Clinton Gutted Welfare
Comments
-
Notice as well that welfare spending actually grew at a faster pace after welfare reform was passed.
-
Budget equals actual spending now. Chinteresting.
-
If you’re claiming they spent less than what was budgeted let’s see your link, if not shut your pathological lying twat of a mouth.2001400ex said:Budget equals actual spending now. Chinteresting.
-
The claim was that Welfare was “gutted”. That’s the dick you jumped into suck Hondo
-
You can finally let this go now, moron -
I don’t even understand what Bob is trying to prove by continuing to fuck this chicken? It’s universally agreed that ‘96 welfare reform “gutted” the program. I guess it’s too difficult to admit you showed your ass. It’s a message board, you were wrong. Just move on.
-
I don’t know about welfare, but I do know the Special Olympics just got canceled.
-
Because there is only one form of welfare. There isn’t housing welfare, this isn’t childcare welfare there isn’t food stamps and there isn’t Medicaid, there only direct cash benefits given to welfare recipients that counts as welfare.HardlyClothed said:I don’t even understand what Bob is trying to prove by continuing to fuck this chicken? It’s universally agreed that ‘96 welfare reform “gutted” the program. I guess it’s too difficult to admit you showed your ass. It’s a message board, you were wrong. Just move on.
And you'll notice how his chart doesn't actually say that money to TANF and AFDC was cut, only that number of people receiving those benefits was reduced. And when you're a liberal that's the biggest tragedy; Someone actually gets off of welfare. So despite the fact that welfare spending on other programs was increased. Despite the fact that the child tax credit was increased, despite the fact that the earned income tax credit was increased. Welfare was "gutted" because fewer people were receiving one form of welfare.
Why would I let it go? You talked straight out of your ass and now "welfare" is reduced to just one single government program. -
I love that people like bob are so aggressive in their stupidity. He latches onto a claim like "welfare was gutted by clinton" and goes on a public mission to disprove that specific phrase instead of just shutting the fuck up and learning more about the 1996 changes. I'm guessing he got this talking point from whichever raving lunatic he listens to on his am radio and now he has an anger boner about proving the 3 people who disagree with him on this shitty message board wrong.
-
I love that liberals are lying pieces of shit and claim that a spending increase of $25B is a “gutting” of a program.
It’s one of the reasons why we can’t even slow spending let alone cut it.
I already know all about the “changes” dumbfuck. It’s why I know the claim that Clinton “gutted” welfare is a fucking lie.
I’m guessing you’re going to run and hide like a Kunt now or respond back with more vacuousness. -
Calm down turbo. Imagine caring about this.MariotaTheGawd said:I love that people like bob are so aggressive in their stupidity. He latches onto a claim like "welfare was gutted by clinton" and goes on a public mission to disprove that specific phrase instead of just shutting the fuck up and learning more about the 1996 changes. I'm guessing he got this talking point from whichever raving lunatic he listens to on his am radio and now he has an anger boner about proving the 3 people who disagree with him on this shitty message board wrong.
-
Has there ever been a more influential poster on this board than me? My one liners are so good that you lemmings repeat them for monthsCuntWaffle said:
Calm down turbo. Imagine caring about this.MariotaTheGawd said:I love that people like bob are so aggressive in their stupidity. He latches onto a claim like "welfare was gutted by clinton" and goes on a public mission to disprove that specific phrase instead of just shutting the fuck up and learning more about the 1996 changes. I'm guessing he got this talking point from whichever raving lunatic he listens to on his am radio and now he has an anger boner about proving the 3 people who disagree with him on this shitty message board wrong.
-
Called itMariotaTheGawd said:
Has there ever been a more influential poster on this board than me? My one liners are so good that you lemmings repeat them for monthsCuntWaffle said:
Calm down turbo. Imagine caring about this.MariotaTheGawd said:I love that people like bob are so aggressive in their stupidity. He latches onto a claim like "welfare was gutted by clinton" and goes on a public mission to disprove that specific phrase instead of just shutting the fuck up and learning more about the 1996 changes. I'm guessing he got this talking point from whichever raving lunatic he listens to on his am radio and now he has an anger boner about proving the 3 people who disagree with him on this shitty message board wrong.
-
Only two lemmings in this thread. Look around.MariotaTheGawd said:
Has there ever been a more influential poster on this board than me? My one liners are so good that you lemmings repeat them for monthsCuntWaffle said:
Calm down turbo. Imagine caring about this.MariotaTheGawd said:I love that people like bob are so aggressive in their stupidity. He latches onto a claim like "welfare was gutted by clinton" and goes on a public mission to disprove that specific phrase instead of just shutting the fuck up and learning more about the 1996 changes. I'm guessing he got this talking point from whichever raving lunatic he listens to on his am radio and now he has an anger boner about proving the 3 people who disagree with him on this shitty message board wrong.
Or, keep assuming we should all follow the lead of Harv's rusty cheesegrater....leading the tolerant Left.
At least APAG and Benny bring something to the table...
-
am i supposed to know/care who harv, apag, and benny are?MisterEm said:
Only two lemmings in this thread. Look around.MariotaTheGawd said:
Has there ever been a more influential poster on this board than me? My one liners are so good that you lemmings repeat them for monthsCuntWaffle said:
Calm down turbo. Imagine caring about this.MariotaTheGawd said:I love that people like bob are so aggressive in their stupidity. He latches onto a claim like "welfare was gutted by clinton" and goes on a public mission to disprove that specific phrase instead of just shutting the fuck up and learning more about the 1996 changes. I'm guessing he got this talking point from whichever raving lunatic he listens to on his am radio and now he has an anger boner about proving the 3 people who disagree with him on this shitty message board wrong.
Or, keep assuming we should all follow the lead of Harv's rusty cheesegrater....leading the tolerant Left.
At least APAG and Benny bring something to the table... -
Hence, why transfer payments is a much better term.SFGbob said:
Because there is only one form of welfare. There isn’t housing welfare, this isn’t childcare welfare there isn’t food stamps and there isn’t Medicaid, there only direct cash benefits given to welfare recipients that counts as welfare.HardlyClothed said:I don’t even understand what Bob is trying to prove by continuing to fuck this chicken? It’s universally agreed that ‘96 welfare reform “gutted” the program. I guess it’s too difficult to admit you showed your ass. It’s a message board, you were wrong. Just move on.
And you'll notice how his chart doesn't actually say that money to TANF and AFDC was cut, only that number of people receiving those benefits was reduced. And when you're a liberal that's the biggest tragedy; Someone actually gets off of welfare. So despite the fact that welfare spending on other programs was increased. Despite the fact that the child tax credit was increased, despite the fact that the earned income tax credit was increased. Welfare was "gutted" because fewer people were receiving one form of welfare.
Why would I let it go? You talked straight out of your ass and now "welfare" is reduced to just one single government program. -
You can't counter a point about the budget with a graph that has no data about it. Try again.HardlyClothed said:
You can finally let this go now, moron -
This is a joke rightFenderbender123 said:
You can't counter a point about the budget with a graph that has no data about it. Try again.HardlyClothed said:
You can finally let this go now, moron -
Since when is welfare "temporary"? Some heave been on it for 7 or 8 generations. That's hardly temporary.
-
I'm all about that free health insurance last year.
No income ftw -
7 generations ago is 120 years or 1909. Not much welfare back then.Sledog said:Since when is welfare "temporary"? Some heave been on it for 7 or 8 generations. That's hardly temporary.
-
Generation is usual considered anywhere from 20 to 25 years. 7 generations ago would either be 140 years ago or 175 years ago but your point is taken, there was no welfare back then.YellowSnow said:
7 generations ago is 120 years or 1909. Not much welfare back then.Sledog said:Since when is welfare "temporary"? Some heave been on it for 7 or 8 generations. That's hardly temporary.
-
Now are you going to follow sledog around the board and call him a pathological liar and post his 7 or 8 generations quote on every thread?SFGbob said:
Generation is usual considered anywhere from 20 to 25 years. 7 generations ago would either be 140 years ago or 175 years ago but your point is taken, there was no welfare back then.YellowSnow said:
7 generations ago is 120 years or 1909. Not much welfare back then.Sledog said:Since when is welfare "temporary"? Some heave been on it for 7 or 8 generations. That's hardly temporary.
-
A simple mistake doesn't make someone a pathological liar Hondo. Claiming:2001400ex said:
Now are you going to follow sledog around the board and call him a pathological liar and post his 7 or 8 generations quote on every thread?SFGbob said:
Generation is usual considered anywhere from 20 to 25 years. 7 generations ago would either be 140 years ago or 175 years ago but your point is taken, there was no welfare back then.YellowSnow said:
7 generations ago is 120 years or 1909. Not much welfare back then.Sledog said:Since when is welfare "temporary"? Some heave been on it for 7 or 8 generations. That's hardly temporary.
And it's a documented fact that Trump's team met with a Russian team to discuss giving DNC emails and Hillary emails to Trump.
and then posting 3 links and claiming they support this lie, when the did no such thing, and still nearly a week later saying your initial statement was accurate is what gets you called a pathological liar. I'm certain that when confronted with the information that he misspoke Sledog will have no problem correcting himself.
It's only pathological liars like yourself who are incapable of doing such a thing Hondo. -
Oh so a simple mistake like no social security in the 50s (there was it was just like 1.25% or something). Funny how when I make a mistake, I'm a liar. But when your comrade makes a mistake. Eh, it's just a mistake.SFGbob said:
A simple mistake doesn't make someone a pathological liar Hondo. Claiming:2001400ex said:
Now are you going to follow sledog around the board and call him a pathological liar and post his 7 or 8 generations quote on every thread?SFGbob said:
Generation is usual considered anywhere from 20 to 25 years. 7 generations ago would either be 140 years ago or 175 years ago but your point is taken, there was no welfare back then.YellowSnow said:
7 generations ago is 120 years or 1909. Not much welfare back then.Sledog said:Since when is welfare "temporary"? Some heave been on it for 7 or 8 generations. That's hardly temporary.
And it's a documented fact that Trump's team met with a Russian team to discuss giving DNC emails and Hillary emails to Trump.
and then posting 3 links and claiming they support this lie, when the did no such thing, and still nearly a week later saying your initial statement was accurate is what gets you called a pathological liar. I'm certain that when confronted with the information that he misspoke Sledog will have no problem correcting himself.
It's only pathological liars like yourself who are incapable of doing such a thing Hondo.
Partisan shill. -
Claiming that Social Security didn't exist back in the 1950s doesn't make you a pathological liar Hondo, it just outs you as an ignorant dipshit. What made you a pathological liar was when you claimed you were "technically correct" that Social Security didn't exist in the 1950s.2001400ex said:
Oh so a simple mistake like no social security in the 50s (there was it was just like 1.25% or something). Funny how when I make a mistake, I'm a liar. But when your comrade makes a mistake. Eh, it's just a mistake.SFGbob said:
A simple mistake doesn't make someone a pathological liar Hondo. Claiming:2001400ex said:
Now are you going to follow sledog around the board and call him a pathological liar and post his 7 or 8 generations quote on every thread?SFGbob said:
Generation is usual considered anywhere from 20 to 25 years. 7 generations ago would either be 140 years ago or 175 years ago but your point is taken, there was no welfare back then.YellowSnow said:
7 generations ago is 120 years or 1909. Not much welfare back then.Sledog said:Since when is welfare "temporary"? Some heave been on it for 7 or 8 generations. That's hardly temporary.
And it's a documented fact that Trump's team met with a Russian team to discuss giving DNC emails and Hillary emails to Trump.
and then posting 3 links and claiming they support this lie, when the did no such thing, and still nearly a week later saying your initial statement was accurate is what gets you called a pathological liar. I'm certain that when confronted with the information that he misspoke Sledog will have no problem correcting himself.
It's only pathological liars like yourself who are incapable of doing such a thing Hondo.
Partisan shill.
You make "mistakes" all the fucking time Hondo. That's on account of you being a poorly read dumbfuck who likes to run your mouth. That's doesn't make you a pathological liar.
Claiming this statement is accurate, and that you posted 3 links that support it, and repeating that lie for over a week when everyone here know you're lying, is what gets you called correctly, a pathological liar.
And it's a documented fact that Trump's team met with a Russian team to discuss giving DNC emails and Hillary emails to Trump.
-
The fast strategy pours get knocked up earlier so I was going with 17 years a pop.SFGbob said:
Generation is usual considered anywhere from 20 to 25 years. 7 generations ago would either be 140 years ago or 175 years ago but your point is taken, there was no welfare back then.YellowSnow said:
7 generations ago is 120 years or 1909. Not much welfare back then.Sledog said:Since when is welfare "temporary"? Some heave been on it for 7 or 8 generations. That's hardly temporary.
-
You're a dumb faggot Duck who's obsessed with the Huskies. One of thousandsMariotaTheGawd said:
Has there ever been a more influential poster on this board than me? My one liners are so good that you lemmings repeat them for monthsCuntWaffle said:
Calm down turbo. Imagine caring about this.MariotaTheGawd said:I love that people like bob are so aggressive in their stupidity. He latches onto a claim like "welfare was gutted by clinton" and goes on a public mission to disprove that specific phrase instead of just shutting the fuck up and learning more about the 1996 changes. I'm guessing he got this talking point from whichever raving lunatic he listens to on his am radio and now he has an anger boner about proving the 3 people who disagree with him on this shitty message board wrong.
-
When your having kids at 14 or 15 it's faster. I should have said 4.YellowSnow said:
7 generations ago is 120 years or 1909. Not much welfare back then.Sledog said:Since when is welfare "temporary"? Some heave been on it for 7 or 8 generations. That's hardly temporary.
-
See Hondo, and this is why Sled just made a simple mistake, and why you're a pathological liar.Sledog said:
When your having kids at 14 or 15 it's faster. I should have said 4.YellowSnow said:
7 generations ago is 120 years or 1909. Not much welfare back then.Sledog said:Since when is welfare "temporary"? Some heave been on it for 7 or 8 generations. That's hardly temporary.
