This is a MUSIC forum. Irrelevant or disrespectful posts/topics will be removed by Admin. Please report any forum spam or inappropriate posts HERE.

General discussion for non music topics. BE RESPECTFUL OR YOUR POSTS WILL BE DELETED.

Moderators: bandmixmod1, jimmy990, spikedace

#241295 by DainNobody
Wed Apr 01, 2015 2:20 pm
Despite the fact that congressional leaders recently expressed concern regarding rising income inequality in the United States, some members of Congress continue to promote policies that would advance this economic trend. The House and Senate recently passed their budget resolutions for fiscal year 2016 and will now iron out the differences between their two proposals in order to agree on a single budget resolution. These proposals—which are similar to the Ryan budgets of years past—once again call for a repeal of the Affordable Care Act, or ACA, as well as steep cuts in funding to social safety net programs and a freeze on Pell Grant awards. These cuts would have devastating effects on low-income families and people of color, exacerbating existing gaps in health insurance coverage, income, and educational attainment and increasing current levels of inequality.
Both budgets seek to repeal the ACA, leaving millions of Americans uninsured. Since the implementation of the ACA, approximately 16 million Americans have acquired health care. There has also been a significant drop in the uninsured rate across all demographic groups, particularly among African Americans and Latinos. Since the beginning of open enrollment in 2013, uninsured rates for whites have fallen 5.3 percentage points against the baseline uninsured rate of 14.3 percent. During the same timeframe, the uninsured rate for African Americans has fallen 9.2 percentage points against a baseline of 22.4 percent, and the uninsured rate for Latinos has fallen 12.3 percentage points against a baseline of 41.8 percent. Repealing the ACA could result in a sharp increase in the number of people without health insurance and could cause health care costs to increase drastically.
The social safety net would also suffer deep cuts. The budgets call for reduced funding to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, formerly known as food stamps, and Medicaid. The House budget proposes converting SNAP and Medicaid into block grants known as State Flexibility Funds. This proposal is modeled after the welfare reform of the 1990s, which created the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, or TANF, program. Unfortunately, TANF has failed to provide necessary assistance to many families, leaving them unable to make ends meet. For example, the program only provides assistance to one-third of poor families with children. Additionally, in more than half of U.S. states, less than one in five families with incomes below the federal poverty line receive TANF assistance.
These cuts and reforms have serious implications for people of color, as they represent the majority of SNAP recipients. Of Americans receiving SNAP benefits, 43 percent are white, 33 percent are African American, 19 percent are Hispanic, 2 percent are Asian and 2 percent are Native American. The same is true for Medicaid recipients: Data show that 60 percent of nonelderly recipients are people of color. Congress’ failure to increase the minimum wage has heightened the need for these programs, particularly for people of color, who are more likely to earn the minimum wage or low wages and who rely on these programs to survive.
Lastly, over the years, students of color have made great strides in improving their college enrollment and graduation rates. Despite this progress, however, their ability to access higher education is in danger. Rising tuition costs prevent low-income students and students of color from accessing postsecondary education, and the House budget proposes a freeze on the maximum Pell Grant award, which would leave many students unable to afford school. Furthermore, the House budget proposes restricting Pell Grant recipients to “those who need the most help,” leaving many Americans facing the unfortunate choice of incurring high levels of debt or forgoing higher education altogether. Sixty percent of African American undergraduate students and close to half of Latino students currently depend on Pell Grants to help pay for school.
Despite new leadership in the House and Senate budget committees, nothing has changed in Congress. Programs that provide a lifeline to low- and middle-income families and communities of color are still on the chopping block, potentially stifling these communities’ opportunities to achieve the American dream. As we continue to move toward a more diverse America—indeed, one with no clear racial or ethnic majority—it is essential to promote policies that provide upward mobility instead of policies that will continue to expand current inequalities.
#241307 by Badstrat
Wed Apr 01, 2015 5:43 pm
Dane, Why are you not posting the links in these diatribes?

Were those your words or do they belong to someone else? That budget means nothing. Look, for example, how a budget under this regime isn't what was proposed. Read the article below to look at what a budget proposed two years early turns into by the date gets there. Do you actually still believe in these people?

Obama’s 2010 Economic Estimate For 2014 Off By $1 Trillion
12:27 PM 03/30/2015
Neil Munro
White House Correspondent

http://dailycaller.com/2015/03/30/obama ... -trillion/

The U.S. economy produced $1 trillion less in 2014 than President Barack Obama promised in his February 2010 financial plan.

The missing $1 trillion adds up to $3,053 less for every American man, woman and child.

It highlights the huge gap between Obama’s promise that his progressive, big-government economic policies would jump-start the economy, and the hard reality of America’s complex society and economy.

The failure of Obama-economics was highlighted March 28, when the federal government admitted that the economy grew only 2.2 percent in 2014.

That’s a little more than half the inflation-adjusted growth of 3.9 percent predicted for 2014 by a Obama when he submitted his first economic plan to Congress in February 2010. The growth predictions are found at page 75.

Since 2009, the U.S. population has grown from 305 million to 321 million, including 11 million illegals.

But annual economic output has grown slowly, from $14.4 trillion in 2009, up to $17.7 trillion in the 12 months up March 2015, not counting inflation.

That combination of slower economic growth and faster population growth means the economy produced $17.7 trillion in value, or $55,140 for every one of the 321 million men, women and children, during 2014.

In contrast, Obama’s rose-colored 2010 plan predicted his policies would turbocharge the U.S. economy up to $18.68 trillion in 2014, or roughly $58,193 per person.

That’s a gap of $3,053 per person.
#241316 by Paleopete
Wed Apr 01, 2015 8:53 pm
Since the implementation of the ACA, approximately 16 million Americans have acquired health care.


Which includes somewhere in the neighborhood of 10 million who were forced to sign up when their existing policies were cancelled, which Obummer promised would not happen.

Here's one news article I found, a bit old though

http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/obamac ... id/562651/

I can't find much about it...been looking for references. Also a large number are signing up for medicaid or subsidies, which are paid out of your taxes.. If that were not true Obummer would be screaming it from the rooftops. As it is, it's hard to get info from the govt about how many people are actually paying for their new forced insurance. Which doesn't do a damn thing to improve health care...29% of the people signed up have to be paying for their insurance for it to NOT lose money. When some numbers came out after last year's signups, it was at 19%. And it took a long time before they would admit it. Again, if it were working, and paying for itself, Obummer would be crowing from the rooftops. Instead...crickets.

You also didn't say anything about the huge increases in people signed up for welfare and food stamps since Obummer took office.

http://www.businessinsider.com/chart-di ... are-2014-2

There is also little incentive for people to get off the dole once in the system. Unemployment numbers have been fudged, by omitting those who are no longer collecting unemployment and those who have given up looking for jobs, since there are very few, meaning the touted unemployment rate is artificially low. Then Obummer wants to implement more govt regulations and impose higher taxes on "the rich", which to him includes anyone making over $200,000 a year. That means most of the small business owners in the country. The combination of higher taxes and overhauling facilities to comply with regulations means inhibiting the creation of jobs or raises for existing employees. So welfare and food stamps will not decrease. And small businesses are already dropping like flies, mostly because they can't afford abominablecare. Businesses had already started closing when it went into effect. More welfare and food stamps,thanks to your buddy Obummer.

The reason they want to cut back is the huge increase in welfare spending under Obummer. Welfare spending has increased by 1/3 in the past few years, which is a huge toll on the budget. And little or nothing is being done to cut back on the spending. Mention cutting back on any kind of out of control government spending and Obummer throws a tantrum, makes fun of republicans, calls everybody in sight racist. That was a big part of the government shutdown in 2013, which the so called news wouldn't talk about. Only a couple of politicians interviewed on CNN were able to bring that out, and only by taking the CNN "journalists" by surprise. When they wanted to cut back on out of control spending, Obummer refused to even talk about it.

http://thehill.com/policy/finance/26274 ... -programs-

I wouldn't pay too much attention to the proposed budgets, as already noted, the final budget will not look anything like the ones already proposed.

The main problems with most public assistance programs are

1. No incentive to get off the dole

2. Widespread abuse.

So far a few programs have been proposed that would create incentive to get back into the workforce and get off welfare, as afar as I know none have actually worked.

Government spending is not all about welfare either.

http://mrconservative.com/2012/03/2471- ... -projects/

http://thefederalist.com/2014/10/22/was ... our-money/

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/12 ... ollars-on/

http://dailysignal.com/2014/10/22/top-6 ... book-2014/

That's just a few links, and only 2 of those programs are duplicated on different links. Why don't I see anybody bitching about this kind of insane spending?

The amount spent on government assistance programs needs to be cut back, it's the biggest drain on the budget. More than anything else, with little or nothing being done to cut back on the number of people signing up. On the contrary, Obummer wants to let at least 5 million illegal immigrants stay in the country, and the majority will probably be on welfare within a week. If they're not already...I don't see you bitching about that either. After all, it comes out of your taxes...and the people of this country lose jobs to illegal immigrants...what few jobs there are...
#241329 by Badstrat
Thu Apr 02, 2015 12:46 am
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cloward%E2 ... n_strategy

The Cloward–Piven strategy is a political strategy outlined in 1966 by American sociologists and political activists Richard Cloward and Frances Fox Piven that called for overloading the U.S. public welfare system in order to precipitate a crisis that would lead to a replacement of the welfare system with a national system of "a guaranteed annual income and thus an end to poverty".

http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/Arti ... gypoe.html

First proposed in 1966 and named after Columbia University sociologists Richard Andrew Cloward and Frances Fox Piven, the Cloward-Piven Strategy seeks to hasten the fall of capitalism by overloading the government bureaucracy with a flood of impossible demands, thus pushing society into crisis and economic collapse.


In the simplest of terms their goal is to collapse the economy of the nation through welfare spending and other give away programs in order to collapse the Republic so that a Socialist Regime can be established. Nothing sinister about that.
#241333 by ANGELSSHOTGUN
Thu Apr 02, 2015 2:22 am
Thats why I called you out... Over Badstrat .

You just posted some of the biggest socialist stuff EVER POSTED HERE!

You just started a whole bunch of new threads that are only backed up by radical ideas.

I guess I'm just plain stupid... OR I'M NOT!

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests