YOUR taxes pay $6000 in Corporate Welfare and only Pennies to Aid Poor

[daredtowork]

Last edited Wed Dec 31, 2014, 12:47 PM - Edit history (1)

For every whirly eyed Tea Party wingnut screeching about how the national coffers are being drained by ALL THAT MONEY we spend on &quot black) lazy, irresponsible, drug addicts" who are unlucky enough to need food, housing, and basic necessities for survival, perhaps you should confront them with the facts about where their tax money is really going:

http://truth-out.org/opinion/item/28293-the-true-costs-of-corporate-welfare

Jaw-dropping isn't it? People have posted hundreds of articles here about how the welfare system has collapses, and how no money is getting to the poor. There has been a lot of hand-wringing about how "we" can't afford to do anything about it. The latest budget includes yet more cuts in Food Stamps and WIC. I've personally attended a welfare general assistance interview where all the applicants for the pittance - a LOAN of $336/month for 3 months out of the year - were threatened with surveillance and neighborhood interviews by fraud investigators (how much did they cost the State?). We're supposed to be down to the wire here, aren't we?

But we can afford to give banks and corporations subsidies of $6000/year out of our pockets?

Where is the outrage? Where are the pitchforks?

By the way, a recent survey of the homeless in Alameda County (Oakland), where the housing situation has reached crisis situation because the tech boom inflated housing prices and rents astronomically, did not turn up those "lazy, irresponsible, drug addicts". The survey turned up elderly, disabled people who had worked, albeit for low wages, all their lives.
http://www.contracostatimes.com/tri-valley-times/ci_27224378/alameda-county-among-new-homeless-growing-number-seniors


America Leads Civilized World in Homelessness. Source: http://www.alternet.org/economy/consequences-american-greed

This is wrong.

This is the opposite of building civilization.

[Trillo]

1. It's so greedy.

Public corporations have the right to sell shares, so they have the best deal going next to bankers. I guess they are trying to play catch up to them.

The humans, the workers, the average citizen, I guess we're basically just slaves.

[daredtowork]

2. Redistribution TO THE RICH

This means when the stock market is exploding, it's exploding with the tax dollars of the average hard working family. Those dollars then get redistributed to share holders.

Those hypocrite Tea Party folk are always griping about how a little aid to the poor is practically Communism because it involves "redistribution" right out of their pockets to the poor. And here is this massive redistribution right out of their pockets to the rich!!!

Again, where is the outrage???!!!!!!!

I supposed now that the Cromnibus has passed, it's too late to do anything.

[Trillo]

3. I can only conjecture: certainly one of the functions of the Christian religion is

To convince the masses that hierarchy is a good thing, and that folks who have more money have been "graced by god".

I personally believe the bottom line fix is public funding of elections, with no private money allowed. I'm not holding my breath on how that might happen.

[daredtowork]

4. Jesus redistributed bread and fishes at least

The wingnuts keep squeezing the bottom harder and harder. I spent all day yesterday arguing with guy on the issue of homelessness: he was practically screaming that the taxpayer must STOP handing over all his money to the lazy, irresponsible, drug-addicted homeless. He absolutely could not be moved from that idea. I'm sure he spends all his days astroturfing the Internet with this "voice of the people". It's his noise that gets the type of Congress elected that keeps the focus on how much the poor are "getting away with".

http://www.mintpressnews.com/u-s-laws-criminalizing-homelessness-mount-even-courts-strike

[Kablooie]

5. Of course. Those high powered lobbyist salaries have to come from somewhere.

The problem with the poor is they don't put enough effort into getting powerful lobbyists into Washington.
If they did it right they wouldn't have to pay anything.
We the taxpayers cover all lobbyist fancy meals, giant mansions and private schools by donating our taxes to the corporate subsidies.
That's what we are here for.

[daredtowork]

6. You forgot the ring side seats at the ballgames nt.

[Kablooie]

7. Are ballgames played in a ring nowadays?

[daredtowork]

8. Courtside? I'm not a sports fan. nt

[niyad]

9. but corporations are people!

[daredtowork]

10. Well if you REALLY want to give those people your $6000/yr...nt

[blkmusclmachine]

11. ,

,

[Quantess]

12. Worth a kick

[daredtowork]

13. Tiny Tim hugs you. nt

[Quantess]

16. Tiny Tim?

Haha, okay.

[MadDAsHell]

14. Is there a reason why you specifically called out black people on welfare?

[daredtowork]

15. I'm calling out the Tea Party

For cutting welfare implicitly racist reasons. Many comments and emails (as well as many coded politician remarks - including from Romney) have been caught hinting that welfare is only subsidizing black people. I'm a white woman who currently receives general assistance welfare and I'm aware that the majority of people on welfare are not black. Numerous studies have also underscored this, but the facts do not make a dent in the propaganda.

I moved the quote marks so that will be more clear. Previously the quote was conveying an actual phrase a wingnut troll kept slinging at me during an argument over the nature of the homeless.