Get a F@#KING Job Grandma!!!

[CC27]

maxrandb (6,493 posts)

Get a F@#KING Job Grandma!!!


Last edited Tue May 23, 2017, 11:50 AM - Edit history (1)

that appears to be the "hard choices" the ReTrumplicans are proposing with their budget...and make no mistake. This is NOT Donnie "Short Fingers" budget...it's the ReTrumplicans. Don't let them run away from it.

Heard some talking head on NPR this morning talking about the "tough choices" states are going to have to make. Cut benefits to the poor, reduce eligibility for the disabled, etc. The only "tough choice" that was missing was TAXING THE ****ING SHIT OUT OF PEOPLE LIKE DONALD TRUMP.

**** - kicking poor people takes ZERO political courage. Raising taxes on the 1%? Well, that would take some ****ing political courage.

http://www.politico.com/story/2017/05/22/trump-budget-cut-social-programs-238696

"Mulvaney rejected accusations that Trump’s budget unfairly targets the poor, arguing instead that it amounts to a broad rethink of the country’s welfare system.

“We need folks to work. We need people to go to work. If you’re on food stamps, and you're able-bodied, we need you to go to work. If you’re on disability insurance and you're not supposed to be, we need you to work,” he added. “There’s a dignity to work, and there’s a necessity to work.”"

https://www.democraticunderground.com/10029105007

DUmmie is pissed the gravy train might end.

[BadCat]

“We need folks to work. We need people to go to work. If you’re on food stamps, and you're able-bodied, we need you to go to work. If you’re on disability insurance and you're not supposed to be, we need you to work,”

Makes perfect sense to normal people.

[Wineslob]

Mulvaney rejected accusations that Trump’s budget unfairly targets the poor, arguing instead that it amounts to a broad rethink of the country’s welfare system.

“We need folks to work. We need people to go to work. If you’re on food stamps, and you're able-bodied, we need you to go to work. If you’re on disability insurance and you're not supposed to be, we need you to work,” he added. “There’s a dignity to work, and there’s a necessity to work.”"

The fact, DUmmies, that this pisses you off is the problem.

[hillneck]

Oh the travesty, of having to earn what you receive in life.  To lurking DUmmies, you tend to appreciate the things you have earned and  worked for.  Just saying.

[Old n Grumpy]

If you can't earn your keep there is a seat on the train to the FEMA labor camp on the eastern front. there will be plenty of work, bread , water and reeducation.

[SVPete]

Same old Poverty Card shtick:

World Ends tomorrow!

Women and children worst affected!

[DLR Pyro]

“We need folks to work. We need people to go to work. If you’re on food stamps, and you're able-bodied, we need you to go to work. If you’re on disability insurance and you're not supposed to be, we need you to work,”

I agree with that but sympathize with business owners who have people like this on payroll since they are just a "slip" or "fall" away from filing a huge workers comp claim so they can get back on the gravy train.

[jukin]

I agree with that but sympathize with business owners who have people like this on payroll since they are just a "slip" or "fall" away from filing a huge workers comp claim so they can get back on the gravy train.

Or as happened to me, said employee says I caused her mental anguish because I told her to her job, be in on time, and work 8 hours a day.

I fired her when after five minutes of explaining the task to her she said, and I will never forget this, "It would be easier for me if you could just do this."  I told her "Then one of us is not needed." and fired her.

[Linda]

I was thinking if you got all the lazy loafers that can work off the government tit then there would be plenty of money left over to take care of grandma.

[USA4ME]

The BIG LIE is there are no cuts. There are reductions to proposed budget increases, but that's not a cut anywhere in the normal world. Only in DC can a reduction in an increase be called a cut. Would that there were real cuts, but that won't happen until we can string them all up by their necks.

.

[freedumb2003b]

The BIG LIE is there are no cuts. There are reductions to proposed budget increases, but that's not a cut anywhere in the normal world. Only in DC can a reduction in an increase be called a cut. Would that there were real cuts, but that won't happen until we can string them all up by their necks.

.

I remember Tom McClintock explaining exactly that -- budget "cuts" are not cuts in the way real humans understand them.  So if you had Program A and had expected a 100% increase in funding and only get a 50% increase that is a 50% cut.  And even if the program is to create a Death Ray, that 50% will hurt women, children and minorities to the point they will be dead bodies in the street for NOT making the Death Ray.

[franksolich]

The BIG LIE is there are no cuts. There are reductions to proposed budget increases, but that's not a cut anywhere in the normal world. Only in DC can a reduction in an increase be called a cut. Would that there were real cuts, but that won't happen until we can string them all up by their necks.

Yeah, that's something that pisses me off a great deal; that Democrats, liberals, and primitives have so much control over the language they can easily manipulate it--a cut in a proposed increase is simply a "cut," and so on.

Somehow, this misapplication of the language needs to be roped, tied down, and dragged somewhere where the liars can't use it any more.

[I_B_Perky]

maxrandb (6,493 posts)

Get a F@#KING Job Grandma!!!

<hysterics>

Grandma is on SS and Medicare.  As far I know no cuts to those programs.  Meanwhile we spend, combined state and fed, an estimated  1 trillion, with a T, per year on welfare and its many benefits.  It is estimated because no one can say for certain how much it truly is.  Cut it 40 percent and guess what? The budget(s) is balanced on both the state and fed level.

What is the spending on Welfare?

