GOP War on the Poor

By the way, i don't know that anyone suggested that E6s are receiving food stamps.

0 Replies

@Setanta,

Well thank you for your service Set, but we are not talking 1970's military pay, we are talking about 2013 military pay and I laid out the #'s. You will notice that I have only commented on active military personal and their use of food stamps.

Cannot afford to move their families? The military covers the cost of moving their people and their families. http://www.military.com/spouse/military-relocation/pcs-moves/managing-relocation-costs.html

So once again why the need for food stamps for people who are active duty in today's modern military?

1 Reply

@Baldimo,

Actually, the pay rates in 1970 and those today are not proportionally very different. As a PFC, i earned a gross pay of $167/month--that had a purchaing power of more than 12 times what that amount has today--that would be the equivalent of about $2000/month today.

People on active duty in the military today need food stamps because their pay is not sufficient to feed their families properly. Apparently, you need that driven into your head like a nail. No one is saying that all GIs need that assistance, but many do.

1 Reply

@Setanta,

$3547 turns out to be $42,504 a year before taxes. A min wage job paying $7.45 (min wage here in colorado) pays about $15,500 per year. I could see someone making min wage needing food stamps but someone making over 40,000 a year with the military, where you can shop at the Commissary, why do they need food stamps?

Why don't you read some of the links I have posted instead of making things up. Military.com is a legit source and spells out all the pay on a yearly scale. You will see here that an E-4 with 3 years of service makes about 45,000 a year with no dependents and about 48,000 a year with a family of 4.

http://www.military.com/benefits/military-pay/military-enlisted-pay-breakdown.html

0 Replies

Look. All this quibbling is nonsense. This is a DOD report.
For whatever reason these families are hurting.

Quote:

The 5,000 military families receiving food stamps was a tiny percentage of the 48 million recipients nationwide, but it was a major increase over the previous year when the Department of Agriculture reported that only 1,000 recipients listed "active duty military" as their employment status.

In addition, the Defense Commissary Agency reported that food stamps were being redeemed at base commissaries at a record pace.

http://www.military.com/daily-news/2013/07/13/dod-5000-military-families-losing-food-stamps.html

Now, let's quibble over the approx . one million veterans affected by the cuts.

I mean, come on!
You want smaller government. Less entitlements(food stamps) and no raise in the minimum wage!
If that's not a war on the poor what is?

1 Reply

Baldimo also wants to cut corporation subsidies, while also cutting the taxes they pay. I'd say he has a bad case of the Reaganomics disease.

1 Reply

@panzade,

Nice change of subjects by the way.

Who said I don't want a raise in the min wage? I wouldn't mind seeing it go up some, but not the $15hr that some have called for. I would support a bump to $10hr. less entitlements only based on eliminating fraud in the system and fraud is there in the entitlement system.

1 Reply

@Setanta,

Cutting corporate welfare is a good thing is it not? That would mean more money to the govt. Lowering their taxes and eliminating tax write off's and other tax breaks would bring more money into the govt. These are all good things. Did Obama not recommend the same thing during the last election?

2 Replies

@Baldimo,

First of all, Mr. Obama does not do my thinking for me--you need to stop trying to force me into the pigeon hole of your choice. Second, how would lowering anyone's taxes bring in more money? You've got that Reaganomics disease real bad.

1 Reply

@Baldimo,

The only thing that creates jobs is consumer demand.

1 Reply

@Setanta,

You just don't lower taxes, you eliminate tax write offs and other tax breaks. Why is it you always miss half of what I say and attack something you don't like. I already mentioned the tax breaks and write off, but you chose to ignore those and jump on the lower taxes portion of what I said. You have a habit of doing that.

You did the same thing with the military pay. I was only talking about military and food stamps and you decided to try and score a point by bringing up something I wasn't even talking about. For an old dude, you sure act like a kid.

1 Reply

@Advocate,

Did I say anything about creating jobs? I wasn't talking about creating jobs.

