Anne Romney Hasn't Worked A Day in Her Life

Post Reply
Coito ergo sum
Posts: 32040
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 2:03 pm
Contact:

Re: Anne Romney Hasn't Worked A Day in Her Life

Post by Coito ergo sum » Mon Apr 23, 2012 12:42 pm

Currently, the federal funds for welfare recipients is paid through what's called the "TANF" - Temporary Assistance for Needy Families - law which was the welfare reform enacted under Clinton. Romney's proposal is to increase assistance at the federal level FOR DAY CARE -- which would only be needed for women who go to work. If you're home, you don't need the fucking day care services -- YOU"RE HOME -- Get it? And, he's saying - if mothers go to work, then under what he proposes they will get more support because they will get assistance for day care.

Coito ergo sum
Posts: 32040
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 2:03 pm
Contact:

Re: Anne Romney Hasn't Worked A Day in Her Life

Post by Coito ergo sum » Mon Apr 23, 2012 12:44 pm

kiki5711 wrote:
Coito ergo sum wrote:
kiki5711 wrote:
Moreover, what Romney is suggesting does NOT exist.
Exactly! It does not exist and it won't. His words are just to pacify and get a vote.
No. That was a typo. There is no federal program for providing childcare to mothers while they go out and work.
What was a typo? You said it doesn't exist and it's only some states that provide it. So, what was the typo?
You said that what Romney proposes already exists. What he is proposing does not already exist. Got it?

Federal level provides assistance for Temporary Assistance for Needy Families.

Some states provide other assistance, that may or may not include day care for working mothers. Most don't.

What Romney is proposing is day care assistance at the federal level for women who go to work and who would otherwise lose their TANF because of it. He is proposing a new program.

User avatar
kiki5711
Forever with Ekwok
Posts: 3954
Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2010 11:51 am
Location: Atlanta, Georgia
Contact:

Re: Anne Romney Hasn't Worked A Day in Her Life

Post by kiki5711 » Mon Apr 23, 2012 12:54 pm

Romney wants to cut government assistance spending. I'd think this kind of assistance would be the LAST on his list, if looked at all.
which would only be needed for women who go to work. If you're home, you don't need the fucking day care services -- YOU"RE HOME -- Get it? And, he's saying - if mothers go to work, then under what he proposes they will get more support because they will get assistance for day care.
Most mothers DO want to go back to work, not stay at home. GET IT!!!!! And again, the family has to "QUALIFY" for the assistance. They're not going to get it just willy nilly asking for it. GET IT!

User avatar
kiki5711
Forever with Ekwok
Posts: 3954
Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2010 11:51 am
Location: Atlanta, Georgia
Contact:

Re: Anne Romney Hasn't Worked A Day in Her Life

Post by kiki5711 » Mon Apr 23, 2012 12:55 pm

I didn't say Romney's program existed. I was referring to the kind of program I was aware of.

Coito ergo sum
Posts: 32040
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 2:03 pm
Contact:

Re: Anne Romney Hasn't Worked A Day in Her Life

Post by Coito ergo sum » Mon Apr 23, 2012 12:59 pm

kiki5711 wrote:Romney wants to cut government assistance spending. I'd think this kind of assistance would be the LAST on his list, if looked at all.
which would only be needed for women who go to work. If you're home, you don't need the fucking day care services -- YOU"RE HOME -- Get it? And, he's saying - if mothers go to work, then under what he proposes they will get more support because they will get assistance for day care.
Most mothers DO want to go back to work, not stay at home. GET IT!!!!! And again, the family has to "QUALIFY" for the assistance. They're not going to get it just willy nilly asking for it. GET IT!

Who said they fucking don't???? Romney thinks they do! Get it???

Look - he's acknowledge the fact that you fucking bitched about -- that if women go back to work, they lose benefits - so, what he is suggesting is that when they go back to fucking work THEY'LL STILL GET GOD DAMN MOTHER FUCKING CHILD CARE ASSISTANCE TO TAKE CARE OF THE KIDS WHEN THEY ARE AT WORK!!!!!

Is that so fucking hard to understand?

I never said they would get it willy nilly just for asking for it! Obviously a woman making $50,000 a year is not going to get child care assistance. But, one getting a job for $20,000 a year might. It depends on the cut-off for assistance. Whoever said it fucking wouldn't have a cutoff? Do you think the Democrats have proposed any assistance programs that don't have cutoff points?

Coito ergo sum
Posts: 32040
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 2:03 pm
Contact:

Re: Anne Romney Hasn't Worked A Day in Her Life

Post by Coito ergo sum » Mon Apr 23, 2012 1:02 pm

kiki5711 wrote:I didn't say Romney's program existed. I was referring to the kind of program I was aware of.
Well then why would you oppose Romney's proposal because those benefits already exist? Clearly you acknowledge that he's proposing new benefits.

Man, you're scatterbrained on this. You want there to be government assistance. You don't think there is enough because many women "might as well not work" because if they get a job they'll lose the benefits. So, Romney proposes to give benefits to WORKING women to cover costs associated with child care while they work, and you lambaste that idea!

What the fuck is it that you want then? You oppose a federal program to provide benefits for child care to working women? Really? YOU OPPOSE THAT?

User avatar
kiki5711
Forever with Ekwok
Posts: 3954
Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2010 11:51 am
Location: Atlanta, Georgia
Contact:

Re: Anne Romney Hasn't Worked A Day in Her Life

Post by kiki5711 » Mon Apr 23, 2012 1:22 pm

Well then why would you oppose Romney's proposal because those benefits already exist?
I DID NOT SAY ROMENY'S plan existed. I spoke only about the kind of program I knew of which was way long time ago, over 20 yrs, and before I even heard of Romney.

User avatar
kiki5711
Forever with Ekwok
Posts: 3954
Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2010 11:51 am
Location: Atlanta, Georgia
Contact:

Re: Anne Romney Hasn't Worked A Day in Her Life

Post by kiki5711 » Mon Apr 23, 2012 1:25 pm

Man, you're scatterbrained on this. You want there to be government assistance. You don't think there is enough because many women "might as well not work" because if they get a job they'll lose the benefits. So, Romney proposes to give benefits to WORKING women to cover costs associated with child care while they work, and you lambaste that idea!
I HIGHGLY DOUBT Romney's talking about giving assistance to ALL working mothers. I'm pretty sure there will still be a sliding scale of who exactly can be "approved" for the assistance.

Coito ergo sum
Posts: 32040
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 2:03 pm
Contact:

Re: Anne Romney Hasn't Worked A Day in Her Life

Post by Coito ergo sum » Mon Apr 23, 2012 1:38 pm

kiki5711 wrote:
Well then why would you oppose Romney's proposal because those benefits already exist?
I DID NOT SAY ROMENY'S plan existed. I spoke only about the kind of program I knew of which was way long time ago, over 20 yrs, and before I even heard of Romney.
So what?

He's proposing new benefits.

Do you oppose them?

Coito ergo sum
Posts: 32040
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 2:03 pm
Contact:

Re: Anne Romney Hasn't Worked A Day in Her Life

Post by Coito ergo sum » Mon Apr 23, 2012 1:42 pm

kiki5711 wrote:
Man, you're scatterbrained on this. You want there to be government assistance. You don't think there is enough because many women "might as well not work" because if they get a job they'll lose the benefits. So, Romney proposes to give benefits to WORKING women to cover costs associated with child care while they work, and you lambaste that idea!
I HIGHGLY DOUBT Romney's talking about giving assistance to ALL working mothers. I'm pretty sure there will still be a sliding scale of who exactly can be "approved" for the assistance.
NOBODY IS EVER TALKING ABOUT GIVING ASSISTANCE TO EVERYONE!!!!!

Why would mothers who make decent money - like lawyers and doctors - need fucking assistance.

Do you oppose Democrat plans that don't give assistance to "all" mothers? WTF is this shit?

What government assistance program does not give more assistance to poorer people, and less to the less poor? What government assistance program does not have a cutoff?

Are you really suggesting that mothers earning $50,000 a year or similar incomes ought to get assistance? And, those married to men making lots of money?

I mean - for the love of fucking Pete -- what the fuck are you even on about? OF COURSE the program will be for people who don't make much money. Who the fuck ELSE would it be for? Everyone? Every mother who wants a job is going to get checks from the government? Is that what you're advocating? Is that why you are lambasting Romney on this? Name one Democrat who has proposed child care for "all working mothers" to be provided by the government.

User avatar
kiki5711
Forever with Ekwok
Posts: 3954
Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2010 11:51 am
Location: Atlanta, Georgia
Contact:

Re: Anne Romney Hasn't Worked A Day in Her Life

Post by kiki5711 » Mon Apr 23, 2012 1:43 pm

Coito ergo sum wrote:
kiki5711 wrote:
Well then why would you oppose Romney's proposal because those benefits already exist?
I DID NOT SAY ROMENY'S plan existed. I spoke only about the kind of program I knew of which was way long time ago, over 20 yrs, and before I even heard of Romney.
So what?

He's proposing new benefits.

Do you oppose them?
So what? So what? Do you even know what it is that he exactly is proposing? from what I heard him talk HE is all about cutting federal benefits, not increasing them?

There will have to be a sliding scale in order to qualify as it has been in many states. What do you think he's going to make the limit? someone making $100,000.00 a year. Obviously NOT.

User avatar
kiki5711
Forever with Ekwok
Posts: 3954
Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2010 11:51 am
Location: Atlanta, Georgia
Contact:

Re: Anne Romney Hasn't Worked A Day in Her Life

Post by kiki5711 » Mon Apr 23, 2012 1:45 pm

So what?

He's proposing new benefits.

Do you oppose them?
NEW BENEFITS? How much more different can they be, than the ones I've already talked about?

Coito ergo sum
Posts: 32040
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 2:03 pm
Contact:

Re: Anne Romney Hasn't Worked A Day in Her Life

Post by Coito ergo sum » Mon Apr 23, 2012 1:54 pm

kiki5711 wrote:
Coito ergo sum wrote:
kiki5711 wrote:
Well then why would you oppose Romney's proposal because those benefits already exist?
I DID NOT SAY ROMENY'S plan existed. I spoke only about the kind of program I knew of which was way long time ago, over 20 yrs, and before I even heard of Romney.
So what?

He's proposing new benefits.

Do you oppose them?
So what? So what? Do you even know what it is that he exactly is proposing? from what I heard him talk HE is all about cutting federal benefits, not increasing them?
He's talking about increasing child care benefits for working women. That is what he said -- quote.
kiki5711 wrote:
There will have to be a sliding scale in order to qualify as it has been in many states. What do you think he's going to make the limit? someone making $100,000.00 a year. Obviously NOT.
Should it be $100,000 a year? Are you suggesting it should be that?

I don't know what the cutoff will be. I know that any programs advocated by Democrats will have cutoffs, and they certainly would not be at $100,000 a year either.

Coito ergo sum
Posts: 32040
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 2:03 pm
Contact:

Re: Anne Romney Hasn't Worked A Day in Her Life

Post by Coito ergo sum » Mon Apr 23, 2012 1:55 pm

kiki5711 wrote:
So what?

He's proposing new benefits.

Do you oppose them?
NEW BENEFITS? How much more different can they be, than the ones I've already talked about?
More fucking money to women who wouldn't currently be eligible --- BECAUSE THEY'RE FUCKING WORKING AN EARNING MONEY!

I.e. - just as you said, sometimes it doesn't make sense for a woman to take a job because the child care costs more money than their low paying job is worth. So, the new child care benefit would provide child care benefits to those working mothers.

You seem to oppose that. Fine.

User avatar
kiki5711
Forever with Ekwok
Posts: 3954
Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2010 11:51 am
Location: Atlanta, Georgia
Contact:

Re: Anne Romney Hasn't Worked A Day in Her Life

Post by kiki5711 » Mon Apr 23, 2012 2:00 pm

More fucking money to women who wouldn't currently be eligible --- BECAUSE THEY'RE FUCKING WORKING AN EARNING MONEY!

I.e. - just as you said, sometimes it doesn't make sense for a woman to take a job because the child care costs more money than their low paying job is worth. So, the new child care benefit would provide child care benefits to those working mothers.

You seem to oppose that. Fine.
How the hell am I opposing that? I'd be all for it if there was actually some solid proof it will be done.

The "HOUSEHOLD" income is considered when applied for these kind of benefits. Now if the mother's job creates more income than eligible per household income, she'll loose the benefits. She'll end up paying the babysitter 1/2 of her income if not more and they're back to square one. So, my questions is where will be the cut off amount?

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: L'Emmerdeur and 22 guests