[Tin Knocker]

Originally Posted by Kristin85

If the state doesn't do this type of research with foster parents, they surely will not do this for parents on welfare. Too much work for the people who already oversee the system.

How did this discussion even turn towards welfare? Of course Malloy didn't get elected because of welfare recipients. Malloy got elected because residents didn't take the time to research his views; they wanted "change" and just voted for the non-Republican. Now they've got it!

Why would people wanting change vote for a person more liberal than their liberal predecessor? Even if a person viewed Rell as a conservative the state itself has been a liberal cesspool for a loong time. The only way CT can change is to become more conservative, its the answer to almost all of our problems, smaller govt & lower taxes.

At any rate there is no way you can give people money & control how its spent. Even food stamps can be & are traded for cash to buy drugs.
A better way would be to give them a card, like an ATM card, that can only be used to buy food & necessities by the person its given to. No cash, zero.

[CTGirlNoMore]

Originally Posted by bobtn

Originally Posted by mlassoff
Do you expect that we should strike the check directly to a 6 year old? "

Why not REQUIRE receipts of every item spent for the child, by the parent, and if 100% or more of the aid rec'd cannot be shown as used for the child, appoint a guardian to receive and use the money on behalf of the child, charging back the so-called parent for the cost of the guardian.

Wow, I wish they would do something like this. "In order to receive your assistance next month, you must show proof.........."

Of course then the parents might go back and return or sell the items tehy bought to show proof so they would still pocket the money. (I sadly knew of someone who did that with their child support - they showed proof that they bought things for their kid, the father gave half the money then she went and returned everything. father paid money and kid got nothing)

[Tetto]

Originally Posted by mlassoff

Get real. The primary voting block for Democrats is not welfare recipients. That's absurd.

That's as real as it gets dude.

[mlassoff]

Originally Posted by Tetto

That's as real as it gets dude.

Well I assume most white supremacists vote Republican. Using this logic, I have to assume that the primary voting block that gets Republicans elected are white supremacists.

Same logic.

But, I guess, being the thoughtful type, I reject the above thesis in its entirety because it's ABSURD!

But of course, I think for myself, instead of parroting what I hear on talk radio.

[Beeker2211]

Originally Posted by mlassoff

Well I assume most white supremacists vote Republican. Using this logic, I have to assume that the primary voting block that gets Republicans elected are white supremacists.

Same logic.

But, I guess, being the thoughtful type, I reject the above thesis in its entirety because it's ABSURD!

But of course, I think for myself, instead of parroting what I hear on talk radio.

Exactly, it might make for a nice narrative for Ayn Rand's and "conservative" talk radio's "leeches vs. producers" mindset the reality is frankly more ambiguous.

Poor people tend not to vote. Even if they did, studies have shown that the poor and middle class hold relatively little sway in Federal Policy formation. I'm trying to find the study I just found a few days ago but I can't remember quite where I saw it lol.

Something interesting though:

What's the Matter with Connecticut:

http://www.stat.columbia.edu/~gelman.../redblue11.pdf

From the abstract:

"We find that income matters more in red America than in blue America. In poor states, rich people are much more likely than poor people to vote for the Republican presidential candidate, but in rich states (such as Connecticut), income has almost no correlation with vote preference."

Some food for thought.

~Cheers

[bobtn]

Just curious, what does each of you think will occur with the state workers, (1) Malloy gets $2 bill, (2) He gets next to squat, blinks, and lays off at most a meaningless quantity of them, than raises taxes much higher on the residents to keep the gravy train going (3) He gets close to squat, and actually eliminates the many thousands of positions which would be required to offset the $2 bill.

What was he like in Stamford-any tough situations in which he showed guts, or was he the type to blink?

[Beeker2211]

Originally Posted by Tin Knocker

Why would people wanting change vote for a person more liberal than their liberal predecessor? Even if a person viewed Rell as a conservative the state itself has been a liberal cesspool for a loong time. The only way CT can change is to become more conservative, its the answer to almost all of our problems, smaller govt & lower taxes.

At any rate there is no way you can give people money & control how its spent. Even food stamps can be & are traded for cash to buy drugs.
A better way would be to give them a card, like an ATM card, that can only be used to buy food & necessities by the person its given to. No cash, zero.

Hate to say, but you have relatively no clue about what you are talking about.

First: CT has one of the slimmest government workers to resident proportions in the country, which is including the fact that CT has no second tier governments and that state generally fills the role a lot of counties take up. So what do you want?

Second: CT has one of the lowest government spending as a percentage of GSP in any state (third I believe after DE and WY).

Third: again, if the conservative models were so great why do the more "conservative" states need so much help from Uncle Sam at the "liberal" states dime? And why do they drag down our stats as a nation so bad? I thought once government got out of the way, wealth can increase to all.

Fourth: An ATM card that welfare recipients use to minimise end user fraud? Sounds new. If this was 1996. EBT cards are the only way the SNAP funds are distributed (most UI is direct deposit, though) as they have been for nearly a decade and a half.

DSS: How to Access Cash and Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) Benefits

PS: Most fraud, as been the case for decades, of governmental funds is third party distributors and not massive end user manipulation.

You just want to blame it all on someone, but maybe you're blaming the wrong group for your woes.

~Cheers

[JViello]

Originally Posted by Kristin85

How did this discussion even turn towards welfare? Of course Malloy didn't get elected because of welfare recipients. Malloy got elected because residents didn't take the time to research his views; they wanted "change" and just voted for the non-Republican. Now they've got it!

Well that's just it Kristin, it's a ruse, a distraction. It's the game the left always plays.

Conservative: "Our state is spending too much on government employees"

Progressive: "Why do you hate the poor and children?" (And police, teachers and firemen)

However, I disagree with you that "welfare recipients" had nothing to do with Malloy's victory. With a margin of less than 10,000 votes, it most certainly did. Read more below.

Originally Posted by mlassoff

But of course, I think for myself, instead of parroting what I hear on talk radio.

LOL You should actually listen sometime before forming opinions like that.

Originally Posted by Beeker2211

Exactly, it might make for a nice narrative for Ayn Rand's and "conservative" talk radio's "leeches vs. producers" mindset the reality is frankly more ambiguous.

Poor people tend not to vote. Even if they did, studies have shown that the poor and middle class hold relatively little sway in Federal Policy formation. I'm trying to find the study I just found a few days ago but I can't remember quite where I saw it lol.

Really? Voter turnout in CT cities was over 30%.

Poverty rates in CT cities hovering around 30%.

Students who qualify for "free lunch" over 95% in some districts of the cities.

Here is how the state voted for the governors race:



Hmmm, so which areas of the state pushed the liberal progressive democrat into office?

Moreover, if you look past just "red and blue" it's really eye opening.

Bridgeport:
Malloy 17,973
Foley 4,099

Hartford
Malloy 16,274
Foley 2,043

New Haven
Malloy 22,298
Foley 3,685

Stamford
Malloy 19,416
Foley 13,779


Most towns and smaller cities looked like Stamford flipped either way.

AP: New town-by-town results in governor's race- The New Haven Register - Serving New Haven, Connecticut

With a spread of roughly 7000 votes, yes those on "assistance" most certainly swayed this election.

CT has flipped and those in the cart now outpower those pulling the cart.

Originally Posted by Beeker2211

Hate to say, but you have relatively no clue about what you are talking about.

First: CT has one of the slimmest government workers to resident proportions in the country, which is including the fact that CT has no second tier governments and that state generally fills the role a lot of counties take up. So what do you want?

Second: CT has one of the lowest government spending as a percentage of GSP in any state (third I believe after DE and WY).

Bullsnot. We have the most state employees per capita than any state in the nation. Period. The state is the largest employer in the state.

And we have one of the highest tax burdens in the nation so it's not a "revenue problem".

Originally Posted by Beeker2211

Third: again, if the conservative models were so great why do the more "conservative" states need so much help from Uncle Sam at the "liberal" states dime? And why do they drag down our stats as a nation so bad? I thought once government got out of the way, wealth can increase to all.

Oh that's easy. History. If you remember, the Northeast and New England specifically used to be VERY conservative and was well ahead of the South after government got involved. The South used to be "prosperous" pre civil war, but the government got involved and pretty much destroyed it. The North prevailed and marched ahead.

So it's not so cut and dry just looking at current "statistics".

Originally Posted by Beeker2211

Fourth: An ATM card that welfare recipients use to minimise end user fraud? Sounds new. If this was 1996. EBT cards are the only way the SNAP funds are distributed (most UI is direct deposit, though) as they have been for nearly a decade and a half.

Agreed, but there is still fraud and waste/abuse. While my wife and I clip coupons and walk through the market with a calculator...the "welfare" family is just grabbing whatever they want and toss it in the cart that's filled to the top. All the while sporting new $150 kicks, latest gear etc and I'm in 5 year old jeans and two year old shoes.

Nice.

[JayCT]

I try to stay out of these kinds of discussions but Beeker is correct. Connecticut does not have a county level of government which most (if not all) other states have. Because of this the state does have to fill in certain duties that counties do in other states. This of course means more employees on the state level which means higher state taxes. Of course we do not have any county taxes so there is a savings there that should be considered. Jay

[mlassoff]

Originally Posted by JViello

Really? Voter turnout in CT cities was over 30%.

Poverty rates in CT cities hovering around 30%.

C'mon JViello. You can do better than this.

Jesus Christ had a beard.
I had a beard.
I am Jesus Christ.

Logical fallacy. There is no evidence that it's the SAME 30% that's both in the "poverty" and "voting" categories.

Silly. Silly.