The left implemented the social programs that guranteed the continuation of the welfare mess and made the government an enabler. Look what happened when those programs were tightened up, the welfare roles dropped and people started working instead of sponging. The middle class and wealthy pay for all those programs with a substantially higher tax rate. The liberals want to talk about those terrible tax shelters and "loopholes. They will never bring up the fact that the wealthy and top income brackets are paying the majority of the tax revenue.
So untrue. But you really don't want a government program to step in in any event. As we here in the midwest have started to help folks walk away from the government programs, they have gone to begging for more people to sign up. You see they can't get increases in budgets if the dependency roles are shrinking. They hustled as fast as they could at the close of last year to spend as much as they could, but their budget shrunk. Not because of a loss of employees mind you. They just had fewer folks there asking for assistance. And that ain't supposed to ever happen. Dirty little government secret. Sounds as though your small business community could use a shot in the arm too. Remember, the implementation of a government program doesn't necessarily mean they care about the folks who need it.
Remember, the implementation of a government program doesn't necessarily mean they care about the folks who need it. No kidding First and foremost goal of EVERY bureaucracy is to preserve itself Walter Wriston (former CITIbank boss)
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tm...&cid=578&u=/nm/20021006/ts_nm/yemen_tanker_dc Market to tank monday on tanker news?
" . . . in Washington, DC. Facing a chorus of support in the Senate for action against Saddam Hussein, Daschle predicted on the eve of a public appeal by President George W. Bush that Congress would give overwhelming approval of a war powers resolution." Left wing extremists are obviously in the minority.
Are you serious? The administration has not said anything new nor has it changed its posture. Could this now be exposed as a political game by Mr. Daschle? Just last week he was saying that, "The case has not been made to my satisfaction." Why can't he follow his so-called convictions? No one would fault him for saying "I do not agree and I will not vote for this resolution!" If that's what he HONESTLY believes. This is the very reason why I do not have much faith in many of those in congress. Political poll taking for life-after-voting is the game of the day! Maybe he'll speak after the president and claim that he doesn't believe in the vote but he made it just for unity sake. That way, no matter what happens he can take some credit for having the right posture.
I can't understand this country! In U.S.A. a man with the abilities of G.Bush becomes President while here in Europe he'd be a ?
LOL FAAACTS, buddy: Percentage of US children who live in poverty: 20% (U.S. Census Bureau, 2000) Number of families or primary individuals who live in mobile homes or trailers: 6.8 million (U.S. Census Bureau, American Housing Survey, 1999) Child poverty in the USA, highest among the seventeen leading industrial nations. Poverty's Effect on Children Unfortunately, not all America's poor have been so fortunate. According to figures released by the U.S. Census Bureau in September 1996, 13.8% of Americans live in poverty. Many more are on the borderline. Poverty affects all ages, but an astonishing 48% percent of its victims are children: About 15 million children -- one out of every four -- live below the official poverty line. 22% of Americans under the age of 18 -- and 25% under age 12 -- are hungry or at the risk of being hungry. Everyday 2,660 children are born into poverty; 27 die because of it. Children and families are the fastest growing group in the homeless population, representing 40%. A survey of 26 industrialized nations (the Luxembourg Income Study) found that the gap between the wealthiest 10% and the poorest 10% is greater in the United States than any other country except Russia (Wallechinsky 6). Real weekly wages in the U.S. rose until 1973, and have been declining since. So income is flat or declining. But unfortunately, expenditures have not followed income's example. Of the major categories of household expenditures, only food and clothing have shown declines over time (Segal 62). All others are up, many in excess of the general inflationary rate. This household squeeze is mirrored on a national level. If we factor together the costs (direct and indirect) of the U.S. international military empire and its adventuristic tendencies (e.g. Persian Gulf, Panama, Grenada, etc.), welfare for the rich, the savings and loan debacle, interest on the national debt (now a trillion dollars every five years) and the expensive drug war, among other issues that might be mentioned, it seems apparent that literally trillions of dollars of national wealth have been squandered over the last 30 years by the economic and political elite to no good purpose and a lot of that money has ended up in the hands of that same economic and political elite and their good friends in corporate America. In order to form an immaculate member of a flock of sheep one must, above all, be a sheep." -- Albert Einstein Lotsa more stats and sources here: http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&postid=133447#post133447
Check Florida real estate; some of those "trailer trash" dwellings cost $40,000 -100,000. 36 % of those earning $15,000 a year call themselves middle class. (National Center for Opinion Research, 2000) Percentage of 5000 American adults polled who cited "lack of effort" as a reason people are poor: 43 % Percentage who cited "strong effort" as a reason some people are rich: 53% (Gallup Poll Social Audit, 1998)