Conservative VS Liberal

[tdslf1 0]

PG,

My question is this. If welfare was good enough for you when you were 19, why is it not good enough for the 19 year old today? THis is your postion. You did it for 2 years. You said you took advantage of it. Are you saying all people who get on welfare are leeches like you say you were? That is why you object to WIC? Because you know you took advantage of it?

It was good enough for you but people simply can't have the problems you had back then. They can't possibly need that 2 year leech spot that you had. According to you, you're different than other people. You're better (hindsight is a muther) and people can't possible have the good intentions you had back then to get off welfare and become self sufficient? WOW.

I told you the arrogance is staggering....

[LeighaMason 19]

My opinions on government waste have nothing to do with being a Christian. Just because Cleos's assumes that I had some kind of talk with teachers about kids who are getting free lunch doesn't mean it happened. That's her imagined scenerio. I overhear what is being said about others, and I happen to know alot of people in my town personally.

As a Christian, I believe in giving to the poor and helping those in need. I am a very generous person with my finances, and time. It has nothing to do with that. Government steals from people to give to others and themselves, in a sense, when they are not good stewards of the money (taxes) they take in. When they pass out funds that they don't even have, they are putting us into deeper debt. Just because I don't feel that head start is something the gov. should waste their money on, doesn't mean I'm a selfish Christian. It means I don't feel the government should WASTE our money.

I don't care how you justify your lack of compassion, I stand by my statement. The programs that you want to cut are the programs that differentiate us from third world countries. If I wanted to live like that I would move there. This is America, where we have the duty take care of each other, the founding fathers said, our duty is dictated by our conscience. My conscience says letting people go hungry, die from lack of health services and not providing a quality education to children in the name of preventing "government waste" is wrong.

We have duties, for the discharge of which we are accountable to our Creator and benefactor, which no human power can cancel. What those duties are, is determinable by right reason, which may be, and is called, a well informed conscience. What this conscience dictates as our duty, is so; and that power which assumes a control over it, is an usurper; for no power can be pleaded to justify the control, as any consent in this case is void.

The Essex Result, May 12, 1778

[Cleo's Mom 257]

With regard to the Head Start Program and its effectiveness:

According to Datta (Datta, 1976 & Lee et al.,1990) who summarized 31 studies, the program showed immediate improvement in the IQ scores of participating children, though after beginning school, the non-participants were able to narrow the difference. Children who attended Head Start are, relative to their siblings who did not, significantly more likely to complete high school, attend college, and possibly have higher earnings in their early twenties. They are less likely to have been booked or charged with a crime.[12] Head Start is associated with large and significant gains in test scores. Head Start significantly reduces the probability that a child will repeat a grade.[1] Recent criticisms of Project Head Start have resulted in plans to improve program services and to expand in a more thoughtful manner to make the program more responsive to the needs of children and families. New directions include expansion below and beyond the ages previously served by Head Start.[13]

This study goes beyond first grade.

Edited April 3, 2010 by Cleo's Mom

[Cleo's Mom 257]

A private business would scrutinize every penny.

Really? I guess wall street banks didn't get this memo when they sqandered our money. But hey, they knew we'd be there with our tax dollars to bail them out.

Government employees don't give a crap how they dish out government funds.

Which employees, exactly, have this power? Because I want to contact them to dish me out some money.:bored:

[Cleo's Mom 257]

Concerning WIC, let's see how you twist this "drama" around:

How WIC Helps

WIC saves lives and improves the health of nutritionally at-risk women, infants and children. The results of studies conducted by FNS and other non-government entities prove that WIC is one of the nation’s most successful and cost-effective nutrition intervention programs. Since its beginning in 1974, the WIC Program has earned the reputation of being one of the most successful Federally-funded nutrition programs in the United States. Collective findings of studies, reviews and reports demonstrate that the WIC Program is cost effective in protecting or improving the health/nutritional status of low-income women, infants and children. The following highlights some of the findings (pertinent references are provided).

• Improved Birth Outcomes and Savings in Health Care Costs
  
• Improved Diet and Diet-Related Outcomes
  
• Improved Infant Feeding Practices
  
• Immunization Rates and Regular Source of Medical Care
  
• Improved Cognitive Development
  
• Improved Preconceptional Nutritional Status
  
• Other Improved Outcomes
  
• Summary
  
• References
  

Improved Birth Outcomes and Savings in Health Care Costs

Research has shown that the WIC Program has been playing an important role in improving birth outcomes and containing health care costs.7,20 A series of reports published by USDA based on linked 1988 WIC and Medicaid data on over 100,000 births found that every dollar spent on prenatal WIC participation for low-income Medicaid women in 5 States resulted in:

• longer pregnancies;
  
• fewer premature births;
  
• lower incidence of moderately low and very low birth weight infants;
  
• fewer infant deaths;
  
• a greater likelihood of receiving prenatal care; and
  
• savings in health care costs from $1.77 to $3.13 within the first 60 days after birth.3,4,5
  

Improved Diet and Diet-Related Outcomes

Studies have found WIC to have a positive effect on children's diet and diet-related outcomes such as:

• higher mean intakes of Iron, Vitamin C, thiamin, niacin and Vitamin B6, without an increase in food energy intake, indicating an increase in the nutrient density of the diet;19
  
• positive effects on the intakes of ten nutrients without an adverse effect on fat or cholesterol;14
  
• more effective than other cash income or SNAP benefits at improving preschoolers' intake of key nutrients;14 and
  
• decline in the rate of iron deficiency anemia from 7.8 percent in 1975 to 2.9 percent in 1985 which the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention attributed to both a general improvement in iron nutrition and participation in WIC and other public nutrition programs.20
  

Improved Infant Feeding Practices

WIC promotes breastfeeding as the optimal method of infant feeding. Studies show:

• WIC participants who reported having received advice to breastfeed their babies from the WIC clinic were more likely to breastfeed than other WIC participants or eligible nonparticipants;18
  
• WIC breastfeeding policy and program activities were strengthened in the early 1990's;
  
• Between 1996 and 2001, the percentage of WIC mothers breastfeeding in the hospital increased by almost 25 percent, from 46.6 to 58.2 percent;
  
• The percentage of WIC infants breastfeeding at six months of age increased by 61.2 percent, from 12.9 to 20.8 percent; and,
  
• For those infants who are fed infant formula, 90 percent received iron-fortified formula, which is recommended for nearly all non-breastfed infants for the first year of life.1
  

Immunization Rates and Regular Source of Medical Care

A regular schedule of immunizations is recommended for children from birth to 2 years of age, which coincides with the period in which many low-income children participate in WIC. Studies have found significantly improved rates of childhood immunization and of having a regular source of medical care associated with WIC participation.19

Improved Cognitive Development

Cognitive development influences school achievement and behavior. Participation in the WIC Program has been shown to:

• improve vocabulary scores for children of mothers who participated in WIC prenatally; and
  
• significantly improve memory for numbers for children enrolled in WIC after the first year of life.19
  

Improved Preconceptional Nutritional Status

Preconceptional nutritional status is an important determinant of birth outcome. A previous pregnancy can cause nutritional depletion of the postpartum woman, particularly those with high parity and short interpregnancy intervals. One study found:

• women enrolled in WIC both during pregnancy and postpartum periods delivered infants with higher mean birth weights in a subsequent pregnancy than women who received WIC prenatally only; and,
  
• the women who received postpartum benefits had higher hemoglobin levels and lower risk of maternal obesity at the onset of the subsequent pregnancy.2
  

Other Improved Outcomes

WIC participation has also been shown to:

• increase the likelihood of children having a regular provider of medical care;19 and,
  
• improve growth rates.6,8
  

Summary:

• WIC reduces fetal deaths and infant mortality.
  
• WIC reduces low birthweight rates and increases the duration of pregnancy.
  
• WIC improves the growth of nutritionally at-risk infants and children.
  
• WIC decreases the incidence of iron deficiency anemia in children.
  
• WIC improves the dietary intake of pregnant and postpartum women and improves weight gain in pregnant women.
  
• Pregnant women participating in WIC receive prenatal care earlier.
  
• Children enrolled in WIC are more likely to have a regular source of medical care and have more up to date immunizations.
  
• WIC helps get children ready to start school: children who receive WIC benefits demonstrate improved intellectual development.
  
• WIC significantly improves children’s diets.
  

WIC reduces fetal death and infant mortality. I don't see how you can call yourself pro-life and be against WIC. Of course, you will notice that I don't call you pro-life, which you aren't, but rather anti-abortion, a BIG difference. But it doesn't really matter because people who are heartless can find numerous ways to justify it.

Edited April 3, 2010 by Cleo's Mom

[LeighaMason 19]

A private business would scrutinize every penny.

Really? I guess wall street banks didn't get this memo when they squandered our money. But hey, they knew we'd be there with our tax dollars to bail them out.

Not even the RNC can watch every penny, as demonstrated this past week.

Government employees don't give a crap how they dish out government funds.

Which employees, exactly, have this power? Because I want to contact them to dish me out some money.:bored:

Once again, Objectivism has been show to be a flawed concept just like its opposite Communism.

[pattygreen 5]

PG,

My question is this. If welfare was good enough for you when you were 19, why is it not good enough for the 19 year old today?

It wasn't good enough for me. I should not have been receiving it. The father of my child had enough money to support us. I just abused the system. It was wrong. And many, many people do it all the time.

THis is your postion. You did it for 2 years. You said you took advantage of it. Are you saying all people who get on welfare are leeches like you say you were? That is why you object to WIC? Because you know you took advantage of it?

No. It's because I know MANY people who take advanytage of it. When the workers there will come right out and tell you about how they 'work' the system so that very few get denied WIC checks, you know it is corrupt.

It was good enough for you but people simply can't have the problems you had back then.

I didn't have a problem back then, I took it because I could. Free is free. I was eligible for it, so I got it. Like I said, most people getting a handout would do just fine without it.

They can't possibly need that 2 year leech spot that you had. According to you, you're different than other people. You're better (hindsight is a muther) and people can't possible have the good intentions you had back then to get off welfare and become self sufficient? WOW.

I told you the arrogance is staggering....

You don't know me from anyone. Like I said, it WASN'T good for me. I had every opportunity to continue to abuse the system back then. I could have lived with my boyfriend instead of getting married, and that would have kept both welfare and his income coming into the house. You know, I didn't have to say a word about my own experience with welfare, but I thought that it would shed light as to how people abuse the system. I am confident enough in myself to admit to others that I am not a perfect person and that it was wrong for me to get on welfare and accept WIC and energy assistance when I was in my early 20's. I know people who are abusing it right now. People work under the table and collect unemployment. They lie about how many people live in their households. They meet the income guidelines because they dont tell all their income to the fed worker they are applying with. I see it all the time.

[pattygreen 5]

Once again, Objectivism has been show to be a flawed concept just like its opposite Communism.

There are many private businesses that watch their pennies. Big businesses that are corrupt, are grouped in with private sector small businesses where the government is concerned. When there is a regulation for big business, it goes for small ones too. This is where the people who want to open a business get screwed.

[pattygreen 5]

Concerning WIC, let's see how you twist this "drama" around:

How WIC Helps

WIC saves lives and improves the health of nutritionally at-risk women, infants and children. The results of studies conducted by FNS and other non-government entities prove that WIC is one of the nation’s most successful and cost-effective nutrition intervention programs. Since its beginning in 1974, the WIC Program has earned the reputation of being one of the most successful Federally-funded nutrition programs in the United States. Collective findings of studies, reviews and reports demonstrate that the WIC Program is cost effective in protecting or improving the health/nutritional status of low-income women, infants and children. The following highlights some of the findings (pertinent references are provided).

• Improved Birth Outcomes and Savings in Health Care Costs
  
• Improved Diet and Diet-Related Outcomes
  
• Improved Infant Feeding Practices
  
• Immunization Rates and Regular Source of Medical Care
  
• Improved Cognitive Development
  
• Improved Preconceptional Nutritional Status
  
• Other Improved Outcomes
  
• Summary
  
• References
  

Improved Birth Outcomes and Savings in Health Care Costs

Research has shown that the WIC Program has been playing an important role in improving birth outcomes and containing health care costs.7,20 A series of reports published by USDA based on linked 1988 WIC and Medicaid data on over 100,000 births found that every dollar spent on prenatal WIC participation for low-income Medicaid women in 5 States resulted in:

• longer pregnancies;
  
• fewer premature births;
  
• lower incidence of moderately low and very low birth weight infants;
  
• fewer infant deaths;
  
• a greater likelihood of receiving prenatal care; and
  
• savings in health care costs from $1.77 to $3.13 within the first 60 days after birth.3,4,5
  

Improved Diet and Diet-Related Outcomes

Studies have found WIC to have a positive effect on children's diet and diet-related outcomes such as:

• higher mean intakes of Iron, Vitamin C, thiamin, niacin and Vitamin B6, without an increase in food energy intake, indicating an increase in the nutrient density of the diet;19
  
• positive effects on the intakes of ten nutrients without an adverse effect on fat or cholesterol;14
  
• more effective than other cash income or SNAP benefits at improving preschoolers' intake of key nutrients;14 and
  
• decline in the rate of iron deficiency anemia from 7.8 percent in 1975 to 2.9 percent in 1985 which the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention attributed to both a general improvement in iron nutrition and participation in WIC and other public nutrition programs.20
  

Improved Infant Feeding Practices

WIC promotes breastfeeding as the optimal method of infant feeding. Studies show:

• WIC participants who reported having received advice to breastfeed their babies from the WIC clinic were more likely to breastfeed than other WIC participants or eligible nonparticipants;18
  
• WIC breastfeeding policy and program activities were strengthened in the early 1990's;
  
• Between 1996 and 2001, the percentage of WIC mothers breastfeeding in the hospital increased by almost 25 percent, from 46.6 to 58.2 percent;
  
• The percentage of WIC infants breastfeeding at six months of age increased by 61.2 percent, from 12.9 to 20.8 percent; and,
  
• For those infants who are fed infant formula, 90 percent received iron-fortified formula, which is recommended for nearly all non-breastfed infants for the first year of life.1
  

Immunization Rates and Regular Source of Medical Care

A regular schedule of immunizations is recommended for children from birth to 2 years of age, which coincides with the period in which many low-income children participate in WIC. Studies have found significantly improved rates of childhood immunization and of having a regular source of medical care associated with WIC participation.19

Improved Cognitive Development

Cognitive development influences school achievement and behavior. Participation in the WIC Program has been shown to:

• improve vocabulary scores for children of mothers who participated in WIC prenatally; and
  
• significantly improve memory for numbers for children enrolled in WIC after the first year of life.19
  

Improved Preconceptional Nutritional Status

Preconceptional nutritional status is an important determinant of birth outcome. A previous pregnancy can cause nutritional depletion of the postpartum woman, particularly those with high parity and short interpregnancy intervals. One study found:

• women enrolled in WIC both during pregnancy and postpartum periods delivered infants with higher mean birth weights in a subsequent pregnancy than women who received WIC prenatally only; and,
  
• the women who received postpartum benefits had higher hemoglobin levels and lower risk of maternal obesity at the onset of the subsequent pregnancy.2
  

Other Improved Outcomes

WIC participation has also been shown to:

• increase the likelihood of children having a regular provider of medical care;19 and,
  
• improve growth rates.6,8
  

Summary:

• WIC reduces fetal deaths and infant mortality.
  
• WIC reduces low birthweight rates and increases the duration of pregnancy.
  
• WIC improves the growth of nutritionally at-risk infants and children.
  
• WIC decreases the incidence of iron deficiency anemia in children.
  
• WIC improves the dietary intake of pregnant and postpartum women and improves weight gain in pregnant women.
  
• Pregnant women participating in WIC receive prenatal care earlier.
  
• Children enrolled in WIC are more likely to have a regular source of medical care and have more up to date immunizations.
  
• WIC helps get children ready to start school: children who receive WIC benefits demonstrate improved intellectual development.
  
• WIC significantly improves children’s diets.
  

WIC reduces fetal death and infant mortality. I don't see how you can call yourself pro-life and be against WIC. Of course, you will notice that I don't call you pro-life, which you aren't, but rather anti-abortion, a BIG difference. But it doesn't really matter because people who are heartless can find numerous ways to justify it.

Governments have to find reasons to keep their programs going and thus have the (tax) funds to run them. When the people running the WIC offices tell those who apply that they have to have a medical reason to be on it, and they don't have one, these workers will make something up.

I don't believe that children will die if WIC wasn't around. BEFORE WIC came into existance, there was not ONE death that came from a lack of cheerioes or juicy juice. There are many programs that can be eliminated and you can be assured that people will not die because of it. I was on WIC when my first 5 were born and until they reached 5 years old. Then I didn't get it anymore. My last 5 never had WIC and they're not malnurished or dead. My neighbor's son had WIC till he was 2. He stopped getting WIC vouchers when he was 2 and now he's 5 even though she was still eligible for them. He's not dead or unhealthy for that lack of 3 years he didn't get any WIC vouchers. It is bogus!

[Cleo's Mom 257]

Governments have to find reasons to keep their programs going and thus have the (tax) funds to run them. When the people running the WIC offices tell those who apply that they have to have a medical reason to be on it, and they don't have one, these workers will make something up.

I don't believe that children will die if WIC wasn't around. BEFORE WIC came into existance, there was not ONE death that came from a lack of cheerioes or juicy juice. There are many programs that can be eliminated and you can be assured that people will not die because of it. I was on WIC when my first 5 were born and until they reached 5 years old. Then I didn't get it anymore. My last 5 never had WIC and they're not malnurished or dead. My neighbor's son had WIC till he was 2. He stopped getting WIC vouchers when he was 2 and now he's 5 even though she was still eligible for them. He's not dead or unhealthy for that lack of 3 years he didn't get any WIC vouchers. It is bogus!

Have you written to your congressman and two senators to tell them they should eliminate all these programs and why? And better yet, tell them to run on eliminating these "wasteful" and unnecessary programs. And see how willing they are to go public with their objections to these programs, especially "independent" Lieberman.

[Cleo's Mom 257]

Governments have to find reasons to keep their programs going and thus have the (tax) funds to run them. When the people running the WIC offices tell those who apply that they have to have a medical reason to be on it, and they don't have one, these workers will make something up.

I don't believe that children will die if WIC wasn't around. BEFORE WIC came into existance, there was not ONE death that came from a lack of cheerioes or juicy juice. There are many programs that can be eliminated and you can be assured that people will not die because of it. I was on WIC when my first 5 were born and until they reached 5 years old. Then I didn't get it anymore. My last 5 never had WIC and they're not malnurished or dead. My neighbor's son had WIC till he was 2. He stopped getting WIC vouchers when he was 2 and now he's 5 even though she was still eligible for them. He's not dead or unhealthy for that lack of 3 years he didn't get any WIC vouchers. It is bogus!

Well, put me squarely in the camp of wanting my tax dollars to go for cheerios and juicy juice NOT a big government tax break to Goldman Sachs. Let them do without!!

[pattygreen 5]

Have you written to your congressman and two senators to tell them they should eliminate all these programs and why? And better yet, tell them to run on eliminating these "wasteful" and unnecessary programs. And see how willing they are to go public with their objections to these programs, especially "independent" Lieberman.

This is exactly why the government should stop producing all these stupid, wasteful spending programs. Once a program is started, you can't get rid of them. You just continue to pay for them forever. They just keep adding to them and adding to them more and more and before you know it, we're right where we are right now. In financial collapse and destuction and bankruptcy! The people cry out when you take away something that you have been enabling them with. When you take away their WIC, for example, then they have to use the money that they have been using to go out to dinner once a week on juicy-juice and milk instead. They get angry when the gov. takes away something that they have become dependant on. Therefore, the gov. shouldn't have even started giving free things to the people. People should have to use their noggins and figure out ways to come up with the extra 20 bucks every week to buy 'extra' groceries. How about lawn mowing? Or shoveling snow in the winter? Aside from your regular job. How about selling those craft projects you're so good at making on ebay once a week to come up with some extra money for heat next winter. Why not have a tag sale. Just one tag sale can come up with enough money to fill your oil tank next year. Put it away and save for that hard time when it's cold out. Then you won't need to apply for energy assistance. Let me tell you, if the government didn't provide it for you, you would do just those kinds of things and many other things to stay warm next winter. But because the feds are there to provide it for you, you take it. You become dependent on them and the rest of America is stuck with your bill! It's just not right.

[pattygreen 5]

Well, put me squarely in the camp of wanting my tax dollars to go for cheerios and juicy juice NOT a big government tax break to Goldman Sachs. Let them do without!!

The government should never give away our tax dollars to corporations either. People who are in business need to take care of their own finances or get out of the business.

[Cleo's Mom 257]

This is exactly why the government should stop producing all these stupid, wasteful spending programs. Once a program is started, you can't get rid of them. You just continue to pay for them forever. They just keep adding to them and adding to them more and more and before you know it, we're right where we are right now. In financial collapse and destuction and bankruptcy! The people cry out when you take away something that you have been enabling them with. When you take away their WIC, for example, then they have to use the money that they have been using to go out to dinner once a week on juicy-juice and milk instead. They get angry when the gov. takes away something that they have become dependant on. Therefore, the gov. shouldn't have even started giving free things to the people. People should have to use their noggins and figure out ways to come up with the extra 20 bucks every week to buy 'extra' groceries. How about lawn mowing? Or shoveling snow in the winter? Aside from your regular job. How about selling those craft projects you're so good at making on ebay once a week to come up with some extra money for heat next winter. Why not have a tag sale. Just one tag sale can come up with enough money to fill your oil tank next year. Put it away and save for that hard time when it's cold out. Then you won't need to apply for energy assistance. Let me tell you, if the government didn't provide it for you, you would do just those kinds of things and many other things to stay warm next winter. But because the feds are there to provide it for you, you take it. You become dependent on them and the rest of America is stuck with your bill! It's just not right.

I'll take that as a "no".

Here's what I support: When the banks gamble with and lose our money, it should be made up by all the executives liquidating their assests, and paying back that money. Then maybe they would qualify for section 8 housing. There's a plan that I could get behind.

[Cleo's Mom 257]

This is exactly why the government should stop producing all these stupid, wasteful spending programs. Once a program is started, you can't get rid of them. You just continue to pay for them forever. They just keep adding to them and adding to them more and more and before you know it, we're right where we are right now. In financial collapse and destuction and bankruptcy! The people cry out when you take away something that you have been enabling them with. When you take away their WIC, for example, then they have to use the money that they have been using to go out to dinner once a week on juicy-juice and milk instead. They get angry when the gov. takes away something that they have become dependant on. Therefore, the gov. shouldn't have even started giving free things to the people. People should have to use their noggins and figure out ways to come up with the extra 20 bucks every week to buy 'extra' groceries. How about lawn mowing? Or shoveling snow in the winter? Aside from your regular job. How about selling those craft projects you're so good at making on ebay once a week to come up with some extra money for heat next winter. Why not have a tag sale. Just one tag sale can come up with enough money to fill your oil tank next year. Put it away and save for that hard time when it's cold out. Then you won't need to apply for energy assistance. Let me tell you, if the government didn't provide it for you, you would do just those kinds of things and many other things to stay warm next winter. But because the feds are there to provide it for you, you take it. You become dependent on them and the rest of America is stuck with your bill! It's just not right.

Here's another suggestion. You claim to know all these families where you live who don't need the government goodies they receive. The next time you see one of them offer them the suggestions you haver posted here so that they can become more self sufficient and not rely on the government for their kid's lunch, among other things. You obviously don't think your elected officials are going to enact any changes, so it's up to you.