Obama and the 'Fiscal Cliff'

[PoliticalChic]

1. Re-examine the welfare solution for poverty. The very first step is to reinstitute the real definition of “poverty.” It is “no home-no heat- no food.” That’s poverty.

2. The Progressives have corrupted the meaning for several reasons, not the least of which is to maximize the vote from recipients of various bogus programs…such as food stamps.




Let’s take a look at three groups included in the poverty statistics.

3. The working poor are aiding by the Earned Income Tax Credits, of Republican provenance.

4. There is the bogus category created by the progressives, the ‘having-not-quite-as-much’ poor….many of whom have more accoutrements than the folks supporting them.

a. “When you walk into the bathroom of the average American home you are a witness to history. It has taken centuries for the toilet and tub to end up in the same room. Those two conveniences, plus shower, washbowl, and running water are a grander collection of comfort and ease than even kings knew before the 20th century.” (Readers Digest) Could any competent person claim that pre-twentieth-century kings be called impoverished? Of course not. So, an American today matches the “comfort and ease” that kings once wished for! That includes every American who, happily falls outside of the “no home-no heat- no food” definition.

b. Since 89% of the ‘poor’ own a microwave, they have a home. Poor Politics - Robert Rector - National Review Online

5. And the ‘helpless poor.’ Not any amount of monetary aid given will help these poor souls. Case in point…Jeffrey Hillman, the homeless man given new shoes by NYPD Officer Larry DePrimo. Hillman is neither homeless, nor is he scamming the system. “According to the Department of Homeless Services, Hillman has an apartment, paid for through a combination of Section 8 vouchers, Social Security disability and veterans benefits. The housing comes with a wide array of services, including drug, alcohol and mental health treatment.
Boots were only part of it* - NY Daily News




7. One should ask why the Progressives, e.g., Obama has made it effort to increase those taking from the government.

a "….the dramatically larger increase also suggests that part
of the program’s growth is due to conscious
policy choices by this administration to ease
eligibility rules and expand caseloads….income limits for eligibility have
risen twice as fast as inflation since 2007
and are now roughly 10 percent higher than
they were when Obama took office." Casey Mulligan, “The Sharp Increase in the Food Stamps Program,” Economix,
Casey B. Mulligan: The Sharp Increase in the Food Stamps Program - NYTimes.com
Study: More Than Half a Trillion Dollars Spent on Welfare But Poverty Levels Unaffected | CNS News



Absorb the information above? Good....here's the math that
goes with it...and would end the fiscal crisis:

8. “Yet this year the federal
government will spend more than $668 billion on at
least 126 different programs to fight poverty.
And that does not even begin to count welfare
spending by state and local governments, which
adds $284 billion to that figure.

In total, the
United States spends nearly $1 trillion every
year to fight poverty. That amounts to $20,610
for every poor person in America, or $61,830 per
poor family of three.
Scribd


So....90% of the spending is not spent on "poverty."
The fiscal problem is the Progressive ideology.

You started off my giving a false definition of poverty and then from there went into a rant about it. How about using a definition as defined by the Government and we can discuss or debate from there.

How the Census Bureau Measures Poverty

How the Census Bureau Measures Poverty - U.S Census Bureau

With all this focus by the left on "poverty", exactly how many of those recieving govenment assistance programs have actually been able to then turn around and later worked their way OUT of government dependency ("poverty")? Can the left provide any such statistics? We don't have a poverty problem in this country, rather we have a growing government dependency problem...... an expensive version of taxpayer "assisted living" program towards those who are in no obligation to repay the Federal Government for the assistance they've received. How does receiving a free cell phone, for example, equate to the real definition of poverty?

Hardly, Shak....

It's the exact opposite....the aim is to infantilize the population.


From Peter Ferrara, “America’s Ticking Bankruptcy Bomb,” chapter five.
1. The road to hell is paved with good intentions. Such should be the epitaph of Liberalism.


2. ‘Welfare’ as a wholly owned subsidiary of the government, and its main result is the incentivizing of a disrespect for oneself, and for the entity that provides the welfare. As more folks in a poor neighborhood languish with little or no work, entire local culture begins to change: daily work is no longer the expected social norm. Extended periods of hanging around the neighborhood, neither working nor going to school becoming more and more socially acceptable.

a. Since productive activity is not making any economic sense because work disincentives of the welfare plantation, other kinds of activities proliferate: drug and alcohol abuse, crime, recreational sex, illegitimacy, and family breakup are the new social norms, as does the culture of violence.

