Tag Archives: welfare

GOP Mayor Wants to Publically Shame the Poor!

Wow! Talk about an evil GOP bastard with no sense of empathy, morals, or shame.

In 1834 a new Poor Law was introduced in the UK. Some people welcomed it because they believed it would:

  • reduce the cost of looking after the poor
  • take beggars off the streets
  • encourage poor people to work hard to support themselves

The new Poor Law ensured that the poor were housed in workhouses, clothed and fed. Children who entered the workhouse would receive some schooling. In return for this care, all workhouse paupers would have to work for several hours each day. The poor objected, and rioted against the law.

GOP mayor wants to build a website to publicly shame welfare recipients in his town

Lewiston Mayor Robert Macdonald has had enough. The Republican executive of the second-largest city in Maine wants to publicly shame the recipients of welfare in his state with a website listing every individual’s name, address and length of time on assistance.

Writing in an op-ed titled, “Enough is Enough: Mainers have a right to know how their money is spent,” Macdonald proposed “a major overhaul of the many laws and policies dealing with confidentiality” and called for a website listing the personal information of every Maine resident receiving public assistance — or as he referred to it, “on the dole.”

Privacy laws, Macdonald contended, were an impediment to Maine residents’ right to know how their tax dollars are being spent, pointing to the “the fear they strike into the average law-abiding citizen.”

Macdonald, who writes a regular column for the Twin City Times, is running for reelection and promised to submit a bill for consideration to the state legislature that is model after an existing website listing recipients of state-funded pensions:

In Maine there is a website that lists the pension amounts received by everyone who is issued a monthly check by the State of Maine. No privacy here because this is being paid out by the State; accordingly, taxpayers have a right to know.

Yet other recipients of state revenues are shielded. Yes, I am referring to those known as welfare recipients.  Why are they treated differently than pensioners? (A rhetorical question).

The answer: our liberal, progressive legislators and their social-service allies have made them a victimized, protected class. It’s none of your business how much of your money they get and spend. Who are you to question it? Just shut up and pay!

Well, the days of being quiet are gone. We will be submitting a bill to the next legislative session asking that a website be created containing the names, addresses, length of time on assistance and the benefits being collected by every individual on the dole. After all, the public has a right to know how its money is being spent.

But that’s not all. Macdonald also promised to introduce a measure cutting off public assistance to low-income Mainers for any child born while the mother is already receiving welfare as well as a 60-month lifetime limit on benefits.

Macdonald ended his weekly column by promising to “talk about our progressive liberal friends’ war on the elderly” in next week’s edition.

Prisons as warehouses for the poor…

1 Comment

Posted by on September 24, 2015 in Stupid Republican Tricks, Stupid Tea Bagger Tricks


Tags: , , , , , ,

On that conservative Welfare Meme & Uncle Ben Carson

An 1860’s handbill, containing all of the elements of the current conservative-Republican belief system abut race, welfare, and white victimization

In the late 1860’s conservatives, including the first KKK, sought to stir up white resentment by attacking the Freedmen’s Bureau with a number of falsified accusations. Like today’s conservatives (with the help of the 3rd KKK), today’s Republicans argue the “dissolution of the black family” the loss of “work ethic”, and “black laziness” having as a root cause the Great Society (re: Welfare) Programs instituted under President Lyndon Johnson. Frequently quoting numbers of $15 trillion to $30 trillion devise by the conservative “think tank” The Heritage Institute, racist conservatives conveniently ignore the fact that the Heritage Institutes numbers are fake – and that whatever that amount may be – nearly 80% of that money was spent on places like The Great White Ghetto, and other areas of the Republican led, poverty stricken South. Not the inner city, mostly black ghetto.

The same three elements are carried over from this racist handbill to today’s racist Republican Party:

  • The “Hard working white man” vs the “Lazy Negro”
  • White Victimization in terms of (falsely claimed) benefits to whites vs blacks
  • That hard working whites are supporting lazy blacks though their hard earned tax money.

Ben Carson’s claim that ‘we have 10 times more people on welfare’ since the 1960s

Ben Carson, a neurosurgeon who is seeking the GOP presidential nomination, asserted in a television interview that government efforts to ease poverty have largely been a failure. He specifically made two claims — that $19 trillion has been spent on anti-poverty programs since the mid-1960s and that “we have 10 times more people on welfare.” More generally, he also said that there are more people living in poverty.

