Page 11 of 22 FirstFirst ... 91011121321 ... LastLast
Results 101 to 110 of 219

Thread: U.S. Adds 146,000 Jobs; Jobless Rate Falls to 7.7%

  1. #101
    Educator Dpetty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Last Seen
    04-05-17 @ 10:35 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    967

    Re: U.S. Adds 146,000 Jobs; Jobless Rate Falls to 7.7%

    Quote Originally Posted by a351 View Post
    Any clue as to what may have caused this phenomena? A Catastrophic financial event of sorts? Or did a large chunk of individuals simply catch a bad case of the "lazies" right around the time period in which trillions of wealth vanished and millions of jobs as well? I think I'll go with the former.
    The cause is not whats being debated right now. The Obama Administration claims they have solved that issue. Isnt our unemployment rate reported around 7% right now? So how do those numbers mesh with the ever increasing #'s on welfare? How can standard of living go up, and the cost of living go down, while at the same time, people with jobs are still relying on welfare?

    News flash, this change in the allocation of assistance programs was lobbied for by dozens of governors, including one Mitt Romney of Massachuets in the prior decade.
    Yes he was lobbying for more power at the state level, where it belongs. How evil of him.
    This stripping of the work requirement that so many have brayed and bemoaned endlessly about was simply a move that allows states to craft their own work requirements which can now include educational endeavors such as job training and trade focused classes. The states however, are not afforded this luxury unless they increase the work rolls of welfare recipents by 20%. A nod to states sovereignty and a move to increase the working rolls of welfare recipents, a Conservatives wet dream you would think?
    I will believe it when i see it.
    Key phrase in the quote you're responding to: Most could've predicted an aggregate rise in recipients and overall expenditures due to the conditions mentioned above, but the trick would be demonstrating the seemingly lavish lifestyle of welfare recipents that you portrayed in earlier posts, and claimed Obama responsible for.
    I never said lavish. I said they should have their NEEDS seen to, and nothing more. Example: Food, water, shelter, clothing (not name brand). Not cable tv (or tv's in general), phones, cars, cigarettes ect ect ect.

  2. #102
    #NeverTrump
    a351's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Space Coast
    Last Seen
    09-09-17 @ 08:54 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    6,902

    Re: U.S. Adds 146,000 Jobs; Jobless Rate Falls to 7.7%

    Quote Originally Posted by Dpetty View Post
    The cause is not whats being debated right now.

    The Obama Administration claims they have solved that issue.

    Isnt our unemployment rate reported around 7% right now? So how do those numbers mesh with the ever increasing #'s on welfare?

    How can standard of living go up, and the cost of living go down, while at the same time, people with jobs are still relying on welfare?


    Yes he was lobbying for more power at the state level, where it belongs. How evil of him.

    I never said lavish.
    It's necessary to discuss if you actually wish to address the effects.

    20 trillions worth of lost wealth? Nah, but they can lay claim to a modest recovery from that disaster. Some expected better, some worse.

    7.7% currently, and working doesn't absolve one from poverty, or from eligibility for welfare and other assistance programs. In fact, employment is one of the staple requirements that must be met in order to qualify.

    Cost of living hasn't gone down, especially when one throws health care and education into the mix. The rest of your question was answered above.

    Yes, and Obama granted his state and all others that very ability.
    The claim is a drastic distortion of what the Obama administration said it intends to do. By granting waivers to states, HHS is seeking to make welfare-to-work efforts more successful, not end them. The waivers would apply to individually evaluated pilot programs -- HHS is not proposing a blanket, national change to welfare law.
    http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-me...-welfare-work/

    Certainly implied it:
    Quote Originally Posted by Dpetty
    Why would they look for work when they can live so comfortably on welfare?

  3. #103
    Educator Dpetty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Last Seen
    04-05-17 @ 10:35 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    967

    Re: U.S. Adds 146,000 Jobs; Jobless Rate Falls to 7.7%

    I like how you delete most of my quote and just leave what suits you. Makes debating much easier doesnt it? Im going to try it with your last post...

    Quote Originally Posted by a351 View Post
    It's necessary actually wish disaster. Some expect worse from poverty, or from eligibility for welfare and other assistance programs. In fact, employment is down, especially when one throws health care and education into the mix. The rest of your question was Yes, and Obama granted others that very ability.
    Wow, you dont know what your talking about, do you? The things you implied... very uncalled for...

  4. #104
    #NeverTrump
    a351's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Space Coast
    Last Seen
    09-09-17 @ 08:54 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    6,902

    Re: U.S. Adds 146,000 Jobs; Jobless Rate Falls to 7.7%

    Quote Originally Posted by Dpetty View Post
    Source?

    Before government got in te business of running peoples lives, people did support charity on their own.

    On the contrary. Local organizations would be much better suited to meet the needs of the people locally because they would be better able to see and understand those needs. Local people helping local people. A national welfare system is far less likely to meet the individual needs of its recipients. Even if you insisted on it being done at a government leve, local government (city or state) would still be better suited than federal...
    Historical Average Federal Tax Rates for All Households

    There was also a great deal more impoverished and malnourished individuals than in our current state. Talk with some who actually lived through the era in question, you may find they don't reflect as kindly upon the time period as those who are commenting from a outside perspective.

    I'd tend to agree that support on a local level is more apt to recognize the needs and nuances of individual cases, but would be unable to address needs on a broad scale, as the federal sector is able in one fell swoop. Federal funding and local administration and allocation sounds like a reasonable compromise.

  5. #105
    Professor
    Hairytic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Mississippi
    Last Seen
    10-01-13 @ 04:45 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    1,592

    Re: U.S. Adds 146,000 Jobs; Jobless Rate Falls to 7.7%

    Quote Originally Posted by Dpetty View Post
    Where do you think the government gets the money to make these grants in the first place?? Do you honestly not know where the government gets money?? Its from US!! They take our money because they think they can use it better than we can. If the government is so good at providing for the poor, why is the problem getting worse and worse every year? Id much prefer to keep my money and use it to help the poor directly, rather than letting the government waste it on useless spending.
    Of course I know where the government gets money. The government is designed to provide for the general welfare of the people based on our constitution. The problem of poverty increases with economic downturns and improves when the economy is doing well. There will never be an end to porverty. When it comes to providing a safety net for people who need a hand up, I have no doubt that the government does a better jobs of provind that safty net with our money collectively than we do individually. That is the reason social saftey nets were set up, because during the great depression people could not take care of the needy on an individual basis.

  6. #106
    Educator Dpetty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Last Seen
    04-05-17 @ 10:35 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    967

    Re: U.S. Adds 146,000 Jobs; Jobless Rate Falls to 7.7%

    Quote Originally Posted by a351 View Post
    There was also a great deal more impoverished and malnourished individuals than in our current state. Talk with some who actually lived through the era in question, you may find they don't reflect as kindly upon the time period as those who are commenting from a outside perspective.
    Im not advocating that we go back to their standard of living, nor do i think that changing the welfare system would do that. I assume you agree with me on that point.

    I'd tend to agree that support on a local level is more apt to recognize the needs and nuances of individual cases, but would be unable to address needs on a broad scale, as the federal sector is able in one fell swoop. Federal funding and local administration and allocation sounds like a reasonable compromise.
    We wouldnt need federal funding in the first place if the system was set up correctly. Whats the point of giving the money to the fed, just so they can waste some of it paying for their needless red tape and pork barrell spending, then pass on a fraction of it to the state level so they can allocate it to the needy? We already pay state taxes, why not let the money go straight to the state and local governments and bypass the needless step of going through the fed? Yet another example of needless big government.

  7. #107
    #NeverTrump
    a351's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Space Coast
    Last Seen
    09-09-17 @ 08:54 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    6,902

    Re: U.S. Adds 146,000 Jobs; Jobless Rate Falls to 7.7%

    Quote Originally Posted by Dpetty View Post
    Im not advocating that we go back to their standard of living, nor do i think that changing the welfare system would do that. I assume you agree with me on that point.



    We wouldnt need federal funding in the first place if the system was set up correctly. Whats the point of giving the money to the fed, just so they can waste some of it paying for their needless red tape and pork barrell spending, then pass on a fraction of it to the state level so they can allocate it to the needy? We already pay state taxes, why not let the money go straight to the state and local governments and bypass the needless step of going through the fed? Yet another example of needless big government.
    Sure.

    Well, many states aren't particularly self sufficient, and raising state and local taxes isn't always political feasible, so federal funding in the form of supplementary assistance is quite useful in order to prevent a large dip in the living conditions of those affected by potential budget constraints on the local level strictly.

