GOP war on the poor: Georgia

[Flopper]

But that's the problem. A lot of these people DO work. A lot of them have two jobs. And some of them want jobs and can't find them because they are often competing with a college grad who can't find a job, either.
40% of Food Stamp recipiants have at least one person in the family with a job.

But when you have a situation where employers are openly discussing cutting employees hours to 32 hours a week so that they don't have to provide health care and dump them off on Medicaid, then you really don't have much room to complain when government grows.

Again- you idiots make this mess when you put the greed of employers over the needs of employees.

Links to the statistics on Americans with two jobs taking welfare?? Provide them.... Secondly, we all KNOW food stamp usage has shot through the roof and college grads have a hard time finding jobs.. it was a part of this election.. you know, the one you liberals voted to keep the same RULING ELITE -- BTW What's the definition of insanity?

Why do all you people that stand with Israel, and proudly advertise the fact, worry that the poor in this country are also getting aid? You know Israel's been getting aid for generations? Maybe time to cut Israel loose also.

A Conservative Estimate of Total U.S. Aid To Israel: More Than $123 Billion. This is more than we spend on food stamps and aid to families with dependent children.

Washington Report on Middle East Affairs | Telling the truth for 30 years

 

[LoneLaugher]

The four biggest lies told about welfare:

Myth #1: Welfare benefits go to minority women who never leave the dole.
THE FACT IS, MORE WHITES RECEIVE aid than blacks or Hispanics. Two out of three welfare recipients are children, not adults. And contrary to the stereotype of families forever dependent, nearly three out of four women receiving aid get off welfare within two years.

Myth #2: Welfare encourages teen pregnancy and large, dependent families.
The states with the highest benefits have the lowest rates of additional births, and the states with the lowest benefits have the highest. Contrary to the myth, AFDC families also are slightly smaller than the U.S. average.

Myth #3: People on welfare live pretty well.

TOGETHER, AFDC AND FOOD-STAMP assistance for the family totals $661 per month, and $7,932 per year. That's just 64 percent of the federal poverty line for a family of three, which stands at a grim $12,320. Just one in five AFDC families receive housing assistance.

Myth #4: Welfare is a huge drain on the federal budget.
In 2006, about 59 billion dollars, or 2.5%% of the federal budget, was spent on traditional social welfare programs while 92 billion was spend on corporate subsidies. During the recession an it's aftermath, these social welfare programs were just over 3% of the federal budget.

The four biggest lies told about welfare reform
Welfare Statistics: Government Spends More on Corporate Welfare Than..

In case anyone missed it.

 

[LibertyLemming]

Of course there are more whites, there are more whites in the USA. If you measure it as a percentage of race it's not whites who dominate the rankings. This is all beyond the point of course, the point is that we should not be forcing supposedly "free" citizens to participate in welfare programs at threat of being locked in a cage for not wanting to participate. That is not the land of the free my friend.

 

[martybegan]

You are correct. You do have to pay for the mistakes of others; be it in the form of taxes, increased crime, or deterioration of our schools and neighborhoods.

Determining who is at fault for personal economic failure is an exercise in futility. Although the father has a drug history and can't hold down a job, the mother was knocked up as a teen and dropped out of school, or there are mental of physical problems, we are still left with the problem of providing support for the family. Withdrawing that support does not fix the problem. It only makes it worst, particular for the children.

Seekng to punish all that abuse the system may seem like a good idea. However putting that idea into practice often turns out to be very expensive and have unanticipated consequences.

Social problems are the most difficult problems a nation faces but they must be addressed because they are at the heart of the nation's financial, educational, and productivity problems. The Right advises that government should just ignore social problems. Ignore the poor, the homeless, the unemployed, the uninsured, and the uneducated. Leave it to the businesses community, charities, and churches to solve these problems. Anyone who actually believes this nonsense is very naive.

The problem is you are trying to fix this shit with borrowed money, and most organizations are not even trying to get these people on thier feet, at least not by using coercion. If you are on the dole, your ass should belong to the government, and you should have to do anything they tell you.

Instead we have taken the shame out of not being able to provide for yourself or your family, resulting in the mess we have now.

So you are saying we should have some WPA type projects with administrators, project planners to setup projects, investigators to determine who can do the work, and supervisors to oversee the work. Then you would have to contend with complains from private contractors and government workers being displaced as well as workers being put into jobs they are not qualified to do.

There really are no simple solutions to social welfare problems.

If we have to do something it is better than than paying them to rot in the ghetto.

People will throw arounds accusations of slavery, but tough shit on that.

 

[martybegan]

Would you care to back up what you have said?

So we have no groups of people that stay on welfare for long periods of time? No intergenerational welfare families? No people gaming the system? No situation where it is often better to be on welfare than working?

Anytime someone wants to clamp down on the welfare state liberals such as you start hemming and hawing about abusing the poor. Well guess what? If asking them to get on thier feet, or forcing them to do some work or learn something is "abuse" then I guess its true the real reason liberals like welfare programs is that is keeps poor people voting for them.

You are backing up your statement by ASKING ME QUESTIONS?

How many? How many ABLE BODIED, SANE ADULT AMERICANS REFUSE TO WORK AN AVAILABLE JOB IN FAVOR OF LIVING OFF OF TAXPAYER FUNDS. And how much do they cost this nation's taxpayers?

How many?

And.............destitute people do not vote. Poor people do not fucking vote in large numbers. Keeping people poor does not result in electoral victory you jackass.

Plenty of poor people vote, and you know it. They get sheparded there by thier local democratic poll people. Go to a poor neighborhood on election day, and the polls are packed.

Stop lying please.

 

[Freewill]

Prove that Obama increased poverty, please.

YEAR: POVERTY%

2012: 16.3%
2011: 15.4%
2010: 15.1%
2009: 14.3%
2008: 13.2% The Obamanation starts.
2007: 12.5%
2006: 12.3%
2005: 12.6%
2004: 12.7
2003: 12.5
2002: 12.1%

2012 US Poverty Rate | Historical Poverty Rates and DOW Jones Average

 

[Si modo]

Prove that Obama increased poverty, please.

From the US Census Bureau:

Table 5. Percent of People By Ratio of Income to Poverty Level: 1970 to 2011
Year All People People age 65 years and over
0.50 0.75 1.00 1.25 1.50 1.75 2.00 0.50 0.75 1.00 1.25 1.50 1.75 2.00
2011........ 6.6 10.3 15.0 19.8 24.8 29.7 34.4 2.3 4.2 8.7 14.5 21.0 27.2 33.6
2010 17/... 6.7 10.5 15.1 19.8 24.7 29.2 34.0 2.5 4.5 8.9 14.7 21.5 28.2 34.5
2009........ 6.3 9.9 14.3 18.7 23.6 28.5 33.0 2.6 4.5 8.9 14.3 20.4 27.3 33.7
2008........ 5.7 9.1 13.2 17.9 22.6 27.3 31.9 2.6 4.8 9.7 15.9 22.7 29.8 36.2
2007........ 5.2 8.4 12.5 17.0 21.8 26.1 30.5 2.5 4.9 9.7 16.1 23.1 29.6 36.0
2006........ 5.2 8.5 12.3 16.8 21.3 25.8 30.5 2.5 5.1 9.4 15.6 22.4 29.0 35.6
2005........ 5.4 8.6 12.6 16.8 21.5 26.1 31.0 2.6 5.0 10.1 16.7 23.6 30.7 36.8
2004 14/.... 5.4 8.6 12.7 17.1 21.6 26.6 31.3 2.6 5.0 9.8 16.5 23.9 31.4 37.9
2003........ 5.3 8.5 12.5 16.9 21.7 26.5 31.1 2.6 4.9 10.2 16.9 24.6 32.2 38.7
2002........ 4.9 8.1 12.1 16.5 21.4 26.1 30.5 2.2 4.6 10.4 16.9 24.6 32.1 38.4
2001........ 4.8 7.8 11.7 16.1 20.8 25.6 30.2 2.2 4.5 10.1 16.6 24.2 31.3 38.2
2000 12/.... 4.5 7.5 11.3 15.6 20.2 24.9 29.3 2.3 4.5 9.9 16.7 24.1 31.4 37.4
1999 11/.... 4.7 7.9 11.9 16.3 21.1 25.8 30.3 2.1 4.1 9.7 15.7 22.8 29.5 35.9
1998........ 5.1 8.5 12.7 17.0 21.5 26.0 30.8 2.3 4.7 10.5 16.8 23.7 30.3 37.2
1997........ 5.4 9.0 13.3 17.8 22.5 27.2 32.1 2.2 4.6 10.5 17.0 23.9 31.9 38.7
1996........ 5.4 9.3 13.7 18.5 23.4 28.5 33.5 2.1 4.9 10.8 18.4 25.2 33.0 40.2
1995........ 5.3 9.3 13.8 18.5 23.5 28.6 33.6 1.9 4.7 10.5 17.7 25.3 32.5 39.6
1994........ 5.9 10.1 14.5 19.3 24.3 29.3 34.3 2.5 5.6 11.7 18.7 26.3 33.8 41.2
1993 10/... 6.2 10.5 15.1 20.0 25.0 30.3 35.2 2.4 5.6 12.2 19.7 27.4 35.2 42.0
1992 9/... 6.1 10.2 14.8 19.7 24.5 29.4 34.4 2.3 5.6 12.9 20.5 27.7 34.6 41.5
1991 8/... 5.6 9.7 14.2 18.9 23.8 28.7 33.5 2.2 5.2 12.4 19.7 26.8 33.9 40.4
1990........ 5.2 9.1 13.5 18.0 22.7 27.6 32.3 2.1 5.2 12.2 19.0 26.3 33.2 39.2
1989........ 4.9 8.4 12.8 17.3 22.0 26.6 31.4 2.0 4.6 11.4 19.1 27.2 34.3 40.5
1988........ 5.2 8.8 13.0 17.5 22.2 26.8 31.7 1.9 4.7 12.0 20.0 27.5 33.9 40.4
1987 7/... 5.2 9.0 13.4 17.9 22.3 26.9 31.7 1.9 5.3 12.5 20.2 27.4 33.6 40.3
1986........ 5.3 9.4 14.0 18.7 23.9 28.9 33.9 2.1 4.7 12.4 20.5 28.0 34.5 40.8
1985........ 5.2 9.4 13.6 18.7 23.9 28.9 33.9 2.0 5.0 12.6 20.9 28.6 35.7 42.0
1984........ 5.5 9.7 14.4 19.4 24.3 29.3 34.6 1.7 4.6 12.4 21.2 29.1 36.1 42.6
1983 6/... 5.9 10.2 15.2 20.3 25.6 30.8 36.1 2.2 5.3 13.8 22.0 29.5 36.9 43.5
1982........ 5.6 10.1 15.0 20.3 25.5 30.9 36.6 2.5 6.0 14.6 23.7 31.8 39.2 46.0
1981 5/... 4.9 9.1 14.0 19.3 24.7 30.1 35.7 2.0 6.3 15.3 25.2 33.7 40.8 48.0
1980........ 4.4 8.3 13.0 18.1 23.1 28.4 33.9 2.1 6.3 15.7 25.7 34.4 42.1 49.2
1979 4/..... 3.8 7.3 11.7 16.4 21.1 26.1 31.3 2.4 6.6 15.2 24.7 32.9 41.0 48.2
1978........ 3.6 6.9 11.4 15.8 20.5 25.9 31.0 1.7 5.3 14.0 23.4 32.4 40.6 47.3
1977........ 3.5 7.0 11.6 16.7 21.8 27.2 32.7 1.7 5.4 14.1 24.5 34.2 42.7 50.0
1976........ 3.3 7.0 11.8 16.7 22.2 27.8 33.5 1.9 5.8 15.0 25.0 34.0 42.5 49.7
1975........ 3.7 7.3 12.3 17.6 23.3 28.8 34.6 2.0 5.7 15.3 25.4 35.0 42.8 50.3
1974 3/..... (NA) (NA) 11.2 16.5 21.6 (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) 14.6 25.9 35.1 (NA) (NA)
1973........ (NA) (NA) 11.1 15.8 20.7 (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) 16.3 26.8 35.7 (NA) (NA)
1972........ (NA) (NA) (NA) 16.8 (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA)
1971 2/..... (NA) (NA) (NA) 17.8 (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA)
1970........ (NA) (NA) (NA) 17.6 (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA)
"SOURCE: U.S. Bureau of the Census, Current Population Survey, Annual Social and Economic Supplements.
For information on confidentiality protection, sampling error, nonsampling error, and definitions, see http://www.census.gov/apsd/techdoc/cps/cpsmar12.pdf
Footnotes are available at http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/poverty/histpov/footnotes.html."


http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/poverty/data/historical/hstpov5.xls (for a clear format of data)

Bottom line, record levels of those in poverty under Obama.

 

[Freewill]

The uniformed won't care and won't read what you have posted. They don't want to know.

Prove that Obama increased poverty, please.

From the US Census Bureau:

Table 5. Percent of People By Ratio of Income to Poverty Level: 1970 to 2011
Year All People People age 65 years and over
0.50 0.75 1.00 1.25 1.50 1.75 2.00 0.50 0.75 1.00 1.25 1.50 1.75 2.00
2011........ 6.6 10.3 15.0 19.8 24.8 29.7 34.4 2.3 4.2 8.7 14.5 21.0 27.2 33.6
2010 17/... 6.7 10.5 15.1 19.8 24.7 29.2 34.0 2.5 4.5 8.9 14.7 21.5 28.2 34.5
2009........ 6.3 9.9 14.3 18.7 23.6 28.5 33.0 2.6 4.5 8.9 14.3 20.4 27.3 33.7
2008........ 5.7 9.1 13.2 17.9 22.6 27.3 31.9 2.6 4.8 9.7 15.9 22.7 29.8 36.2
2007........ 5.2 8.4 12.5 17.0 21.8 26.1 30.5 2.5 4.9 9.7 16.1 23.1 29.6 36.0
2006........ 5.2 8.5 12.3 16.8 21.3 25.8 30.5 2.5 5.1 9.4 15.6 22.4 29.0 35.6
2005........ 5.4 8.6 12.6 16.8 21.5 26.1 31.0 2.6 5.0 10.1 16.7 23.6 30.7 36.8
2004 14/.... 5.4 8.6 12.7 17.1 21.6 26.6 31.3 2.6 5.0 9.8 16.5 23.9 31.4 37.9
2003........ 5.3 8.5 12.5 16.9 21.7 26.5 31.1 2.6 4.9 10.2 16.9 24.6 32.2 38.7
2002........ 4.9 8.1 12.1 16.5 21.4 26.1 30.5 2.2 4.6 10.4 16.9 24.6 32.1 38.4
2001........ 4.8 7.8 11.7 16.1 20.8 25.6 30.2 2.2 4.5 10.1 16.6 24.2 31.3 38.2
2000 12/.... 4.5 7.5 11.3 15.6 20.2 24.9 29.3 2.3 4.5 9.9 16.7 24.1 31.4 37.4
1999 11/.... 4.7 7.9 11.9 16.3 21.1 25.8 30.3 2.1 4.1 9.7 15.7 22.8 29.5 35.9
1998........ 5.1 8.5 12.7 17.0 21.5 26.0 30.8 2.3 4.7 10.5 16.8 23.7 30.3 37.2
1997........ 5.4 9.0 13.3 17.8 22.5 27.2 32.1 2.2 4.6 10.5 17.0 23.9 31.9 38.7
1996........ 5.4 9.3 13.7 18.5 23.4 28.5 33.5 2.1 4.9 10.8 18.4 25.2 33.0 40.2
1995........ 5.3 9.3 13.8 18.5 23.5 28.6 33.6 1.9 4.7 10.5 17.7 25.3 32.5 39.6
1994........ 5.9 10.1 14.5 19.3 24.3 29.3 34.3 2.5 5.6 11.7 18.7 26.3 33.8 41.2
1993 10/... 6.2 10.5 15.1 20.0 25.0 30.3 35.2 2.4 5.6 12.2 19.7 27.4 35.2 42.0
1992 9/... 6.1 10.2 14.8 19.7 24.5 29.4 34.4 2.3 5.6 12.9 20.5 27.7 34.6 41.5
1991 8/... 5.6 9.7 14.2 18.9 23.8 28.7 33.5 2.2 5.2 12.4 19.7 26.8 33.9 40.4
1990........ 5.2 9.1 13.5 18.0 22.7 27.6 32.3 2.1 5.2 12.2 19.0 26.3 33.2 39.2
1989........ 4.9 8.4 12.8 17.3 22.0 26.6 31.4 2.0 4.6 11.4 19.1 27.2 34.3 40.5
1988........ 5.2 8.8 13.0 17.5 22.2 26.8 31.7 1.9 4.7 12.0 20.0 27.5 33.9 40.4
1987 7/... 5.2 9.0 13.4 17.9 22.3 26.9 31.7 1.9 5.3 12.5 20.2 27.4 33.6 40.3
1986........ 5.3 9.4 14.0 18.7 23.9 28.9 33.9 2.1 4.7 12.4 20.5 28.0 34.5 40.8
1985........ 5.2 9.4 13.6 18.7 23.9 28.9 33.9 2.0 5.0 12.6 20.9 28.6 35.7 42.0
1984........ 5.5 9.7 14.4 19.4 24.3 29.3 34.6 1.7 4.6 12.4 21.2 29.1 36.1 42.6
1983 6/... 5.9 10.2 15.2 20.3 25.6 30.8 36.1 2.2 5.3 13.8 22.0 29.5 36.9 43.5
1982........ 5.6 10.1 15.0 20.3 25.5 30.9 36.6 2.5 6.0 14.6 23.7 31.8 39.2 46.0
1981 5/... 4.9 9.1 14.0 19.3 24.7 30.1 35.7 2.0 6.3 15.3 25.2 33.7 40.8 48.0
1980........ 4.4 8.3 13.0 18.1 23.1 28.4 33.9 2.1 6.3 15.7 25.7 34.4 42.1 49.2
1979 4/..... 3.8 7.3 11.7 16.4 21.1 26.1 31.3 2.4 6.6 15.2 24.7 32.9 41.0 48.2
1978........ 3.6 6.9 11.4 15.8 20.5 25.9 31.0 1.7 5.3 14.0 23.4 32.4 40.6 47.3
1977........ 3.5 7.0 11.6 16.7 21.8 27.2 32.7 1.7 5.4 14.1 24.5 34.2 42.7 50.0
1976........ 3.3 7.0 11.8 16.7 22.2 27.8 33.5 1.9 5.8 15.0 25.0 34.0 42.5 49.7
1975........ 3.7 7.3 12.3 17.6 23.3 28.8 34.6 2.0 5.7 15.3 25.4 35.0 42.8 50.3
1974 3/..... (NA) (NA) 11.2 16.5 21.6 (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) 14.6 25.9 35.1 (NA) (NA)
1973........ (NA) (NA) 11.1 15.8 20.7 (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) 16.3 26.8 35.7 (NA) (NA)
1972........ (NA) (NA) (NA) 16.8 (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA)
1971 2/..... (NA) (NA) (NA) 17.8 (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA)
1970........ (NA) (NA) (NA) 17.6 (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA)
"SOURCE: U.S. Bureau of the Census, Current Population Survey, Annual Social and Economic Supplements.
For information on confidentiality protection, sampling error, nonsampling error, and definitions, see http://www.census.gov/apsd/techdoc/cps/cpsmar12.pdf
Footnotes are available at http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/poverty/histpov/footnotes.html."


http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/poverty/data/historical/hstpov5.xls (for a clear format of data)

Bottom line, record levels of those in poverty under Obama.

 

[Flopper]

The problem is you are trying to fix this shit with borrowed money, and most organizations are not even trying to get these people on thier feet, at least not by using coercion. If you are on the dole, your ass should belong to the government, and you should have to do anything they tell you.

Instead we have taken the shame out of not being able to provide for yourself or your family, resulting in the mess we have now.

So you are saying we should have some WPA type projects with administrators, project planners to setup projects, investigators to determine who can do the work, and supervisors to oversee the work. Then you would have to contend with complains from private contractors and government workers being displaced as well as workers being put into jobs they are not qualified to do.

There really are no simple solutions to social welfare problems.

If we have to do something it is better than than paying them to rot in the ghetto.

People will throw arounds accusations of slavery, but tough shit on that.

You really seem to be out of touch with reality. Most people receiving welfare do not live in ghettos. Furthermore, many people on welfare have jobs. They tend to be minimum wage, temp or part time jobs, that do not pay enough to cover rent and put food on the table.

A new CBPP analysis of budget and Census data, however, shows that more than 90 percent of the benefit dollars that entitlement and other mandatory programs spend go to assist people who are elderly, seriously disabled, or members of working households — not to able-bodied, working-age Americans who choose not to work.

In spite of facts, the right continues to claim that people would rather be on welfare than work. They continue to ignore the fact that corporate welfare cost the government more than social welfare.


Contrary to "Entitlement Society" Rhetoric, Over Nine-Tenths of Entitlement Benefits Go to Elderly, Disabled, or Working Households — Center on Budget and Policy Priorities

 

[squeeze berry]

Welfare = Democrats buying votes with our money

Votes the right wing lost by screwing over those people to start with.

If you gave those people good paying jobs instead of screwing them at every oppurtunity, they might be incliined to vote REpublican.

who is standing in your way.?
After all your king won a mandate twice.

shouldn't everyone have a good paying job by now?

 

[Synthaholic]

Welfare fraud is rampant. I hope every single state will begin its own investigation and start weeding out grown men& women who are capable of working-- lying around and getting freebies. It's beyond ridiculous and your hyperbole is duly noted. Calm down and stop using DNC crazed rantings- "REPUBLICANS HATE THE POOR!" You liberals are one sick group of people. You truly are. You don't want to do ANYTHING to fix our problems.. just use it all for political score-- Sooo sick of it. Yesterday rdean ranted on about a republican Lt. Governor wanting parents who get free lunches for their kids, to have to attend parent teacher conferences, accusing all republicans of wanting to starve kids.. IT'S SOOOOOO RIDICULOUS! Let's just keep throwing money away that we don't have without reforms.. Let's not fix a broken education system or look for welfare fraud.. YOU and your comrades make it impossible for anything to get truly done because you LIE and demonize people who actually try to get something done.

What are you doing here, welsher?

 

[LoneLaugher]

So we have no groups of people that stay on welfare for long periods of time? No intergenerational welfare families? No people gaming the system? No situation where it is often better to be on welfare than working?

Anytime someone wants to clamp down on the welfare state liberals such as you start hemming and hawing about abusing the poor. Well guess what? If asking them to get on thier feet, or forcing them to do some work or learn something is "abuse" then I guess its true the real reason liberals like welfare programs is that is keeps poor people voting for them.

You are backing up your statement by ASKING ME QUESTIONS?

How many? How many ABLE BODIED, SANE ADULT AMERICANS REFUSE TO WORK AN AVAILABLE JOB IN FAVOR OF LIVING OFF OF TAXPAYER FUNDS. And how much do they cost this nation's taxpayers?

How many?

And.............destitute people do not vote. Poor people do not fucking vote in large numbers. Keeping people poor does not result in electoral victory you jackass.

Plenty of poor people vote, and you know it. They get sheparded there by thier local democratic poll people. Go to a poor neighborhood on election day, and the polls are packed.

Stop lying please.

Odd. You went to the last point. How about addressing the earlier question. HOW MANY?

 

[LoneLaugher]

Prove that Obama increased poverty, please.

YEAR: POVERTY%

2012: 16.3%
2011: 15.4%
2010: 15.1%
2009: 14.3%
2008: 13.2% The Obamanation starts.
2007: 12.5%
2006: 12.3%
2005: 12.6%
2004: 12.7
2003: 12.5
2002: 12.1%

2012 US Poverty Rate | Historical Poverty Rates and DOW Jones Average

That does not prove the claim, does it?

 

[LoneLaugher]

Prove that Obama increased poverty, please.

From the US Census Bureau:

