Romney's plan would shred safety net for poor

kidrocks

Gold Member
Jan 23, 2012
3,315
380
130
Eat your food stamps.




http://www.cnn.com/2012/02/02/opinion/dolan-romney-poor/index.html?hpt=hp_t1

(CNN) -- "I'm not concerned about the very poor." Oops. Mitt Romney messed up. Again. This was a bigger "oops moment" for Romney than when he said a few weeks ago that the $374,327 he earned in speakers' fees over the course of 12 months amounted to "not very much." It was bigger than "I like being able to fire people." It was the biggest since he blurted out that corporations are people, my friend" at the Iowa State Fair.

Call it a Freudian slip, call it overconfidence emerging from a big win in the Florida Republican primary, call it a classic, out-of-touch-sounding "Rich Romney" gaffe. It may be all of those things, but this comment represents a scripted piece of the Romney campaign strategy. He hopes to co-opt an Obama campaign message aimed at appealing to the middle-class voters each will need in the general election.


Karen DolanDid his inept remark reflect a poor understanding of this position except as an election strategy? One has reason to wonder. Whether it's policies that affect poor Americans, women, immigrants or the nation's ever-shrinking middle class, one gets the uneasy feeling that the positions Romney recites are crafted for political gain rather than from a sense of conviction about what is good or bad for this country.

Why? On abortion, for example, the former Massachusetts governor supported the right to choose and a greater role for government in helping spread access to health care -- which won him votes in that liberal state. But he shed those positions when they would prevent him from attracting conservative Republicans on a national stage. He has famously and repeatedly done similar turnabouts, most recently when he faced Florida's Latino primary voters with a kinder, gentler version of his previously anti-immigrant rhetoric.

Romney taking heat for "poor" comments

Obama strategist's take on Romney Of course, a conservative political candidate trying to both woo a big-government-averse base and appeal to general-election moderates would focus on the middle class. We may even understand when particularly cynical politicians tune their strategies toward higher-income Americans, who tend to vote in greater numbers than lower-income folks. But what is far more puzzling is the reason Romney gave CNN's Soledad O'Brien for what sounded very much like callous disregard for the poorest Americans. "I'm not concerned about the very poor," he said. "We have a safety net there. If it needs a repair, I'll fix it."

Actually, if you look at Romney's policy agenda, you will see that "fixing it" could not be further from his plan, unless it's doublespeak for "eviscerating it." Romney calls for immediate across-the-board cuts in nonsecurity discretionary spending. That would mean slashing the budget for many of the programs that comprise our safety net, by 5%, according to his spending proposal. These cuts would come on top of the 17% cut already affected by this summer's Budget Control Act.

Romney: Middle-income Americans are focus, not very poor

Further, according to analysis from the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, his proposals to cap total spending at 20% of gross domestic product, along with increasing already bloated military spending, cutting taxes and pursuing a balanced budget, would necessitate enormous cuts to vital programs. "The cuts would measure 21% in 2016 and 36% in 2021," the center said. "If policymakers exempted Social Security from the cuts and then cut all other nondefense programs by the same percentage, the cuts would rise to 30% in 2016 and 54% in 2021."

Funding could all be gutted that helps low-income students afford college with Pell grants, enables low-income women and their children to eat a more nutritious diet, covers the cost of the highly successful Head Start early-education program and pays for job training, housing assistance and veterans' health care.

In short, Romney's plan would incinerate the very safety net that he claims to be his excuse for expressing no interest in addressing the needs of the "very poor." Oh, and how poor are the poorest 5% or 10% of Americans he seemed to be referring to, exactly? Even the census, which tracks household income for all Americans, doesn't say with precision, although it does note that households with annual income of $15,000 or less made up 13.7% of our population in 2010. I don't know about you, but I'm concerned about them.

If Romney's lack of concern about the very poor came with a real plan indeed to fix a tattered safety net so that poverty rates could begin to decrease, he might be less vulnerable to the charge of being out of touch with voters. But as long as his gaffes and policy prescriptions continue to belie either a lack of understanding of the economic plight of Americans or a cynical political calculation that both ignores and will exacerbate that plight, Romney will go the way of his fellow "oops"-prone 2012 presidential candidate.

When he joins the ranks of the also-rans, don't worry about him. Given that his net worth is somewhere between $85 million and $264 million, if anyone in America has a "very ample" safety net to fall back on, it's Mitt Romney.
 
Last edited:
Rush Limbaugh said the problem with Romney wasn't that he said he didn't focus on the poor, but the "safety net". He should be getting rid of the safety net.
 
Safety net? More like a safety queen sized bed with a mini-bar, free WiFi and cable, free omelets and cell phones.
 
But but but I thought he cared about poor peo---oh wait.

"I'm not concerned about the very poor" Mitt Romney
 
Safety net? More like a safety queen sized bed with a mini-bar, free WiFi and cable, free omelets and cell phones.

Those Darn Poor People! Have they screwed this Country or what? They were probably behind the Wall Street collapse. And it was most of their sons and daughters who fought that war in Iraq which ballooned the deficit. POOR PEOPLE ARE DRIVING THIS COUNTRY DOWN THE DRAIN...

The Perfect Republican Agenda = GET RID OF POOR PEOPLE!
 
Conservative America is like the French Revolution in reverse - millions of poor folks streaming into the streets to defend the interests of the wealthy.
 
Conservative America is like the French Revolution in reverse - millions of poor folks streaming into the streets to defend the interests of the wealthy.

I don't think so. I think they just hate having a black president and will do anything to get him out of office. Even if it fucks up their own lives and the lives of their children, to racists, it's definitely worth it.
 
I remember a few years ago there was a couple at church that we knew, no kids and the husband had just finished college. They were on food stamps.
One weekend we were over there for dinner and it was the end of the month. "Come on, let's go to Kroger. It is the 30th and we have about $40 left we need to use. How about rib eyes."
Now this is not the norm but it does happen.
I am not skeptical of scientists at all, believe in evolution and global warming but that has nothing to do with the giveaways the United States of Santa Claus has become 365 24/7.
Most people on government assistance are moochers.
I know it, Obama knows it, YOU KNOW IT, EVERYONE KNOWS IT.
 
And notice they call Obama the foodstamps president when actually more people filed for foodstamps under GW Bush. Of course that was for 8 years and Obama has only been in office for 4 years, but consider most if not all of those people filing for foodstamps now are still the fault of GW Bush and the GOP who ran the show from 2000-2006 and have since obstructed all the solutions.

Regardless of if its Romney or Paul, the goal is smaller government and more power to the rich and corporations. They are taking over America. No longer is government for all of us. Its every man for himself. Sure the rich want that. But that isn't the America they succeeded in. That's changing the rules so its harder for us to achieve what they achieved. The successful manufacturing executive who worked 30 years and now has a fat pension and 401K, plus good social security and medicare. Now its no pension, companies don't even match the 401K anymore and every day the politicians loot the social security and medicare programs.

Even Clinton and Obama have gone along with the rich who clearly own our country. They have to. But at least they understand American workers should not have to compete with chinese and mexican slave labor.

Ron Paul talks a good game but he's still bad for the poor and middle class. I hope he runs as a third party ticket.

Here is a way to determine if you should vote Democrat or Republican. Do you like working 40 hour work weeks or do you wish it would go back to 60 hour work weeks? If you want 60 hour work weeks, vote GOP. Or if you think you should take a $10,000 pay cut because we could get it cheaper overseas, vote GOP.
 
And notice they call Obama the foodstamps president when actually more people filed for foodstamps under GW Bush. Of course that was for 8 years and Obama has only been in office for 4 years, but consider most if not all of those people filing for foodstamps now are still the fault of GW Bush and the GOP who ran the show from 2000-2006 and have since obstructed all the solutions.

Regardless of if its Romney or Paul, the goal is smaller government and more power to the rich and corporations. They are taking over America. No longer is government for all of us. Its every man for himself. Sure the rich want that. But that isn't the America they succeeded in. That's changing the rules so its harder for us to achieve what they achieved. The successful manufacturing executive who worked 30 years and now has a fat pension and 401K, plus good social security and medicare. Now its no pension, companies don't even match the 401K anymore and every day the politicians loot the social security and medicare programs.

Even Clinton and Obama have gone along with the rich who clearly own our country. They have to. But at least they understand American workers should not have to compete with chinese and mexican slave labor.

Ron Paul talks a good game but he's still bad for the poor and middle class. I hope he runs as a third party ticket.

Here is a way to determine if you should vote Democrat or Republican. Do you like working 40 hour work weeks or do you wish it would go back to 60 hour work weeks? If you want 60 hour work weeks, vote GOP. Or if you think you should take a $10,000 pay cut because we could get it cheaper overseas, vote GOP.

