Study: NY Welfare Recipients Eligible For More In Benefits Than Teachers Earn

reply to post by Indigo5

The Koch Brothers conducted a hostile take-over of the Cato Institute...and Cato went from conservative to outright propagandist

STOP POLITICAL TROLLING.

And as far as the BS numbers...it is throwing in everything but the kitchen sink...NOT actual money that welfare recipients get, but rather a gooey lump of everything the author could lump together.

Yeah someone is throwing everything including the kitchen sink IE Koch Brothers, and other stuff NOT to talk about the topic:

Which can be found here:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Click here for more information.

Originally posted by neo96
reply to post by Indigo5

 

The Koch Brothers conducted a hostile take-over of the Cato Institute...and Cato went from conservative to outright propagandist

STOP POLITICAL TROLLING.

And as far as the BS numbers...it is throwing in everything but the kitchen sink...NOT actual money that welfare recipients get, but rather a gooey lump of everything the author could lump together.

Yeah someone is throwing everything including the kitchen sink IE Koch Brothers, and other stuff NOT to talk about the topic:

Which can be found here:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Your post above seems as substantiative as a burp?

Pointing out that the author of a study lacks credibility and demonstrating why, is not trolling.

Nor is pointing out the author admitting he fudged the numbers...

Neo...It seems to me that everyone that challenges your unending stream of petty, partisan, BS ...you accuse of being a troll?

The OP is Briebart's spin on a Koch Brothers sponsored study where even the author admits that the numbers do not reflect real people.

That's just the facts...

reply to post by neo96


Oh...Hey...and BTW...why does this report look familiar?

Oh yah..Cato ran the same EXACT piece back in 1995!

In 1995, during the national debate over welfare reform, the Cato Institute released a study called "The Work Vs. Welfare Trade-Off."

The report was packed with statistics culled from Cato's research: "In 40 states wel­fare pays more than an $8 an hour job.. .. In nine states welfare pays more than the aver­age first-year salary for a teacher. . . . And in the six most generous states it pays more than the entry-level salary for a computer programmer." On average, the study reported, welfare "pays" an average of $17,500 a year.

Not surprisingly, "recipients are likely to choose welfare over work, thus increasing long-term dependence." Therefore, "the most promising welfare reforms are those that substantially cut back on the level of benefits."

EXCEPT FOR THIS...

Cato's report turns out to be an embarrassing mess of bad math and dishonest numbers. In April 1996, seven months after the report was released, the liberal Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (CBPP) issued a critique of the Cato study, pointing out numerous analytical errors in the report, as well as simple faulty arithmetic.

fair.org...

So not only is it BS...It is recycled BS...

reply to post by Indigo5

Pointing out that the author of a study lacks credibility and demonstrating why, is not trolling.

Doesn't have a damn thing to do with the topic.

Nor is pointing out the author admitting he fudged the numbers...

Using a link to say another link is 'fudging' the numbers disproves nothing.

Neo...It seems to me that everyone that challenges your unending stream of petty, partisan, BS ...you accuse of being a troll?

Yep as the above has NOTHING to do with this :

Study: NY Welfare Recipients Eligible For More In Benefits Than Teachers Earn

The OP is Briebart's spin on a Koch Brothers sponsored study where even the author admits that the numbers do not reflect real people.

There's more trolling as the fact clearly is someone doesn't want to talk about the topic, and wants to talk about EVERYTHING but the topic

Internet troll

Originally posted by neo96
reply to post by doobydoll

 

Think I will hold both accountable :

"There is no evidence that people on welfare are lazy," writes CATO senior fellow Michael Tanner. "But they're also not stupid. If you pay them more not to work than they can earn by working, many will choose not to work."

I blame the people who take advantage of the program, and I blame those in government who take advantage of the people.

Hey neo96, I think the term "choose not to work" is the same thing as laziness. There will always be people making more than you do. How can anyone rationalize not working because folks sitting on welfare are making more than themselves? This is a piss poor rationalization.

Anyways, it is our government that makes the rules. You saw in my earlier post that in PA, folks get kicked off after I think 2 years? (Don't quote me on the term though.) I hate to admit this, but humans are dark and evil and will take advantage when the opportunity presents itself. Everyone needs to push for similar laws like in PA.

reply to post by Indigo5


So the evil koch brothers did a 'hostile take over' in 1995?

Er wait no that was recently so that pretty much disproves all your gripes.

Originally posted by neo96

Nor is pointing out the author admitting he fudged the numbers...

Using a link to say another link is 'fudging' the numbers disproves nothing.

Wow...That "link" was from the STUDY...THAT YOU CITED IN THE OP...YOUR SOURCE/BASIS FOR THE OP IS NOT GOOD ENOUGH FOR YOU?????

That is classic! Or derangement? Not sure which?

Of course. This shouldnt surprise anyone. This is how democrats in NY get their votes. Let's keep people poor to secure votes.

reply to post by Indigo5


Yeah it was good says the source is consistent even after getting vilified in this thread.

So,

Originally posted by neo96
reply to post by Indigo5

 

So the evil koch brothers did a 'hostile take over' in 1995?

No...the Koch brothers just demanded a recycling of the 1995 article...Practicly down to the exact wording...only slightly worse arithmetic and dishonest math this time.

Originally posted by Indigo5

Originally posted by neo96
reply to post by Indigo5

 

So the evil koch brothers did a 'hostile take over' in 1995?

No...the Koch brothers just demanded a recycling of the 1995 article...Practicly down to the exact wording...only slightly worse arithmetic and dishonest math this time.

So you know this for a fact ?

All I have heard is opinion.

Here are some direct numbers.

This is TANF benefits site, and I will add the amount listed in 5 of the major states in the US.

New York

TANF benefits are figured based on individual state guidelines and dependent on factors such as family size, earned and unearned income, and housing expenses. The state of New York has a 60 month (5 year) cap on TANF benefits. In 2005, the maximum benefit for a family of three was $577 monthly, or $6924 per year.

California

TANF benefits are figured based on individual state guidelines and dependent on factors such as family size, earned and unearned income, and housing expenses. The California TANF program provides monetary benefits by EBT. The maximum monthly TANF benefit for a family of three in 2005 was $704 per month, or $9448 per year. There is a 60 month (five year) time limit for receiving welfare benefits in California.

Florida

TANF benefits are figured based on individual state guidelines and dependent on factors such as family size, earned and unearned income, and housing expenses. The Florida TCA program provides monetary benefits for a maximum of 48 months to recipients who participate in work-related activities for at least 30 hours a week. The maximum monthly TANF benefit ranges between $95 and $610 per month.

Texas

TANF benefits are figured based on individual state guidelines and dependent on factors such as family size, earned and unearned income, and housing expenses. TANF recipients in Texas can receive benefits for a range of one to three years depending on education, unique family situation and work experience. There are no such limits for children. Welfare benefits are distributed via EBT card. The maximum benefit for a family of three consisting of one parent and two children is $260 per month. To learn more about benefit amounts, click here.

Washington

TANF benefits are figured based on individual state guidelines and dependent on factors such as family size, earned and unearned income, and housing expenses. TANF benefit amounts are based on family size and countable income. A household of three that has no countable income could receive as much as $546 per month. Other services include educational and equipment expenses, car repair and help with transportation.

Add any Zip Code and Get the Info Here


Peace, NRE.

Originally posted by neo96
reply to post by Indigo5

 

Yeah it was good says the source is consistent even after getting vilified in this thread.

Yah...after a 52 page report full of dishonest math, errors and BS...he had the grace to include a one liner at the end in "notes" explaining that his numbers don't reflect real people...

Not every welfare recipient fits the profile used in this study, and many who do fit it do not receive every benefit listed.

object.cato.org...

Kind of like the guy that speaks quickly on the commercial for Anti-Depressans..."Some patients have depressive thoughts and attempt suicide while on this medication"

The report is BS...

And BTW...If the report calculates the market value of Medicaid and Medicare...then why doesn't it calculate the benfits worth for the Teachers salary it compares it to? How much is a teachers health insurance worth? He seemed to have forgotten that number?...

The whole report is just Right-Wing idealogical porn and just as honest as an airbrushed centerfold.

But whatever gets you through the night.

reply to post by NoRegretsEver


Have anything more current ?

2005 ?

Originally posted by Indigo5
reply to post by neo96

 

Honestly, I don't get the pre-occupation with poor people?

The poor are an easy target. You know, the type of partisan target that can't defend itself. Demonizing the poor also effectively draws attention away from those few who are gaming the system for massive amounts of wealth.

reply to post by neo96


The study is the topic, you gave one view of it, Indigo is giving another (which he's right about by the way). I don't which is sadder that fact that you have been groomed to hate fellow Americans or that you've sunk so low as to dismiss anyone that disagrees with you as a troll.

Originally posted by GD21D

Originally posted by Indigo5
reply to post by neo96

 

Honestly, I don't get the pre-occupation with poor people?

The poor are an easy target. You know, the type of partisan target that can't defend itself. Demonizing the poor also effectively draws attention away from those few who are gaming the system for massive amounts of wealth.

Seriously ?

I see someone bought in to that vitriol yes why those poor people need the righteous left putting them evil conservatives in place.

God forbid anyone trying to have a REAL conversation about it ALWAYS gets labeled as a 'hater'.

The Welfare state is gaming the system for massive amounts of wealth some people choose to turn a blind eye to it.

Because it is just easier to shoot the messenger ain't it?

Originally posted by Kali74
reply to post by neo96

 

The study is the topic, you gave one view of it, Indigo is giving another (which he's right about by the way). I don't which is sadder that fact that you have been groomed to hate fellow Americans or that you've sunk so low as to dismiss anyone that disagrees with you as a troll.

I am so GD sick and tired of the left telling me who I hate.

Really sick and tired of it,

As I said in the topic people were free to disagree didn't I ?

That meant people ARE FREE to hold their own opinions.

What people don't have a right to is going around telling me I hate people.

reply to post by neo96


It drips off your words.

Why get mad at people for having the ability to comprehend it?