Page 8 of 14 FirstFirst ... 678910 ... LastLast
Results 71 to 80 of 135

Thread: U.S. Poverty Climbed to 17-Year High in 2010

  1. #71
    Disappointed Evolutionist
    Catawba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Seen
    05-28-13 @ 08:15 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    27,254

    Re: U.S. Poverty Climbed to 17-Year High in 2010

    Quote Originally Posted by tessaesque View Post

    See, I want better for the poor, and I think the programs we have no don't offer "better". I think they offer a security blanket while leaving them standing out in the cold. It doesn't solve the problem, it just makes it more tolerable.
    We reformed welfare for the poor in 1996. Now what we need to do is reform welfare for the rich.
    Treat the earth well: it was not given to you by your parents, it was loaned to you by your children. We do not inherit the Earth from our Ancestors, we borrow it from our Children. ~ Ancient American Indian Proverb

  2. #72
    pirate lover
    liblady's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    St Thomas, VI
    Last Seen
    03-14-16 @ 03:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    16,165
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: U.S. Poverty Climbed to 17-Year High in 2010

    Quote Originally Posted by tessaesque View Post
    Not only did you take a flying leap off the cliff to make a lot of assumptions, but you put a lot of words into my mouth that I did not say.

    I'll make this painfully clear for you, and perhaps you'll actually take the time to understand what I'm saying instead of standing on your little soap box, attacking an idea I didn't express:

    1. I want to provide programs to help the poor overcome the obstacles that keep them poor, namely lack of education and job skills.
    2. I never said we should remove their benefits or let children starve in the process of helping the poor acquire the above skills.
    3. I never said that the poor are lazy or "parasites" or even blamed them for the lack of education or job skills.
    4. My point in attacking the entitlements designed to "prevent" poverty was to point out that they don't, in fact, prevent poverty. These programs sustain people who are still living in poverty despite the money/programs.

    See, I want better for the poor, and I think the programs we have no don't offer "better". I think they offer a security blanket while leaving them standing out in the cold. It doesn't solve the problem, it just makes it more tolerable.

    But by all means, turn my statement into a rich vs. poor argument. Jump to conclusions. Attack me for wanting a better program and a better opportunity for people. Go ahead. It just proves you don't care what I have to say, you just want to get up there and rant away about something not only unrelated to my argument, but completely outside of any logical interpretation of what I was saying.
    i'm not sure what you want doesn't already exist. there are many, many education and jobs skills programs for the disadvantaged. in fact, these types of programs were part of welfare reform. and in many cases, these programs ARE mandatory. what's happening now is that despite record profits, companies are not hiring. they are sitting on their cash, giving outrageous bonuses to ceos while letting the wages of the masses stagnate. that's why providing incentives to these compaines for creating jobs is a good thing.

    Originally Posted by johnny_rebson:

    These are the same liberals who forgot how Iraq attacked us on 9/11.


  3. #73
    Disappointed Evolutionist
    Catawba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Seen
    05-28-13 @ 08:15 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    27,254

    Re: U.S. Poverty Climbed to 17-Year High in 2010

    Quote Originally Posted by liblady View Post
    all we hear is about the deadbeats on welfare. it's a myth, pure and simple.
    Excellent point! I think many people would be surprised their beliefs about welfare are myths. Here are some of the major ones below:

    Five Major Welfare Myths

    "Myth #1: The typical welfare recipient is a black inner city single mother.

    The Census Bureau's most recent annual poverty report found that urban black mothers constitute less than one out of six of all poor households. Rural white families account for more--one out of five. White surburban families account for even more--one out of four.

    Myth #2: The poor are lazy.

    Forty percent of poor adults work, although many cannot find full time jobs. Indeed, even when they do they may still be in poverty. Some 11 million jobs in 1991 paid less than $11,500, $2,000 under the official poverty level for a family of four. Of those poor adults who don't work, 90 percent fall into the following categories: 22 percent are disabled, 17 percent are in school, 21 percent are elderly retirees, 31 percent have family responsibilities.

    Myth #3: Welfare mothers breed welfare daughters.

    Two long term studies reported by the House Ways and Means Committee in 1992 found that only about one in five daughters of "highly welfare dependent" mothers themselves become highly dependent on welfare. The rest rely on welfare sporadically or not at all.

    Myth #4: Throwing people off the welfare rolls will eventually improve their lives and save taxpayers money.

    The most celebrated experiment in welfare reform has occurred in Michigan. Governor Engler completely eliminated his state's $240 million General Assistance(GA) payments to 83,000 childless, able bodied adults.Only 8 percent of these former GA recipients found employment and they earn
    an average of only $120 a week. Many sell blood for $20 a pint. Over one third lost their homes when the program ended. As one study notes, if only 5 percent of these former GA recipients end up in prison or a state psychiatric institution all the taxpayer savings from ending General Assistance will be lost.

