Liberalism and Limitless Welfare: An Explanation.

[NYcarbineer]

Conservatives got more than they bargained for when they decided to destroy the American middle class.

and here is the proof..........a scam artist electrician...........who will repeatedly tell you the problem is fixed only to see the fuse blow again................

Supporting a party that has added more to the welfare rolls and then saying they fixed it..................

Ignoring the underlying problem all together.

Americans with good paying jobs don't collect welfare.

Conservatism has tried to systemically drive down wages, weaken labor, and drive jobs out of this country for the benefit of the capitalists.

And they've been successful. Now you're reaping the whirlwind, because what conservatives never took into account is that the People, with the power of the ballot box, would take back much of what conservatives took away from them,

in the form of government help for the poor and low income Americans that conservatism created.

 

[Rotagilla]

marxist doubletalk/class envy

the evil rich.....

In certain countries like in Scandinavia, govt is run for the people. In the US it is run for the rich.

Is that rich envy, or just seeing the blatant bull that goes on in US govt?

Oh..I think most got your point. I'm not sure in the way you meant, though.
Look, you worry about scandinavia all you want....We aren't talking about them here..

Why are you trying to change the subject?

 

[NYcarbineer]

William Voegeli spoke at Hillsdale College in October, analyzing why, with inordinate growth and very little in results of solving poverty, "liberals do not seem all that concerned about whether the machine they’ve built, and want to keep expanding, is running well.

For inflation-adjusted, per capita federal welfare state spending to increase by 254 percent from 1977 to 2013, without a correspondingly dramatic reduction in poverty, and for liberals to react to this phenomenon by taking the position that our welfare state’s only real defect is that it is insufficiently generous,..."


No...not insanity, although one could make that argument.
Voegeli explains it as a different twist of their psyche.



1. "....while the welfare state was growing constantly, liberals were insisting constantly it wasn’t big enough or growing fast enough..... the welfare state is a permanent work-in-progress, and its liberal advocates believe that however many resources it has, it always needs a great deal more.

2. [We are left with] two of the journalist’s standard questions:
What is the liberal disposition regarding the growth of the welfare state? ....
Why do liberals feel that no matter how much we’re doing through government programs to alleviate and prevent poverty, whatever we are doing is shamefully inadequate?




3. [From a policy perspective,] Progressives of a century ago, followed by New Deal and Great Society liberals, worked to transform a republic where the government had limited duties and powers into a nation where there were no grievances the government could or should refrain from addressing, and where no means of responding to those grievances lie outside the scope of the government’s legitimate authority.




4. If we make ...an effort to understand committed liberals as they understand themselves—then we have to understand them as people who, by their own account, get up every morning asking, “What can I do today so that there’s a little less suffering in the world?” ....the question of liberal compassion,....

a. Empathetic kindness is “what binds us together, and . . . how we’ve always moved forward, based on the idea that we have a stake in each other’s success.” [These are the] Arguments and rhetoric that work—that impress voters and intimidate opponents—are used again and again.




5. [But] disciplining government according to “measured provable performance and effective spending” ought to be a “completely philosophically neutral objective.” Skinflint conservatives want government to be thrifty for obvious reasons, but ... liberals’ motivations should be even stronger.

a. ‘You [Liberals] ought to be the most offended of anybody if a dollar that could help a poor person is being squandered in some way.’"
Current Issue

Do the right care if it's running well? They care if they profit out of it, they don't care if lives are lost, in fact they seem to encourage people getting themselves killed for the cause of making more rich people richer.

"[Democrat] GOV. LAMM ASSERTS ELDERLY, IF VERY ILL, HAVE 'DUTY TO DIE'
DENVER, March 28— Elderly people who are terminally ill have a ''duty to die and get out of the way'' instead of trying to prolong their lives by artificial means, [Democrat] Gov. Richard D. Lamm of Colorado said Tuesday."
GOV. LAMM ASSERTS ELDERLY IF VERY ILL HAVE DUTY TO DIE - NYTimes.com

Do you support unlimited taxpayer funded assistance to give seniors every medical treatment they desire, despite their ability to pay?

 

[frigidweirdo]

And republicans think with what? Not their brains either....

Not all republicans, but the republican philosophy is more logical. A liberal will do something because it feels good. Conservatives and republicans do things because it creates the result they want. Not 100% of course, but in general I believe it's true.

More logical for you perhaps.

You seem to think you understand liberals, when you're not one.

I'm not going to stand up and say I support the Liberal way of doing things, but I'm not going to support the Conservative way either.

Sure, the right get results. They get money in their pockets, they get lower people killed, they get crime, they get all that they need for themselves to be better off and ef everyone else.

Even Bush going into Iraq and messing the country up served his purpose.

What REALLY surprises me are the hangers on who don't benefit from the the Republican way and yet still vote for them, still deny the reality of the situation.

Iraq was clearly getting rid of the bad man in Iraq. Forget that other bad men exist in this world and they run countries, because they've not been told about them every day in the media.

Today it was a nice story about how in Iran people will get fined for having dogs. What do they care? All they need to know is that Iran is bad and evil, whereas Saudi Arabia which doesn't let women drive, is nice, because you didn't get told that women can't drive.

So, while the RICH are logical, the poorer Republicans are getting it right where the sun don't shine. And they're happy about it.

 

[Brucethethinker]

Supporting a party that has added more to the welfare rolls and then saying they fixed it..................

Many, perhaps most welfare recipients like getting welfare. If the economy were to boom and they could make lots more money by working than they do on welfare, some would undoubtedly go to work. But when you see welfare recipients protesting and marching down the street, are they asking for job training and better economic conditions, or are they asking for more welfare money? I claim they want more money, which means there's less chance of them getting a job.

 

[frigidweirdo]

marxist doubletalk/class envy

the evil rich.....

In certain countries like in Scandinavia, govt is run for the people. In the US it is run for the rich.

Is that rich envy, or just seeing the blatant bull that goes on in US govt?

Oh..I think most got your point. I'm not sure in the way you meant, though.
Look, you worry about scandinavia all you want....We aren't talking about them here..

Why are you trying to change the subject?

Not at all.

The topic seems to me this. Some countries work for the rich, other countries work for the people. Scandinavia has countries who work for the people. They also have welfare. I'm not saying they're always right in how they do their welfare, however you trying to attack me for being a Marxist IS CLEARLY not a part of this debate. It was an attempted attack.

Comparing countries and how they do things is clearly using examples to show a point which otherwise might get lost.

Your response. Ignore everything. Head in sand, forget other countries and how successful they are.

Why are YOU trying to change the subject?

 

[PoliticalChic]

I've posted an opinion on other threads this morning that went something like the following..........

As an electrician I always look for the core problem when troubleshooting a faulty electrical circuit...............To fix the problem correctly and once and for all..............

A Liberal/prog electrician doesn't fix the real problem.......The underlying problem............When they a fuse blow they just put in a bigger fuse to fix it...........but it never fixed why the fuse blew the first time..............The underlying problem gets worse.............bigger fuse...........and continue to put in bigger fuses to keep the circuit going until they BURN THE HOUSE DOWN...............Because they refuse to address the real problem, and ignore repairing it by taking the temp easy way out by putting in larger fuses.....................

Minimum wage being an example................Common core another.............Their economic fixes are band aides...........They don't fix the underlying problems with our economy and standard of living..............As the current of lower standards increases they go.............bigger fuse.............more minimum wage..........problem repeats....................

It is the repair by an INCOMPETENT ELECTRICIAN...........and the only solution is hiring a REAL ELECTRICIAN to repair the fault...............unless you want your house to burn down.

And the republicans are any better? No, they're not. They don't even bother trying to fix the problem. The problem is good for them. They're like the electrician who always does a shoddy job, so he gets called out time and time and time again.

"They don't even bother trying to fix the problem. "

Well...good to see you admit that there is a problem.


But you're wrong about who attempts to fix it...and who uses every possible....even unconstitutional...effort to see that it continues.


"Obama kills welfare reform

By Dick Morris - 07/17/12 10:07 PM EDT

Determined to destroy Bill Clinton’s signature achievement, President Obama’s administration has opened a loophole in the 1996 welfare reform legislation big enough to make the law ineffective. Its work requirement — the central feature of the legislation — has been diluted beyond recognition by the bureaucrats at the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).

On Thursday of last week, HHS issued regulations that modified — gutted — the work requirement.

Section 415(a)(2)(B) of the welfare reform act, now codified at 42 U.S.C. § 615(a)(2)(B), expressly states that ‘a waiver granted under section 1315 of this title [the one that HHS now claims it is acting under] or otherwise which relates to the provision of assistance under a State program funded under this part (as in effect on Sept. 30, 1996) shall not affect the applicability of section 607 of this title [which applies the work requirements] to the State.’ In short, whatever else might be said of the scope of the waiver authority, the Secretary has no lawful authority to waive the work requirements of section 607, which is what HHS is contemplating in its Memorandum.”
Obama kills welfare reform TheHill

 

[Rotagilla]

Conservatives got more than they bargained for when they decided to destroy the American middle class.

and here is the proof..........a scam artist electrician...........who will repeatedly tell you the problem is fixed only to see the fuse blow again................

Supporting a party that has added more to the welfare rolls and then saying they fixed it..................

Ignoring the underlying problem all together.

Americans with good paying jobs don't collect welfare.

Conservatism has tried to systemically drive down wages, weaken labor, and drive jobs out of this country for the benefit of the capitalists.

Not true.

Real conservatives are against the left continuing to allow illegals into the country so they can be exploited by big business.
Illegals work for less, which also drives down fair wages for citizens...Which also increases poverty and dependency on government entitlement programs...which leads to votes for democrats who like big government as more and more illegals are fast tracked to "citizenship".
You aren't fooling anyone by purposely twisting the truth.

Is barack obama the president?

Why is the border still open?
Immigration "reform".
Close and enforce the border and the immigration laws that are in place..That will be significant "reform" over the disorder and corruption we have now.

 

[frigidweirdo]

I've posted an opinion on other threads this morning that went something like the following..........

As an electrician I always look for the core problem when troubleshooting a faulty electrical circuit...............To fix the problem correctly and once and for all..............

A Liberal/prog electrician doesn't fix the real problem.......The underlying problem............When they a fuse blow they just put in a bigger fuse to fix it...........but it never fixed why the fuse blew the first time..............The underlying problem gets worse.............bigger fuse...........and continue to put in bigger fuses to keep the circuit going until they BURN THE HOUSE DOWN...............Because they refuse to address the real problem, and ignore repairing it by taking the temp easy way out by putting in larger fuses.....................

Minimum wage being an example................Common core another.............Their economic fixes are band aides...........They don't fix the underlying problems with our economy and standard of living..............As the current of lower standards increases they go.............bigger fuse.............more minimum wage..........problem repeats....................

It is the repair by an INCOMPETENT ELECTRICIAN...........and the only solution is hiring a REAL ELECTRICIAN to repair the fault...............unless you want your house to burn down.

And the republicans are any better? No, they're not. They don't even bother trying to fix the problem. The problem is good for them. They're like the electrician who always does a shoddy job, so he gets called out time and time and time again.

"They don't even bother trying to fix the problem. "

Well...good to see you admit that there is a problem.


But you're wrong about who attempts to fix it...and who uses every possible....even unconstitutional...effort to see that it continues.


"Obama kills welfare reform

By Dick Morris - 07/17/12 10:07 PM EDT

Determined to destroy Bill Clinton’s signature achievement, President Obama’s administration has opened a loophole in the 1996 welfare reform legislation big enough to make the law ineffective. Its work requirement — the central feature of the legislation — has been diluted beyond recognition by the bureaucrats at the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).

On Thursday of last week, HHS issued regulations that modified — gutted — the work requirement.

Section 415(a)(2)(B) of the welfare reform act, now codified at 42 U.S.C. § 615(a)(2)(B), expressly states that ‘a waiver granted under section 1315 of this title [the one that HHS now claims it is acting under] or otherwise which relates to the provision of assistance under a State program funded under this part (as in effect on Sept. 30, 1996) shall not affect the applicability of section 607 of this title [which applies the work requirements] to the State.’ In short, whatever else might be said of the scope of the waiver authority, the Secretary has no lawful authority to waive the work requirements of section 607, which is what HHS is contemplating in its Memorandum.”
Obama kills welfare reform TheHill

Okay, problem is a bit of an understatement in the US. Neither party is trying to fix it, neither seems remotely interested in fixing it, I doubt they even care if there's a problem.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Conservatives got more than they bargained for when they decided to destroy the American middle class.

