What's preventing you from starting your own corporationbe trusting of corporations Brehs. when they only care about the bottom line $$$$. nothing else. well let me take that back. they are racist too and they care about $$$. lol

What's preventing you from starting your own corporationbe trusting of corporations Brehs. when they only care about the bottom line $$$$. nothing else. well let me take that back. they are racist too and they care about $$$. lol

I've said this probably before you thought you were unique about this shyt.I'VE been trying to tell yall this.
THEE ONLY REASON WE DONT HAVE MEDICARE FOR ALL OR FREE EDUCATION(COLLEGE) FOR ALL is due to TOO MANY BLACKS(speficially) and to many minorities in general. Whites dont have a hard time or not nearly as hard of a time comprehending helping other whites. they do however have a much harder time thinking about HELPING other races. these are the facts. this is why they are always screaming about democrats giving out handouts and gifts to blacks and minorities. when even though whites take home most of the handouts(we're talking pure numbers, not percentage of a group.) They are speaking in code. it means. "i dont want to give any N words my money."
Co-muthafukkin sign.
I remember reading a few years back that if you go county by county/district by district, the more homogenously white the district the more likely there was more municipal spending on welfare. The more diverse the district, the less municipal spending on welfare.
Race is still the #1 reason we don't have a robust welfare system like almost nearly every other western country.
The country was diverse in the 1940s tooWow there is so much ignorance in this thread I don't know where to start. Denmark, Sweden, and all the other countries that Bernie Sanders wants to emulate have populations between 5 to 10 million people and are all about 95% white? Do you really think those countries could continue to have a massive welfare state if they were taking in millions of unskilled and uneducated immigrants from Mexico, Guatemala, Haiti, Bangladesh, Vietnam, and other backwards countries? Of course not. Those immigrant groups would contribute very little in taxes but would consume disproportionately large amounts of government services. As those immigrants became a larger portion of the population the welfare state would become even more unstainable then it already is. That is why immigration levels to Scandinavian countries is so low in comparison to other western nations.
It is funny how the United States takes more immigrants from every race, religion, and ethnicity than every other country in the world combined and yet we still have morons in this thread complaining about how racist of a country it is.
This is one of the stupidest things i've ever read.Now that I think about it, how racist is Bernie Sanders for continually saying he wants to emulate countries that are like 95% white?
The country was diverse in the 1940s too
Whats your point?
So, posting facts and something that is common sense to those with a functioning brain is now "trolling"?
Every state should do EXACTLY what Maine did for able bodied single people that are unemployed. They had about 14,000 people on food stamps, but when they were required to work SIX hours a week, that number dropped to about 2,000 people..
Typical laziness and handout attitude.
So you're finally admitting that the usa does not love you and you shouldn't suck they dikks anymore? It's about time your ignorant ass wakes upThe country was diverse in the 1940s too
Whats your point?
I read an article about that. A lot of the people collecting food stamps actually had jobs and were working under the table while collecting unemployment at the same time. Of course a lot of them just had no interest in work at all.
The bigger the welfare state the more opportunity for people to fraud the government and rip off hard working taxpayers. It is not surprising a life long bum like Bernie Sanders wants a big welfare state.
http://www.fns.usda.gov/sites/default/files/ops/Characteristics2014-Summary.pdf
Nearly two-thirds percent of SNAP participants were children, elderly, or had disabilities. Forty-four percent of participants were under age 18, 10 percent were age 60 or older, and 10 percent were disabled non-elderly adults.
SNAP households had little income. Nearly 22 percent of SNAP households had no cash income of any kind in the month the data was collected. Only 16 percent had gross income above the poverty line, while 43 percent had income at, or below, half the poverty line. The average SNAP household income was slightly less than 58 percent of the poverty line. The average gross income for all SNAP households was $759 per month.
Here is an article about Maine's food stamps reforms.
EDITORIAL: Maine's food stamp program merits mass replication
EDITORIAL: Maine's food stamp program merits mass replication
Las Vegas Review-Journal
It sometimes feels like our leaders fail us at every turn, so it's refreshing when government does the right thing. Take the state of Maine, for example, with its meaningful steps toward tackling a national policy problem.
In 2000, 17.2 million people in this country received food stamps. That number ballooned to 45.8 million by 2015. Costs have risen dramatically, too, from $20.7 billion in 2000 to $83.1 billion in 2014.
As reported by Robert Rector and Rachel Sheffield of The Daily Signal, the fastest growing segment of food stamp recipients is able-bodied adults without dependents (ABAWDs) — people between the ages of 18 and 49 who don't have children or other dependents to support but who can work. This segment has grown from 2 million recipients in 2008 to roughly 5 million today, and the growth spurred Maine Gov. Paul LePage to take action.
Gov. LePage recently established work requirements on ABAWDs in his state. If you live in Maine, have no dependents and can work, you are now required to find a job, undergo training or perform community service if you wish to continuing receiving state aid.
There are plenty of job openings for low-skilled workers in Maine, as well as considerable training and community service opportunities. The state has been aggressive in pushing ABAWDs to get with the new program. However, Mr. Rector and Ms. Sheffield noted that most have refused to participate in any training or commit to community service for even the minimum requirement of six hours per week. Those who refused to participate saw their food stamps benefits stop.
After just three months — from December 2014 to March 2015 — Maine's new work policy caused the state's caseload of ABAWDs to drop by a whopping 80 percent, from 13,332 recipients to 2,678.
Further, as the report suggests, the program likely also reduces fraud among those who are on food stamps but have under-the-table employment in which their earnings aren't documented. These recipients often find it difficult to participate in job training or community service while still doing their gray economy work, so they simply choose to drop off the welfare rolls.
Maine's program is an outstanding step toward making sure those who need such aid get it, while also helping them get back to work, and it's better still in combatting fraud and bringing fairness to the taxpayers who fund it. And as the Daily Signal report noted, because the federal government provides 90 percent of food stamp funding, such programs could help all states by curbing food stamp abuse nationwide.
To Nevada's credit, similar efforts have been undertaken with the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program. Nevada has an employment and training mandate, but it's not quite as strict as Maine's, in large part due to the state's still-recovering economy. With Maine's quantified success, any state without such a program would be wise to replicate the reforms of the Pine Tree State.


Wow there is so much ignorance in this thread I don't know where to start. Denmark, Sweden, and all the other countries that Bernie Sanders wants to emulate have populations between 5 to 10 million people and are all about 95% white? Do you really think those countries could continue to have a massive welfare state if they were taking in millions of unskilled and uneducated immigrants from Mexico, Guatemala, Haiti, Bangladesh, Vietnam, and other backwards countries? Of course not. Those immigrant groups would contribute very little in taxes but would consume disproportionately large amounts of government services. As those immigrants became a larger portion of the population the welfare state would become even more unstainable then it already is. That is why immigration levels to Scandinavian countries is so low in comparison to other western nations.
It is funny how the United States takes more immigrants from every race, religion, and ethnicity than every other country in the world combined and yet we still have morons in this thread complaining about how racist of a country it is.




