Why can't Public Assistance increase?

[Ray From Cleveland]

Customers demand cheaper products because they afford to pay more due to wage disparity.

Bull. It's been going on for well over 30 years. And we Republicans have been warning about this day for a long time now. And what did your leaders back then tell you? "Oh, those are Republicans. Don't listen to them. Silly, silly Republicans. Why they are only looking out for their rich buddies don't you see?"

 

[OnePercenter]

Name one Republican politician that either authored or supported any legislation that benefited the middle class, without giving rich/wealthy/corporations a bigger boost.

George W. Bush.

George W. Bush

BushCo caused the worst economic failure in history.

That wasn't what you started with. Can you say "move the goal posts"? Sure, I knew you could.

And Bush was an economically liberal president. The only economically conservative thing he did was cut taxes.

That wasn't what you started with. Can you say "move the goal posts"? Sure, I knew you could.

Bullshit.

I stated: Name one Republican politician that either authored or supported any legislation that benefited the middle class, without giving rich/wealthy/corporations a bigger boost?

Your (s) answer was W. Bush, that caused to worst economic crash in US history.

And the answer is correct. Medicare expansion, for one.

And Bush was an economically liberal president. The only economically conservative thing he did was cut taxes.

How did eight years of BushCo work for the middle class?

It worked quite well until the housing bubble popped, but you knew that. The middle class hasn't fared so well since, either, even though we've had enough time for a decent recovery.

And the answer is correct. Medicare expansion, for one.

Nice try. Mega payday for big pharma, and well as one of the largest cover-ups by Scully.

It worked quite well until the housing bubble popped, but you knew that. The middle class hasn't fared so well since, either, even though we've had enough time for a decent recovery.

Why wouldn't an economy based on loans and spec not work? Oh yeah, it didn't.

 

[OnePercenter]

George W. Bush.

This should be interesting. Liberals can't stand it when they're reminded how economically liberal their most hated president really was.

This should be interesting. Liberals can't stand it when they're reminded how economically liberal their most hated president really was.

I'm not a liberal, I'm a dirty rotten capitalist.

Self hatred is a liberal characteristic.

Self hatred is a liberal characteristic.

Bloviating is your characteristic?

I'm not stating on internet boards that I regard myself as a dirty rotten anything. That was you.

I'm not stating on internet boards that I regard myself as a dirty rotten anything. That was you.

Dirty-rotten is what business competitors call me.

 

[Tresha91203]

Why can't we just cut it to ZERO???

Because every non-third-world-nation in the World recognizes that part of the social contract of an enlightened society is that we care for our poor. I'm sorry if you cannot recognize the social, economic, and health benefits of reducing poverty in our nation. Perhaps you should move to one of those third-world countries where they don't care, and let the rich freely rape, and pillage the poor.

When you subsidize laziness and acceptance of poverty, you get what you pay for.

Well, like I said, not a single civilized nation in the world agrees with you.

Sent from my 5054N using Tapatalk

Gads will we ever stop hearing about how great all the *other* civilized countries have it sooo much better than the us?

"Progressives in America are often keen on promoting the European welfare state as an argument for big government, not least in the healthcare debate. They point to European countries, often the social-democratic Nordic countries, as role models, with their universal healthcare, public school system, generous social-safety net, and all the happy people who live there.

"This line of argument got a significant boost when Newsweek proclaimed that Finland was the best country in the world to live in, closely followed by Sweden and Switzerland. And of course they are happy. After all, there is no poverty in these great countries, the populace is educated, and people generally don't have a care in the world, because the benevolent government is always there to solve every problem.

"Many people have tried to dispel this myth, but it still persists. I don't presume to be able to put this issue to rest, but there are some things that should be known about this mythical utopia, the "best country in the world" — Finland."

The Bankrupt Finnish Welfare State

I've been hearing about how the Nordic countries are going bankrupt under their generous welfare state for about 30 years. Somehow, they're still here and the people are still the happiest. Maybe they've figured out something that Americans seem to be too stupid to understand. They adapt to the current situation.

They are overwhelmingly white, Christian and native. We want diversity and bleeding borders, so that will not work here. You can't take a snippet from a homogeneous culture and enact it in an opposite culture. If we kick out our immigrants, maybe it would work, but we aren't going to do that.

 

[OnePercenter]

There is no free market or enterprise, and the Republican system since at least 1970 has been throwing the middle class under the bus. I should know, I'm one of those capitalists.

"Middle class" is a myth developed by Marxists. Roughly 38% of the people who were considered "middle class" in 1970 are not in the "middle class" today. Most moved up, some moved down. Likewise, the group you call "the rich" aren't the same people either.... nor are "the poor" ...these are all class categories you speak of as if they never change. We don't have classes in America. You are free to aspire to any class you want to be in.

You claim to be a capitalist but you're espousing Marxism so that means you can only be a corporatist. You're actually a bigger threat to free market capitalism than the Socialists. You exploit the power of government for your advantage. That's not free market capitalism... it's the antithesis of it.

"Middle class" is a myth developed by Marxists. Roughly 38% of the people who were considered "middle class" in 1970 are not in the "middle class" today. Most moved up, some moved down. Likewise, the group you call "the rich" aren't the same people either.... nor are "the poor" ...these are all class categories you speak of as if they never change. We don't have classes in America. You are free to aspire to any class you want to be in.

You claim to be a capitalist but you're espousing Marxism so that means you can only be a corporatist. You're actually a bigger threat to free market capitalism than the Socialists. You exploit the power of government for your advantage. That's not free market capitalism... it's the antithesis of it.

The economic class you belong is a myth? LOL!

That I belong to ANY class is a myth in America. I am only limited by my ambition. You see, you HAVE to lie about this... you MUST sell this myth in order to promote Marxism. We're not some Asian country with a caste system or dictators and kings where there is a ruling class. So all your arguments for Marxism don't work as well until you build up the myth that people are trapped in their class.

The TRUTH is, we're not trapped in our class. We have the freedom and liberty to be in any class we like... it's all up to us as individuals. People risk their lives every day to come here for this opportunity.

Name one Republican politician that either authored or supported any legislation that benefited the middle class, without giving rich/wealthy/corporations a bigger boost.

George W. Bush.

George W. Bush

BushCo caused the worst economic failure in history.

Totally different point than the question you asked. It's also another lie.

That I belong to ANY class is a myth in America. I am only limited by my ambition. You see, you HAVE to lie about this... you MUST sell this myth in order to promote Marxism. We're not some Asian country with a caste system or dictators and kings where there is a ruling class. So all your arguments for Marxism don't work as well until you build up the myth that people are trapped in their class.

The TRUTH is, we're not trapped in our class. We have the freedom and liberty to be in any class we like... it's all up to us as individuals. People risk their lives every day to come here for this opportunity.

It's nice you have such a gung-ho attitude, but when the smoke clears and the bank statement opens....you're middle class.

Totally different point than the question you asked. It's also another lie.

The point was how it worked for the middle class. Not well.

 

[OnePercenter]

Please explain to us how the company that you work has anything to due with the creation, maintenance, or expansion of the national power grid when the grid is managed by the U.S. Department of Energy.

The Department of Energy REGULATES the electric utility industry through FERC, NERC, and the ISOS. They do not OWN anything.

If they did, how would individual electric companies be responsible for the excise taxes on the facilities (poles, transformers, wire, etc....) on a yearly basis, and why would said companies be able to deduct the depreciation of those assets (when replaced), on their taxes.

Please learn something about this industry before you make yourself look any sillier.

The Department of Energy REGULATES the electric utility industry through FERC, NERC, and the ISOS. They do not OWN anything.

If they did, how would individual electric companies be responsible for the excise taxes on the facilities (poles, transformers, wire, etc....) on a yearly basis, and why would said companies be able to deduct the depreciation of those assets (when replaced), on their taxes.

Please learn something about this industry before you make yourself look any sillier.

Why does the government through the DOE pay tens of millions/billions to repair and improve the grid?

 

[OnePercenter]

Employers are making money, so much so that most need to hire a third hand to shove it in their pockets.

The governments job is to make sure the predator employers don't take advantage of their employees, and to set a minimum wage to keep workers off the government dole.

No, that is not governments job. Governments job is to preserve the freedom we have to insure our own happiness and finances. Show me one of the three things you listed that are in the US Constitution.

No, that is not governments job. Governments job is to preserve the freedom we have to insure our own happiness and finances. Show me one of the three things you listed that are in the US Constitution.

There ya go again, answering a 2016 question with an 1870 answer.

 

[Flash]

Ya know. I keep hearing from fake conservatives about how we spend too much on welfare. Welfare would cause taxes to raise. Poor people want to steal more of my money. Blah, blah, blah.

Some interesting statistics:

Finland spends 3.2% of its federal budget on public assistance.

Great Britain spends a little over 4.6%

Israel spends 2.4%

Norway spends a whopping 6.2%.

And the US? 0.7%. That's it.

So, why can't we just increase that to 2%? We can take that 2% away from our bloated military budget. It would still make us the Western nation that spends the least amount of money on their poor, but imagine the massive effect that would have on poverty in this country. And it wouldn't even cost the tax payers one. Red. Cent. more than they are paying, now. Because I'm not suggesting increasing the budget. I'm suggesting giving public assistance a slightly larger piece of the existing budget.

Why is that such an outrageous idea?

Either you are a simple troll trying to be funny or a really, really dumb Moon Bat.

Nobody is that stupid to suggest that a country $20 trillion in debt, a dismal economy and tremendous welfare rolls increase it even more. Even the run of the mill ignorant, clueless and confused Libtard is not that stupid.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

There ya go again, answering a 2016 question with an 1870 answer.

At least I have an answer.

 

[Boss]

It's nice you have such a gung-ho attitude, but when the smoke clears and the bank statement opens....you're middle class.

What's "middle class?"

I suppose, by some people's measure, I would probably be middle class.... while others may consider me "wealthy" ...and there are probably some uber-wealthy people who would laugh at the idea that I am wealthy.

I'll put it like this... I am comfortable. I don't have to work anymore. I have made enough money in my lifetime to live comfortably for the rest of my days and my kids and family are all taken care of as well. I live an extremely moderate lifestyle because I've learned the best things in life are free. It doesn't take a lot of material things to make me happy.

Are we judging "middle class" by my annual earned income? If you're going by that, I'm poverty level. I didn't even qualify to pay income tax this year. But you see... I've already earned my income and paid my taxes. I now have wealth and I live off that. And this is where your class warfare arguments break down. MOST wealthy people are in the same boat. They don't earn massive incomes anymore... they may have at one time, but they don't anymore.

 

[dblack]

Public assistance CAN increase. The only problem is that public confiscation already lags far behind public assistance, putting us further in debt every year.

 

[Boss]

The point was how it worked for the middle class. Not well.

Well, of course that's the point! It's always the point with Marxists, that's why they promote class warfare!

This so-called "middle class" is ALWAYS perpetually being subverted by "the wealthy" ...that's the whole entire basis for your promotion of Marxism! Without THAT, you can't make a rational argument FOR Marxism... so naturally, things are never great for the "middle class" and you are able to juxtapose Marxism as our saving grace. The problem is... it's a myth! ---It's all based on a LIE!

Here's the dirty little secret... In a free market capitalist system, you actually NEED for things to be tough for the so-called "middle class" because if things were peachy-keen, no one would have any motivation to aspire for more. We'd all be fat and happy in our middle class existence and no one would ever prosper. We can't have a system where everyone is comfortable and content, there is no upward economic prosperity in such a system. Things NEED to be a little tough... that's what motivates people to do more. It's precisely the thing that drives upward mobility.

 

[OnePercenter]

Customers demand cheaper products because they afford to pay more due to wage disparity.

Bull. It's been going on for well over 30 years.

And we Republicans have been warning about this day for a long time now. And what did your leaders back then tell you? "Oh, those are Republicans. Don't listen to them. Silly, silly Republicans. Why they are only looking out for their rich buddies don't you see?"

Bull. It's been going on for well over 30 years.

The same time wage disparity started?

And we Republicans have been warning about this day for a long time now. And what did your leaders back then tell you? "Oh, those are Republicans. Don't listen to them. Silly, silly Republicans. Why they are only looking out for their rich buddies don't you see?"

Of course you did. <sarcasm>

 

[Anathema]

Why does the government through the DOE pay tens of millions/billions to repair and improve the grid?

For the same reason the Dept of Education spends millions on schools it doesn't own. The Federal Government Illegally, unconstitutionally, and immorally provides financial support to many smaller utility companies that exist on almost no margin. They don't own these companies, the subsidize them.

Some monies also go into research and development for electric facilities (again Unconstitutionally).

 

[OnePercenter]

There ya go again, answering a 2016 question with an 1870 answer.

At least I have an answer.

At least I have an answer.

It's not the governments roll to protect the middle class from predators?

 

[OnePercenter]

It's nice you have such a gung-ho attitude, but when the smoke clears and the bank statement opens....you're middle class.

What's "middle class?"

I suppose, by some people's measure, I would probably be middle class.... while others may consider me "wealthy" ...and there are probably some uber-wealthy people who would laugh at the idea that I am wealthy.

I'll put it like this... I am comfortable. I don't have to work anymore. I have made enough money in my lifetime to live comfortably for the rest of my days and my kids and family are all taken care of as well. I live an extremely moderate lifestyle because I've learned the best things in life are free. It doesn't take a lot of material things to make me happy.

Are we judging "middle class" by my annual earned income? If you're going by that, I'm poverty level. I didn't even qualify to pay income tax this year. But you see... I've already earned my income and paid my taxes. I now have wealth and I live off that. And this is where your class warfare arguments break down. MOST wealthy people are in the same boat. They don't earn massive incomes anymore... they may have at one time, but they don't anymore.

What's "middle class?"

I suppose, by some people's measure, I would probably be middle class.... while others may consider me "wealthy" ...and there are probably some uber-wealthy people who would laugh at the idea that I am wealthy.

I'll put it like this... I am comfortable. I don't have to work anymore. I have made enough money in my lifetime to live comfortably for the rest of my days and my kids and family are all taken care of as well. I live an extremely moderate lifestyle because I've learned the best things in life are free. It doesn't take a lot of material things to make me happy.

Are we judging "middle class" by my annual earned income? If you're going by that, I'm poverty level. I didn't even qualify to pay income tax this year. But you see... I've already earned my income and paid my taxes. I now have wealth and I live off that. And this is where your class warfare arguments break down. MOST wealthy people are in the same boat. They don't earn massive incomes anymore... they may have at one time, but they don't anymore.

Since you're confused, this should help.

What is middle class, anyway? - CNNMoney

 

[BuckToothMoron]

Ya know. I keep hearing from fake conservatives about how we spend too much on welfare. Welfare would cause taxes to raise. Poor people want to steal more of my money. Blah, blah, blah.

Some interesting statistics:

Finland spends 3.2% of its federal budget on public assistance.

Great Britain spends a little over 4.6%

Israel spends 2.4%

Norway spends a whopping 6.2%.

And the US? 0.7%. That's it.

So, why can't we just increase that to 2%? We can take that 2% away from our bloated military budget. It would still make us the Western nation that spends the least amount of money on their poor, but imagine the massive effect that would have on poverty in this country. And it wouldn't even cost the tax payers one. Red. Cent. more than they are paying, now. Because I'm not suggesting increasing the budget. I'm suggesting giving public assistance a slightly larger piece of the existing budget.

Why is that such an outrageous idea?

I am ok spending more on welfare, Social security Medicare, Medicaid, etc, but let's do it like those puny other countries you listed do it. That is divide the spending into small more efficient groups or States. Don't let the behemoth Federal government handle it. Do you realize the US is 4 times the population of all those other countries combined. Smaller government can be more efficient, so let the states handle all the entitlements and they can spend what suits them.

 

[Boss]

It's nice you have such a gung-ho attitude, but when the smoke clears and the bank statement opens....you're middle class.

What's "middle class?"

I suppose, by some people's measure, I would probably be middle class.... while others may consider me "wealthy" ...and there are probably some uber-wealthy people who would laugh at the idea that I am wealthy.

I'll put it like this... I am comfortable. I don't have to work anymore. I have made enough money in my lifetime to live comfortably for the rest of my days and my kids and family are all taken care of as well. I live an extremely moderate lifestyle because I've learned the best things in life are free. It doesn't take a lot of material things to make me happy.

Are we judging "middle class" by my annual earned income? If you're going by that, I'm poverty level. I didn't even qualify to pay income tax this year. But you see... I've already earned my income and paid my taxes. I now have wealth and I live off that. And this is where your class warfare arguments break down. MOST wealthy people are in the same boat. They don't earn massive incomes anymore... they may have at one time, but they don't anymore.

What's "middle class?"

I suppose, by some people's measure, I would probably be middle class.... while others may consider me "wealthy" ...and there are probably some uber-wealthy people who would laugh at the idea that I am wealthy.

I'll put it like this... I am comfortable. I don't have to work anymore. I have made enough money in my lifetime to live comfortably for the rest of my days and my kids and family are all taken care of as well. I live an extremely moderate lifestyle because I've learned the best things in life are free. It doesn't take a lot of material things to make me happy.

Are we judging "middle class" by my annual earned income? If you're going by that, I'm poverty level. I didn't even qualify to pay income tax this year. But you see... I've already earned my income and paid my taxes. I now have wealth and I live off that. And this is where your class warfare arguments break down. MOST wealthy people are in the same boat. They don't earn massive incomes anymore... they may have at one time, but they don't anymore.

Since you're confused, this should help.

What is middle class, anyway? - CNNMoney

Too funny... Your very own link begins by admitting there is no concrete definition of "middle class" and it's all a matter of perspectives..... I just love it when smart-ass morons MAKE MY POINT FOR ME!

 

[Flash]

Using the force of government to take money away from the people that earn it and giving it away to the people that didn't earn it is a bad thing. It is thievery in addition to creating a welfare state that will resul in severe economic problems,

 

[OnePercenter]

Why does the government through the DOE pay tens of millions/billions to repair and improve the grid?

For the same reason the Dept of Education spends millions on schools it doesn't own. The Federal Government Illegally, unconstitutionally, and immorally provides financial support to many smaller utility companies that exist on almost no margin. They don't own these companies, the subsidize them.

Some monies also go into research and development for electric facilities (again Unconstitutionally).

For the same reason the Dept of Education spends millions on schools it doesn't own. The Federal Government Illegally, unconstitutionally, and immorally provides financial support to many smaller utility companies that exist on almost no margin. They don't own these companies, the subsidize them.

Some monies also go into research and development for electric facilities (again Unconstitutionally).

A 2016 debate with a 1780 answer.