Does Barack Obama Want Black Children to be Poorer?


In 1996 Congress passed and Bill Clinton signed the welfare reforms that for the first time in 20 years caused poverty statistics for black children to fall to unprecedented lows during the modern welfare era.

In 1996, Barack Obama was against these reforms.

In 2009, with his giant welfare bill he calls a “stimulus plan,” Barack Obama has eliminated these reforms.

Watch this video to see how Obama wants to return to the days of higher poverty rates for black children.

Proof once again that Democrats want to enlarge welfare rolls, destroy the lives of citizens, make everyone poorer, and create a permanent underclass that they can count on for votes.


Category: ,

RSS feed

20 Comments Leave a comment

And we're still waiting for the MSM to publicize this.

Praying (Diary) Saturday, February 21st at 5:40PM EST (link)

But all I’m hearing is crickets chirping.

They KNOW that the MAJORITY of Americans will be OUTRAGED!

I am OUTRAGED!

The radical liberals are unleashed, and they are DANGEROUS!

No!!!11!1!!1!1! The Bilderbergers are coming

 

Where was this clip during the campaign? nt

Mr_Ed (Diary) Saturday, February 21st at 7:11PM EST (link)

Mr. Ed
Straight from the Horse’s Mouth

 

What does welfare reform

mom2oneson (Diary) Saturday, February 21st at 7:26PM EST (link)

have to do with poverty levels? Poverty is based on how much parents earn and family (or does not earn) and family size. So I don’t understand the tie between their parents earning and public assistance? Working parents can get food stamps but that is never counted as income for anything. The EIC is not counted as income either. They can’t save or invest it though or else it will count against public assistance. They can’t invest in a stock because the capital gain will disqualify them from recieving the EIC again.
AFDC/TANF cash is for no income at all.
I don’t get the connection?

The correlation of economic class you are born into...

6eorge Jetson (Diary) Saturday, February 21st at 8:26PM EST (link)

with the economic class at your retirement is the weakest in the UNITED STATES among the major nations. (Another way of saying that Americans have the greatest class mobility.)

However, those that do not work are not going to participate in the economic engine that has offered more opportunity here than anywhere else in the world. When you implement a policy that discourages a large segment from working, would you expect any long term result other than a lack of economic achievement in that group?

See the poverty chart in the video.

How does it discourage a large segment from working? nt

mom2oneson (Diary) Sunday, February 22nd at 1:37AM EST (link)

It will only discourage a large segment from working...

DONTREADONME (Diary) Sunday, February 22nd at 1:55AM EST (link)

if it makes them comfortable. While you may not be comfortable where you are at with Gov assistence does not mean that many of your fellow Americans feel the same way. It is unfortunate, but we need to make these people very uncomfortable, and pray for those that are assistence can find a way to bust their rears to get ahead. I know it sucks, but we need to demand more from most of the people in this country that can provide for themselves but remain on Welfare. I know I am mean conservative. :)

 
 

A "progressive" welfare payout sucks the the marginal return out of work

6eorge Jetson (Diary) Sunday, February 22nd at 3:11AM EST (link)

It’s just math. Say the base welfare payment is X, but the reduction in welfare is half of every new dollar I earn. If I go out and get a $10/hour job, but I lose $5/hour worked, then my effective marginal pay rate is $5/hour.

Wouldn’t more welfare receipients conclude “Why bother?” in the face of a reduced incentive to work?

Back in my wild and crazy single days

Achance (Diary) Sunday, February 22nd at 5:09AM EST (link)

I met a pretty young thing in designer clothes at a tony local watering hole. I said to myself, “she’s either an heiress or a welfare mommy.” She was the latter but she had some well developed skills and attributes. I kinda took up with her for a while and shamed her into getting a job; well, actually, I got the job for her ’cause she didn’t have a clue how to get a job. Since she was usually at my house or me at hers, I took her to work every day and usually took her to lunch. Horizontally speaking; she was the very best. You date yourself if you know the song that line comes from.

Then after a payday or two she starts complaining that she’s broke. I did the back of the matchbook math. I was a fairly high-level State employee and on welfare, her disposable income had been more than mine. Working, she was broke, even in a job better than her vertical abilities might merit and with full benefits. So, after about a month an a half, she quit the job, went back on welfare, and returned to answering the door only well after noon and in her always elegant bathrobes. She kicked me to the curb along the way because I wasn’t the commiting kind of guy in those days, at least the way she defined committment.

She had a “domestic disturbance” at her apartment, bewitched the much older cop who responded, ran off his wife, and is now living happily ever after on his retirement.

In Vino Veritas

Achance

mom2oneson (Diary) Sunday, February 22nd at 10:24AM EST (link)

You are made me blush but I read it. : – )

How could her welfare payment be higher than work? AFDC/TANF payments are so low. Unless she had a huge # of kids and recieve a big food stamp allotment I don’t see how it could be higher than full time work?

no coffee

mom2oneson (Diary) Sunday, February 22nd at 10:26AM EST (link)

Sorry for the extra verbs! :-)

A few years after that

Achance (Diary) Sunday, February 22nd at 12:17PM EST (link)

some Outside outfit did a survey of the State’s welfare benefits. A single mother of one, which she was, who used all the available benefits had an effective income of about $39K. The job she was in was entry level and paid little more than half that. Alaska has a very lucrative welfare scheme driven by the fact that the rural areas of the State have NO economy.

Since everything was paid for; rent, food, etc., what money she had was pretty much discretionary.

In Vino Veritas

 
 
 
 

daycare expenses & sliding scale

mom2oneson (Diary) Sunday, February 22nd at 10:19AM EST (link)

When these AFDC/TANF motheres start work, they receive subsidized daycare. How does that cost the state less? Incomes are low enough that they recieve food stamps and mediciad still when employed.
On TANF an unemployed mother of 3 might recieve $400/month (I don’t know what it is but am guessing it’s around there) cash payment. When they work the state pays $1200 for four children in daycare, plus things like bus fare or gas gift cards, taxis to get to work and here in FL (I don’t know about other states) they were buying “welfare to work” recipients cars. I don’t know how it’s calculated but there is also expense for the large number employees hired for daycare and welfare to work.

For the sliding scales, only TANF is like that $1 for $1 starting at $1, but the payments are so low. Even if someone worked 60 hours a month that would still kill any TANF/AFDC payment. Food stamps have a limit before they are decreased at all. I know when we recieved them, the limit was high, around $1400/month and that was just for 2 people. Most people have a larger family size so the limit will be higher.

The only place I’ve seen the would rather collect than work mentality is with married families that are on the high end of the food stamp earning limits. The husband works but the wife refuses to work because it will cut off or reduce their food stamps.
I’m sure there are some out there but haven’t seen single parents deciding AFDC/TANF is better than work so they just stay home. I see it mostly with food stamps/medicaid with married families. Also they won’t opt in to buy insurance through their work because they can keep their children on medicaid.

Thanks for explaining. :)

unemployment

mom2oneson (Diary) Sunday, February 22nd at 10:41AM EST (link)

The other place I see the would rather collect than work is with unemployment. I’m sure there are exceptions but I see that all of the time. The unemployment pay is higher or comparable to some jobs so it does exactly what Jetson said.

 
 
 
 
 

"Poverty is based on how much parents earn and"

Vegas_Rick (Diary) Saturday, February 21st at 7:34PM EST (link)

when they are on welfare, they typically don’t earn anything cause they’re sitting at home collecting welfare payments.

Duh

“God is great, beer is good and people are crazy.”- Billy Currington

“Nothing in this world can take the place of persistence. Talent will not; nothing is more common than unsuccessful people with talent. Genius will not; unrewarded genius is almost a proverb. Education will not; the world is full of educated derelicts. Persistence and determination alone are omnipotent. The slogan ‘press on’ has solved and always will solve the problems of the human race.” Calvin Coolidge.

 

What would be interesting is connecting

woodsman (Diary) Saturday, February 21st at 8:27PM EST (link)

all of the failed Liberal policies and how they impact the very people they are “supposed” to help. Then connect these programs to the people whom the Liberals count on for votes.

Show social engineering for what it is…

 

Did Obama just throw one,

indyooper Saturday, February 21st at 9:39PM EST (link)

if not the only, and I emphasis only, bright star of the Clinton Legacy under the bus. Join the crowd, and it is pretty crowded under there. The wheels on the (Obama) bus go thump thump thump…

Maybe he pushed the wrong button?

SoFiMil (Diary) Saturday, February 21st at 9:53PM EST (link)

WARREN: What’s the most significant position you held ten years ago that you no longer hold today, that you flipped on, you changed on, because you actually see it differently?

OBAMA: Because I actually changed my mind.

WARREN: You changed your mind. Exactly.

OBAMA: Well, you know, I — I’m trying to think back ten years ago. I think that a good example would be the issue of welfare reform, where I always believed that welfare had to be changed. I was much more concerned ten years ago when President Clinton initially signed the bill that this could have disastrous results. I worked in the Illinois legislature to make sure that we were providing child care and health care, other support services for the women who were going to be kicked off the roles after a certain time.

http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=ODYwZWQwM2ZlY2VkNjMxMTRiNTE3NmNhZTlkYTk3Mjk=

www.suvstrategery.blogspot.com

 

There's also NAFTA...

6eorge Jetson (Diary) Saturday, February 21st at 10:49PM EST (link)

but that’s in Obama’s cross-hairs also.

 
 

Our Dear Leader continues with his eloquence...

SoFiMil (Diary) Sunday, February 22nd at 8:24AM EST (link)

Left out this last part of snip from my above comments:

Obama: It had — it worked better than, I think, a lot of people anticipated. And, you know, one of the things that I am absolutely convinced of is that we have to work as a centerpiece of any social policy.

www.suvstrategery.blogspot.com

 

Caterpillar smoking a hookah.

Steve Maley (Diary) Sunday, February 22nd at 11:02AM EST (link)

Welfare reform is was touted by the Dems as one of the landmark accomplishments of the Clinton administration. It’s perhaps the best & highest-profile example of the co-opting of a Repub initaitive by the triangulating prevaricator & his genius wife from Arkansas.

Now comes the stealth rollback, a love note slipped into the stimulus package that was much too important to let anyone read.

And the MSM dithers and runs cover for Obama. None but the motivated wonks will ever even know what happened. This is too unpopular with the unwashed to let them know.

Have I fallen Through the Looking Glass?

The blogger formerly known as ‘Vladimir’.