What utter nonsense.

One can always see what Liberals are guilty of by what they claim the other side did....


"Incomes Have Dropped Twice as Much During the 'Recovery' as During the Recession
President Obama likes to talk about income inequality, but what matters far more is the actual income of the typical American. And how has the typical American household income fared on Obama's watch? Well, the economic "recovery" has now spanned an Olympiad, and during that time the typical American household income has not only dropped—it has dropped more than twice as much as it did during the recession.

... the real (inflation-adjusted) median annual household income in America has fallen by 4.4 percent during the "recovery," after having fallen by 1.8 during the recession. During the recession, the median American household income fell by $1,002 (from $55,480 to $54,478). During the recovery—that is, from the officially defined end of the recession (in June 2009) to the most recent month for which figures are available (June 2013)—the median American household income has fallen by $2,380 (from $54,478 to $52,098). So the typical American household is making almost $2,400 less per year (in constant 2013 dollars) than it was four years ago, when the Obama "recovery" began."
Incomes Have Dropped Twice as Much During the Recovery as During the Recession The Weekly Standard


You voted for this sad sack, huh?

That makes two of you.

 

[PoliticalChic]

marxist doubletalk/class envy

the evil rich.....

In certain countries like in Scandinavia, govt is run for the people. In the US it is run for the rich.

Is that rich envy, or just seeing the blatant bull that goes on in US govt?

So....when are you leaving?

 

[PoliticalChic]

And the republicans are any better? No, they're not. They don't even bother trying to fix the problem. The problem is good for them. They're like the electrician who always does a shoddy job, so he gets called out time and time and time again.

Who says I agree with them lock stock and barrel........If they are a shitty electrician then they are a shitty electrician........Doesn't matter on the party.

But the parties are shoddy. Right to the core.[/QUOTE]


So....you're not a reliable Democrat voter?
Did you vote for Romney?

 

[eagle1462010]

And the republicans are any better? No, they're not. They don't even bother trying to fix the problem. The problem is good for them. They're like the electrician who always does a shoddy job, so he gets called out time and time and time again.

Who says I agree with them lock stock and barrel........If they are a shitty electrician then they are a shitty electrician........Doesn't matter on the party.

But the parties are shoddy. Right to the core.

So....you're not a reliable Democrat voter?
Did you vote for Romney?[/QUOTE]
The quote function shifted my words to his post and vice versa...........

 

[PoliticalChic]

Conservatives got more than they bargained for when they decided to destroy the American middle class.

and here is the proof..........a scam artist electrician...........who will repeatedly tell you the problem is fixed only to see the fuse blow again................

Supporting a party that has added more to the welfare rolls and then saying they fixed it..................

Ignoring the underlying problem all together.

Americans with good paying jobs don't collect welfare.

Conservatism has tried to systemically drive down wages, weaken labor, and drive jobs out of this country for the benefit of the capitalists.

And they've been successful. Now you're reaping the whirlwind, because what conservatives never took into account is that the People, with the power of the ballot box, would take back much of what conservatives took away from them,

in the form of government help for the poor and low income Americans that conservatism created.

If it weren't for lies you'd be mute.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Conservatives got more than they bargained for when they decided to destroy the American middle class.

and here is the proof..........a scam artist electrician...........who will repeatedly tell you the problem is fixed only to see the fuse blow again................

Supporting a party that has added more to the welfare rolls and then saying they fixed it..................

Ignoring the underlying problem all together.

Americans with good paying jobs don't collect welfare.

Conservatism has tried to systemically drive down wages, weaken labor, and drive jobs out of this country for the benefit of the capitalists.

And they've been successful. Now you're reaping the whirlwind, because what conservatives never took into account is that the People, with the power of the ballot box, would take back much of what conservatives took away from them,

in the form of government help for the poor and low income Americans that conservatism created.

If it weren't for lies you'd be mute.

If you want to argue that conservatism isn't anti-labor, let's hear it.

If you want to argue that conservative free traders don't want capital to go to the area of cheapest labor, let's hear it.

If you want to argue that conservative economy/domestic/social policy is designed to widen the gap between richer and poorer at every opportunity, let's hear it.

Try to do it in your own thoughts.

 

[Brucethethinker]

More logical for you perhaps.

Logic is not subjective.

You seem to think you understand liberals, when you're not one.

I was when I was young. You know the saying, "a young person who is not liberal has no heart; a mature person who is liberal has no brain".

Sure, the right get results. They get money in their pockets,

I'm with you so far...

...they get lower people killed, they get crime, they get all that they need for themselves to be better off and ef everyone else.

You lost me there. The right thinks people are responsible for their own well being. They think it's better to teach a man to fish than it is to give a man a fish. But the right is more generous with charitable giving than the left. The left is more generous with other peoples money.

What REALLY surprises me are the hangers on who don't benefit from the the Republican way and yet still vote for them, still deny the reality of the situation.

We don't always agree with who benefits. When I was younger and working, I believed that unemployment was a bad thing. When you apply for a job what do you say you were doing for the last 6 months? If unemployment wasn't available, you'd take any job for the time being. So unemployment is a short term benefit, but a long term liablity.

So, while the RICH are logical, the poorer Republicans are getting it right where the sun don't shine. And they're happy about it.

More rich are demonrat than republican. Demonrats don't care about America. I don't agree with half of what republicans stand for, but I do believe they care about America. Ronald Reagan was the first republican I supported, Jimmy "Peanut Brain" Carter was the last demonrat I supported.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Conservatives got more than they bargained for when they decided to destroy the American middle class.

What utter nonsense.

One can always see what Liberals are guilty of by what they claim the other side did....


"Incomes Have Dropped Twice as Much During the 'Recovery' as During the Recession
President Obama likes to talk about income inequality, but what matters far more is the actual income of the typical American. And how has the typical American household income fared on Obama's watch? Well, the economic "recovery" has now spanned an Olympiad, and during that time the typical American household income has not only dropped—it has dropped more than twice as much as it did during the recession.

... the real (inflation-adjusted) median annual household income in America has fallen by 4.4 percent during the "recovery," after having fallen by 1.8 during the recession. During the recession, the median American household income fell by $1,002 (from $55,480 to $54,478). During the recovery—that is, from the officially defined end of the recession (in June 2009) to the most recent month for which figures are available (June 2013)—the median American household income has fallen by $2,380 (from $54,478 to $52,098). So the typical American household is making almost $2,400 less per year (in constant 2013 dollars) than it was four years ago, when the Obama "recovery" began."
Incomes Have Dropped Twice as Much During the Recovery as During the Recession The Weekly Standard


You voted for this sad sack, huh?

That makes two of you.

And you think that would be different if McCain had been elected?

lol, good one.

 

[NYcarbineer]

The Chinese are doing what used to be our jobs for $300 a month.

Bring those jobs back here at 300 a month and the US worker would still get virtually every form of government assistance for the poor/low income American.

That is how free trade, another pillar of conservative economic policy, works.

 

[eagle1462010]

To the leftist brigade............

If we were to measure current success in this country of the admins policies in regards to welfare recipients would his policies be for the Greater Good of this country..............Noting that the number in poverty and on Welfare have increased.........................

The War on poverty has been going on for a long time now............and it's purpose was to remove people from it and not add to it.............In that regard the War is lost under the Obomb administration.......unless you think getting more on the dole is a good thing.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Conservatives got more than they bargained for when they decided to destroy the American middle class.

and here is the proof..........a scam artist electrician...........who will repeatedly tell you the problem is fixed only to see the fuse blow again................

Supporting a party that has added more to the welfare rolls and then saying they fixed it..................

Ignoring the underlying problem all together.

Americans with good paying jobs don't collect welfare.

Conservatism has tried to systemically drive down wages, weaken labor, and drive jobs out of this country for the benefit of the capitalists.

And they've been successful. Now you're reaping the whirlwind, because what conservatives never took into account is that the People, with the power of the ballot box, would take back much of what conservatives took away from them,

in the form of government help for the poor and low income Americans that conservatism created.

If it weren't for lies you'd be mute.

If you want to argue that conservatism isn't anti-labor, let's hear it.

If you want to argue that conservative free traders don't want capital to go to the area of cheapest labor, let's hear it.

If you want to argue that conservative economy/domestic/social policy is designed to widen the gap between richer and poorer at every opportunity, let's hear it.

Try to do it in your own thoughts.

Every single thing I post are my own thoughts, you moron.