 

[PoliticalChic]

You started off my giving a false definition of poverty and then from there went into a rant about it. How about using a definition as defined by the Government and we can discuss or debate from there.

How the Census Bureau Measures Poverty

How the Census Bureau Measures Poverty - U.S Census Bureau

With all this focus by the left on "poverty", exactly how many of those recieving govenment assistance programs have actually been able to then turn around and later worked their way OUT of government dependency ("poverty")? Can the left provide any such statistics? We don't have a poverty problem in this country, rather we have a growing government dependency problem...... an expensive version of taxpayer "assisted living" program towards those who are in no obligation to repay the Federal Government for the assistance they've received. How does receiving a free cell phone, for example, equate to the real definition of poverty?

Good post and I agree.

The War on Poverty is an abject failure. Hell. We have more people on welfare and Medicaid than ever before.

Poverty in the US is pretty damned good living compared to REAL POVERTY in third world countries.

Hell. The don't have No cell phones, TV's, computers, Nikes, housing payed for, food payed for, medical and dental care payed for. Nice to have us taxpayers footing all those bills for em here in the US.

Yup. Poverty in America is the pits.l

Check this out to make your blood boil even more:

"You can do as well working one week a month at minimum wage as you can working $60,000-a-year, full-time, high-stress job.
Emmerich analyzes disposable income and economic benefits among several key income classes and comes to the stunning (and verifiable) conclusion that "a one-parent family of three making $14,500 a year (minimum wage) has more disposable income than a family making $60,000 a year." And that excludes benefits from Supplemental Security Income disability checks. America is now a country which punishes those middle-class people who not only try to work hard, but avoid scamming the system."
In Entitlement America, The Head Of A Household Of Four Making Minimum Wage Has More Disposable Income Than A Family Making $60,000 A Year | ZeroHedge



He has a detailed chart that will make you laugh if you're not crying....

 

[JakeStarkey]

poor l'il PC who does not get that what I predicted is happening: the far right is being reined it by the mainstream leadership.

I agree that Obama is really pushing it, and right now, if I were in Congress I would go over the cliff then vote against what Obama wants en toto.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Two conservative Republicans booted from House budget panel - Yahoo! News

We need to burn down the GOP

 

[CrusaderFrank]

PC is in silly mode.

As I have been telling everyone for a long time that after the election Boehner and the other conservative leaders were going to tromp on the reactionary extremists who got in their way in governing.

These two Congressman will only be two names on a list that went up against the establishment and were crushed.

There will be no credence given to Mises clones and cretins.

The moves to reach out to Hispanics and to increase exceptions for abortions to include rape and incest are only some of the new moves by the GOP leadership to divorce itself from the causes of their defeat.

Surrendering to Obama is not governing.

The first Civil war will be in the Republican Party

 

[CrusaderFrank]

My message to the RNC

How can we help?

You can help by reinstating Representatives Tim Huelskamp of Kansas and Justin Amash of Michigan to the House Budget Committee.

You ran a Moderate candidate in 08, you lost

The Tea Party ran in 2010, we won big

You ran another Moderate in 2012, you lost again

By removing Huelskamo and Amash you have declared war on Conservatives. You started it, we will end it

 

[JakeStarkey]

Msg to far right extremists and libertarians: grow up, shut up, or put up.

Either support the mainstream GOP conservative leadership or be destroyed.

Frank, we will crush you guys, very easily, and remake the party exactly as we wish.

I told you this day was coming, and it is here, and now you will cry.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Msg to far right extremists and libertarians: grow up, shut up, or put up.

Either support the mainstream GOP conservative leadership or be destroyed.

Frank, we will crush you guys, very easily, and remake the party exactly as we wish.

I told you this day was coming, and it is here, and now you will cry.

Just like the last 2 elections the RNC ran, this will not work out as you thought. You guys lose when you run things.

You declared war on your base, you cannot win and no, we're not going third party like you and the Dems want. In a generation the only role for Republican Moderates will be to clean out the ash trays and hand out fliers at Republican conventions.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Jake, you lost.

You lost in 08 and you lost again this past November.

This latest stunt is very Hitler in the Bunker where you want to pull the world down around your ears.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Yes, it will work out fine, because the mainstream leadership and voters have finally seen through the nuttery of you extremists. We can't win with you, but you can cause us to lose.

You are not the base, merely the excess now. Who cares is you go 3rd party or not, you won't be telling the GOP what to do anymore.

Watch us destroy your primary candidates next time.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Yes, it will work out fine, because the mainstream leadership and voters have finally seen through the nuttery of you extremists. We can't win with you, but you can cause us to lose.

You are not the base, merely the excess now. Who cares is you go 3rd party or not, you won't be telling the GOP what to do anymore.

Watch us destroy your primary candidates next time.

As thick as you are...I will continue to attempt to educate you.

That's how I roll.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Yes, it will work out fine, because the mainstream leadership and voters have finally seen through the nuttery of you extremists. We can't win with you, but you can cause us to lose.

You are not the base, merely the excess now. Who cares is you go 3rd party or not, you won't be telling the GOP what to do anymore.

Watch us destroy your primary candidates next time.

Jake, you fucked yourselves royally tying your star to Obama's. You gave us the absolute Perfect Way to take over the Republican Party and one day, we will thank you for it.

We watched you destroy our candidates in 08 and 12, how'd that work out for Republicans?

This stunt was so perfect for Conservatives. You Shruted it out in the trillions column this time, Jake.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Two conservative Republicans booted from House budget panel - Yahoo! News

No doubt you believe.....I almost said 'think,' but that wouldn't apply to you, now, would it....that you are attempting to burnish your well-established anti-Republican creds, true, Jakal?


Believe me....such is hardly necessary.


You use every opportunity to do so....infinitely redundant.


And, transparent, as the OP deals specifically with the fraudulent use of welfare programs by your fav, the progressive/liberal/Democrats.



Clearly you can find nothing in the OP to disagree with.
Wise, very wise.

Isn't this about the fourth time you've started this same thread?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

I will say it again, by kicking Conservatives off the Budget Committee and caving to Obama, Boehner, Jake and the Republican Moderates just asked Obama to second for them in their political Sepukku and he gladly accepted.

The real money in the Republican Party, the business owners, the casino owners need a vibrant US economy they will desert the Moderates in droves as the economy continue to suffer from Obama and his Moderate enablers.

Thank you Jake Boehner! What a great early Christmas gift!!

 

[PoliticalChic]

Two conservative Republicans booted from House budget panel - Yahoo! News

No doubt you believe.....I almost said 'think,' but that wouldn't apply to you, now, would it....that you are attempting to burnish your well-established anti-Republican creds, true, Jakal?


Believe me....such is hardly necessary.


You use every opportunity to do so....infinitely redundant.


And, transparent, as the OP deals specifically with the fraudulent use of welfare programs by your fav, the progressive/liberal/Democrats.



Clearly you can find nothing in the OP to disagree with.
Wise, very wise.

Isn't this about the fourth time you've started this same thread?

No.

But, if you're not satisfied, you can have your money back.


See ya.'

 

[JakeStarkey]

Princess Misses Mises, I salute you.

Yes, it will work out fine, because the mainstream leadership and voters have finally seen through the nuttery of you extremists. We can't win with you, but you can cause us to lose.

You are not the base, merely the excess now. Who cares is you go 3rd party or not, you won't be telling the GOP what to do anymore.

Watch us destroy your primary candidates next time.

As thick as you are...I will continue to attempt to educate you.

That's how I roll.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Princess Misses Mises, I salute you.

Yes, it will work out fine, because the mainstream leadership and voters have finally seen through the nuttery of you extremists. We can't win with you, but you can cause us to lose.

You are not the base, merely the excess now. Who cares is you go 3rd party or not, you won't be telling the GOP what to do anymore.

Watch us destroy your primary candidates next time.

As thick as you are...I will continue to attempt to educate you.

That's how I roll.

Again, thanks, Jake

Best of all, you can't undo it and you can't try to tie us into your capitulation to Obama.

Merry Christmas!

 

[JakeStarkey]

The GOP will govern, with or without you, Frank, but we certainly will not govern by the far right or libertarian way. Only the path to national destructions follows down those strange hiways and biways.

 

[NYcarbineer]

No doubt you believe.....I almost said 'think,' but that wouldn't apply to you, now, would it....that you are attempting to burnish your well-established anti-Republican creds, true, Jakal?


Believe me....such is hardly necessary.


You use every opportunity to do so....infinitely redundant.


And, transparent, as the OP deals specifically with the fraudulent use of welfare programs by your fav, the progressive/liberal/Democrats.



Clearly you can find nothing in the OP to disagree with.
Wise, very wise.

Isn't this about the fourth time you've started this same thread?

No.

But, if you're not satisfied, you can have your money back.


See ya.'

Was my guess over or under? Because I know for certain that you've harped on this topic many a time before.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Name the conservative rightwing nut Republicans with a bright political future at the national level,

and then name the moderates,

and see which list fills up first.