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.
No it is a biased example from a biased source which is pushing an agenda. The median household income, according to the 2010 census was $51,914. If this woman was grossing 69k/year, she is above the national median. Whoever did this chart obviously based this on a city (maybe NYC) with a high cost of living and failed to disclose this information. The chart also shows her in the food stamp area, but even in NYC she wouldn't be able to get food stamps unless she is disabled. Whether she lives in NYC or Houston, TX makes a huge difference. Clearly the source is biased.
At the top of this chart, it says in so many words that Obama is to blame and Romney can fix this.The widening gap in income and income inequality are more to blame for the rising number of people needing government assistance than Obama. The average worker has received a very small increase in pay over the last 20 years, while the increase in CEO pay is huge. The cost of living is increasing faster than the salaries of average workers. Where does this leave people? What would you expect?
Do you argue that "welfare cliffs" do not exist in most other regions of the country?
I can relate to these numbers and I know for a fact that a woman in this position is not living large. Even if she has a bf to help her get her nails done and pay for a cell phone it's a miserable check to check existence. The op wouldn't want to live in the neighborhoods this woman could afford to live in but the op paints a rosy picture. Like "Julia" is living a great life.
Btw, section 8 is closed so Julia would only qualify for chip and day care subsidy on 29k in Nyc. Julia has to shack up with a bf or live in the projects around here.
There is no guarantee that she could get child care assistance either. Funds are always limited for these programs. She may not be able to get anything but CHIP. The whole welfare queen thing is so eighties. People are still trying to prove that people getting government assistance are living large and have a better quality of life than people who make over the national median. The chart is BS.
Do you argue that "welfare cliffs" do not exist in most other regions of the country?
If they do, they are no where near 69k. The whole point of this chart is to prove that there is no incentive to work harder or even attempt to get a better job. This may be the case for someone in a minimum wage job with no skills, but saying that making 29k is better than making 69K (anywhere in the US) is a huge stretch. This article is also implying (like some of the people in this thread) that Democrats want people to be on welfare, which is BS. Like I pointed out in another post, the cost of living is increasing faster than wages. The rich are getting richer, the middle class is shrinking and the poor are getting poorer. If wealth is concentrated to such small percentage of the population, of course more people will need assistance. This has been happening over the last 20 years - Obama had nothing to do with it and cutting social programs isn't going to fix it.
Or the up and coming "technically section 8" stuff on the NJ side too, right?
Kind of ironic considering that I recall living in the ghetto as a university student and had a knife pulled on me on one occasion.
Yeah and you only had to live there while you were a student. Have a huge glass of schadenfreude for Julia because the Julias of the world don't get to escape the ghetto. Feel better now?
I don't need to provide a graph. I proved my point in my first post in this thread with numbers and links to back it up. You have already proven that graphs can be inaccurate with this thread.
Yeah and you only had to live there while you were a student. Have a huge glass of schadenfreude for Julia because the Julias of the world don't get to escape the ghetto. Feel better now?
Schadenfreude is actually my favorite drink, and downed a huge amount for the "homeowners" who got greedy and ran up the housing bubble only to have it blow up in their face.
In this case however, you're wrong that Julia doesn't get to escape from the ghetto. She only does if she feels content living at the peak of the welfare cliff, and unfortunately many do. Like I said, section 8 isn't as bad as you think it is in many cases.
Every RWNJ dumps on "Julia" for taking some benefits while working a full time job. None of them dump on Romney for saving orders of magnitude more in taxes by taking advantage of similar laws for the very wealthy. As he no longer has a paying full time job he is completely on welfare except he is living in "his" money.
Money is GREEN and the source makes no matter. You are either working for your living or you are on welfare.
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.