Who would you want to have the most power?
The moocher class or the working class?
The wealthy have the power because they earn the power.
I work 60 hours every week and I am wealthy.
Did you just learn something that will help you become wealthy?
If not go ahead and cry, whine and moan and be poor.
 
I remember a few years ago there was a couple at church that we knew, no kids and the husband had just finished college. They were on food stamps.
One weekend we were over there for dinner and it was the end of the month. "Come on, let's go to Kroger. It is the 30th and we have about $40 left we need to use. How about rib eyes."
Now this is not the norm but it does happen.
I am not skeptical of scientists at all, believe in evolution and global warming but that has nothing to do with the giveaways the United States of Santa Claus has become 365 24/7.
Most people on government assistance are moochers.
I know it, Obama knows it, YOU KNOW IT, EVERYONE KNOWS IT.

I don't know how much they give a family of 4 on foodstamps but I do know they give my buddy too much. $300 a month. He's single. I've seen him shop. He could live on $150 a month. I wouldn't object to getting a little chincier on single people who are probably working under the table or living somewhere for free. But don't cut them off completely. Not in America.

Even $50 bucks a week would be enough and save us $100 x however many people are on foodstamps. We would save a lot if they cut back on all the foodstamps. I do see them eating better than I do to be honest. LOL.
 
Destroy the producers, put the bankers in jail, let the federal government get bigger and bigger and keep safety nets for the poor. What's wrong with that message? It's the typical democrat agenda that does nothing but keep the status quo and keep the poor on a leash. Democrats have no vision for the once great Country except federally mandated crap disguised as "safety nets".
 
Destroy the producers, put the bankers in jail, let the federal government get bigger and bigger and keep safety nets for the poor. What's wrong with that message? It's the typical democrat agenda that does nothing but keep the status quo and keep the poor on a leash. Democrats have no vision for the once great Country except federally mandated crap disguised as "safety nets".

More like a safety prison cell.
I like the movie Shawshank Redemption where Brooks was about to be paroled after 45 years in prison. He was about to kill another inmate because he was scared of the free world. He could not make it there.
The moocher class are institutionalized now. They can not make it in the free market world as they are conditioned to get everything paid for by the taxpayers.
And Democrats believe that is a good thing.
 
And notice they call Obama the foodstamps president when actually more people filed for foodstamps under GW Bush. Of course that was for 8 years and Obama has only been in office for 4 years, but consider most if not all of those people filing for foodstamps now are still the fault of GW Bush and the GOP who ran the show from 2000-2006 and have since obstructed all the solutions.

Regardless of if its Romney or Paul, the goal is smaller government and more power to the rich and corporations. They are taking over America. No longer is government for all of us. Its every man for himself. Sure the rich want that. But that isn't the America they succeeded in. That's changing the rules so its harder for us to achieve what they achieved. The successful manufacturing executive who worked 30 years and now has a fat pension and 401K, plus good social security and medicare. Now its no pension, companies don't even match the 401K anymore and every day the politicians loot the social security and medicare programs.

Even Clinton and Obama have gone along with the rich who clearly own our country. They have to. But at least they understand American workers should not have to compete with chinese and mexican slave labor.

Ron Paul talks a good game but he's still bad for the poor and middle class. I hope he runs as a third party ticket.

Here is a way to determine if you should vote Democrat or Republican. Do you like working 40 hour work weeks or do you wish it would go back to 60 hour work weeks? If you want 60 hour work weeks, vote GOP. Or if you think you should take a $10,000 pay cut because we could get it cheaper overseas, vote GOP.

Who would you want to have the most power?
The moocher class or the working class?
The wealthy have the power because they earn the power.
I work 60 hours every week and I am wealthy.
Did you just learn something that will help you become wealthy?
If not go ahead and cry, whine and moan and be poor.

Power to the people brother.

I certainly don't want you to have any more power than I do. One person, one vote. That's the problem. You think because "you won" Charlie Sheen that you should be able to make the rules. That its ok that you can pay politicans to rewrite the rules so America goes back to before we had a great stong big middle class. You know, before FDR and the New Deal.

Yes, the ruling class LOVED the era before the big middle class came into existance. Sick days, vacation days, pay my health insurance, only work me 40 hours a week or pay me overtime! Minimum wages. Labor laws. Social security and medicare. You guys hate paying for all this stuff. Trying to max your profits any way you can. American workers are hard workers and we have high productivity, turns out. But you want more.

Hitler earned the power too. Doesn't make it right.