    Myth #5: Welfare is cheaper than creating well paying public jobs.

    In his book "Securing the Right to Employment", Philip Harvey calculates that in 1986 we could have achieved full employment by creating l0.4 million public service jobs. He further assumed that the average annual wage would be $13,000. The cost of such a program would have been a daunting $142 billion. But when we deduct from this sum the taxes that would be paid by these new workers and the savings from drastically reduced unemployment insurance payments, welfare , Medicaid, food stamps and other expenditures directly linked to low income and unemployment overall we would have spent $13 billion less. A full employment program, even excluding the social savingsfrom reduced family violence, more stable communities, and less crime, pays for itself in reduced welfare expenditures.

    If we can overcome these five myths about welfare we may well engage in a national dialogue with meaningful results, not only for the one in five Americans who now live in poverty, but for the nation as a whole. But this will occur only when we challenge and overcome the welfare myths that paralyze our thinking."
    https://www.msu.edu/user/skourtes/myths.html
    Treat the earth well: it was not given to you by your parents, it was loaned to you by your children. We do not inherit the Earth from our Ancestors, we borrow it from our Children. ~ Ancient American Indian Proverb

  4. #74
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Last Seen
    03-16-12 @ 11:02 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    7,624

    Re: U.S. Poverty Climbed to 17-Year High in 2010

    We can throw out any study that uses words like "highly welfare dependent" .

    All that means is they had a desired result and took out enough people until they got there.

  5. #75
    pirate lover
    liblady's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    St Thomas, VI
    Last Seen
    03-14-16 @ 03:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    16,165
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: U.S. Poverty Climbed to 17-Year High in 2010

    Quote Originally Posted by 1Perry View Post
    We can throw out any study that uses words like "highly welfare dependent" .

    All that means is they had a desired result and took out enough people until they got there.
    well, you could try to prove that statement. in fact, especially these days, when welfare is limited, children don't see their mothers on welfare for a long period of time, so are not inured to it like you might think.

    welfare is not our big issue......medicare is. jobs are.

    Originally Posted by johnny_rebson:

    These are the same liberals who forgot how Iraq attacked us on 9/11.


  6. #76
    Bring us a shrubbery!
    tessaesque's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Plano, Texas
    Last Seen
    11-09-17 @ 06:18 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    15,910

    Re: U.S. Poverty Climbed to 17-Year High in 2010

    Quote Originally Posted by Catawba View Post
    We reformed welfare for the poor in 1996. Now what we need to do is reform welfare for the rich.
    Those reforms sucked...because they still did not address the cause of poverty. The idea that we should just shrug and say, "oh, we tried once...let's forget about it" is ridiculous.
    "Hmmm...Can't decide if I want to watch "Four Houses" or give myself an Icy Hot pee hole enema..." - Blake Shelton


  7. #77
    Bring us a shrubbery!
    tessaesque's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Plano, Texas
    Last Seen
    11-09-17 @ 06:18 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    15,910

    Re: U.S. Poverty Climbed to 17-Year High in 2010

    Quote Originally Posted by Catawba View Post
    Who do you think has swelled the poverty numbers? Under the welfare reform of 1996, those not disabled can only remain on welfare for two years.

    So let's hear your plan?

    I'm not sure why you even mentioned time limits. What good is a time limit if we are not simultaneously requiring mandatory participation in work training or education programs? If we are not utilizing means of helping these people become more marketable, more skilled?
    "Hmmm...Can't decide if I want to watch "Four Houses" or give myself an Icy Hot pee hole enema..." - Blake Shelton


  8. #78
    pirate lover
    liblady's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    St Thomas, VI
    Last Seen
    03-14-16 @ 03:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    16,165
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: U.S. Poverty Climbed to 17-Year High in 2010

    Quote Originally Posted by tessaesque View Post
    I'm not sure why you even mentioned time limits. What good is a time limit if we are not simultaneously requiring mandatory participation in work training or education programs? If we are not utilizing means of helping these people become more marketable, more skilled?
    most states DO require that, btw.

    Originally Posted by johnny_rebson:

    These are the same liberals who forgot how Iraq attacked us on 9/11.


  9. #79
    pirate lover
    liblady's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    St Thomas, VI
    Last Seen
    03-14-16 @ 03:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    16,165
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: U.S. Poverty Climbed to 17-Year High in 2010

    Quote Originally Posted by tessaesque View Post
    Those reforms sucked...because they still did not address the cause of poverty. The idea that we should just shrug and say, "oh, we tried once...let's forget about it" is ridiculous.
    so what's your plan to address the causes of poverty?

    Originally Posted by johnny_rebson:

    These are the same liberals who forgot how Iraq attacked us on 9/11.


  10. #80
    Bring us a shrubbery!
    tessaesque's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Plano, Texas
    Last Seen
    11-09-17 @ 06:18 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    15,910

    Re: U.S. Poverty Climbed to 17-Year High in 2010

    Quote Originally Posted by Catawba View Post
    Excellent point! I think many people would be surprised their beliefs about welfare are myths. Here are some of the major ones below:

    Five Major Welfare Myths

    "Myth #1: The typical welfare recipient is a black inner city single mother.

    The Census Bureau's most recent annual poverty report found that urban black mothers constitute less than one out of six of all poor households. Rural white families account for more--one out of five. White surburban families account for even more--one out of four.

    Myth #2: The poor are lazy.

    Forty percent of poor adults work, although many cannot find full time jobs. Indeed, even when they do they may still be in poverty. Some 11 million jobs in 1991 paid less than $11,500, $2,000 under the official poverty level for a family of four. Of those poor adults who don't work, 90 percent fall into the following categories: 22 percent are disabled, 17 percent are in school, 21 percent are elderly retirees, 31 percent have family responsibilities.

    Myth #3: Welfare mothers breed welfare daughters.

    Two long term studies reported by the House Ways and Means Committee in 1992 found that only about one in five daughters of "highly welfare dependent" mothers themselves become highly dependent on welfare. The rest rely on welfare sporadically or not at all.

    Myth #4: Throwing people off the welfare rolls will eventually improve their lives and save taxpayers money.

    The most celebrated experiment in welfare reform has occurred in Michigan. Governor Engler completely eliminated his state's $240 million General Assistance(GA) payments to 83,000 childless, able bodied adults.Only 8 percent of these former GA recipients found employment and they earn
    an average of only $120 a week. Many sell blood for $20 a pint. Over one third lost their homes when the program ended. As one study notes, if only 5 percent of these former GA recipients end up in prison or a state psychiatric institution all the taxpayer savings from ending General Assistance will be lost.

    Myth #5: Welfare is cheaper than creating well paying public jobs.

    In his book "Securing the Right to Employment", Philip Harvey calculates that in 1986 we could have achieved full employment by creating l0.4 million public service jobs. He further assumed that the average annual wage would be $13,000. The cost of such a program would have been a daunting $142 billion. But when we deduct from this sum the taxes that would be paid by these new workers and the savings from drastically reduced unemployment insurance payments, welfare , Medicaid, food stamps and other expenditures directly linked to low income and unemployment overall we would have spent $13 billion less. A full employment program, even excluding the social savingsfrom reduced family violence, more stable communities, and less crime, pays for itself in reduced welfare expenditures.

    If we can overcome these five myths about welfare we may well engage in a national dialogue with meaningful results, not only for the one in five Americans who now live in poverty, but for the nation as a whole. But this will occur only when we challenge and overcome the welfare myths that paralyze our thinking."
    https://www.msu.edu/user/skourtes/myths.html
    Funny, I didn't say any of those things.

    I'm seeing several liberal posters make a bunch of outrageous leaps to attack a statement that was not only logically sound, but also pretty damned accurate. The core causes of poverty still exist. The programs we have utilized have not decrease those causes in any significant number. Even prior to the recession, poverty levels did not typically decrease. They trended stagnant, or with slight increases. You can blame the recession for some increase in poverty, but you can't blame all poverty on the recession.

    I want programs that actually benefit people in poverty, that help them advance themselves instead of helping them maintain the status quo in crappy apartments, or clothing their kids in Goodwill bargains, or feeding their kids once a day because the food stamps don't go far enough, or telling their 18 year old that college isn't an option, so he better start applying for McDonalds or high-risk labor positions. I'd rather we actually admitted that the system absolutely sucks and start working to fix it.

    And, I'd rather we stop playing some stupid little game with stereotypes and generalizations. I didn't blame poverty on the poor. I didn't call every person in poverty a single black mother. I didn't say that people in poverty are lazy or stupid or incapable. I said that there are common trends amongst the poor, and there are easy ways to fix them.

    You can take the status quo if you want, but it wasn't working before the recession and it won't work after.
    Last edited by tessaesque; 09-14-11 at 03:45 PM.
    "Hmmm...Can't decide if I want to watch "Four Houses" or give myself an Icy Hot pee hole enema..." - Blake Shelton


Page 8 of 14 FirstFirst ... 678910 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •