165
Limiting welfare to the truly needy : Swingers Discussion 212248101
Busy Swingers Forum - everything you always wanted to know about swingers.
SwingLifeStyle Swingers Personal Ads. | SwingLifeStyle Swingers Clubs

Busy Swingers Forum

Everything you always wanted to know about swingers.

Create A Free Account

HELP
FORUMSGeneral DiscussionsPoliticsLimiting welfare to the truly needy
TOPIC: Limiting welfare to the truly needy
Created by: Fun_Ahoy
Original Starting post for this thread:
Some people say that the "safety net" should be there only for people who are making an effort, and not for those who don't work. An interesting article (partially copied below) points out that during the first three years of the recession, $150 billion of extra spending went mostly to the working poor above the basic poverty level. (The official "poverty level" is about $11,000 for a single person and about twice that for a family of four). 

The article goes on to say that we could save about $265 billion annually if we just restricted the major safety net programs (TANF, food stamps, Medicaid, earned income tax credits, and subsidized housing) to those at or below the poverty level. 

Presumably a fair amount of that spending will recede on its own as we recover from the recession and employment/wages begin to grow again more strongly. But the question remains. 

Should the lower middle class (the working poor) be cut out? Would doing so be a disincentive for people moving from welfare to work? Would taking that money out of the economy diminish aggregate demand to the extent it would adversely impact the economy?

Here's the first section of the article:

Restoring a True Safety Net DAVID J. ARMOR and SONIA SOUSA

The Obama years have seen unprecedented growth in spending on what used to be known as the federal "anti-poverty" or "welfare" programs: means-tested initiatives to provide food, health insurance, housing benefits, and income support to the poor. These programs certainly grew during the Bush administration, with spending increasing by a total of about $100 billion over that eight-year period ($12.5 billion per year in 2010 dollars). But that spending increased another $150 billion in just the first two years of the Obama administration.  

The scale of these increases is staggering. In three years, from 2008 through 2010, total annual spending on welfare programs (in 2010 dollars) increased from $475 billion to $666 billion — a 40% increase after accounting for inflation. At a combined annual cost of two-thirds of a trillion dollars, these programs are now on the same scale as the defense budget ($693 billion), Social Security ($700 billion), and Medicare ($551 billion).

Some of these spending increases were justified by the deep recession that began in December 2007. Indeed, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA), or the stimulus program, specifically targeted poverty programs for greatly expanded funding. And, as in the recessions of the early 1980s and early '90s, the poverty rate climbed during the 2008 recession — to 15% from an average of about 12.5% during the mid-2000s. But this rise in poverty does not explain most of the recent increases in spending on anti-poverty programs.

Rather, it is the dramatic expansion of eligibility for these programs — spreading their benefits well into the middle class — that has driven the explosion of spending. Today, more than half of the benefits allocated through programs we think of as "anti-poverty" efforts actually go to people above the poverty line as defined by the U.S. Census Bureau. As a result, our poverty programs — once justified and defended as a safety net for Americans truly in need — exist, increasingly, to make life more comfortable for the middle class. --------------- Here's a link to the chart of proposed savings if these benefits were limited to the official poverty level or to alternative percentages above it:

nationalaffairs. com/imgLib/20120921_Armor_Table4LARGE. jpg

GoTo Page: 1 2 3 4 5
 1 to 10 of 44   End
User Details are only visible to members.
Robert you really don't know what a tech makes if they are skilled. I make twice that as does most of the 16 guys that works in the dealership I work in.We all have houses and some very nice toys that we have earned.

Berryville VA
Username hidden
(1750 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
Vacp:

The median income of an automotive electician is around 35k... That is not good pay, It doesn't build or buy a home. It barely pays for the cost of living for a family of four and allows for no emergency spending.

35k is the upper echolons of poverty in the US.

Hazle Township PA
Username hidden
(7344 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
Robert I have helped many people through life. By teaching them a job skill that they can make a good living and provide for their families.I am also involved in a lot of charity work to help the local needy kids and the elderly. So yes I do help people a lot. My hard work in my past has allowed me to take the time to help the people who need it.

Berryville VA
Username hidden
(1750 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
Vacp.

Ah yet you open it daily and speak uselessly about growing your personal self and never another's self.

Hazle Township PA
Username hidden
(7344 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
"Age never ensure intellect, wisdom or knowledge."

You totally missed my point. Not surprising.

Belle Chasse LA
Username hidden
(10774 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
But age has taught us to keep our mouth shut when we have no clue what we are talking about.

Berryville VA
Username hidden
(1750 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
Fun:

Age never ensure intellect, wisdom or knowledge.

Hazle Township PA
Username hidden
(7344 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
"Get this through that skull of yours."

Instructions from young Robert. That's rich. And truly needy.

Belle Chasse LA
Username hidden
(10774 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
Big:

Get this through that skull of yours.

It is the responsibility of the strong to protect the weak, to provide a living wage which grows the national economy.

Social welfare exist only because you fail to force the wealthy to do their duty to their countrymen and because of your failing, the many do it for you by means of the federal government.

If you don't love your nation enough to ensure that every man who works is paid a living wage, that is your own personal problem, learn to enjoy the socialist ideals you support with your inaction against the greed of the wealthy who created the need for socialism.

Hazle Township PA
Username hidden
(7344 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
welfare,foodstamps.ssi,ss,housing for the poor.are all soicalist programs.as such.we are doomed by them.they bleed the workers for more money.to pay what socialist want so they can spend more money,that tear down more people and force them in to provrty.so more taxes to take a way more money form people to pay for more progams that demand more money that force more people in to proverty.socialism does not work,it can not work,it will not work.for it to work there has to be enough people to pay in to it.ther are not enough rich people to support it no matter how many rich people you steal form.socialism is a ponzia scheme.the only ones that benafit form it are the ones who cheat everybody else and are at the top.everybody else LOSSES.the winners are the top 1%.you can kick dirt,piss,shit ,cry,or fuck a tree,it will not change the facts.it is impossiable to work..............BS

Kingston TN
Username hidden
(1991 posts)
GoTo Page: 1 2 3 4 5
 1 to 10 of 44   End
TOPIC: Limiting welfare to the truly needy