We’ve often explained that statistics can be manipulated when comparing decades. For instance, the population of the United States is 60 percent larger in 2015 than it was in 1965, so it may not be relevant to compare raw numbers. There are definitional issues, such as what constitutes an “anti-poverty” or “welfare” program. Is it all means-tested programs, including health insurance such as Medicaid that also assists people above the poverty line? Or should it be limited to traditional anti-poverty programs such as Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF)?

Let’s check out Carson’s math.

The Facts

Eligibility for participation in government benefit programs can be based either on financial need (means-tested) or the occurrence of an event (such as reaching retirement age). Examples of mean-tested “social welfare” programs include TANF; food stamps; Supplemental Security Income (SSI) for the disabled; Special Supplemental Nutritional Program for Women, Infants and Children (WIC); public or subsidized rental housing; free or reduced-priced school meals; and Medicaid, the health insurance program for the poor.

Doug Watts, a Carson campaign spokesman, said, “We’re speaking of means-tested public assistance programs.”

Under that rubric, the “federal government is spending almost $1 trillion a year on welfare programs that provide cash, food, housing, medical treatment, social services, training, and education to poor and low-income Americans,” providing benefits and cash to almost 100 million recipients, Watts said. “Dr. Carson recognizes the need and value of public assistance. Our point is the way government has addressed it, by virtually throwing money and programs, that have mostly proved ineffective or inadequate at reducing poverty.”

The poverty rate in 1965 was 15 percent, when the “war on poverty” announced by President Lyndon Johnson began to be implemented; Watts noted that in 2010 it was still 15 percent. (It was 14.5 percent in 2013, the first drop since 2006.) Watts also provided two other figures, though without providing a source: In 1965, Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) “had roughly 400,000 cases (recipients),” he said. “In 2015, TANF (the successor to AFDC) had 3.1 million recipients. That alone is 8 times.”

100 million recipients

Definitions are important for this number, which is made up primarily of people on Medicaid (64.9 million people in 2014) and food stamps (46.5 million in 2014). But Medicaid is increasingly aimed at the elderly (people in nursing homes) or the disabled. “Medicaid spending per participant is much higher for people who are elderly, disabled, or pregnant than it is for nondisabled children or for working-age adults who are not disabled or pregnant,” the Congressional Budget Office said in a report. The Medicaid rolls have also expanded because the Affordable Care Act extended it to some people with income above the Federal Poverty Level.

The 100 million figure is a bit misleading, though, because it includes anyone who resides in a household in which at least one person (such as someone who is disabled) receives a means-tested payment. As of the fourth quarter of 2012, the Census Bureau says, the number stood at 109 million, but the Medicaid figure is listed as nearly 82 million, far higher than the number of people who actually receive Medicaid. Indeed, other census data indicates that 82 percent of the households that receive means-tested benefits included at least one person who was working.

In a May report, the Census Bureau said 52.2 million people — 21.3 percent of the population— participated in one or more major means-tested assistance programs, on average, each month. That seems a much more reasonable figure to use — and it’s about half the size of number touted by the Carson campaign.

The poverty rate

In saying that the poverty rate has barely changed, the Carson campaign is referring to the official poverty rate. It is worth noting that even by the official metric, the rate has declined slightly since 1965. But increasingly scholars believe the official figure is not especially informative because noncash benefits such as Medicaid, food stamps or public housing are not recorded as income, meaning it does not capture the effect of anti-poverty programs that Carson suggests are ineffective.

The Census Bureau has tried to mitigate these concerns with a Supplemental Poverty Measure (SPM) introduced in 2011. In fact, the 2014 report by the White House Council of Economic Advisers reassessed poverty rates over time using the SPM.

“Poverty rates fell from 25.8 percent in 1967 to 16 percent in 2012 — a decline of nearly 40 percent,” the report concluded. “In 2012 alone, the combined effect of all federal tax, cash and in-kind aid programs was to lift approximately 14.5 percent of the population — over 45 million people — out of poverty.”

$19 trillion in spending

Carson’s $19 trillion figure is within the range of estimates by right-leaning organizations that have placed spending for anti-poverty programs at $15 trillion to $20 trillion in the past 50 years. These figures, which are in inflation-adjusted dollars, include spending on about 80 means-tested programs by the federal government, plus state and local governments. The estimates include items such as nearly $100 billion for education programs, with about half devoted to Pell Grants for college, as well as the refundable portion of the Earned Income Tax Credit — which one can receive receive if you hold a job. So some might find it debatable that all of these programs constitute “welfare.”

Medicaid, again, is a huge part of the number — but the growth in the Medicaid budget is reflective of increases in health-care costs in general. The Congressional Research Service, in a 2012 report, says that between 1962 and 2011, “federal outlays for low-income health programs have increased, in inflation-adjusted terms, at a rate of 13.3 percent per year versus 6.5 percent for other spending.”

And while $19 trillion sounds like a lot of money, that’s over half a century. In context, federal spending in constant dollars amounts to nearly $110 trillion in that period.…More…


Tags: , , , , , , , ,

Republicans and Welfare


Poor people are “animals”…

Leave a comment

Posted by on July 14, 2015 in American Greed, Domestic terrorism


Tags: , , , , ,

Republicans on Welfare

A favorite conservative line is that they are paying for black folks on welfare with their taxes. The following is a list of the counties in America with the highest Food Stamp benefits…

Starr Texas 63,177 36% 63% 19% +6%
Costilla Colorado 3,173 24% 62% 77% +22%
McKinley New Mexico 71,477 28% 56% 0% +11%
Owsley Kentucky 4,667 49% 49% >90% +5%
Wolfe Kentucky 6,933 42% 43% 14% +5%
Clay Kentucky 24,102 37% 39% 9% +5%
Ripley Missouri 13,446 39% 39% 22% +22%
Lee Kentucky 7,389 37% 39% 6% +3%
McCreary Kentucky 17,341 37% 38% 7% +8%
Hancock Tennessee 6,669 37% 38% 26% +18%
Dunklin Missouri 31,300 44% 37% >90% +16%
Grundy Tennessee 14,182 36% 37% 6% +29%
Magoffin Kentucky 13,101 37% 37% 18% +2%
Carter Missouri 5,867 36% 37% 60% +14%
Washington Missouri 24,817 35% 36% 18% +24%

Notice anything?

ANd the two counties where “>90%” of black folks are on food stamps?

Dunklin, Missouri

The racial makeup of the county was 88.64% White, 8.68% Black or African American, 0.31% Native American, 0.27% Asian, 0.01% Pacific Islander, 1.03% from other races, and 1.06% from two or more races.

Owsley, Kentucky

The racial makeup of the county was 99.22% White, 0.10% Black or African American, 0.06% Native American, 0.04% Asian, 0.02% Pacific Islander, 0.02% from other races, and 0.54% from two or more races. 0.72% of the population were Hispanics or Latinos of any race.

You can look at the full data set here.

A Map showing the levels of SNAP recipients on a County level also shows something else interesting. The majority of the counties in America with 25%, 50%, or more on Food Stamps…

Are in the very Republican South. The darker areas represent counties where 30% or more of the population is on SNAP.

According to a TIME analysis of county-by-county food stamp enrollment data, GOP politicians represent more districts that majorly (30%+) participate in SNAP than Democrats.

Tags: , , , , , , , ,

Republican District Hurt By Budget Cuts

Last night’s Gubernatorial election in Virginia went about as expected, although the Republican challenger was a bit closer than projected. Looking at the voting acrss the State, the more populaous and prosperous areas voted overwhelmingly Democrat, while rural counties and the southwestern mountain are voted heavily Republican.

There are a lot of similarities between those areas and the area in this article in Kentucky. Poor white folks voting for their own misery… wonder when these folks are going to finally wake up and realize their Tea Party representatives don’t give a damn about their welfare.

Austerity deals harsh blow to already stricken land

Republican Congressman Hal Rogers brought so many federal dollars home to eastern Kentucky’s coal country, he was crowned “Prince of Pork.”

Now that spigot has been turned off, just when his district might actually need it the most.

Competition from natural gas, cheaper coal, and environmental regulations have hastened the demise of the mining industry here, already in decline. More than 6,200 eastern Kentucky miners have been laid off since July 2011. There are now fewer coal jobs here than in 1920, when the great-grandfathers of today’s miners wielded shovels and pick-axes.

But sequestration—a series of across-the-board spending cuts that many Tea Party Republicans have come to embrace—and other austerity measures have accelerated the economic free fall. Unemployment benefits to laid-off miners are shrinking; fewer meals are getting delivered to homebound seniors; and there’s less money to help workers retool for new jobs. Beginning Friday, food stamps will be cut by an average of $36 per month for a family of four.

It’s yet another blow to struggling Appalachian mining towns like Harlan, where the mayor estimates that 15% of the town’s residents have moved out in the past year, searching for work elsewhere.

Unsold guns are piling up in pawnshops. Even the local mortician is feeling the pinch: grieving relatives are downgrading from hardwood coffins to two-gauge steel, and ordering five baskets of flowers instead of twenty or thirty. “If I don’t sell to the coal people, I don’t sell,” one Harlan businessman explained.

Rogers has been one of the few Republicans to slam sequestration as devastating, unworkable, and unrealistic. Unless Congress decides otherwise, $109 billion in cuts will continue every year until 2021—a budget that Rogers must implement as chair of the House Appropriations Committee. But many of his Republicans colleagues have embraced the $85 billion in cuts this year as guaranteed spending cuts. It’s unlikely that budget negotiations that started this week in Congress will reverse all of them.

The incremental nature of sequestration —slow rolling, local, and scattered unevenly nationwide—has made the belt-tightening hard to measure and easy to dismiss since the cuts took effect in March. “The people that I’ve talked to seem to be doing well,” Missouri Rep. Billy Long said in April. “In fact, when I got out in restaurants here in town, people come up to me. They want to see more sequestration, not less.”

Even some Democrats believe the White House overhyped the cuts when it made dire predictions about their impact, some of which didn’t pan out. “I think they probably went over the top in terms of saying that the consequences were going to be horrible. The lines in the airports aren’t long, the world hasn’t changed overnight,” said former Pennsylvania Gov. Ed Rendell.

But Harlan sees long lines. They are in the unemployment office, filled with out-of-work miners chasing any rumor of jobs left to be had. A TV in the waiting area explains how federal cuts have chipped away at the safety net most had hoped they would never need.

“Sequestration…What does that mean for you? Your Emergency Unemployment Compensation benefits that begin on or after March 31, 2013 must be reduced 10.7% for each week of unemployment through September 2013.”

“Sequestration is a terrible way to do business. I’ve said it since day one. It slices the good with the bad, and removes the duty of Congress to ensure vital programs, like Head Start and various grant programs receive adequate support,” Rogers told MSNBC. “Couple those deep cuts with the rapid loss of coal mining jobs in eastern Kentucky and we’re now facing an economic superstorm.”

For Donnie Reeves, 40, each passing week of unemployment means less security. He lost his mining job in March, just weeks before his wife Tiffanie lost her job as a teaching assistant. “After December, it’s no more unemployment, no more nothing,” he said in August.

“I would have to work a minimum of three jobs, each 40 hours a week at minimum wage. That’s to keep the lights on. No groceries, no gas,” said Donnie, who made $70,000 in his best year.

Donnie spent the summer retraining for a factory job through an emergency federal program spared—this time—from sequestration’s axe. Tiffanie found a job helping unemployed Kentuckians like her husband find work.

But with two teenage kids and their hometown’s economy in tatters, the Reeves know that their future may lie outside Harlan, leaving behind a family rooted here for more than 120 years.

“Tiff,” he told her last spring, when they were first considering the idea, “we’re giving up.”…


Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,

Welfare and “White Trash”

One of the favorite theories of the racial conservative set is that “Welfare destroyed the back community”. It is a popular “adage” reinforced by paid Uncle Toms like Larry Elder and Thomas Sowell. Unfortunately for white conservatives …There are a few Mack Truck size holes in that argument…

  1. The majority of people who receive “welfare: and have received welfare since the 1930’s (35-40 years before the Great Society opened up welfare to black folks) are white.
  2. The black poverty rate in 1960 was 60%. Today, it is at a stubborn 20% and has been pretty much since the end of Clinton. The “Great Society” and Liberal ideas like “Equal Opportunity” resulted in the largest migration from poverty of any group in this country’s history.What the Great Society did not do, despite billions in investment, by and large is to move the large groups of southern and Appalachian whites into productivity. Much of conservative racial hysteria, and conservative racial resentment against blacks, Hispanics, and immigrants comes from the fact that those groups are in some part at least – succeeding.
  3. The “Black Community” envisioned in conservative mindset is the inner city. The vast majority of black folks, and even the majority of black poor folks  don’t live there anymore.  Indeed, according to some studies over 80% of black folks in the US now live in suburban or rural communities.
  4. Lastly, if welfare destroyed the black community… Why exactly hasn’t it had the same effect on the white community?

Thomas Sowell’s least popular book among conservatives is “Black Rednecks and white Liberals“. The reason is, while doing his usual buckdance about the depravity of the black community – he opens the door to the same issues afflicting a portion of the white community… specifically In the infamous Red State Zone. His theory is that black folks learned dysfunctional behavior from dysfunctional white folks during slavery (AKA Rednecks). While going into great detail about what he theorizes happened to the “Black community”, he utterly ignores where that white “Redneck” community, which now comprise the most faithful conservative voters went.

Republican Representative Dana Rohrabacher kinda lets that cat out of the bag yesterday with his tweet..

Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R-Calif.) said on Twitter this week that he would like to “defund white trash” who take advantage of federal social programs.

Rohrabacher made the remark in a reply to a Twitter user who was complaining about immigration policy.

Ga_bree_lla @ga_bree_ella@ImmortalTech @danarohrabacher Its ok for lazywhitetrash 2live off food stamps but won’t legalize my ppl who actuall contributetothiscountry

Dana Rohrabacher ✔ @DanaRohrabacher@ga_bree_ella would defund white trash, but not our vets , seniors & other deserving Americans 2 provide benefits 2 those here illegally

House Republicans are seeking cuts to food stamps that would trim the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program‘s cost by roughly 5 percent over 10 years.

In June, Rohrabacher said that John Boehner (R-Ohio) should be removed from his position as House speaker if he brought immigration reform to a full vote without majority support from Republicans.

Charles Blow hit the nail on the head with the following article Please follow the link and read the rest) –

‘A Town Without Pity’

America was once the land of Lady Liberty, beckoning the world: “Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, the wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me. I lift my lamp beside the golden door!”

No more.

Today’s America — at least as measured by the actions and inactions of the pariahs who roam its halls of power and the people who put them there — is insular, cruel and uncaring.

In this America, people blame welfare for creating poverty rather than for mitigating the impact of it. An NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll in June foundthat the No. 1 reason people gave for our continuing poverty crisis was: “Too much welfare that prevents initiative.”

In this America, the House can — as it did in July — pass a farm bill that left out the food stamp program at a time when a record number of Americans, nearly 48 million, are depending on the benefits.

In this America, a land of immigrants, comprehensive immigration reform can be stalled in The People’s Branch of government, and anti-reform mouthpieces like Ann Coulter and Pat Buchanan can warn that immigration reform will be the end of the country.

And in today’s America, poverty and homelessness can easily seep beneath the wall we erect in our minds to define it.

A December report by the United States Conference of Mayors that surveyed 25 cities found that all but 4 of them reported an increase in requests for emergency food aid since 2011, and three-fourths of them expected those requests to increase in 2013.

The report also found that 60 percent of the cities surveyed had seen an increase in homelessness, and the same percentage of cities expected homelessness to increase in 2013.

But poverty isn’t easily written off as an inner-city ailment. It has now become a suburban problem. A report this week by the Brookings Institution found that “during the 2000s, major metropolitan suburbs became home to the largest and fastest-growing poor population in America.”

Nor can economic insecurity be written off as a minorities-only issue. According to survey results published last month by The Associated Press:

“Nonwhites still have a higher risk of being economically insecure, at 90 percent. But compared with the official poverty rate, some of the biggest jumps under the newer measure are among whites, with more than 76 percent enduring periods of joblessness, life on welfare or near-poverty.”…


Tags: , , , , , , , ,

Who’s Your Daddy? About Black Folks and Charity

That Christian spirit… Don’t believe it?

Check this out.

Charitable Donations: Blacks Outpace Whites

Black Emplyees Influence Corporations to Give

Reuters is reporting today on a study showing that African American donors give higher percentages of their incomes to charity than their white counterparts, with nearly two-thirds of black households make charitable donations, worth a total of about $11 billion a year. And it’s not just a little more: that number means black donors turn over a full 25 percent more of their incomes than white donors annually, according to the W.K. Kellogg Foundation and Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors research.  The results have many wondering why more African Americans don’t self-identify as philanthropists.

From Reuters:

But they don’t see themselves as big players in the charitable arena, and that presents an image problem, say experts like Judy Belk, a senior vice president for Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors.

“African Americans have been very uncomfortable with the title of philanthropist,” Belk said. “If you don’t see role models who look like you when people start talking about issues related to philanthropy, you start believing, ‘Hey, maybe I’m not a philanthropist.'”

Belk said she got so weary of hearing this that she helped produce a 12-minute video released in November, dubbed, “I Am A Philanthropist,” which features diverse faces, races and ethnicities of donors and grant-makers. .  .

The report cites black churches as a historically important repository of giving, but notes that other important causes are coming to the fore.

While religious giving was the largest charitable category overall, it leveled off in dollar terms in 2010, according to Giving USA, a Chicago-area foundation that publishes philanthropy data and trends. At the same time, contributions for the arts increased almost 6 percent, a trend that was consistent across all racial groups.

Leave a comment

Posted by on February 24, 2012 in Giant Negros, The Post-Racial Life


Tags: , , , , , , ,


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 205 other followers