Bread Winner Making Babies!!! Welfare Queens!!!

[Flopper]

So if you want to do away with the foster care system, what is your counter-proposal? Work-houses?

Who wants to do away with foster care?

Hopefully, we will find a solution so it's not needed or at least it can be reduced. The cost of foster care is significantly higher than supporting children in their home. Also, foster care is a terrible alternative to leaving kids in their home unless the kids are in danger.

The idea of pulling kids out of low income marginally dysfunctional homes and putting them in foster care is a terrible idea, both for the kids and the taxpayers. Foster care is designed as a temporary home for kids. Most of them return to their original homes.

*-*The Future of Children -

 

[Agit8r]

So if you want to do away with the foster care system, what is your counter-proposal? Work-houses?

Who wants to do away with foster care?

Hopefully, we will find a solution so it's not needed or at least it can be reduced. The cost of foster care is significantly higher than supporting children in their home. Also, foster care is a terrible alternative to leaving kids in their home unless the kids are in danger.

The idea of pulling kids out of low income marginally dysfunctional homes and putting them in foster care is a terrible idea, both for the kids and the taxpayers. Foster care is designed as a temporary home for kids. Most of them return to their original homes.

*-*The Future of Children -

And yet we see more efforts that could take kids out of moderately dysfunctional homes, such as the proposals to drug test welfare recipients. Unfortunately, there are no easy answers.

 

[Obamanation]

Apparently not for everyone, unless the payoff really is a lot more than your estimate.

Well it is tax-free!!! 45K with free health care is aprox. the same as 70K after taxes and health care....

It would be a significant raise for most working Americans!!!

Wrong again.

First, the amount which was first claimed to be $144,000 was reduced to $45,000 by fact check. The $45,000 would only be true it all the kids were teenagers which they obviously are not. If most of them were were less than 12 years old, which seems like from reading the email, the figure would be closer to $38,000. Thus our $144,000 is now down to about $38,000.

Second DFCS limits the number of foster children to no more than six children in a single house — two fewer than the eight claimed in the e-mail. Thus our $144,000 figure is now down to $28,500

The email also assumes that the home is licensed as a foster care facility which seems highly unlikely. If we use the highest amount paid to unlicensed facilities, $1236/mo for 6 kids, the yearly total is $14,832. Thus our $144,000 figure is now $14,832/year. Almost 1/10 the amount claimed in the headline. This is a wonderful example of distortions of facts we get so often from the Right.

Lastly, $45,000 net income for a family of 10, (mother, grandmother, and 8 kids) does not equate to a gross earned income of $70,000. Standard deduction and personal Exemptions are $46,950.

But please don't let these facts alter your allusions. It's too much fun debunking this stuff.

Now this shows the reals brains of the left. I'm impressed! Really I am.

You want to justify people stealing tax money to sit on their ass and make babies for future generations to care for. Instead of holding people accoutable for their actions you want to make excuses for them... unless they are rich right?

On a side note -- if the cut off really is SIX, and I have no reason to believe you, don't you think they would take that into account, and give the extra two kids to the other grandmother? I mean these people have been working the system for 50 years now. I'm pretty sure they know the game MUCH, MUCH better than you and me...

But you keep pretending that gaming American out of hundreds of billions of dollars it ok if you are lazy and don't want to work --- but some high-crime if a rich person were to do it...

Double-standards and hypocracy... Biggest tools in the liberal box!

 

[Obamanation]

The amount of money you give to a welfare family probably wouldn't pay for the batteries in the remote.

...I'm sure you didn't think that through... since about 20% of my fed taxes goes directly to programs that are redistribution in nature...

It's pretty ugly to think that anyone making 50K a year is over $2000.00 to Robin Hood gov't programs. ...and downright scary to think about those of us fortunate enough to make over 200K.

Okay, let's look at that claim.

Let's say you make 50K. So you pay about 20% in taxes, but probably if you take all your deductions, it's closer to 15. Only 13% of federal expenditures go to "Welfare" or "Safety Net" programs. So really, what you are paying for welfare programs comes out to $975.00.

Dividing that up amongst the MILLIONS on various welfare programs comes out to pennies.

Now, yeah, that money goes up if you throw Social Security and Medicare into the mix, but since you are going to be entitled to those if you live that long, and will probably take out more than you put in if you live long enough, not seeing the problem here.

Here's the real problem. The top 20% of the populatoin controls more than 80% of the wealth. Now assuming you aren't in the top 20%, the real problem is that the money has shifted upwards, not downwards.

More number games...

$1000.00 would buy one hard working family exactly what it would buy one family of sloths --- you can split the 1K any way you want --- oh wait--- that isn;t true because the hard working family has to pay for their own food, and pay full rent, oh and gas to get to work, clothes for work, etc.

I guess that a $1000 does much more for the sloths than the hard workers...

 

[Obamanation]

Who wants to do away with foster care?

Hopefully, we will find a solution so it's not needed or at least it can be reduced. The cost of foster care is significantly higher than supporting children in their home. Also, foster care is a terrible alternative to leaving kids in their home unless the kids are in danger.

The idea of pulling kids out of low income marginally dysfunctional homes and putting them in foster care is a terrible idea, both for the kids and the taxpayers. Foster care is designed as a temporary home for kids. Most of them return to their original homes.

*-*The Future of Children -

And yet we see more efforts that could take kids out of moderately dysfunctional homes, such as the proposals to drug test welfare recipients. Unfortunately, there are no easy answers.

There are MANY answers, you don't like the ones that require people to be accoutable and responsible for their own actions - and we don't like the ones that don't hold people accountable...

 

[JoeB131]

[

More number games...

$1000.00 would buy one hard working family exactly what it would buy one family of sloths --- you can split the 1K any way you want --- oh wait--- that isn;t true because the hard working family has to pay for their own food, and pay full rent, oh and gas to get to work, clothes for work, etc.

I guess that a $1000 does much more for the sloths than the hard workers...

The problem with that notion is that it assumes hard work is equally compensated.

It isn't.

40% of families on Food Stamps have at least one member who has a job. Just not a job that is good enough to put food on the table.

 

[Agit8r]

Hopefully, we will find a solution so it's not needed or at least it can be reduced. The cost of foster care is significantly higher than supporting children in their home. Also, foster care is a terrible alternative to leaving kids in their home unless the kids are in danger.

The idea of pulling kids out of low income marginally dysfunctional homes and putting them in foster care is a terrible idea, both for the kids and the taxpayers. Foster care is designed as a temporary home for kids. Most of them return to their original homes.

*-*The Future of Children -

And yet we see more efforts that could take kids out of moderately dysfunctional homes, such as the proposals to drug test welfare recipients. Unfortunately, there are no easy answers.

There are MANY answers, you don't like the ones that require people to be accoutable and responsible for their own actions - and we don't like the ones that don't hold people accountable...

I don't have a problem, in principal, with requiring people who call upon the civil authority to better their situation, to abide by what the civil authority sees fit as means of bettering their situation. I'm just noting that there are likely to be consequences, like placing kids in foster homes. Now if you have an easy answer to how you can enforce more accountability into this scenario, by all means speak up

 

[Obamanation]

[

More number games...

$1000.00 would buy one hard working family exactly what it would buy one family of sloths --- you can split the 1K any way you want --- oh wait--- that isn;t true because the hard working family has to pay for their own food, and pay full rent, oh and gas to get to work, clothes for work, etc.

I guess that a $1000 does much more for the sloths than the hard workers...

The problem with that notion is that it assumes hard work is equally compensated.

It isn't.

40% of families on Food Stamps have at least one member who has a job. Just not a job that is good enough to put food on the table.

Work is compensated at the level you are willing to work for compensation. It's called FREE MARKET! Deal with it!

You are going on a tangent ONCE AGAIN!

If you don't work, and CAN -- you and your family SHOULD struggle!!!

If you want to blame those who have, instead of joining them --- YOU SHOULD STRUGGLE!!!

Life is hard --- when you don't TRY!!!

 

[Obamanation]

And yet we see more efforts that could take kids out of moderately dysfunctional homes, such as the proposals to drug test welfare recipients. Unfortunately, there are no easy answers.

There are MANY answers, you don't like the ones that require people to be accoutable and responsible for their own actions - and we don't like the ones that don't hold people accountable...

I don't have a problem, in principal, with requiring people who call upon the civil authority to better their situation, to abide by what the civil authority sees fit as means of bettering their situation. I'm just noting that there are likely to be consequences, like placing kids in foster homes. Now if you have an easy answer to how you can enforce more accountability into this scenario, by all means speak up

OK - if you don't work - you don't eat, unless you have friends or family to feed you. If you burn your bridges, your screwed!! ...so don't take advantage of people.

If you find youself without food and shelter --- YOU CAUSED IT!!! DEAL WITH IT!

 

[Agit8r]

There are MANY answers, you don't like the ones that require people to be accoutable and responsible for their own actions - and we don't like the ones that don't hold people accountable...

I don't have a problem, in principal, with requiring people who call upon the civil authority to better their situation, to abide by what the civil authority sees fit as means of bettering their situation. I'm just noting that there are likely to be consequences, like placing kids in foster homes. Now if you have an easy answer to how you can enforce more accountability into this scenario, by all means speak up

OK - if you don't work - you don't eat, unless you have friends or family to feed you. If you burn your bridges, your screwed!! ...so don't take advantage of people.

If you find youself without food and shelter --- YOU CAUSED IT!!! DEAL WITH IT!

so we are back to workhouses for the children

 

[Flopper]

Who wants to do away with foster care?

Hopefully, we will find a solution so it's not needed or at least it can be reduced. The cost of foster care is significantly higher than supporting children in their home. Also, foster care is a terrible alternative to leaving kids in their home unless the kids are in danger.

The idea of pulling kids out of low income marginally dysfunctional homes and putting them in foster care is a terrible idea, both for the kids and the taxpayers. Foster care is designed as a temporary home for kids. Most of them return to their original homes.

*-*The Future of Children -

And yet we see more efforts that could take kids out of moderately dysfunctional homes, such as the proposals to drug test welfare recipients. Unfortunately, there are no easy answers.

Very true. Social problems are the most difficult problems we face. One of my main problems with the Right is they seem to believe that if we ignore them they will go away. However, like any serious disease, it doesn't get better by pretending it doesn't exist.

 

[Obamanation]

I don't have a problem, in principal, with requiring people who call upon the civil authority to better their situation, to abide by what the civil authority sees fit as means of bettering their situation. I'm just noting that there are likely to be consequences, like placing kids in foster homes. Now if you have an easy answer to how you can enforce more accountability into this scenario, by all means speak up

OK - if you don't work - you don't eat, unless you have friends or family to feed you. If you burn your bridges, your screwed!! ...so don't take advantage of people.

If you find youself without food and shelter --- YOU CAUSED IT!!! DEAL WITH IT!

so we are back to workhouses for the children

Workhouses for children??? lol

That is funny --- Hyperbolize much???

Hey, good news for worthless dead-beats --- I'll FEED and shelter your Children! ...and when I can't, I'll find someone who will... but YOU, get off your ass and fix your situation --- if you are lucky your child will appreciate that you put down the crack-pipe and worked to get him/her back...

My church will make sure EVERY child in our city is cared for... If we don't have the money --- we will find it!!!

 

[Obamanation]

Hopefully, we will find a solution so it's not needed or at least it can be reduced. The cost of foster care is significantly higher than supporting children in their home. Also, foster care is a terrible alternative to leaving kids in their home unless the kids are in danger.

The idea of pulling kids out of low income marginally dysfunctional homes and putting them in foster care is a terrible idea, both for the kids and the taxpayers. Foster care is designed as a temporary home for kids. Most of them return to their original homes.

*-*The Future of Children -

And yet we see more efforts that could take kids out of moderately dysfunctional homes, such as the proposals to drug test welfare recipients. Unfortunately, there are no easy answers.

Very true. Social problems are the most difficult problems we face. One of my main problems with the Right is they seem to believe that if we ignore them they will go away. However, like any serious disease, it doesn't get better by pretending it doesn't exist.

Nope if you want it to get better infuse responsibility and accountability... It's the only answer...

 

[Agit8r]

OK - if you don't work - you don't eat, unless you have friends or family to feed you. If you burn your bridges, your screwed!! ...so don't take advantage of people.

If you find youself without food and shelter --- YOU CAUSED IT!!! DEAL WITH IT!

so we are back to workhouses for the children

Workhouses for children??? lol

That is funny --- Hyperbolize much???

Hey, good news for worthless dead-beats --- I'll FEED and shelter your Children! ...and when I can't, I'll find someone who will... but YOU, get off your ass and fix your situation --- if you are lucky your child will appreciate that you put down the crack-pipe and worked to get him/her back...

My church will make sure EVERY child in our city is cared for... If we don't have the money --- we will find it!!!

Every church that I've been to could barely guilt enough people into "tithing" to pay their mortgage, but good luck with that

 

[Esmeralda]

If this is true, it is obviously bad.

But if you imagine that WELFARE is the problem effecting this nation's economy, you are simply NOT very well informed.

There will always be people who will take advantage of, legally and illegally, any program and condition that exists, whether it is a social welfare program or a free economy, capitalist program. A crook is a crook, and they are not limited to those who take advantage of welfare. Crooks who take advantage of the laws regarding free economy cause a lot of harm too, the evidence being the current world wide recession.

As editec has posted, the welfare program, and abuse of the welfare program, is not the problem affecting the country's economy.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Frankly, I don't have an X-Box or a Widescreen TV. Frankly, I'm less worried about a poor family having a Widescreen (cost maybe $600.00) bought on a welfare check they probably should have used for food or utilities than I am about Mitt Romney spending $70,000 on a fucking Dancing Horse because he shipped a bunch of middle class jobs off to China.

When will you libs get it through your think skulls that it is NONE OF YOUR FUCKING Business how an individual spends their money.
You are 100% moron. You are just a pissed off bitter individual who through their own fault has accomplished nothing and blames every one else for his faults.
You're nothing but an unorganized grabasstic piece of amphibian shit.

Quite right.

So it's none of your business that a welfare family spends their money on a wide screen. But you guys whine about it incessantly.

Oh YES IT IS...Because it is the TAXPAYER'S..Which in part makes it MY MONEY.

 

[thereisnospoon]

If this is true, it is obviously bad.

But if you imagine that WELFARE is the problem effecting this nation's economy, you are simply NOT very well informed.

There will always be people who will take advantage of, legally and illegally, any program and condition that exists, whether it is a social welfare program or a free economy, capitalist program. A crook is a crook, and they are not limited to those who take advantage of welfare. Crooks who take advantage of the laws regarding free economy cause a lot of harm too, the evidence being the current world wide recession.

As editec has posted, the welfare program, and abuse of the welfare program, is not the problem affecting the country's economy.

Yes it is. Because we spend trillions of dollars that are being thrown down a rat hole.
This is money taken from the productive private sector and turned over to the unproductive public sector.
Government creates nothing. It consumes.

 

[thereisnospoon]

...I'm sure you didn't think that through... since about 20% of my fed taxes goes directly to programs that are redistribution in nature...

We talking about Social Security and Medicare too?

That argument does not wash.

 

[nitroz]

Time to stop the food stamps from coming in and for CPS to step in if she can't do anything her self.

It's obvious that she's in it for a free ride.

 

[Agit8r]

[MENTION][/MENTION]

Time to stop the food stamps from coming in and for CPS to step in if she can't do anything her self.

It's obvious that she's in it for a free ride.

AAAANNND, now the discussion has come full circle