Who says this was a do-nothing Congress? Congress sticks it to the poor every which way they can, literally taking the food out of the mouths of babies and disabled seniors. See link...

rumitoid

Congress sticks it to the poor every which way they can, literally taking the food out of the mouths of babies and disabled seniors. See link below for the gruesome details. (Of course, some here will be just tickled about this.)

http://news.yahoo.com/stick-poor-congressional-strategy-080500785.html

Boo_Boo Loc: Jellystone

rumitoid wrote:

Congress sticks it to the poor every which way they can, literally taking the food out of the mouths of babies and disabled seniors. See link below for the gruesome details. (Of course, some here will be just tickled about this.)

http://news.yahoo.com/stick-poor-congressional-strategy-080500785.html

Dave Loc: Upstate New York

rumitoid wrote:

Congress sticks it to the poor every which way they can, literally taking the food out of the mouths of babies and disabled seniors. See link below for the gruesome details. (Of course, some here will be just tickled about this.)

http://news.yahoo.com/stick-poor-congressional-strategy-080500785.html

I do enjoy one calling themselves non-partisan while loving the most partisan folks disguised as journalists.

It is possible for one to love the poor while decrying the government's efforts at creating even more - and to love the poor while recognizing the role the government plays in creating and sustaining poverty.

jay-are

rumitoid wrote:

Congress sticks it to the poor every which way they can, literally taking the food out of the mouths of babies and disabled seniors. See link below for the gruesome details. (Of course, some here will be just tickled about this.)

http://news.yahoo.com/stick-poor-congressional-strategy-080500785.html

The concept that things are being taken away from the poor is based on the premise that they had the things in the first place. That is a false premise.

The article says people will be kicked out of "their" homes. That is a lie. They don't own the homes. No body is taking anything away from them that belongs to them. People should be motivated to own their own homes in order to avoid being at the mercy of the true owner of the home. Who forced them to take a deal that included rental assistance? Nobody. They chose to rent and to take government assistance. They chose to put themselves at the mercy of the home owners and the government. Now may be the time to find a better way to meet their needs. This way will not work anymore for some. This is no different than makers of buggy whips having to find new jobs when the automobile began being mass produced. Ford motor company did not take away their houses or food.

catpaw Loc: Bakersfield, California

jay-are wrote:

The concept that things are being taken away from ... (show quote)

Question is did they accept gov't assistance out of choice or because they didn't have one?
"Now may be the time to find a better way to meet their needs." But first, let's take what meager means of subsistence they have and make them really suffer. Now, that makes sense.
You want parasite "takers" and "debt drivers" and do-nothings on the gov't tit? Check into the corporate subsidies you tax dollars are paying for. You know, the "job creators" who are going to trickle down on everybody. You may find out you're b***hing at the wrong people. But then, they have lobbyistst with l**t to buy congressmen. Poor people don't.

jay-are

catpaw wrote:

Question is did they accept gov't assistance out o... (show quote)

If the government was doing any good the poor would become not poor as a result of the government's actions.

Which poor who are on government assistance are getting rich? I can't name any.

And which poor who are entering the free market and producing something for a profit are getting rich? I can think of plenty, Bill Gates, Michael Dell, Barak Obama, the facebook guy, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Harrison Ford, Tom Cruise, the Amway inventors, the Herbalife people working from their kitchen table, etc. etc.

catpaw Loc: Bakersfield, California

jay-are wrote:

If the government was doing any good the poor woul... (show quote)

Well, "the government" did propose a jobs bill that got v**ed down; and a construction bill for infrastructure that would have meant jobs and that got v**ed down.

Boo_Boo Loc: Jellystone

jay-are wrote:

The concept that things are being taken away from ... (show quote)

:thumbup: :thumbup:

Boo_Boo Loc: Jellystone

catpaw wrote:

Question is did they accept gov't assistance out o... (show quote)

:thumbdown: :thumbdown: :thumbdown: :thumbdown: :thumbdown: :thumbdown: :thumbdown:

Boo_Boo Loc: Jellystone

catpaw wrote:

Question is did they accept gov't assistance out o... (show quote)

:thumbdown: :thumbdown: :thumbdown: :thumbdown: :thumbdown: :thumbdown: :thumbdown:

Dave Loc: Upstate New York

catpaw wrote:

Question is did they accept gov't assistance out o... (show quote)

I agree tht there should be no corporate subsidies - the federal government needs to get out of the way at several levels - and the only people I hear furthering that idea are the tea party folks.

Dave Loc: Upstate New York

catpaw wrote:

Well, "the government" did propose a jobs bill that got v**ed down; and a construction bill for infrastructure that would have meant jobs and that got v**ed down.

Spending money we don't have on the liberal idea of trickle down solves no problems but creates quite a few new ones - not the least of which is much more cronyism - just like the last "shovel ready stimulus" bill did.

jay-are

catpaw wrote:

Well, "the government" did propose a jobs bill that got v**ed down; and a construction bill for infrastructure that would have meant jobs and that got v**ed down.

Would those construction workers get rich? Why would you rather work for the government than a private company? Where is the humiliation in having a real job, where you take responsibility for yourself instead of just being dependent on government for handouts?

lpnmajor Loc: Arkansas

jay-are wrote:

Would those construction workers get rich? Why would you rather work for the government than a private company? Where is the humiliation in having a real job, where you take responsibility for yourself instead of just being dependent on government for handouts?

The States should be taking care of their own. They have gotten used to the Fed doing it.

permafrost Loc: Minnesota

Dave wrote:

Spending money we don't have on the liberal idea of trickle down solves no problems but creates quite a few new ones - not the least of which is much more cronyism - just like the last "shovel ready stimulus" bill did.

Trickle down came from the Reaganomics time..Never did work...