re: Louisiana bans some welfare use

quote:

---

You have quite the narrow definition of "welfare spending."

---

I have a narrow definition of what "welfare" is ? The OP linked the article about welfare that confirmed a another NY Times statistic. I didn't link the 2 articles nor did I make up that stats that roughly 4000 HOUSEHOLDS in Louisiana receive Welfare(TANF) of $192 per month / HOUSEHOLD.

If my definition of "Welfare" is limited then Right Wingers should stop priding themselves with "welfare" reform by the GOP Congress under Clinton .


The Welfare Reform Act of 1996 has a narrow definition of "Welfare" as well. Just as the 2 articles in your opinion have a narrow definition of it.


1)Food Stamps (Snap) EBT - was not affected by the Welfare Act-$0

2)W.I.C. Has been going strong for 40 plus years & was not affected by the "Welfare" Reform Act.- $0


3) Public Housing/Section was not affected by the "Welfare" reform Act-$0


The "Welfare" they reformed was TANF which is a modest cash payout to poor families of 3 or more. According to the articles there are about 4000 or so Louisiana Households on the cash program.

Newt Gingrich's/GOP Welfare reform only affected 1 social program & that's TANF(Welfare as it is historically known).

"Welfare" is a very coded & toxic word used Republicans use to get their base riled up & secure votes with their identity politics.("Those people" & "Our" money) .

But in reality this Gingrich/GOP "Welfare" reform had absolutely nothing to do with cutting Section 8/Food Stamps/W.I .C. Etc...or any other evil social program. They were targeting the program that is recognized as "Welfare" (TANF).


Welfare(TANF) is /was a modest program with the Coded words to get Right Wingers riled up. It's Republicans who are trying expand the definition of their coded "welfare" to further villainize the poor.


How can I not call someone a knucklehead when they (not me) link 2 articles & then dispute what's in the articles?

So stop patting yourselves on the backs about Welfare (TANF) Reform as the GOP duped you & read up on the Welfare Reform ACT.

Also read the OP article(Fox News) & another posters verification article(NY Times) about the 4000 Louisiana Households who receive $192 / month for a family of 3 or more.

Welfare is TANF & a word to get bitter Right Wingers riled up/votes.

quote:

---

Wait, there is actually a dip shite who thinks only 3500 families in LA receive welfare?

would be hilarious except the ignorant son of a bitch can vote

---

So you didn't read the Fox News article linked by the OP? New York Times article linked by another verifying that roughly several thousand families receive welfare in Louisiana

Obviously Newt Gingrich /GOP politicians are just as ignorant & wrong as myself & both articles that state that roughly 4000 La. Households are on "Welfare"

Newt Gingrich isn't stupid ,but he knows his base is ignorant & that's why he pushed & keeps touting his Welfare Reform Act that did not affect

:SNAP/W.I.C./Section 8 nor other programs for poor children outside Welfare(TANF)


It only affected the very modest program historically called Welfare & not the new GOP expansion of that word ("Welfare") to villainize all Social programs.


Gingrich/GOP/Clinton/Fox News & The NY Times must all be ignorant as well.

quote:

---

Maybe if you did read on occasion you'll also understand what the modest program Welfare is/was & how the GOP has successfully used that coded word(Welfare) in their identity politics.

---

You did not answer the question. Are folks buying tattoos, jewelry, and lingerie with taxpayer money? Are you okay with that?

quote:

---

Lot of people attacking Sugar when he happens to be 100% correct on this on.

The law is what he claims, a feel good measure. Is it a step in the right direction? Perhaps. Perhaps it is not a step at all.

Nobody is against reducing fraud and abuse of the system, just don't think this law will have a noticeable affect to that end.

Please continue the ignorance.....

---

You think sugar's point is that this law doesn't go far enough to reduce fraud? And, you are calling others ignorant?

quote:

---

sugar71

---

You are arguing statistics from one data set without acknowledging the whoel. You keep focusing on right vs. left. The board seems to be focusing on the following discussion, which you are ignoring:
1) Louisiana spent $3B in welfare last year
2) It makes sense to put controls into the system to stop people from abusing the system

What you appear to be arguing is that people aren't abusing the system, and you refuse to acknowledge the total spending number, instead focusing on racism towards taxpayers and right wing stereotypes. Why are you making such generalizations?

Your arguments are intellecutally dishonest because you won't argue on the same topics, instead resorting to ad hominem attacks, red herrings, and strawmen. How can you expect to be taken seriously?

My response had nothing to do with the article in the OP. I responded to your assertion that TANF is the only program that qualifies as welfare. It's quite clear that a number of programs fall under the umbrella of "welfare spending."

For crying out loud, the federal budget lists SNAP, Housing (section) and other programs under the "welfare" tab. I guess they're part of this Republican conspiracy to change the definition of the word too?

LINK

What about this?

quote:

---

demonize/stereotype all social services(which are a pittance compared to other waste, fraud,etc...)

---

Pensions (SSI/Disability)- $921.8 billion
Healthcare (Medicare/Medicaid)- $969.8 billion
Welfare (Housing/SNAP/etc.)- $395.9 billion

This time YOU used the term "social services." Are these programs not social services? Do you really believe all this money being spent is a pittance? Spending on social services makes up nearly two-thirds of the federal budget. I think you're the one who has these terms confused.

There should be a TD rule that one can not post links as evidence & then turn around & dispute their own links.

Republicans still pat themselves on the back about Welfare (TANF) reform but it was only speaking of the program historically called Welfare. Fox news scummily put up the 'ebt' accepted here,,but this program has nothing to do with Food stamps(ebt) since one cannot buy clothes with food stamps(unless they barter).


The GOP throws out how they reformed "Welfare" & their base gets excited & the GOP feasts on this ignorance & negative connotations associated with it.

I knew they would come running when they saw 'welfare use ' to do more villanization of the poor.


And yes I am all for any type of Job training tied to Social programs for those on it over extended period of times perhaps.

I am all for any reform & would like to do it without villainizing entire groups of people & punishing those who don't abuse the programs.


I'm under no delusion that fraud/theft can be completely stopped in any setting & I am not for completely tearing down these programs due the abuses of some.

quote:

---

About 3,500 households in Louisiana receive welfare benefits, and about 2,400 households get kinship care subsidies, according to the department. Average payments are $192 per month for welfare and $419 a month for kinship care.

---

Sounds like a big problem.

quote:

---

I'm under no delusion that fraud/theft can be completely stopped in any setting & I am not for completely tearing down these programs due the abuses of some.

---

It can't be completely controlled (barter system, as you mentioned).

However, keeping people from spending taxpayer money on tattoos, manicures, and lingerie seems logical.

You've mentioned the $192/month number a few times. That's a decent sum of expendable "income" when your housing, food, and medical is already covered.

quote:

---

And yes I am all for any type of Job training tied to Social programs for those on it over extended period of times perhaps.

---

You are also out of step with today's Democrat Party if you believe this.

Today's Democrat Party considers this government largesse payments to be the private property of the recipients, rather than some kind of gratuity or charity.

As such, any strings or conditions attached to these welfare payments are Unconstitutional, in the view of today's Democrats.

Will you continue to support this?