What we know about Brett Favre and his texts in Mississippi welfare scandal

Eagles fan actually

Threw too many bad INTs with his "gunslinging" style

Examples

Cost the Vikings the 2009 NFC title

and the one that I loved, personally

This was inexcusable in OT of a playoff game

 

Why are you asking this inane question about poor people?

 

I agree with your rich info of a post and agree except the salaries. In my town which is considered more upscale, the police make well over $100k a yr and we don't have much violence here.

 

I believe that is their ancillary on the coast not the full unniversity in Haittisburg

I know what they did and I now who if Farve. Obviously you cannot actually respond to what I posted.


I didn't defend it, I was trying to discuss why they would do it in the manner in which it was done instead of something above board and transparent. He did not personally benefit and it went to good cause.

 

That is not the context in which they made those statements they made those statements in the context that has been explained to you, that the govenrment unlike a private business which must rely on the profits they make to pay workers, can simply tax more of the people's money or when it is the federal government print more money. Also the union members are their employers, they can buy the votes of the union workers with the people's money. YOU need to understand context not me.

And government workers have struck and or refused to work when they were not getting their demands but then since they are usually one of the larger voting blocks they rarely have to they just get what they want.

Why do you keep harping on the dues paid to the union that has NOTHING to do with what I and others have said about it.

If they are using their own money and resources OF COURSE the Hatch Act doesn't come into play, do you even know what is the Hatch Act, it is about using GOVERNMENT money and resources. And it's not about making them second class citizens it is about not making them the political elite class that can vote themselves more and more or the taxpayer money to pay themselves. And as noted my comment was rhetorical, you do know what rhetorical means? You said it gives them a hedge, well a hedge against who?

 

Nope, many it get it reimbursed through the EITC yet still collect SS and Medicare benefits when they retire.

 

Yes the Gingrich/Kasich welfare reform bill which was a resounding success. Of course he tried to take credit for it but had been told by his political adviser Dick Morris that if he didn't go along with the Republican welfare reform and tax cuts and budgets he would be a one term President.

 

LMAOROG, At the time they were trying to impeach him? You believe Tricky Dick Jr huh?


How Bill Clinton’s Welfare Reform Changed America
Bill Clinton's 1992 presidential campaign placed welfare reform at its center, claiming that his proposal would “end welfare as we have come to know it.”

https://www.history.com/news/clinton-1990s-welfare-reform-facts


In 1997, Clinton signed a reduction in the capital gains tax rate to 20% from 28%.



THAT WAS HIS SECOND TERM RIGHT?



WHAT OTHER BS DO YOU HAVE?

BTW AFTER BJ BILL'S 1ST BUDGT SURPLUS, THE GOP PASSED A $792 BILLION TAX CUT HE VETOED TO GET THE NEXT 3 BUDGET SURPLUSES, THANKS TO THE 1993 DEMOCRATIC CONGRESS INCREASING REVENUES (TAXES) WHICH COST THEM THE '94 ELECTIONS!

 

Yes the Gingrich/Kaisch REPUBLICAN welfare reform, which Clinton vowed to repeal later if the Dems took back the Congress, but he tried to do so through his labor department by having a ruling that ALL federal workplace rules would apply to work requirements for welfare recipients in the PRIVATE sector effectively wiping out the work requirements although many governors simply ignored it and took the originals work requirements and enforced them.

It was the Republican capital gains tax rate cuts which rolled back HIS TAX RATE INCREASE in his 1993 bill. His bill slowed the growth of tax revenues.

1990 1,032.0 4.1% <- Democrats tax increase agreed to by Bush for spending cuts the Dems never passed
1991 1,055.0 2.2%
1992 1,091.2 3.4%
1993 1,154.3 5.8% <- Clinton tax increase signed AUGUST 1993 however
"Taxpayers who owed additional 1993 taxes due to the
OBRA93 tax rate increases were given the option of
deferring payment of two-thirds of the tax that was in
excess of the tax that would have been owed at the 31
percent rate. Half of the deferral taxes were to be paid in
1995 and the remaining half in 1996 [2].
http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-soi/93inintrts.pdf
1994 1,258.6 9.0%
1995 1,351.8 7.4% <- Even with the differed tax revenues revenue growth slow
1996 1,453.1 7.5%
1997 1,579.2 8.7% -> Gingrich/Kasich tax rate cuts
1998 1,721.7 9.0%
1999 1,827.5 6.1%
2000 2,025.2 10.8%
2001 1,991.1 -2%
2002 1,853.1 -7%
2003 1,782.3 -4% Bush tax rate cuts begin implimentation
2004 1,880.1 5% Bush tax rate cuts fully implimented
2005 2,153.6 15%
2006 2,406.9 12%
2007 2,568.0 7% <- Dems take back the Congress
2008 2,524.0 -2%
2009 2,105.0 -17%
2010 2,162.7 3%
2011 2,303.5 7% <- Republicans take back the house
2012 2,445.0 6%
2013 2,775.1 13%
2014 3,021.5 9% Obama Capital Gains tax increase and surcharge
2015 3,249.9 8%
OMB Historical Tables

 

[

So Dick lied to you? About both things? Way to ignore the past post where Clinton ran on welfare reform and his signing the capital tax cut AFTER he was reelected, both refuting your previous BS



Once again with your BS, No serious economists believes any tax cuts the past 50+ years has brought in more revenues. None


Care to point to the actual COSTS of the tax cuts? LMAOROG

 

Cool tell me what the Dems did in 2007 that Dubya signed?

 

They have a lab there on the coast as well as some classroom facilities, among other things. However, some classes are conducted at the main campus as well.


.

I did respond to what you posted. You were the one who condoned the stealing of money to another program because "it was for a good cause." Stealing money from the lowest of the low by a person who has made millions in his professional career is never right. And yet, if you found a poor black person who stole a measly $100 from the food program, you would be up in arms and calling for an extremely long prison sentence and the elimination of the program altogether by juxtaposing and gross generalization about ALL Black people in said program.

.

Yeah you did. There is no other logical explanation after you wrote: "They weren't ripping off the state for personal profit. It was worthy cause, how about some of the COVID stimulus money. Only know what the article says about it."

Actually, they did steal and made a profit and yes, it was a monetary profit. Among the other things that Brett Farve did was receive another $1.1 million for speaking engagements that he never did.

To answer the other question, who came up with this scheme, is John Davis, the former head of Mississippi's Department of Human Services and he has pled guilty. The ex-governor of Mississippi Phil Brandt is accused, via the text messages, that he helped arrange all of this with Brett Farve. And Nancy New, a former nonprofit executive who also has pled guilty and funneled the money to Brett Farve and other entities.


https://www.nbcnews.com/news/missis...welfare-scandal-involves-brett-favr-rcna48925

https://mississippitoday.org/2022/09/13/phil-bryant-brett-favre-welfare/

 

Again, union salaries are not funded through taxes, federal or otherwise. A deduction from your salary is generally your choice unless you live in a closed Union shop state, like NY for instance. But most states are open shops, which means you do not have to join the union. I do know some people who pay directly from their bank account the union dues after the salary is direct deposited into the bank. But that does not mean unions are funded by salaries, especially government unions.

Like most things in life, there are positives and negatives with everything and unions are among a plethora of organizations that provide positive and negative attributes, just like any government.

As for vote buying, what organization is not a vote-buying scheme? Shall we look at lobbyists from the NRA, Pharma, Medical associations, political parties, environmental groups, and so forth? Everyone is in the "vote buying business" these days. It is why I have always said that the United States is the most open, legally obligated, corrupt country on this planet. We just fool ourselves with dark money or PACs or political parties or every lobbyist from the right to the left out there try to garner our votes with ads, op-eds, TV news programs, etc.

 

I wasn't clear enough. I was referring to US national average in which the other poster was referring to.

 

Not all private businesses rely on profits, consumer choices, etc. Nonprofit organizations are also private businesses, just a specific subset in which the money received is through donations primarily, sometimes through sales, such as the Goodwill stores that sell second-hand merchandise and goods. On a micro level, the federal government does utilize a lot of private business techniques. All government agencies, since the 1970s, must prove that the agency can meet its goal. That being said, they use a lot of private business techniques for its employees including qualitative evaluations based on the job description, which is done by the manager. To assist the manager, the agency may deploy internal and "external" quality assurance monitors to evaluate the employee's performance. They utilize synergy methods to make sure the organization is. You now, for most jobs, have to submit a resume to apply for a job instead of the OP-512 form. Generally, for most rank and file, your links to whatever political party is irrelevant to the hire. And a whole bunch more. The one thing it is bloated is upper management, but that is a different thread altogether. In summary, the government is an employer, whether you wear a uniform, miliary or civilian, or not.

Their salary regardless of where it comes from is their own money. They worked for it, they earned it. Period. Whether it is IBM or the government, if you are employed by them, earn a salary, and want to join a union, voluntarily pay the dues, neither the major corporation or the government is subsidizing the union.

The hedge is against management, the ones who pay the bills. The management of the federal government is OPM primarily for the civilian workforce.

 

The cost to date of the "Great Society" has been 22 Trillion. What is the ROI for this spending? I don't have a problem with the government providing temporary humanitarian assistance to people. However, muti-generational welfare provided as an entitlement is simply theft from people who pay taxes.

 

Perhaps you should look up "generational welfare."

 

In general, should wages be determined by the law of supply and demand or politicians?

And how do you think exporting jobs and importing cheap labor impacts wages?

Some knowledge of the economic principles outlined Adam Smith's Wealth of Wages should be required to graduate from high school.

 

Why do republicans need to be speaking about this? Why should we care about Bret farv or even be knowledgeable on this situation. That’s why we have law enforcement. If he broke the law I’m sure he’ll be charged. It is not important for me to even know about this.

 

Exactly so. These sorts of threads IMHO are simply trolling.

 

Even Goodwill relies on making a "profit" off the goods it sells to pay staff and expenses. "Non-profit" means they do not distribute profits to owners or shareholders. You comments about government agencies is quite naive. They make a habit of making sure they spend every dime they get so they can demand more and keep their employee numbers up to justify it.

NO ONE IS ARGUING THAT...........WHY DO YOU KEEP SAYING????????

NO ONE IS ARGUING THAT...........WHY DO YOU KEEP SAYING????????

The taxpayers pay the bill. If IBM agrees to pay their workers more can they use the force of law to take your money to do so? Does the workforce at IBM get to hire their own bosses who promise them even higher wages? NO.

 

Which is not a two year school and where the issue with Farce is concerned.

Absolutely false please retract your statement. I said I could not understand why they did it they way they did, possibly illegal, when it was for a good cause they probably could have raised the money in an above board transparent manner. If you are going to claim. I said something then please do me the curtsey of getting it right.

Just stop it, I will speak for myself I do not grant you the privilege of doing so for me.

Yes I have read about the $1.5M since he he faces problems over it even though he made restitution for it, still owes interest though.

Ifnthey prover they violated the law off with their heads. Yet my original questions remain even though you refuse to address them.

 

He ran on it and then did nothing sonnet wouldn't piss off his voters and when he did agree to the Gingrich/Kaisch reform tried to poison pill it. He signed his capital gains INCREASE his first years which helped slow the strong recovery he inherited and slowed a strong growth in federal tax revenues overall. It almost cost him reelection but Morris came up with the triangulation strategy to side with the Republicans.

Lots do and it is the historical record. I gave it to you.

They didn't COST we had RECORD REVENUE INCREASES.

 

Yeah, I don't care about welfare money outside of it coming from taxes I'm forced to pay. I'd rather see it go towards a volleyball court or actual disabled person.

 

Indeed you would, there's no guessing to that. I'm not uncomfortable with this topic though. I really couldn't care less that Favre used some welfare scheme to build a volleyball court.