Quote:Disagree the fact that it's talked about more and more is evidence the tide is turning. At some point it'll be either a fair tax consumption or full blown socialism which way we go is 50/50.
fair tax has been talked about for years and there's literally 0 chance it happens
Just want to inform everyone, we've been a socialist country for a very very long time now...
As Bob Marley would say, "don't worry, about a thing. Cuz every little things, gonna be all right"
Quote:Just want to inform everyone, we've been a socialist country for a very very long time now...
As Bob Marley would say, "don't worry, about a thing. Cuz every little things, gonna be all right"
Yes we have, and the natural results of that socialism are showing in our society as we move closer and closer to collapse.
Quote:Lol, are you new to America and it's labor market?
Come on, man... you know better than this.
You know you're right. In just some stupid kid that saved money to work for himself.
Quote:Just want to inform everyone, we've been a socialist country for a very very long time now...
As Bob Marley would say, "don't worry, about a thing. Cuz every little things, gonna be all right"
No, we have been an overly increasing social democracy (high emphasis on public welfare and social programs) but we are not yetsocialist (state ownership of the means of production)
Except for the fact that alot of social programs have been getting cut since Reagan....
Including Clinton's gutting of unemployment benefits!!
Man, I get the feeling that you guys just eat the tripe they feed you without any critical thought, sometimes...
I mean, you're all clearly very smart people, I have the best online arguments here. But I can't believe how far off we all can be in terms of what should be facts that we all agree upon.
Quote:You know you're right. In just some stupid kid that saved money to work for himself.
Awe, don't get offended. I was just being a smart aleck...
But let me ask you, have you not noticed the number of applicants are staggering for every job opening?
It's basically that way here in New Mexico...
Quote:Just, wow. I'm so happy you were able to find someone whom you despise that you can then use as a sweeping generalization for all workers and "liberals".
You bring nothing to this conversation but an anecdote about a woman that you don't even know very well, but are more then happy to pass judgement on.
You're a fascinating individual.
I never said that I despise her, and for your information I happen to know her very well. She happens to be a very good friend of my wife's and I even wrote her resume for her to get the position that she has.
I'll give you another example that I have seen in my own workplace. A fellow technician that I worked with (he actually used to be my supervisor) was earning very good money. I'm not talking a lower wage, I'm talking close to 6 figures (at the time in 2001'ish). He was divorced with a child that lived with him, and married a divorced woman with two children. He would constantly come to work and tell me about his electricity or gas being shut off at his home because he was behind on his bill... while he sipped his Starbucks coffee and then proceeds to tell me how they went out for sushi for dinner (I used to work the overnight shift). He also commonly talked about bouncing checks and/or "floating" checks using those payday loan kind of places. Again, this is someone making $75k+ in Jacksonville which is a pretty good wage.
They decided that they wanted to have a child together, and he used to complain a lot about
Medicaid while they were going through the pregnancy.
Now I really don't care about his poor life decisions, but what I do have a problem with is someone that makes far more than a "living wage" using government assistance. When someone that certainly has the means but refuses to act responsibly has the "need" to use my tax dollars, I have a big problem with that.
By the way, he ended up getting fired. Why? Because he had a horrible credit history (among other things) which will get a security clearance revoked in a heartbeat. I eventually took over and held his job for a few years until I moved up and moved on to better things.
My point is, that yes there are times when people need help. I don't have a problem with that. However, far too many people are too dependent on government to do for them what they should be doing for themselves.
Quote:Awe, don't get offended. I was just being a smart aleck...
But let me ask you, have you not noticed the number of applicants are staggering for every job opening?
It's basically that way here in New Mexico...
I wasn't being offended I was being sarcastic. Self employment has to be a viable option for the economy to function.
Quote:I never said that I despise her, and for your information I happen to know her very well. She happens to be a very good friend of my wife's and I even wrote her resume for her to get the position that she has.
I'll give you another example that I have seen in my own workplace. A fellow technician that I worked with (he actually used to be my supervisor) was earning very good money. I'm not talking a lower wage, I'm talking close to 6 figures (at the time in 2001'ish). He was divorced with a child that lived with him, and married a divorced woman with two children. He would constantly come to work and tell me about his electricity or gas being shut off at his home because he was behind on his bill... while he sipped his Starbucks coffee and then proceeds to tell me how they went out for sushi for dinner (I used to work the overnight shift). He also commonly talked about bouncing checks and/or "floating" checks using those payday loan kind of places. Again, this is someone making $75k+ in Jacksonville which is a pretty good wage.
They decided that they wanted to have a child together, and he used to complain a lot about Medicaid while they were going through the pregnancy.
Now I really don't care about his poor life decisions, but what I do have a problem with is someone that makes far more than a "living wage" using government assistance. When someone that certainly has the means but refuses to act responsibly has the "need" to use my tax dollars, I have a big problem with that.
By the way, he ended up getting fired. Why? Because he had a horrible credit history (among other things) which will get a security clearance revoked in a heartbeat. I eventually took over and held his job for a few years until I moved up and moved on to better things.
My point is, that yes there are times when people need help. I don't have a problem with that. However, far too many people are too dependent on government to do for them what they should be doing for themselves.
He was commiting fraud in that case because Medicaid wouldn't be available for someone making north of 75k.
Quote:Are you sure? This is the government we're talking about. There's probably some special Medicaid program buried in section MCMLXX on page 12,459 to help people who are having trouble conceiving.
In florida they didn't expand medicaid, the poverty level for a family of 5 currently is $28,440 annually.
https://aspe.hhs.gov/poverty-guidelines
pregnancy medicaid allows up to 192% of the poverty level for coverage. which means the coverage for a family of 5 for pregnancy medicaid would end at (1.92 x $28,440) $54,528. Even a family of 6 or 7 making 75k a year is beyond the income limits.
https://aspe.hhs.gov/poverty-guidelines
So if he was really making 75k a year and collecting medicaid he was committing fraud, most likely they didn't actually get married and on paper his new wife was only claiming her income or no income. Either way someone making 75k a year was never the intention of medicaid but that's the problem with state funded welfare, it's easily abused, it's easily cheated, and there's never any consequences. Which is why I advocate localizing welfare as much as possible, that way there's an incentive for communities to turn in and report fraudulent abusers.
Quote:Yes we have, and the natural results of that socialism are showing in our society as we move closer and closer to collapse.
As has been said by every disaffected voter for the past 150 years.
I don't think most Americans would recognize socialism if it bit them in the butt.
Quote:Eight years of Obama's control of the economy. Eight more coming up with Hillary. No recovery in sight. Is anyone having fun yet?
<a class="bbc_url" href='https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Aiay8I5IPB8'>https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Aiay8I5IPB8</a>
Quote:As has been said by every disaffected voter for the past 150 years.
I don't think most Americans would recognize socialism if it bit them in the butt.
Well yeah, that's why so many clamor for it.
Quote:Especially when your "facts" are just your repeating of lies by leftist pundits.
Clinton reduced welfare payments (by setting a time limit on them), not unemployment benefits.
Social programs aren't being cut. Obama did away with Clinton's time limit. The number of people on food stamps is at its highest in history. Social Security disability payouts (essentially a Federal giveaway since it's not accounted for in what people pay into the system) is also at the highest levels in history. More people are included in Medicaid (i.e. taxpayer-paid healthcare for the poor, don't confuse it with Medicare) than at any time in the past, another government giveaway.
Thank you for the correction, it was tanf, not unemployment benefits that Clinton cut.
And who's being fed lies now? The tanf waivers are exemptions that don't gut the Clinton cuts, to the maximum time you can be on it. And states get to decide whether or not they want to extend an applicant!
And actually a simple Google search will show that unemployment benefits have also been cut, very recently...
Now, what you are talking about in regards to more people using food stamps and other social programs is based on the economy and the policies that began with Reagan, Bush, and Clinton which have continued on into the 2000's. To blame the results of supply side economics and free trade only on Obama is laughable and dishonest.
Quote:He was commiting fraud in that case because Medicaid wouldn't be available for someone making north of 75k.
Quote:In florida they didn't expand medicaid, the poverty level for a family of 5 currently is $28,440 annually. https://aspe.hhs.gov/poverty-guidelines
pregnancy medicaid allows up to 192% of the poverty level for coverage. which means the coverage for a family of 5 for pregnancy medicaid would end at (1.92 x $28,440) $54,528. Even a family of 6 or 7 making 75k a year is beyond the income limits. https://aspe.hhs.gov/poverty-guidelines
So if he was really making 75k a year and collecting medicaid he was committing fraud, most likely they didn't actually get married and on paper his new wife was only claiming her income or no income. Either way someone making 75k a year was never the intention of medicaid but that's the problem with state funded welfare, it's easily abused, it's easily cheated, and there's never any consequences. Which is why I advocate localizing welfare as much as possible, that way there's an incentive for communities to turn in and report fraudulent abusers.
There is no doubt in my mind that he was "using the system" so to speak (I wonder which other Presidential candidate does something similar?). I don't know if he was married "on paper" to the woman, that's just what he always said. Now that I think about it though, he did always mention getting a pretty good size tax "refund". Usually he would blow a significant amount of it on a new computer or they would take a trip to Orlando and some of the theme parks.
Regardless, I do acknowledge that the cases that I've seen with my own two eyes are probably not "typical" of most that
need assistance, but it sure does highlight the need to reign in the system. There is far too much abuse that costs me, someone that actually has to pay taxes.
There are also far too many that have come to
depend on the temporary help that is government assistance as being a permanent situation for them. The problem is, they seem to think that government is their "ATM machine" and they don't realize that the very people that have to fill that machine are the very ones that could/would employ them.