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)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 11-07-2012, 11:40 PM
 
Location: Sacramento, Ca.
2,441 posts, read 3,420,397 times
Reputation: 2629

Advertisements

OK so let me understand some of these haughty comments. If someone falls into a situation where public assistance [does that mean of any kind?] is needed, somehow they become free-loading losers, leeching the fine decent taxpaying trolls who think it is mature to villify and demonize them with racially slurred overtones? Then what about the $92 billion spent corporate subsidies vs. the $59 billion spent on social welfare? Looks like about 50% more was handed out to corporate welfare than was given to housing and food stamp programs, at least in 2006. And I'm sure the numbers rose in subsequent years, not to mention all the self-made folks who applied for business and student loans and depended on 'help' from employers and customers to eke out a vocational existence. But I guess none of that matters when you're infallibly degrading lowly people in need.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-07-2012, 11:52 PM
 
10,181 posts, read 10,217,845 times
Reputation: 9252
Quote:
Originally Posted by newtoli View Post
Well, again, as a 30-something year old, white collar employed, white woman with a masters, I voted at 8am yesterday on my way to work.

Meanwhile my 20 year old, unemployed, pill popping cousin blathered on and on about voting for Romney the entire year, and then didn't even bother to vote.

Your assumptions are why Romney lost.

You forgot about us educated white women.
You don't speak for all educated white women. This educated white woman (with a Masters too! Who DOESN'T have one these days? Stop patting yourself on the back. I got mine before they were just the next and obvious step in higher education b/c that regular old BA or BS is just that regular anymore) sees through the crap and didn't vote for your boy.

Knock it off.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-08-2012, 12:04 AM
 
Location: The beautiful Garden State
2,734 posts, read 4,137,070 times
Reputation: 3671
Quote:
Originally Posted by newtoli View Post
FWIW, SSDI only pays about $800/month. I had a friend on it, it's not really enough to live on in most parts of the country.
Oh, I agree, but she would also qualify for Medicare (after 29 months), and possibly the food stamps, too, and possibly discounts on utilities, and probably prescription medication discounts.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-08-2012, 12:05 AM
 
Location: Metro-Detroit area
4,050 posts, read 3,950,149 times
Reputation: 2107
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sawdustmaker View Post
You don't speak for all educated white women. This educated white woman (with a Masters too! Who DOESN'T have one these days? Stop patting yourself on the back. I got mine before they were just the next and obvious step in higher education b/c that regular old BA or BS is just that regular anymore) sees through the crap and didn't vote for your boy.

Knock it off.
I agree that she dosen't speak for all educated white women. Seems she only speaks for the intelligent educated white women.

the less intelligent educated white women were voting for a man who endorsed the idea that it is alright for a woman to do the same job as a man and receive less pay. The less intelligent educated white women were voting for a man who said that a woman had no right to an abortion even in cases of rape and incest or when it endangers the life of the mother.

The less intelligent were voting for a man who said, "corporations are people too".
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-08-2012, 12:06 AM
 
10,181 posts, read 10,217,845 times
Reputation: 9252
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Opinionated View Post
OK so let me understand some of these haughty comments. If someone falls into a situation where public assistance [does that mean of any kind?] is needed, somehow they become free-loading losers, leeching the fine decent taxpaying trolls who think it is mature to villify and demonize them with racially slurred overtones?

There's your first problem. Who said anything about someone "falling in" to a situation where public assistance is needed? THOSE are the people it was DESIGNED FOR. To help people get a leg up when they fell on hard times. NOT a generational lifestyle....which it has become for more than it hasn't. If you say differently? You come to my business, I'll introduce you to a bunch who happily pass the knowledge of living off of others down -some have 5 generations still going strong!

Quote:
Then what about the $92 billion spent corporate subsidies vs. the $59 billion spent on social welfare?
You HONESTLY don't get the difference? Here's a hint: one creates jobs, the other doesn't want a job. EVER. Not then, not now, not ever. Not if college/housing/food/clothing/transportation was free and all they had to do was get up in the morning.

How sheltered of a life do you liberals live who don't know this?

Absolutely amazing.

