- Advertisement -
  • Most Commentedmost commented up
  • Most Emailedmost emailed up
  • Popularmost popular up
- Advertisement -

« News Home

State shifting focus to people living in poverty

Published: Tue, December 31, 2013 @ 12:05 a.m.

By Marc Kovac



Advocates for the needy in recent weeks have called repeatedly on Gov. John Kasich to continue waiving work requirements for welfare recipients to ensure families have access to food assistance.

Representatives of food banks joined Democratic lawmakers and others urging the administration to follow in the footsteps of other states and request an extension of the waiver, implemented during the so-called Great Recession and continued in Ohio through the end of 2013.

“The cold-hard reality of hunger is about to get a whole lot worse beginning in January for over 134,000 unemployed, nondisabled childless adults living in 72 counties who will lose their food-stamp benefits unless they are able to meet the work requirements ...,” Lisa Hamler-Fugitt, executive director of the Ohio Association of Food Banks, told reporters during a November news conference at the Statehouse. “Hunger has never been higher in Ohio as it is now, and unemployment continues to be a statewide challenge.”

But Kasich has stood firm in his decision to move forward without the waiver, requiring able-bodied adults to look for jobs, attend career training or complete other tasks in order to receive continuing food assistance.

Though he didn’t mention the issue specifically during a year-end speech to chamber of commerce groups recently, Kasich said his administrations is entering the new year with hopes of developing better ways to help Ohioans living in poverty while working to ensure others find jobs and leave the public welfare rolls.

“It’s also a sin to continue to help people who need to learn how to help themselves,” the governor said.


Kasich doesn’t have a set plan in place for dealing with poverty. He said his administration is open to ideas.

“It’s probably some sort of connection between health, education, training and probably having to do also with a number of social services that come together at a point where we can get people listed,” he said. “Too much of the systems are archaic and they are not flexible. In other words, if you have somebody who’s on a benefit program and they can get a job but yet they can’t get a job that pays anything more than what they’re getting, it doesn’t work real well, does it? So we need to figure out a way to incentivize people back to work, and here’s the reason: If people are not working over time, the children see a role model and example that is not healthy for their future.

“And I learned this in welfare reform. ... They said when we were going to eliminate the entitlement ... people screamed that it was going to be a disaster, and now people who were on welfare say thank you for what you did. ... They said thank you for getting us off. So it’s effective training, it’s effective education, it’s decent health care. Poverty is cruel. You see that one in four kids they say in our state lives in poverty. Think about that. Not much to eat, not good clothes to wear. ... We’ve got to do better than that in this state.”

Broken System

But the governor said the state needs to find ways to make sure public assistance is directed at those who are truly in need and not those who are just stuck in the system.

“It’s so hard to figure out how do you separate those who are truly needy from those who kind of got of got comfortable being in poverty,” he said. “Now some people will say nobody’s comfortable with that, but if you talk to people who are experts in this area, some will tell you that it is a challenge. Nobody gets a lot of money on these programs. Nobody does. Say you get a family of four. They get about $115 or $120 a week to take care of their groceries, their utilities, their clothing and all that. ... Let’s help those that are really hungry to get out and improve their lives, and that involves training. But how do you get the system to work where people don’t become permanently stuck because we haven’t figured out a way to design a system that is incentivized, that gets people to work. ...

“The lady that’s working the midnight shift at a fast-food restaurant, who’s barely scraping by, she doesn’t want her money to be given to somebody who doesn’t want to work. She’s all for giving her money to somebody who can’t work. So the next stage is, how do we think about this? ... We’re going to see what we can do to think differently. I have no great answers at this point. You have to have compassion, but you also have to have an element of discipline in the way we run these programs.”

Medicaid Expansion

The governor received an early Christmas present from the Ohio Supreme Court — a decision confirming his move to implement an expansion of Medicaid eligibility through the seven-member state Controlling Board rather than seeking full votes of the Ohio House and Senate.

He defended his Medicaid decision during his chamber of commerce speech.

“Twenty-six thousand veterans do not have health care,” he said. “That’s unconscionable. They fall in a place where they don’t get any help. Now that we’re getting our dollars back, Ohio’s dollars back, to our state to deal with our problems, they’re going to get help. The mentally ill? What we have done to the mentally ill in this country is a disgrace. We took them out of the institutions, and where do we see them? They’re in our prisons. ... Ten percent [of the state’s prison] population are people with mental illness. You put a schizophrenic in a prison? It’s not right.

“So now we’re going to have the resources we need to begin to deal with the problems of mental illness in our communities. And God forbid that any of you have your sons or daughters come home for Christmas vacation and to find out that your daughter’s up in her room for a couple of hours, you find out she’s bipolar. Well, we’ll treat it, we can fix it, but you can’t fix it without doing the things you need to do and to have the resources you need. ...

“You’re going to see the mentally ill treated better, the drug addicted and the needs of the local community served. The working poor are now going to have rational health care so that they don’t end up in the emergency room where they get the most expensive and least effective care.”

Marc Kovac is the Dix Capital Bureau Chief. Email him at mkovac@dixcom.com or on Twitter at OhioCapitalBlog.


1southsidedave(5126 comments)posted 1 year, 9 months ago

This is the result of sending U.S. manufacturing jobs overseas...and the economy will worsen for those with the least education and job skills

Suggest removal:

2DontBanThisDrone(808 comments)posted 1 year, 9 months ago


Many of these people have no hope of getting out of poverty, and they know that. They are at the point where they are just hoping for food and water from one day to the next.


Suggest removal:

3Sensible(134 comments)posted 1 year, 9 months ago

Sincere question for you.
Are you satisfied with the snow shoveler in post # 6 getting food stamps?
Would that be OK with you?

Suggest removal:

476Ytown(1318 comments)posted 1 year, 9 months ago

It's now been 50 years since President Johnson declared the war on poverty. Since then, what have we accomplished to lift Americans out of poverty? In 1964, 19% of Americans in poverty, in 2013 15%.

"President Lyndon Johnson intended for the War on Poverty to make Americans self-sufficient and prosperous through their own abilities, not through increased reliance on government aid. Ironically, Johnson actually planned to reduce, not increase, welfare dependence. His declared goal for the War on Poverty was “making taxpayers out of taxeaters"

"Since the beginning of the War on Poverty, the U.S. has spent over $17 trillion on anti-poverty programs. In terms of its original goal of making poor Americans self-sufficient and prosperous through their own abilities, the War on Poverty has been a colossal failure. In many low-income communities, the work ethic has eroded and marriage has collapsed. As result, lower-income groups are less capable of self-sufficient prosperity today than they were when the War on Poverty began."

Surprising Facts About America's Poor:


How do we define poor? "For most Americans, the word "poverty" suggests destitution: an inability to provide a family with nutritious food, clothing, and reasonable shelter. But only a small number of the 37 million persons classified as "poor" by the Census Bureau fit that description. While real material hardship certainly does occur, it is limited in scope and severity. Most of America's "poor" live in material conditions that would be judged as comfortable or well-off just a few generations ago"

One of the highest predictors of poverty is being a single parent. "Welfare programs create disincentives to marriage because benefits are reduced as a family’s income rises. A mother will receive far more from welfare if she is single than if she has an employed husband in the home. For many low-income couples, marriage means a reduction in government assistance and an overall decline in the couple’s joint income."


Suggest removal:

5Sensible(134 comments)posted 1 year, 9 months ago


You said: "I have absolutely no problem with a snow shoveller getting food stamps. If they are trying to help themselves, but aren't making enough to make ends meet, I think the food stamp program is a good way to help them,"

And you also said: "foodstamps, ... should be limited to those who are unable to work due to physical disability." (http://www.vindy.com/news/2013/oct/07... )

Are you contradicting yourself or is your position evolving?

Suggest removal:

6Sensible(134 comments)posted 1 year, 9 months ago


If you consider your position to be consistent , then you are delusional.

Reminds me of your positions on medicare.

Classic trolling behavior

Suggest removal:

7Jerryl(106 comments)posted 1 year, 9 months ago


Didn't get the memo?


Suggest removal:

876Ytown(1318 comments)posted 1 year, 9 months ago

eivo: The old saying..."you can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink".

I think the general consensus is that people would rather a hand-out than a hand-up.

Suggest removal:

9HappyBob(336 comments)posted 1 year, 9 months ago


Have you ever spent time in, or worked in places like McCreary County KY, or Shannon County SD, or Allendale SC?

If you'd had the experiences as I have over the past twenty years you'd not be as willing to accept at face value the characterizations from the Heritage Foundation.

Heritage says that the typical poor American lives in an air-conditioned house or apartment that is in good repair and has cable TV, a car, multiple color TVs, a DVD player, a VCR, and many other appliances. Half of the poor have computers, and one-third have wide-screen plasma TVs.

All I can say, from personal experience, is that their characterization is BS.

I'd invite Jim DeMint and his crew to go with me, to see what poverty is really like. If you have some medical skills, you can go along also.

Suggest removal:

1076Ytown(1318 comments)posted 1 year, 9 months ago

HappyBob, I do not disagree with you that we have pockets in the US like the Appalachian Mountains and Indian Reservations that fit the description of deep poverty. What is the common denominator in their situation? Lack of education, jobs, limited health care, limited opportunity, long-term neglect and lack of investment? What other factors? Rural ares hard to access and even high alcohol or drug abuse, single parent households?

In 2011, 6.6 percent of all people, or 20.4 million people, lived in deep poverty (had income below one-half the poverty threshold, or $11,511 for a family of four).

Persistent poverty and living in rural areas are also linked. Nearly 28 % of people living in completely rural counties live in persistent poverty counties. In contrast, 7.5 % of people living in the most urban nonmetro areas live in persistent poverty counties.

Children living in female-headed families with no spouse present had a poverty rate of 47.6 percent, over four times the rate of children in married-couple families (10.9 percent).

The median, or midpoint, income in June 2013 was $52,098. That's down from $54,478 in June 2009, when the recession officially ended. And it's below the $55,480 that the median household took in when the recession began in December 2007.

This report says nearly every group is worse off than four years ago, except for those 65 to 74. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/08...

Nearly half the world – over three billion people – live on less than $2.50 a day according to Global Poverty Project. Compared to the other half of the world, we live like royalty. Although in 2011, the Brookings Institute said Youngstown has the nation's highest concentration of poverty among the 100 biggest metro areas but there are still cell phones, microwaves, TVs, cars and homes with heating and air conditioning..

Suggest removal:

11Sensible(134 comments)posted 1 year, 9 months ago


Thought that it might be possible to have an adult conversation with eivo, but instead of explaining his shifting positions, he starts name-calling and accusing.

Clearly he does not act like an adult. He is not worth the time and space for a response.. Your advice ("Dont feed the Troll") is appropriate.

What is somewhat puzzling is why 76Ytown supports his antics. Wonder if they are related?

Suggest removal:

1276Ytown(1318 comments)posted 1 year, 9 months ago

Sensible: We'd like to hear your sensible comments on the issue..."State shifting focus to people living in poverty" If a conversation is an informal exchange of thoughts, opinions, ideas, information, etc., what have you contributed other than calling someone a troll?

~Are you satisfied with the snow shoveler in post # 6 getting food stamps?
Would that be OK with you?

~Are you contradicting yourself or is your position evolving?

~If you consider your position to be consistent , then you are delusional.

~Reminds me of your positions on medicare.

~Classic trolling behavior

Suggest removal:

1376Ytown(1318 comments)posted 1 year, 9 months ago

Sensible: I meant to say: We'd like to hear your ADULT comments on the issue.

Suggest removal:

14Sensible(134 comments)posted 1 year, 9 months ago

Post #1 by the troll:
"I wonder if the left wing extremists ..."

Suggest removal:

1576Ytown(1318 comments)posted 1 year, 9 months ago

Sensible: Are you a left wing extremist? I couldn't tell by your history.

You do however ask a lot of questions, so I'm guessing that you're not sure if you're to the left or to the right.

Suggest removal:

16HappyBob(336 comments)posted 1 year, 9 months ago

You have commented before about your distain of statistics and averages, so I don't understand why you quote them so frequently.

Regardless, we agree that there are many factors that contribute to poverty, you have already named the leading ones. I'd like to add a couple more that I've seen at work. 1)Business interests, specifically protectionism, to insure that a competing business (offering increased employment) is prevented from entering an area. 2) Mobility and lack of transportation (particularily in rural areas). 3) Human attitudinal issues like lack of confidence, fear of failure, depression and despair.

Poor education (both in work and life skills) probably stands out (to me) as the most common and debilitating factor. Second I would venture is tradition. The... "My parents were worthless, they told me I was worthless, so what's the use. This is the life I was brought up to lead" .. factor.

My sense is that there are multiple risk factors, and while we as a society need to address the major ones, we have to acknowledge that the causes are many.

Having been a "guest" in several poverty homes and gotten to know the folks there, there is one thing of which I can assure you. If I ever suggested to these folks that they were "freeloaders", their reaction would have been "OK, I'll fulfill your prophesy".

What they respond to is encouragement, not deprecation.

