goemaw.com
General Discussion => The New Joe Montgomery Birther Pit => Topic started by: K-S-U-Wildcats! on October 25, 2013, 08:38:43 AM
-
http://cnsnews.com/news/article/terence-p-jeffrey/census-bureau-means-tested-govt-benefit-recipients-outnumber-full (http://cnsnews.com/news/article/terence-p-jeffrey/census-bureau-means-tested-govt-benefit-recipients-outnumber-full)
(CNSNews.com) - Americans who were recipients of means-tested government benefits in 2011 outnumbered year-round full-time workers, according to data released this month by the Census Bureau.
There were 108,592,000 people in the United States in the fourth quarter of 2011 who were recipients of one or more means-tested government benefit programs, the Census Bureau said in data released this week. Meanwhile, according to the Census Bureau, there were 101,716,000 people who worked full-time year round in 2011. That included both private-sector and government workers.
That means there were about 1.07 people getting some form of means-tested government benefit for every 1 person working full-time year round.
The Census Bureau counted as recipients of means-tested government programs “anyone residing in a household in which one or more people received benefits from the program.” Many of these people lived in households receiving more than one form of means-tested benefit at the same time.
Among the 108,592,000 people who fit the Census Bureau’s description of a means-tested benefit recipient in the fourth quarter of 2011 were 82,457,000 people in households receiving Medicaid, 49,073,000 beneficiaries of food stamps, 20,223,000 on Supplemental Security Income, 23,228,000 in the Women, Infants and Children program, 13,433,000 in public or subsidized rental housing, and 5,854,000 in the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program. Also among the 108,592,000 means-tested benefit recipients counted by the Census Bureau were people getting free or reduced-price lunch or breakfast, state-administered supplemental security income and means-tested veterans pensions.
The 108,592,000 people who were recipients of means-tested government programs in the fourth quarter of 2011 does not include people who received benefits from non-means-tested government programs but not from means-tested ones. That would include, for example, people who received Social Security, Medicare, unemployment, or non-means-tested veterans compensation, but did not receive benefits from a means-tested program such as food stamps or public housing.
We can probably tack a few million more onto this number come 2014, when our latest means-tested entitlement officially kicks in - Obamacare subsidies for those up to 400% of the "poverty line." And let's not forget the push to legalize 15-30 million illegal (currently) immigrants, who will almost all be eligible for one or more of these benefits.
The work and welfare numbers are not mutually exclusive, of course, but both numbers are alarming (well, I mean, unless you're a libtard, and then you see votes).
-
It's called vote buying. Democrats use taxpayer money to buy votes and call it democracy.
-
:frown:
-
we're screwed
-
Maybe our robust 1.5% GDP growth will get us out of this mess. :whistle1:
-
people realize we're marching towards our own economic death, right?
-
The eight stages of democracy
From bondage to spiritual faith;
From spiritual faith to great courage;
From courage to liberty;
From liberty to abundance;
From abundance to complacency;
From complacency to apathy;
From apathy to dependence; <---- we are here
From dependence back into bondage. <---- where libs want to be
-
DNfullR, do bene's include social security? I mean, those numbers are going to get much worse than that very soon if so. Thanks Baby Boomers!
-
DNfullR, do bene's include social security? I mean, those numbers are going to get much worse than that very soon if so. Thanks Baby Boomers!
I assumed not since it says "means tested" benefits.
Among the 108,592,000 people who fit the Census Bureau’s description of a means-tested benefit recipient in the fourth quarter of 2011 were 82,457,000 people in households receiving Medicaid, 49,073,000 beneficiaries of food stamps, 20,223,000 on Supplemental Security Income, 23,228,000 in the Women, Infants and Children program, 13,433,000 in public or subsidized rental housing, and 5,854,000 in the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program. Also among the 108,592,000 means-tested benefit recipients counted by the Census Bureau were people getting free or reduced-price lunch or breakfast, state-administered supplemental security income and means-tested veterans pensions.
The 108,592,000 people who were recipients of means-tested government programs in the fourth quarter of 2011 does not include people who received benefits from non-means-tested government programs but not from means-tested ones. That would include, for example, people who received Social Security, Medicare, unemployment, or non-means-tested veterans compensation, but did not receive benefits from a means-tested program such as food stamps or public housing.
-
DNfullR, do bene's include social security? I mean, those numbers are going to get much worse than that very soon if so. Thanks Baby Boomers!
I assumed not since it says "means tested" benefits.
Among the 108,592,000 people who fit the Census Bureau’s description of a means-tested benefit recipient in the fourth quarter of 2011 were 82,457,000 people in households receiving Medicaid, 49,073,000 beneficiaries of food stamps, 20,223,000 on Supplemental Security Income, 23,228,000 in the Women, Infants and Children program, 13,433,000 in public or subsidized rental housing, and 5,854,000 in the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program. Also among the 108,592,000 means-tested benefit recipients counted by the Census Bureau were people getting free or reduced-price lunch or breakfast, state-administered supplemental security income and means-tested veterans pensions.
The 108,592,000 people who were recipients of means-tested government programs in the fourth quarter of 2011 does not include people who received benefits from non-means-tested government programs but not from means-tested ones. That would include, for example, people who received Social Security, Medicare, unemployment, or non-means-tested veterans compensation, but did not receive benefits from a means-tested program such as food stamps or public housing.
Correct, only means-tested benefits (generally known as "welfare") are included. This means that Social Security Disability is not included either, though most of those people are probably on some other form of welfare anyway.
-
MODS: Please change thread title to " the official neocon circle jerk thead(WARNING no libtards allowed)".
TIA
-
MODS: Please change thread title to " the official neocon circle jerk thead(WARNING no libtards allowed)".
TIA
On the contrary, libs are necessary in this thread to explain how this is good news and great for the economy.
-
Reduced-price lunch is going to bring this country to its knees if it hasn't already.
-
CNSNews.com :lol:
-
CNSNews.com :lol:
Unlike NPR they're not funded by the government.
-
Yes, because my original post explicitly said "CNSnews.com, LOL, try NPRnews.com instead".
-
Also as a FWIW I listen to the Aceman and basically agree with most everything he says about his welfare experiences and what they can teach us about welfare reform.
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xLTTX35LNJo
-
CNSNews.com :lol:
Here SB, you can check the accuracy of the reporting:
http://www.census.gov/sipp/tables/quarterly-est/household-char/hsehld-char-11.html
http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/cpstables/032012/perinc/pinc07_000.htm
-
Oh I believe you. I was just LOLing because, you know, CNSnews.com is the source of articles posted on facebook by your weird relatives who hate everything Obama does and are weird and adamantly vocal about it all the time and spend way too much time typing status updates in ALL CAPITAL LETTERS!!!!!!
-
Yes, because my original post explicitly said "CNSnews.com, LOL, try NPRnews.com instead".
I was just quoting from their website. That's how they beg for money.
-
Oh I believe you. I was just LOLing because, you know, CNSnews.com is the source of articles posted on facebook by your weird relatives who hate everything Obama does and are weird and adamantly vocal about it all the time and spend way too much time typing status updates in ALL CAPITAL LETTERS!!!!!!
They do come up with some amazing credible stuff that gets ignored by every other investigative reporter.
But, as long as an article has credible sources to back up what they say, you can't just laugh and say 'Oh, its the Blaze, LOL". Now if it's just some reporter blabbing without anything to back them up, then you can say "Oh, its MSNBC, LOL" and move on. Part of being a moderate.
-
Pathetic*
*as to the substance of the article and the libtard response
-
13,433,000 in public or subsidized rental housing
This includes $100k earners we know.
Well, it did until last week. :frown:
-
13,433,000 in public or subsidized rental housing
This includes $100k earners we know.
Well, it did until last week. :frown:
I think we're talking federal benefits only here, not your rent control free loading friends.
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xLTTX35LNJo
did anyone watch this?
I feel like you guys would lol at it
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xLTTX35LNJo
did anyone watch this?
I feel like you guys would lol at it
i watched it.
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xLTTX35LNJo
did anyone watch this?
I feel like you guys would lol at it
i watched it.
:blank:
-
It's always a democratic libtard problem to them because they fail to account for wage stagnation, trade laws, and outsourcing.
You know real tangible issues besides finger pointing nonsense.
-
Headinjun bringing the heat! Zealtown, pop. Headinjun!
-
It's always a democratic libtard problem to them because they fail to account for wage stagnation, trade laws, and outsourcing.
You know real tangible issues besides finger pointing nonsense.
Everyone understands that the libtards are to blame for these things, they are juat skipping straight to finger pointing.
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xLTTX35LNJo
did anyone watch this?
I feel like you guys would lol at it
yoga-luke_abana
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xLTTX35LNJo
did anyone watch this?
I feel like you guys would lol at it
yoga-luke_abana
:thumbs:
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xLTTX35LNJo
did anyone watch this?
I feel like you guys would lol at it
i watched it.
:blank:
Nordic Justice is trying to start a race war in the comments section.
-
Maybe our robust 1.5% GDP growth will get us out of this mess. :whistle1:
our anemic growth, and the need to redistribute wealth in order to stimulate demand is a good reason to support some form of wealth transfer, even if these individual programs may do pretty poor jobs of it.
i think the trend towards underemployment and negative real wage growth of less educated/less skilled labor is a systemic problem that is only going to get worse in coming years. figuring out a way to ameliorate that issue is going to be a huge problem (i don't actually think we are likely to solve it).
-
:goodbyecruelworld:
-
Maybe our robust 1.5% GDP growth will get us out of this mess. :whistle1:
our anemic growth, and the need to redistribute wealth in order to stimulate demand is a good reason to support some form of wealth transfer, even if these individual programs may do pretty poor jobs of it.
i think the trend towards underemployment and negative real wage growth of less educated/less skilled labor is a systemic problem that is only going to get worse in coming years. figuring out a way to ameliorate that issue is going to be a huge problem (i don't actually think we are likely to solve it).
Handing out unearned money will never be the answer to GDP growth. People must work in a productive job and a friendly business environment is the only way it will ever happen.
-
Maybe our robust 1.5% GDP growth will get us out of this mess. :whistle1:
our anemic growth, and the need to redistribute wealth in order to stimulate demand is a good reason to support some form of wealth transfer, even if these individual programs may do pretty poor jobs of it.
i think the trend towards underemployment and negative real wage growth of less educated/less skilled labor is a systemic problem that is only going to get worse in coming years. figuring out a way to ameliorate that issue is going to be a huge problem (i don't actually think we are likely to solve it).
Handing out unearned money will never be the answer to GDP growth. People must work in a productive job and a friendly business environment is the only way it will ever happen.
a productive business environment doesn't solve the problem of an oversupply of labor. we're entering the technological equivalent of a slave economy, where free labor cannot earn a living wage, because their labor isn't actually worth a living wage. the only way to keep the economy moving is to find a way to pay/give them more than they're worth.
i mean, it's possible i'm wrong, and i dunno, boutique handmade pickles are going to provide a way for millions of people to earn a living. that'd be great, but i don't think it's going to happen.
expanding the earned income tax credit was the best thing reagan ever did. updating it would go a long way to solving the problem - for now.
-
Maybe our robust 1.5% GDP growth will get us out of this mess. :whistle1:
our anemic growth, and the need to redistribute wealth in order to stimulate demand is a good reason to support some form of wealth transfer, even if these individual programs may do pretty poor jobs of it.
i think the trend towards underemployment and negative real wage growth of less educated/less skilled labor is a systemic problem that is only going to get worse in coming years. figuring out a way to ameliorate that issue is going to be a huge problem (i don't actually think we are likely to solve it).
Handing out unearned money will never be the answer to GDP growth. People must work in a productive job and a friendly business environment is the only way it will ever happen.
a productive business environment doesn't solve the problem of an oversupply of labor. we're entering the technological equivalent of a slave economy, where free labor cannot earn a living wage, because their labor isn't actually worth a living wage. the only way to keep the economy moving is to find a way to pay/give them more than they're worth.
i mean, it's possible i'm wrong, and i dunno, boutique handmade pickles are going to provide a way for millions of people to earn a living. that'd be great, but i don't think it's going to happen.
expanding the earned income tax credit was the best thing reagan ever did. updating it would go a long way to solving the problem - for now.
John Dougie's idea is much better. Much more efficient and better long term to move the demand curve right, than constantly fighting to move the supply curve up.
You're basically proposing the solution to a gun shot wound is to change shirts.
-
What is hilarious is there are people in this thread who believe 82 million Americans are on Medicaid because they can't see the fun with numbers being had here.
-
What is hilarious is there are people in this thread who believe 82 million Americans are on Medicaid because they can't see the fun with numbers being had here.
I don't think anybody said that or believes it. The article is pretty straightforward.
-
Maybe our robust 1.5% GDP growth will get us out of this mess. :whistle1:
our anemic growth, and the need to redistribute wealth in order to stimulate demand is a good reason to support some form of wealth transfer, even if these individual programs may do pretty poor jobs of it.
i think the trend towards underemployment and negative real wage growth of less educated/less skilled labor is a systemic problem that is only going to get worse in coming years. figuring out a way to ameliorate that issue is going to be a huge problem (i don't actually think we are likely to solve it).
Handing out unearned money will never be the answer to GDP growth. People must work in a productive job and a friendly business environment is the only way it will ever happen.
a productive business environment doesn't solve the problem of an oversupply of labor. we're entering the technological equivalent of a slave economy, where free labor cannot earn a living wage, because their labor isn't actually worth a living wage. the only way to keep the economy moving is to find a way to pay/give them more than they're worth.
i mean, it's possible i'm wrong, and i dunno, boutique handmade pickles are going to provide a way for millions of people to earn a living. that'd be great, but i don't think it's going to happen.
expanding the earned income tax credit was the best thing reagan ever did. updating it would go a long way to solving the problem - for now.
First, your Keynesian theory is just that- a theory, and one that hasn't really panned out.
Second, please don't pretend the unsustainable expansion of our welfare state has anything to do with Keynesian economics or "stimulating" the economy. It is about buying votes, plain and simple. This is the Democratic power model that harkens all the way back to the first days of the party machine.
Third, you are completing ignoring the severe harm our massive welfare state has wrought. It is a cancer on the soul of America - our individualism, self sufficiency, and work ethos. Millions of able bodied Americans choose to live a marginal existence for "free" rather than work. More and more people drop out of the workforce and we celebrate that the unemployment rate is "dropping."
-
That's the most daxy dax post in awhile.
-
Oh man, who can forget the Democrats being swept into Congress in 2006 riding the coat tails of Fiscal Responsibility.
7 years later with Democrats controlling at least one branch of our legislative body the entire time as well as the executive office. The National Debt has increased at a record pace, Federal Budget Deficits range from $800 billion to $1.3 trillion a year. 5 years into the Obama Administration the unemployment rate is still over 7% and only there because the labor force is at an all time record low. More people on food stamps than ever, and an average of $700 to $800 billion a year being spent on government social welfare programs, while there are more people on the gov't dole than are actually in the work force. Meanwhile this year, those that actually work will flood the gov't cofers with record Tax Revenues and still the gov't will fall $800 billion dollars short of paying its bills. Not to mention the administrations hallmark legislation has limped into action with a catastrophic whimper.
The Democrat response: Don't question us.
Check and Balances: Only if a Republican is President.
And the GOP's response is to make sure gay people can't get married and abortions should be illegal.
-
Welfare is a beautiful thing! It completely disconnects you from reality, and your loyalty/dependance belongs to the state... http://gopthedailydose.com/2013/10/22/memphis-house-fire-leaves-3yo-dead-aunt-just-wants-food-stamps/
Go ahead left-tards, knock the "gopdailydose" and pay no attention to the words that come out of her mouth.
-
Welfare is a beautiful thing! It completely disconnects you from reality, and your loyalty/dependance belongs to the state... http://gopthedailydose.com/2013/10/22/memphis-house-fire-leaves-3yo-dead-aunt-just-wants-food-stamps/
Go ahead left-tards, knock the "gopdailydose" and pay no attention to the words that come out of her mouth.
its comical watching the libtards/obamabots defend this.
-
Oh man, who can forget the Democrats being swept into Congress in 2006 riding the coat tails of Fiscal Responsibility.
7 years later with Democrats controlling at least one branch of our legislative body the entire time as well as the executive office. The National Debt has increased at a record pace, Federal Budget Deficits range from $800 billion to $1.3 trillion a year. 5 years into the Obama Administration the unemployment rate is still over 7% and only there because the labor force is at an all time record low. More people on food stamps than ever, and an average of $700 to $800 billion a year being spent on government social welfare programs, while there are more people on the gov't dole than are actually in the work force. Meanwhile this year, those that actually work will flood the gov't cofers with record Tax Revenues and still the gov't will fall $800 billion dollars short of paying its bills. Not to mention the administrations hallmark legislation has limped into action with a catastrophic whimper.
The Democrat response: Don't question us.
Check and Balances: Only if a Republican is President.
Let's not forget that since 2006 and before we've had the republican policies of :
-Occupying two foreign nations with no revenue to pay for it
- a new homeland security dept with no revenue to pay for it.
- Medicare part d with no revenue to pay for it
- a more than doubling of the DOD budget with no revenue to pay for it.
These things are still with us and the elected right has never proposed or allowed these things to have a revenue source.
-
Democrats would not agree to make cuts to balance these expenses, and pubs would not raise taxes to pay for them. They both agreed they were necessary. Would you support a balanced budget amendment?
-
I've got no problem with those facts Dax.
I do think that both sides get swept up into the MIC.
what I do have a problem with is the conservatives thinking they can just completely wash their hands of the costs of the things they spearheaded for.
We see all this bitching about the projected costs of "Obamacare" but see no bitching about the historical bills come due for the republican policies of yesteryear. Policies that would be fought for by the right if the left decided to end them.
-
I've got no problem with those facts Dax.
I do think that both sides get swept up into the MIC.
what I do have a problem with is the conservatives thinking they can just completely wash their hands of the costs of the things they spearheaded for.
We see all this bitching about the projected costs of "Obamacare" but see no bitching about the historical bills come due for the republican policies of yesteryear. Policies that would be fought for by the right if the left decided to end them.
That's not the subject of this thread. Regardless, the fact that republicans joined in bipartisan profligacy in the past is hardly an excuse for the present unipartisan profligacy. Again though, not the subject of this thread.
-
Man... This woman might be too dependent on her food stamps.
http://youtu.be/xx2McAGUF88
-
If she did lose her card in the fire, I would like her contact info, I would be glad to make her whole until she receives her new one. Government is just not equipted to move fast enough in these situations.