More of our $$ Down the Drain... Tell Congress NO !!!!!!!!!

[DC CD]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081011/ap_on_go_co/second_stimulus

 

 

WASHINGTON - After consulting with Barack Obama,

Democratic leaders are likely to call Congress back to work after the election in

hopes of passing legislation that would include extended jobless benefits,

money for food stamps and possibly a tax rebate, officials said Saturday.

 

ADVERTISEMENT

 

The bill's total cost could reach $150 billion, these officials said.

 

[vol_scouter]

Paid for with a redistribution of wealth other wise known as socialism and marxism. Obama will fundamentally change America if he gets elected into a socialist/marxist state. Wake up before it is too late.

[NJCubScouter]

Wait. Let me see if I can get this. $700 billion for banks and other corporations that helped tank themselves by paying top executives many millions of dollars, and by gambling wrong, and by doing other things, is ok, but $150 billion for the actual human beings who are the real victims of the resulting catastrophe is not ok? If you redistribute money to people who had money and blew it, that's capitalism, but if you redistribute it to people who never had it, and need it, that's socialism? Is all this written down somewhere so I can follow it?

[funscout]

I'm not crazy about the big bailout, but something did need to be done. If the banks went under, then innocent people would lose their savings.

 

On the other issue, at first glance it always looks like, yes, we do need to give money to more people on welfare, etc. But, when you look into it, you find that many people abuse the welfare and other systems, so, actually some cutting can be done. I personally know several people who get government aid even though they have enough money to support themselves. When I used to work in the school system, I knew of several families who were on welfare and received free lunches for their kids, yet they were able to afford cable T.V. (which I did not have), a T.V. in every kids' bedroom, more than one gaming system (my own kids had none), designer clothes for their kids (my kids get clothes from Wal-Mart and Target), etc. My husband and I worked hard for our money and did not ask for hand-outs, while these other families took from the government (us!) and used their remaining money to buy luxuries that we hard working families could not afford.

 

Yes, I do know of people who genuinely need the assistance, and I am happy they can get it. But there are MANY families who do not need the money, but take it from us anyway. So, before we expand the number of people who take money from the government, let's weed out the cheaters.

[NJCubScouter]

funscout, just wait till after this Wall Street bailout and you find out how many billions of those 700 billion were wasted, stolen or otherwise misspent. It will make you forget all about your neighbors' welfare-subsidized cable bill. Was the bailout necessary? Unfortunately, it probably was, even though it should not cost as much as it will. But please, spare me the old line about the "welfare cheats", which by the way many were already weeded out under Bill Clinton's welfare reform program, probably the biggest cost-savings measure in U.S. government history. I am a little more concerned about the corporate and bank executives being paid $10, 20, 50 or whatever million a year to run all these enterprises into the ground. Next to that, your neighbors' HBO seems kind of trivial.

[Gold Winger]

" When I used to work in the school system, I knew of several families who were on welfare and received free lunches for their kids, yet they were able to afford cable T.V. (which I did not have), a T.V. in every kids' bedroom, more than one gaming system (my own kids had none), designer clothes for their kids (my kids get clothes from Wal-Mart and Target), etc."

 

It was once explained to me by a social worker that if we didn't give the kids free lunches, they wouldn't eat because their parents would be spending all of the money on cable TV, beer and smokes. Evidently, it is unthinkable that if you give someone money that you can tell them what they can spend it on. Simple rule: if you're collecting checks you don't get cable TV and getting caught with a pack of smokes should be enough to cause a ending of benefits.

[Beavah]

Yah, $150 billion for jobless benefits and food stamps to me is a better investment than da $150 billion in pork-barrel nonsense they added on to the $700 billion bailout, eh?

 

B