Note to Sensible: Just between you and I, evio just posts to impress himself. Since his birth in October, he has contradicted himself numerous times, plays the victim, troll, etc. Your best course of action is to just ignore him, because you are wasting your time.

Suggest removal:

17dontbeafool(1568 comments)posted 1 year, 9 months ago

No sympathy at all for the less fortunate. There are a lot of great people who are just thrown into the category of worthless and free loaders. Some extreme right are so full of hate, they just care about how the poor affects their own bank accounts instead of showing any kind of compassion. Self only attitudes 99.9% of the time.

Suggest removal:

18Sensible(134 comments)posted 1 year, 9 months ago


To the left or to the right of what?

I don't consider myself to be an extremist of either "side",

Post #25, name-calling is name-calling regardless

Suggest removal:

1976Ytown(1318 comments)posted 1 year, 9 months ago

HappyBob: You're right, averages can be too easily manipulated but the percentages in the above are pretty telling since they come from census numbers. (as much as you can trust the census).

So what can we do to solve the country's poverty problems? You and I agree that expanding your horizons changes your perspective on things. Education is key to breaking the cycle. The internet will be one way to change the world as people are given the opportunity to learn. Distance learning gives people the opportunity to get a good education from wherever they live.

100 years ago or maybe even 50 years ago, most people didn't meet or talk to as many new people in a year as we do in a day. When I was young, our family would travel from Yo to New Castle to visit relatives. You would have thought we'd have to pack a lunch...it seemed so far!

"My parents were worthless, they told me I was worthless, so what's the use. This is the life I was brought up to lead" .. factor." Yes. Sadly that happens, but also there are many people brought up in extreme poverty that went on to become the light of the world.

~Dr. Ben Carson's mother was one of 24 children, dropped out of school in the 3rd grade, married at 13, found out that her husband was a bigamist, went on to raise her 2 children as a single mom. He became a neurosurgeon.
Other success stories: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01...

"Whatever you believe, with feeling, becomes your reality; you always act in a manner consistent with your beliefs."

This is much like the story of the "Chained Elephant", where a huge elephant can be held in one place by a chain around one leg attached to a stake in the ground. Why doesn't this giant animal simply tear the stake out of the ground or break the chain? The reason is that the elephant has been chained this way since it was young, when it actually couldn't break free.

The baby elephant tries and tries to break free initially, but soon learns that it's futile and so gives up. From that point on he knows that when he is chained to a peg, there is no point trying to break free. Although the full-grown elephant could easily break free, he doesn't, because he doesn't believe that he can. His mind has been trained that when he is chained, he can't get away.

And so it is with the human mind and Limiting Beliefs. What does this mean? Simply, it means that if you think negatively you'll get negative results, and if you believe you are not capable of achieving a certain result then your mind will prove you right! The only conclusion that makes sense, then, is this: If you believe you deserve something better, you'd better think something better!?

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/2446590

Suggest removal:

2076Ytown(1318 comments)posted 1 year, 9 months ago

Whenever you feel that you can't because of your life circumstances, remember Nick Vujicic.


Suggest removal:

21dontbeafool(1568 comments)posted 1 year, 9 months ago

"Whatever you believe, with feeling, becomes your reality; you always act in a manner consistent with your beliefs."

Exactly, when you have people on here spewing hate about the poor being lazy, useless, freeloaders, dumb, and that is what you hear about yourself over and over, then you start to believe what you are hearing. Right wing's idea of helping is to take everything away from them, degrade them, and make them help themselves.

Suggest removal:

22YtownParent(558 comments)posted 1 year, 9 months ago

Wage stagnation is the largest cause of the problems and it has grown since the War on Poverty was launches. As the welfare system has grown workers wages have stayed flat in relation to productivity (company earnings). The welfare system feeds that stagnation and vice versa. Get rid of the minimum wage dollar amounts and base wages on productivity and the welfare roles will decrease.

Unfortunately nothing will ever happen, save a mass work stoppage by all low wage employees across the country, to change the system. Because God forbid you say that every person in a company contributes to the success of the company and should at the least be earning a decent living for making the company a success. The right screams its socialism. No it is capitalism at it's finest where workers are freely charging and receiving a fair purchase price for their labor from the companies that are buying it.

Suggest removal:

23dontbeafool(1568 comments)posted 1 year, 9 months ago

If the minimum wage was 15/hour, and the assistance stipends remained the same, THAT would entice the people who can work, but choose to stay on assistance, to go get a job. I see why many stay on assistance if they make the same amount on assistance as they would making $7 an hour.

Suggest removal:

24dontbeafool(1568 comments)posted 1 year, 9 months ago

My point is that they SHOULDN'T increase the amount of assistance. If there is a significant difference between what you can make working and what you can make sitting at home doing nothing, more people would be working. I can't really blame a single mom who stays home and gets the same amount of free money as she would a min wage job. Throw in day care on top of that. It isn't what I would do, but I can understand why some would.

Suggest removal:

2576Ytown(1318 comments)posted 1 year, 9 months ago

People who exist on welfare and people who exist on minimum wage just exist on the edge. There will always be a need for entry level jobs but that's just a stepping stone to something better, not a life long career. What the jobs reports don't tell you is what the effect of the recession has had on better paying jobs that are being replaced by part time and lower paying jobs. The medium income has been been falling. Now we're in a catch 22. People can't find jobs that pay more than what they can get on public assistance so there's no incentive to work.

You may not like what Kasich is saying: "if you have somebody who’s on a benefit program and they can get a job but yet they can’t get a job that pays anything more than what they’re getting, it doesn’t work real well, does it? but his point is that we're creating a system that keeps people down if we enable people to get benefits without trying to help them out of their situation.

Requiring able-bodied adults to look for jobs, attend career training or complete other tasks in order to receive continuing food assistance is not asking people to do something immoral. If an able-bodied person receiving assistance is given the opportunity to better themselves and get off assistance, is that an outcry?

The key to fixing the problem is middle class jobs. The focus should be on creating more middle income, living wage jobs. This recession has expanded the lower class, not the middle class as planned.

Suggest removal:

26Jerryl(106 comments)posted 1 year, 9 months ago

Focus on "elite"
Care to identify any of these non-working ELITES?

You have been complaining about "freeloaders" now for months, this is the first time I've heard you call them elites.

Since you have been so vocal about "freeloaders" I wonder if you know any?

Suggest removal:

27billdog1(3774 comments)posted 1 year, 8 months ago

Although not a big fan of our Goobinator, I believe he has the right idea. Those that are able bodied and have the ability need to do something besides set at home. He stated an able bodied, single person, with no children needs to get training, a job, or work for what they get. What is wrong with that. The public assistance program was never designed to be a way of life. Even the single mothers when applying need to HAVE to tell who the father is or no assistance. That father can work for the system or get a J.O.B. If this was done it would be a matter of a couple of years and all would change. The young men would think twice before getting the turtle all muddy.

Suggest removal:

28Jerryl(106 comments)posted 1 year, 8 months ago

I see that you refuse to respond to questions about your posts (see #44). Either you are unable to defend your words, or your position is just indefensible.

Beyond the "elites" question, your inability to answer the question if you know any "freeloaders" (one of your favorite topics) is just another example that you are nothing more than a troll.

You are uninterested in having a debate or discussion but just use this format as a soapbox to push your own political agenda.

That makes you no better than the majority of the politicians that you criticize.

Suggest removal:

29SheDevil(120 comments)posted 1 year, 8 months ago

I did not ask you to identify anyone that you "know" are "freeloaders".

However, if you know that they are "freeloaders" have you bothered to do your duty as a citizen to report these people to the appropriate authorities?

Is case you missed it there is a mechanism in place to do something about these "freeloaders"'.

If you really "know", you should say something to the people who can do something about real cases.

You can complain about government waste all day, but until you do something about it, you are just part of the problem

Reflect on that!

Suggest removal:

30SheDevil(120 comments)posted 1 year, 8 months ago

You and I have a obvious difference in what being a freeloader means.

A person who collects unemployment compensation and does not seek employment as required is a freeloader. They are committing fraud, that is reportable.

A person who collects disability and is not disabled is a freeloader. They are committing fraud, that is reportable.

A person who collects food stamps and has unreported income, they are freeloaders, and are committing fraud that is reportable.

A person who does not report income or under reports income to avoid income taxes, they are freeloaders and that is a fraud, and reportable.

All government benefits have some requirements, if a person does not meet those requirements, they are freeloaders. By not meeting the requirements they have committed a fraud and that is reportable.

Are any of the freeloaders that you know NOT defrauding the government?

Then again, maybe freeloading doesn't mean the same thing to you. Or maybe you just like to hear yourself, so you make up things to b**ch about.

Suggest removal:

31dontbeafool(1568 comments)posted 1 year, 8 months ago

shedevil is quickly becoming my fav. She is amazeballs.

Suggest removal:

32dontbeafool(1568 comments)posted 1 year, 8 months ago

I know, see how annoying it is? Every since she went and got a job, you don't get to do that as much. I bet you are sad.

Suggest removal:

33YtownParent(558 comments)posted 1 year, 8 months ago

@evio says: "I know people who fit my definition of freeloaders as well as some that fit your definition of freeloaders and no, I don't feel it is my responsibility to report them anymore than I feel it is my responsibility to report people who cheat on their income taxes."

Standing by and letting a crime happen is a crime. If you don't report it then you are supporting it and are just as guilty of being a crook as the person defrauding the rest of us taxpayers. You're just as guilty as Widdersheim is of Zaryl Bush'es crimes and just as guilty of helping them get away with it as Jon Kuzan was of helping Koliser get away with his crimes.

Suggest removal:

34dontbeafool(1568 comments)posted 1 year, 8 months ago

You are 100% correct Ytown Parent. Eivo is a freeloader by association. He is a freeloading accomplice.

Suggest removal:

35dontbeafool(1568 comments)posted 1 year, 8 months ago

@stateline. As long as we are giving out foreign aid, we should be giving assistance to those in need.
@Lol I agree with you completely. I believe in assisting those in need, but there needs to be more reform and enforcement. But what doesn't go to them is going to go to some other wasteful pork barrell spending for the study of the monarch butterfly or some crap, just look at the new approved budget. Sweet deals for both Repubs and Dems in their home areas.

Suggest removal:

36dontbeafool(1568 comments)posted 1 year, 8 months ago

you go to Obamacare, I'll go to Bush. I thought the liar said that the oil from the middle east was going to pay for the war in Iraq. I'm still waiting......

Suggest removal:

37YtownParent(558 comments)posted 1 year, 8 months ago

Get your facts straight @eivo. EBT cards can be used at ATM's at Pot shops, not for purchases. While the Colorado legislature didn't add strip clubs to the list of banned ATM', they didn't need to because strip club ATM's are already under a nationwide federal ban. I'm not naive enough to think that there aren't people who'll make a withdrawal at the ATM and then buy weed. It's interesting that the legislature ignored the pot lobby who are the ones who specifically asked for the ban to be put in place.

On another point, I agree people should not get extra benefits for popping out more kids. I don't think anyone should get anything else from the government, including tax deductions, for breeding like rabbits.

Suggest removal:

38dontbeafool(1568 comments)posted 1 year, 8 months ago

@stateline, I respectfully disagree, on receiving no assistance. Are you saying it is okay to give money in assistance to other countries if they are our allies, but not some of our own people in need? We have hungry and needy, and are in debt. When what's the last time one of our allies gave us foreign aide?

Suggest removal:

39YtownParent(558 comments)posted 1 year, 8 months ago

@eivo you said: "Good news!!! EBT cards are now accepted in pot shops and strip joints in Colorado. The only problem is that if they use all of their money up on those things, they will need a new SNAP program so that they can afford to eat."

As I said they're not accepted at Pot Shops nor strip joints, they can be used at ATM's located at the shops. ATM's are owned and operated by third parties -not the shops they're located at- whether the store sells pot, groceries or gasoline.

Yes, ATM's at those locations should have been added to the existing federal list which includes ATM's at strip clubs, liquor stores, bars, and gun stores. The dems that voted it down argued it there weren't enough ATM's in those locations to allow beneficiaries access to cash to pay their bills & make necessary purchases. That's a crock. There aren't enough ATM's in those areas to allow their banker campaign contributors to make a profit on transaction fees. Transaction fees the state pays not the beneficiary.

Before you ask, why does someone getting benefits need access to cash to pay bills & make necessary purchases, I'll answer they don't. They can pay their bills with an EBT card at the library or over the phone. The card can be used for purchases at Wal-MArt, Family Dollar, Dollar General etc. for Toilet Paper, laundry soap etc. If they need to get cash back for the landlord, they can get it back at the same stores. It's too easy to use the benefits anywhere, which promotes frivolous spending and hinders financial responsibility. What else do you expect from congress.

Suggest removal:

40YtownParent(558 comments)posted 1 year, 8 months ago

Corporate welfare is good becasue it'll trickle down to the bottom rung employees (sarcasm). You forgot to add how much corporate welfare goes along with the Food Stamp and EBT prgrams @ Repubs4the Rich. Anyone getting assistance must be working (despite statements that they don't) & the companies they work for get 100% tax for the wages and benefits they pay workers receiving assistance.

That's the real reason Wal-Mart etc. are against minimum wage increases, because once their employees become self-sufficient then the company actually has to pay the cost of their wages, instead of getting it picked up by tax payers.

Suggest removal:

41dontbeafool(1568 comments)posted 1 year, 8 months ago

here you go Eivo.... Boehner wants 2 Billion, yes with a B, for a failing bankrupt company in his home state. BTW, this is TODAY'S news.
good point Ytown....

Suggest removal:

42dontbeafool(1568 comments)posted 1 year, 8 months ago

If it was up to you, the auto industry would be dead and non existant today. The bailout was loans which even Bush and others recommended and deemed necessary to avoid catastrophy. 2 BILLION is just the tip of the iceberg, take a look at what the oil companies get! But I admit, it is not just a Republican thing.. (corporate welfare). Both parties are for corporate welfare, but only one party is for welfare for the POOR! At least the Dems will give some money to the poor as well.

Suggest removal:

43dontbeafool(1568 comments)posted 1 year, 8 months ago

I noticed you didn't comment on the other half of my post. Because there is nothing you can argue. Shall we go to oil company subsidies? I can look some stuff up.

Suggest removal:

44dontbeafool(1568 comments)posted 1 year, 8 months ago

You don't know any Republicans that favor oil company subsidies? Do you even know your party? Here is one example where almost 50 Republican senators filibustered against Dem led legislation in order to protect 24 billion dollars to the 5 richest oil companies. The Republicans won and protected the subsidies. You are ignorant to what your own party is for.

Suggest removal:

45dontbeafool(1568 comments)posted 1 year, 8 months ago

forgot the link....

Suggest removal:

46dontbeafool(1568 comments)posted 1 year, 8 months ago

I have a problem with corporate welfare PERIOD, especially when they want to cut money to the poor who actually need it, but not to the rich corporations. But at least now you know some Republicans who are FOR subsidies to oil companies. But knowing you, you won't even accept that as a fact.

Suggest removal:

47dontbeafool(1568 comments)posted 1 year, 8 months ago

You have?

Suggest removal:

48dontbeafool(1568 comments)posted 1 year, 8 months ago

First of all, since I have been registered on this site, I have not seen an artical specific to Solyndra to comment, but I have commented that I do not think corporate welfare by either party is right, so I think that blanket statement would cover my position on it. I haven't commented on mass murderers either, but that doesn't mean that I am not against them.

Suggest removal:

49dontbeafool(1568 comments)posted 1 year, 8 months ago

I'm sure you mentioned Solyndra in articles dealing with Kasich or Puppy Mills or some other unrelated stories. Secondly, 75% of your post are so far out there that they aren't worth commenting or responding to. And lastly, I will comment on what I want to, when I want to.

Suggest removal:

50dontbeafool(1568 comments)posted 1 year, 8 months ago

How we forget history. It was Bush who initiated the bailouts, and Obama continued. I think they both made the right choice. Read on.

Lest we forget, it was Bush rather than Obama who initiated the government rescue of the auto companies.
On December 19, 2008, a week after Republicans in the Senate had killed a bailout bill proposed by Democrats, saying it didn’t impose big enough wage cuts on the U.A.W., Bush unilaterally agreed to lend $17.4 billion of taxpayers’ money to General Motors and Chrysler, of which $13.4 billion was to be extended immediately. He had to twist the law to get the money. Deprived of congressional funding, he diverted cash from the loathed TARP program, which Congress had already passed, but which was supposed to be restricted to rescuing the banks. “I didn’t want there to twenty-one-per-cent unemployment,” he said to a meeting of the National Automobile Dealers Association in Las Vegas last month, explaining why he acted as he did. “I didn’t want history to look back and say, ‘Bush could have done something but chose not to do it.’ ”

Obama, who in December, 2008, was the President-elect, publicly supported Bush’s move, saying it was a “necessary step to avoid a collapse in our auto industry that would have devastating consequences for our economy and our workers.” After taking office six weeks later, Obama put together an auto task force that extended tens of billions more in emergency financing to Detroit over the ensuing months, and also did what appears to have been a pretty good job in restructuring G.M. and selling Chrysler to Fiat.

Suggest removal:

51dontbeafool(1568 comments)posted 1 year, 8 months ago

I'm talking to a rock. There is no point.

Suggest removal:

52YtownParent(558 comments)posted 1 year, 8 months ago

Just to clarify, you were very happy with the world while government spending went from a $150 billion surplus to a $1.4 trillion deficit, based on the numbers reported by The Heritage Foundation.

Suggest removal:

53YtownParent(558 comments)posted 1 year, 8 months ago

All your points show exactly what I've always said, the only difference between Bush and Obama is their party affiliation. The only thing Obama has done is continue and expand the Bush era.

Suggest removal:

54NBees(53 comments)posted 1 year, 8 months ago

Curious... do any of you realize that Ohio already has a 3 year lifetime CAP on cash assistance otherwise known as welfare? Mandatory Opportunity (working for benefits, job training, and such) is hard to implement when there are not enough opportunities to mandate. This War on Poverty, just like every other war declared on a concept instead of clearly defined enemy, is a never ending battle that cannot be won. Our need for an enemy has targeted the people instead of the problems that create poverty. We have made the impoverished the enemy, slam them, shun them, blame them for the national debt and everything else that ails this country, and that is no way to treat our citizens. We have no business helping other countries if we can't take care of our own.

Suggest removal:

55dontbeafool(1568 comments)posted 1 year, 8 months ago

Speaking out of both sides of you head again Eivo. One hand, you say that we need the pipeline to create needed jobs, yet on the other hand you say that there are plenty of available good jobs out there now, but they go unfilled week after week because people would rather sit at home and mooch. So if people are unwilling to work, why build a pipeline where the oil is going overseas anyway? You want good jobs around here, talk to Kasich and ask him why most all of the shale jobs were given to out of state workers. While you are at it, ask him why Ohio is only getting around 2% in monies while every other state gets a minimum of 7% from the gas companies. Poor negotiations, especially when you have the leverage of having the gas that they so much want.

Suggest removal:

56dontbeafool(1568 comments)posted 1 year, 8 months ago

So basically, everyone from Ohio is pretty much worthless and lazy according to you. I think you just insulted everyone who comments on this site. Maybe you should move to the midwest and be amongst harder working people.

Suggest removal:

57dontbeafool(1568 comments)posted 1 year, 8 months ago

When you say, how could the Ohio governor get anyone to come out of their houses and work for a high paying job! That is how I can come to that conclusion. You claim that people will come out in droves to work for the keystone pipeline in other areas of the country, but in Ohio, not a chance. Do you even read what you type? Better yet, maybe think before you type, then read, then hit enter.

Suggest removal:

58dontbeafool(1568 comments)posted 1 year, 8 months ago

Eivo, It looks like the Keystone pipeline cleared a hurdle today, making it likely that Obama will sign it. I will make a deal with you. One year after the first oil flows through it, if gas is not @ $2.50 or lower, then you must remove yourself from these comment boards never to comment again. If it is higher, then I will do the same. Put your money where your mouth is since you believe this pipeline is going to lower gas rates.

Suggest removal:

59dontbeafool(1568 comments)posted 1 year, 8 months ago

2.75 then. You said it would bring the price down because it was all supply and demand. 2.75 is reasonable. Shoot, It was recently at around $3.10 in the last couple months.

Suggest removal:

60dontbeafool(1568 comments)posted 1 year, 8 months ago

And out of the 92% of Ohioans who are working, You don't think that 30% of them would drop their sub standard job for a good job with the big oil company? You don't think Ohioans should at least have the opportunity to decide what job would be better for them? You are all about choices when it is about stupid light bulbs, but don't let workers have a choice if they would like a better job than their current one. Makes sense.

Suggest removal:

61dontbeafool(1568 comments)posted 1 year, 8 months ago

Well the price can come down next week below $3.30 without a pipeline. I called you on your B.S. now you are back tracking? Not too confident in the effect the pipeline will have now, are you?

Suggest removal:

62dontbeafool(1568 comments)posted 1 year, 8 months ago

Well since you aren't going to back it up, you can stop crying about the flipping pipeline then.

Suggest removal:

63dontbeafool(1568 comments)posted 1 year, 8 months ago


Suggest removal:


HomeTerms of UsePrivacy StatementAdvertiseStaff DirectoryHelp
© 2015 Vindy.com. All rights reserved. A service of The Vindicator.
107 Vindicator Square. Youngstown, OH 44503

Phone Main: 330.747.1471 • Interactive Advertising: 330.740.2955 • Classified Advertising: 330.746.6565
Sponsored Links: Vindy Wheels | Vindy Jobs | Vindy Homes