CDZ Why do Conservatives believe that America is no longer great?

[oldsoul]

Red:
It's convenient to make that claim, perhaps even easy to assume it's actually true, but the data and stipulations of welfare regulations show it is not a legitimate concern right now and that it's not reflective of what goes on with the overwhelming majority of public assistance recipients.

Public assistance programs, since Bill Clinton's TANF reforms, have removed the incentive and ability to stay indefinitely on public assistance. The welfare reform law that was signed by President Clinton in 1996 largely turned control over welfare benefits to the states, but the federal government provides some of the funding for state welfare programs through a program called Temporary Assistance For Needy Families (TANF).

TANF grants to states require that all welfare recipients must find work within two years of first receiving benefits. This includes single parents, who are required to work at least 30 hours per week. Two-parent families are required to work 35 to 50 hours per week. Failure to obtain work could result in loss of benefits. It is also worth noting that, thanks to the pay offerings of companies such as Walmart, many who work at low wage jobs qualify for public assistance, even though they work full-time.

According to statisticbrain.com, the vast majority of TANF recipients, 80.4 percent, receive benefits for five years or less. Nearly 25 percent of all recipients receive benefits for less than a year. (The site still refers to the program by the old name of Aid To Families With Dependent Children. AFDC is the old name for the program, that was replaced by TANF in 1996. The site’s statistics are current, however.)

If instead you you are going to claim that the ~20% of folks who receive benefits for more than five years constitute the "biggest hurdle" to our nation getting to the point that the need for public assistance be eliminated, then by all means, I'm eager to see the facts and figures that support that assertion. My gut says that nothing will be able to show that to be so, but my gut is hardly proof of my view or yours. So please, show me how eliminating the expenditures associated with that 20% is going to result in achieving the "end state" you note as the target; if it seems plausible and probable to work, I'll sign up to lead the charge of implementing it.

Well, while the statistics may not be in my favor, I accually have experience in this, do you? People do stay on welfare for their entire life, people do work the system, people do have the mentality that "the working man is a sucker". I wonder where that fits into your statistics.

You shouldn't have to wonder at all where those folks fit into "my" statistics. Merely looking at them would tell you those people are among the roughly "20 percent," not the 80.4 percent, noted in my last post above.

That the people whom you are aware of who "do work the system" and who "do have the mentality that 'the working man is a sucker'" do indeed exist as members of the the "20 percent," is specifically why I asked you to use whatever facts and figures you can come by to present a cogent case that they are indeed the "biggest hurdle" to our nation getting to the point that the need for public assistance be eliminated.

I didn't deny that some people abuse either the letter or spirit of public assistance programs, but I don't see any evidence suggesting they rise to the levels you think they do; I don't see anything suggesting they constitute "the biggest hurdle" to achieving the "end state" goals that you or I identified. You have, however, now asserted that you "have experience in this," so by all means, bring that experience to bear and show us the credible case you have to present.

All you have to do is follow the money

Our poor people are in that tiny sliver of 40% of Americans with 2 tenths of a percent of the wealth. How much would their scamming the system impact the overall slice of the pie? Almost nothing

Now lets look at the 1% with 34.6% of the wealth. How much does their scamming the system impact their slice of the pie? Keep in mind they have an army of lawyers, accountants and politicians to help them do so

So, class warfare is going to be your tactic? Why don't we look at WHY people are where they are? The fact that they are there tells me nothing, the reasons for their position in the "pie" are really quite important.
To simply say that the rich have more and therefore they need to give more is not even fair to the people you are intending to help. I say this because that position assumes that those in the lower brackets CANNOT improve their situation without help. Will they ever be one of the top 1%? Probably not, but they do have the ability to improve their situation none the less. Unless the entire "pie" is distributed equally (regardless of an individuals value to the economy), there will always be diparity. So, using the disparity arguement is disingenuous, at best.

Class warfare? How did you get that out of rightwinger's remarks?

All s/he was saying is that the potential negative impact that can result from one's/a group's "scamming" any aspect of "the system" (be it the welfare system, the tax system, etc.) is greater from "scams" effected by/for well off folks than from those effected by/for destitute folks. At least that's what I think he was saying.

Easy, he/she posted a gragh showing wealth disparity, and said that is proof that the rich are doing more harm with their "scams". All the gragh shows is wealth disparity, not how much damage a certain group of people are doing with their "scams". It is not a large step to go from this to "class warfare".
Now, to be fair, one could surmise, from the gragh, that the rich COULD do more damage IF they are scamming the system. It does not, however, prove that they ARE scamming the system. The following link privides proof of the scamming of the welfare system:
Welfare Fraud
As does this one:
REPORT: The Worst Examples Of Welfare Fraud And How To Fix Them

 

[oldsoul]

You shouldn't have to wonder at all where those folks fit into "my" statistics. Merely looking at them would tell you those people are among the roughly "20 percent," not the 80.4 percent, noted in my last post above.

