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.
Medicare and Social Security aren't welfare. People pay premiums for those for decades before they're even eligible to collect any benefits.
Of course they are; they are entitlements.
Lower income folks on food stamps also pay into the system. Anyone who earns income has paid into the system to receive subsidy.
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent
Except it's not doing that. It's destabilizing the economy by creating an exponentially growing welfare-dependent class that will be increasingly difficult to support.
How is that sustainable going forward? What's your plan for paying to support all those additional people, 70% of which are likely to need some or several forms of public assistance for life?
Let's take a look at the enormity of the problem using a numerical example...
Because we now have nearly 50% Medicaid births, we'll do a 1 to 1 comparison: 1 million receiving public assistance, 1 million not receiving such, the latest published birth rate numbers for each group* (halved because the rates were reported for women only), and the formula for predicting future population: future value = present value x (e)^kt, where e equals the constant 2.71828, k equals the rate of increase (expressed as a decimal, rate taken from the U.S. Census data), and t is the number of years.
After 20 years, the population of those not receiving public assistance will have grown from 1 million to 1.75 million.
After 20 years, the population of those very likely needing public assistance will have grown from 1 million to 4.953 million, 3.467 million of which will never rise above poverty.
1.75 million paying taxes to support social programs for 3.467million after just 20 years. The poverty class is growing at twice the rate of everyone else.
Providing for an exponentially growing welfare-dependent class is unsustainable. That's a mathematical certainty.
So, again, I have to ask... What's your plan for paying to support the exponentially increasing welfare-dependent class?
As I already articulated in this thread, the Democrats have proposed solutions for the problems that have worked at their intended goal. The Republicans have no solutions. Your approach to every thread is to criticize the Democrats and ask everyone else for solutions (again for you to criticize).
Welfare is not unsustainable, nor is it the cause of economic woes. "Welfare spending" (Unemployment, social security, food stamps) are economic stablizers. They go up in recessions. They go down in recoveries. The evidence is in the historical graphs.
Welfare reform does not alleviate poverty. When Clinton's Administration reformed poverty, there was a minimal impact on poverty. Economic recoveries alleviate poverty; nothing more nothing less.
If the poverty rate for blacks is consistent regardless of state, why does New York (higher precentage of blacks) have lower rates of poverty than Oklahoma, Kentucky, Texas, and West Virginia?
Obama is decimating the coal industry and allowing millions of illegal aliens to enter/remain in Texas. What did you think was going to happen when Obama deliberately does that?
Presumably because New York has higher median income than those other states. Government defines income by a specific dollar amount regardless of state.
The point was, New York has the highest Black population in the United States overall, and a significantly higher percentage than poor conservative states of the midwest (Oklahoma, Kentucky, West Virginia, Texas). Yet, New York has lower rates of poverty. The argument was that blacks are responsible for poverty in the deep red South (Alabama, Tennessee, Mississippi, etc). Since all red states mentioned have significantly higher poverty rates than New York, and consistently crappy income levels, I'm inclined to draw the conclusion that the variable is policy, not race.
Obama is decimating the coal industry and allowing millions of illegal aliens to enter/remain in Texas. What did you think was going to happen when Obama deliberately does that?
Deflection.
Feel free to address my post. Thank you for making my point that being black doesn't create poverty. Blacks are born into poverty.
Not everyone can be a professional, either. Isn't diversity grand? Develop a skill that's in demand, doesn't even have to take brains or braun, and you earn a high income.
If you really think that women have babies so they can get greater benefits I would say with certainty that you`ve never raised children. By raising children I`m not talking about taking the boy fishing or to his little league game.
You are kidding right? Who says anything about raising children? It's about getting the benefits. Children would grow by themselves.
Since it is a true statement, why do conservatives wish to keep people poor and ignorant? Don't we want to lower the amount of "welfare babies" ?
"Yes, so cut out the welfare already," said the Republicans.
"You guys hate the poor!!! You have no heart!!! You don't want to help the poor!!! The Republicans want your babies to starve to death!!!!!!" said the Democrats.
No, they're government INSURANCE programs, hence the title of the ACT:
Federal Insurance Contributions Act (FICA)
SNAP, Section 8, Medicaid, TANF, etc., etc., are not insurance programs for which premiums are paid.
Quote:
Welfare is not unsustainable, nor is it the cause of economic woes.
Indeed it is. Both. Over $1 trillion is spent each year on social welfare programs for people who TAKE more than they contribute. It's a huge net loss.
(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.)
By the way, you still haven't answered the question... What's your plan for paying to support all those additional people, 70% of which are likely to need some or several forms of public assistance for life?
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.
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.
