Thread: GOP Bill H.R. 1135: Welfare Reform Act of 2011

too bad the ACLU won't allow this......if it goes thru then how can those in the projects or illegals take advantage and milk the system?

amen they shouldn't get them stamp if they strike

you guys are missing the point, it's not just family members. it's anyone that lives in the same household.

so then it's ok for a rich person that doesn't need the money to strike (NFL, NHL, etc.) but the children of a poor person get screwed for the parents not wanting to be poor.

shit even now with the current laws if the adult say is found guilty of welfare fraud for a job change or unreported income only the parent (the offender) would lose the benefits this new law would cause the children to lose the benefits as well.

who exactly does this help? how is this a solution? is there some unknown problem with union workers on welfare? it makes no sense at all...

Originally Posted by LAM

you guys are missing the point, it's not just family members. it's anyone that lives in the same household.

The continuation of pushing workers into a corner, and reducing their influence on anything.

Look at mortgages:

In the 1930s (during labor disagreements) the government decided make it easier and encourage many Americans to become homeowners --> translation: take out long term mortgage loans. Go into debt.

People with large amounts of debt and long term term are much easier to control.

Originally Posted by LAM

What exactly do striking workers have to do with welfare reform? this was obviously written by one of the GOP corporate puppet masters.

Yes. Puppet masters. More of your partisen fantasy drivel with no foundation of proof.

Anyone in the household? Sure, because usually it's one family per household. Anyone that makes the decision to strike should not be afforded the luxury of sucking off our tax dollars. I hope this makes unions striking on a whim to think twice before trying to bend companies over a barrel. The parasites need to be pushed back before they kill the host.


Cry me a river, LAM.

I am for this law, if you can work, you should. I certainly don't want my tax dollars supporting someone physically capable of working to sit at home because of a labor dispute.

Phsophor,

I did not perceive LAM's post to be partisan.

Originally Posted by Big Smoothy

The continuation of pushing workers into a corner, and reducing their influence on anything.

Look at mortgages:

In the 1930s (during labor disagreements) the government decided make it easier and encourage many Americans to become homeowners --> translation: take out long term mortgage loans. Go into debt.

People with large amounts of debt and long term term are much easier to control.

it's amazing how many people just don't get it...

Originally Posted by Big Smoothy

Phsophor,

I did not perceive LAM's post to be partisan.

the idiots supporting these far right extremist views have no idea that the Chamber of Commerce is also trying to get the Federal Minimum Wage eliminated.

poor people = people with no power

Originally Posted by LAM

the idiots supporting these far right extremist views have no idea that the Chamber of Commerce is also trying to get the Federal Minimum Wage eliminated.

That's less than 3% of the hourly workforce. It doesn't matter, you can't support a family on what the federal minimum wage is anyway or any state's minimum wage for that matter.

Originally Posted by LAM

Read The Bill: H.R. 1135 - GovTrack.us

‘(3) STRIKING WORKERS INELIGIBLE- Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no member of a family unit shall participate in the food stamp program at any time that any able-bodied work eligible adult member of such household is on strike as defined in the Labor Management Relations Act, 1947 (29 U.S.C. 142(2)), because of a labor dispute (other than a lockout) as defined in section 2(9) of the National Labor Relations Act (29 U.S.C. 152(9)): Provided, That a family unit shall not lose its eligibility to participate in the food stamp program as a result of one of its members going on strike if the household was eligible immediately prior to such strike, however, such family unit shall not receive an increased allotment as the result of a decrease in the income of the striking member or members of the household: Provided further, That such ineligibility shall not apply to any family unit that does not contain a member on strike, if any of its members refuses to accept employment at a plant or site because of a strike or lockout.’.

What exactly do striking workers have to do with welfare reform? this was obviously written by one of the GOP corporate puppet masters.

Did any of you actually read this or did you just scan it with partisan key words in mind.

No one should have a problem with:
A)a stay at home wife(or husband) suddenly applying for welfare because hubby(wife) is on strike. Fuck her/him get a part-time job, your striking mate can do the house-person chores now...

B) Families who are already eligible stay eligible, they just don't get an increase in benefits because their spouse is on strike....

C) it protects the benefits of persons on welfare who decide not to be scabs...

"I was blinded by the RIGHT(or LEFT), revved up like a douche my reading comprehension goes to shite, Blinded by the RIGHT(or LEFT)"

It makes sense to me, usually union workers negotiate for back pay for the time lost from the strike anyhow....

Originally Posted by troubador

That's less than 3% of the hourly workforce. It doesn't matter, you can't support a family on what the federal minimum wage is anyway or any state's minimum wage for that matter.

so once again instead of fixing it they are trying to secretly make it go away, and who exactly benefits from this? corporations do...

having no minimum pay only helps business and if you look at the stock index they don't need anymore handouts...

Spot-on, LAM

The statistics and data are there.

I agree with you.

Originally Posted by LAM

so once again instead of fixing it they are trying to secretly make it go away, and who exactly benefits from this?

Teenagers who want a job. Increasing the minimum wage isn't a fix.

I don't really see the connection b/w labor unions and welfare, but I am fine with making able bodied people work, rather than sit on their arse and collect food stamps during a labor dispute. As far as minimum wage, people who are willing to work for $5 or $6 per hour, as well as nonunion workers who actually have to compete for higher wages, will benefit if it goes away.

Labor unions have long outlived and offset the good they once did. They've grown into a destructive beast that is strangling the economy of this country. They promote laziness and entitlement mentality. They are bankrupting municipalities in many states and are destroying the public education system in this country. The more the GOP can do to hamstring labor unions, the better off we'll all be.

Originally Posted by GearsMcGilf

They've grown into a destructive beast that is strangling the economy of this country. They promote laziness and entitlement mentality. They are bankrupting municipalities in many states and are destroying the public education system in this country.

where is the data to support this? Pension contributions from state and local employers aren’t blowing up budgets. They amount to just 2.9 percent of state spending, on average, according to the National Association of State Retirement Administrators. The Center for Retirement Research at Boston College puts the figure a bit higher at 3.8 percent.

Why employee pensions aren't bankrupting states | McClatchy

state and local governments were not broke until we bailed out wall street and continue tax give aways for billion dollar company's. there isn't a shread of economic data out there to support these statements. this is the standard bull shit from the extreme right, blame the working man for bankrupting the country.

So you anti-union people: if an employer has extremely dangerous conditions at the place of work and several of your colleagues have been brutally injured in the recent past and no labor union negotiations have resolved the issue your answer is to starve the families that strike that are standing up for their health and well being. OK got it. Good motto to live by. Fuck everybody that you perceive as having more than you.

the sole purpose of the GOP's labor union busting is to defund the Dems in current elections and to establish a permanent GOP majority in US politics. labor unions are major campaign contributors to the Dems.