That the people whom you are aware of who "do work the system" and who "do have the mentality that 'the working man is a sucker'" do indeed exist as members of the the "20 percent," is specifically why I asked you to use whatever facts and figures you can come by to present a cogent case that they are indeed the "biggest hurdle" to our nation getting to the point that the need for public assistance be eliminated.

I didn't deny that some people abuse either the letter or spirit of public assistance programs, but I don't see any evidence suggesting they rise to the levels you think they do; I don't see anything suggesting they constitute "the biggest hurdle" to achieving the "end state" goals that you or I identified. You have, however, now asserted that you "have experience in this," so by all means, bring that experience to bear and show us the credible case you have to present.

All you have to do is follow the money

Our poor people are in that tiny sliver of 40% of Americans with 2 tenths of a percent of the wealth. How much would their scamming the system impact the overall slice of the pie? Almost nothing

Now lets look at the 1% with 34.6% of the wealth. How much does their scamming the system impact their slice of the pie? Keep in mind they have an army of lawyers, accountants and politicians to help them do so

So, class warfare is going to be your tactic? Why don't we look at WHY people are where they are? The fact that they are there tells me nothing, the reasons for their position in the "pie" are really quite important.
To simply say that the rich have more and therefore they need to give more is not even fair to the people you are intending to help. I say this because that position assumes that those in the lower brackets CANNOT improve their situation without help. Will they ever be one of the top 1%? Probably not, but they do have the ability to improve their situation none the less. Unless the entire "pie" is distributed equally (regardless of an individuals value to the economy), there will always be diparity. So, using the disparity arguement is disingenuous, at best.

The issue is not class warfare or why people are where they are

The issue, which you, yourself brought up was who is scamming the system the most and who benefits the most
My post made it obvious

Your post does nothing of the sort. It merely shows income disparity. It does nothing to show that one group or another is doing any specific thing. If that is what you mean to show, then find statistics on what the rich are doing to "scam" the system.

The magnitude of money to be made or lost is obviously way beyond you

Let me put it this way:

Poor Person: Look, I got a free cell phone
Rich Person: Look, I just bought a new jet and wrote it off as a business expense

You propose that your post is proof of something? Your entire arguement has been about what COULD happen, but what I am interested in is what DOES happen. Is this a difficult concept for you to grasp?

 

[rightwinger]

All you have to do is follow the money

Our poor people are in that tiny sliver of 40% of Americans with 2 tenths of a percent of the wealth. How much would their scamming the system impact the overall slice of the pie? Almost nothing

Now lets look at the 1% with 34.6% of the wealth. How much does their scamming the system impact their slice of the pie? Keep in mind they have an army of lawyers, accountants and politicians to help them do so

So, class warfare is going to be your tactic? Why don't we look at WHY people are where they are? The fact that they are there tells me nothing, the reasons for their position in the "pie" are really quite important.
To simply say that the rich have more and therefore they need to give more is not even fair to the people you are intending to help. I say this because that position assumes that those in the lower brackets CANNOT improve their situation without help. Will they ever be one of the top 1%? Probably not, but they do have the ability to improve their situation none the less. Unless the entire "pie" is distributed equally (regardless of an individuals value to the economy), there will always be diparity. So, using the disparity arguement is disingenuous, at best.

The issue is not class warfare or why people are where they are

The issue, which you, yourself brought up was who is scamming the system the most and who benefits the most
My post made it obvious

Your post does nothing of the sort. It merely shows income disparity. It does nothing to show that one group or another is doing any specific thing. If that is what you mean to show, then find statistics on what the rich are doing to "scam" the system.

The magnitude of money to be made or lost is obviously way beyond you

Let me put it this way:

Poor Person: Look, I got a free cell phone
Rich Person: Look, I just bought a new jet and wrote it off as a business expense

You propose that your post is proof of something? Your entire arguement has been about what COULD happen, but what I am interested in is what DOES happen. Is this a difficult concept for you to grasp?

OK lets look at what does happen. Keep in mind the Pie Chart I posted that shows "Where the money is"

A poor person "scams the system"..... claims children they don't have, receives benefits while working, sells food stamps for cigarettes

A rich person "scams the system"......claims millions in bogus tax write offs, hides money offshore, mixes business and personal expenses

Who is hurting our economy more?

 

[oldsoul]

So, class warfare is going to be your tactic? Why don't we look at WHY people are where they are? The fact that they are there tells me nothing, the reasons for their position in the "pie" are really quite important.
To simply say that the rich have more and therefore they need to give more is not even fair to the people you are intending to help. I say this because that position assumes that those in the lower brackets CANNOT improve their situation without help. Will they ever be one of the top 1%? Probably not, but they do have the ability to improve their situation none the less. Unless the entire "pie" is distributed equally (regardless of an individuals value to the economy), there will always be diparity. So, using the disparity arguement is disingenuous, at best.

The issue is not class warfare or why people are where they are

The issue, which you, yourself brought up was who is scamming the system the most and who benefits the most
My post made it obvious

Your post does nothing of the sort. It merely shows income disparity. It does nothing to show that one group or another is doing any specific thing. If that is what you mean to show, then find statistics on what the rich are doing to "scam" the system.

