I need help with this, re. families on welfare and the cost

[LaydeeBug]

I think I am going to tell them that there are dirty cops...cops on the take...cops that *steal* and *game* the system. Some do it for the whole of their careers. Is the answer to cut funding for the police? The obvious answer is a resounding NO because then only the most vulnerable will be hurt...that 'cop on the take' will be able to hustle another system, because that's what hustlers *do*. They hustle. Such is the same story with food stamps, welfare, any of it. What do you think? Oh, and please let's give Jeff Sessions the red ass. Pleeeeeeeeease? How much did this shut down cost per family on welfare? Seriously!

http://www.budget.senate.gov/republican/public/index.cfm/2012/12/total-welfare-spending-equates-to-168-per-day-for-every-household-in-poverty

[zbdent]

1. Point out to them that there are likely fewer terrorists, statistically, in the Muslim faith

than there are pedophile priests in the Catholic faith ...

and they want to keep a single dime from going to Muslim outfits, but are more than happy to channel money to, and bow down to, the Catholics ...

[LaydeeBug]

2. I would, but this is about someone's spite mongering welfare. nt

[LaydeeBug]

3. shameless kick. Shameless, oh so shameless kick. nt

[pinboy3niner]

4. SNAP (Food Stamps): Facts, Myths and Realities

Lots of information at the link. A sample excerpt:

SNAP has a strong record of program integrity.

SNAP error rates declined by 57% since FY2000, from 8.91% in FY2000 to a record low of 3.80% in FY2011.[vi] The accuracy rate of 96.2% (FY2011) is an all-time program high and is considerably higher than other major benefit programs, for example Medicare fee-for-service (91.5%) or Medicare Advantage Part C (88.6%). [vii]

Two-thirds of all SNAP payment errors are a result of caseworker error. Nearly one-fifth are underpayments, which occur when eligible participants receive less in benefits than they are eligible to receive.[viii]

The national rate of food stamp trafficking declined from about 3.8 cents per dollar of benefits redeemed in 1993 to about 1.3 cent per dollar during the years 2009 to 2011.[ix] As you may have read in local news, USDA is aggressively fighting trafficking, but while there are individual cases of program abuse, for every one instance of fraud, there are hundreds of stories of heartbreaking need.

http://feedingamerica.org/how-we-fight-hunger/programs-and-services/public-assistance-programs/supplemental-nutrition-assistance-program/snap-myths-realities.aspx

[denverbill]

5. This is Session's own staff's analysis of Congressional Research Service data.

His own staff is obviously incompetent to actually do that kind of analysis. They are very likely deliberately underestimating the number of people receiving benefits and probably overestimating or double-counting the dollar amounts of benefits. Most likely, people who not legally meeting the definition of 'in poverty' are receiving some benefits, so by limiting the count to the number of people specifically 'in poverty' they are drastically altering the numbers.

Of course, it's impossible to verify because they don't bother linking to their sources or showing where their numbers are derived from. Doing so would make it too easy to debunk.

I've also done some research using Congressional Research Service data. My analysis shows Republicans have an average IQ of 40. I don't have a link to my data however, so you'll just have to assume I'm correct.

[LaydeeBug]

6. Oh, it's even worse than that...

He is using cumulative welfare spending compared to median household income.


He does this because he is a bastard person.