I guess it's better to live in la-la land 24/7 and pretend everyone living off the system is only there b/c they don't want to be. Time to WAKE up.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-08-2012, 12:11 AM
 
Location: Baltimore, MD / NY
781 posts, read 1,192,114 times
Reputation: 434
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Opinionated View Post
OK so let me understand some of these haughty comments. If someone falls into a situation where public assistance [does that mean of any kind?] is needed, somehow they become free-loading losers, leeching the fine decent taxpaying trolls who think it is mature to villify and demonize them with racially slurred overtones? Then what about the $92 billion spent corporate subsidies vs. the $59 billion spent on social welfare? Looks like about 50% more was handed out to corporate welfare than was given to housing and food stamp programs, at least in 2006. And I'm sure the numbers rose in subsequent years, not to mention all the self-made folks who applied for business and student loans and depended on 'help' from employers and customers to eke out a vocational existence. But I guess none of that matters when you're infallibly degrading lowly people in need.
They really should make an applause smiley.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-08-2012, 12:11 AM
 
Location: Fairfax County, VA
3,719 posts, read 5,677,004 times
Reputation: 1480
My thoughts on this thread:

Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-08-2012, 12:41 AM
 
12,669 posts, read 20,401,653 times
Reputation: 3050
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rabbidave View Post
My daughter who has Lupus,Rheumatoid arthritis, thyroid issues ,three back surgeries and a recent shoulder reconstruction is on food stamps and was fearing she would lose them under Romney.
After a conversation with her I realized that the single factor of food stamps and other medicaid support
put Mr Obama over the top? You can't make this stuff up!
It was an ingenious political strategy for future application and it worked huge!!
I appreciate my daughter food stamps as it gets her through the month.
Her medicaid isn't enough for rent or living independently and with her daughter has to
find friends to live with (basements,over garages etc).
We help with our minimal income.

She should be living with you
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-08-2012, 12:46 AM
 
Location: Imaginary Figment
11,449 posts, read 14,431,534 times
Reputation: 4777
Quote:
Originally Posted by KUchief25 View Post
Whole thing sounds made up to me.
You'd certainly be an expert at that.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-08-2012, 12:51 AM
 
Location: Baltimore, MD / NY
781 posts, read 1,192,114 times
Reputation: 434
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sawdustmaker View Post
Who said anything about someone "falling in" to a situation where public assistance is needed? THOSE are the people it was DESIGNED FOR. To help people get a leg up when they fell on hard times. NOT a generational lifestyle....which it has become for more than it hasn't. If you say differently? You come to my business, I'll introduce you to a bunch who happily pass the knowledge of living off of others down -some have 5 generations still going strong!
Originally, 'a stepping stone' kind of approach. However, policy changes and federal disinvestment in certain types of public assistance over the past several decades have undeniably changed the direction and objectives of these programs. For example, research the history of public housing. It was originally designed to provide temporary housing accommodations to individuals returning from war as well as working class families (not extremely needy families), that just needed a "leg up." Housing developments were separated by race, most projects were White. Key policy changes over time (de-seg of public housing, Brooke Amendment), led to higher-income folks moving out in droves, replaced by extremely needy minority families in their place. Add on cutbacks in federal funding from 1960s on to address basic maintenance, (i.e., Pruitt Igoe), and, public housing, which, at one time was designed to foster upward mobility, transitioned into ill-maintained warehouses for the poor. Which, ended up creating a ripple effect as you eloquently described, intergenerational poverty.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sawdustmaker View Post
You HONESTLY don't get the difference? Here's a hint: one creates jobs, the other doesn't want a job. EVER. Not then, not now, not ever. Not if college/housing/food/clothing/transportation was free and all they had to do was get up in the morning.
I'm not sure what type of work you do, but you are making sweeping generalizations based upon your specific experience(s), that are rather inaccurate and not representative of individuals and families in need as a whole. Just curious if "they" are black, white, or, a mix according to you?

Also, this is a good read:

Think by Numbers » Government Spends More on Corporate Welfare Subsidies than Social Welfare Programs

Lastly, unclear how billions of dollars paid in bonuses to executives of taxpayer-bailed-out companies created jobs--maybe you can clarify.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


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

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