PS. I'm wealthy and I only work 40 hours a week. 4:45 and I'm Fred Flintstone. Stop trying to squeeze every last drop from us.

There was a time when the average American worked 80 hours a week. Very little leasure time. Over the decades it went down to 70, then 60, finally 40. Americans like their leasure time.

In every way the rich/business owner class are trying to take back all the "entitlments" we have come to appreciate as Americans.

And we could afford to live like this because the top 1% weren't getting the Bush tax breaks. Actually, we should roll back the Reagan tax breaks to the rich but we will start with Bush's unfair tax breaks that bankrupted the country. Besides the war and all the jobs that went overseas.

Ever consider the GOP bankrupted the government on purpose so they could kill all the programs they hate?
 
If Romney actually was in favor of that he'd pick up a lot of votes, mine especially.
But the OP is a lie. And the poster is a liar.
 
Destroy the producers, put the bankers in jail, let the federal government get bigger and bigger and keep safety nets for the poor. What's wrong with that message? It's the typical democrat agenda that does nothing but keep the status quo and keep the poor on a leash. Democrats have no vision for the once great Country except federally mandated crap disguised as "safety nets".

More like a safety prison cell.
I like the movie Shawshank Redemption where Brooks was about to be paroled after 45 years in prison. He was about to kill another inmate because he was scared of the free world. He could not make it there.
The moocher class are institutionalized now. They can not make it in the free market world as they are conditioned to get everything paid for by the taxpayers.
And Democrats believe that is a good thing.

If there is no social security and if Paul Ryan's plan for medicare ever passed, you would run out of money before you died. You would end up living with your kids.

If not, you are the exception. Congrats. Vote GOP. But the rest of us understand that this is class warfare. The rich are attacking the middle class.

Are you like Trump or Romney? Born with a silver spoon in your mouth? Of course then you want it to be every man for himself. Thank god for people like Obama and Buffett.

And besides. We tried it your way. Didn't work. Sending all those jobs overseas. And the rich didn't hire so why give them those tax breaks?

Fact is, the rich have taken over the government and supreme court and we need to take it back. Gonna be tough, especially when broke asses like you vote GOP.

You don't make enough money. If you did, you wouldn't be here.
 
I am a Democrat, and I certainly do not believe that creating a class that is dependent is a good thing. However, far more odious is the idea that a man or woman that has worked all of their lives, suddenly find themselves out of a job, the company shut down or moved, in an economy where they are competing with people far younger for entry level jobs because that is all that is available, being told that no help is available. 'Root, hog, or die' is a seriously deficient policy in this day and age.

Yes, there should be a safety net out there for the unforseen circumstances that many of us fall into. Like a serious illness that renders you incapable of doing the work that you have done all of your life. One that also bankrupts you, and puts you out of your home.

Now being one of those very lucky people that has retained exceptional health, and am able to do a job that wears down people a generation younger than me, I suppose I should be saying that everyone should be like me. But none of the people that I hiked mountains with when I was in my youth, up to 30, can go with me now. I find myself wishing that I could still share the high country with them, but can only show them pictures of where I have been, and discuss where we use to go, because their health is no longer up to these kinds of excursions.

By the same token, each of us that have not experianced devestating economic loss not due to our errors, should every day thank our lucky stars. This is not excusing the lazy people, but there are plenty of people out there that have fallen onto hard times through no fault of their own. And withdrawing the safety net because of those that cheat, is the same as same as fining every company in an industry because of one companies transgressions.
 
I don't know how much they give a family of 4 on foodstamps but I do know they give my buddy too much. $300 a month. He's single. I've seen him shop. He could live on $150 a month. I wouldn't object to getting a little chincier on single people who are probably working under the table or living somewhere for free. But don't cut them off completely. Not in America.

The maximum SNAP benefit this fiscal year for a single person household is $200/month. That max benefit is for the poorest of the poor (e.g. no net income); the benefit shrinks as you get closer to the 130% FPL eligibility cutoff. See the table here.
 
I don't know how much they give a family of 4 on foodstamps but I do know they give my buddy too much. $300 a month. He's single. I've seen him shop. He could live on $150 a month. I wouldn't object to getting a little chincier on single people who are probably working under the table or living somewhere for free. But don't cut them off completely. Not in America.

The maximum SNAP benefit this fiscal year for a single person household is $200/month. That max benefit is for the poorest of the poor (e.g. no net income); the benefit shrinks as you get closer to the 130% FPL eligibility cutoff. See the table here.

$200 more than what it should be
 

Forum List

Back
Top