Maine Governor wants to stop EBT being used for candy/soft drinks

[CFM]

that's in for an individual,but what do you do with the people who's needs are unmet by private charity? They are subsidized so they can live independently

do you want this instead?

If someone's needs are being met privately, blame yourself. I personally meet the needs where I see fit. Since it's not your place to determine whether or not that's enough, saying needs are unmet means you're not doing what you should.

If someone is receiving a subsidy, they aren't living independently. The two words have opposite meanings. A subsidy is a form of financial AID or SUPPORT. In this case, it's one extended by the government using money forced from someone other than the person getting the subsidy. Independent means WITHOUT outside help or UNAIDED.

I've already stated how I believe it should be done and if it's not up to the level you think, you're the reason not me.

 

[cancel2 2022]

If someone's needs are being met privately, blame yourself. I personally meet the needs where I see fit. Since it's not your place to determine whether or not that's enough, saying needs are unmet means you're not doing what you should.

If someone is receiving a subsidy, they aren't living independently. The two words have opposite meanings. A subsidy is a form of financial AID or SUPPORT. In this case, it's one extended by the government using money forced from someone other than the person getting the subsidy. Independent means WITHOUT outside help or UNAIDED.

I've already stated how I believe it should be done and if it's not up to the level you think, you're the reason not me.

Fuck me, is this some kind of joke?

 

[CFM]

No, it's not even close. S.S. and Medicare are almost 50% of the budget. The remainder of those you listed are not all tied to welfare. Hell look at Donald Trump as an example of someone who has constantly used and tied up the legal system.

Not true. In FY 2015, net Medicare expenditures were $546 billion out of total spending of $3.7 trillion. That's 14.6%. In FY 2015, SS spending totaled $900 billion ($750 billion in old age survivor insurance (OASI) and $150 billion in disability insurance (DI)). That 24.3% of the $3.7 trillion spent. Combined it's just shy of $1.5 billion.

In FY 2015, federal tax revenue totaled $3.18 trillion. While SS and Medicare spending totaled almost $1.5 trillion, payroll taxes only brought in $1.07 trillion or 33% of the total revenue. In other words, SS and Medicare spent almost $500 billion MORE than the taxes designed to fund it brought in.

As for Donald Trump, one must look at whether his use of the legal system was due to him suing or being sued. If it's the former, it counts toward what you're trying to say. If it's the latter, it doesn't unless you are making the argument that when he was sued he should have not fought it.

 

[CFM]

Fuck me, is this some kind of joke?

The joke is the person that says if voluntary donations aren't enough, the government should force it from people. If the voluntary donations of the country as a whole isn't to the level of some bleeding heart that support mandated "charity", they're not doing enough. If I give to the level I see fit with my money and it's not enough to someone else, the onus is on them to give more. It's not their place to dictate how much of what I've earned should go to another person.

 

[anatta]

Fuck me, is this some kind of joke?

CFM doesn't get the idea that a subsidy ALLOWS FOR independent living.
what is independent living? living by yourself and with family independent of some kina government poorhouse/workhouse.

Private charity is supposed to be a reliable way to accomplish independent living instead. uh huh.

 

[cawacko]

Not true. In FY 2015, net Medicare expenditures were $546 billion out of total spending of $3.7 trillion. That's 14.6%. In FY 2015, SS spending totaled $900 billion ($750 billion in old age survivor insurance (OASI) and $150 billion in disability insurance (DI)). That 24.3% of the $3.7 trillion spent. Combined it's just shy of $1.5 billion.

In FY 2015, federal tax revenue totaled $3.18 trillion. While SS and Medicare spending totaled almost $1.5 trillion, payroll taxes only brought in $1.07 trillion or 33% of the total revenue. In other words, SS and Medicare spent almost $500 billion MORE than the taxes designed to fund it brought in.

As for Donald Trump, one must look at whether his use of the legal system was due to him suing or being sued. If it's the former, it counts toward what you're trying to say. If it's the latter, it doesn't unless you are making the argument that when he was sued he should have not fought it.

