A Burgundy and Gold Obsession
'Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies.' - Groucho Marx

Thanks Thanks:  0
Likes Likes:  0
Disagree Disagree:  0
Post of the Year Post of the Year:  0
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 37
  1. #1
    BGObsessed
    Join Date
    04-01-11
    Location
    Virginia Beach, VA
    Posts
    4,738
    Post Responses
    Thanks, Likes, & More
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Blog Entries
    3
    Army

    Default Obama WOuld Rather You Be Dependent On Welfare Than Get Back To Work

    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012...-requirements/

    For those who haven't heard, the Obama administration has announced plans to remove work requirements for welfare programs. This essentially gives recipients no reason to look for a job. If you're being given free money and free food, and the only thing you have to do to get it is not work, why wouldn't you take that deal?

    I'd love to hear an attempt to defend this.
    0 0 0 0
     
     
    It's ok, I don't like you either.

  2. #2

    Join Date
    02-01-10
    Location
    Waynesboro, VA
    Posts
    9,169
    Post Responses
    Thanks, Likes, & More
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Blog Entries
    65
    James Madison

    Default

    Pretty indefensible on the surface. Need to look into this some more.
    0 0 0 0
     
     
    OLine. DLine. Secondary.

  3. #3

    Join Date
    07-22-09
    Posts
    7,584
    Post Responses
    Thanks, Likes, & More
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    yup. undoes a legislative agreement worked out between Clinton and a Republican House.
    0 0 0 0
     
     

  4. #4
    BGObsessed
    Join Date
    04-01-11
    Location
    Virginia Beach, VA
    Posts
    4,738
    Post Responses
    Thanks, Likes, & More
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Blog Entries
    3
    Army

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Goaldeje View Post
    Pretty indefensible on the surface. Need to look into this some more.
    This was my first thought. I haven't heard the particulars other than what's been said so far, but on the surface it sounds pretty knuckle headed.
    0 0 0 0
     
     
    It's ok, I don't like you either.

  5. #5

    Join Date
    07-15-09
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Posts
    13,516
    Post Responses
    Thanks, Likes, & More
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Florida Atlantic

    Default

    I'm a strong proponent of helping-hand programs that force people to work for their assistance, and eventually get real jobs and off welfare. If this is true (not more right-wing half truths), I think it will lose Obama the election. Most are in favor of work programs instead of just handouts, IMO.
    Posted via BGO Mobile Device
    0 0 0 0
     
     

  6. #6

    Join Date
    02-01-10
    Location
    Waynesboro, VA
    Posts
    9,169
    Post Responses
    Thanks, Likes, & More
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Blog Entries
    65
    James Madison

    Default

    I did a quick google search last night, and FOX was reporting 83% of Americans are in favor of work-welfare. No offense to anyone here, but I would like to verify this through another couple of websites before proclaiming it the truth. I will try to do so when I get back this afternoon.
    0 0 0 0
     
     
    OLine. DLine. Secondary.

  7. #7

    Join Date
    07-15-09
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Posts
    13,516
    Post Responses
    Thanks, Likes, & More
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Florida Atlantic

    Default

    I found a heritage article that uses the same number (83%), maybe that's where Fox News got it. Some interesting points:

    Waives Centerpiece of Reform: On July 12, the Obama Administration issued a directive from the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) that guts the successful welfare reform act of 1996. Obama’s new policy allows states to waive the federal work requirement, the foundation of the reform law.
    The End of Work Requirements: Work requirements have been watered down over the years, as liberals in Congress refused to reauthorize the law and states found loopholes to get around the requirements. The Obama Administration’s directive aims to weaken work requirements much further—to the point that they are essentially meaningless.
    Seems like this reform will pass more power to the states, but not funding requirements. I'm all for allowing the states to decide if they want work-requirements or not, as long as they are funding their own welfare.

    I really don't see an argument against work-requirements for welfare recipients, just like I can't really see an argument against drug-testing requirements. Seems like no-brainers to me. In fact, kill two birds with one stone; give welfare recipients mundane filing jobs or something similar in government; pares back the amount of workers the government needs as well as paring back welfare spending.
    0 0 0 0
     
     

  8. #8

    Join Date
    07-22-09
    Posts
    7,584
    Post Responses
    Thanks, Likes, & More
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lanky Livingston View Post
    I'm a strong proponent of helping-hand programs that force people to work for their assistance, and eventually get real jobs and off welfare. If this is true (not more right-wing half truths), I think it will lose Obama the election. Most are in favor of work programs instead of just handouts, IMO.
    Posted via BGO Mobile Device

    the whole purpose of the excutive order is to buy votes/win elections!
    0 0 0 0
     
     

  9. #9

    Join Date
    07-15-09
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Posts
    13,516
    Post Responses
    Thanks, Likes, & More
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Florida Atlantic

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by fansince62 View Post
    the whole purpose of the excutive order is to buy votes/win elections!
    The executive order as in this particular one? Or the executive order in general? Because if its the latter, that's a pretty jaded view of our government.
    0 0 0 0
     
     

  10. #10
    BGObsessed
    Join Date
    07-16-09
    Location
    Germantown, MD
    Posts
    362
    Post Responses
    Thanks, Likes, & More
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Minnesota

    Default

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rep-gw...b_1695515.html

    I have been outspoken regarding my concerns about the TANF program which, since its passage in 1996, has shifted the focus of welfare to a series of rules and restrictions -- rather than a focus on effective job preparation and placement, though that was one of its purported goals. Sadly, TANF has never taken into consideration the importance of education and training in helping recipients gain meaningful employment.
    This waiver program could allow greater education and training opportunities, which can expand the possibilities for beneficiaries and our overall labor market. It helps to cut the red tape that has held this program hostage and urges states to improve their efforts to place people into jobs, rather than keeping them enrolled in restricted job-search activities. Additionally, although these waiver opportunities will be limited and do not alter the employment requirements of TANF, the proposal will encourage states to draft plans that will quantifiably increase the number of welfare beneficiaries who find and retain employment.
    http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/ofa/.../im201203.html

    Section 1115 of the Social Security Act provides authority for the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to consider and approve experimental, pilot, or demonstration projects which, in the Secretary’s judgment, are likely to assist in promoting the objectives of Title IV-A. Section 1115 allows for waiver of compliance with section 402 of the Social Security Act to the extent and for the period necessary to enable a state to carry out an approved project. The statute also provides authority for costs of such projects which would not otherwise be an allowable use of funds under Part A of Title IV to be regarded as an allowable use of funds, to the extent and for the period approved.

    As specified in statute, the purpose of Part A is to increase the flexibility of states in operating a program designed to: (1) provide assistance to needy families so that children may be cared for in their own homes or in the homes of relatives; (2) end the dependence of needy parents on government benefits by promoting job preparation, work, and marriage; (3) prevent and reduce the incidence of out-of-wedlock pregnancies and establish annual numerical goals for preventing and reducing the incidence of these pregnancies; and (4) encourage the formation and maintenance of two-parent families.
    States led the way on welfare reform in the 1990s — testing new approaches and learning what worked and what did not. The Secretary is interested in using her authority to approve waiver demonstrations to challenge states to engage in a new round of innovation that seeks to find more effective mechanisms for helping families succeed in employment. In providing for these demonstrations, HHS will hold states accountable by requiring both a federally-approved evaluation and interim performance targets that ensure an immediate focus on measurable outcomes. States must develop evaluation plans that are sufficient to evaluate the effect of the proposed approach in furthering a TANF purpose as well as interim targets the state commits to achieve. States that fail to meet interim outcome targets will be required to develop an improvement plan and can face termination of the waiver project.

    The demonstration authority provided by section 1115 and sound evaluation of approved projects will provide valuable knowledge that will help lead to improvements in achieving the purposes of the TANF program.
    0 0 0 0
     
     
    The challenge ahead of us is never as great as the power behind us.

  11. #11

    Join Date
    07-15-09
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Posts
    13,516
    Post Responses
    Thanks, Likes, & More
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Florida Atlantic

    Default

    Very interesting. As usual, there are two sides to every story.
    0 0 0 0
     
     

  12. #12

    Join Date
    07-15-09
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Posts
    13,516
    Post Responses
    Thanks, Likes, & More
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Florida Atlantic

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MikeSr619 View Post
    and why are there "rules and restrictions" placed upon this? because people arent using it to get back on their feet; theyre using it as a means of income. most of the time a second income or to take full advantage and do nothing to better themselves.

    im not buying it. there need to be rules like drug testing to qualify. You used to have to show that you applied for jobs in order to get an unemployment check but now you dont have to anymore either. People are now being used to getting hand fed instead of taking charge and getting back on their feet.
    You're painting welfare recipients with a pretty broad brush here. Also, welfare is ideally a second-source of income, just to help make ends meet. These are the people we want on welfare, no? Not the people using it as their primary source of income, not doing anything to better themselves.
    0 0 0 0
     
     

  13. #13

    Join Date
    07-15-09
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Posts
    13,516
    Post Responses
    Thanks, Likes, & More
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Florida Atlantic

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MikeSr619 View Post
    and saying that they can now go to school and get more education isnt the same brush? like you said, there are 2 sides. this is the other side as far as Im concerned. I see it happen. You ever see the signs in the liquor stores that say you cant use food stamps on alcohol?

    when I say second income I mean they are working under the table and taking advantage of the system and not what it is meant for.
    Gotchya. Do you really think that most welfare recipients are cheating the system? There is fraud, no doubt, but most of them? Seems harsh. I honestly don't know.
    0 0 0 0
     
     

  14. #14
    BGObsessed
    Join Date
    04-01-11
    Location
    Virginia Beach, VA
    Posts
    4,738
    Post Responses
    Thanks, Likes, & More
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Blog Entries
    3
    Army

    Default

    I know that a small sampling of the populace isn't anything to hang a defining claim on, but my Aunt worked for years at Social Services, I have known many people on welfare and other welfare programs, and a lot of people I know have known a lot of people in the system.

    From my personal experience, as far as actual welfare checks go, most people are abusing the system. If you pay attention at the store, you'll see what I mean. These people will swipe their EBT or EPPIcard to buy their stuff (which is what they load welfare funds onto) and it will be for the most ridiculous things like DVDs, jewelry, Nikes, Jerseys, hats, etc. then they will roll out of the parking lot in a car I'd love to drive. It disgusts me. People think it would be too expensive to investigate every recipient, but I still say the money saved by eliminating the crooks would more than offset investigative costs.
    0 0 0 0
     
     
    It's ok, I don't like you either.

  15. #15

    Join Date
    07-22-09
    Posts
    7,584
    Post Responses
    Thanks, Likes, & More
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    ex..who knows? only definitive conclusion we can come to is that putting people to work is not a priority for the President. He touts that his administration has created 4 million jobs. well...there are a million fewer jobs today than in 2008. the obvious conclusion can be drawn.
    0 0 0 0
     
     

  16. #16
    2016 BGO Survivor Champ

    Join Date
    08-01-09
    Location
    My location
    Posts
    11,491
    Post Responses
    Thanks, Likes, & More
    Mentioned
    21 Post(s)
    Florida State

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by fansince62 View Post
    ex..who knows? only definitive conclusion we can come to is that putting people to work is not a priority for the President. He touts that his administration has created 4 million jobs. well...there are a million fewer jobs today than in 2008. the obvious conclusion can be drawn.

    And the amount of people dependent on Government is up drastically!
    0 0 0 0
     
     
    The more things change...the more they stay the same. It's like deja vu all over again.

  17. #17
    BGObsessed
    Join Date
    04-01-11
    Location
    Virginia Beach, VA
    Posts
    4,738
    Post Responses
    Thanks, Likes, & More
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Blog Entries
    3
    Army

    Default

    And Obama admittedly doesn't even talk to his own job council anymore.
    0 0 0 0
     
     
    It's ok, I don't like you either.

  18. #18

    Join Date
    02-01-10
    Location
    Waynesboro, VA
    Posts
    9,169
    Post Responses
    Thanks, Likes, & More
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Blog Entries
    65
    James Madison

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by fansince62 View Post
    ex..who knows? only definitive conclusion we can come to is that putting people to work is not a priority for the President. He touts that his administration has created 4 million jobs. well...there are a million fewer jobs today than in 2008. the obvious conclusion can be drawn.
    I was told there would be no math.
    0 0 0 0
     
     
    OLine. DLine. Secondary.

  19. #19
    BGObsessed
    Join Date
    04-01-11
    Location
    Virginia Beach, VA
    Posts
    4,738
    Post Responses
    Thanks, Likes, & More
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Blog Entries
    3
    Army

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Goaldeje View Post
    I was told there would be no math.
    You misunderstood....we said no meth
    0 0 0 0
     
     
    It's ok, I don't like you either.

  20. #20

    Join Date
    07-15-09
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Posts
    13,516
    Post Responses
    Thanks, Likes, & More
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Florida Atlantic

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by fansince62 View Post
    ex..who knows? only definitive conclusion we can come to is that putting people to work is not a priority for the President.
    Where do you come up with this stuff? Is he supposed to wave his magic wand and create jobs? Putting people to work has been a top priority since day 1, since (yes, wait for it....) he inherited such a big mess in 2008.

    You can make a great case that the methods he's employed have been useless/mismanaged/misguided, but that doesn't take away from the fact that he's been trying to create jobs.

    He touts that his administration has created 4 million jobs. well...there are a million fewer jobs today than in 2008. the obvious conclusion can be drawn.
    We lost 5 million jobs after 2008?
    0 0 0 0
     
     

 

 

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 12-26-11, 07:35 PM

User Tag List

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •