100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: Another 20 people shot in Chicago | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
From what a guy posted on dh a while back, I would say welfare is going after men more. He call welfare a loan shark. If word is spreading that men are being held accountable for their kids, it might be making a difference in the black community. in all communities. Would you care to wager how many single parent kids there are in the 4 thug infested areas of Chicago. Or care to wager on how many multiple kid making sperm donor " baby daddies" there are in there too. It would actually be alot faster too count the " baby daddies" who do take financial responsibility for the kids they make in there...just use your hand my question are: what does that have to do with my statement? What does deadbeat dads in Chicago have to do with deadbeat dads in general? And how does that change a FACT that deadbeat dads exist in EVERY community and in EVERY community, holding them accountable will be a step ahead? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
From what a guy posted on dh a while back, I would say welfare is going after men more. He call welfare a loan shark. If word is spreading that men are being held accountable for their kids, it might be making a difference in the black community. in all communities. Would you care to wager how many single parent kids there are in the 4 thug infested areas of Chicago. Or care to wager on how many multiple kid making sperm donor " baby daddies" there are in there too. It would actually be alot faster too count the " baby daddies" who do take financial responsibility for the kids they make in there...just use your hand my question are: what does that have to do with my statement? What does deadbeat dads in Chicago have to do with deadbeat dads in general? And how does that change a FACT that deadbeat dads exist in EVERY community and in EVERY community, holding them accountable will be a step ahead? |
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Easttowest72
on
Sun 08/26/18 09:56 AM
|
|
How much of the coolaid have you drank? It doesn't matter if single women claim having illegitimate kids is by choice. They are still illegitimate kids....got it. No liberal spin will change the facts. no cool aid. Math, Data....lol it does matter if the argument is that having a child out of wedlock is amoral. because if a single demographic is increasing how often they have kids, they are becoming LESS Moral, while if they are decreasing it, the are becoming MORE moral whereas a racial demographic can be becoming MORE moral while still having a larger wed to unwed ratio. because the RATIO depends upon the rate at which one group is changing compared to the other, so if both groups are actually DECREASING but one group DECREASES more than the other, the ratio increases. but Im done trying to explain math. I provided the data, maybe the CDC having the same information regarding two different standards will get the point across https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/hus/2011/007.pdf 2011? I gave you data from Sept 2017. Then I checked again. Liberal spins don't change facts. your data is children centered, children born to wed vs unwed my data is two fold , children centered (that infamous 70 percent number some love to regurgitate to imply something about 'morals') AND Adult centered, how many kids single women are having (a number less reported that indicates a single persons propensity to decide to have a child though they arent married, and tells more about 'morals') feel free to search for a drastic change from only eight years ago, but I doubt the trends have reversed themselves ... and I correct it myself, there does seem to be a decrease, about 5 percent for white women and about 15 percent for black women(WOW, I wonder why THAT number isn't regurgitated so often ..lol) https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/hus/2011/007.pdf 2010 https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr67/nvsr67_01.pdf 2016 (latest numbers) Your liberal spin doesn't change that 70% number. Those women aren't going to a fertility bank and making a conscious choice to get pregnant and raise a baby alone. They are getting pregnant and trying to trap a man and going on welfare when it doesn't work out like they planned. Nothing moral about it. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
When you have section 8 paying over $1000 a month for housing that's comparable to a minimum wage job. Add in foodstamps. Somebody once posted he knew somebody getting over $800. That close to twice minimum wage. Add in medical. No premiums, copays or deductibles, plus the usual 20%, dental etc. Your at 3 times minimum wage, add in wic, help with utilities, and a check. That's close to 4 times minimum wage. Welfare is causing the breakdown of the family unit. White people are getting on the welfare gravy too. That means less are working. Less paying into that system. I can't say that I blame them. In the long run it will get welfare changes. Hopefully the family unit will be restored. 4 times the minimum wage? 32 dollars an hour? times 160 hours a month , 5120 a month? where is one living where their expenses come to that much a month? I made twice minimum wage (16) an hour, which after taxes left me about 2 grand a month. 800 for rent would bring it down to 1200. my insurance was about 300 for me and one child, which leaves me 900 and milk and utilities dont come to that much.... this is more the scenario, when I made 10 an hour, (1600) a month with one child, meant I was under 130 percent of poverty guidelines. I was able to receive a whopping 300 for food and 300 check, that would be the same at 1600 or ZERO income as long as it was below the threshold, because i went on Family Size , for snap, about 1.50 per meal per person, and for TANF, it varies by state. so that was 600 in assistance and adding on the hypothetical 800 for rent, thats 1400, not close to 4 times minimum wage, even if I add in the 300 for medical/dental per month, its still not 4 times minimum wage. hopefully, wages will get on par with cost of living increases ... so fewer will need assistance to pull through. Ms.h, have you ever had a baby while not on medicaid? My daughter was born 14 years ago. The bill was over $10,000. You listed ins premiums only. Now be realistic and add the real benefit of Medicaid. It's usually paying for mom and 1-15 kids. Dental pays at 80% and most work only 50%. Medicaid recipients don't understand the struggle of the middle class. Does milk alone sustain you? I believe the guy who posted $800 because I feed a family every week and no $300 a month is b.s. You got the rent part about right. Unless the woman has more than a 2br. 5120×12=$61,440. That's a lower middle class income. $32x40=$1280 a week. Minus $300 in taxes, $40 insurance $60 in 401k. $880 is about what's left to live on. Rent here is usually a little over $1000, unless you live in a dump. I've heard of 3 section 8 women and rent was over $1000. One was coming from the landlord. One was at Honda. One my ex was trying to get away from because the two oldest kids were turning 18 and she had to move. 880 a week to live on is almost 3600 a month. I have lived on much less than that a large part of my life, even when I had assistance. those numbers are not the reality. Have you ever known any doctors? My brother is one. The government does not pay the same rates that other insurance does. So the bill would NOT be the same as someone not on medicaid. They do not pay a monthly rate IN CASE a recipient needs help. they pay PER PROCEDURE AFTER the help is received. 
and then there is the issue that not everyone receiving medicaid is pregnant. and that the average family size for families on assistant is the same as the average generally (hint, its not 15) medicaid recipients understand struggle is struggle, and many struggle as much or more as 'middle class' |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
When you have section 8 paying over $1000 a month for housing that's comparable to a minimum wage job. Add in foodstamps. Somebody once posted he knew somebody getting over $800. That close to twice minimum wage. Add in medical. No premiums, copays or deductibles, plus the usual 20%, dental etc. Your at 3 times minimum wage, add in wic, help with utilities, and a check. That's close to 4 times minimum wage. Welfare is causing the breakdown of the family unit. White people are getting on the welfare gravy too. That means less are working. Less paying into that system. I can't say that I blame them. In the long run it will get welfare changes. Hopefully the family unit will be restored. 4 times the minimum wage? 32 dollars an hour? times 160 hours a month , 5120 a month? where is one living where their expenses come to that much a month? I made twice minimum wage (16) an hour, which after taxes left me about 2 grand a month. 800 for rent would bring it down to 1200. my insurance was about 300 for me and one child, which leaves me 900 and milk and utilities dont come to that much.... this is more the scenario, when I made 10 an hour, (1600) a month with one child, meant I was under 130 percent of poverty guidelines. I was able to receive a whopping 300 for food and 300 check, that would be the same at 1600 or ZERO income as long as it was below the threshold, because i went on Family Size , for snap, about 1.50 per meal per person, and for TANF, it varies by state. so that was 600 in assistance and adding on the hypothetical 800 for rent, thats 1400, not close to 4 times minimum wage, even if I add in the 300 for medical/dental per month, its still not 4 times minimum wage. hopefully, wages will get on par with cost of living increases ... so fewer will need assistance to pull through. Ms.h, have you ever had a baby while not on medicaid? My daughter was born 14 years ago. The bill was over $10,000. You listed ins premiums only. Now be realistic and add the real benefit of Medicaid. It's usually paying for mom and 1-15 kids. Dental pays at 80% and most work only 50%. Medicaid recipients don't understand the struggle of the middle class. Does milk alone sustain you? I believe the guy who posted $800 because I feed a family every week and no $300 a month is b.s. You got the rent part about right. Unless the woman has more than a 2br. 5120×12=$61,440. That's a lower middle class income. $32x40=$1280 a week. Minus $300 in taxes, $40 insurance $60 in 401k. $880 is about what's left to live on. Rent here is usually a little over $1000, unless you live in a dump. I've heard of 3 section 8 women and rent was over $1000. One was coming from the landlord. One was at Honda. One my ex was trying to get away from because the two oldest kids were turning 18 and she had to move. 880 a week to live on is almost 3600 a month. I have lived on much less than that a large part of my life, even when I had assistance. those numbers are not the reality. Have you ever known any doctors? My brother is one. The government does not pay the same rates that other insurance does. So the bill would NOT be the same as someone not on medicaid. They do not pay a monthly rate IN CASE a recipient needs help. they pay PER PROCEDURE AFTER the help is received.
and then there is the issue that not everyone receiving medicaid is pregnant. and that the average family size for families on assistant is the same as the average generally (hint, its not 15) medicaid recipients understand struggle is struggle, and many struggle as much or more as 'middle class' |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
70%... is... well....70%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
How much of the coolaid have you drank? It doesn't matter if single women claim having illegitimate kids is by choice. They are still illegitimate kids....got it. No liberal spin will change the facts. no cool aid. Math, Data....lol it does matter if the argument is that having a child out of wedlock is amoral. because if a single demographic is increasing how often they have kids, they are becoming LESS Moral, while if they are decreasing it, the are becoming MORE moral whereas a racial demographic can be becoming MORE moral while still having a larger wed to unwed ratio. because the RATIO depends upon the rate at which one group is changing compared to the other, so if both groups are actually DECREASING but one group DECREASES more than the other, the ratio increases. but Im done trying to explain math. I provided the data, maybe the CDC having the same information regarding two different standards will get the point across https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/hus/2011/007.pdf 2011? I gave you data from Sept 2017. Then I checked again. Liberal spins don't change facts. your data is children centered, children born to wed vs unwed my data is two fold , children centered (that infamous 70 percent number some love to regurgitate to imply something about 'morals') AND Adult centered, how many kids single women are having (a number less reported that indicates a single persons propensity to decide to have a child though they arent married, and tells more about 'morals') feel free to search for a drastic change from only eight years ago, but I doubt the trends have reversed themselves ... and I correct it myself, there does seem to be a decrease, about 5 percent for white women and about 15 percent for black women(WOW, I wonder why THAT number isn't regurgitated so often ..lol) https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/hus/2011/007.pdf 2010 https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr67/nvsr67_01.pdf 2016 (latest numbers) Your liberal spin doesn't change that 70% number. Those women aren't going to a fertility bank and making a conscious choice to get pregnant and raise a baby alone. They are getting pregnant and trying to trap a man and going on welfare when it doesn't work out like they planned. Nothing moral about it. yes, and that 70 number is data from the SAME source as my 'spin' regarding the propensity for single women(white and black) to have kids ... its either a legit source or its not, cant ONLY be legit when the data implicates black women and merely 'spin' when it implicates white women. HAAA, and though the data does not include sperm bank information, how would that choice be any more 'amoral' than anyone else choosing to have a child when they are not married? where is your data regarding how many births are 'traps' .... nonsense. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
How much of the coolaid have you drank? It doesn't matter if single women claim having illegitimate kids is by choice. They are still illegitimate kids....got it. No liberal spin will change the facts. no cool aid. Math, Data....lol it does matter if the argument is that having a child out of wedlock is amoral. because if a single demographic is increasing how often they have kids, they are becoming LESS Moral, while if they are decreasing it, the are becoming MORE moral whereas a racial demographic can be becoming MORE moral while still having a larger wed to unwed ratio. because the RATIO depends upon the rate at which one group is changing compared to the other, so if both groups are actually DECREASING but one group DECREASES more than the other, the ratio increases. but Im done trying to explain math. I provided the data, maybe the CDC having the same information regarding two different standards will get the point across https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/hus/2011/007.pdf 2011? I gave you data from Sept 2017. Then I checked again. Liberal spins don't change facts. your data is children centered, children born to wed vs unwed my data is two fold , children centered (that infamous 70 percent number some love to regurgitate to imply something about 'morals') AND Adult centered, how many kids single women are having (a number less reported that indicates a single persons propensity to decide to have a child though they arent married, and tells more about 'morals') feel free to search for a drastic change from only eight years ago, but I doubt the trends have reversed themselves ... and I correct it myself, there does seem to be a decrease, about 5 percent for white women and about 15 percent for black women(WOW, I wonder why THAT number isn't regurgitated so often ..lol) https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/hus/2011/007.pdf 2010 https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr67/nvsr67_01.pdf 2016 (latest numbers) Your liberal spin doesn't change that 70% number. Those women aren't going to a fertility bank and making a conscious choice to get pregnant and raise a baby alone. They are getting pregnant and trying to trap a man and going on welfare when it doesn't work out like they planned. Nothing moral about it. yes, and that 70 number is data from the SAME source as my 'spin' regarding the propensity for single women(white and black) to have kids ... its either a legit source or its not, cant ONLY be legit when the data implicates black women and merely 'spin' when it implicates white women. HAAA, and though the data does not include sperm bank information, how would that choice be any more 'amoral' than anyone else choosing to have a child when they are not married? where is your data regarding how many births are 'traps' .... nonsense. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
70%... is... well....70% yes, and its sad not enough understand math to know what that actually refers to. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
When you have section 8 paying over $1000 a month for housing that's comparable to a minimum wage job. Add in foodstamps. Somebody once posted he knew somebody getting over $800. That close to twice minimum wage. Add in medical. No premiums, copays or deductibles, plus the usual 20%, dental etc. Your at 3 times minimum wage, add in wic, help with utilities, and a check. That's close to 4 times minimum wage. Welfare is causing the breakdown of the family unit. White people are getting on the welfare gravy too. That means less are working. Less paying into that system. I can't say that I blame them. In the long run it will get welfare changes. Hopefully the family unit will be restored. 4 times the minimum wage? 32 dollars an hour? times 160 hours a month , 5120 a month? where is one living where their expenses come to that much a month? I made twice minimum wage (16) an hour, which after taxes left me about 2 grand a month. 800 for rent would bring it down to 1200. my insurance was about 300 for me and one child, which leaves me 900 and milk and utilities dont come to that much.... this is more the scenario, when I made 10 an hour, (1600) a month with one child, meant I was under 130 percent of poverty guidelines. I was able to receive a whopping 300 for food and 300 check, that would be the same at 1600 or ZERO income as long as it was below the threshold, because i went on Family Size , for snap, about 1.50 per meal per person, and for TANF, it varies by state. so that was 600 in assistance and adding on the hypothetical 800 for rent, thats 1400, not close to 4 times minimum wage, even if I add in the 300 for medical/dental per month, its still not 4 times minimum wage. hopefully, wages will get on par with cost of living increases ... so fewer will need assistance to pull through. Ms.h, have you ever had a baby while not on medicaid? My daughter was born 14 years ago. The bill was over $10,000. You listed ins premiums only. Now be realistic and add the real benefit of Medicaid. It's usually paying for mom and 1-15 kids. Dental pays at 80% and most work only 50%. Medicaid recipients don't understand the struggle of the middle class. Does milk alone sustain you? I believe the guy who posted $800 because I feed a family every week and no $300 a month is b.s. You got the rent part about right. Unless the woman has more than a 2br. 5120×12=$61,440. That's a lower middle class income. $32x40=$1280 a week. Minus $300 in taxes, $40 insurance $60 in 401k. $880 is about what's left to live on. Rent here is usually a little over $1000, unless you live in a dump. I've heard of 3 section 8 women and rent was over $1000. One was coming from the landlord. One was at Honda. One my ex was trying to get away from because the two oldest kids were turning 18 and she had to move. 880 a week to live on is almost 3600 a month. I have lived on much less than that a large part of my life, even when I had assistance. those numbers are not the reality. Have you ever known any doctors? My brother is one. The government does not pay the same rates that other insurance does. So the bill would NOT be the same as someone not on medicaid. They do not pay a monthly rate IN CASE a recipient needs help. they pay PER PROCEDURE AFTER the help is received.
and then there is the issue that not everyone receiving medicaid is pregnant. and that the average family size for families on assistant is the same as the average generally (hint, its not 15) medicaid recipients understand struggle is struggle, and many struggle as much or more as 'middle class' So your defence of Medicaid not being a benefit to recieptients is it pays less? Ok. Do they still have a baby for free? While middle class people pay a ton. Yes they do. That's why people are choosing to sit on welfare. Making $60,000 a year to struggle with medical cost is ********. We need to stop the unlimited medical for the sit at home and procreate group. Lots of middle class Americans are doing without healthcare. They either don't have ins, can't afford the deductibles, can't afford to take off work, or procedures are being denied. Meanwhile the non working are being well cared for at the expense of the working who can't afford the same care. Crazy!! Isn't it. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
msharmony
on
Sun 08/26/18 10:34 AM
|
|
When you have section 8 paying over $1000 a month for housing that's comparable to a minimum wage job. Add in foodstamps. Somebody once posted he knew somebody getting over $800. That close to twice minimum wage. Add in medical. No premiums, copays or deductibles, plus the usual 20%, dental etc. Your at 3 times minimum wage, add in wic, help with utilities, and a check. That's close to 4 times minimum wage. Welfare is causing the breakdown of the family unit. White people are getting on the welfare gravy too. That means less are working. Less paying into that system. I can't say that I blame them. In the long run it will get welfare changes. Hopefully the family unit will be restored. 4 times the minimum wage? 32 dollars an hour? times 160 hours a month , 5120 a month? where is one living where their expenses come to that much a month? I made twice minimum wage (16) an hour, which after taxes left me about 2 grand a month. 800 for rent would bring it down to 1200. my insurance was about 300 for me and one child, which leaves me 900 and milk and utilities dont come to that much.... this is more the scenario, when I made 10 an hour, (1600) a month with one child, meant I was under 130 percent of poverty guidelines. I was able to receive a whopping 300 for food and 300 check, that would be the same at 1600 or ZERO income as long as it was below the threshold, because i went on Family Size , for snap, about 1.50 per meal per person, and for TANF, it varies by state. so that was 600 in assistance and adding on the hypothetical 800 for rent, thats 1400, not close to 4 times minimum wage, even if I add in the 300 for medical/dental per month, its still not 4 times minimum wage. hopefully, wages will get on par with cost of living increases ... so fewer will need assistance to pull through. Ms.h, have you ever had a baby while not on medicaid? My daughter was born 14 years ago. The bill was over $10,000. You listed ins premiums only. Now be realistic and add the real benefit of Medicaid. It's usually paying for mom and 1-15 kids. Dental pays at 80% and most work only 50%. Medicaid recipients don't understand the struggle of the middle class. Does milk alone sustain you? I believe the guy who posted $800 because I feed a family every week and no $300 a month is b.s. You got the rent part about right. Unless the woman has more than a 2br. 5120×12=$61,440. That's a lower middle class income. $32x40=$1280 a week. Minus $300 in taxes, $40 insurance $60 in 401k. $880 is about what's left to live on. Rent here is usually a little over $1000, unless you live in a dump. I've heard of 3 section 8 women and rent was over $1000. One was coming from the landlord. One was at Honda. One my ex was trying to get away from because the two oldest kids were turning 18 and she had to move. 880 a week to live on is almost 3600 a month. I have lived on much less than that a large part of my life, even when I had assistance. those numbers are not the reality. Have you ever known any doctors? My brother is one. The government does not pay the same rates that other insurance does. So the bill would NOT be the same as someone not on medicaid. They do not pay a monthly rate IN CASE a recipient needs help. they pay PER PROCEDURE AFTER the help is received.
and then there is the issue that not everyone receiving medicaid is pregnant. and that the average family size for families on assistant is the same as the average generally (hint, its not 15) medicaid recipients understand struggle is struggle, and many struggle as much or more as 'middle class' So your defence of Medicaid not being a benefit to recieptients is it pays less? Ok. Do they still have a baby for free? While middle class people pay a ton. Yes they do. That's why people are choosing to sit on welfare. Making $60,000 a year to struggle with medical cost is ********. We need to stop the unlimited medical for the sit at home and procreate group. Lots of middle class Americans are doing without healthcare. They either don't have ins, can't afford the deductibles, can't afford to take off work, or procedures are being denied. Meanwhile the non working are being well cared for at the expense of the working who can't afford the same care. Crazy!! Isn't it.
Dear, Im not 'defending' anything. I am disputing the numbers presented in this thread. the logic is false. there is no data that people have kids to get welfare...lol there is no data that there is 60,000 a year in benefit by being on welfare. there is no 'unlimited' for sit at home, there is a lifetime cap and a work requirement for CASH. most able bodied on medicaid, therefore, are not 'sitting at home' unless they are doing so without any CASH with which to survive. lots of poor arent using medicaid either because they are not utilizing DOCTOR services, and therefore medicaid is not having to pay ANYTHING for them. whats crazy is working class griping about the poor having it so good, as if ANY of them would trade places ... its nonsense. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I just explained how section 8, medicaid, foodstamps, utility assistance, wic, cash payments can easily equal a middle class income. We've had another poster explain how a woman he dated welfared enough to pay cash for a car.
When I was in my 20's I had a friend who worked at the welfare office tell me I should quit my job because I could get everything i was working for free, if I quit my job. Who would no better than a person who is giving it out. If they are unmarried, no job, kids already on welfare and having more, they are definitely doing it for welfare. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Doesn't matter what deal the hospitals make with the government at the end of the day the recipient who has government coverage DOES NOT go into their pocket for hospital costs. Whereas, people who have private coverage....do
So we pay for the delivery thru private coverage monthly costs and deductibles and they pay.... nothing.. we pay for their children to be delivered too. that's it, period. Now I remember very clearly that I paid my private coverage deductible and affiliated costs when both of my sons were born, it cost me a few $1,000 each time, not including the monthly premiums. Didn't you have to pay these deductibles as well, MS. When your kids were born? |
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Toodygirl5
on
Sun 08/26/18 10:56 AM
|
|
Government needs to stop. Supporting people who don't want to work.
Who cares if they have children and are single moms! Get a JOB. I worked. Around many women who had Children!! Stop it. !! Assistance is for people who are disabled, or those who are laid off, or between jobs. Some Criminals are raised on government assistance then when they go to jail, government still supports them. This Country leaders need to Wise up and Keep a Conservative in Office as POTUS. Stop focusing on Presidet's sex life and let him help the Economy. Socialism will destory a Country ! Duh |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I just explained how section 8, medicaid, foodstamps, utility assistance, wic, cash payments can easily equal a middle class income. We've had another poster explain how a woman he dated welfared enough to pay cash for a car. When I was in my 20's I had a friend who worked at the welfare office tell me I should quit my job because I could get everything i was working for free, if I quit my job. Who would no better than a person who is giving it out. If they are unmarried, no job, kids already on welfare and having more, they are definitely doing it for welfare. yes. and someone on ALL Those programs could, but COULD and DO are different things. AS MOST are not receiving ALL those programs. and when you cut out the housing, the benefits dont come CLOSE to middle class. Im sorry you seemed to know or associate with so many low lives, but it takes research outside of your personal experiences to get the truth to the claim of people having more than middle class: According to the survey, the national median household income rose to $59,039 — an increase of 3.2% from the previous year and the American middle class' highest income level to date, beating the previous record of $58,655 in 1999 (all numbers are adjusted for inflation) http://www.businessinsider.com/middle-class-income-us-state-2017-9 If you someone who receives aLL The benefits depending on which state, that can range from 11 to 60 thousand dollars(in state of Hawaii, where cost of living and wages are higher) all other states fall below the middle class threshold ... http://object.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/pubs/pdf/the_work_versus_welfare_trade-off_2013_wp.pdf |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Plenty of people are choosing welfare over work. Those women at Honda did and had more babies to increase benefits. The one in section 8 housing had her 3rd for tax payers to support.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I just explained how section 8, medicaid, foodstamps, utility assistance, wic, cash payments can easily equal a middle class income. We've had another poster explain how a woman he dated welfared enough to pay cash for a car. When I was in my 20's I had a friend who worked at the welfare office tell me I should quit my job because I could get everything i was working for free, if I quit my job. Who would no better than a person who is giving it out. If they are unmarried, no job, kids already on welfare and having more, they are definitely doing it for welfare. yes. and someone on ALL Those programs could, but COULD and DO are different things. AS MOST are not receiving ALL those programs. and when you cut out the housing, the benefits dont come CLOSE to middle class. Im sorry you seemed to know or associate with so many low lives, but it takes research outside of your personal experiences to get the truth to the claim of people having more than middle class: According to the survey, the national median household income rose to $59,039 — an increase of 3.2% from the previous year and the American middle class' highest income level to date, beating the previous record of $58,655 in 1999 (all numbers are adjusted for inflation) http://www.businessinsider.com/middle-class-income-us-state-2017-9 If you someone who receives aLL The benefits depending on which state, that can range from 11 to 60 thousand dollars(in state of Hawaii, where cost of living and wages are higher) all other states fall below the middle class threshold ... http://object.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/pubs/pdf/the_work_versus_welfare_trade-off_2013_wp.pdf So you just proved me right..... 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
What is and has been going in Chicago is complete unbridled insanity.
Period. As long as the family unit is dysfunctional and abuse, addiction, lack of education and joblessness continues so will the blood shed. There will be no hope for Chicago or any other major city if the above continues. The body count will rise as well as destruction and depression. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Doesn't matter what deal the hospitals make with the government at the end of the day the recipient who has government coverage DOES NOT go into their pocket for hospital costs. Whereas, people who have private coverage....do So we pay for the delivery thru private coverage monthly costs and deductibles and they pay.... nothing.. we pay for their children to be delivered too. that's it, period. Now I remember very clearly that I paid my private coverage deductible and affiliated costs when both of my sons were born, it cost me a few $1,000 each time, not including the monthly premiums. Didn't you have to pay these deductibles as well, MS. When your kids were born? it does matter if one is arguing about the money they get COMPARED to middle class, the medicaid money they 'get' is money they only 'get' if and when they are provided a service. and if the medical industry is double screwing you by using your taxes AND your insurance money, seems like the beef should be with THEM. The first time my husband was military and it was covered through our insurance. I did not review my husbands checks for what was taken out. The second time I was working in the timeshare industry and my insurance from work covered it, I paid about 200 a month, so it ran me about 1800. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Government needs to stop. Supporting people who don't want to work. Who cares if they have children and are single moms! Get a JOB. I worked. Around many women who had Children!! Stop it. !! Assistance is for people who are disabled, or those who are laid off, or between jobs. Some Criminals are raised on government assistance then when they go to jail, government still supports them. This Country leaders need to Wise up and Keep a Conservative in Office as POTUS. Stop focusing on Presidet's sex life and let him help the Economy. Socialism will destory a Country ! Duh How will government determine who doesn't "want" to work? should we have a system where government dictates where you must work to have food and shelter? Should people struggling no longer have the discretion to choose the work that fits their skills, education, geography and needs? |
|
|
|
|