In FY 2017 total US government spending on welfare — federal, state, and local — is “guesstimated” to be $1,117 billion, that is 1.117 trillion for you math impaired dummies including $716 billion for Medicaid, and $411 billion in other welfare.

Figures come from the government themselves.

http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/us_welfare_spending_40.html


Don't believe that? Well take a look at the senate figures from 2011:

https://www.budget.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/CRS%20Report%20-%20Welfare%20Spending%20The%20Largest%20Item%20In%20The%20Federal%20Budget.pdf

Still don't believe me? Well please notice that this washpo article/opinion does not dispute the amount spent, just whether poverty has declined.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2014/01/12/no-we-dont-spend-1-trillion-on-welfare-each-year/

No dummies... Grandma is going to be just fine.  You lazy asses on the other hand might be just need to face reality and get a job. 

For some reason up until the 1960's this country seemed to get along just fine without welfare and mass starvation.

Personally I hope all you dummies end up in the gutter dying of hunger.  This would please me. Then I would have more money to spend on my family instead of yours.  I know our quality of life would improve. Obviously I don't care about yours. 

[docstew]

The BIG LIE is there are no cuts. There are reductions to proposed budget increases, but that's not a cut anywhere in the normal world. Only in DC can a reduction in an increase be called a cut. Would that there were real cuts, but that won't happen until we can string them all up by their necks.

.

There should be a Constitutional Amendment that Congress must start from a blank page every year when making their budget (no previous years baseline and increase by x%), and that payments from the gov to individuals except for goods or services received are unconstitutional.

[98ZJUSMC]

If you can't earn your keep there is a seat on the train to the FEMA labor camp on the eastern front. there will be plenty of work, bread , water and reeducation.

Much cheaper.

[tuolumnejim]

Or as happened to me, said employee says I caused her mental anguish because I told her to her job, be in on time, and work 8 hours a day.

I fired her when after five minutes of explaining the task to her she said, and I will never forget this, "It would be easier for me if you could just do this."  I told her "Then one of us is not needed." and fired her.

Was she from the participation trophy generation?

[jukin]

Was she from the participation trophy generation?

Nope. Came with good references but just couldn't handle the environment of a small company. I fought her all the way and won.

[DLR Pyro]

Nope. Came with good references but just couldn't handle the environment of a small company. I fought her all the way and won.

how much did it cost you in time and money to win?

[DUmpsterDiver]

>“We need folks to work. We need people to go to work. If you’re on food stamps, and you're able-bodied, we need you to go to work. If you’re on disability insurance and you're not supposed to be, we need you to work,” he added. “There’s a dignity to work, and there’s a necessity to work.”"

Well said.  I do not expect a faithful democrat to understand it.  If you can hold a hand out, get a job with that good hand.

[Adam Wood]

The BIG LIE is there are no cuts. There are reductions to proposed budget increases, but that's not a cut anywhere in the normal world. Only in DC can a reduction in an increase be called a cut. Would that there were real cuts, but that won't happen until we can string them all up by their necks.

.

Actually, to Trump's great credit, there actually are some real, genuine cuts (not just reductions in the increase in spending) in this budget. I came across a really great document yesterday that lays this all out beautifully. It's like 182 pages, but what it is is a line-item of each thing that is actually being cut, and then each subsequent page has a specific description of why it is being cut, complete with citations.  So, for example, LIHEAP is being eliminated.  As they note, it has been completely riddled with fraud for decades. They don't note it in that particular document, but LIHEAP has been used as a "crowbar" to other federal programs for years now.  How it works is that someone comes along to the welfare office and they don't actually qualify for welfare or food stamps or whatever, but the social worker says "well, you have trouble meeting your electric bill, right? *wink* *wink*" and whoever it is says "yeah, sure."  So they are "qualified" for LIHEAP, and then, because they qualify for one federal assistance program, they automatically qualify for all federal assistance programs.  TA DA!  Instant food stamps, instant TANF, instant cash to go buy booze, cigarettes, drugs, and lottery tickets.

So there are actual genuine cuts here.  BUT, and this is a big "but," these are cuts from the 2017 CR that literally gave Obama everything he wanted and then some.  Remember that one?  Ryan and McMilquetoast just gave away the store without so much as a twitch, and the Democrats all praised them for it.  So if you go back and look at just a few years ago, you find that the 2017 CR had huge increases in the budget, as did the previous years under Obama.  So, for example, HUD rental assistance funding is being cut from $37,162,000,000 in 2017 down to $35,228,000,000, about a $1.9B cut.  But as recently as 2014, HUD's rental assistance budget was $33,954,000,000, so Trump's budget is still a 3.7% increase over just five years ago.  But if you go back and look at that same budget in 2007, ten years ago, it was $20,202,000,000.  Ergo, in ten years, most of which were Obama's, that budget damn near doubled.  I know that rent has gotten higher since then, but it sure as shit hasn't DOUBLED in that amount of time, nor has there actually been anything like that amount of increase in actual need.

There are genuine, actual cuts that Trump has made (note: *NOT* to Social Security, Medicare, or Medicaid), but they're really just a very slight trim off of the MASSIVE amounts that President Zero managed to bulldoze into Democrat cronyism over his time in office, and we're not even CLOSE to the levels of spending when Zero took office.   This can't even be qualified as a fiscal haircut; it's more like a shave.  Not even a close one.