Interesting quiz on welfare recipients

quote:

---

2. As of July, unemployed workers had been looking for a job for 32 weeks on average. What is the maximum length of time a U.S. worker can receive unemployment benefits?

C) 30 weeks

---

What an amazing coincidence that the unemployed appear to find jobs right after their benefits run out.

quote:

---

5. Which of these takes the largest toll on the federal government’s bottom line each year?

C) Tax expenditures (loopholes, deductions, etc., in the tax code)

---

This does not surprise me at all. This is why I am a supporter of the Fair Tax. However, with that being said I believe every federal program and department needs to be cut significantly. Hell, I worked for the Department of Energy for a few years and I still can't figure out why it should exist.

quote:

---

They factor in tax credits for interest paid on the mortgage.

---

However you want to categorize it, it's still a benefit (not sure even that's the best word). It's no different that somebody being too poor to pay taxes. They're both carve-outs.

quote:

---

5. Which of these takes the largest toll on the federal government’s bottom line each year?
A) Social Security
B) Defense spending
C) Tax expenditures (loopholes, deductions, etc., in the tax code)

---

Which one of these is not like the other? Hmmm, geee, I don't know...I see an expenditure from money collected, and then another expenditure from money collected, and then there's that one at the end there weirdly called an expenditure. Hey, that's odd...the stuff in parenthesis all mean the opposite of expenditure. Wait a minute...so the author of this test of facts about welfare actually included a "correct" answer that suggests the biggest hit to our bottom line is that we don't take enough of other people's money and we call not taking enough an expenditure.

Well that piece of information should help everyone balance their household budget. The reason they are not balancing their budget has nothing to do with what they spend in pursuit of their desired lifestyle, it is that they are spending too much on the "not taking enough from other people" expenditure.

Again , you assume all money is government's and they merely allow us to have some. That quiz is garbage and you know it.

Deductions... Really? How stupid do you have to be to think such a broad area should be included in a review of govt expenses?

Keep in mind:

#2 - It was 99 weeks up until the end of 2013.

#3 - The use of subsidies here doesn't meet the definition of the word (but does meet the political objective of the CBPP). Subsidies by definition are a sum of money granted by the government to assist industry/business/people. A deduction (unless completely non-refundable) does not meet that definition. The Child tax credit is a subsidy as you get the cash even if you did not pay fed income tax. Deductions, you don't.

But yes, mortgage and property tax deductions tend to be used by those who have mortgages and property tax bills (shocking breakthrough study!). By framing as subsidy, the casual viewer may think it is like HUD section benefits which is their goal.

4) As the link shows, 47% do not pay federal income tax. The difference between the 47% and 14% is those who pay no income tax but pay payroll taxes (and that group by a mile will pull vastly more out through medicare and SS then they put in). But hey, better sound bite to pretend they are chipping in. Ofcourse I am not sure granting someone benefits at multiples above their contribution at my expense means they are chipping in, but whatever.

5) This one is so preposterously stupid I don't know where to begin. (a) the presumption with this is all money is the governments to start with, thus any language in the tax code that allows you to keep some of your own money is an 'expenditure'. Try that accounting in any other world and see what happens. It is created fiction. Second these fictional tax expenditures are grouped in their entirety for the comparison. Why not compare to social entitlement spending? Because the result would suck ($2.1 trillion in social entitlement spending this year). Thus we need to break that into smaller pieces (just SS) yet keep the fake 'tax expenditures' at the consolidated level. Again, ridiculous approach that a 6 year old could see through.

8) Another preposterous attempt to confuse. Food stamps are given on a sliding scale based on income. As you earn more you get less. Thus, of course an average is going to be low because the guy making $5 less then the cut off gets a very small residual amount. Then this study takes that small residual amount and spreads it over 90 meals a month to get the shock number of $1.50 as an 'average'. Why doesn't she tell us what the full benefit is? Simple - that doesn't fit the political agenda. Now people lack of mathematical understanding will have them thinking food stamp recipients are only getting $1.50 a meal. Beautiful deceit.

quote:

---

#2 - It was 99 weeks up until the end of 2013.

---

simply not true. many states never had 99 weeks of unemployment to begin with. Yes some with high unemployment got 99 weeks, but they were high unemployment states. Some states had 50 weeks, some had 99 weeks.

The 99 weeks started to fade in 2010.

quote:

---

You are correct in the 99 week fading down to a lean 73 weeks lol

But before you get too excited about some never having 99 weeks, that wasn't the question. Question was MAXIMUM for a US worker. So take the highest and that is your answer (which is why in the quiz she said 30 and not 26).

So yes, the 30 is a 2014 number that is a fraction of what it has been for several years (which was the point)

---

Sure but even when it was 99 weeks, there were quite a few states that didn't offer it.

And i posted 2012, 2013 was even a further reduction.

I agree the quiz has a political point but the 99 weeks is this right wing meme that is just kinda garbage IMHO.