Stupidity baffles me!!!

[iman77]

http://youtu.be/s9TUcyEPbzk

How does welfare create jobs? I guess like spending money reduces debt?

We have record high numbers of recipients of welfare, so shouldn't we have record high numbers of job creation if this notion holds true?

Somebody has some splainin' to do.

[gfejunkie]

Stupidity... Probably.

Mental disorder... Most definitely.

[Takeshi Miike]

The short answer here is that the existence or non-existence of jobs is based on demands for goods and services produced in this country. If you give money to folks who live a hand to mouth existence, they will most surely spend the money, thus adding to demand for goods and services. Whether you like that answer or not is immaterial, it's just the truth. I'm personally not a big fan of handouts, but am not willfully ignorant enough to deny that demand, not supply, drives economic growth.

[iman77]

All they are doing is creating a welfare state so these moochers will have to continue to vote for them. They want them to have the mentality that if they don't vote for pro welfare politicians, they might have to go to work.

Food is an essential, not something we buy out of luxury. You don't think that, if forced, some of these people would get a job to buy food?

Plus, I would say that you negate the gains based on the principal that the worker in the grocery store would take home more money if he didn't have deductions from his paycheck that support the food stamper. If the workers see a net gain of .05 cents on a dollar and pay .06 cents in taxes, how has the working man benefitted?

And, what about all the buildings, computers, man hours, paper, stamps, and everything it takes to administer food stamps? How much do you think that costs or adds to the national debt? Shit ain't free.

Don't believe this bologna man. You are smarter than that.

[DTorrchia]

So then by that reasoning, as Iman77 rightly pointed out, the government should simply give all of us money and we'll be swimming in jobs and productivity because demand drives economic growth? Ahmm, the numbers from the Stimulus don't seem to substantiate that theory.
I'd really like to see proof where for every $1.00 handed out in welfare, $1.80 goes into the economy. Did they take into account....oh, I don't know, let's say drug use among welfare recipients? I suppose you could argue that if the government gives $20.00 to the welfare recipient and the welfare recipient buys a rock of crack cocaine which leads the crack cocaine dealer to buy a pair of Nike's or a gold chain, well, yeah, I guess in a way it's "stimulating" our economy.
Really?! Is this what we've come down to in our country?? More welfare for more "jobs creation" and economic stimulus?? We're in deeper trouble than I thought if that's the best solution we can come up with.

[Yssup Rider]

Similarly, I'd like to see proof of how "trickle down" economics and the corporate welfare it promotes results in job/economic growth.

Seems to me that it's led to the decline of the middle class and the end of America as a manufacturer, not to mention runaway unemployment, even right here in Texas! (look it up).

But I guess if you've got enough money to play the market, you could come out OK.

IMHO, it's a lot cheaper for us as a nation to take care of our poor than it is to take care of our rich. At least with the poor, there's a chance they'll return the favor one day.

[iman77]

You really think that the people who are taking advantage of the system are going to repay it someday? My left nut has more gumption than 10 of those moochers put together.

Trickle down economics wasn't the perfect answer, neither was subprime lending, welfare, or a bunch of other stuff. BOTH parties have got us where we are. Take off your lib blinders and be an American, not somebody driven by Republican or Democrat beliefs.

The sub prime housing was started by JIMMY CARTER in the Community Re-Investment Act, look it up. When there was not enough sub prime loans being made, Citi bank was sued to make them start issuing them. Guess who one of those lawyers was, Barack Hussein Obama. Look it up and know the truth.

And, wasn't George Wallace a Democrap too? Remember his support of violence against black people to prevent desegregation. I never understood why so many black people drool over Democrats when the blue dog southern Democrats did more to stop desegregation. They were flat out racists terrorists.

[Billy_Saul]

Originally Posted by iman77

And, wasn't George Wallace a Democrap too? Remember his support of violence against black people to prevent desegregation. I never understood why so many black people drool over Democrats when the blue dog southern Democrats did more to stop desegregation. They were flat out racists terrorists.

"I shall never fight in the armed forces with a Negro by my side ... Rather I should die a thousand times, and see Old Glory trampled in the dirt never to rise again, than to see this beloved land of ours become degraded by race mongrels, a throwback to the blackest specimen from the wilds."— Robert C. Byrd, in a letter to Sen. Theodore Bilbo (D-MS),

Byrd, a KKK member at the time; went on to serve 51 years in the senate (D-WV)

[DTorrchia]

Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

Similarly, I'd like to see proof of how "trickle down" economics and the corporate welfare it promotes results in job/economic growth.

Seems to me that it's led to the decline of the middle class and the end of America as a manufacturer, not to mention runaway unemployment, even right here in Texas! (look it up).

But I guess if you've got enough money to play the market, you could come out OK.

IMHO, it's a lot cheaper for us as a nation to take care of our poor than it is to take care of our rich. At least with the poor, there's a chance they'll return the favor one day.

This is what gets me. Instead of simply admitting that this kind of thinking is wrong (more welfare=more jobs) you try to justify it by bringing up "trickle down economics". When the Agriculture Secretary was asked what he plans on doing about 1 in 7 Americans being on Welfare, his answer is to justify why welfare is a good thing. I don't have an issue with "taking care of our poor" when our poor show that they don't want to remain that way and that they are not abusing the system. That doesn't mean I want MORE Americans to go out and jump on the Welfare system. Obama's Agriculture Secretary was ignorant to make such a remark. Instead of defending him and this policy of more handouts=more jobs, we should be looking for a way to reduce the number of Americans who need welfare. We should cut off the ones who are obviously abusing the system and find a way to get them to work. That in the long run will help our economy, not this sorry excuse of a "stimulus".

[iman77]

Preach on brotha!

Did anyone see the article about the British lady who got herself some bolt ons by saving up her welfare money. She said that she was a good mother to her 5 children and was using the welfare system to make sure her children had all the things they need. She said she "deserved" the bolt ons because 5 pregnancies took a toll on her body. By the way, that was with 4 daddies.

What about the 30,000 higher education students in MI that had their food stamps taken from them. They were abusing the system because they could. MI authorities stated that the state was being cheated out of $72 mil a year by the students. If you can afford college, you can afford food. Ramen noodles, sammiches, and cereal aren't that expensive.

Have you seen the food stamp receipt that is floating around the net. A man found it discarded in the parking lot of a grocery store in Menomine, WI. 4 cold water lobster tails, 2 porter house steaks, and fixins. 14 items totaling >$140.

Look at liberalism v. conservatism. Kalifornia v. Texas. New York . Florida. What works, and what doesn't?

I know alot of people don't like Perry, but he said some very poinant things. "People are not subjects of the government, government is subject of the people." Straight out of the Constution. "I will work everday to make the government as insignificant in your lives as possible." "I don't support gay marriage, but it isn't any of my business if two people want to do that."

You see, government wants to regulate who can get married, abortion, how much fuel our cars use and too much other shit. I don't agree with abortion or gay marriage, but if people want to do it that is their business. Niether I nor the government should have any say in what decisions people feel are right for themselves.

Government, butt out of our lives and let Americans prosper. If someone doesn't, it't their own damn fault. Who needs Social Security? If you get educated about how to save and invest in school, you won't need the government to do it for you. If you don't save and don't have any money, that's your fucking fault not mine. Social programs are killing us!

[Yssup Rider]

Originally Posted by iman77

I know alot of people don't like Perry, but he said some very poinant things.

Yeah, like accusing the Fed of treason.

Rather than whining about the people on welfare and removing government from our lives (how utterly ludicrous that is), why not explain how the alternative to that has EVER stimulated the economy or generated jobs.

I do NOT believe in unjustified welfare. That goes for the rich as well as the poor. I know a lot of folks who grew up in Canada and worked half a year so they could get unemployment benefits for the other half. I always thought that was bullshit.

However, I believe very strongly in welfare-to-work programs. I believe in the New Deal, and wish to hell that the lame-ass Congress would turn its attention to jobs. I believe in Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid... for ALL Americans!

Originally Posted by iman77
And, wasn't George Wallace a Democrap too? Remember his support of violence against black people to prevent desegregation. I never understood why so many black people drool over Democrats when the blue dog southern Democrats did more to stop desegregation. They were flat out racists terrorists.

George Wallace was a Democrat, as was the entire South back then. He also formed a third party so he could get onto the ballot in 1968. Abraham Lincoln was a Republican. Worst race riots at the time were in the North. What's your point? Do you even have one?

I suggest you go to the LBJ Library and check out the exhibit now on display. Excellent historical perspective on the radical groups of the 60s, including the Panthers, the Free Speech Movement, the States Rights Movement (Wallace's group), the John Birch Society (who were too radical for the Republicans of the time) and yes, the Moral Majority. Of course, that would require a LOT of reading, but it's worth it. And just might improve your posting.

Oh, and by the way, they were YELLOW DOGS not Blue Dogs. LOL!

I think we've found a NEW voice of reason. Rally round the flag, boys!

[iman77]

"Four score and seven years ago, our fathers brought forth on this continent a new nation, conceived in liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that ALL men are created equal." where is the racism in that?

You are worse than Ed Schulz

[Yssup Rider]

Whoever called Lincoln a racist?

What is it that you do, imam?

[kingorpawn]

"The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money [to spend]"
Margret Thatcher

[Guest040616]

Originally Posted by iman77

Stupidity baffles me!!!

Oh excuse me, I thought this thread was about Gov. Good Hair!