thegreatRDU
Topic Author
Posts: 884
Joined: Tue Mar 07, 2006 10:47 am

Naacp Blasts Santorum For Welfare Remarks

Thu Jan 05, 2012 6:22 pm

"At a campaign stop in Sioux City, Iowa on Sunday, Santorum was talking about entitlement reform when he said, "I don't want to make black people's lives better by giving them somebody else's money; I want to give them the opportunity to go out and earn the money."

It's strange how nobody had said anything about Black people...the question was about entitlement reform...

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_1...ting-blacks-in-entitlement-reform/
Our Returning Champion
 
PSA53
Posts: 2928
Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2003 1:54 pm

RE: Naacp Blasts Santorum For Welfare Remarks

Thu Jan 05, 2012 8:19 pm

I agree in what Santorum wants to achieve.But unfortunately, he just worded all wrong I agree with the NAACP in the way it was presented.
Tuesday's Off! Do not disturb.
 
User avatar
pu
Posts: 1316
Joined: Sat Dec 03, 2011 1:08 am

RE: Naacp Blasts Santorum For Welfare Remarks

Thu Jan 05, 2012 9:18 pm

I think its stupid to pretend entitlement spending and race are not related. Likewise the NAACP criticism is out of place since this is (whether you agree with him or not) what Mr Santorum genuinely believes will help black people.

I just did a very fast google search and according to the US census about 1 in 4 black mothers receive public assistance compared to less than 10 percent for whites. Presumably if Mr Santorum helps people get off entitlements this will actually benefit blacks disproportionately versus whites since blacks are disproportionate recipients of entitlements.

Pu
 
redflyer
Posts: 3881
Joined: Thu Feb 24, 2005 3:30 am

RE: Naacp Blasts Santorum For Welfare Remarks

Thu Jan 05, 2012 9:45 pm

Quoting thegreatRDU (Thread starter):
It's strange how nobody had said anything about Black people...the question was about entitlement reform...

I watched the video. The entirety of it was Santorum talking. So how do we know what the question was?
My other home is a Piper Cherokee 180C
 
TransIsland
Posts: 1826
Joined: Wed Mar 03, 2004 9:22 pm

RE: Naacp Blasts Santorum For Welfare Remarks

Fri Jan 06, 2012 12:00 am

Quoting thegreatRDU (Thread starter):
"At a campaign stop in Sioux City, Iowa on Sunday, Santorum was talking about entitlement reform when he said, "I don't want to make black people's lives better by giving them somebody else's money; I want to give them the opportunity to go out and earn the money."

What he means is that he doesn't want to make Obama's life better by paying him a presidential salary funded by other people's (i.e. taxpayers') money.   
I'm an aviation expert. I have Sky Juice for breakfast.
 
User avatar
stasisLAX
Posts: 2924
Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 9:04 am

RE: Naacp Blasts Santorum For Welfare Remarks

Fri Jan 06, 2012 2:40 am

Well, at least Ricky didn't make any "man-on-dog" sex remarks.

Source: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/0...103.html?ncid=edlinkusaolp00000003

Honestly, I lived in Pennsylvania when he was a U.S. Senator, and he's an complete idiot. He was more interested in "wedge issues" like abortion and gay marriage (to build his credentials with the far-right wingnuts) then he was in economic issues that effect the everyday lives of middle class Pennsylvanians, thus he was voted out of office in the 2006 election. Santorum also spent almost all of his time in Washington DC (residing in Virginia), and spent less than a month in Pennsylvania - while lying and saying his kids were in Pennsylvania and allowing the PA school district where he supposedly resided to spend almost $90000 for "online enrollment" in a "virtual" school for his 6 children..... The voters of Pennsylvania had enough of his antics, and voted Ricky out.
"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety!" B.Franklin
 
User avatar
Dreadnought
Posts: 9809
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2008 6:31 pm

RE: Naacp Blasts Santorum For Welfare Remarks

Fri Jan 06, 2012 2:27 pm

Santorum's words were stupidly chosen, but he (and reasonable people) are trying to fight the takeover of this country by stupidity and laziness, and especially those who encourage and facilitate these things.

From the files of “just when you thought they could not be any more stupid” moments, here's this story:

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...diploma-might-violate-americans-w/

Quote:
Employers are facing more uncertainty in the wake of a letter from the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission warning them that requiring a high school diploma from a job applicant might violate the Americans with Disabilities Act.

This is the Obama Administration for you. Requiring a job applicant to be able to read and write and do high-school level math is discrimination!

Now, if not having a HS Diploma is a disability, when will the demands come for disability pension checks for everyone who decided to skive off classes at 16 and hang out on the streets?

The purpose of the Obama Administration is nothing more or less than what Cloward and Pivin advocated 40 years ago. Find every way to get as many people on the dole as possible, so that they will greedily vote for the party that gives them checks and the trend becomes irreversible, and watch the system collapse. We are at the tipping point now, where those people who see government as their baby-daddy will outnumber those of us who have to pay for it.

I know a woman who is a nurse at a nursing home. She''s 70 years old, and she is a kind, attentive lady who cares for people older than herself. She took care of my grandmother for 10 years. She lives in a home with 7 other people - all her children and grandchildren. All are adult age, and NONE of them has a job, and none of them even wants a job according to Mary - they are all on some form of "assistance". Mary is at a loss what to do - she's 70 and is the only one actually earning a paycheck.

In California - a pinnacle of progressiveness for many years, the graduation rate for minorities runs between 50 and 60%. Those who don't graduate don't go on to trade schools and learn to do something useful - they are the type of people who end up like in Mary's household. A culture has been developed that (unlike generations ago), there is no social stigma or shame attached to being a bum, and a leech on society. You are now entitled.

I see very little hope any president will be able to change this trend. The US is screwed. It may one day recover, via a strong backlash by productive members of society saying "enough!", but it will get very very ugly, as required reforms would be antithetical to the propaganda we've been hearing for years, such as only people who are taxpayers or have jobs should have the right to vote. It may require a brand new Constitution. I'm afraid the old one, as brilliant and inspired as it was, has been utterly bastardized and misinterpreted by now enough that the sitting president can chose to ignore it any time he wants to.
Forget dogs and cats - Spay and neuter your liberals.
 
User avatar
casinterest
Posts: 5358
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 5:30 am

RE: Naacp Blasts Santorum For Welfare Remarks

Fri Jan 06, 2012 7:01 pm

Quoting dreadnought (Reply 6):
Santorum's words were stupidly chosen, but he (and reasonable people) are trying to fight the takeover of this country by stupidity and laziness, and especially those who encourage and facilitate these things.

Don't make this about something it isn't.
Santorum made a remark based on preconcieved notions of race and not poverty.
if his attittude is shaped more by race than by econimics then he isn't fit to lead . End of story.


