Why do democrats want more people on foodstamps and welfare

[danielpalos]

What about generational welfare?
Do you cut someone off because their parents were poor?

No, but if we had a regulation that nobody gets welfare unless they are fixed first, that would cut our welfare roles by 70% down the road.

Sounds like something Hitler would propose

Why is that? What do you think working people do when they have as many kids as they could afford to have?

current policy pays more when you have more kids. why lie to their stock holders if there is no multimillion dollar bonus in it.

That is a lie . You don’t have any idea how welfare benefits work. Geez, that stuff changed back in bill Clinton days .

would persons on unemployment compensation have as many kids?

 

[rightwinger]

Why do dems say excuses like "because they need help?"
You lying mother fuckers. What about generational welfare. Excess in shit they dont need. You are making CAREERS out fo this shit. How many people do you idiots actually think aqre against helping out someone that falls on hard times?
FFS, pelosi said welfare is good. ACA is good because lazy entitled hippies can have healthcare while they play the guitar in the downtown square for 30 bucks a day.
You lying partisan shitheads need to grow up.

What about generational welfare?
Do you cut someone off because their parents were poor?

No, but if we had a regulation that nobody gets welfare unless they are fixed first, that would cut our welfare roles by 70% down the road.

Sounds like something Hitler would propose

Why is that? What do you think working people do when they have as many kids as they could afford to have?

Forced sterilization is just fucking sick
What is the matter with you conservatives?

 

[rightwinger]

A 50% tax cut?

That should trickle down with an end to welfare and food stamps
Companies can no longer claim they can't afford pay increases

there is no right work, even in right to work States.

Without unions, there is nothing to force companies to trickle down that profit to the workers

Correct, that's what unions used to do. They used so much force that they forced our work right out of the country.

No, they fought for the rights of workers and ensured they got their fair slice of the pie

No more with "right to work"
Right to get paid like shit

Beats not getting paid at all.

Sure .......make workers settle for less

 

[deanrd]

Isn't it better for Americans to have jobs and self respect?

Democratic Party on Welfare & Poverty

Why do democrats want more people on foodstamps and welfare

Because we are good people, we just don't want Republicans to starve. But I'm starting to reconsider.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

there is no right work, even in right to work States.

Without unions, there is nothing to force companies to trickle down that profit to the workers

Correct, that's what unions used to do. They used so much force that they forced our work right out of the country.

No, they fought for the rights of workers and ensured they got their fair slice of the pie

No more with "right to work"
Right to get paid like shit

Beats not getting paid at all.

Sure .......make workers settle for less

Like I said, better than not working at all. We are not an isolated country where we are only allowed to buy what we make. The American consumer is obsessed with cheap prices and products, and manufacturers cannot produce those cheap products in this country if they are paying floor sweepers $25.00 an hour.

Until you can change the minds of consumers, manufacturers will always look to pay the least. Bring unions back in, it will force them out of state or country to produce those cheap products.

It's not Republicans, it's not Democrats, it's not outsourcing, it's not relocating. It's the American consumer who is in charge of all of it.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Why do dems say excuses like "because they need help?"
You lying mother fuckers. What about generational welfare. Excess in shit they dont need. You are making CAREERS out fo this shit. How many people do you idiots actually think aqre against helping out someone that falls on hard times?
FFS, pelosi said welfare is good. ACA is good because lazy entitled hippies can have healthcare while they play the guitar in the downtown square for 30 bucks a day.
You lying partisan shitheads need to grow up.

What about generational welfare?
Do you cut someone off because their parents were poor?

No, but if we had a regulation that nobody gets welfare unless they are fixed first, that would cut our welfare roles by 70% down the road.

Sounds like something Hitler would propose

Why is that? What do you think working people do when they have as many kids as they could afford to have?

Forced sterilization is just fucking sick
What is the matter with you conservatives?

There is nothing forced about it. If you don't want to get fixed, don't use our social programs.

And why is it less sick if my wife and I have to stop at two children because it's all we can afford and welfare people have as many as they desire because I have to support them? That's what I call sick.

How are you going to solve or reduce poverty in this country if you keep paying people to have poor children?

 

[skye]

Isn't it better for Americans to have jobs and self respect?

Democratic Party on Welfare & Poverty

Rats Dem rats want slaves

to vote for them

It ain't happening!

Rats demrats are on their way out now....bye you disgusting scum.....Justice is here to rule ...thanks GOD JUSTICE is here to rule again!

 

[hadit]

No, but if we had a regulation that nobody gets welfare unless they are fixed first, that would cut our welfare roles by 70% down the road.

Sounds like something Hitler would propose

Why is that? What do you think working people do when they have as many kids as they could afford to have?

current policy pays more when you have more kids. why lie to their stock holders if there is no multimillion dollar bonus in it.

