Proven Right Yet Again!

[Cecilie1200]

1. “:…food stamp recipients -- increasing from 33 million people in 2009 to 43 million in 2012 -- as a sign that poverty had skyrocketed under President Obama. But a new study suggests that the reason there has been such an increase in food stamp recipients during the last four years is even more pernicious.

2. …George Mason University's David Armor and Sonia Sousa, argue that the food stamp program can no longer be regarded as an anti-poverty program because nearly half of its recipients are above the poverty line, many of them substantially so.

a. …other anti-poverty programs have an even higher percentage of the non-poor among their recipients.





3. The study examined spending over the last thirty years for federal anti-poverty programs providing nutrition, health care, housing and cash assistance for the supposed poor. They show that the explosion in costs for these programs has little to do with the higher numbers of Americans who have fallen into poverty since the Great Recession…

4. Spending for poverty programs received a big boost during the Bush years, a $100 billion increase over eight years. But the Obama spending spree dwarfed those increases.In his first two years in office, President Obama increased such spending by $150 billion, some of it in the 2009 stimulus package.




5. The portion of the federal budget now attributable to fighting the "war on poverty" is now roughly equal to the entire defense budget ($666 billion compared to $693 billion), slightly less than spending on Social Security ($700 billion), but more than on Medicare ($551 billion).

a. Taken together, federal spending on income transfers and other social benefits are now 2.76 times greater than spending for national defense.

6. The major changes occurred when the government allowed more lenient standards for eligibility for benefits. Most of these programs were originally designed to help those who lived below the official poverty line, which in 2011 was $11,702 for a single person and $22,811 for a family of four. But over the years, the federal government has lowered the threshold so that even those earning twice the income considered below poverty still qualify.

a. …in several states, a family of four with income of over $45,000 a year is eligible to receive benefits.

7. …over half of the recipients of food stamps (now known as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program or SNAP), have income above the poverty line.

a. Of the 40.3 million receiving food stamps in 2010 (the last year for which detailed figures are available), 20.4 were above the poverty cut-off. Of these, a whopping 8 million have income twice the poverty level.





8. …the non-poor receive more benefits than food stamps. Those living at 133-200 percent or more of the poverty level also constitute the greatest number of beneficiaries of Medicaid and the Children's Health Insurance Program.

a. Even Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF), which gives cash benefits to those supposedly in need, now supports those whose incomes are twice the official poverty definition; indeed 40 percent of TANF funds go to families whose incomes are more than 200 percent of poverty.

9. The policy implications of these findings are enormous. What once were programs to provide a safety net for the truly poor are now programs to boost the living standards of the lower middle class.

10. … these changes reflect a sea change in social and economic policy. Those who have warned that America is heading toward a welfare state are wrong. We are already there.” The American Welfare State - Linda Chavez - [page]



This from one of my previous posts:
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.
http://www.usmessageboard.com/politics/265982-obama-and-the-fiscal-cliff.html



You've been lied to...and you bought it like it was on sale!

Say what, Obama voters???




“Some ideas are so stupid, only an intellectual could believe them.” George Orwell

If the Federal Government and State Governments would just fund abortions, the food stamp problem would be solved.

Are you proposing the poor be fed their own aborted babies?

I think the suggestion was supposed to be that we should just kill off all the poor people in the womb, so that then there would be no poor people to have to feed. But your interpretation was . . . interesting. I nearly spit coffee all over my keyboard.

Hmmm, where have I heard that "abort and kill the undesirables" theme before?

 

[Mr. Shaman]

Suppose it couldn't have been a plain recession FDR turned into a great depression huh?

Yup. Thats exactly what he did.

His polices didnt' work and he turned a recession into a Great Depression.

Please!

If ANYTHING initiated The Depression, it was.....

....Allowing The Marketplace To Regulate Itself!!


[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w6whSWn1RRM]Great Depression - YouTube[/ame]​

 

[PoliticalChic]

Suppose it couldn't have been a plain recession FDR turned into a great depression huh?

Yup. Thats exactly what he did.

His polices didnt' work and he turned a recession into a Great Depression.

Please!

If ANYTHING initiated The Depression, it was.....

....Allowing The Marketplace To Regulate Itself!!


[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w6whSWn1RRM]Great Depression - YouTube[/ame]​

1. In 1931, in some of the darkest days of the Great Depression and the middle of the Hoover administration, unemployment rate stood at 17.4 %. Seven years later, after five years of FDR, and literally hundred s of wildly ambitious new government programs, more than doubling of federal spending, the national unemployment rate stood at – 17.4 %. At no point during the 1930’s did unemployment go below 14 %. Even in 1941, in the midst of the military buildup, 9.9 % of American workers were unemployed.