Quit turning it into an Obama battle.
Older than I just was ,and younger than I will soo be.
 
PPVRA
Posts: 7864
Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2004 7:48 am

RE: Naacp Blasts Santorum For Welfare Remarks

Sat Jan 07, 2012 12:06 am

Quoting dreadnought (Reply 6):
Santorum's words were stupidly chosen, but he (and reasonable people) are trying to fight the takeover of this country by stupidity and laziness, and especially those who encourage and facilitate these things.
Quote:




I’m rather tired of all the people who don’t like Romney trying to claim Rick Santorum is not a big government conservative. . .
http://www.redstate.com/erick/2012/0...overnment-conservative-looks-like/

In the link, a rather large list of dubious votes, including in support of welfare.

Santorum is every bit as statist as Obama. And this is not an exaggeration, he has himself declared that he is not an "individual liberties" type of guy. He is a collectivist through and through, just not the same type we are used to seeing.

[Edited 2012-01-06 16:21:19]
"If goods do not cross borders, soldiers will" - Frederic Bastiat
 
FlyPNS1
Posts: 5260
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:12 am

RE: Naacp Blasts Santorum For Welfare Remarks

Sat Jan 07, 2012 12:15 am

Quoting dreadnought (Reply 6):
Santorum's words were stupidly chosen, but he (and reasonable people) are trying to fight the takeover of this country by stupidity and laziness, and especially those who encourage and facilitate these things.

Except you miss a few key points.

Many of those who receive aid actually HAVE jobs and do work hard. However, their pay is so little they are still in poverty and thus get benefits. Remember, even some members of the military get food stamps.

The bigger problem you miss is what do we do with the chunk of the population that isn't so bright. Regardless of race, there is a chunk of our population that has an IQ between 75-90. Most of these folks aren't going to be lawyers, doctors, engineers or CEO's. This is nothing new. Our population has always had a sizeable group in this category.

In the past, many of these people could still make an ok living working in lower end service and manufacturing industries. However, now the wage scales in these low end professions have been pushed down so far that many are in poverty, no matter how much they work.

And so far, the only solution conservatives have for these folks is that they need to pay more in taxes and take even deeper paycuts so that America can be "competitive"!!

Quoting dreadnought (Reply 6):
We are at the tipping point now, where those people who see government as their baby-daddy will outnumber those of us who have to pay for it.

Hardly. Only about 1 in 8 households receives any type of welfare (food stamps, welfare, etc). While that number is definitely too high, it's hardly the tipping point you make it out to be. Not to mention that many of the poor don't even vote.

Quoting dreadnought (Reply 6):
This is the Obama Administration for you. Requiring a job applicant to be able to read and write and do high-school level math is discrimination!

That's not what the letter is about. Try reading the article again or maybe your high school diploma should be revoked!

Quoting dreadnought (Reply 6):
The US is screwed. It may one day recover, via a strong backlash by productive members of society saying "enough!", but it will get very very ugly, as required reforms would be antithetical to the propaganda we've been hearing for years, such as only people who are taxpayers or have jobs should have the right to vote.

Hardly. If some reasonable reforms were promoted, they would easily pass. The problem is that no one wants reasonable reform. The Democrats don't want reform at all and the Republicans want to gut these programs totally. Neither side is right, so nothing gets fixed and the status quo remains.
 
redflyer
Posts: 3881
Joined: Thu Feb 24, 2005 3:30 am

RE: Naacp Blasts Santorum For Welfare Remarks

Sat Jan 07, 2012 1:19 am

Quoting FlyPNS1 (Reply 9):
In the past, many of these people could still make an ok living working in lower end service and manufacturing industries. However, now the wage scales in these low end professions have been pushed down so far that many are in poverty, no matter how much they work.

Just curious, but do these low-end professions that have been pushed down so far account for the fact that a majority of those who are in poverty and receiving welfare are in single parent homes that are often times still producing children out-of-wedlock?
My other home is a Piper Cherokee 180C
 
User avatar
Dreadnought
Posts: 9809
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2008 6:31 pm

RE: Naacp Blasts Santorum For Welfare Remarks

Sat Jan 07, 2012 2:36 am

Quoting CasInterest (Reply 7):

Quit turning it into an Obama battle.

Obama is but one cog in the wheel, albeit a big one.

Quoting FlyPNS1 (Reply 9):
Hardly. Only about 1 in 8 households receives any type of welfare (food stamps, welfare, etc). While that number is definitely too high, it's hardly the tipping point you make it out to be. Not to mention that many of the poor don't even vote.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/1...-government-benefits_n_996990.html

[/quote]Nearly half, 48.5 percent, of the population lived in a household that received some type of government benefit in the first quarter of 2010, according to Census data. Those numbers have risen since the middle of the recession when 44.4 percent lived households receiving benefits in the third quarter of 2008.

The share of people relying on government benefits has reached a historic high, in large part from the deep recession and meager recovery, but also because of the expansion of government programs over the years.[/quote]

Quoting FlyPNS1 (Reply 9):
In the past, many of these people could still make an ok living working in lower end service and manufacturing industries. However, now the wage scales in these low end professions have been pushed down so far that many are in poverty, no matter how much they work.

Which comes back to the issue of trade schools I was talking about. Without a trade school system integrated into public education as an alternative to the University path, you are stuck with mostly uneducated morons who have no useful skills, and often barely know how to read. Naturally, that means a wage of a ditch-digger. But with trade school skills, where you know how to do something, then higher wages are justified.

Quoting FlyPNS1 (Reply 9):
That's not what the letter is about. Try reading the article again or maybe your high school diploma should be revoked!

Oh, give me a break. The letter claims that demanding that a person has a minimal amount of intelligence and education (and a HS diploma IS minimal - in many places all you have to do is show up) in order to get a job is somehow unfair. Those demands might have something to do with the fact that the job might involve machinery where you need to be able to read the manual to avoid chopping your foot off. You think that is unreasonable? That's a joke.

Put it this way. If an employer is looking to fill a job which requires no skills whatsoever - a warm body is all that is needed - why would he arbitrarily restrict his choices (and presumable drive up his competitive wage costs) by insisting on a high level of education?

Your argument makes no sense.

Quoting FlyPNS1 (Reply 9):
The problem is that no one wants reasonable reform. The Democrats don't want reform at all and the Republicans want to gut these programs totally. Neither side is right, so nothing gets fixed and the status quo remains.

On that we agree, although I would point out that not all Republicans want to gut all those programs. I think Ron Paul does, but not the others.

Quoting FlyPNS1 (Reply 9):

Hardly. If some reasonable reforms were promoted, they would easily pass.

On that I have my doubts. Look how long we've been fighting about abortion. Some want no restrictions, some want it completely illegal. A reasonable compromise would be: no restrictions in the 1st trimester, and banned thereafter (or something like that). But I guarantee you they would still bitch.
Forget dogs and cats - Spay and neuter your liberals.
 
zippyjet
Posts: 5077
Joined: Tue Sep 04, 2001 3:32 pm

RE: Naacp Blasts Santorum For Welfare Remarks

Sat Jan 07, 2012 6:11 am

Quoting stasisLAX (Reply 5):
Honestly, I lived in Pennsylvania when he was a U.S. Senator, and he's an complete idiot. He was more interested in "wedge issues" like abortion and gay marriage (to build his credentials with the far-right wingnuts) then he was in economic issues that effect the everyday lives of middle class Pennsylvanians, thus he was voted out of office in the 2006 election. Santorum also spent almost all of his time in Washington DC (residing in Virginia), and spent less than a month in Pennsylvania - while lying and saying his kids were in Pennsylvania and allowing the PA school district where he supposedly resided to spend almost $90000 for "online enrollment" in a "virtual" school for his 6 children..... The voters of Pennsylvania had enough of his antics, and voted Ricky out.

   Let us hope he gets the full scrutiny that the other candidates have received or still getting. Candidates of his ilk seem to excel at divide and conquer; Like Nero playing his fiddle while Rome burned. While our economy and middle class are devolving Santorum and the others are at their standard bag of tricks, Same sex marriage is blasphemy. Fetus first at all costs even if mother croaks in the process, fetus first even if she was gang banged against her will, fetus first even if the poor kid upon delivery is deaf, dumb, blind and can't play a mean game of pinball! I always felt the plundering and degredation and incompetance under W was as low as we could go. Sadly this lot of candidates may give Heir Bush a run for is money in awfullness.
I'm Zippyjet & I approve of this message!
 
Mir
Posts: 19092
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 3:55 am

RE: Naacp Blasts Santorum For Welfare Remarks

Sat Jan 07, 2012 7:27 am

Quoting dreadnought (Reply 11):
Put it this way. If an employer is looking to fill a job which requires no skills whatsoever - a warm body is all that is needed - why would he arbitrarily restrict his choices (and presumable drive up his competitive wage costs) by insisting on a high level of education?

Because he knows that in a situation where there are a lot of applicants for a few jobs, he can ensure that he gets the best people by restricting the pool. Saves him the trouble of having to go through the resumes of those who don't have higher education levels. We see this all the time - when jobs are harder to come by, the qualifications for those jobs will increase. The wages will not, however, because the employer knows that if one person doesn't want to work for peanuts, there will most likely be someone with similar qualifications who will, simply due to the large number of applicants and the scarcity of jobs in general.

-Mir
7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
 
GBLKD
Posts: 306
Joined: Sun Jan 16, 2011 7:02 pm

RE: Naacp Blasts Santorum For Welfare Remarks

Sat Jan 07, 2012 10:40 am

Quoting dreadnought (Reply 11):
Which comes back to the issue of trade schools I was talking about. Without a trade school system integrated into public education as an alternative to the University path, you are stuck with mostly uneducated morons who have no useful skills, and often barely know how to read. Naturally, that means a wage of a ditch-digger. But with trade school skills, where you know how to do something, then higher wages are justified.

Dear Mr Dreadnought.

I don't agree with most of what you write, we're at the opposite ends of the political spectrum but on this you've hit the nail on the head. Geography is irrelevent, we have the same issues over here.

Our education system is (thanks to the Blair years where education was technology and target driven) also lacking in trade based learning for those who don't fit the academic mould. There are a few "trade schools" here, the County I live in has such schemes in place but the number of spaces are limited.

it's the best way to break the cycle of families who see the benefits system as a lifestyle choice instead of the safety net it should be. There are very few truly useless people with no hope in this world, sure there are the "ditch diggers" as you put it but if you catch most kids at a young enough age and give them the chance to find what they are good at then give them the chance to leave school with a marketable and certified practical skill then society is the winner.

I came from a single parent home and a mother who considered social security as a career choice. Unlike a lot of kids (most in the same situation) I grew up with I could see from an early age that it was not a good way to live your life. I've spent the last 22 years driving coaches and trucks, I'll never be a millionaire and in some cases have less than the benefit culture brigade but I've never taken a penny in welfare and have got my pride in tact. Everything I have I've worked for.

There are a lot out there like me but there are just as many that need a good push in the right direction. I've seen it myself, part of my old job was taking coach loads of kids from thier schools to the college that provides the construction and auto engineering classes and it really works. Kids who were written off in primary school are now working, some are running thier own small businesses now, employing people and paying into the system instead of taking from it.
 
D L X
Posts: 11638
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 3:30 am

RE: Naacp Blasts Santorum For Welfare Remarks

Sat Jan 07, 2012 4:27 pm

Way more white people receive welfare than black people.


So, anyone care to tell me why Santorum singled out blacks? This isn't the first time he's singled out blacks. It is in fact a trend, and the trend suggests it is not accidental.
 
redflyer
Posts: 3881
Joined: Thu Feb 24, 2005 3:30 am

RE: Naacp Blasts Santorum For Welfare Remarks

Sat Jan 07, 2012 5:29 pm

Quoting D L X (Reply 15):
Way more white people receive welfare than black people.

Is that opinion or fact? Because the statistics from the HHS tell a different story than what you perceive to be true.

African-Americans - 33.3%
Whites - 31.2%
Hispanic - 28.8%
Asian - 2.1%
Multi - 1.8%
Native - 1.3%
Unknown - 1%
Hawaiian - 0.6%

http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/ofa/character/fy2009/tab08.htm
My other home is a Piper Cherokee 180C
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 13757
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

RE: Naacp Blasts Santorum For Welfare Remarks

Sat Jan 07, 2012 5:58 pm

Quoting stasisLAX (Reply 5):
Well, at least Ricky didn't make any "man-on-dog" sex remarks.

I had heard of this comment, and after reading the linked article, he said that homosexuality was not the same thing as pedophilia or bestiality.

So is the criticism that he put them all in the same sentence?

Marriage today is a sick institution. Alimony should be outlawed except when one partner can prove pain and suffering. I have no idea why homosexuals want in, but given that they do, I have no objection. Perhaps homosexual divorces will lead the system towards an examination of alimony, which would be a good thing IMHO.

Quoting dreadnought (Reply 6):
Santorum's words were stupidly chosen, but he (and reasonable people) are trying to fight the takeover of this country by stupidity and laziness, and especially those who encourage and facilitate these things.


LOL, the fight against stupidity will be led by one who chooses his words stupidly?

Do we want a president that chooses his words stupidly?

Sorry, Mr Khrushchev , what I really meant was...

Quoting dreadnought (Reply 6):
Find every way to get as many people on the dole as possible, so that they will greedily vote for the party that gives them checks and the trend becomes irreversible, and watch the system collapse.

Pretty extreme statement. The opposite of this would be just as extreme: Get as many people off the dole as possible so the rich will continue to fund the party that works for the 1%ers and the trend becomes irreversable and the system collapses.

Seems to me empowering the rich is working out a lot better than empowering the poor these days.

Quoting FlyPNS1 (Reply 9):
The bigger problem you miss is what do we do with the chunk of the population that isn't so bright. Regardless of race, there is a chunk of our population that has an IQ between 75-90. Most of these folks aren't going to be lawyers, doctors, engineers or CEO's. This is nothing new. Our population has always had a sizeable group in this category.

In the past, many of these people could still make an ok living working in lower end service and manufacturing industries. However, now the wage scales in these low end professions have been pushed down so far that many are in poverty, no matter how much they work.

And so far, the only solution conservatives have for these folks is that they need to pay more in taxes and take even deeper paycuts so that America can be "competitive"!!

Sorry, in conservative theology, people with low IQs just don't exist, there's just "us" and "lazy people".
Inspiration, move me brightly!
 
D L X
Posts: 11638
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 3:30 am

RE: Naacp Blasts Santorum For Welfare Remarks

Sat Jan 07, 2012 6:43 pm

Quoting redflyer (Reply 16):
Is that opinion or fact?

It is absolutely true in Iowa. You know, the place where Santorum said it.

And even if it is not true (in your 2008-09 citation) nationwide, it is absolutely the case that most of the recipients of welfare are not black.

There is simply no way around accepting that Santorum chose to and will continue to choose to single blacks out. Accept it, and then ask yourself why.

[Edited 2012-01-07 10:59:14]
 
User avatar
Dreadnought
Posts: 9809
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2008 6:31 pm

RE: Naacp Blasts Santorum For Welfare Remarks

Sat Jan 07, 2012 7:08 pm

Quoting Revelation (Reply 17):
Pretty extreme statement. The opposite of this would be just as extreme: Get as many people off the dole as possible so the rich will continue to fund the party that works for the 1%ers and the trend becomes irreversable and the system collapses.

From Cloward, Richard; Piven, Frances. "The Weight of the Poor: A Strategy to End Poverty". (Originally published in The Nation, May 2, 1966).

http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2010/03/24-4

Quote:
Widespread campaigns to register the eligible poor for welfare aid, and to help existing recipients obtain their full benefits, would produce bureaucratic disruption in welfare agencies and fiscal disruption in local and state governments. These disruptions would generate severe political strains, and deepen existing divisions among elements in the big-city Democratic coalition: the remaining white middle class, the white working-class ethnic groups and the growing minority poor. To avoid a further weakening of that historic coalition, a national Democratic administration would be con-strained to advance a federal solution to poverty that would override local welfare failures, local class and racial conflicts and local revenue dilemmas. By the internal disruption of local bureaucratic practices, by the furor over public welfare poverty, and by the collapse of current financing arrangements, powerful forces can be generated for major economic reforms at the national level.

The ultimate objective of this strategy--to wipe out poverty by establishing a guaranteed annual income
--will be questioned by some. Because the ideal of individual social and economic mobility has deep roots, even activists seem reluctant to call for national programs to eliminate poverty by the outright redistribution of income. Instead, programs are demanded to enable people to become economically competitive. But such programs are of no use to millions of today's poor.

Their goal is nothing less than a collapse of the existing social and economic system and get everyone on sort of state salary. Hillary Clinton once claimed to be a fan of this strategy, and Obama, while not openly embracing it recently, is certainly a fan.

This strategy was pushed very hard in the 1966 Democratic Convention
Forget dogs and cats - Spay and neuter your liberals.
 
D L X
Posts: 11638
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 3:30 am

RE: Naacp Blasts Santorum For Welfare Remarks

Sat Jan 07, 2012 7:22 pm

Dreadnought, can you tell us how your post relates to Santorum? If it's there, I don't understand it. Please clarify.
 
User avatar
Dreadnought
Posts: 9809
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2008 6:31 pm

RE: Naacp Blasts Santorum For Welfare Remarks

Sat Jan 07, 2012 7:28 pm

Quoting D L X (Reply 20):
Dreadnought, can you tell us how your post relates to Santorum? If it's there, I don't understand it. Please clarify.

Big picture, man.
Forget dogs and cats - Spay and neuter your liberals.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 13757
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

RE: Naacp Blasts Santorum For Welfare Remarks

Sat Jan 07, 2012 8:26 pm

Quoting D L X (Reply 18):
It is absolutely true in Iowa. You know, the place where Santorum said it.

Then maybe Santorum should have qualified his statement.

Quoting D L X (Reply 18):
And even if it is not true (in your 2008-09 citation) nationwide, it is absolutely the case that most of the recipients of welfare are not black.

Had you said that, there'd be no argument, but you didn't.

Quoting D L X (Reply 18):

There is simply no way around accepting that Santorum chose to and will continue to choose to single blacks out. Accept it, and then ask yourself why.

Because he thinks racial sterotyping is a winning campaign strategy for him, which again shows he's an idiot.
Inspiration, move me brightly!
 
redflyer
Posts: 3881
Joined: Thu Feb 24, 2005 3:30 am

RE: Naacp Blasts Santorum For Welfare Remarks

Sat Jan 07, 2012 8:59 pm

Quoting D L X (Reply 18):
It is absolutely true in Iowa. You know, the place where Santorum said it.

Ah, okay then. You didn't indicate that your comment was specific to Iowa only. I guess if we're going to cherry-pick statistics, I could certainly point to states where African-Americans are by far the largest majority by a huge margin that receive welfare. Such as the District of Columbia: 99.4%; Delaware: 60.9%; Maryland 77%. You get the point.

Quoting D L X (Reply 18):
And even if it is not true (in your 2008-09 citation) nationwide, it is absolutely the case that most of the recipients of welfare are not black.

How is it true that most of the recipients of welfare are not African-American when the statistics indicate that overall they otherwise are?
My other home is a Piper Cherokee 180C
 
User avatar
DeltaMD90
Posts: 8245
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 11:25 pm

RE: Naacp Blasts Santorum For Welfare Remarks

Sat Jan 07, 2012 9:19 pm

Quoting redflyer (Reply 16):
Quoting D L X (Reply 15):
Way more white people receive welfare than black people.

Is that opinion or fact? Because the statistics from the HHS tell a different story than what you perceive to be true.

African-Americans - 33.3%
Whites - 31.2%
Hispanic - 28.8%
Asian - 2.1%
Multi - 1.8%
Native - 1.3%
Unknown - 1%
Hawaiian - 0.6%

http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/ofa/...8.htm

I think it is a higher percentage of blacks but more whites overall. But according to these percentages, there isn't much of a difference...

Quoting Revelation (Reply 17):
I had heard of this comment, and after reading the linked article, he said that homosexuality was not the same thing as pedophilia or bestiality.

I agree he isn't equating them, but all he's doing is making a slippery slope fallacy. We're arguing homosexuality here, not anything else! They're not mutually inclusive. Could even argue that interracial marriage didn't cause man on dog...
Ironically I have never flown a Delta MD-90 :)
 
redflyer
Posts: 3881
Joined: Thu Feb 24, 2005 3:30 am

RE: Naacp Blasts Santorum For Welfare Remarks

Sat Jan 07, 2012 10:02 pm

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 24):
I think it is a higher percentage of blacks but more whites overall. But according to these percentages, there isn't much of a difference...

The stats from HHS reflect the number of families receiving assistance. For 2009, 1.7 million total received assistance. The percentages are derived from that 1.7 million. So help me understand how, if 33.3% of that 1.7 million is comprised of African-American families, and 31.2% are white, that there would still be more whites receiving welfare? Even if the numbers were identical, by fact that African-Americans tend to have more offspring on average would indicate that there would still be more African-Americans receiving welfare.
My other home is a Piper Cherokee 180C
 
D L X
Posts: 11638
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 3:30 am

RE: Naacp Blasts Santorum For Welfare Remarks

Sat Jan 07, 2012 10:38 pm

Quoting redflyer (Reply 23):

Quoting D L X (Reply 18):
It is absolutely true in Iowa. You know, the place where Santorum said it.

Ah, okay then. You didn't indicate that your comment was specific to Iowa only.

In truth, I did not believe that it was just specific to Iowa. I had read other articles about Santorum's statement (and elsewhere) saying that whites outnumbered blacks in terms of getting welfare assistance. I can't find the current numbers though.

Quoting redflyer (Reply 23):
How is it true that most of the recipients of welfare are not African-American when the statistics indicate that overall they otherwise are?

The link that you posted says that 33.3% were black. That means that 66.7% are not. Santorum has singled out one group. Remember what he said: "I don't want to make black people's lives better by giving them somebody else's money"

"Somebody else's money" must be that 66.7%.

Why in hell does Santorum single out black people?

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 24):
I think it is a higher percentage of blacks but more whites overall.

That is what I thought as well.

But even that is no reason to single out blacks to make sure we don't get "somebody else's money." There are approximately 37 Million black individuals in this country, and according to redflyer's link, about 575,000 received welfare in 2009. That's nowhere near enough to stereotype! That's only 1.5%! (To compare, about .5% of whites are on welfare.)

You guys, like me, are all airplane geeks. It's like saying that Delta is a safer airline than American because American has had three times more crashes than Delta. Those are the absurd comparisons that get made when you're dealing with tiny sample sizes.
 
FlyPNS1
Posts: 5260
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:12 am

RE: Naacp Blasts Santorum For Welfare Remarks

Sat Jan 07, 2012 10:54 pm

Quoting dreadnought (Reply 11):
Which comes back to the issue of trade schools I was talking about. Without a trade school system integrated into public education as an alternative to the University path, you are stuck with mostly uneducated morons who have no useful skills,

Even with a trade school system, you are stuck with a lot of uneducated morons because there aren't nearly enough trade school type jobs to accomodate the 30-50 million people who fall into this category.

Quoting dreadnought (Reply 11):
The letter claims that demanding that a person has a minimal amount of intelligence and education (and a HS diploma IS minimal - in many places all you have to do is show up) in order to get a job is somehow unfair.

No, it only says that if you demand a HS diploma, it had better be a job that actually requires a high school diploma. You don't need a HS diploma to work at Wal-Mart. The problem is that many employers who do not want to accomodate those with disabilities use the HS diploma as a way to weed the disabled out. This is particularly a problem for those who are high-functioning adults, but have mental retardation.

Quoting dreadnought (Reply 11):
On that we agree, although I would point out that not all Republicans want to gut all those programs.

Not all, but most. Many however know it's not politically popular to say so they keep it to themselves.

Quoting dreadnought (Reply 11):
reasonable compromise would be: no restrictions in the 1st trimester, and banned thereafter (or something like that). But I guarantee you they would still bitch.

But that's not a reasonable reform in the eyes of most conservatives who want no abortions at all.

Quoting D L X (Reply 26):
Why in hell does Santorum single out black people?

Because he (and Gingrich now too) are trying to play to the far right base which is primarily old, white people who get off on this type of racial stereotyping. It might buy them a few primary votes, but in the long-term they're just paving a path for Romney's victory.
 
User avatar
Dreadnought
Posts: 9809
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2008 6:31 pm

RE: Naacp Blasts Santorum For Welfare Remarks

Sat Jan 07, 2012 11:28 pm

Quoting FlyPNS1 (Reply 27):
Even with a trade school system, you are stuck with a lot of uneducated morons because there aren't nearly enough trade school type jobs to accomodate the 30-50 million people who fall into this category.

Actually, do the math. Countries with a healthy manufacturing sector have a good 20-25% of the labor force directly involved in manufacturing. We have 9%. Call the difference 11% to be on the conservative side. Based on the 130 million current workforce, that indicates that if we stopped importing so much stuff and produced our own stuff to the same level as a Germany or Switzerland, we could add about 14 million jobs.

Sure there will still be morons. But there is a place for ditch-diggers too, just not so many of them.

Quoting FlyPNS1 (Reply 27):
Not all, but most. Many however know it's not politically popular to say so they keep it to themselves.

I disagree. I WANT those programs eliminated and given over to the states. If California wants to provide a bunch of benefits, let them do it on their own dime. But I've listed to the candidates, and the only one who comes close to that viewpoint is Ron Paul, and he's wishy-washy about it. Unfortunately his isolationist views are intolerable, so I can't vote for him.

Quoting FlyPNS1 (Reply 27):
But that's not a reasonable reform in the eyes of most conservatives who want no abortions at all.

Nor for those on the left who want to be able to abort on demand right up until birth (and in the case of one pundit last year, even up to a year or two after birth).
Forget dogs and cats - Spay and neuter your liberals.
 
thegreatRDU
Topic Author
Posts: 884
Joined: Tue Mar 07, 2006 10:47 am

RE: Naacp Blasts Santorum For Welfare Remarks

Sun Jan 08, 2012 1:02 am

Santorum is everything that's wrong with the GOP

Quoting dreadnought (Reply 28):
Unfortunately his isolationist views are intolerable, so I can't vote for him.

Here we go again...
Our Returning Champion
 
zippyjet
Posts: 5077
Joined: Tue Sep 04, 2001 3:32 pm

RE: Naacp Blasts Santorum For Welfare Remarks

Sun Jan 08, 2012 4:04 am

Quoting thegreatRDU (Reply 29):
Santorum is everything that's wrong with the GOP

  

Just another dim bulb clone peddling the SSDD messages:
Those evil Welfate lazy folks
Fetus tampering is a capital crime
Science is athiesm unless it brings in big $$$
Cow ploppies cause global warming
Drill baby drill
Strip Mine more than Stripperella strips
Open the borders for cheap labor to keep the grass mowed and remove the animal ploppies at the Country Club and or someone who works on the cheap to plumb the toilets in your McMansion
Big business and Wall Street prosperity trickle down to the stupid lazy poor.
You may have been gang raped by a dozen cretins but the woman was asking for it. If she gets preggers, better deliver that fetus even if the mother expires in the process. So what if the fetus comes out as a sociopathic three eyed boy that foams at the mouth and will graduate to become a serial killer extroidinaire. And if that momma of that unwanted fetus dares apply for assistance she is a lazy and not worthy of being an American citizen
Tripple the strength of the Patriot act.
The message, the poor are screwing the middle class and the middle class are opressing the poor.
And Bill Clinton got "serviced" by a porcine intern

That should cover it.
I'm Zippyjet & I approve of this message!
 
User avatar
DeltaMD90
Posts: 8245
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 11:25 pm

RE: Naacp Blasts Santorum For Welfare Remarks

Sun Jan 08, 2012 4:57 am

I really don't like Santorum at all, but I'm gonna go out on a limb and say he didn't mean to offend anyone. Stereotypes are very prevalent in our society, and one should not act on them, but sometimes they slip. Then again, someone running for president should know better. Doesn't matter, I can dislike him on a plethora of other issues  
Ironically I have never flown a Delta MD-90 :)
 
avek00
Posts: 3155
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 5:56 am

RE: Naacp Blasts Santorum For Welfare Remarks

Sun Jan 08, 2012 6:02 am

Quoting D L X (Reply 15):
Way more white people receive welfare than black people.

Indeed, and in America corporations receive far more direct and indirect welfare benefits than people of any color.
Live life to the fullest.
 
jcs17
Posts: 7376
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2001 11:13 am

RE: Naacp Blasts Santorum For Welfare Remarks

Sun Jan 08, 2012 6:28 am

Quoting dreadnought (Reply 11):

Which comes back to the issue of trade schools I was talking about. Without a trade school system integrated into public education as an alternative to the University path, you are stuck with mostly uneducated morons who have no useful skills, and often barely know how to read. Naturally, that means a wage of a ditch-digger. But with trade school skills, where you know how to do something, then higher wages are justified.

Agree 100%. In Switzerland and many countries from Europe, for example... Damn, I almost forgot you are from Switzerland, Charles. Trade school and apprenticeships occupies the time of 11th/12th grade in many European countries should a pupil not desire future schooling. I would fully support this sort of education system with the caveat that should a student desire to return to school they are not penalized unless they are academically disqualified.

I really have no problem with what Santorum said. I don't like him as a Republican candidate, but kids should be given a realistic out if they don't aspire to go to college. They shouldn't have to take third year of Spanish or mathematics. We should be training them for jobs.

The sole problem I think in this solution lies in the fact that there are only so many car mechanics, plumbers, HVAC installers that the country could absorb. Unfortunately, in a huge population that we have, it might be completely unrealistic.
America's chickens are coming home to rooooost!
 
seb146
Posts: 13778
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:19 am

RE: Naacp Blasts Santorum For Welfare Remarks

Sun Jan 08, 2012 4:13 pm

I guess this means nothing:

“While an employer is not required to ‘prefer’ a learning-disabled applicant over other applicants with more extensive qualifications, it is clear that the EEOC is informing employers that disabled individuals cannot be excluded from consideration for employment based upon artificial barriers in the form of inflexible qualification standards,”

People that have been factory workers or coal miners and now are trying to get a job at Wal-Mart because their job was shipped overseas can not be discriminated because they had no formal education. They worked to support their family instead of finishing school. I don't understand the leap to blacks in the ghetto.

Maybe if the right wing would stop looking at skin color. After all, this is not 1956.

Quoting dreadnought (Reply 6):
I know a woman who is a nurse at a nursing home.

And I know a blackjack dealer, Edward, who has to also work at McDonalds while his wife Sarah works full time at the grocery store just to keep a roof over the heads of themselves and their two children. None have health insurance and both are white. I suppose they do not deserve public assistance? Or they deserve more since they are white and working?

Quoting jcs17 (Reply 33):
Trade school and apprenticeships occupies the time of 11th/12th grade in many European countries should a pupil not desire future schooling.

That would never work in the Unted States. There would be no profit in that for the private sector. Especially since most of those jobs are overseas.
Life in the wall is a drag.
 
User avatar
Dreadnought
Posts: 9809
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2008 6:31 pm

RE: Naacp Blasts Santorum For Welfare Remarks

Sun Jan 08, 2012 4:44 pm

Quoting seb146 (Reply 34):
Quoting dreadnought (Reply 6):
I know a woman who is a nurse at a nursing home.

And I know a blackjack dealer, Edward, who has to also work at McDonalds while his wife Sarah works full time at the grocery store just to keep a roof over the heads of themselves and their two children. None have health insurance and both are white. I suppose they do not deserve public assistance? Or they deserve more since they are white and working?

My point is that Mary (the nurse) is of an older generation - she's still working because she can, and she has some self-respect. But by her own words, her kids and grandkids have developed the mindset that if the state is willing to give them money, that is far preferable to working. Mary's own words: "They don't work, they aren't looking for work, and they aren't even interested in looking for work."

Something is wrong with the system when it creates this mindset.
Forget dogs and cats - Spay and neuter your liberals.
 
Mir
Posts: 19092
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 3:55 am

RE: Naacp Blasts Santorum For Welfare Remarks

Sun Jan 08, 2012 8:38 pm

Quoting seb146 (Reply 34):
“While an employer is not required to ‘prefer’ a learning-disabled applicant over other applicants with more extensive qualifications, it is clear that the EEOC is informing employers that disabled individuals cannot be excluded from consideration for employment based upon artificial barriers in the form of inflexible qualification standards,”

Makes perfect sense. And if you read that actual article, the EEOC's letter also makes perfect sense. It's certainly not saying that not having a high school diploma qualifies as a disability. All it says is that if someone has a disability that prevents them from gaining a high school diploma, they can only be disqualified from a job if the performance of that job actually requires a high school diploma.

Quoting dreadnought (Reply 35):
Something is wrong with the system when it creates this mindset.

Is it really the system, or is it how people were raised?

I'll be happy to give the system at least some of the blame. But it would be a very strange thing indeed if the system, which is voted on by the people, were so in opposition to the values that the people hold.

-Mir
7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
 
User avatar
DeltaMD90
Posts: 8245
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 11:25 pm

RE: Naacp Blasts Santorum For Welfare Remarks

Mon Jan 09, 2012 5:44 am

Quoting Mir (Reply 36):
Is it really the system, or is it how people were raised?

I'll be happy to give the system at least some of the blame.

It is the culture, and I believe this is something the NAACP should really be dealing with (regarding the black population, NOT stating it is only a black thing, but there isn't a Hispanic, Asian, or white equivalent AFAIK.) Not too educated on minority issues either, so if I'm way off the mark, I don't mean any harm.

But the system has its flaws that need to be closed up. I have no idea how to fix it, but I think maybe removing a lot of the bureaucratic and having more boots on the ground that can spot out abuses.

Quoting Mir (Reply 36):
But it would be a very strange thing indeed if the system, which is voted on by the people, were so in opposition to the values that the people hold.

Well that is easy. Happens a lot when big government gets tangled up. It strays off the mark and gets corrected once in a while. I predict the time for correction is close...
Ironically I have never flown a Delta MD-90 :)
 
Mir
Posts: 19092
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 3:55 am

RE: Naacp Blasts Santorum For Welfare Remarks

Mon Jan 09, 2012 1:24 pm

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 37):
I think maybe removing a lot of the bureaucratic and having more boots on the ground that can spot out abuses.

This is contradictory. In order to spot and stop abuses (which we all agree is a good thing), you have to have rules, and people to enforce them. And then you have to have oversight to make sure that the people who enforce the rules are doing so fairly and accurately. And lo and behold, you've got a bureaucracy.

-Mir
7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
 
seb146
Posts: 13778
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:19 am

RE: Naacp Blasts Santorum For Welfare Remarks

Mon Jan 09, 2012 1:51 pm

Quoting dreadnought (Reply 35):
My point is that Mary (the nurse) is of an older generation

And my point is: I can do the whole "I know a guy" thing too.

Quoting dreadnought (Reply 35):
Mary's own words: "They don't work, they aren't looking for work, and they aren't even interested in looking for work."

Because "Mary" did not have the good sense to kick them out when they turned 18. She needs to take responsibility for her own bad parenting. It is not her kid's fault they didn't leave. She never instilled that in them. People need to take personal responsibility for their poor choices. Her poor choice? Not raising her kids right.
Life in the wall is a drag.
 
D L X
Posts: 11638
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 3:30 am

RE: Naacp Blasts Santorum For Welfare Remarks

Mon Jan 09, 2012 1:55 pm

Quoting dreadnought (Reply 35):
But by her own words, her kids and grandkids have developed the mindset that if the state is willing to give them money, that is far preferable to working
Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 37):
It is the culture, and I believe this is something the NAACP should really be dealing with

  

DeltaMD90, I know you didn't mean any harm by this statement, but I had to flag it to pop it up to the front of people's minds.

Look at my stat from above - 37 MILLION blacks in America, 575,000 on welfare. That's 1.5%. Clearly, if it was the culture, that percentage would be WAY higher than 1.5%.

Compare to a recent story by 20/20 about Cleveland and its housing epidemic. A huge number of black residents are underwater on their mortgages, and with variable rate mortgages, they are finding that their new payments are actually higher than they can take in. Now, when American Airlines recently found that its payments outstripped its receipts, it declared bankruptcy **even though it had $4 BILLION on hand**. But what do these afflicted, underwater, black residents of Cleveland do? They continue to pay their mortgages, doing whatever they possibly can to NOT foreclose, even though it would be financially advantageous to do so. Turns out, it's not 1.5% of the black population that believes this way, but damn near all of it. THAT is culture.
 
FlyPNS1
Posts: 5260
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:12 am

RE: Naacp Blasts Santorum For Welfare Remarks

Mon Jan 09, 2012 4:25 pm

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 37):
But the system has its flaws that need to be closed up. I have no idea how to fix it, but I think maybe removing a lot of the bureaucratic and having more boots on the ground that can spot out abuses.

I think the easier fix is to put tight limits on the amount of time one can receive benefits. Things like welfare and food stamps are meant to be short term. I would say that you get one year of welfare and maybe two years of food stamps over a lifetime. Of course, there's also unemployment insurance for short-term job losses as well.

I'm certainly not a far-right conservative, but even I have a problem with long-term welfare recipients. I have no problem helping people who have hit hard times and believe the government should intervene to prevent massive collapses (see the Great Depression), but long-term welfare benefits no one.

Quoting jcs17 (Reply 33):
The sole problem I think in this solution lies in the fact that there are only so many car mechanics, plumbers, HVAC installers that the country could absorb. Unfortunately, in a huge population that we have, it might be completely unrealistic.

And that's exactly the problem. There simply aren't that many trade jobs available. Particularly now, where many of the construction trades have taken a nose-dive since the housing market flopped. The other problem is that trade schools don't fix the problem that many kids entering high school are fundamentally still illiterate and unable to do basic math. Sending these kids to trade/vocation schools won't help since they are unlikely to have success in a trade vocation when they can't effective read, write or do basic math.

Quoting D L X (Reply 40):
Look at my stat from above - 37 MILLION blacks in America, 575,000 on welfare. That's 1.5%. Clearly, if it was the culture, that percentage would be WAY higher than 1.5%.

Your math is a bit off. The 575,000 number is families...not individuals. So, you'd need to multiply the 575K by however many people were in each family. If we use an average family size of 3.

Also, if you look at other forms of welfare (food stamps), African Americans account for a disproportionately high number of recipients.

http://milwaukeecourieronline.com/in...ly-double-that-of-white-americans/

From this article, we get that 22.6% of the 40.5 million receiving food stamps are African-American which equates to over 9 million African-Americans. Using your 37 million number, that means that about 1 out of 4 African Americans is receiving food stamps.

While I wouldn't say it is cultural, I think it is highly problematic that such a high % of African American's are using these services. Though with that said, I certainly don't see any need for Santorum (or Gingrich) to call African American's out as they clearly aren't the majority of the users of welfare.
 
D L X
Posts: 11638
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 3:30 am

RE: Naacp Blasts Santorum For Welfare Remarks

Mon Jan 09, 2012 7:47 pm

Quoting FlyPNS1 (Reply 41):
Your math is a bit off. The 575,000 number is families...not individuals. So, you'd need to multiply the 575K by however many people were in each family. If we use an average family size of 3.

Okay, even if we assumed it was 6 in a family, we'd still be talking about 9% on welfare, and 91% not on welfare. So, 91% of African Americans are NOT on welfare -- that means that it is not cultural.

Quoting FlyPNS1 (Reply 41):
Also, if you look at other forms of welfare (food stamps), African Americans account for a disproportionately high number of recipients.

Right. And the Concorde accounts for a disproportionate number of airline crashes. Therefore, the Concorde is unsafe.
In other words, this argument you have made continues to sidestep the point. You cannot say that it is culture when 91%+ do not partake in it.
 
User avatar
Dreadnought
Posts: 9809
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2008 6:31 pm

RE: Naacp Blasts Santorum For Welfare Remarks

Mon Jan 09, 2012 8:08 pm

Quoting D L X (Reply 40):
Look at my stat from above - 37 MILLION blacks in America, 575,000 on welfare. That's 1.5%. Clearly, if it was the culture, that percentage would be WAY higher than 1.5%.

The problem is your data. You are only looking at one program. There are dozens (hundreds actually) of federal, state and local aid programs. Even the tax system has been perverted to become a means of Welfare - if you get a bigger refund check than your combined withholding tax payments (because of all the deductions you claim in your return), you are basically on welfare.
Forget dogs and cats - Spay and neuter your liberals.
 
D L X
Posts: 11638
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 3:30 am

RE: Naacp Blasts Santorum For Welfare Remarks

Tue Jan 10, 2012 12:33 am

Quoting dreadnought (Reply 43):
The problem is your data. You are only looking at one program.

Feel free to list all of the various programs that black people (and not white people) are taking advantage of that suggest that blacks have a culture of living on the dole. I'm assuming by your tone that you have such a list handy, and that it will come to be shown that the great majority of blacks (and not white people) are partaking. Your number should take us from 1.5% to well over 50% to make your point remotely relevant.

Quoting dreadnought (Reply 43):
Even the tax system has been perverted to become a means of Welfare - if you get a bigger refund check than your combined withholding tax payments

And what percentage of people do you think that is?

Give me a number, then give me a source. Deductions reduce the amount of tax you owe. They do not result in money back.


(And you're going to make the utterly ridiculous leap to a Tax Code argument, there is no better example of people living off government tax deductions than rich, majority white, men.)
 
N1120A
Posts: 26467
Joined: Sun Dec 14, 2003 5:40 pm

RE: Naacp Blasts Santorum For Welfare Remarks

Tue Jan 10, 2012 12:33 am

I cannot believe there are people here defending Santorum. Well, I can, but I'm surprised they are admitting to supporting such racist views.

Quoting zippyjet (Reply 30):

  

I like that list.
Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
 
thegreatRDU
Topic Author
Posts: 884
Joined: Tue Mar 07, 2006 10:47 am

RE: Naacp Blasts Santorum For Welfare Remarks

Tue Jan 10, 2012 3:50 am

My New Hampshire Primary Predictions...

Mitt Romney 29%

Ron Paul 24%

Jon Huntsman 16%

Rick Santorum 15%

Newt Gingrich 12%

Rick Perry 2%
Our Returning Champion
 
User avatar
DeltaMD90
Posts: 8245
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 11:25 pm

RE: Naacp Blasts Santorum For Welfare Remarks

Tue Jan 10, 2012 3:52 am

Quoting Mir (Reply 38):
This is contradictory. In order to spot and stop abuses (which we all agree is a good thing), you have to have rules, and people to enforce them. And then you have to have oversight to make sure that the people who enforce the rules are doing so fairly and accurately. And lo and behold, you've got a bureaucracy.

Well I have no idea how it works out honestly. My line of thinking is abuses go on and no one sees due to the bureaucracy...

Quoting D L X (Reply 40):
DeltaMD90, I know you didn't mean any harm by this statement, but I had to flag it to pop it up to the front of people's minds.

Look at my stat from above - 37 MILLION blacks in America, 575,000 on welfare. That's 1.5%. Clearly, if it was the culture, that percentage would be WAY higher than 1.5%.

Well, I guess I'm in dangerous generalization territory. I have no idea what the figures are, but I've heard personal stories from blacks growing up in the inner city, have heard there are many problems in the inner city, and know that the CJ system is biased (intentionally or unintentionally) against minorities partly on socioeconomic reasons (according to my criminology class.)

Quoting FlyPNS1 (Reply 41):
I think the easier fix is to put tight limits on the amount of time one can receive benefits. Things like welfare and food stamps are meant to be short term. I would say that you get one year of welfare and maybe two years of food stamps over a lifetime. Of course, there's also unemployment insurance for short-term job losses as well.

The problem I see with this is no matter what the time frame, some people will ride welfare all the way til the end and then what? They are screwed. What do they do then? It's there fault obviously, but I think there need to be measures to get them off welfare. IDK.

Quoting N1120A (Reply 45):

I cannot believe there are people here defending Santorum. Well, I can, but I'm surprised they are admitting to supporting such racist views.

Who's admitting to racism? It's not a FACT he's trying to be racist or he is racist, for all we know he could just be ignorant. I very much dislike him, but part of me is saying he might have just slipped up. Does that make me racist, because I don't agree with you!?
Ironically I have never flown a Delta MD-90 :)
 
zippyjet
Posts: 5077
Joined: Tue Sep 04, 2001 3:32 pm

RE: Naacp Blasts Santorum For Welfare Remarks

Wed Jan 11, 2012 4:52 am

Quoting N1120A (Reply 45):
I like that list.

Now if it could be the stuff of some advertising. This is the Dems chance to demonstrate how this SOB rolls. Lets see all the GOP candidates fight each other. I hope their Summer nominating convention is contentious like that cluster that was the Democratic convention in Chicago circa 1968, but without the violence. Just a lot of shouting and maybe some pushing and shoving amongst them.
I'm Zippyjet & I approve of this message!
 
jcs17
Posts: 7376
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2001 11:13 am

RE: Naacp Blasts Santorum For Welfare Remarks

Wed Jan 11, 2012 6:53 am

Quoting FlyPNS1 (Reply 41):

And that's exactly the problem. There simply aren't that many trade jobs available. Particularly now, where many of the construction trades have taken a nose-dive since the housing market flopped. The other problem is that trade schools don't fix the problem that many kids entering high school are fundamentally still illiterate and unable to do basic math. Sending these kids to trade/vocation schools won't help since they are unlikely to have success in a trade vocation when they can't effective read, write or do basic math.

I think that's the capitalist economy in a nut shell. Unfortunately, there are those who cannot be reached and who may be in the underclass. Look, even in social democratic societies (take France or Sweden, for example), there is a lower class. In the USSR, there was a lower class -- the farmers, the mill workers, etc as opposed to the government workers in Moscow. As humans, sociologically speaking, there is a capitalist sense. Not in the fact that we try to rip people off, but we try to accumulate as much wealth as possible. There will always be an underclass. The problem in the ghetto is trying to make people to buy into things like education and planned parenting. Unfortunately, for many this is a concept that is out of reach.

Capitalism and human behavior, it is what is.
America's chickens are coming home to rooooost!

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: airtechy, Iemand91, WingsFan, Yahoo [Bot] and 25 guests