Tag Archives: Barack Obama

News

Government spends $61,194 on welfare for each household below the poverty line

5 Comments

From the Weekly Standard. (With a rant from me below)

Excerpt:

New data compiled by the Republican side of the Senate Budget Committee shows that, last year, the United States spent over $60,000 to support welfare programs per each household that is in poverty. The calculations are based on data from the Census, the Office of Management and Budget, and the Congressional Research Services.

“According to the Census’s American Community Survey, the number of households with incomes below the poverty line in 2011 was 16,807,795,” the Senate Budget Committee notes. “If you divide total federal and state spending by the number of households with incomes below the poverty line, the average spending per household in poverty was $61,194 in 2011.”

This dollar figure is almost three times the amount the average household on poverty lives on per year. “If the spending on these programs were converted into cash, and distributed exclusively to the nation’s households below the poverty line, this cash amount would be over 2.5 times the federal poverty threshold for a family of four, which in 2011 was $22,350 (see table in this link),” the Republicans on the Senate Budget Committee note.

To be clear, not all households living below the poverty line receive $61,194 worth of assistance per year. After all, many above the poverty line also receive benefits from social welfare programs (e.g. pell grants).

How do people become poor anyway, in a rich country like America? Is it someone else’s fault, or is it a result of their own poor decision-making? Let famous black economist Walter Williams – chair of the Department of Economics at the prestigious George Mason University –explain it for us:

Avoiding long-term poverty is not rocket science. First, graduate from high school. Second, get married before you have children, and stay married. Third, work at any kind of job, even one that starts out paying the minimum wage. And, finally, avoid engaging in criminal behavior.

If you graduate from high school today with a B or C average, in most places in our country there’s a low-cost or financially assisted post-high-school education program available to increase your skills.

Most jobs start with wages higher than the minimum wage, which is currently $5.15. A man and his wife, even earning the minimum wage, would earn $21,000 annually. According to the Bureau of Census, in 2003, the poverty threshold for one person was $9,393, for a two-person household it was $12,015, and for a family of four it was $18,810. Taking a minimum-wage job is no great shakes, but it produces an income higher than the Bureau of Census’ poverty threshold. Plus, having a job in the first place increases one’s prospects for a better job.

To augment what Dr. Williams said with a study:

Nearly three out of four poor families with children in America are headed by single parents. When a child’s father is married to his mother, however, the probability of the child’s living in poverty drops by 82 percent.

The collapse of marriage, along with a dramatic rise in births to single women, is the most important cause of childhood poverty but government policy doesn’t reflect that reality, according to a special report released today by The Heritage Foundation.

I had to spend all day Saturday and all day Sunday this weekend working to fix a defect so that I could get back on track on my next project. I am still 4 days behind schedule on that new project. If I can’t catch up, I’ll probably have to cancel my November vacation, and maybe even my December vacation. The massive expenditures on welfare for “the poor” is the reason why I have to come in on Saturday and Sunday to work. I have to  to work to pay for these people, and their enablers in the Democrat party.

Don’t I have a right to pursue my dreams and my marriage plans and my plans to be a public, effective Christian, with the money that I earn through my work? For example, on Saturday, I sent $125 to a young Christian scholar so that he could attend a conference and present a paper on a moral issue that we both care about. The government would never give him money, but they will tax me to pay for contraceptives for everyone else. I am a virgin – I don’t even buy contraceptives for myself! I really have better things to do with my earned income than buying “Obamaphones” for people who spend their entire lives collecting welfare. Don’t I have a right to spend what I earn on my own goals and priorities?

UPDATE: The Manhattan Institute explains how welfare waivers water down the work incentives for welfare.

Related posts

News

Abortion profiteers Planned Parenthood spending $12 million to re-elect Obama

2 Comments

From Life Site News.

Excerpt:

Hey, America, do you know what you’re funding when your taxes go to “women’s health” via Planned Parenthood? You think I’m going to say abortion, don’t you? I don’t actually need to say that since you’d have to be brain dead not to know that part. But how about to Barack Obama’s re-election? Wait, you say! Not us! We give my money to Planned Parenthood because women’s health is important. Our tax dollars should support this crucial organization.

Government grants and funding to Planned Parenthood in the last reported year, 2009-2010, was $487.4 million — and so far $12 million from the non-profit has been given to re-elect President Obama. That’s right. This organization that says it cares so much about your cervix cares more about it’s proverbial booty.

Never before has the abortion provider spent so much money in an election, reports say. Neither has there been a precedent for the mother hen to leave her roost and go full time on the campaign trail, as Planned Parenthood President Cecile Richards announced she’d be doing for Obama earlier this month. The woman who makes over $400K a year as the leader of the abortion provider has taken a break from her “day job”  running the national death squad to campaign for the president. It’s clear who’s actually ruling the hen house.

As Planned Parenthood reports on its 2010 IRS Form 990, Richards made $420,153. After she announced on October 19th she’d be working full time as a volunteer for Obama, the first thought you might have had is to demand she not take her salary for those few weeks. After all she isn’t working.

Oh wait.

If you recall, we pointed out recently that the real goal of the Planned Parenthood Action Fund is to raise money for political lobbying. So actually, spending $12 million in the election of the most pro-abortion candidate ever and going on the road to help win swing states actually is very much a part of Richards’ job.

It’s very simple, really. The Democrats subsidize Planned Parenthood. Planned Parenthood performs abortions for money. Planned Parenthood donates a portion of their profits back to the Democrats. Democrats encourage children to have sex earlier and earlier. The number of abortions increases as more people have sex and get pregnant. And it goes around and around, with the Democrats and Planned Parenthood laughing all the way to the bank.

Abortions will stop when we stop the flow of taxpayer money. It’s all about the money.

Related posts

News

Obama administration will pay companies to violate law governing layoff notices

2 Comments

From the Heritage Foundation.

Excerpt:

The Obama Administration’s disregard for the law has struck again—and this time, it’s encouraging others to violate the law at taxpayer expense.

That’s worth saying again: The Obama Administration is encouraging people to violate a law, and promising that it will use taxpayer money to cover fines incurred from this action.

The law: The law in question is called the WARN Act, and it requires that federal contractors send employees layoff notices 60 days before a plant closing or mass layoff.

The inconvenience: Massive defense spending cuts under sequestration are scheduled to hit on January 2, 2013. Defense contractors affected by the budget cuts would have to issue notice letters to employees by November 2 (four days before the election) to meet the January 2 start date for the spending cuts.

The penalty taxpayers would pay: Employers who violate the WARN Act are liable to their former employees for “back pay for each day of a violation” and “benefits under an employee benefit plan,” as well as a penalty of $500 for each day that notice has not been sent to the local government where the layoffs will occur.

As an example, Lockheed CEO Bob Stevens has said that 123,000 of his employees would receive layoff notices. If companies fail to meet the WARN Act’s deadline, lawsuits from employees could result—but the White House has provided a taxpayer-funded guarantee as a way to counter their fears of enormous litigation costs. This guarantee is not only unprecedented but also potentially unlawful.

This President is only interested in one thing – misleading the American people on the issues so he can get re-elected. We have about a week to get this out there, or he’s going to do it. Make sure you keep sharing all of these articles with people who haven’t voted. We need to get everyone informed and into the ballot box on election day.