Reply With Quote
Do you internet buddies think those "cartoons" are funny, m<s?
Keep it up UTA.
Do you internet buddies think those "cartoons" are funny, m<s?
Yeah, like that? Do they think it's funny?
I know since you're hurt all you can do is post all of them you can find, but who really likes those?
Probably need to take a break, little fella.
the quality of your memes keeps going down :-DDDKeep it up UTA.
Did you read the article? There was no classification of SS as welfare, but more broadly the "safety net" which I think is fair as it's a social insurance program.Cpbb putting out analysis once again.
Classing SS benefits as welfare?
Holy ing .
I not only read the article, I read the study.
The en lement and mandatory programs covered in the analysis are Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, unemployment insurance, SNAP (formerly known as the Food Stamp Program), SSI, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), the school lunch program, the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP), the Earned Income Tax Credit, and the refundable component of the Child Tax Credit.* This is the full list of en lement or mandatory programs (other than the veterans’ and federal retirement programs) for which the Census Bureau collects data on which beneficiaries receive them.* It includes every en lement or mandatory benefit program with annual federal and state expenditures of over $10 billion other than veterans’ and federal retirement programs.*
It lumps it in with en lement/welafre spending which it certainly is not.
I can understand the view of social insurane but as a compnent of a "safety net", I disagree.
SS is not an en lement?
Perhaps. Welfare? No.
And it sure as aint a handout as the OP gleefully describes it.
The only person who called it welfare was you. The purpose of SS was to prevent poverty in old age. How is that not a safety net program? What do you take issue with, the fact that people pay into SS? Seems you'd take issue with Medicare being included as well.
The op spoke to a very specific portion of the study, which was based on race and was bolded. No one referred to SS as a handout.
No, the study treats it as if its welfare...there is no deliniation in the data nor weighting.
I have no issue with paying into SS at all nor medicare.
But SS is contractual in its inception and implementation as opposed to social welfare programs in general.
en lement is pejorative term used by the Repugs to slander 1%er St Ronnie's "welfare queens in cadillacs" and "young bucks", ie, en led but NOT deserving, iow, a giveaway to the undeserving.
But one is both en led to AND deserves SS payments because one paid SS for 40 or more working quarters.
In the VRWC/Repug decades long strategy of cutting the safety net while cutting taxes on the wealthy:
A cut to Social Security disability benefits may be around the corner
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/g...nd-the-corner/
... Repugs LIE that disability fraud is rampant, so all disability claimants must be punished.
Whites in poverty take more government handouts more than blacks in poverty.
SS is not a handout.
The broader point of the study was to define on what en lements the fed is spending money irrespective of whether or not it's contractual. I see value in that. Why does the data need to be delineated other than to color some programs as handouts?
Disregard....
There is value, albeit quite generic, in the study. It's the associations made by mouthbreathers like the OP that couch it incorrectly.
He was refering to handouts of which, SS is not.
SS data was used in the paper. It is couched as a handout by the OP. Ergo, by dint of lazy conflation, SS is a handout as well.
There is more value, IMO, in determining the variances in SS data, if such exists
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