1 Reply

@Baldimo,

Don't ascribe some nefarious antipathy to me. Cutting taxes is not going to bring more money in. As far as eliminating tax write offs and breaks, we need that cash to get the government back on a sound fiscal basis as it is.

You really are delusional, i addressed directly your remarks about the military and food stamps. Keep your snotty insults to yourself, creep.

1 Reply

@Baldimo,

Baldimo wrote:

Did I say anything about creating jobs? I wasn't talking about creating jobs.

I didn't say you did. But most cons believe that giving tax cuts to corps would create jobs.

0 Replies

@Setanta,

How is eliminating tax breaks and write offs for corporations going to get the govt back on a sound fiscal basis? Tax write off's and breaks prevent more money from going into govt coffers. Eliminating those would be good would it not?

1 Reply

@Baldimo,

Quote:

Nice change of subjects by the way.

I sincerely thought we were done with the 5,000 military families being hurt by food stamp cuts. It's a fact even though you're surprised by the news.

So I moved on(GOP war on the poor) to the subject of GOP resistance to raising the minimum wage while endeavoring to shrink our government and their entitlements.

Quote:

Who said I don't want a raise in the min wage?

My point was not aimed at you specifically but I agree pretty much with your response.

From the GAO

Quote:

Reducing fraud and abuse in Government programs requires program planning and design which builds in enforcement safeguards, coordinated program operations, and program evaluation which allows the measurements of progress and the determination of the most effective strategies and techniques against fraud and abuse.
The ability to ensure that Federal resources actually reach the truly needy and that the increasingly scarce amounts available will not be improperly depleted is dependent on this work.

Basically what they're saying is: we need more funds to complete this very important work. Please stop with the sequestrations and gov. shut downs so we can do our work!

0 Replies

@Baldimo,

I despair of your understanding. I endorse eliminating write offs, and i don't see it as any good reason to give the greedy sons of bitches a tax cut.

0 Replies

https://scontent-a-mia.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-prn2/1390771_704702492883027_1646392594_n.jpg

Quote:

So what did Lockheed do about the fate of the C-130? It bypassed the Pentagon and went straight to Congress. Using a procedure known as a congressional "add-on" -- that is, an earmark -- Lockheed was able to sell the military another fleet of C-130s that it didn’t want.

To be fair, the Air Force did request some C-130s. Thanks to Senator John McCain, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) did a study of how many more C-130s the Air Force requested between 1978 and 1998. The answer: Five.

How many did Congress add on? Two hundred and fifty-six.

As Hartung commented, this must “surely [be] a record in pork-barrel politics.”

Gotta be enough billions in pork barrel spending to help our vets get their food stamps...all 900,000 of them.

1 Reply

@panzade,

Great post!

Will the public ever catch on to how bad the GOP is?

1 Reply

@Advocate,

http://www.thecollegefix.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/lincolnplaque.jpg

There are some noble Republicans but the Great Emancipator would be shocked if could see the current GOP low-jinks.

Quote:

In Iowa, Sarah Palin compared the federal debt she says shackles Americans to slavery. […]

“Our free stuff today is being paid for by taking money from our children and borrowing from China,” she said at the Iowa Faith & Freedom Coalition’s fall fundraiser at the State Fairgrounds Saturday night. “When that money comes due – and this isn’t racist, but it’ll be like slavery when that note is due. We are going to beholden to the foreign master.”

It’s hard to know where to start with rhetoric as nonsensical as this. Do we note that the deficit is already shrinking at its fastest pace since World War II? Or maybe highlight the fact that the U.S. was poised to pay off the national debt until Republicans put two wars, two tax cuts, and a Wall Street bailout on the national charge card?

Do we mention that no sentence can end well if it starts, “This isn’t racist, but…”? Or perhaps the inconvenient detail that China only holds about 8% of the national debt?

Is it worth remembering that focusing on debt reduction in a weak economy is ridiculous? Or how about the fact that the same policymakers who claim to be obsessed with debt reduction refuse to consider compromises that would actually reduce the debt?

Really? Comparing our debt to a stain on our history that was bravely ended by a Republican?

0 Replies

GOP War on the Poor

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know