Why do democrats hate poor black people and want them permanently on welfare?

[thereisnospoon]

With how fast the middle class is shrinking you should be concerned for everyone. I don't hear real answers from either party.

The middle class is NOT shrinking. That's a liberal narrative. And it works against themselves. Out of one side of their mouths they shriek about the allegedly shrinking middle class. Out of the other side of their yapper, they clam Obama created about three billion new jobs.
Can't have it both ways.

what's so funny?
The three billion jobs thing? I posted an absurdity to make a point. One that went over your head.

 

[thereisnospoon]

With how fast the middle class is shrinking you should be concerned for everyone. I don't hear real answers from either party.

what??? Republicans want to eliminate taxes regulations unions illegals to bring back 40 million jobs that liberals offshored. Now do you understand?

We've trIed that. It all goes to the rich. Taxes are at historic lows. Unions are in deep decline. The middle class shrinks. The rich sent jobs to china. The rich hire immigrants. How dumb are you?

Make American great again? We need strong unions.

Nonsense. There is no need for collectives which encourage group think and discourage individual achievement. Unions are the quintessential form of socialism. Good for slackers. Bad for the achievers.
Unions have reduced membership because they did that to themselves.
"It all goes to the rich"....Define "It"...
Just what did you expect with tax reductions? A windfall amount written on a check to arrive at your house?
Newsflash. When taxes are lowered across the board, those who pay the most, benefit the most. And you wan it that way. You claim those who earn more shoudl pay more. In the even of the tax reduction, the reverse applies. You cannot have it both ways.
I find it amazing that you liberals never saw a tax you did not like.

You don't have a rebuttal, do you? It figures. Facts are a bitch when they don't fit your agenda, aren't they?

 

[Brain357]

No I've given several. Increasing consumer spending here in the US with increased ages vs business investment in other countries. While decreasing corporate taxes and keeping more money in the economy. While decreasing inequality which slows the economy...

No I've given several. Increasing consumer spending here in the US with increased ages vs business investment in other countries.

You should stop doing things that cause companies to want to invest overseas versus here.

While decreasing corporate taxes and keeping more money in the economy.

You recommend reducing corporate taxes?

While decreasing inequality which slows the economy...

I've never understood the logic behind this claim....can you explain it?

Giving a corporate tax break for increasing wages makes companies want to invest overseas?

It should be obvious why. Suppose you own a restaurant. You need lots of customers obviously. Well with lots of inequality only the rich can afford to go out to eat. While they have lots of money, the few rich still only eat 3 times a day so your restaurant fails. The restaurant doesn't need lots of rich people, it just needs lots of people rich enough to eat out regularly.

Now I can of course find you a link too, but that's the easy to understand explanation.

Giving a corporate tax break for increasing wages

You'll have to explain this idea of yours.

Well with lots of inequality only the rich can afford to go out to eat.

Do we have lots of inequality? Because I see no shortage of people going out to eat.

It's already been explained several times.

That really depends where you are. Restaurants fail quite often.

It's already been explained several times.

So explain it again. Currently, if a company spends an extra $100 on salary, they pay $35 less in tax.
You want to give them a break larger than $35?

I'm fine if a company pays no taxes as long as they are employing here and providing good wages and benefits. You are welcome to look back in this thread for details.

 

[Brain357]

So businesses are succeeding and our economy is slow? You should think about that.

I have, I've thought about it a lot. And my conclusion is we had a President for eight years promoting government dependency. It's still happening today. As Rush Limbaugh said so many times "If you pay people not to work, don't be surprised when they don't!"

We have industry begging people to take jobs, and people not taking them. What does that tell you? We also have record high rates of people not participating in the workforce.

You can never get an economy going with so many people on the dole. There are no raises on welfare. There are no promotions on welfare. You get X amount of money, and that's all you'll ever get. You are poor and will always be poor.

We have very low unemployment. Ever heard of the baby boomers? We've known they were retiring for sometime, participation is no surprise. More people are going to college and delaying going into the workforce.

Which is all bull because for one, many people of retirement age went back to work, and two, the baby boom could never spike the participation rate that drastically anyway. Next is the fact that many kids in college always worked. It's the only way to survive to pay for things not covered by school loans.

Unemployment numbers are affected by the labor participation rate. If you are surveyed and tell the poll worker you are not working nor looking for work, you are not considered unemployed. Therefore, if you have huge numbers of people unemployed and not looking for work, of course it gives you phony unemployment numbers.

Who do you know that can just choose to not work? People who can afford to retire. Those who can't afford to retire keep working. I know several who have happily retired in recent years, baby boomers.

If you can get on some sort of government program, you don't have to work. That's the problem.

People pay into social security. Speaking of we have been worried about social security and when the baby boomers retire for sometime now. It was predictable that participation would go down.

 

[MaryL]

Democrats are rich white libs, They have never lived with poor blacks or illegals and they have to prove just how fair and open minded they are by overstating their hand. All those poor poor rich kids want to dictate to us what morality is. Poor poor little offspring of rich white elitists, being born all rich and white. I pity them so much.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

No I've given several. Increasing consumer spending here in the US with increased ages vs business investment in other countries.

You should stop doing things that cause companies to want to invest overseas versus here.

While decreasing corporate taxes and keeping more money in the economy.

You recommend reducing corporate taxes?

While decreasing inequality which slows the economy...

I've never understood the logic behind this claim....can you explain it?

Giving a corporate tax break for increasing wages makes companies want to invest overseas?

It should be obvious why. Suppose you own a restaurant. You need lots of customers obviously. Well with lots of inequality only the rich can afford to go out to eat. While they have lots of money, the few rich still only eat 3 times a day so your restaurant fails. The restaurant doesn't need lots of rich people, it just needs lots of people rich enough to eat out regularly.

Now I can of course find you a link too, but that's the easy to understand explanation.

Giving a corporate tax break for increasing wages

You'll have to explain this idea of yours.

Well with lots of inequality only the rich can afford to go out to eat.

Do we have lots of inequality? Because I see no shortage of people going out to eat.

It's already been explained several times.

That really depends where you are. Restaurants fail quite often.

It's already been explained several times.

So explain it again. Currently, if a company spends an extra $100 on salary, they pay $35 less in tax.
You want to give them a break larger than $35?

I'm fine if a company pays no taxes as long as they are employing here and providing good wages and benefits. You are welcome to look back in this thread for details.

You've been very short on details of your "tax incentive plan".

 

[Wyatt earp]

I have, I've thought about it a lot. And my conclusion is we had a President for eight years promoting government dependency. It's still happening today. As Rush Limbaugh said so many times "If you pay people not to work, don't be surprised when they don't!"

We have industry begging people to take jobs, and people not taking them. What does that tell you? We also have record high rates of people not participating in the workforce.

You can never get an economy going with so many people on the dole. There are no raises on welfare. There are no promotions on welfare. You get X amount of money, and that's all you'll ever get. You are poor and will always be poor.

We have very low unemployment. Ever heard of the baby boomers? We've known they were retiring for sometime, participation is no surprise. More people are going to college and delaying going into the workforce.

Which is all bull because for one, many people of retirement age went back to work, and two, the baby boom could never spike the participation rate that drastically anyway. Next is the fact that many kids in college always worked. It's the only way to survive to pay for things not covered by school loans.

Unemployment numbers are affected by the labor participation rate. If you are surveyed and tell the poll worker you are not working nor looking for work, you are not considered unemployed. Therefore, if you have huge numbers of people unemployed and not looking for work, of course it gives you phony unemployment numbers.

Who do you know that can just choose to not work? People who can afford to retire. Those who can't afford to retire keep working. I know several who have happily retired in recent years, baby boomers.

If you can get on some sort of government program, you don't have to work. That's the problem.

People pay into social security. Speaking of we have been worried about social security and when the baby boomers retire for sometime now. It was predictable that participation would go down.

It wasn't predicted people would live longer, that's why it was always a ponzi scheme


.

 

[Rocko]

No one breaks the cycle of poverty because of government handouts. That's a concept liberals don't get.

Millions of people broke the cycle from the Great Depression to WWII, and it was Government programs that sustained them during that period.

So the plan is to sustain black people until when?

Until we have another Jobs Boom, laissez-fair, dude.

We've already had numerous jobs boom's since a WWII. What now?

 

[danielpalos]

So businesses are succeeding and our economy is slow? You should think about that.

I have, I've thought about it a lot. And my conclusion is we had a President for eight years promoting government dependency. It's still happening today. As Rush Limbaugh said so many times "If you pay people not to work, don't be surprised when they don't!"

We have industry begging people to take jobs, and people not taking them. What does that tell you? We also have record high rates of people not participating in the workforce.

You can never get an economy going with so many people on the dole. There are no raises on welfare. There are no promotions on welfare. You get X amount of money, and that's all you'll ever get. You are poor and will always be poor.

We have very low unemployment. Ever heard of the baby boomers? We've known they were retiring for sometime, participation is no surprise. More people are going to college and delaying going into the workforce.

Which is all bull because for one, many people of retirement age went back to work, and two, the baby boom could never spike the participation rate that drastically anyway. Next is the fact that many kids in college always worked. It's the only way to survive to pay for things not covered by school loans.

Unemployment numbers are affected by the labor participation rate. If you are surveyed and tell the poll worker you are not working nor looking for work, you are not considered unemployed. Therefore, if you have huge numbers of people unemployed and not looking for work, of course it gives you phony unemployment numbers.

Who do you know that can just choose to not work? People who can afford to retire. Those who can't afford to retire keep working. I know several who have happily retired in recent years, baby boomers.

If you can get on some sort of government program, you don't have to work. That's the problem.

Employers don't have to hire labor even if they are not retired, even in Right to Work States.

 

[danielpalos]

Stock market isn't GDP.

Correct. Stock market is a reflection of business success or failure.

So businesses are succeeding and our economy is slow? You should think about that.

I have, I've thought about it a lot. And my conclusion is we had a President for eight years promoting government dependency. It's still happening today. As Rush Limbaugh said so many times "If you pay people not to work, don't be surprised when they don't!"

The rich are getting a capital gains tax preference to create Jobs Booms, but don't.

Wow. You know very little then.....Hey genius. Even small account holders of stocks, mutual funds, 401ks, etc. are affected by the cap gains tax cuts. Also, when one sells real property or other tangible asset, they realize a capital gain. You want a second full bite at that apple. You may curse the wealthy and wish they were the victims of confiscatory taxation, but in your zeal to steal, you sweep up everyone who is trying to build a nest egg, no matter how small, into your money grab schemes.

The rich don't have to use a work ethic from the Age of Iron, with a good capital ethic.

Who benefits the most from capital gains preferences, without having to work.

 

[danielpalos]

No one breaks the cycle of poverty because of government handouts. That's a concept liberals don't get.

Millions of people broke the cycle from the Great Depression to WWII, and it was Government programs that sustained them during that period.

So the plan is to sustain black people until when?

Until we have another Jobs Boom, laissez-fair, dude.

We've already had numerous jobs boom's since a WWII. What now?

what about now? Jobs Booms means fewer people on social services for the right to whine about. the rich even have a capital gains tax preference, to help out.

 

[Markle]

I think if the job climate improves it would be wise to cut back on welfare for those able to work.

Great, reinstate the 1996 Welfare Reform Act. No work or no classes, no checks. But this time with random drug tests with stiff penalties including lifetime disqualification.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Why did George Bush drive up the black unemployment rate the year before he left office? lol

 

[Markle]

Who benefits the most from capital gains preferences, without having to work.

ANYONE who own's stocks, bonds investment property or whatever.

 

[Rustic]

Why did George Bush drive up the black unemployment rate the year before he left office? lol

Career politicians on both sides of the aisle have no idea how to run a successful country… Fact

 

[Markle]

Millions of people broke the cycle from the Great Depression to WWII, and it was Government programs that sustained them during that period.

It was the FDR government programs which extended the Great Depression by SEVEN YEARS.

How long did the Depression of 1920 last and what government programs were used which caused it to end?

 

[Redfish]

I'm amused by your fixation with the pay of a CEO. General Electric has 333,000 employees...ONE CEO. Exxon/Mobil 73,500 employees...ONE CEO, formerly Rex Tillerson.

Is this all you have? Quit you're belly-achin'.

And the CEOs should be increasing worker pay with their own. That isn't happening however.

Report: CEOs Earn 331 Times As Much As Average Workers, 774 Times As Much As Minimum Wage Earners

CEO should be increasing other workers pay with their own? Why? Who made that rule up?

Well the CEO isn't doing any of the real work. So the success of a company has much to do with the workers, they should be sharing in the success obviously.

maybe not any physical work. but those jobs are 24/7/365 and very high stress. A pussy like you could never make it as a CEO.

Yes their job is kind of like playing monopoly. You make lots of decisions, but don't do any actual work. I like monopoly.

risk and reward, supply and demand. Econ 101

 

[danielpalos]

I think if the job climate improves it would be wise to cut back on welfare for those able to work.

Great, reinstate the 1996 Welfare Reform Act. No work or no classes, no checks. But this time with random drug tests with stiff penalties including lifetime disqualification.

Why does the right wing insist on keeping people poor?

 

[Redfish]

Why did George Bush drive up the black unemployment rate the year before he left office? lol

are you fricken blind? obozo took office in jan 09. the UE rate went up under his failed administration and never got back down to 08 rates. That is on Obama.

 

[Redfish]

I think if the job climate improves it would be wise to cut back on welfare for those able to work.

Great, reinstate the 1996 Welfare Reform Act. No work or no classes, no checks. But this time with random drug tests with stiff penalties including lifetime disqualification.

Why does the right wing insist on keeping people poor?

conservatives want every citizen to have a good paying job that will enable them to support themselves and their family. Its you libs that want a permanent under class that is dependent on government handouts and whose votes you think you can buy with free stuff.