Table 5. Percent of People By Ratio of Income to Poverty Level: 1970 to 2011
Year All People People age 65 years and over
0.50 0.75 1.00 1.25 1.50 1.75 2.00 0.50 0.75 1.00 1.25 1.50 1.75 2.00
2011........ 6.6 10.3 15.0 19.8 24.8 29.7 34.4 2.3 4.2 8.7 14.5 21.0 27.2 33.6
2010 17/... 6.7 10.5 15.1 19.8 24.7 29.2 34.0 2.5 4.5 8.9 14.7 21.5 28.2 34.5
2009........ 6.3 9.9 14.3 18.7 23.6 28.5 33.0 2.6 4.5 8.9 14.3 20.4 27.3 33.7
2008........ 5.7 9.1 13.2 17.9 22.6 27.3 31.9 2.6 4.8 9.7 15.9 22.7 29.8 36.2
2007........ 5.2 8.4 12.5 17.0 21.8 26.1 30.5 2.5 4.9 9.7 16.1 23.1 29.6 36.0
2006........ 5.2 8.5 12.3 16.8 21.3 25.8 30.5 2.5 5.1 9.4 15.6 22.4 29.0 35.6
2005........ 5.4 8.6 12.6 16.8 21.5 26.1 31.0 2.6 5.0 10.1 16.7 23.6 30.7 36.8
2004 14/.... 5.4 8.6 12.7 17.1 21.6 26.6 31.3 2.6 5.0 9.8 16.5 23.9 31.4 37.9
2003........ 5.3 8.5 12.5 16.9 21.7 26.5 31.1 2.6 4.9 10.2 16.9 24.6 32.2 38.7
2002........ 4.9 8.1 12.1 16.5 21.4 26.1 30.5 2.2 4.6 10.4 16.9 24.6 32.1 38.4
2001........ 4.8 7.8 11.7 16.1 20.8 25.6 30.2 2.2 4.5 10.1 16.6 24.2 31.3 38.2
2000 12/.... 4.5 7.5 11.3 15.6 20.2 24.9 29.3 2.3 4.5 9.9 16.7 24.1 31.4 37.4
1999 11/.... 4.7 7.9 11.9 16.3 21.1 25.8 30.3 2.1 4.1 9.7 15.7 22.8 29.5 35.9
1998........ 5.1 8.5 12.7 17.0 21.5 26.0 30.8 2.3 4.7 10.5 16.8 23.7 30.3 37.2
1997........ 5.4 9.0 13.3 17.8 22.5 27.2 32.1 2.2 4.6 10.5 17.0 23.9 31.9 38.7
1996........ 5.4 9.3 13.7 18.5 23.4 28.5 33.5 2.1 4.9 10.8 18.4 25.2 33.0 40.2
1995........ 5.3 9.3 13.8 18.5 23.5 28.6 33.6 1.9 4.7 10.5 17.7 25.3 32.5 39.6
1994........ 5.9 10.1 14.5 19.3 24.3 29.3 34.3 2.5 5.6 11.7 18.7 26.3 33.8 41.2
1993 10/... 6.2 10.5 15.1 20.0 25.0 30.3 35.2 2.4 5.6 12.2 19.7 27.4 35.2 42.0
1992 9/... 6.1 10.2 14.8 19.7 24.5 29.4 34.4 2.3 5.6 12.9 20.5 27.7 34.6 41.5
1991 8/... 5.6 9.7 14.2 18.9 23.8 28.7 33.5 2.2 5.2 12.4 19.7 26.8 33.9 40.4
1990........ 5.2 9.1 13.5 18.0 22.7 27.6 32.3 2.1 5.2 12.2 19.0 26.3 33.2 39.2
1989........ 4.9 8.4 12.8 17.3 22.0 26.6 31.4 2.0 4.6 11.4 19.1 27.2 34.3 40.5
1988........ 5.2 8.8 13.0 17.5 22.2 26.8 31.7 1.9 4.7 12.0 20.0 27.5 33.9 40.4
1987 7/... 5.2 9.0 13.4 17.9 22.3 26.9 31.7 1.9 5.3 12.5 20.2 27.4 33.6 40.3
1986........ 5.3 9.4 14.0 18.7 23.9 28.9 33.9 2.1 4.7 12.4 20.5 28.0 34.5 40.8
1985........ 5.2 9.4 13.6 18.7 23.9 28.9 33.9 2.0 5.0 12.6 20.9 28.6 35.7 42.0
1984........ 5.5 9.7 14.4 19.4 24.3 29.3 34.6 1.7 4.6 12.4 21.2 29.1 36.1 42.6
1983 6/... 5.9 10.2 15.2 20.3 25.6 30.8 36.1 2.2 5.3 13.8 22.0 29.5 36.9 43.5
1982........ 5.6 10.1 15.0 20.3 25.5 30.9 36.6 2.5 6.0 14.6 23.7 31.8 39.2 46.0
1981 5/... 4.9 9.1 14.0 19.3 24.7 30.1 35.7 2.0 6.3 15.3 25.2 33.7 40.8 48.0
1980........ 4.4 8.3 13.0 18.1 23.1 28.4 33.9 2.1 6.3 15.7 25.7 34.4 42.1 49.2
1979 4/..... 3.8 7.3 11.7 16.4 21.1 26.1 31.3 2.4 6.6 15.2 24.7 32.9 41.0 48.2
1978........ 3.6 6.9 11.4 15.8 20.5 25.9 31.0 1.7 5.3 14.0 23.4 32.4 40.6 47.3
1977........ 3.5 7.0 11.6 16.7 21.8 27.2 32.7 1.7 5.4 14.1 24.5 34.2 42.7 50.0
1976........ 3.3 7.0 11.8 16.7 22.2 27.8 33.5 1.9 5.8 15.0 25.0 34.0 42.5 49.7
1975........ 3.7 7.3 12.3 17.6 23.3 28.8 34.6 2.0 5.7 15.3 25.4 35.0 42.8 50.3
1974 3/..... (NA) (NA) 11.2 16.5 21.6 (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) 14.6 25.9 35.1 (NA) (NA)
1973........ (NA) (NA) 11.1 15.8 20.7 (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) 16.3 26.8 35.7 (NA) (NA)
1972........ (NA) (NA) (NA) 16.8 (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA)
1971 2/..... (NA) (NA) (NA) 17.8 (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA)
1970........ (NA) (NA) (NA) 17.6 (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA)
"SOURCE: U.S. Bureau of the Census, Current Population Survey, Annual Social and Economic Supplements.
For information on confidentiality protection, sampling error, nonsampling error, and definitions, see http://www.census.gov/apsd/techdoc/cps/cpsmar12.pdf
Footnotes are available at http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/poverty/histpov/footnotes.html."


http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/poverty/data/historical/hstpov5.xls (for a clear format of data)

Bottom line, record levels of those in poverty under Obama.

And nether does that. I'm disappointed in you.

 

[bripat9643]

Prove that Obama increased poverty, please.

YEAR: POVERTY%

2012: 16.3%
2011: 15.4%
2010: 15.1%
2009: 14.3%
2008: 13.2% The Obamanation starts.
2007: 12.5%
2006: 12.3%
2005: 12.6%
2004: 12.7
2003: 12.5
2002: 12.1%

2012 US Poverty Rate | Historical Poverty Rates and DOW Jones Average

That does not prove the claim, does it?

