to her!"
You failed.
edit on 23-2-2013 by Libertygal because: (no reason given)
You failed.
Originally posted by WaterBottle
reply to post by Libertygal
Never-mind.... I don't feel like arguing this
You failed.
Nah, but you should lay off the heritage foundation articles.
edit on 23-2-2013 by WaterBottle because: (no reason given)
He sure does when he tries to lie about sequestration that he said if anyone tried to stop it, he would veto it, then goes on a public rant that the sequestration is the GOP's fault.
Because you were proven wrong and made yourself look silly.
Originally posted by WaterBottle
reply to post by Libertygal
Because you were proven wrong and made yourself look silly.
Nope. He didn't change welfare reform. Still has the same time lifetime limits and program as in 1996. The states have more power over the work requirements now.
And the additional funds to the states welfare programs were temporary, only lasting 2 years. The funding that "gutted welfare" expired. However giving more money to states in a recession is "gutting welfare"........
en.wikipedia.org...
But this is off topic, so I'm not gonna continue.
edit on 23-2-2013 by WaterBottle because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by tothetenthpower
reply to post by neoholographic
So I see, Obama can't give us his greatness because he's blocked by fillibusters even though he had the House and Senate on lock when he first got into office and he could of done some of these wonderful things then.
Obama has never controlled the house.
This clearly shows the problem. Obama followers have nothing but excuses for Obama. He never has to take responsibility for nothing he has done. It's always someone elses fault.
I don't support Obama, but I do understand that MOST things, are not his fault. MOST things, are the fault of CONGRESS.
This hurts the black community as well as the rest of the Country.
The fact that you separate the two above as magically being different somehow, is 50% of your country's problem.
~Tenth