In 24 States, 50% or More of Babies Born on Medicaid; New Mexico Leads Nation With 72%

a 2015 study stated that 43% of recipients of typical welfare had been receiving benefits for longer than 48 months.

Also, 39% of children vs 17% of adults receive assistance even when no considering free lunches which means illegals' children are on the dole until adulthood at a rate of approx 43%.

 

And I view it as a necessity of a functioning society. Without it we'd all be living into the badlands.

 

That's an easy fix if the Republicans have some backbone.

Welfare:

1st child: full payment for support.
2nd child: 75% of the first child.
3rd child: 25% of the first child.
4th child: 0% of the first child.​

 

Yeah, what a wasteland....

 

Yes, the roaring 20's.



It was all pomp and glory for the top 1% while the rest of the country groveled with nothing.

But do tell me how this is good for the people.

 

Right, it's so much better now. We don't have any poor people with all of these wonderful socialist programs.

 

If we forced all the illegals to go home by denying ALL Government benefits and making getting a job near impossible, we would keep $26+ billion dollars a year in our economy and save in upwards of $113 Billion dollars at the federal, state and local levels. More than enough to assist the poor.

 

Yes, but you posted a nice stark image, one that mirrors today, basically. The 20's is another time where wealth and income inequality were extremely high.

The 20's is a bad example for what you wanted to pose. It's also not relative, but whatever.

 

You want to make the case that before these social welfare programs the US was a "badlands", but it wasn't. Wealth inequality was not much different than it is today. People made less, but things were less expensive. People relied on their families more back then instead of relying on the Government when hard times came around.

 

Sure. But there's no way "costs" are going to decrease, and without market controls, it's a non-discussion. Costs are never going to come down. Once a corporation gets used to consuming a certain amount, the shareholders get hungry for returns, they don't give a **** if people die on the streets.

The primary issue with your comparison is, 97 years ago, we didn't have technology like we do now. 97 years ago, we didn't know what certain things did to make people sick.

97 years ago the American banksters were shellacking everyone across the nation.

The 20's is a perfect example of how crony capitalism works.

 

FDR used the depression to advance the Big Lie that if we just gave more of our money to the Government and relied on it's
merciful bounty society would be so much better off. That lie is called Socialism and it's been a failure everywhere it's been tried IF
you believe that you can run your own life better than some face bureaucrat in Washington DC can. I know I can.

 

They're ""precious lives" when abortion comes up and a nuisance once born.....

too bad that abortions aren't paid for.....then you won't have whiners complaining about births....well, they will probably whine about anything

 

Why? Do you think that some are beneath the ability to function in a modern day society? Why, nature or nurture, both?

 

Big government's ability to skew the system currently makes the 20's look like mere child's play. Heck, they weren't even using the tax code to give rent seeking privilege, and the health care market has been contorted so far out of the consumers' favor that it is ridiculous. Government continuously leverages more fixed costs on competitors which allow the established market leaders to operate without risk of legitimate competition.

 

Why is treating symptoms considered bad by everyone except progressives who rue the day that the root cause is brought up.

 

Why? Because legislating responsibility is a choice right wingers typically take that i disagree with, thats why.

If you cant convince them, then legislate. Straight outta the gop play book.

 

My parents received food stamps, a bit of a guess here, for 10 yrs? 6 kids, 1 working parent, making a low wage. But work he did, and my mom did PT sales of Avon, fuller brush, etc.
And, 2015 is still recovering from the great recession.
Perhaps, not letting the country spend like drunken sailors having the largest housing bubble perhaps in history, would not have had such a crash and so many losing jobs.

Add to that, real wages have not increased much since the 1990s. Most economic expansion had been to increasing debt and rising real estate.
Jobs have been leaving since the 1990s.

 

I may be wrong, but something like that exists already? There must be a cap. And I don't think 2nd and more kids get the same increases as the 1st.
But that is how it should go. A cap and reduced increases with more offspring.

 

True that. That's what nice campaign donations gets. A less competitive market.

 

OK, that didn't correlate to the topic being discussed. Also, I never want to legislate choice. I hate it when the religious right legislate morality just add much as anyone. Now, why do you believe redistribution to certain individuals is necessary for society to not break down?

 

The redistribution scheme has been a major ingredient in the economy. It's a major reason you are saying we haven't recovered in 2015. Yet, we constantly here support for government involvement. Also, no offense, but why have six kids if you can't afford to care for them? My parents required assistance for a few months, but I took from that experience something entirely different. I realized that their decisions left them vulnerable. The wages have been stagnant, yet education levels have been increasing. Corporations and baking conglomerates have been larger and larger and small business entrepreneurs are choked out of competition. Still, every tax increase stats at 250k annually and goes up to 40 million which tells me the tax the rich scheme is just another barrier to competition protecting the uber wealthy.

 

Because its already redistribution. Its already that waay. Only now we pay more then countries you and others despise, yet they have a healthier population and spend less.

Its not ****ing brain surgery. Its simplistic. Single payer works. Free market does not work.

We only have one life. Why the **** should all of us spend ours worrying that one day we may have the audacity to get sick and our insurance will just choose not to cover us?

I already spend more then the french. Why should they have a better systen that covers every single person there, and yet, i am stuck with high premiums, deductibles, co pays? For worse coverage?

You havent offered a single convincing argument for the free market beyond typical right wing talking points.

Failure.

 

Christians didn't believe in birth control.
5 kids in 5 yrs. But then I think reality set in and BC was used. The last came along 7 yrs later.
As long as they want to stagnate wages, let the profits go ever higher, and the uber rich get to get richer, I say they can pay for what welfare the country needs.

 

That makes no sense.......

 

Maybe not to you.