Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 04-08-2014, 02:58 PM
 
24,834 posts, read 37,260,702 times
Reputation: 11538

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by hawaiian by heart View Post
The example i brought up had nothing to do with is being rich bad, it has everything to do with how it effects our economic welbeing. Please really go back and read it.
Still there has to be a number as to what is to rich.

 
Old 04-08-2014, 02:59 PM
 
Location: mainland but born oahu
6,657 posts, read 7,721,911 times
Reputation: 3136
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent View Post
Didn't Obama promise Hope and Change? What happened to that? Why is he spending $3 million on a 1-day vanity trip?

I speak the truth. Many don't like the truth because some of the facts are very uncomfortable. Such as...

Medicaid Pays For Nearly Half of All Births in the United States | publichealth.gwu.edu

Those kids are dependent on welfare from day one: Medicaid, WIC, etc., etc. PLUS the 3 times higher birth rate of those receiving public assistance. That exponential growth of the welfare-dependent class is not sustainable and everyone with at least half a brain knows it.
Im not arguing with you i agree what im trying so hard to get you to see is greed, laziness, immorality are not a class thing, nor are they limited to one party. Bush had huge spending and got us in a war.

Last edited by hawaiian by heart; 04-08-2014 at 03:34 PM..
 
Old 04-08-2014, 03:03 PM
 
Location: mainland but born oahu
6,657 posts, read 7,721,911 times
Reputation: 3136
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent View Post
What cuts? No way is federal SNAP spending going to decline. Not with so many people receiving food stamps.


SNAP


SOURCE: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program Participation and Costs, January 2014.


Note to moderators: all images appearing in this post have been linked via HTML text command in a legally permissible manner per the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals Perfect 10 v. Amazon ruling, and as such do not constitute copyright violation.
The 2014 Farm Bill: SNAP is Cut and Corporate Welfare is Increased
 
Old 04-08-2014, 03:06 PM
 
41,111 posts, read 25,632,392 times
Reputation: 13868
Quote:
Originally Posted by hawaiian by heart View Post
Will you stop it with the hate! Our deficit was already terrible from the bush administration. God irresponsibly is irresponsibly. It doesn't matter which party.
Hate lol, no that is liberals who hate. Bush? LOLOL yep and of course let's not forget it's Obama too. Now Obama has made more poor people.

Last edited by petch751; 04-08-2014 at 03:31 PM..
 
Old 04-08-2014, 03:07 PM
 
Location: mainland but born oahu
6,657 posts, read 7,721,911 times
Reputation: 3136
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent View Post
No, my challenge was: "Prove that everyone getting a means-tested government program welfare benefit is working."

You didn't. Your own post said, "41 Percent Of SNAP Participants Lived "In A Household With Earnings."

Do you somehow think 41% of participants is everyone? Aren't you missing the other 59%?
Then i missunderstood or miss read your post. But still it proves that not every poor welfare guy is a bum or thief.
 
Old 04-08-2014, 03:08 PM
 
Location: the very edge of the continent
88,726 posts, read 44,522,703 times
Reputation: 13599
Quote:
Originally Posted by freightshaker View Post
Good solid companies operate on profit margin. Salaries,and cost of goods and services, are all determined by profit margin. If the profit margin is decreased, then the cost of those goods and services produced are increased to maintain profitability. If the profit margin increases significantly, salaries are increased. CEO's contrary to common belief, do not set their own salaries. Their salaries are set by the board of directors and approved by stock holders. Stock holders reward CEO's for their performance which increases the stock value. This is a very very basic explanation that I hope you can understand.
Thank you for that!
 
Old 04-08-2014, 03:09 PM
 
Location: Lost in Texas
9,827 posts, read 6,917,204 times
Reputation: 3415
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent View Post
Thank you for that!
My pleasure..
 
Old 04-08-2014, 03:13 PM
 
Location: the very edge of the continent
88,726 posts, read 44,522,703 times
Reputation: 13599
Quote:
Originally Posted by hawaiian by heart View Post
They're cutting off benefits for illegal immigrants, lottery winners, and dead people.
 
Old 04-08-2014, 03:16 PM
 
Location: mainland but born oahu
6,657 posts, read 7,721,911 times
Reputation: 3136
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent View Post
I thought you said you knew about economics?

Since when aren't the costs of doing business factored into the price of a good or service?
Yes its always factored, the point i made was the reason the CEOs and Owners make millions and billions is because we are helping keep business costs down with corporate welfare. Of course if we cut it , it will raise prices. But the price raising won't be because we cut corporate welfare but because CEOs and Owners are used to make millions and billions in profits or pay so they will raise prices to get what they want.

I say its not the taxpayers or the consumers responsibility to compensate a corporation whos owners or CEOs have an inflated and unrealistic ideal of there worth.
 
Old 04-08-2014, 03:23 PM
 
Location: mainland but born oahu
6,657 posts, read 7,721,911 times
Reputation: 3136
Quote:
Originally Posted by freightshaker View Post
Good solid companies operate on profit margin. Salaries,and cost of goods and services, are all determined by profit margin. If the profit margin is decreased, then the cost of those goods and services produced are increased to maintain profitability. If the profit margin increases significantly, salaries are increased. CEO's contrary to common belief, do not set their own salaries. Their salaries are set by the board of directors and approved by stock holders. Stock holders reward CEO's for their performance which increases the stock value. This is a very very basic explanation that I hope you can understand.
But its safe to say that corporate welfare cuts business cost which rises the profits that pays more salary to CEOs. Thats kinda my point why are we supporting corporations?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Closed Thread


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top