Yes it does, you stupid turd.

 

[LoneLaugher]

YEAR: POVERTY%

2012: 16.3%
2011: 15.4%
2010: 15.1%
2009: 14.3%
2008: 13.2% The Obamanation starts.
2007: 12.5%
2006: 12.3%
2005: 12.6%
2004: 12.7
2003: 12.5
2002: 12.1%

2012 US Poverty Rate | Historical Poverty Rates and DOW Jones Average

That does not prove the claim, does it?

Yes it does, you stupid turd.

Stupid turd? As opposed to a smart turd?

Does that chart prove that Obama increased poverty? Or does it simply prove that poverty increased before and after he became President without addressing the cause?

C'mon......you are a smart turd.....you can do it.

 

[JoeB131]

Prove that Obama increased poverty, please.

YEAR: POVERTY%

2012: 16.3%
2011: 15.4%
2010: 15.1%
2009: 14.3%
2008: 13.2% The Obamanation starts.
2007: 12.5%
2006: 12.3%
2005: 12.6%
2004: 12.7
2003: 12.5
2002: 12.1%

2012 US Poverty Rate | Historical Poverty Rates and DOW Jones Average

Besides the fact that the Obama Adminstration didn't start until 2009, not 2008, how is it that under Bush, poverty jumped from 12.1% to 14.3% and you guys don't have a problem with that, but it goes up further do to the damage Bush did under Obama, and you guys suddenly care about the poor.

 

[bripat9643]

Prove that Obama increased poverty, please.

YEAR: POVERTY%

2012: 16.3%
2011: 15.4%
2010: 15.1%
2009: 14.3%
2008: 13.2% The Obamanation starts.
2007: 12.5%
2006: 12.3%
2005: 12.6%
2004: 12.7
2003: 12.5
2002: 12.1%

2012 US Poverty Rate | Historical Poverty Rates and DOW Jones Average

Besides the fact that the Obama Adminstration didn't start until 2009, not 2008, how is it that under Bush, poverty jumped from 12.1% to 14.3% and you guys don't have a problem with that, but it goes up further do to the damage Bush did under Obama, and you guys suddenly care about the poor.

For obvious reasons, the poverty rate always goes up when unemployment increases. Under Obama, the rate went up and stayed up. That's never happened before. According to the liberal mantra during the Bush administration "it happened on his watch," Obama is responsible. Who are you going to blame if not Obama?

 

[JoeB131]

Besides the fact that the Obama Adminstration didn't start until 2009, not 2008, how is it that under Bush, poverty jumped from 12.1% to 14.3% and you guys don't have a problem with that, but it goes up further do to the damage Bush did under Obama, and you guys suddenly care about the poor.

For obvious reasons, the poverty rate always goes up when unemployment increases. Under Obama, the rate went up and stayed up. That's never happened before. According to the liberal mantra during the Bush administration "it happened on his watch," Obama is responsible. Who are you going to blame if not Obama?

I would blame his predecessors for signing all the bad trade treaties that allowed jobs to be moved overseas, and even gave tax credits to companies that moved operations, to start with.

Incidently, I didn't blame Bush for the 2001-2 recession. The seeds for that were laid well before he got there.

the 2008 recession, that was all him.

 

[bripat9643]

Besides the fact that the Obama Adminstration didn't start until 2009, not 2008, how is it that under Bush, poverty jumped from 12.1% to 14.3% and you guys don't have a problem with that, but it goes up further do to the damage Bush did under Obama, and you guys suddenly care about the poor.

For obvious reasons, the poverty rate always goes up when unemployment increases. Under Obama, the rate went up and stayed up. That's never happened before. According to the liberal mantra during the Bush administration "it happened on his watch," Obama is responsible. Who are you going to blame if not Obama?

I would blame his predecessors for signing all the bad trade treaties that allowed jobs to be moved overseas, and even gave tax credits to companies that moved operations, to start with.

Incidently, I didn't blame Bush for the 2001-2 recession. The seeds for that were laid well before he got there.

the 2008 recession, that was all him.

Yeah, how did I know you were going to blame BOOOOOOSH?

No tax credits were given to companies for moving overseas. And I'm not aware of any trade treaties that Bush signed. However, Clinton signed NAFTA. Perhaps you meant to blame him for unemployment during the Obama administration. Or maybe even Kennedy or Johnson.

As for the 2008 recession, normally recessions cure themselves. It's only under the Obama administration that a depressed economy has become a permanent fixture.