2. March 4, 1933, in his first Inaugural Address, FDR said “Our greatest primary task is to put people to work.” This meant that the New Deal was a wretched, ill-conceived failure.


3. After the stock market crash,, the Dow hit 250 in 1930 under Hoover (it had been 343 before the crash). January 1940, after seven years of the New Deal, the market had collapsed to 151, and remained in the low 100’s through most of FDR’s terms.


4. Federal spending went from 2.5 % in 1929 to 9 % in 1936: Washington’s portion of the economy increased by 360 % in just seven years- with no benefit to the economy.


5. Arthur Schlesinger, Jr., liberal New Deal historian wrote in The National Experience, in 1963, “Though the policies of the Hundred Days had ended despair, they had not produce recovery…” He also wrote honestly about the devastating crash of 1937- in the midst of the “second New Deal” and Roosevelt’s second term. “The collapse in the months after September 1937 was actually more severe than it had been in the first nine months of the depression: national income fell 13 %, payrolls 35 %, durable goods production 50 %, profits 78% .


6. In 1935, the Brookings Institution (left-leaning) delivered a 900-page report on the New Deal and the National Recovery Administration, concluding that “ on the whole it retarded recovery.”
The Real Deal - Society and Culture - AEI


7. Economist Jim Powell, in “FDR’s Folly,” notes that a disproportionate amount of FDR’s relief and public works spending “went not to the poorest states such as the South, but to western states were people were better off , apparently because there were ‘swing’ states which could yield FDR more votes in the next election.”


8. John Maynard Keynes, in a letter published in the NYTimes, December 31, 1933, warned “ even wise and necessary Reform may, in some respects, impede and complicate Recovery. For it will upset the confidence of the business world and weaken their existing motives to action.” Even Keynes say the danger in treating the nation’s capitalists as an enemy, as “the unscrupulous money changers,” as FDR called them in his first Inaugural.


9. Warren Harding inherited one of the sharpest recessions in American history in 1921. By July it was over. Harding and Treasury Sec’y Mellon cut government expenditures by 40 %, allowing wages to fall, in a natural recovery to full employment. The cuts, and even sharper tax cuts under Coolidge, produced the long period of growth and rising living standards associated with the Roaring Twenties.


10. Charity has, historically been the province of private organizations, as far back as “The Scot Charitable Society,” organized in Boston in 1657. Not government.



Here, on your level:
As far as recessions, Harding good, FDR bad.



So, then,....some sage advice: rather than investing in Crayola, you would do better investing in a few textbooks.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Hey, anybody know what we're suppose to do with all these starving people people that I'm tripping over?

Give 'em a kick. They're supposed to be in the gutter, not on the sidewalk. Some people just don't know their place.

(For the sake of the humor/irony-impaired leftists among us, that was sarcasm.)

 

[saveliberty]

Hey, anybody know what we're suppose to do with all these starving people people that I'm tripping over?

Give 'em a kick. They're supposed to be in the gutter, not on the sidewalk. Some people just don't know their place.

(For the sake of the humor/irony-impaired leftists among us, that was sarcasm.)

Your hanging with me. Its understood.

 

[Oldstyle]

I seriously don't care. Naturally after a major crash we had in 08 these things would go up. Usuage is going to spike because so many jobs where lost. I don't blame obama for a natural cause and affect. Hell I don't even blame bush for the spike. It would happen regardless of who was in office ritht after a crash. Mccain would have seen the samething.

What a meaningless point to whine about. You where right about nothing.

It's five years after the "crash", Plasma and we're still mired in a glacially slow economy. Any clue as to when this becomes the fault of Obama fiscal policy or lack thereof?

 

[PoliticalChic]

I seriously don't care. Naturally after a major crash we had in 08 these things would go up. Usuage is going to spike because so many jobs where lost. I don't blame obama for a natural cause and affect. Hell I don't even blame bush for the spike. It would happen regardless of who was in office ritht after a crash. Mccain would have seen the samething.

What a meaningless point to whine about. You where right about nothing.

It's five years after the "crash", Plasma and we're still mired in a glacially slow economy. Any clue as to when this becomes the fault of Obama fiscal policy or lack thereof?

...Liberals don't have the capacity to change their perspective. While they claim to support the law, these folks voted for

a. affirmative action, creation of different classes based on skin color
b. a legislative icon who was responsible for the death of a young girl, and who plotted with the Russians against the President of the United States
c. a rapist who lost his license for perjury....
d. a radical who supported infanticide, and lived under the tutelage of an America-hater...


Based on the above....I wouldn't wait around for the change. No matter how low we sink, Obama will enter the Liberal pantheon and take his place with LBJ, Teddy, Bill, and, probably, Mel Reynolds.

 

[Cecilie1200]

28,000 posts and politicalchic talks too much...

Hypocritical post is hypocritical.

Methinks NY believes that any woman who says more than, "Can I get you another beer?" is talking too much. For all their claims to "champion" women, leftists don't seem to actually LIKE them.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

Yup. Thats exactly what he did.

His polices didnt' work and he turned a recession into a Great Depression.

Please!

If ANYTHING initiated The Depression, it was.....

....Allowing The Marketplace To Regulate Itself!!


[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w6whSWn1RRM]Great Depression - YouTube[/ame]​

1. In 1931, in some of the darkest days of the Great Depression and the middle of the Hoover administration, unemployment rate stood at 17.4 %. Seven years later, after five years of FDR, and literally hundred s of wildly ambitious new government programs, more than doubling of federal spending, the national unemployment rate stood at – 17.4 %. At no point during the 1930’s did unemployment go below 14 %. Even in 1941, in the midst of the military buildup, 9.9 % of American workers were unemployed.


2. March 4, 1933, in his first Inaugural Address, FDR said “Our greatest primary task is to put people to work.” This meant that the New Deal was a wretched, ill-conceived failure.


3. After the stock market crash,, the Dow hit 250 in 1930 under Hoover (it had been 343 before the crash). January 1940, after seven years of the New Deal, the market had collapsed to 151, and remained in the low 100’s through most of FDR’s terms.


4. Federal spending went from 2.5 % in 1929 to 9 % in 1936: Washington’s portion of the economy increased by 360 % in just seven years- with no benefit to the economy.


5. Arthur Schlesinger, Jr., liberal New Deal historian wrote in The National Experience, in 1963, “Though the policies of the Hundred Days had ended despair, they had not produce recovery…” He also wrote honestly about the devastating crash of 1937- in the midst of the “second New Deal” and Roosevelt’s second term. “The collapse in the months after September 1937 was actually more severe than it had been in the first nine months of the depression: national income fell 13 %, payrolls 35 %, durable goods production 50 %, profits 78% .


6. In 1935, the Brookings Institution (left-leaning) delivered a 900-page report on the New Deal and the National Recovery Administration, concluding that “ on the whole it retarded recovery.”
The Real Deal - Society and Culture - AEI


7. Economist Jim Powell, in “FDR’s Folly,” notes that a disproportionate amount of FDR’s relief and public works spending “went not to the poorest states such as the South, but to western states were people were better off , apparently because there were ‘swing’ states which could yield FDR more votes in the next election.”


8. John Maynard Keynes, in a letter published in the NYTimes, December 31, 1933, warned “ even wise and necessary Reform may, in some respects, impede and complicate Recovery. For it will upset the confidence of the business world and weaken their existing motives to action.” Even Keynes say the danger in treating the nation’s capitalists as an enemy, as “the unscrupulous money changers,” as FDR called them in his first Inaugural.


9. Warren Harding inherited one of the sharpest recessions in American history in 1921. By July it was over. Harding and Treasury Sec’y Mellon cut government expenditures by 40 %, allowing wages to fall, in a natural recovery to full employment. The cuts, and even sharper tax cuts under Coolidge, produced the long period of growth and rising living standards associated with the Roaring Twenties.


10. Charity has, historically been the province of private organizations, as far back as “The Scot Charitable Society,” organized in Boston in 1657. Not government.



Here, on your level:
As far as recessions, Harding good, FDR bad.



So, then,....some sage advice: rather than investing in Crayola, you would do better investing in a few textbooks.

Here ya' go, Bubblehead........

initiate: to cause or facilitate the beginning of

You Bimbos never were known for your power-o'-concentration.​

 

[PoliticalChic]

Please!

If ANYTHING initiated The Depression, it was.....

....Allowing The Marketplace To Regulate Itself!!


Great Depression - YouTube​

1. In 1931, in some of the darkest days of the Great Depression and the middle of the Hoover administration, unemployment rate stood at 17.4 %. Seven years later, after five years of FDR, and literally hundred s of wildly ambitious new government programs, more than doubling of federal spending, the national unemployment rate stood at – 17.4 %. At no point during the 1930’s did unemployment go below 14 %. Even in 1941, in the midst of the military buildup, 9.9 % of American workers were unemployed.


2. March 4, 1933, in his first Inaugural Address, FDR said “Our greatest primary task is to put people to work.” This meant that the New Deal was a wretched, ill-conceived failure.


3. After the stock market crash,, the Dow hit 250 in 1930 under Hoover (it had been 343 before the crash). January 1940, after seven years of the New Deal, the market had collapsed to 151, and remained in the low 100’s through most of FDR’s terms.


4. Federal spending went from 2.5 % in 1929 to 9 % in 1936: Washington’s portion of the economy increased by 360 % in just seven years- with no benefit to the economy.


5. Arthur Schlesinger, Jr., liberal New Deal historian wrote in The National Experience, in 1963, “Though the policies of the Hundred Days had ended despair, they had not produce recovery…” He also wrote honestly about the devastating crash of 1937- in the midst of the “second New Deal” and Roosevelt’s second term. “The collapse in the months after September 1937 was actually more severe than it had been in the first nine months of the depression: national income fell 13 %, payrolls 35 %, durable goods production 50 %, profits 78% .


6. In 1935, the Brookings Institution (left-leaning) delivered a 900-page report on the New Deal and the National Recovery Administration, concluding that “ on the whole it retarded recovery.”
The Real Deal - Society and Culture - AEI


7. Economist Jim Powell, in “FDR’s Folly,” notes that a disproportionate amount of FDR’s relief and public works spending “went not to the poorest states such as the South, but to western states were people were better off , apparently because there were ‘swing’ states which could yield FDR more votes in the next election.”


8. John Maynard Keynes, in a letter published in the NYTimes, December 31, 1933, warned “ even wise and necessary Reform may, in some respects, impede and complicate Recovery. For it will upset the confidence of the business world and weaken their existing motives to action.” Even Keynes say the danger in treating the nation’s capitalists as an enemy, as “the unscrupulous money changers,” as FDR called them in his first Inaugural.


9. Warren Harding inherited one of the sharpest recessions in American history in 1921. By July it was over. Harding and Treasury Sec’y Mellon cut government expenditures by 40 %, allowing wages to fall, in a natural recovery to full employment. The cuts, and even sharper tax cuts under Coolidge, produced the long period of growth and rising living standards associated with the Roaring Twenties.


10. Charity has, historically been the province of private organizations, as far back as “The Scot Charitable Society,” organized in Boston in 1657. Not government.



Here, on your level:
As far as recessions, Harding good, FDR bad.



So, then,....some sage advice: rather than investing in Crayola, you would do better investing in a few textbooks.

Here ya' go, Bubblehead........

initiate: to cause or facilitate the beginning of

You Bimbos never were known for your power-o'-concentration.​

You seem to have overlooked ten of the items in the post....



Just to prove that, contrary to popular contention, you are not galactically stupid...

...would you like to try again?

 

[saveliberty]

The galaxy takes offense...

 

[Cecilie1200]

Suppose it couldn't have been a plain recession FDR turned into a great depression huh?

Although in fairness to FDR, one does have to point out that Hoover was already doing a bang-up job of screwing things up and prolonging the financial pain, and FDR's policies were, in a sense, a continuation - and MASSIVE expansion - of Hoover's.

And yes, for you pigeon-brained hacks out there totally hung up on party beyond all else, Hoover was a Republican. However, he was a conservative like I'm Hillary Clinton.

 

[Cecilie1200]

What the hell is with the repeated child reference?

It has officially moved from annoying to creepy.

I don't think it's actually his inner pedophile coming out. I think it just means he's not very creative.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Hey, anybody know what we're suppose to do with all these starving people people that I'm tripping over?

Give 'em a kick. They're supposed to be in the gutter, not on the sidewalk. Some people just don't know their place.

(For the sake of the humor/irony-impaired leftists among us, that was sarcasm.)

Your hanging with me. Its understood.

Watching leftists splutter and turn purple isn't just my hobby; it's my life's work. And work is goooood!

 

[Cecilie1200]

The galaxy takes offense...

At the fact that his stupidity is actually BIGGER than it is?

 

[saveliberty]

Give 'em a kick. They're supposed to be in the gutter, not on the sidewalk. Some people just don't know their place.

(For the sake of the humor/irony-impaired leftists among us, that was sarcasm.)

Your hanging with me. Its understood.

Watching leftists splutter and turn purple isn't just my hobby; it's my life's work. And work is goooood!

Definitely just a hobby with me. They bore me most days. I try to mix it up and work on two or more tasks while posting on multiple subjects, but even that gets routine.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Your hanging with me. Its understood.

Watching leftists splutter and turn purple isn't just my hobby; it's my life's work. And work is goooood!

Definitely just a hobby with me. They bore me most days. I try to mix it up and work on two or more tasks while posting on multiple subjects, but even that gets routine.

Oh, I'm always doing other stuff at the same time. Let's face it, making leftists turn purple and splutter isn't exactly difficult.