Americans Are Mistaken About Who Gets Welfare

Cypress said:
The word welfare is a loaded word, and is carefully constructed to convey a certain ideology and even, racist mindset.

No idea why social security and medicare are not considered "welfare", i.e., a public service funded by taxes and available to people when they qualify. It is a pure form of welfare, dare we even say a variant of your garden vareity European Socialist-Kenyan-Marxist social welfare programs.

I am sure it is probably because nobody want to offend old people, and even a lot of republicans collect this kind of "welfare".
Click to expand...

Big difference in someone receiving SS/Medicare vs. someone receving food stamps and other social programs. If you can explain the difference, you will have refuted your own claim. If you can't, perhaps it's because you're as lazy and uneducated as the 1 in every 3 1/2 blacks that use food stamps.
 
Timshel said:
I am not familiar with it, but I don't think know of any reason to believe that AA or Great Society programs slowed their progress. Our current social safety net programs are too paternalistic and could be better, but I don't think they are doing more harm than good to beneficiaries.

Certainly it is not doing as much harm as continuing discrimination within the criminal justice system.

http://projects.heraldtribune.com/bias/sentencing/
Click to expand...


http://walterewilliams.com/the-welfare-states-legacy/

Those social welfare programs are creating a society were the government is taking the place of the father. Nothing Great about that.
 
Cypress said:
Word salad. Entitlement. Welfare. Don't care about any alleged distinction.

I have never been interested in the attempts of politicians, message boarders, or anyone else to word-smith ideas in the service of selling them.

The constitution refers to the "general welfare", and I am pretty sure they had a broader concept of that than food stamps or unemployment benefits.

Conservatives constantly wail about the European socialist "welfare" states, and we know exactly what they are talking about: the broad array of publically funded services and programs that provide a societal benefit that is generally feasibly unavailable through for-profit corporations.

I am pretty sure if you went to your CATO websites, they would have decades of reports, opinion columns, and studies referring to Medicaid and Social Security as hallmarks of European style "welfare".

The way the word "welfare" is used by the right is carefully calculated, and I think we all know that.

As for the budget, half going to social programs, healthcare, education, does not bother me in the least. This is not 1844 anymore, and modern civilized nations have decided we have a different set of standards today, than the Kaiser of Germany or the Tsar of Russia had in 1855.
Click to expand...

The word social safety net is used by the left in a carefully calculated way. They try to make out what is nothing more than a leech and freeloader program sound like it isn't exactly that.

If you think helping someone unwilling to do for themselves is such a good thing, why don't you spend half of your personal income providing for them. To spend money on someone unwilling to do for him/herself is a waste of money.
 
CFM said:
Not talking about divorce and neither did the article.
Click to expand...


Okay, single motherhood and children outside of marriage are up too across the board (well not lately, but relative to the 70s and before.... nope welfare is not the biggest factor, maybe not even a factor).

CFM said:
Keep making excuses and continue to get the same results for those about which the article addressed.
Click to expand...

I am not making any excuses.

I have read Walter on this topic plenty of times. He's not quite right. Yes, INDIVIDUALS can do better. SOME are strong enough to overcome no matter what we throw at them. But why should we throw things at them, like you wish to do? Why is it necessary for you to demean them as a group or as individuals? Do you think that helps them in some way? Or is it just about you claiming unearned credit for the achievements of other in your tribe? What's your end goal?

When discussing the group, as those like you pushing identity politics are doing, you have stopped talking about an individual tree and started talking about a forest. In that context those past wrongs WILL skew the numbers. It's not even up for debate and it is not an excuse. It's a fact/phenomenon that has been observed and measured repeatedly.
 
Timshel said:
Okay, single motherhood and children outside of marriage are up too across the board (well not lately, but relative to the 70s and before.... nope welfare is not the biggest factor, maybe not even a factor).



I am not making any excuses.

I have read Walter on this topic plenty of times. He's not quite right. Yes, INDIVIDUALS can do better. SOME are strong enough to overcome no matter what we throw at them. But why should we throw things at them, like you wish to do? Why is it necessary for you to demean them as a group or as individuals? Do you think that helps them in some way? Or is it just about you claiming unearned credit for the achievements of other in your tribe? What's your end goal?

When discussing the group, as those like you pushing identity politics are doing, you have stopped talking about an individual tree and started talking about a forest. In that context those past wrongs WILL skew the numbers. It's not even up for debate and it is not an excuse. It's a fact/phenomenon that has been observed and measured repeatedly.
Click to expand...

There are studies going back decades showing AFDC was causing marriages to break up. I can't speak to all the details of the program today and if they've altered the incentives of the program to change it but it definitely had an effect previously.
 
cawacko said:
There are studies going back decades showing AFDC was causing marriages to break up. I can't speak to all the details of the program today and if they've altered the incentives of the program to change it but it definitely had an effect previously.
Click to expand...

Oh please. You people kill me with this mess.

The racist white man didn't want Black men to benefit from welfare so they started cutting off benefits to any woman who had a man in the house.

Blacks were on welfare because racist white men would hire them, educate them, nor give them the necessary tools they needed to survive in a country that was controlled by white men. We were left to fend for our selves in a country that hates and oppressed us.

racist white men wanted to keep Blacks enslaved it's why we still have oppression issues to this day.
 
TTQ64 said:
Oh please. You people kill me with this mess.

The racist white man didn't want Black men to benefit from welfare so they started cutting off benefits to any woman who had a man in the house.

Blacks were on welfare because racist white men would hire them, educate them, nor give them the necessary tools they needed to survive in a country that was controlled by white men. We were left to fend for our selves in a country that hates and oppressed us.

racist white men wanted to keep Blacks enslaved it's why we still have oppression issues to this day.
Click to expand...

"you people"

So the studies at the time were false?


Edit: Nevermind, rhetorical question. You don't believe anything you don't agree with
 
cawacko said:
There are studies going back decades showing AFDC was causing marriages to break up. I can't speak to all the details of the program today and if they've altered the incentives of the program to change it but it definitely had an effect previously.
Click to expand...

There are a variety of factors and you are focusing on a single one. The biggest one seems to be that it became easier for everyone to get a divorce but especially women.

You are blaming AFDC (and yes it was worse and more problematic but the tweaks have not closed the gap) when the data tends to support the idea that financial difficulties are the biggest factor after easier divorces. Of course, those eligible for AFDC have more financial difficulties.

A better social safety net, like UBI, would probably alleviate the problems even more. But we will never go back to the days when divorce was only for the rich/Hollywood or at the discretion of men alone. Those days are gone and good riddance.
 
Timshel said:
There are a variety of factors and you are focusing on a single one. The biggest one seems to be that it became easier for everyone to get a divorce but especially women.

You are blaming AFDC (and yes it was worse and more problematic but the tweaks have not closed the gap) when the data tends to support the idea that financial difficulties are the biggest factor after easier divorces. Of course, those eligible for AFDC have more financial difficulties.

A better social safety net, like UBI, would probably alleviate the problems even more. But we will never go back to the days when divorce was only for the rich/Hollywood or at the discretion of men alone. Those days are gone and good riddance.
Click to expand...

Yes there are many many reasons for divorce. I'm in no way saying AFDC is the only reason. But we are talking about welfare/entitlements so yes that is why I bring AFDC. Bringing up rich people getting divorced because one spouse cheated isn't exactly relevant to this thread. But AFDC causing people to get divorced for decades is.
 
cawacko said:
Yes there are many many reasons for divorce. I'm in no way saying AFDC is the only reason. But we are talking about welfare/entitlements so yes that is why I bring AFDC. Bringing up rich people getting divorced because one spouse cheated isn't exactly relevant to this thread. But AFDC causing people to get divorced for decades is.
Click to expand...


Again, you are suggesting that the higher rates of divorce amongst those receiving AFDC is due to AFDC. So you are comparing them to those who are not eligible for AFDC. Those people [those not eligible for AFDC] may divorce for reasons other than finances (but finances is still the biggest factor for them too, I believe). The higher rates of divorce is not likely due to the AFDC. It's more likely due to what AFDC is attempting to solve/alleviate, i.e., their impoverished state (Note for CFM: not an excuse for individuals but these things DO matter in the aggregate).
 
Last edited:
cawacko said:
"you people"

So the studies at the time were false?


Edit: Nevermind, rhetorical question. You don't believe anything you don't agree with
Click to expand...

I don't believe anything that comes from the racist right. And I'll bet a dollar to a donut that "study" was conducted by racist white winger.
 
cawacko said:
Yes there are many many reasons for divorce. I'm in no way saying AFDC is the only reason. But we are talking about welfare/entitlements so yes that is why I bring AFDC. Bringing up rich people getting divorced because one spouse cheated isn't exactly relevant to this thread. But AFDC causing people to get divorced for decades is.
Click to expand...

Let me get this straight. Black people, because your side believes Blacks collect the most welfare, divorced so they could collect welfare?

do you really believe that cawacky?
 
TTQ64 said:
I don't believe anything that comes from the racist right. And I'll bet a dollar to a donut that "study" was conducted by racist white winger.
Click to expand...

I know. You don't believe congressional votes records so why would you believe anything else.
 
TTQ64 said:
Let me get this straight. Black people, because your side believes Blacks collect the most welfare, divorced so they could collect welfare?

do you really believe that cawacky?
Click to expand...

Human beings respond to incentives. Last time I checked regardless of ones race we are all human beings. The government created a system, for example, where single mothers were economically incentivized not to get married to the child's father.
 
cawacko said:
Human beings respond to incentives. Last time I checked regardless of ones race we are all human beings. The government created a system, for example, where single mothers were economically incentivized not to get married to the child's father.
Click to expand...

wow so you do believe it.

Do you realize how stupid that sounds?

And you wonder why I call you a racist. Only a racist would believe such nonsense. You are saying that Black women didn't want to get married so they could collect welfare..........smh.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top