  8. #108
    Educator Dpetty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Last Seen
    04-05-17 @ 10:35 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    967

    Re: U.S. Adds 146,000 Jobs; Jobless Rate Falls to 7.7%

    Quote Originally Posted by Hairytic View Post
    Of course I know where the government gets money. The government is designed to provide for the general welfare of the people based on our constitution. The problem of poverty increases with economic downturns and improves when the economy is doing well. There will never be an end to porverty. When it comes to providing a safety net for people who need a hand up, I have no doubt that the government does a better jobs of provind that safty net with our money collectively than we do individually. That is the reason social saftey nets were set up, because during the great depression people could not take care of the needy on an individual basis.

    You have the wording a little messed up.


    Article 1, section 8.
    The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

    The general welfare does not refer to the welfare of the people, its refering to the welfare of the United States. The federal government is charged with protecting the rights of the citizens, as well and defence against enemies, both foreign and domestic. It doesnt mean they need to buy us groceries. Why do you think we even have government at a state level, if the fed is supposed to do everything? State government is not merly a sub government to the federal government. Its a whole different level of government, with different roles and responsibilities. Politicians are giving themselves to much power. The checks and balances that were put in place at the birth of our country are breaking down.

  9. #109
    Educator Dpetty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Last Seen
    04-05-17 @ 10:35 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    967

    Re: U.S. Adds 146,000 Jobs; Jobless Rate Falls to 7.7%

    Quote Originally Posted by a351 View Post
    Well, many states aren't particularly self sufficient, and raising state and local taxes isn't always political feasible, so federal funding in the form of supplementary assistance is quite useful in order to prevent a large dip in the living conditions of those affected by potential budget constraints on the local level strictly.
    I guarantee that most Americans would be all for paying more state taxes, if it meant paying less federal taxes. As far as the states that arent self sufficient, thats a whole different problem. The federal government isnt exactly proving to be very sufficient either or we wouldnt be hearing so much about this "fiscal cliff" all the time. Obviously what im proposing will never happen because it would require to many politicians (from both sides of the isle) with god complexes giving up their power for the betterment of the people, but if it did, it would require a huge restructuring at the state level.

  10. #110
    Student
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Last Seen
    11-22-14 @ 02:35 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    206

    Re: U.S. Adds 146,000 Jobs; Jobless Rate Falls to 7.7%

    Quote Originally Posted by Hairytic View Post
    Corporate welfare abuse costs the US much more than social welfare abuse. Still, we shouldn't force people who really need a hand up to starve and go without medical care because of the ones who abuse the system. Those who do abuse it and are caught get punished, so it's not like they get by with it over and over again. I worked for the prison for many years and we had inmates that were in for welfare fraud.
    I simply don't see that abuse of the system is a reason why we should get rid of social welfare. Now, corporate welfare is another matter. We paid billions to bail out large banks, and the bank fat cats paid themselves millions. No one went to jail for it. Now that is real abuse in my opinion.
    While I agree on corporate welfare being a problem, I still think you underestimate what's going on in social welfare programs. And it's not only welfare programs. I run a small business in Ohio and the regular abuse I see in the workers comp system is mind boggling. I often tell people that with what I've learned about playing the system I could be the ultimate nightmare employee. In Ohio if you want some paid time off go to work tomorrow and say "ow, I hurt my shoulder". I could turn that simple statement into months of paid time off and lots of free drugs. And 2 years from now I'll "hurt" that same shoulder again(just in time for walleye season) after all I do have a history of it and it's obviously the employers fault.

    Again it's not abuse it's an industry. I have a couple of employees that can get on their cell phones and within minutes tell you which little store down in the inner city is offering the best return on food stamps. Usually around 60 cents on the dollar. The company that gets the most from those food stamps appears to be Anhueser Busch. I've seen printed handouts telling you how to get your child diagnosed with ADD so you can get more money and free drugs. Heck one of my employees divorced his wife for the sole purpose of playing the system. He uses his mothers address, he and the wife "agreed" on very low child support payments making her and the kids eligible for basically a free ride, rent voucher, utility assistance, healthcare, daycare, etc. He still lives there, nothing has changed other than govt money coming in. And of course his take is "everyone else is doing it".

    Here's a thought lets clean up both corporate and social welfare abuse. Instead of hiring 16000 IRS agents we should have hired 16000 fraud investigators.

Page 11 of 22 FirstFirst ... 91011121321 ... 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
  •