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.
Maybe the welfare person is only idle whilst between jobs.
.
One in 50 perhaps. Until 1990s Welfare Reform,we had one generation after another mooching. We still need to cut back the duration of Welfare more. EITC should have a cap both on lifetime subsidy per household, plus years claimed.
And a lot of corporate bosses who want to call all the shots and not be dictated to by a union labor contract.
Absolutely. Like the CEO of Hostess whose salary was tripled right before they asked the workers for further wage reductions. Of course they want to call the shots.
One in 50 perhaps. Until 1990s Welfare Reform,we had one generation after another mooching. We still need to cut back the duration of Welfare more. EITC should have a cap both on lifetime subsidy per household, plus years claimed.
Maybe a cap on corporate welfare and bailouts too. Since that costs taxpayers a lot more than TANF does.
One company alone, AIG, received more than $150 billion during the bailout--more than was spent on TANF in the 26 yrs from 1990 to 2006.
Maybe the welfare person is only idle whilst between jobs.
yet she/he is labled scrounger whilst the idle consultant is paid mega bonus.
One rule for the rich as they say.
Most top consultants work close to 80 hours/week. A friend of mine who is a consultant for Bain worked 93 hours last week. Do you have any clue what you are talking about?
Maybe a cap on corporate welfare and bailouts too. Since that costs taxpayers a lot more than TANF does.
One company alone, AIG, received more than $150 billion during the bailout--more than was spent on TANF in the 26 yrs from 1990 to 2006.
how about elliminat corporate bailout completely
why should the taxpayer bailout a failed company...be it an insurance company, a bank, or a car company
all the money we spend of stimulas and bailout, we could have put a solar electrical system on every single family house in america...saving american homeowners REAL CASH as they would not need to pay some utility company 100-300 every single money...also saving the enviroment by not needing as much coal to power the powerplants feeding electricity to homes
but no liberals chose to bail out failed banks, failed car companies, and tried to impose a carbon tax on the people
Maybe a cap on corporate welfare and bailouts too. Since that costs taxpayers a lot more than TANF does.
One company alone, AIG, received more than $150 billion during the bailout--more than was spent on TANF in the 26 yrs from 1990 to 2006.
I have no issue with corp incentives tied to objective measures, such as FTEs or capital investments.
I do agree we need to watch the next AIG implode. We handled Lehman correctly, allowing the market to determine on its own whether they should exist or cease to exist. We should have followed that same principle at AIG as well as GM and Chrysler.
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.
