Republicans double down on welfare lie.

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
dank69

dank69

Lifer
Oct 6, 2009
35,320
28,550
136
a777pilot said:
Bottom line....

Do you, any of you, all of you, believe that is it better to require those getting a government hand out, i.e., welfare, to do work for that money or is it better to just give them, the unemployed/destitute, money and let them do what they want?
Click to expand...
You are arguaing against a straw man. The waiver is granted to states that find ways to get these people back into the workforce faster. Wouldn't you agree that the best thing for all of us would be to find ways to get these people working again?
 
a777pilot

a777pilot

Diamond Member
Apr 26, 2011
4,261
21
81
dank69 said:
You are arguaing against a straw man. The waiver is granted to states that find ways to get these people back into the workforce faster. Wouldn't you agree that the best thing for all of us would be to find ways to get these people working again?
Click to expand...

YES, I would, but I saw what the government did with the definition of a "green" job, so I am waiting to find out just what the new and improved definiton of work just might be.

For all I know it could be defined as "work" to walk yourself down to a bank to cash your government welfare check.

When you have the definition of work, let me know.
 
Matt1970

Matt1970

Lifer
Mar 19, 2007
12,320
3
0
dank69 said:
You are arguaing against a straw man. The waiver is granted to states that find ways to get these people back into the workforce faster. Wouldn't you agree that the best thing for all of us would be to find ways to get these people working again?
Click to expand...

Not true. That states can use whatever means they wanted to to get the people back to work under the old plan.
 
W

WHAMPOM

Diamond Member
Feb 28, 2006
7,628
183
106
cybrsage said:
You just said that the Obama administration is allowing states to get a waiver to remove the requirement to work and do something other than require people to work. You also say it is a lie to say the Obama administration is removing the requirement for people to have to work.

Which one do you actually mean, since they are diametrically opposed?
Click to expand...

Do you have underdeveloped reading comprehension or overwhelming trollishness? Cybrsap?
 
dank69

dank69

Lifer
Oct 6, 2009
35,320
28,550
136
a777pilot said:
YES, I would, but I saw what the government did with the definition of a "green" job, so I am waiting to find out just what the new and improved definiton of work just might be.

For all I know it could be defined as "work" to walk yourself down to a bank to cash your government welfare check.

When you have the definition of work, let me know.
Click to expand...
I'll get right on that. :rolleyes:
 
W

WHAMPOM

Diamond Member
Feb 28, 2006
7,628
183
106
EagleKeeper said:
Obama is stating that the states can

1) Drop it first
2) Then propose to see if the new ideas will work.
3) Get permission to try the new ideas
4) It takes a few years for a new idea to get implemented; monitored and evaluated.
Click to expand...

Sure it dont work like this: Propose a new idea to get permission to drop out of the Federal plan? Of course it has to be workable and not a Republican crock of shit.
 
W

WHAMPOM

Diamond Member
Feb 28, 2006
7,628
183
106
a777pilot said:
YES, I would, but I saw what the government did with the definition of a "green" job, so I am waiting to find out just what the new and improved definiton of work just might be.

For all I know it could be defined as "work" to walk yourself down to a bank to cash your government welfare check.

When you have the definition of work, let me know.
Click to expand...

A dollar's worth of productivity that earns a dollar's worth of pay?
 
J

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,681
136
Matt1970

Matt1970

Lifer
Mar 19, 2007
12,320
3
0
Jhhnn said:
That's terribly misinformed at best.

Romney actually supported such an effort when he was a governor, completely ignored in his current frenzy to demonize Obama-

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/09/opinion/mr-romney-hits-bottom-on-welfare.html

The whole flap is probably the most dishonest effort by Repubs in the election season so far.
Click to expand...

Not terrible misinformed and what Romney does is irrelivant. The law merely states that anyone recieving welfare must obtain employment within 2 years of receiving benefits. If you can find info to the contrary I would be happy to read it.
 
Last edited:
cybrsage

cybrsage

Lifer
Nov 17, 2011
13,021
0
0
MomentsofSanity said:
A waiver is not forcing the requirements to be dropped, as the ad states. It would be a decision of the state. How is that Obama ending them? It is given each state the option to choose. Their own legislatures would be responsible for ending them if they chose to.
Click to expand...

Obama quietly ended work requirements for welfare
Click to expand...

...the more you know...
 
cybrsage

cybrsage

Lifer
Nov 17, 2011
13,021
0
0
MomentsofSanity said:
Yes. I read what the disputed ad claimed. That doesn't make it valid. States were given the right to choose. Show Obama forced them to abandon them and there is no choice and you'd have a point.

Here, this should help.

http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/ofa/policy/im-ofa/2012/im201203/im201203.html
Click to expand...


Sigh...lets try again, this time actually follow along:

techs said:
Republicans double down on welfare lie.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/13/romney-obama-welfare_n_1772151.html

Republican ad video followed by Democratic ad in response.

I report, you decide.


The Obama administration announced in July that states could seek waivers from certain welfare rules, but in doing so they would have to provide ideas for projects and initiatives that would do a better job of increasing employment among welfare recipients. Furthermore, the Obama administration has made it clear that it would not drop requirements for states that failed to promise better work outcomes.

Yet in the new ad, the narrator states, “On July 12th, Obama quietly ended work requirements for welfare. You wouldn’t have to work and wouldn’t have to train for a job.”
Click to expand...


Did the obama administration end work requirements for states by allowing them to get a waiver to no longer have them and therefor a state with a waiver no longer has the work requirement?
 
V

Vic Vega

Diamond Member
Sep 24, 2010
4,536
3
0
The guy who wrote welfare reform said that the work requirement has been gutted, all of it. I believe that guy. Since he knows exactly what the original says (he wrote it) and what it intends (he wrote it) he is the perfect guy to explain the changes. He says the work requirement is gone.
 
M

mect

Platinum Member
Jan 5, 2004
2,424
1,636
136
Vic Vega said:
The guy who wrote welfare reform said that the work requirement has been gutted, all of it. I believe that guy. Since he knows exactly what the original says (he wrote it) and what it intends (he wrote it) he is the perfect guy to explain the changes. He says the work requirement is gone.
Click to expand...

Do you know the guy's name? When was it gutted?
 
1prophet

1prophet

Diamond Member
Aug 17, 2005
5,313
534
126
The guy is Robert Rector, wrote most of it.

JUDY WOODRUFF: In other words, giving — as I understand, it’s giving states more flexibility to figure out ways to get people to work.
ROBERT RECTOR: It’s allowing states to be exempted from the participation rates entirely. They say that they will waive or do away with all of Section 407. That’s the entire work requirement in the bill. Every aspect, every clause, every phrase is now invalid. It no longer is binding. It’s gone.
PETER EDELMAN: That’s not true.
ROBERT RECTOR: It’s absolutely true.
Click to expand...
video from pbs news hour below
http://www.therightscoop.com/herita...s-assertion-that-obama-gutted-welfare-reform/
 
J

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,681
136
cybrsage said:
Sigh...lets try again, this time actually follow along:




Did the obama administration end work requirements for states by allowing them to get a waiver to no longer have them and therefor a state with a waiver no longer has the work requirement?
Click to expand...

No. That's quite clear in the link I provided earlier.

The department “is only interested in approving waivers if the state can explain in a compelling fashion why the proposed approach may be a more efficient or effective means to promote employment entry, retention, advancement, or access to jobs,” according to the memo.
Click to expand...

Romney asked for such when governor of Massachusetts, as did many others. Yet he now attacks the granting of what he asked for himself.

Robert Rector of the Heritage foundation slinging mud & innuendo? Unsurprising. He's also an abstinence only advocate.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom