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)
 
Old 04-12-2018, 06:31 AM
 
Location: the very edge of the continent
89,004 posts, read 44,804,275 times
Reputation: 13698

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Magritte25 View Post
Yeah sure. That's it. That's the story.
In fact, it is. The US Census Bureau actually tracked that for a while.

We have a HUGE underclass dependent on means-tested welfare programs, and they're outbreeding those who actually financially support themselves by a rate of 3 to 1. Yes, you read that correctly, 3 to 1. Of course, the more children they bear, the more in means-tested welfare program benefits they collect.

Here are the stats on birth rates when such were tracked and published by the US Census Bureau:
Quote:
"The 1996 Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act (PRWORA) gave states greater flexibility to formulate and implement initiatives to reduce welfare dependency and encourage employment for members of low-income families with children. For the nation, in 2006, 10 years after passage of the Act, the birth rate for women 15 to 50 years old receiving public assistance income in the last 12 months was 155 births per 1,000 women, about three times the rate for women not receiving public assistance (53 births per 1,000 women)."
http://www.census.gov/prod/2008pubs/p20-558.pdf

And, again...
Quote:
"For the nation, the birth rate for women receiving public assistance was 160 births per 1,000 women, almost three times the rate for women not receiving public assistance (56 births per 1,000 women)."
http://www.census.gov/prod/2010pubs/p20-563.pdf

I'm sure you and everyone else can understand that the compounding effect on population growth will make that dependent-class increasingly more impossible to support with freebie welfare handouts. Eventually, the Fed Gov is going to run out of other people's money with which to artificially fund their subsistence.

 
Old 04-12-2018, 07:20 AM
 
Location: the very edge of the continent
89,004 posts, read 44,804,275 times
Reputation: 13698
Many people know what's going on... I'm going to remind everyone of this...


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=luo40WjBKWI
 
Old 04-12-2018, 09:40 AM
 
36,524 posts, read 30,847,571 times
Reputation: 32768
Quote:
Originally Posted by Colorado^ View Post
They don't "get" they TAKE.

I had an additional $200K "redistributed" this year on Obamacare tax to pay for other people's healthcare. I still have to pay for my own health coverage out of pocket. And that's on top of having to pay well over $1M in income tax.
They cant take it if its not given to them.


Join the club. If you are paying in excess of one million dollars in income taxes your better off than us middle class folks making a fraction of what you are and still having to pay for our own healthcare. So there is that.
 
Old 04-12-2018, 09:45 AM
 
36,524 posts, read 30,847,571 times
Reputation: 32768
Quote:
Originally Posted by headingtoDenver View Post
It isn't a matter of soda being cheap, it is a matter of how much of it they buy. SNAP recipients should be limited just like WIC. Soft drinks are the #1 thing purchased and it takes up over 5% of their benefits. That's just for soda and doesn't include other stuff like chips. They want frivolous items, they can buy them with their own money.


https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry...b058ce7aaadea0
Why do you care what items they purchase. Food stamps are to supplement food purchases freeing up money to be used for say items not covered under food stamps.
WIC, OTOH, is specifically for nutritional food designed for healthy pregnancies and babies.
 
Old 04-12-2018, 09:53 AM
 
Location: Florida
7,195 posts, read 5,725,104 times
Reputation: 12342
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quick Enough View Post
"Most who are able-bodied adults word and only a very small percentage get cash welfare benefits.
When was the last time ou were in a gov't housing project or section 8 house?"

I WORKED in those places and can tell you stories you would,'t believe about the WASTE FRAUD AND ABUSE OF programs.

I don't think you know what you are taking about.
You make a lot of assumptions.

I’ll go with government documents and statistics over a personal anecdote from someone who is obviously biased against the poor.
 
Old 04-12-2018, 09:55 AM
 
581 posts, read 456,264 times
Reputation: 2511
I don't have an issue with the elderly or truly disabled receiving food stamps, but I've come to accept there's just segments of our society who are stupid, useless and will always expect the government to play Surrogate Daddy for their poor decision making. Sure, go ahead and have a sixth baby when you already have five you can't afford, do drugs, don't bother to get an education, be a loser because the alternative requires a bit of effort and determination. It sucks our tax dollars have to pay for it, but you can't change people with that sort of mentality.
 
Old 04-12-2018, 10:17 AM
 
56,988 posts, read 35,189,362 times
Reputation: 18824
Quote:
Originally Posted by JAMS14 View Post
It's easy to tell everyone else they should starve when you are sitting on a trust fund.
He ain’t sitting on a trust fund. He’s as broke as the next man. He’s just playing his CD rugged individualist role. It’s phony. Everyone on here will run to get a welfare check if times get bad enough.

Don’t be fooled by these posts and posters. It’s a ruse
 
Old 04-12-2018, 10:26 AM
 
59,029 posts, read 27,290,738 times
Reputation: 14274
Quote:
Originally Posted by AnotherTouchOfWhimsy View Post
You make a lot of assumptions.

I’ll go with government documents and statistics over a personal anecdote from someone who is obviously biased against the poor.
"I’ll go with government documents and statistics"

If you want to keep believing stats from an organization that is WRONG most of the time, that is YOUR problem.
 
Old 04-12-2018, 10:31 AM
 
Location: Philadelphia
11,998 posts, read 12,931,071 times
Reputation: 8365
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wayland Woman View Post
Cheese has been included to help the dairy farmers stay in business.

I wish Trump would order the same kind of study of Pentagon and military spending.
Exactly -Since World War II, the United States military has killed or helped kill some 20 million people, overthrown at least 36 governments, interfered in at least 84 foreign elections, attempted to assassinate over 50 foreign leaders, and dropped bombs on people in over 30 countries. TRILLIONS and TRILLIONS of tax payer money funneled into the hands of traitorous war profiteers, politicians and globalist bankers.

The United States is responsible for the deaths of 5 million people in Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia, and over 1 million just since 2003 in Iraq.

For the past almost 16 years, the United States has been systematically destroying a region of the globe, bombing Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, Libya, Somalia, Yemen, and Syria, not to mention the Philippines. The United States has “special forces” operating in two-thirds of the world’s countries and non-special forces in three-quarters of them.



Welfare spending is a tiny drop in the ocean compared to the disgusting war profiteering and military industrial complex that has destroyed our country from within and warped the minds of our citizens. At least welfare is spent on American citizens and doesn't needlessly kill our used and abused young men and women in the military. It is disgusting and it never ends. Investigate and slash the budgets of DOD, CIA, NSA, TSA, Homeland Security, NRO, etc., etc. NOW! Support our troops and bring them home to defend our own country and borders for once in history.





"WAR IS A RACKET
It always has been. It is possibly the oldest, easily the most profitable, surely the most vicious. It is the only one international in scope. It is the only one in which the profits are reckoned in dollars and the losses in lives."
-The honorable Major General Smedley D. Butler-most decorated American soldier in US history.

http://davidswanson.org/warlist/

Last edited by 2e1m5a; 04-12-2018 at 11:31 AM..
 
Old 04-12-2018, 11:28 AM
 
Location: Living rent free in your head
42,849 posts, read 26,259,081 times
Reputation: 34057
Quote:
Originally Posted by SparklesNShine View Post
I don't have an issue with the elderly or truly disabled receiving food stamps, but I've come to accept there's just segments of our society who are stupid, useless and will always expect the government to play Surrogate Daddy for their poor decision making. Sure, go ahead and have a sixth baby when you already have five you can't afford, do drugs, don't bother to get an education, be a loser because the alternative requires a bit of effort and determination. It sucks our tax dollars have to pay for it, but you can't change people with that sort of mentality.
So, if you aren't elderly or disabled but you are out of work...what then? If you think people who don't have food will sit quietly on the sidewalk and wait to die you are dead wrong, if they are desperate enough they will take what they need, especially for their children. That is one of the reasons we give out social benefits, to avoid having rioting or a civil war like the French Revolution.

All of your poor shaming / poor blaming is just nonsense. Very few people have 6 kids. The average family size of a person on welfare is the same as those who do not receive benefits.

In 2015, children made up three-quarters of TANF recipients. Of families receiving TANF, half (50 percent) had one child, and a bit more than one-quarter had two children. In many cases, the child is the only beneficiary in the household, because the parent is ineligible, or the child does not live with a parent; these cases accounted for 49 percent of all TANF cases in the 2015 fiscal year. As of fiscal year 2015, of adult TANF recipients, four percent were younger than 20, and another 50 percent between 20 and 29.
https://www.childtrends.org/indicato...lfareafdctanf/

“Average family size was the same (3.7 persons), whether or not a family received assistance,”
https://thinkprogress.org/your-assum...-22c03293de62/
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.


Closed Thread


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