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.
Johnson launched the war on poverty. DC Republicans have launched a war on the poor. That's a slight difference.
Tell that to the dems controlled inner cities in NJ for many years. The only thing that's changed for them is the date. Otherwise, crime is up, poverty is up and they're still voting the same fools in office and expect change.
I see our Republican friends in DC have gotten all hot and bothered about food stamps, Medicaid, WIC, and other social safety net programs helping poor folks. It's almost as if they are waging a war on the poor. There's this radical socialist who also believes there's a war on the poor.
I think the article and this post does a disservice to discussion - it merely leads to pointless and often half-truth accusations. Instead of taking a few select phrases and quotes from the speech to try and distort and inflame we need to work together.
The majority in both parties want a social safety net, period.
The social safety net isn't that efficient and has fraud - for the good of the country it needs to be tweeked at the very least - even Obama in 2008 said so.
Let's find a way to not reduce benefits, while making it more efficient and cutting the fraud out.
Maybe if we talk to each other we can find common ground instead of using polarizing gimmicks.
I think the article and this post does a disservice to discussion - it merely leads to pointless and often half-truth accusations. Instead of taking a few select phrases and quotes from the speech to try and distort and inflame we need to work together.
The majority in both parties want a social safety net, period.
The social safety net isn't that efficient and has fraud - for the good of the country it needs to be tweeked at the very least - even Obama in 2008 said so.
Let's find a way to not reduce benefits, while making it more efficient and cutting the fraud out.
Maybe if we talk to each other we can find common ground instead of using polarizing gimmicks.
The question I think is....a safety net at what level? And the GOP has made it pretty clear they want it set at slavery, and the liberals want it set at "human with respect".
The question I think is....a safety net at what level? And the GOP has made it pretty clear they want it set at slavery, and the liberals want it set at "human with respect".
Take of those rose colored glasses and step away from the table.
The question I think is....a safety net at what level? And the GOP has made it pretty clear they want it set at slavery, and the liberals want it set at "human with respect".
I think you missed the point about not making up inflaming nonsense.
Republicans tend to not want to see people choosing to live in the social safety net. They feel that how it is currently set there is a disincentive to work often. And this is rue at least in a few cases. No rational person wants to see slavery brought back. So let's not make up crap.
If we worked on better means testing and catching fraud -- most Republicans would be happy as it would address the above...while not cutting, but rather keeping the same benefits would make the Democrats happy. Net effect, it would help our budget, which is growing rapidly with entitlements among other things.
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.