From Heritage:

Where Does All The Money Go?

•Forty-nine percent, or almost half of all spending, paid for Social Security and health care entitlements (primarily Medicare and Medicaid).


http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2014/12/federal-spending-by-the-numbers-2014

 

[Celticguy]

Isn't it sad how so many believe those demanding others support them have more of a say in how things are done than the ones forced to fund it?

It's sad the constitution ceased being the basis of our kaws.

 

[CFM]

From Heritage:

Where Does All The Money Go?

•Forty-nine percent, or almost half of all spending, paid for Social Security and health care entitlements (primarily Medicare and Medicaid).


http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2014/12/federal-spending-by-the-numbers-2014

Perhaps you should check your source in more detail instead of just looking for something that appears to say what you want.

I see where you get your number from the rainbow colored dollar bill. Are you still wanting to say that 49% of federal spending goes toward SS and Medicare? Read it closely. If you do, be prepared to be embarrassed.

 

[CFM]

I'd have to go look at the exact numbers but my understanding is its not economically beneficial for people to have children to get more welfare money like it might have been so more in the past.

Are you saying that if a family with whatever number of kids adds to that number, the benefits don't increase or even go down? You know better.

It's not just the social welfare benefits that costs those actually paying income taxes, it's other things that additional child gives to the parent(s) related to taxes. For 2015 tax year, each dependent received a $4000 exemption. If the couple is married with 6 kids, the total in exemptions is $32,000 and as long as the kids didn't reach the age of 18 during that tax year, they get a child tax credit of $1000/each and potentially more thorough the earned income tax credit for poor people with kids. Add that 7th kid and the total exemptions increases by $4000 and another credit of $1000 comes into play. Each time that happens, the gross income amount the family can make based solely on the makeup of the frailly goes up.

 

[cawacko]

Perhaps you should check your source in more detail instead of just looking for something that appears to say what you want.

I see where you get your number from the rainbow colored dollar bill. Are you still wanting to say that 49% of federal spending goes toward SS and Medicare? Read it closely. If you do, be prepared to be embarrassed.

By Medicare I was including Medicaid. Is it better to see those two apart?

 

[cawacko]

Are you saying that if a family with whatever number of kids adds to that number, the benefits don't increase or even go down? You know better.

It's not just the social welfare benefits that costs those actually paying income taxes, it's other things that additional child gives to the parent(s) related to taxes. For 2015 tax year, each dependent received a $4000 exemption. If the couple is married with 6 kids, the total in exemptions is $32,000 and as long as the kids didn't reach the age of 18 during that tax year, they get a child tax credit of $1000/each and potentially more thorough the earned income tax credit for poor people with kids. Add that 7th kid and the total exemptions increases by $4000 and another credit of $1000 comes into play. Each time that happens, the gross income amount the family can make based solely on the makeup of the frailly goes up.

Do you think all families on welfare are filing tax returns?

 

[cawacko]

CFM, if your goal is to reduce poor people having babies wouldn't more abortion clinics and places like Planned Parenthood help?

 

[CFM]

By Medicare I was including Medicaid. Is it better to see those two apart?

Medicare and Medicaid aren't anywhere near the same thing. Since they aren't, the only way you can see it is apart. Medicare is for people over 65 that have paid into the system while working. To get it, you have to have paid into it. Medicaid is insurance for the poor. It's means tested meaning you can pay the taxes that fund it (i.e. - income taxes) and never get it and vice versa.

Look at the breakdown above the dollar bill titled "Where does all the money go?" It's a line item breakdown. Line Item 650 Social Security shows 23.55% for FY 2013. I used the 2015 numbers which was about 1/2% higher than 2013. Line Item 570 shows Medicare at 14.41%. For 2015, it was .2% higher. The total using the breakdown from your source was right at 38%. Being that my source was two years newer, the percentages changed slightly as one might expect.

Whatever the percentages happen to be, one thing is true. What is spent on SS and Medicare is $500 billion more than what is brought in from the taxes that fund it.

 

[CFM]

CFM, if your goal is to reduce poor people having babies wouldn't more abortion clinics and places like Planned Parenthood help?

Why would I support killing an innocent life because someone doesn't like the results of the CHOICE they made in spreading their legs? Like I've said before, I don't care how many kids a poor, rich, or somewhere in between person has as long as the responsibility for that choice is funded by those making it.

 

[cawacko]

Why would I support killing an innocent life because someone doesn't like the results of the CHOICE they made in spreading their legs? Like I've said before, I don't care how many kids a poor, rich, or somewhere in between person has as long as the responsibility for that choice is funded by those making it.

You were talking about costs of poor children earlier. The cheapest way to have less poor children is for poor parents to be able to abort and to have better access to health care services to avoid getting pregnant. Again, we're talking about cost issues here. Because people who are poor who can't afford kids aren't going to stop having sex. That's just called being human.

 

[CFM]

Do you think all families on welfare are filing tax returns?

I have no way of knowing that information to make a blind guess.

What I know is if that family I described does file one (2 adults/7 children), they won't pay a dime in federal income taxes unless their gross family income is $93,449 and that's based solely on the 2/7 makeup without taking into account any other deductions, exemption, and credits they get for being that size. My numbers were taken directly from the 2015 1040 form and tax tables. It's not made up. By the way, if that is their income, their total tax is a whopping $1.

 

[cawacko]

I have no way of knowing that information to make a blind guess.

What I know is if that family I described does file one (2 adults/7 children), they won't pay a dime in federal income taxes unless their gross family income is $93,449 and that's based solely on the 2/7 makeup without taking into account any other deductions, exemption, and credits they get for being that size. My numbers were taken directly from the 2015 1040 form and tax tables. It's not made up. By the way, if that is their income, their total tax is a whopping $1.

Do you have a link where you got those numbers?

 

[CFM]

You were talking about costs of poor children earlier. The cheapest way to have less poor children is for poor parents to be able to abort and to have better access to health care services to avoid getting pregnant. Again, we're talking about cost issues here. Because people who are poor who can't afford kids aren't going to stop having sex. That's just called being human.

I was talking about the costs of poor children when it came to those of us forced to pay for what their own parents won't pay. You have to include all of my statement.

The cheapest way for those of that aren't the kid's parents is to not require us to pay for the choices the parents made to have them. Being human has a price and as long as the price of another human's choice don't cost me, I don't care how many children they have. It only matters when those parents don't do their job and demand the rest of us be required to pay for a choice THEY made. It isn't just about costs in general. It's about costs transferred to oner group of people because the group that made a decision now can't pay for it.

What makes you think that a decision by a set of parents to have kids they can't afford automatically becomes the responsibility of those that didn't produce them when the ones that did won't? I'm not asking those parents to do anything above and beyond what I do for my kids.

 

[cawacko]

I was talking about the costs of poor children when it came to those of us forced to pay for what their own parents won't pay. You have to include all of my statement.

The cheapest way for those of that aren't the kid's parents is to not require us to pay for the choices the parents made to have them. Being human has a price and as long as the price of another human's choice don't cost me, I don't care how many children they have. It only matters when those parents don't do their job and demand the rest of us be required to pay for a choice THEY made. It isn't just about costs in general. It's about costs transferred to oner group of people because the group that made a decision now can't pay for it.

What makes you think that a decision by a set of parents to have kids they can't afford automatically becomes the responsibility of those that didn't produce them when the ones that did won't? I'm not asking those parents to do anything above and beyond what I do for my kids.

I understand the argument you are making but our country isn't set up that way and will never be. So since what you are arguing will never happen the best way to lower costs, if that is your goal, is to reduce poor people from having kids. How are ways we can do that? Have them abort them if that is their desire or do everything we can to help them not get pregnant.

 

[CFM]

CFM, if your goal is to reduce poor people having babies wouldn't more abortion clinics and places like Planned Parenthood help?

That's not my goal. Like I said, I don't care how many kids you have as long as YOU, meaning the ones having them, support them.

My goal is to have those producing the kids support their kids.