Show this to Bush, Inc...Lovers...

Social Security is not only going to get privatized but also gutted and benefits vastly reduced.


http://money.cnn.com/2005/01/04/news/economy/social_security/index.htm

If the Democrats in Congress does not stand up and at least fight for Social Security then the party can go to hell.

us NAFTA and ended welfare as we knew it. Gosh ain't the DLC great!

NAFTA I can never forgive him or the Democrats for that. They have been slowly betraying labor for years but this was th most egregious betrayal.

Thought it was Clintons try at an American EU. Seem to work from how I remember the Clinton economy.

Very attractive.

own," and never shall be.

looking for "welfare queens" driving cadilacs. What a crock of shit.
We should have been looking for CEOs driving bimmers. Once again, the "have-the-mosts" manage to convince the "have-mores" and their wannabes that someone that can barely keep food on the table for their families is a threat to their financial security. The threat to your financial security is the jerk that makes half a million a year and pays as little taxes as possible.

There are those welfare queens who drive cadillacs and go to the store and buy steak with their food stamps and have 6 kids without being married -- but those CEO's that get a slap on the wrist for stealing us blind, that is insane!

rush to "fix" welfare, it was the republicans in Congress that manufactured most, if not all, of the welfare stories. In fact, independent observers found little evidence of the "massive welfare fraud" on a personal level. Don't perpetuate the myth. Find out the truth and spread the truth. Don't do the PR job for the bastards.

store and she saw it all of the time.

She used to tell me how people would come in (fitting that description). Meanwhile, she and her husband worked full-time (with three small kids). She said she could not afford the luxury food items that these people were buying.

"...that description."

But my sister said she used to see women coming in to the store, driving very fancy cars, and using food stamps to buy luxury food items.

I personally know of some women that had baby, after baby and didn't work and just collected more welfare. Now I think some of those people are welfare queens.

"I" don't want to work my butt off and pay the taxes to support them so yes, I do aplaud Bill Clinton's work for welfare reform.

I am in no way wanting to take away welfare from the people that need it to get on their feet, but there comes a time when if you have third world practices, your country becomes a third world.

What? You didn't want welfare reform? You thought it was fine the way it was before the change?

had fairly generous welfare disbursements (compared to other states) before Clinton's cuts.
Here are the REAL New York figures PRIOR to the cuts:

For a single adult the monthly housing payment was $215.
The food stamp maximum was $104 per month.
The cash aid was $76 per month for transport and incidentals.
Total = $395/month or $98.75 a week.

The figures are the same today except:

Single childless adults are not eligible for a dime, unless disabled.
People with children must work for the city for 35 hours a week to receive the $76 cash.
That's $2 an hour.
The benefit has not increased in 15 years, other than 2 bus fares a day to get to the work site.

Can anyone explain how a person can live like royalty on 98 bucks a week?

but isn't it hard to determine what a person is driving when you are working the supermarket check-out?
Also, food stamps and welfare are two different things. In 1995 AFDC cost 25.6 billion and 23.7 billion in 1996. It served 12.7 million families. Food stamps cost 27.4 billion and 27.3 billion in the same period and served 26.8 million families.
In the meantime interest on the national debt went from 232.2 billion in 1995 to 241.1 billion in 1996. So, no I am not that concerned about a little bit of waste, fraud, and abuse in the welfare system. If we reduced the national debt and the interest payments there-on, we could easily afford it.
I also remember that "welfare reform" came from the Republicanoid Congress and Clinton vetoed it twice before finally signing it. The best ways to get people off welfare are to create jobs, increase the minimum wage, and increase the EIC. Clinton's record on that was very good.

Yes indeed that for sure is proof positive that welfare queens with Cadillacs and six children exist!

Yes indeed!

180

That people like this don't exist?

Perhaps your background was shelered from such sights?

You presume much.

Yes a complete myth fomented by Saint Ronnie.

I do not wish ill fortune on you but should you one day cry out in hunger and in pain and no one answers think again the thoughts you are thinking now.

180

We get all the latest Right Wing Talking Points spewed here.

But apparently some of the oldies never went out of style.

Talking points backed up by years of sitting in Mommies basement spewing out words of wisdom on a PC while being totally devoid of life experience.

Or something like that.

But I am a Korean War vet, disabled, did my time so people can speak out in FREEDOM, speak their mind, dribble their nonsense.

180

I believe that was the whole problem with the system.

I've seen people get help after they their first child, only to have more children on the system -- and they get more money to boot.

Bill Clinton must have thought there was abuse, too, or he wouldn't have pushed for reform. Welfare was becoming a way of life and living for some people and it was only (i believe) supposed to be there to help, not support people permanently.

I guess that's why I'm a moderate and (probably why I did like Bill Clinton). I'm just trying to see both sides. No, we can't get rid of welfare, there are people that need a helping-hand. I also think it's disgusting the way are mentally ill are thrown onto the streets. (of course, that's another discussion) We have to help people, however, on the other hand, I think it isn't fair for taxpayers to support people who don't try to get jobs, who think welfare is they're way to a free meal and are taking advantage of the system.

Just stating my opinion and not looking for a fight.

Coulda fooled me.

I do not care that there are cheaters in welfare. There are cheaters everywhere (Enron). It is the way of a free society. Those that cheat and get caught are punished as the law requires unless you are rich white and Republican.

Surely you have noticed that?

180

It wasn't intentional.
I agree there are cheaters everywhere.

The Enron thing what a travesity that was and showed their GW* connections.
If people would go after B*sh on all ends, they have to come up with something to out him. (His Enron, Haliburton, connections, 9/ll, election fraud, etc.)

Have a great day.

was mostly just that, bullshit. The dismantling of the public safety net involved many contrived scenarios, one of which was welfare reform. Now instead of helping those less fortunate among us, we donate to Haliburton, Aegis and Carlyle. The welfare queen meme is part of the continuing effort to direct the public's attention from the out-and-out plundering and pillaging taking place today. Horrible injustices are taking place WITHIN our own country every day. The tax burden is being shifted away from the wealthiest to the poorest. The quality of medical care is now completely contingent on personal wealth. The United States now ranks at the bottom of the top ten industrial nations in infant mortality and medical care. The list goes on and on. It is an irrefutable fact, the ARE getting richer at the expense of the rest of us. The middle class, which made this country great, is being sucked dry and will soon disappear. Most of us in this country are moving toward "working poverty" and just don't know it yet.

Welfare queens aren't fucking this country, it's greedy, arrogant, self-absorbed assholes that think they are entitled to more because of their last name and their social standing.

depending on what "luxury" food items she allowed them to purchase with their food stamps. Most states place fairly strict limits on the types of food and grocery items which can be *legally* purchased with food stamps and impose criminal penalties on vendors and/or their employees for allowing people to purchase items illegally. As an example, one can not purchase alcohol or tobacoo products, diapers, pre-prepared meals, or many items subject to sales taxes with the Lone Star card in Texas. Heck, one can not even purchase a hot deli pre-cooked meat with the Lone Star Card in Texas. And any store/employee allowing a food stamp recipient to do so would be breaking the law.

So are you certain that was what happened? I'd hate to have to report her to the authorities. :shrug:

Here in West Texas the cotton farmer's wife is the biggest welfare queen ever. The market price for cotton this annum last was .40 per pound, but that wasn't what the govt. guaranteed. The govt. had guaranteed .80 cents per pound, ergo, YOUR TAX DOLLARS paid HALF of the total cotton proceeds for every farm in and around Amarillo, Lubbock, and various other Texas red-towns.

No inner city welfare queen ever had it so good. Thanks, uncle Sam, for farm subsidies!

signed....it had already been passed by the time of Clinton's inauguation

http://www.media.rice.edu/media/NewsBot.asp?MODE=VIEW&ID=645&SnID=657822429

<snip>
"President Bush signed into law, among other things, the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Clean Air Act. He also successfully fought for and negotiated the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), which was later signed into law."

Is changing the way Social Security benefits are calculated a good idea?

Yes 15%

No 62%

Too early to say 23%

total responses to this question: 23638

I don't think most, if not all, of **Bush lovers care. They've been brainwashed a couple of decades now listening to Rush, Falwell, Robertson, Faux, etc. As it is, they don't even care about the Founding Principles, and most seem to have a poor knowledge of history as a result.

I see the big challenge as getting public opinion's attention, and obtaining fair exposure to the public in the media.

We must continue to be 'the Media' ... grassroot pressure on elected officials, etc.

** is likely to go on a speaking 'tour' similar to the one he was sent on in 2001, re: tax cut ... speaking in arenas far away from blue areas, packed with bused-in 'supporters' ... each time getting replay in the corporate media echo chamber 24/7 ... free advertising at taxpayer expense ... drumming in and repeating the lie: it's broke ... who on the people's side is going to be fighting for Social Security as invited guests on TV? Will they be able to get a word in edge-wise? We know from experience how the spin rooms operate.

I expect a TV advertising campaign to be a necessary expense.

I, also, expect the Republicans in the new Congress to be like a panzer division operating in blitzkrieg style.

pure and simple. There is a HUGE surplus in social security. The problem is that our government has been borrowing EXTENSIVELY from the system and wants to find anyway to avoid paying it back. Can't give those tax cuts to millionaires if we have to pay back Social Security.

This is sick.

will not see any change. My question is what age is this? I'm 45 but I'm on disability so if they raise the retirement age to 70, I will receive my disability until I turn 70 (Disability funding comes from a completely different part of the SS Dept. I don't know why, where, or how, but I have been told by the lady at the Social Security Department that even if Social Security Retirement went bankrupt, I would still get my disability because it comes out of other funding. (Don't yell at the messenger please. I know it doesn't sound right to me either; however, I have been told this more than once.)

Plus, I get more in disability then I would ever get in SS retirement (like 3 times the amount).

One thing that gets me is raising the age to 70. That's just not fair. My husband is a welder and fabricator. He cannot stand on his feet in extreme heat and/or cold, 10 hours a day, until he is 70 years old before retiring. It would kill him. Hmmmm . . . probably what they are going for anyway.

I'm sure they realize that it still takes manual labor to build the roads they have to drive on, mechanics to work on the planes they fly in, welders who have to build the bridges they cross over, trash men to pick up the trash and dispose of it, carpenters, plummers, and on and on. There will always be manual laborers that use their backs as well as their brains, and cannot do the same type of work until they turn 70. Not everyone in this country gets the type of time off our Government gives itself.

the idiots I know love the idea of "privitizing" Social Security, so that they have some "control" of their money. They forget about the S&L scandals, corporate malfeasance (Enron, Global Crossings, WorldCom, etc.), and the recent mutual fund scandals.

Remember, they are the same idiots that voted for Bush* in the first place. Unfortunately, we have to suffer with them. :grr:

It could be President Bush's Supreme Court Packing scheme. The whole case for privitization is based on scare-mongering and lies, and privitization is just another word for Phase out. These people hate Social Security and they have hated it for years, and this is their chance to get rid of it.

But Social Security is still a popular program and if people know that privitization means destruction, well, they won't think to highly of the Bushies.

Bryant
Check ito ut --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com