Re: inflation rate of 41.9 quintillion percent
- From: hot-ham-and-cheese@xxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: 30 May 2007 18:11:22 -0700
On May 26, 12:37 pm, Sue <sebr...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Fri, 25 May 2007 22:45:05 -0700, Usenet2...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
<Usenet2...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
In article <s8qd53h88tu3lkvahcjojs450dadvd6...@xxxxxxx>,
And then, they went after the welfare mothers on AFDC. And
pushed them to jobs.
That sometimes costs more than it saves since we pay for their child
care.
Yep. Ohio spent $200,000 for an on-line baby-sitter finder.
My favorite part of welfare reform is that we no longer give more
money for more babies.
You're starving the children... and Mom might have to cut back on
necessities like nail care.
We stopped doing that several years ago here
in California. Not all states do this. One of the few times that
this state exhibited some common sense.
Agreed.
Again, politically easy and looking good. The voters WANT to
boot the bludgers. Only snot-nosed liberals like Michael Moore
had a problem with that.
Then, limiting federal food stamps. I seem to recall that there
is now a lifetime cap on receiving those (actually a reloadable
debit card, now.) Plus issues about refusing people with drug
convictions (I don't know if that was approved.)
There is no life time cap on food stamp receipt. For adults who
aren't disabled, are under 50 and have no minor children living with
them there is a 3 months out of every 36 months limit (in California
anyway and most food stamps rules are federal) unless work
requirements are met. Now, the county in which I live has had a
waiver for years due to a high unemployment rate.
As for the drug convictions - if it just for possession they can get
food stamps if they provide proof that they've gone through a
treatment program.
How much does that cost the taxpayers?
Again, this is California. I don't know about any
other states. California has a tendency to be a bit more generous.
Anything other than possession and they are banned no matter what they
do.
That's harsh!
The next thing was NOT easy, but they did it anyway. That was
raising the eligibility point for the old-age portion of
Socialist Insecurity, by two years. That was gradual, and
seemingly small.
It would never have worked if they had suddenly jacked it up to,
say, age 75 - average death age.
But, in reality, I foresee much tighter restrictions on the
disability benefits approvals (probably already happening without
publicity.) Along with MediCaid and Medicare being more stingy
(probably already happening without publicity.)
Fewer and fewer providers are accepting MedicAid (MediCal here)
because it pays them so little. However, over the years we've
expanded who is covered and to what extent (in California).
Sue
And then tax the SS benefits so the real value is decreased... again.
.
- References:
- Re: inflation rate of 41.9 quintillion percent
- From: Curly Surmudgeon
- Re: inflation rate of 41.9 quintillion percent
- From: Robert Sturgeon
- Re: inflation rate of 41.9 quintillion percent
- From: Usenet2007
- Re: inflation rate of 41.9 quintillion percent
- From: Sue
- Re: inflation rate of 41.9 quintillion percent
- Prev by Date: Re: $500 reward- handguns stolen!
- Next by Date: Re: inflation rate of 41.9 quintillion percent
- Previous by thread: Re: inflation rate of 41.9 quintillion percent
- Next by thread: Re: inflation rate of 41.9 quintillion percent
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading