Ten myth busting facts about welfare

[David_42]

Fromthe link:

The poverty rate increased from 11 percent in 2000 to 15 percent in 2011.

So poverty increased despite (because of) 8 years of Democrat rule.
Democrat policies fail to lift people out of poverty. They fail every time.

What happened in 2008? Welfare programs are shown to reduce poverty and lift people out of it, social security keeps millions out of poverty.

 

[PredFan]

Important read.
Ten myth-busting facts about welfare

Unlike monthly jobs numbers, poverty numbers come out only once a year—and they’ll be rolling out on Tuesday. That means this is the time to talk about the 46.2 million living in poverty. And you can’t talk about poverty without talking about welfare, officially known as the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program.

It may come as a surprise, but TANF was never intended to be a comprehensive anti-poverty program. It was designed to be a temporary leg up, but its mission varies greatly from state to state.

Here are a few other facts that may surprise you:

1. States have no legal obligation to support poor families with cash. States have a lot more freedom to do what they want with this program than people realize. In the extreme, states could even decide to get rid of TANF altogether, as Alabama budget cuts threatened to do last year.
2. States are able to set their own rules about who gets TANF and how much, usually reflecting the state’s culture and philosophy about government’s role in helping the poor. Some states believe the poor shouldn’t get help from the government. Whether a family receives TANF assistance and how much they receive depends largely on the state where they live. For example, in Texas, fewer than 1 in 10 poor families receive assistance, compared with almost three out of four in California.
3. Not everyone who is poor gets welfare. The official poverty line is already so low that a family of three with any income over $1,500 a month is not officially poor. And even that is not poor enough to qualify for TANF. To qualify, you typically need to have income below half the poverty line; in some states, the income limit is much lower. Cash assistance reaches fewer than one in three poor families nationally (about 1.5 percent of the total population).
4. Reducing poverty is not one of TANF’s purposes. The amount families receive from TANF does not come close to lifting them out of poverty. The most a family could receive in the most generous state is still less than half the federal poverty line. A family of three would receive at most about $400 a month in the average state.
5. Even though TANF was intended to assist needy families and promote work, the program devotes relatively few resources to either purpose.
   • In 2010, only 28.8 percent of TANF funds nationally was spent on cash payments to needy families. Less than 8 percent goes to activities that help people find work (including job search, work subsidies, education and training, transportation, individual development accounts, and other work expenses, combined).
   • A whopping 63 percent is spent on other social service programs or child care, or the other two purposes of TANF: preventing out-of-wedlock pregnancies and encouraging the formation and maintenance of two-parent families.
6. The amount the federal government gives states for TANF has not changed since 1997. The federal government spends a total of $16.5 billion a year on TANF. This figure does not change with inflation, so it is worth less and less over time. States are obligated to contribute their own funds as well.
7. The program was not responsive to the recession or the recent rise in poverty. During the recession, the share of needy families receiving cash assistance fell. The number of families receiving cash assistance grew, but the number of poor families grew faster.
   • While unemployment rates doubled, the number of families receiving cash assistance grew by only 13 percent.
   • The poverty rate increased from 11 percent in 2000 to 15 percent in 2011.
   • Child poverty rose from 16 percent in 2000 to 22 percent in 2011.
8. Since TANF began in 1997, the share of poor families receiving assistance has fallen in all states, and the difference among states has grown. In 1998, about half (53 percent) of poor families with children nationally received TANF cash assistance, compared with 28 percent in 2010. In 1998, poor families in California were three times more likely to receive cash assistance than families in Texas; by 2010, California poor families were 10 times more like to receive cash assistance than those in Texas, where TANF cash assistance went to just 7 out of 100 poor families with children.

Your site busted. Lol

"The Urban Institute is a Washington DC-based think tank that carries out economic and social policy research to "open minds, shape decisions, and offer solutions."[1] The institute receives funding from government contracts, foundations and private donors. The Urban Institute measures policy effects, compares options, shows which stakeholders get the most and least, tests conventional wisdom, reveals trends, and makes costs, benefits, and risks explicit.[2] The Urban Institutue is described as a "leading liberal think tank" by the Los Angeles Times[3]

BAM! End of another stupid thread.

 

[BluesLegend]

The welfare class looks well fed for being poor, maybe they should get a job and work off some of that lard ass.

Cheap processed food make you fat and sick rather than healthy. How bout a jobs/infrastructure bill, training for 3-4 million tech jobs going begging, enterprise zones in inner cities, and better public transportation, hater dupes. NO ONE prefers welfare to a good job.

Ahahaha NO. Look we gave Baltimore over $1 billion in stimulus money and they only spent $3 million on jobs training. Guess where the money went, yes into the pockets of the public employee unions who already had jobs. No more money for these corrupt lying bastard democrats.

 

[The Rabbi]

Fromthe link:

The poverty rate increased from 11 percent in 2000 to 15 percent in 2011.

So poverty increased despite (because of) 8 years of Democrat rule.
Democrat policies fail to lift people out of poverty. They fail every time.

What happened in 2008? Welfare programs are shown to reduce poverty and lift people out of it, social security keeps millions out of poverty.

Idiot.
Your link says the exact opposite: TANF is not designed to lift people out ofpoverty. IT's right there in what you posted. Did you bother to read it?
We arent talking about 2008. We're talking about 2011, supposedly after 3 years of expansion under Obama.
Dem policies deliver failure.

 

[danielpalos]

One myth busting fact about Persons of alleged morals; unemployment compensation that clears our poverty guidelines simply for being unemployed on an at-will basis in our at-will employment States, is much more market friendly and practical and moral with a McCarthy era phrase in our pledge.

 

[The Rabbi]

One myth busting fact about Persons of alleged morals; unemployment compensation that clears our poverty guidelines simply for being unemployed on an at-will basis in our at-will employment States, is much more market friendly and practical and moral with a McCarthy era phrase in our pledge.

The failure of the Bern model has led to classic Gresham's Law behavior in taking out the weak hands. We are looking at a black swan stochastic.

 

[Andylusion]

Kind of an odd post really. It says "myth busting" and yet, I don't think anything that was posted, disproved any corresponding myth.

I don't know of any myth said by anyone, that this thread supposedly 'disproved'.

 

[danielpalos]

One myth busting fact about Persons of alleged morals; unemployment compensation that clears our poverty guidelines simply for being unemployed on an at-will basis in our at-will employment States, is much more market friendly and practical and moral with a McCarthy era phrase in our pledge.

The failure of the Bern model has led to classic Gresham's Law behavior in taking out the weak hands. We are looking at a black swan stochastic.

that may work for you, my good Rabbi; but, i may need a Good argument for St. Pete. And, you know how that goes.

 

[David_42]

Fromthe link:

The poverty rate increased from 11 percent in 2000 to 15 percent in 2011.

So poverty increased despite (because of) 8 years of Democrat rule.
Democrat policies fail to lift people out of poverty. They fail every time.

What happened in 2008? Welfare programs are shown to reduce poverty and lift people out of it, social security keeps millions out of poverty.

Idiot.
Your link says the exact opposite: TANF is not designed to lift people out ofpoverty. IT's right there in what you posted. Did you bother to read it?
We arent talking about 2008. We're talking about 2011, supposedly after 3 years of expansion under Obama.
Dem policies deliver failure.

Welfare programs shown to reduce poverty in America
Remember 2008. Idiot.

 

[Andylusion]

Fromthe link:

The poverty rate increased from 11 percent in 2000 to 15 percent in 2011.

So poverty increased despite (because of) 8 years of Democrat rule.
Democrat policies fail to lift people out of poverty. They fail every time.

What happened in 2008? Welfare programs are shown to reduce poverty and lift people out of it, social security keeps millions out of poverty.

Idiot.
Your link says the exact opposite: TANF is not designed to lift people out ofpoverty. IT's right there in what you posted. Did you bother to read it?
We arent talking about 2008. We're talking about 2011, supposedly after 3 years of expansion under Obama.
Dem policies deliver failure.

Welfare programs shown to reduce poverty in America
Remember 2008. Idiot.

This is the universal problem with all research into such topics.

You assume...... ASSUME... that no one would change how they live, based on the current situation.

But that isn't so. For example, you assume that if we raise taxes, that everyone will continue to live as they do now, and pay the higher tax rate.

But in reality, when France instituted a wealth tax, the rich people in France packed up their wealth, their jobs, their businesses, and left the country. In 1990s, when US passed a Yacht tax, all the wealthy stopped buying Yachts in the US. They still bought yachts... just from other countries with a more reasonable tax rate.

People change how they live, based on the incentives and programs put in place.

Your link follows the same logical fallacy.

You assume that if we phased out welfare programs, that everyone would just "Oh well I guess I'll die", and just become homeless and die on the streets.

But we've already proven that theory false. Back in 1995 when we passed welfare reform, everyone said exactly the same thing. Everyone is going to just starve to death, and kids will die on the sidewalks from lack of food, and millions of people will be homeless living under a bridge.

Instead... they got jobs. People changed how they lived, based on the incentives given. You pay people, and feed people, to not work and then they don't work. Then you say if we got off those people, they'd be starving and homeless.

No, more likely they would get a job, and start carrying water, instead of just drinking it.

I had this experience personally. I had a guy I was working with get laid off from a job, and he went home and lived off unemployment. I kept asking him when he was going to get a job, and all he said was why bother? He's collecting unemployment, why work? So he stayed at home for almost the full 99 weeks that unemployment was extended. And why not?

Now ultimately, that hurt him because when he got near the 99 week limit, he found he had a difficult time getting work, and had to settle for a job that paid less money, because he had been unemployed for 99 weeks. That's a red flag to employers. So the unemployment extension harmed him... as I knew it would. But at the time..... why work if you left-wing idiots are stupid enough to pay him to not work?

So while I'm sure the article is completely accurate to the statistics.... it's not accurate to the fact people change how they live to fit the incentives you give them.

 

[danielpalos]

not everyone can get trained and employed in 99 weeks. in any case, why set up an arbitrary and capricious limit instead of being more rational in the choices offered labor in any at-will employment State.

 

[Misty]

not everyone can get trained and employed in 99 weeks. in any case, why set up an arbitrary and capricious limit instead of being more rational in the choices offered labor in any at-will employment State.

That's BS. If you really want to work you can find a job. There are 11 million illegals who prove that everyday.

 

[David_42]

not everyone can get trained and employed in 99 weeks. in any case, why set up an arbitrary and capricious limit instead of being more rational in the choices offered labor in any at-will employment State.

That's BS. If you really want to work you can find a job. There are 11 million illegals who prove that everyday.

Who get hired because they'll work for less then minimum wage to struggle and provide for their families..

 

[danielpalos]

not everyone can get trained and employed in 99 weeks. in any case, why set up an arbitrary and capricious limit instead of being more rational in the choices offered labor in any at-will employment State.

That's BS. If you really want to work you can find a job. There are 11 million illegals who prove that everyday.

i have a work ethic. why should i have to work hard merely to get a job? if an employer doesn't want me, they don't have to hire me. Not sending really hot head hunter chics to convince me to accept employment, constitutes a lack of an employment offer on the part of Capitalists under our form of Capitalism.

 

[Obiwan]

Fromthe link:

The poverty rate increased from 11 percent in 2000 to 15 percent in 2011.

So poverty increased despite (because of) 8 years of Democrat rule.
Democrat policies fail to lift people out of poverty. They fail every time.

What happened in 2008? Welfare programs are shown to reduce poverty and lift people out of it, social security keeps millions out of poverty.

Idiot.
Your link says the exact opposite: TANF is not designed to lift people out ofpoverty. IT's right there in what you posted. Did you bother to read it?
We arent talking about 2008. We're talking about 2011, supposedly after 3 years of expansion under Obama.
Dem policies deliver failure.

Welfare programs shown to reduce poverty in America
Remember 2008. Idiot.

Report: 3 Million More Children in Poverty Under Obama

 

[The Rabbi]

Fromthe link:

The poverty rate increased from 11 percent in 2000 to 15 percent in 2011.

So poverty increased despite (because of) 8 years of Democrat rule.
Democrat policies fail to lift people out of poverty. They fail every time.

What happened in 2008? Welfare programs are shown to reduce poverty and lift people out of it, social security keeps millions out of poverty.

Idiot.
Your link says the exact opposite: TANF is not designed to lift people out ofpoverty. IT's right there in what you posted. Did you bother to read it?
We arent talking about 2008. We're talking about 2011, supposedly after 3 years of expansion under Obama.
Dem policies deliver failure.

Welfare programs shown to reduce poverty in America
Remember 2008. Idiot.

Report: 3 Million More Children in Poverty Under Obama

Thanks.
Yeah the idiot David 42 (a reference to his iQ I suspect) didnt bother to read his own link where it says TANF is not designed to lift people out of poverty. Or havign read it he must now deny what it said, what he said, or deflect from the topic.

 

[Obiwan]

Fromthe link:
So poverty increased despite (because of) 8 years of Democrat rule.
Democrat policies fail to lift people out of poverty. They fail every time.

What happened in 2008? Welfare programs are shown to reduce poverty and lift people out of it, social security keeps millions out of poverty.

Idiot.
Your link says the exact opposite: TANF is not designed to lift people out ofpoverty. IT's right there in what you posted. Did you bother to read it?
We arent talking about 2008. We're talking about 2011, supposedly after 3 years of expansion under Obama.
Dem policies deliver failure.

Welfare programs shown to reduce poverty in America
Remember 2008. Idiot.

Report: 3 Million More Children in Poverty Under Obama

Thanks.
Yeah the idiot David 42 (a reference to his iQ I suspect) didnt bother to read his own link where it says TANF is not designed to lift people out of poverty. Or havign read it he must now deny what it said, what he said, or deflect from the topic.

Well, liberals are dumb, but they're well organized...

 

[Andylusion]

not everyone can get trained and employed in 99 weeks. in any case, why set up an arbitrary and capricious limit instead of being more rational in the choices offered labor in any at-will employment State.

That's BS. If you really want to work you can find a job. There are 11 million illegals who prove that everyday.

Who get hired because they'll work for less then minimum wage to struggle and provide for their families..

Life is a struggle. Get over it. No one promised you a life on a bed of roses, where you get everything you want, without working for it.

I've worked 3 jobs at the same time before. Your telling me that me, without any college degrees, or skills or abilities of any kind, can manage to find 3 jobs to pay my bills, but other people can't?

Fact is, illegals are able to find work. But born bred Americans who can read and write English, are unable to? Bull. You just are flat out full of crap.

 

[Misty]

not everyone can get trained and employed in 99 weeks. in any case, why set up an arbitrary and capricious limit instead of being more rational in the choices offered labor in any at-will employment State.

That's BS. If you really want to work you can find a job. There are 11 million illegals who prove that everyday.

Who get hired because they'll work for less then minimum wage to struggle and provide for their families..

That is BS too. Illegals do not work for less. They are savvy enough to know about how much to get paid. Sheesh do you think they are ignorant?

 

[Andylusion]

not everyone can get trained and employed in 99 weeks. in any case, why set up an arbitrary and capricious limit instead of being more rational in the choices offered labor in any at-will employment State.

That's BS. If you really want to work you can find a job. There are 11 million illegals who prove that everyday.

Who get hired because they'll work for less then minimum wage to struggle and provide for their families..

That is BS too. Illegals do not work for less. They are savvy enough to know about how much to get paid. Sheesh do you think they are ignorant?

Answer: Yes. Most left-winger assume everyone is ignorant and stupid. That's why they try and control every aspect of life. It's part of their ideology.