That is a lie . You don’t have any idea how welfare benefits work. Geez, that stuff changed back in bill Clinton days .

would persons on unemployment compensation have as many kids?

UE is temporary assistance while you are between jobs. It's not designed to be a long term thing, like welfare. IOW, you can't claim UE when you just decide you don't want to work the rest of your life.

 

[rightwinger]

What about generational welfare?
Do you cut someone off because their parents were poor?

No, but if we had a regulation that nobody gets welfare unless they are fixed first, that would cut our welfare roles by 70% down the road.

Sounds like something Hitler would propose

Why is that? What do you think working people do when they have as many kids as they could afford to have?

Forced sterilization is just fucking sick
What is the matter with you conservatives?

There is nothing forced about it. If you don't want to get fixed, don't use our social programs.

And why is it less sick if my wife and I have to stop at two children because it's all we can afford and welfare people have as many as they desire because I have to support them? That's what I call sick.

How are you going to solve or reduce poverty in this country if you keep paying people to have poor children?

Double down on being a sick fuck

You want to feed your family?
Get sterilized first

 

[danielpalos]

Sounds like something Hitler would propose

Why is that? What do you think working people do when they have as many kids as they could afford to have?

current policy pays more when you have more kids. why lie to their stock holders if there is no multimillion dollar bonus in it.

That is a lie . You don’t have any idea how welfare benefits work. Geez, that stuff changed back in bill Clinton days .

would persons on unemployment compensation have as many kids?

UE is temporary assistance while you are between jobs. It's not designed to be a long term thing, like welfare. IOW, you can't claim UE when you just decide you don't want to work the rest of your life.

Labor should have a better choice for staying in the "ready reserve labor pool".

 

[hadit]

Isn't it better for Americans to have jobs and self respect?

Democratic Party on Welfare & Poverty

We believe in helping those who need help

How American of us

Everyone wants to do that. The question is how to do it effectively, wisely and economically. One side seems to argue that we should just simply open the money spigots and let people take as much as they can for as long as they can, while the other side seems to argue that it is better to limit assistance and make it contingent upon effort displayed by the recipient. One side seems to argue that such assistance is judged to be successful by ever increasing numbers of people accessing it, while the other seems to be arguing that fewer numbers of people accessing such help is a better measure of success.

It is not as simple as the childish argument that "We want to help people and you don't".

 

[hadit]

Why is that? What do you think working people do when they have as many kids as they could afford to have?

current policy pays more when you have more kids. why lie to their stock holders if there is no multimillion dollar bonus in it.

That is a lie . You don’t have any idea how welfare benefits work. Geez, that stuff changed back in bill Clinton days .

would persons on unemployment compensation have as many kids?

UE is temporary assistance while you are between jobs. It's not designed to be a long term thing, like welfare. IOW, you can't claim UE when you just decide you don't want to work the rest of your life.

Labor should have a better choice for staying in the "ready reserve labor pool".

It's called, "I'll take the job, see you on Monday".

 

[danielpalos]

Isn't it better for Americans to have jobs and self respect?

Democratic Party on Welfare & Poverty

We believe in helping those who need help

How American of us

Everyone wants to do that. The question is how to do it effectively, wisely and economically. One side seems to argue that we should just simply open the money spigots and let people take as much as they can for as long as they can, while the other side seems to argue that it is better to limit assistance and make it contingent upon effort displayed by the recipient. One side seems to argue that such assistance is judged to be successful by ever increasing numbers of people accessing it, while the other seems to be arguing that fewer numbers of people accessing such help is a better measure of success.

It is not as simple as the childish argument that "We want to help people and you don't".

A social safety net must be consistent to provide consistent results.

 

[danielpalos]

current policy pays more when you have more kids. why lie to their stock holders if there is no multimillion dollar bonus in it.

That is a lie . You don’t have any idea how welfare benefits work. Geez, that stuff changed back in bill Clinton days .

would persons on unemployment compensation have as many kids?

UE is temporary assistance while you are between jobs. It's not designed to be a long term thing, like welfare. IOW, you can't claim UE when you just decide you don't want to work the rest of your life.

Labor should have a better choice for staying in the "ready reserve labor pool".

It's called, "I'll take the job, see you on Monday".

How well did that work during the Great Depression? Only the right wing, never gets it.

 

[hadit]

That is a lie . You don’t have any idea how welfare benefits work. Geez, that stuff changed back in bill Clinton days .

would persons on unemployment compensation have as many kids?

UE is temporary assistance while you are between jobs. It's not designed to be a long term thing, like welfare. IOW, you can't claim UE when you just decide you don't want to work the rest of your life.

Labor should have a better choice for staying in the "ready reserve labor pool".

It's called, "I'll take the job, see you on Monday".

How well did that work during the Great Depression? Only the right wing, never gets it.

We're not in a depression. Get a job.

 

[danielpalos]

would persons on unemployment compensation have as many kids?

UE is temporary assistance while you are between jobs. It's not designed to be a long term thing, like welfare. IOW, you can't claim UE when you just decide you don't want to work the rest of your life.

Labor should have a better choice for staying in the "ready reserve labor pool".

It's called, "I'll take the job, see you on Monday".

How well did that work during the Great Depression? Only the right wing, never gets it.

We're not in a depression. Get a job.

Capitalism has a natural rate of unemployment.

Thus, I am "naturally unemployed".

The law is, employment at will in any at-will employment State.

Don't be illegal to a federal doctrine and State laws, right wingers, if fixes a Bad moral precedent, for less fortunate illegals.

 

[rightwinger]

Isn't it better for Americans to have jobs and self respect?

Democratic Party on Welfare & Poverty

We believe in helping those who need help

How American of us

Everyone wants to do that. The question is how to do it effectively, wisely and economically. One side seems to argue that we should just simply open the money spigots and let people take as much as they can for as long as they can, while the other side seems to argue that it is better to limit assistance and make it contingent upon effort displayed by the recipient. One side seems to argue that such assistance is judged to be successful by ever increasing numbers of people accessing it, while the other seems to be arguing that fewer numbers of people accessing such help is a better measure of success.

It is not as simple as the childish argument that "We want to help people and you don't".

It is much bigger than "get a job"
30 million Americans receiving public assistance have jobs

The problem is our lower skilled jobs no longer pay enough for people to support themselves and their families. While we bend over backwards to give tax cuts to employers, we do nothing to incentivize higher pay for their workers

 

[hadit]

UE is temporary assistance while you are between jobs. It's not designed to be a long term thing, like welfare. IOW, you can't claim UE when you just decide you don't want to work the rest of your life.

Labor should have a better choice for staying in the "ready reserve labor pool".

It's called, "I'll take the job, see you on Monday".

How well did that work during the Great Depression? Only the right wing, never gets it.

We're not in a depression. Get a job.

Capitalism has a natural rate of unemployment.

Thus, I am "naturally unemployed".

The law is, employment at will in any at-will employment State.

Don't be illegal to a federal doctrine and State laws, right wingers, if fixes a Bad moral precedent, for less fortunate illegals.

No, you are unemployed because you choose to be. And you should not be rewarded for making that choice.

 

[hadit]

Isn't it better for Americans to have jobs and self respect?

Democratic Party on Welfare & Poverty

We believe in helping those who need help

How American of us

Everyone wants to do that. The question is how to do it effectively, wisely and economically. One side seems to argue that we should just simply open the money spigots and let people take as much as they can for as long as they can, while the other side seems to argue that it is better to limit assistance and make it contingent upon effort displayed by the recipient. One side seems to argue that such assistance is judged to be successful by ever increasing numbers of people accessing it, while the other seems to be arguing that fewer numbers of people accessing such help is a better measure of success.

It is not as simple as the childish argument that "We want to help people and you don't".

It is much bigger than "get a job"
30 million Americans receiving public assistance have jobs

The problem is our lower skilled jobs no longer pay enough for people to support themselves and their families. While we bend over backwards to give tax cuts to employers, we do nothing to incentivize higher pay for their workers

It's simple economics. If a job pays more than it's worth to an employer, then it becomes a net loss. A company cannot operate with net loss jobs unless the other jobs generate more than enough revenue to cover the losses. Now, how do you propose to incentivize employers to maintain and pay for net loss jobs?

 

[danielpalos]

Isn't it better for Americans to have jobs and self respect?

Democratic Party on Welfare & Poverty

We believe in helping those who need help

How American of us

Everyone wants to do that. The question is how to do it effectively, wisely and economically. One side seems to argue that we should just simply open the money spigots and let people take as much as they can for as long as they can, while the other side seems to argue that it is better to limit assistance and make it contingent upon effort displayed by the recipient. One side seems to argue that such assistance is judged to be successful by ever increasing numbers of people accessing it, while the other seems to be arguing that fewer numbers of people accessing such help is a better measure of success.

It is not as simple as the childish argument that "We want to help people and you don't".

It is much bigger than "get a job"
30 million Americans receiving public assistance have jobs

The problem is our lower skilled jobs no longer pay enough for people to support themselves and their families. While we bend over backwards to give tax cuts to employers, we do nothing to incentivize higher pay for their workers

Healthcare reform and a fifteen dollar an hour minimum wage!