The magnitude of money to be made or lost is obviously way beyond you

Let me put it this way:

Poor Person: Look, I got a free cell phone
Rich Person: Look, I just bought a new jet and wrote it off as a business expense

You propose that your post is proof of something? Your entire arguement has been about what COULD happen, but what I am interested in is what DOES happen. Is this a difficult concept for you to grasp?

OK lets look at what does happen. Keep in mind the Pie Chart I posted that shows "Where the money is"

A poor person "scams the system"..... claims children they don't have, receives benefits while working, sells food stamps for cigarettes

A rich person "scams the system"......claims millions in bogus tax write offs, hides money offshore, mixes business and personal expenses

Who is hurting our economy more?

You apparenty are missing my point, so I will make it again:

WHERE IS YOUR PROOF THAT THIS IS HAPPENING. I can claim that the moon is made from cheese, does that make it a fact?

 

[rightwinger]

The issue is not class warfare or why people are where they are

The issue, which you, yourself brought up was who is scamming the system the most and who benefits the most
My post made it obvious

Your post does nothing of the sort. It merely shows income disparity. It does nothing to show that one group or another is doing any specific thing. If that is what you mean to show, then find statistics on what the rich are doing to "scam" the system.

The magnitude of money to be made or lost is obviously way beyond you

Let me put it this way:

Poor Person: Look, I got a free cell phone
Rich Person: Look, I just bought a new jet and wrote it off as a business expense

You propose that your post is proof of something? Your entire arguement has been about what COULD happen, but what I am interested in is what DOES happen. Is this a difficult concept for you to grasp?

OK lets look at what does happen. Keep in mind the Pie Chart I posted that shows "Where the money is"

A poor person "scams the system"..... claims children they don't have, receives benefits while working, sells food stamps for cigarettes

A rich person "scams the system"......claims millions in bogus tax write offs, hides money offshore, mixes business and personal expenses

Who is hurting our economy more?

You apparenty are missing my point, so I will make it again:

WHERE IS YOUR PROOF THAT THIS IS HAPPENING. I can claim that the moon is made from cheese, does that make it a fact?

Of course there is proof

Just look ad Bernie Madoff and what he got away with for so long. Madoffs problem is that he was stupid enough to get caught

Why do the super wealthy have an army of lawyers, accountants and politicians at their disposal? So they don't become a Madoff

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

how long would it take you to spend a trillion dollars if you spent 1 dollar a second?

1 x 60 seconds = 60 dollars a minute
60 x 60 minutes = 360 dollars an hour
360 x 24 hours = 8,640 dollars a day
8640 x 365 days = 3,153,000 dollars a year
3153000 x 10000 years = 331,530,000,000 dollars(that is over 330 billion dollars for 10 thousand years)
331,530,000,000 x 3 = 1,000,000,000,000 + dollars for 33,000 years.
The Bloated Federal Government SPEND almost 4 times this in 1 year, yet there is still more US citizens in poverty EVER. It isn't the rich that is the problem, but those who are in charge, and spending like liberals.

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

Your post does nothing of the sort. It merely shows income disparity. It does nothing to show that one group or another is doing any specific thing. If that is what you mean to show, then find statistics on what the rich are doing to "scam" the system.

The magnitude of money to be made or lost is obviously way beyond you

Let me put it this way:

Poor Person: Look, I got a free cell phone
Rich Person: Look, I just bought a new jet and wrote it off as a business expense

You propose that your post is proof of something? Your entire arguement has been about what COULD happen, but what I am interested in is what DOES happen. Is this a difficult concept for you to grasp?

OK lets look at what does happen. Keep in mind the Pie Chart I posted that shows "Where the money is"

A poor person "scams the system"..... claims children they don't have, receives benefits while working, sells food stamps for cigarettes

A rich person "scams the system"......claims millions in bogus tax write offs, hides money offshore, mixes business and personal expenses

Who is hurting our economy more?

You apparenty are missing my point, so I will make it again:

WHERE IS YOUR PROOF THAT THIS IS HAPPENING. I can claim that the moon is made from cheese, does that make it a fact?

Of course there is proof

Just look ad Bernie Madoff and what he got away with for so long. Madoffs problem is that he was stupid enough to get caught

Why do the super wealthy have an army of lawyers, accountants and politicians at their disposal? So they don't become a Madoff

The problem with those who were stupid enough to have Bernie pull the wool over their heads, is that if it is too good to be true, then it probably isn't. Those greedy rich people wanted more money so invest in a scam that they believed would do them good. Bernie Madoff is an amateur compared to the Federal Government and social security. Talk about a ponsie scheme where the young will pay for the old to retire.

 

[Arianrhod]

No mystery. Every policy by Bush 43, Clinton, Bush 41, the Great God Reagan, all the way back to Adam's exile from Eden is "all Obama's fault." Or, IOW, you can't fix Stupid.

 

[Kosh]

Donald Trump's major talking point is that America is no longer great- so why do Conservatives believe America is no longer great?

When do Conservatives believe America stopped being great?

WOW a debunked narrative being posted by a far left drone!

Why does the far left hate America like radical Islam does?

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

No mystery. Every policy by Bush 43, Clinton, Bush 41, the Great God Reagan, all the way back to Adam's exile from Eden is "all Obama's fault." Or, IOW, you can't fix Stupid.

When George Bush inherited the economy left to him by(I did not have sexual relations with that woman) Bill Clinton, the national debt was only 4 trillion dollars. When Obama took the reigns from Bush (No Child left behind and Free prescription drugs, 2 wars and Dept of Homeland Security) George went out with 9 trillion dollars on the debt. As of right now, that debt(that Obamas rate was less, but when you spike it at the beginning to 1 trillion anything lower is a lower rate) is over 18 trillion dollars, that Obama has outspent the first 43 presidents. The problem with you liberals is you cant get out of the past, because of saying "The past is behind US, what are we going to do NOW, to fix it," you just go back and blame Bush. You can change the appearance of someone to make a man look like a woman but you cant educate someone who doesn't want to learn.

 

[oldsoul]

Your post does nothing of the sort. It merely shows income disparity. It does nothing to show that one group or another is doing any specific thing. If that is what you mean to show, then find statistics on what the rich are doing to "scam" the system.

The magnitude of money to be made or lost is obviously way beyond you

Let me put it this way:

Poor Person: Look, I got a free cell phone
Rich Person: Look, I just bought a new jet and wrote it off as a business expense

You propose that your post is proof of something? Your entire arguement has been about what COULD happen, but what I am interested in is what DOES happen. Is this a difficult concept for you to grasp?

OK lets look at what does happen. Keep in mind the Pie Chart I posted that shows "Where the money is"

A poor person "scams the system"..... claims children they don't have, receives benefits while working, sells food stamps for cigarettes

A rich person "scams the system"......claims millions in bogus tax write offs, hides money offshore, mixes business and personal expenses

Who is hurting our economy more?

You apparenty are missing my point, so I will make it again:

WHERE IS YOUR PROOF THAT THIS IS HAPPENING. I can claim that the moon is made from cheese, does that make it a fact?

Of course there is proof

Just look ad Bernie Madoff and what he got away with for so long. Madoffs problem is that he was stupid enough to get caught

Why do the super wealthy have an army of lawyers, accountants and politicians at their disposal? So they don't become a Madoff

Madoff is but one example. If you cannot come up with proof that your claims are legitamate, I will have no choice but to discount them as the rantings of an angry leftist.

 

[rightwinger]

The magnitude of money to be made or lost is obviously way beyond you

Let me put it this way:

Poor Person: Look, I got a free cell phone
Rich Person: Look, I just bought a new jet and wrote it off as a business expense

You propose that your post is proof of something? Your entire arguement has been about what COULD happen, but what I am interested in is what DOES happen. Is this a difficult concept for you to grasp?

OK lets look at what does happen. Keep in mind the Pie Chart I posted that shows "Where the money is"

A poor person "scams the system"..... claims children they don't have, receives benefits while working, sells food stamps for cigarettes

A rich person "scams the system"......claims millions in bogus tax write offs, hides money offshore, mixes business and personal expenses

Who is hurting our economy more?

You apparenty are missing my point, so I will make it again:

WHERE IS YOUR PROOF THAT THIS IS HAPPENING. I can claim that the moon is made from cheese, does that make it a fact?

Of course there is proof

Just look ad Bernie Madoff and what he got away with for so long. Madoffs problem is that he was stupid enough to get caught

Why do the super wealthy have an army of lawyers, accountants and politicians at their disposal? So they don't become a Madoff

Madoff is but one example. If you cannot come up with proof that your claims are legitamate, I will have no choice but to discount them as the rantings of an angry leftist.

No sense arguing with you any further

 

[oldsoul]

You propose that your post is proof of something? Your entire arguement has been about what COULD happen, but what I am interested in is what DOES happen. Is this a difficult concept for you to grasp?

OK lets look at what does happen. Keep in mind the Pie Chart I posted that shows "Where the money is"

A poor person "scams the system"..... claims children they don't have, receives benefits while working, sells food stamps for cigarettes

A rich person "scams the system"......claims millions in bogus tax write offs, hides money offshore, mixes business and personal expenses

Who is hurting our economy more?

You apparenty are missing my point, so I will make it again:

WHERE IS YOUR PROOF THAT THIS IS HAPPENING. I can claim that the moon is made from cheese, does that make it a fact?

Of course there is proof

Just look ad Bernie Madoff and what he got away with for so long. Madoffs problem is that he was stupid enough to get caught

Why do the super wealthy have an army of lawyers, accountants and politicians at their disposal? So they don't become a Madoff

Madoff is but one example. If you cannot come up with proof that your claims are legitamate, I will have no choice but to discount them as the rantings of an angry leftist.

No sense arguing with you any further

I will take that as you cannot/will not provide proof and have buried your head in the sand to protect your ideology.

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

You propose that your post is proof of something? Your entire arguement has been about what COULD happen, but what I am interested in is what DOES happen. Is this a difficult concept for you to grasp?

OK lets look at what does happen. Keep in mind the Pie Chart I posted that shows "Where the money is"

A poor person "scams the system"..... claims children they don't have, receives benefits while working, sells food stamps for cigarettes

A rich person "scams the system"......claims millions in bogus tax write offs, hides money offshore, mixes business and personal expenses

Who is hurting our economy more?

You apparenty are missing my point, so I will make it again:

WHERE IS YOUR PROOF THAT THIS IS HAPPENING. I can claim that the moon is made from cheese, does that make it a fact?

Of course there is proof

Just look ad Bernie Madoff and what he got away with for so long. Madoffs problem is that he was stupid enough to get caught

Why do the super wealthy have an army of lawyers, accountants and politicians at their disposal? So they don't become a Madoff

Madoff is but one example. If you cannot come up with proof that your claims are legitamate, I will have no choice but to discount them as the rantings of an angry leftist.

No sense arguing with you any further

While you have your head in the sand, take a look a this. No, you don't want to. Is that because you don't want to see how corrupt your liberal elite politicians are?
7 amazing sentences that have actually been written about Congress’s most bizarre member

Congressional leaders like Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) seem sufficiently worried enough about Grayson's prospects that Reid has called on Grayson to resign his congressional seat, saying Grayson has "no moral compass" after allegations published in the New York Times and Tampa Bay Times that Grayson improperly used his position of power to promote his own hedge fund.

Tom Daschle Tax Problem Emerges: UPDATED

"Now we must move forward," Obama said in a written statement accepting "with sadness and regret" Daschle's request to be removed from consideration. A day earlier, Obama had said he "absolutely" stood by Daschle in the face of problems over back taxes and potential conflicts of interest.

Morality and Charlie Rangel’s Taxes

Ever notice that those who endorse high taxes and those who actually pay them aren’t the same people? Consider the curious case of Ways and Means Chairman Charlie Rangel, who is leading the charge for a new 5.4-percentage point income tax surcharge and recently called it “the moral thing to do.” About his own tax liability he seems less, well, fervent.

You liberals always believe what your liberal politicians say about the Republicans cheating the system or not paying their taxes, yet when the liberals are caught REDHANDED you go and put your heads back in the sand as you pointedly showed US. Yes you cannot change stupid, but you can enlighten people to think outside the box.

 

[oldsoul]

So, class warfare is going to be your tactic? Why don't we look at WHY people are where they are? The fact that they are there tells me nothing, the reasons for their position in the "pie" are really quite important.
To simply say that the rich have more and therefore they need to give more is not even fair to the people you are intending to help. I say this because that position assumes that those in the lower brackets CANNOT improve their situation without help. Will they ever be one of the top 1%? Probably not, but they do have the ability to improve their situation none the less. Unless the entire "pie" is distributed equally (regardless of an individuals value to the economy), there will always be diparity. So, using the disparity arguement is disingenuous, at best.

The issue is not class warfare or why people are where they are

The issue, which you, yourself brought up was who is scamming the system the most and who benefits the most
My post made it obvious

Your post does nothing of the sort. It merely shows income disparity. It does nothing to show that one group or another is doing any specific thing. If that is what you mean to show, then find statistics on what the rich are doing to "scam" the system.

The magnitude of money to be made or lost is obviously way beyond you

Let me put it this way:

Poor Person: Look, I got a free cell phone
Rich Person: Look, I just bought a new jet and wrote it off as a business expense

You propose that your post is proof of something? Your entire arguement has been about what COULD happen, but what I am interested in is what DOES happen. Is this a difficult concept for you to grasp?

OK lets look at what does happen. Keep in mind the Pie Chart I posted that shows "Where the money is"

A poor person "scams the system"..... claims children they don't have, receives benefits while working, sells food stamps for cigarettes

A rich person "scams the system"......claims millions in bogus tax write offs, hides money offshore, mixes business and personal expenses

Who is hurting our economy more?

Ok, since you refuse to engage in a logical discussion, I will get to the point I was attempting to help you arrive at. Here goes:
If a welfare recipiant claims that they have a need that, later, is proven to be non-existant, I think everyone would agree that is fraud and is an abuse of the system.
Say Frank Stenson ( a fake "1%er" that I made up), is a global real estate invester that has properties in various counties around the globe, one of which is France, and he purchases an aircraft to travel to and from his properties. He uses said aircraft to travel to France on business (he can prove this), and decides to bring his family along to take a vacation after his business is done. Frank wrote-off the purchase of the aircraft as a business expense, and we will assume that he is legally entitled to do this. So, is Frank now guilty of fraud, for transporting his family on his aircraft? Or is he simply using his advantage of having an aircraft, and business in France, to be able to take his family with, at little additional expense? Maybe, one could argue that Frank's family should have flown commercial, but let's be realistic, noone would expect their plumber to have a separate vehicle for plumbing, and one for getting groceries, now would they? What is the difference? Is it price? Is it distance traveled? Or is it that the plumber would be unlikely to use their plumbing vehicle for a family vacation? What if the plumber took their plumbing vehicle (Let's say it's a quad-cab pick-up) to a plumbing convention in Vegas, and brought his family with. Is he now guilty of fraud for writing off the pick-up as a business expense?

 

[320 Years of History]

Well, while the statistics may not be in my favor, I accually have experience in this, do you? People do stay on welfare for their entire life, people do work the system, people do have the mentality that "the working man is a sucker". I wonder where that fits into your statistics.

You shouldn't have to wonder at all where those folks fit into "my" statistics. Merely looking at them would tell you those people are among the roughly "20 percent," not the 80.4 percent, noted in my last post above.

That the people whom you are aware of who "do work the system" and who "do have the mentality that 'the working man is a sucker'" do indeed exist as members of the the "20 percent," is specifically why I asked you to use whatever facts and figures you can come by to present a cogent case that they are indeed the "biggest hurdle" to our nation getting to the point that the need for public assistance be eliminated.

I didn't deny that some people abuse either the letter or spirit of public assistance programs, but I don't see any evidence suggesting they rise to the levels you think they do; I don't see anything suggesting they constitute "the biggest hurdle" to achieving the "end state" goals that you or I identified. You have, however, now asserted that you "have experience in this," so by all means, bring that experience to bear and show us the credible case you have to present.

All you have to do is follow the money

Our poor people are in that tiny sliver of 40% of Americans with 2 tenths of a percent of the wealth. How much would their scamming the system impact the overall slice of the pie? Almost nothing

Now lets look at the 1% with 34.6% of the wealth. How much does their scamming the system impact their slice of the pie? Keep in mind they have an army of lawyers, accountants and politicians to help them do so

So, class warfare is going to be your tactic? Why don't we look at WHY people are where they are? The fact that they are there tells me nothing, the reasons for their position in the "pie" are really quite important.
To simply say that the rich have more and therefore they need to give more is not even fair to the people you are intending to help. I say this because that position assumes that those in the lower brackets CANNOT improve their situation without help. Will they ever be one of the top 1%? Probably not, but they do have the ability to improve their situation none the less. Unless the entire "pie" is distributed equally (regardless of an individuals value to the economy), there will always be diparity. So, using the disparity arguement is disingenuous, at best.

The issue is not class warfare or why people are where they are

The issue, which you, yourself brought up was who is scamming the system the most and who benefits the most
My post made it obvious

Your post does nothing of the sort. It merely shows income disparity. It does nothing to show that one group or another is doing any specific thing. If that is what you mean to show, then find statistics on what the rich are doing to "scam" the system.

Lord, have effin' mercy!!! oldsoul, I respect you and your viewpoints, but do you really need the substance of rightwinger's remarks spelled out that much? He wasn't even suggesting that rich folks do scam the system, at least in a literal sense, only that to the extent they do so successfully, the impact is greater than that of poor folks doing so. That shouldn't be that hard to "get."

Whereas poor folks' "scams" are overt and easily seen and understood, rich folks' "scams" are not. Rich folks' "scams" consist of "scamming" the system so as to get legislation passed that favors them, sometimes even just one of them. Legally speaking, that isn't a scam. Ethically speaking it's nothing but a scam and no different in ethical substance or intent than the overt scams some poor folks undertake. All that differs is the nature and extent of influence the two groups can and may employ to effect their respective "scams."

FWIW, one might ask "why are rich folks' 'scams' not blatantly overt?" The answer is quite simple. Rich folks, unlike poor folks, have a lot to lose if they are found to be overtly scamming the system, whatever system it be. Poor folks have little to nothing to lose. They aren't going to be much, if any, worse off if they get caught.

I've been regarding you as being among the (few) folks here who sit and focus on the substantive content of discussions rather than on the semantics of them. Have I been mistaken?

 

[oldsoul]

You shouldn't have to wonder at all where those folks fit into "my" statistics. Merely looking at them would tell you those people are among the roughly "20 percent," not the 80.4 percent, noted in my last post above.

That the people whom you are aware of who "do work the system" and who "do have the mentality that 'the working man is a sucker'" do indeed exist as members of the the "20 percent," is specifically why I asked you to use whatever facts and figures you can come by to present a cogent case that they are indeed the "biggest hurdle" to our nation getting to the point that the need for public assistance be eliminated.

I didn't deny that some people abuse either the letter or spirit of public assistance programs, but I don't see any evidence suggesting they rise to the levels you think they do; I don't see anything suggesting they constitute "the biggest hurdle" to achieving the "end state" goals that you or I identified. You have, however, now asserted that you "have experience in this," so by all means, bring that experience to bear and show us the credible case you have to present.

All you have to do is follow the money

Our poor people are in that tiny sliver of 40% of Americans with 2 tenths of a percent of the wealth. How much would their scamming the system impact the overall slice of the pie? Almost nothing

Now lets look at the 1% with 34.6% of the wealth. How much does their scamming the system impact their slice of the pie? Keep in mind they have an army of lawyers, accountants and politicians to help them do so

So, class warfare is going to be your tactic? Why don't we look at WHY people are where they are? The fact that they are there tells me nothing, the reasons for their position in the "pie" are really quite important.
To simply say that the rich have more and therefore they need to give more is not even fair to the people you are intending to help. I say this because that position assumes that those in the lower brackets CANNOT improve their situation without help. Will they ever be one of the top 1%? Probably not, but they do have the ability to improve their situation none the less. Unless the entire "pie" is distributed equally (regardless of an individuals value to the economy), there will always be diparity. So, using the disparity arguement is disingenuous, at best.

The issue is not class warfare or why people are where they are

The issue, which you, yourself brought up was who is scamming the system the most and who benefits the most
My post made it obvious

Your post does nothing of the sort. It merely shows income disparity. It does nothing to show that one group or another is doing any specific thing. If that is what you mean to show, then find statistics on what the rich are doing to "scam" the system.

Lord, have effin' mercy!!! oldsoul, I respect you and your viewpoints, but do you really need the substance of rightwinger's remarks spelled out that much? He wasn't even suggesting that rich folks do scam the system, at least in a literal sense, only that to the extent they do so successfully, the impact is greater than that of poor folks doing so. That shouldn't be that hard to "get."

Whereas poor folks' "scams" are overt and easily seen and understood, rich folks' "scams" are not. Rich folks' "scams" consist of "scamming" the system so as to get legislation passed that favors them, sometimes even just one of them. Legally speaking, that isn't a scam. Ethically speaking it's nothing but a scam and no different in ethical substance or intent than the overt scams some poor folks undertake. All that differs is the nature and extent of influence the two groups can and may employ to effect their respective "scams."

FWIW, one might ask "why are rich folks' 'scams' not blatantly overt?" The answer is quite simple. Rich folks, unlike poor folks, have a lot to lose if they are found to be overtly scamming the system, whatever system it be. Poor folks have little to nothing to lose. They aren't going to be much, if any, worse off if they get caught.

I've been regarding you as being among the (few) folks here who sit and focus on the substantive content of discussions rather than on the semantics of them. Have I been mistaken?

No, you have not been mistaken, I would rather discuss the substance of a topic, however, I do expect that a person can articulate what their position is and be able to support it. I would have thought you to understand that.
That said, while the rich folks may (and I would argue are) able to influence legislation, they are the few, and the not-so-rich have the numbers. To put it another way, if one or a group of "rich folks" want a particular peice of legislation passed do they have more or less power to influence the outcome than the rest of the voters (if they came together and used that power)? See, the problem with your arguement, as I see it, is not that "they" have so much power, it is that "we" do not use ours, when "they" do. That is not scamming the system, IMO, that is using the system to your advantage. Everyone does this to one degree or another, it's just a matter of scope, and legality.
Further the real issue that is so damaging to our country is the "us VS them" mentality coupled with the "entitlement" mentality of so many. This, IMO, is fostered by the progressives, on both sides of the aisle, to further their political agendas. Eventually the American people will see through this, I just hope that it is not too late when they do.
What we need more than anything else is a leader that can unite us again. Sadly, this will likely require a common "enemy". This is something I have not seen in my adult life, and it is tearing this country apart, because we are turning on ourselves.

 

[rightwinger]

OK lets look at what does happen. Keep in mind the Pie Chart I posted that shows "Where the money is"

A poor person "scams the system"..... claims children they don't have, receives benefits while working, sells food stamps for cigarettes

A rich person "scams the system"......claims millions in bogus tax write offs, hides money offshore, mixes business and personal expenses

Who is hurting our economy more?

You apparenty are missing my point, so I will make it again:

WHERE IS YOUR PROOF THAT THIS IS HAPPENING. I can claim that the moon is made from cheese, does that make it a fact?

Of course there is proof

Just look ad Bernie Madoff and what he got away with for so long. Madoffs problem is that he was stupid enough to get caught

Why do the super wealthy have an army of lawyers, accountants and politicians at their disposal? So they don't become a Madoff

Madoff is but one example. If you cannot come up with proof that your claims are legitamate, I will have no choice but to discount them as the rantings of an angry leftist.

No sense arguing with you any further

While you have your head in the sand, take a look a this. No, you don't want to. Is that because you don't want to see how corrupt your liberal elite politicians are?
7 amazing sentences that have actually been written about Congress’s most bizarre member

Congressional leaders like Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) seem sufficiently worried enough about Grayson's prospects that Reid has called on Grayson to resign his congressional seat, saying Grayson has "no moral compass" after allegations published in the New York Times and Tampa Bay Times that Grayson improperly used his position of power to promote his own hedge fund.

Tom Daschle Tax Problem Emerges: UPDATED

"Now we must move forward," Obama said in a written statement accepting "with sadness and regret" Daschle's request to be removed from consideration. A day earlier, Obama had said he "absolutely" stood by Daschle in the face of problems over back taxes and potential conflicts of interest.

Morality and Charlie Rangel’s Taxes

Ever notice that those who endorse high taxes and those who actually pay them aren’t the same people? Consider the curious case of Ways and Means Chairman Charlie Rangel, who is leading the charge for a new 5.4-percentage point income tax surcharge and recently called it “the moral thing to do.” About his own tax liability he seems less, well, fervent.

You liberals always believe what your liberal politicians say about the Republicans cheating the system or not paying their taxes, yet when the liberals are caught REDHANDED you go and put your heads back in the sand as you pointedly showed US. Yes you cannot change stupid, but you can enlighten people to think outside the box.

WTF does that have to do with the relative ability of the rich or poor to scam the system

 

[baileyn45]

You apparenty are missing my point, so I will make it again:

WHERE IS YOUR PROOF THAT THIS IS HAPPENING. I can claim that the moon is made from cheese, does that make it a fact?

Of course there is proof

Just look ad Bernie Madoff and what he got away with for so long. Madoffs problem is that he was stupid enough to get caught

Why do the super wealthy have an army of lawyers, accountants and politicians at their disposal? So they don't become a Madoff

Madoff is but one example. If you cannot come up with proof that your claims are legitamate, I will have no choice but to discount them as the rantings of an angry leftist.

No sense arguing with you any further

While you have your head in the sand, take a look a this. No, you don't want to. Is that because you don't want to see how corrupt your liberal elite politicians are?
7 amazing sentences that have actually been written about Congress’s most bizarre member

Congressional leaders like Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) seem sufficiently worried enough about Grayson's prospects that Reid has called on Grayson to resign his congressional seat, saying Grayson has "no moral compass" after allegations published in the New York Times and Tampa Bay Times that Grayson improperly used his position of power to promote his own hedge fund.

Tom Daschle Tax Problem Emerges: UPDATED

"Now we must move forward," Obama said in a written statement accepting "with sadness and regret" Daschle's request to be removed from consideration. A day earlier, Obama had said he "absolutely" stood by Daschle in the face of problems over back taxes and potential conflicts of interest.

Morality and Charlie Rangel’s Taxes

Ever notice that those who endorse high taxes and those who actually pay them aren’t the same people? Consider the curious case of Ways and Means Chairman Charlie Rangel, who is leading the charge for a new 5.4-percentage point income tax surcharge and recently called it “the moral thing to do.” About his own tax liability he seems less, well, fervent.

You liberals always believe what your liberal politicians say about the Republicans cheating the system or not paying their taxes, yet when the liberals are caught REDHANDED you go and put your heads back in the sand as you pointedly showed US. Yes you cannot change stupid, but you can enlighten people to think outside the box.

WTF does that have to do with the relative ability of the rich or poor to scam the system

The discussion of "scamming" the system is moot. The rich, along with their counterparts IN GOVT have created and create the "system". The difference with the poor is that the left in this country continually tells them they are at worst nothing and at best victims.

 

[320 Years of History]

You apparenty are missing my point, so I will make it again:

WHERE IS YOUR PROOF THAT THIS IS HAPPENING. I can claim that the moon is made from cheese, does that make it a fact?

Of course there is proof

Just look ad Bernie Madoff and what he got away with for so long. Madoffs problem is that he was stupid enough to get caught

Why do the super wealthy have an army of lawyers, accountants and politicians at their disposal? So they don't become a Madoff

Madoff is but one example. If you cannot come up with proof that your claims are legitamate, I will have no choice but to discount them as the rantings of an angry leftist.

No sense arguing with you any further

While you have your head in the sand, take a look a this. No, you don't want to. Is that because you don't want to see how corrupt your liberal elite politicians are?
7 amazing sentences that have actually been written about Congress’s most bizarre member

Congressional leaders like Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) seem sufficiently worried enough about Grayson's prospects that Reid has called on Grayson to resign his congressional seat, saying Grayson has "no moral compass" after allegations published in the New York Times and Tampa Bay Times that Grayson improperly used his position of power to promote his own hedge fund.

Tom Daschle Tax Problem Emerges: UPDATED

"Now we must move forward," Obama said in a written statement accepting "with sadness and regret" Daschle's request to be removed from consideration. A day earlier, Obama had said he "absolutely" stood by Daschle in the face of problems over back taxes and potential conflicts of interest.

Morality and Charlie Rangel’s Taxes

Ever notice that those who endorse high taxes and those who actually pay them aren’t the same people? Consider the curious case of Ways and Means Chairman Charlie Rangel, who is leading the charge for a new 5.4-percentage point income tax surcharge and recently called it “the moral thing to do.” About his own tax liability he seems less, well, fervent.

You liberals always believe what your liberal politicians say about the Republicans cheating the system or not paying their taxes, yet when the liberals are caught REDHANDED you go and put your heads back in the sand as you pointedly showed US. Yes you cannot change stupid, but you can enlighten people to think outside the box.

WTF does that have to do with the relative ability of the rich or poor to scam the system

I can tell you the answer right now. Nothing of substance, of merit!!!

That member will clearly say just about anything, without the barest shred of awareness of the full picture, apparently just to be a voice of opposition. I can't say why, I can only say what I've observed. Based on what I've observed, "why" doesn't really matter.