Is the Paul Ryan Budget cruel?
Assassin~ Badass Buzz Guru
2012/04/02 14:07:05
|
|
|||||
|
38 votes
|
|
47% | |||
|
43 votes
|
|
53% | |||
The Paul Ryan Budget will cut $3.3 trillion from low-income programs over 10 years, even more than the $2.9 trillion in Mr. Ryan’s first disastrous budget last year. Meanwhile it actually slashes taxes for large corporations in America.
Mitt Romney says its an "excellent piece of work".
The Ryan budget proposes a cut of $810 billion through 2022, one-fifth of current
spending, which would lead states to drop coverage for an estimated 14
million to 28 million people.
receive them, or could cut everyone’s benefits. For a struggling
family of four, that would mean a loss of $90 worth of food a month.
What do you think: Is the Paul Ryan budget cruel?
Mitt Romney says its an "excellent piece of work".
The Ryan budget proposes a cut of $810 billion through 2022, one-fifth of current
spending, which would lead states to drop coverage for an estimated 14
million to 28 million people.
By eliminating the expansion of Medicaid in the health care law, cutting
$1.6 trillion, it would leave another 17 million low- and
moderate-income people uninsured.
receive them, or could cut everyone’s benefits. For a struggling
family of four, that would mean a loss of $90 worth of food a month.
What do you think: Is the Paul Ryan budget cruel?
Read More: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/30/opinion/a-cruel-...
“Obesity costs our society billions of dollars a year in lost productivity and medical expenses, roughly half of which the federal government pays through Medicare and Medicaid. We know that obesity plagues the poor more than the nonpoor and poor women more than poor men. Poor women make up the majority of adult welfare recipients - coincidence or causal connection?
This book investigates the controversial claim by welfare critics that public assistance programs like the Food Stamp and National School Lunch programs contribute to obesity among the poor. The author synthesizes empirical evidence from an array of disciplines - anthropology, economics, epidemiology, medicine, nutrition science, marketing, psychology, public health, sociology, and urban planning - to test this claim and to test whether other causal processes are at work.”
http://www.boomerangbooks.com...
"We know that obesity plagues the poor more than the nonpoor and poor women more than poor men. Poor women make up the majority of adult welfare recipients - coincidence or causal connection?"
http://www.boomerangbooks.com...
Below is another quote and reference:
"•Despite a striking increase in obesity among the poor, government food programs still operate under their nearly half-century assumption that the poor need more food.
•While 65 percent of Americans, by some estimates, are deemed to be overweight, and nearly half of those obese, rates for the poor are estimated at 5 to 10 percentage points higher."
http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/i...
The poor need better quality food, not more of it.
They can easily sell their food stamps and buy hamburgers, Pizza, or anything else they want. A lot of them do sell their foodstamps.
I am an accountant and we were taught about the massive amount of fraud in most welfare programs. I never audited a welfare program. If I did, I would be able to tell you how to defraud it. Most of them are simple.
The bottom line is that when government gives away free money, people are going to take it. If you cut the welfare program, government will make it harder to get it.
"Earlier this month, the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel revealed that Wisconsin food-stamp recipients routinely sell their benefit cards on Facebook. The investigation also found that "nearly 2,000 recipients claimed they lost their card six or more times in 2010 and requested replacements." USDA rules require that lost cards be speedily replaced. The Wisconsin Policy Research Institute concluded: "Prosecutors have simply stopped prosecuting the vast majority of [food-stamp] fraud cases in virtually all counties, including the one with the most recipients, Milwaukee."
Troy Hutson, the chief of Washington state's food-stamp program, resigned in April after a Seattle television station revealed that some food-stamp recipients were selling their cards on Craigslist or brazenly cashing them out on street corners (for 50 cents on the dollar) and using the proceeds for illegal drugs and prostitution. Washington state Sen. Mike Carrell complained: "Dozens of workers at DSHS [the Department of Social and Health Services] have reported numerous unpunished cases of fraud to me. They have told me that DSHS management has allowed these things to happen, and in some cases actively restricted fraud investigations."
http://online.wsj.com/article...
"The USDA's Food and Nutrition Service now has only 40 inspectors to oversee almost 200,000 merchants that accept food stamps nationwide. The Government Accountability Office reported last summer that retailers who traffic illegally in food stamps by redeeming stamps for cash or alcohol or other prohibited items "are less likely to face criminal penalties or prosecution" than in earlier years."
"Lax attitudes toward fraud are spurring swindles across the nation:"
http://online.wsj.com/article...
Marxist Liberals buy votes with welfare programs. Support the party and it will transfer wealth to you. Marxism doesn't work!
That isn't even what Marxism was about! Even if it was, how is, as you are suggesting, rich people cheating the system redistributing the wealth?
When a Liberal can’t produce facts, they generally use the fallacy of shooting the messenger. They attack the source of the argument rather then providing an argument of their own to dispute it.
So far you said; “it is illegal to sell ones food stamps. the only times I've heard of anyone doing it was to pay the rent.”
My reference said; "Earlier this month, the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel revealed that Wisconsin food-stamp recipients routinely sell their benefit cards on Facebook.
When the government gives away free money, people are going take it anyway the can whether it is legal or not. It is all about lining pockets with welfare programs.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com...
45,753,078 Americans and 21,581,234 households were on food stamps as of May 2011. Your link claims that 2,000 people made claims of lost cards upwards of six times. Now even assuming that every single one of those people were committing fraud that is still less then 1% of the people in the program as a whole.
"Earlier this month, the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel revealed that Wisconsin food-stamp recipients routinely sell their benefit cards on Facebook." This gives no numbers, but taking the previously listed number of 2,000 people nation wide, we can nicely divide that between the 50 states to come up with an average of 40 people per state committing fraud, assuming all 6+ claims are false. So roughly 40 people in the entire state committed fraud as compared to an average of 915,061.56 of people in the program per state, or roughly 1 out of 22,876.
Yeah that sounds like a huge amount of corruption and pocket lining as compared to elsewhere, and this is also not even addressing how many of those people are likely to be committing it purely out of greed and not need, and grossly rounding up everyone who made a lost card claim over a certain number of times, and not allowing for how many of them may have genuinely lost cards.
Below is a more typical way and it is just for one store.
“Hilliard and her brothers, Craig and Hillary Nash, allowed customers to use food stamp benefits to buy ineligible items — like alcohol and tobacco — and performed "fictional transactions with customers in order to obtain the monetary value of customers' food stamp benefits in exchange for lesser amounts of money," the indictment said.”
“U.S. Attorney Stephanie Finley said previously that more than $2 million was fraudulently obtained in the scheme.”
http://www.houmatoday.com/art...
BTW, The 2000 was just for Wisconsin not nation wide.
With out that information how can one make a conclusion how common it is or isn't?
Reworking the numbers on the card loss it comes to 1 in 458 (that's with me rounding up from 457.53078 to keep numbers even.) Since you've given no actual numbers or even reasonable estimates on the numbers of these other kinds of fraud, simply saying that these are more common, lets say twice as many people do this on a regular basis, giving us 6,000 in the state. And we'll add another 1.000 to cover miscellaneous as yet unnamed forms of fraud giving us a total of 7,000. Taking my previous average of 915,061.56, which for ease I shall round up to 915,062, we have 1 out of 130.72314285714285714, or for ease of discussion's sake, 1 in 131. So for ever 130 people who use their food stamps in the way intended, 1 person commits fraud. This really still sounds like a case of punishing the many for the crimes of the few because they happen to share the common trait of being poor.
You said; “Your link only says how much was stolen not how many people were in on it on the food stamp side, nor does it tell over how long a period of time that this happened for them to accumulate that amount. Was it days, weeks, months, years, a decade, what?"
Yes, so how can you use my examples of fraud in your calculations?
The Federal government doesn't give the total percentage of people receiving food stamps that are fraudulent.
Liberals buy votes with welfare programs and with only 40 auditors policing almost 46 million people, who knows the real amount of fraud in the food stamp program?
"Yes, so how can you use my examples of fraud in your calculations?"
by taking a previously given example, making what seem reasonable comparative extrapolations based on the information given. I took the given 2000 possible card selling frauds, then looked at what was claimed to be a far more common fraud and attempted to extrapolate a worst case possible number in comparison without going so far as to feel unreasonable. And faulting me for trying to work with your faulty information to form an illustrative example of why I believe your's doesn't mean my illustrative example is more faulty then your's.
Well considering everyone in it also has a DHS worker that they must report all changes in situation to within 7-10 days or be expunged from the program for at least a year, (if not forever), who must be granted a look at paycheck stubs, banking history, and a list of liquidateable assets before they can be granted anything, as well as looking at the numbers of households who are running of one income th...
"Yes, so how can you use my examples of fraud in your calculations?"
by taking a previously given example, making what seem reasonable comparative extrapolations based on the information given. I took the given 2000 possible card selling frauds, then looked at what was claimed to be a far more common fraud and attempted to extrapolate a worst case possible number in comparison without going so far as to feel unreasonable. And faulting me for trying to work with your faulty information to form an illustrative example of why I believe your's doesn't mean my illustrative example is more faulty then your's.
Well considering everyone in it also has a DHS worker that they must report all changes in situation to within 7-10 days or be expunged from the program for at least a year, (if not forever), who must be granted a look at paycheck stubs, banking history, and a list of liquidateable assets before they can be granted anything, as well as looking at the numbers of households who are running of one income things would suggest that there is a higher number of people with legitimate need then there are people willing to go through the trouble and risk for at best 500ish a month that can only be spent legitimately on groceries.
all politicians are trying to buy votes, the question is who's trying to get them by trying to appeal to the needs of the people at large and who is trying to get them by applying the wants of certain individuals?
My 2000 lost cards came from the state of Wisconsin investigations.
The Federal government doesn’t release any facts on Food stamp fraud. States do release data on food stamp fraud and all other welfare fraud in their state.
The fraud persists in all welfare programs. New York has budgeted 1.129 billion just for Medicaid fraud.
“This year’s audit target for the Office of Medicaid Inspector General is $1.129 billion. That is the most aggressive target ever set for the office. We are on a trajectory to meet our goal through aggressive auditing and by educating providers about Medicaid claim rules to avoid inappropriate payments to begin with.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/0...
Obviously, just for the state of New York to spend 1.129 billion on Medicaid fraud show how common fraud is just in the that program. We are not talking about an insignificant amount of offenders.
Obama and Liberals could care less about Federal welfare fraud because they are stealing the money from the States and giving it back to the states to fund welfare programs.
I never said it was perfect, only tried to point out that for the majority of people on it, it is a vital and literal lifeline. It needs some major reworking, yes, but claiming that simply gouging money from it will help things will only take away from the people using it honestly, and make it harder for those with genuine need to get on it.
How are liberals in the government stealing from the states exactly?
Since, most of my income comes from investments; I could lower my income to the point that I could get food stamps. It is perfectly legal. A millionaire can get food stamps.
The Federal government taxes the people in all states. If they didn’t tax the people to fund welfare programs, the states could tax the people more. Therefore, the Federal government is taxing the people from each state and giving the money back to the states with strings attached.
I live in Nebraska; we get $1.84 back for every dollar we send into the Federal government. Low cost states get a great deal while high cost states get less money back then they pay in.
No, they check your investments, land, EVERYTHING YOU OWN, to make sure that you don't have funds else where that you can draw on. Have you ever even looked at the basic paper work for these things?
If the federal government didn't take their own tax, how could they fund things like the military, the CIA and FBI, grants for scientific investigation, ect? Even if the feds stopped taking any tax at all, you would still have to convince the people to allow the state to take up the difference.
No state gets all of the money it puts in back, or what would be left to (try) to pay for things like the military, the FBI, grants for scientific research, ect.? I know there's a deficit, but if it worked that way it would seem like there'd be an even greater one, as what would the federal government have kept for it's self at all?
"DETROIT (WWJ) – According to a new report, 47 percent of Detroiters are ”functionally illiterate.” The alarming new statistics were released by the Detroit Regional Workforce Fund on Wednesday.
WWJ Newsradio 950 spoke with the Fund’s Director, Karen Tyler-Ruiz, who explained exactly what this means.
“Not able to fill out basic forms, for getting a job — those types of basic everyday (things). Reading a prescription; what’s on the bottle, how many you should take… just your basic everyday tasks,” she said."
http://detroit.cbslocal.com/2...
did you ask your friend about how they may have had to budget to afford that plus whatever else they may have had to eat? if one budgets right it's not too hard to afford one night a month of something nice. healthy food is not cheap in a lot of places, so how much is too much exactly? they want more cash aid to do what, by the way? how many of them need it to pay the rent, or for their car, or medical debt (the number on reason in the country to be in debt), or to pay of student loans that have come due, or for some kind of medication? yeah, there are those that want it for all the wrong things, but do you really think that's the major reason people apply? When we live in an economy with four unemployed people for every one job that comes up on the market? why are the people you know selling them for cash?
(and I can't help but ask, if you disapprove so much of those that would commit fraud, why do you associate with people who do it without reporting them?)
If they had passed a budget sometime in the past three years we could force them to hold to it. But, instead, they have been getting by with spending bills that allow them to spend any amount without accountability.