quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic

LOTS of benefits...yeah that does it....
Freed said the agency has “not calculated how much fraud may exist in Kansas,” but that federal officials estimate it is between 1 percent and 4 percent within the food stamp program alone and that there is no reason to think the incidence is less here than occurs nationally. According to agency records, 318,988 Kansans — 176,417 adults and 142,571 children — were on the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP, formerly known as food stamps) last month. The average per-person benefit was $121. Also in June, 18,550 people received cash assistance that averaged about $111 per person per month. In addition, 8,163 families received child-care subsidies that averaged $353 per month. The federal government pays for most of the three programs, which together last fiscal year cost taxpayers more than $537 million. “They all have potential for fraud,” Freed said, noting that last year the department’s fraud unit won 240 civil judgments against beneficiaries for the return of $941,000 in wrongfully obtained welfare benefits. The fraud unit investigated 2,714 cases last year, up significantly from 1,213 the year before. - See more at: http://www.khi.org/news/article/kansas-doubles-down-welfare-fraud/#sthash.4vRi8fmU.dpuf

quote:

ORIGINAL: slvemike4u

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: slvemike4u

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: MercTech

quote:

ORIGINAL: joether
Amusing that Republicans in Kansas think the poor is a bigger drain on their resources than wealthy corporations that demand everything from reduction in taxes, to prime real estate to build upon. If a wealth person shows up, Republicans will kneel down to suck their cock, but if anyone else has a problem, 'fuck 'em'.
I saw this story last night and thought it just sounded absolutely silly. The ATM cards are limited to $25/day in charges. Most people shop by the week rather than the day. Poor people working 40 hours/week at minimal wage now have to trudge off to the market on their way home to handle the food purchases. Its like Republicans wish to give the wealthy every convenience but be an absolute dick to the poor. Because we all know that being financially poor is such an easy thing to handle....
Yet per many sources, each of these ATM cards charge a fee of $0.85 after the first transaction. So that is six days financial institutions are gaining $0.85 of the poor. In Kansas (per most sources) place the poor at over 15,500 in the last few moments. That's $0.85 per card holder each day. That Republicans want to keep the poor from gaming the system is silly compared to how easily the wealthy do it already.
The Republicans at state and federal levels have been going out of their way to earn bad press. In a time they should be trying to minimize the damages, they are showing they still dont understand the concept of 'running good government'.

Placing limitations on where and for what government subsidies may be used for is a reasonable stipulation and is routinely found in State regulations all around the country. And limiting how much CASH a person can withdraw from a government debit card while placing few limits on PURCHASES made with the debit card is not unusual at all. It isn't a Republican thing, it is a governmental micro management thing.
I'd say $25 a day is low but the limitation concept is valid. The last time I was forced to use an EBT card (drawing unemployment compensation from Illinois) the cash out limit was $100 a day. But no limit on making purchases. And, the Illinois EBT cad was blocked from being used at those third party ATMs you find in casinos and convenience stores. But you could still do debit card purchases at convenience stores.
Move along, these aren't the Republican droids you are looking for.

It doesn't matter that KS will be in the majority in passing a limitation on the usage of EBT cards. It doesn't matter that the limitations are, pretty much, the same as the Federal requirements (+cruise ships). It only matters that it was a Republicans passing it, and something could be written mocking them. That's it.

Let's ignore the rest of it....let's ignore the tax cutting, the deficit shortfall,the cuts to education and other services.
It's a republican gov.and a republican led statehouse,so let's ignore all of that,
LOL

Start a thread about it, Mike. This thread was about the legislation that is being passed, regarding limitations to the use of EBT cards. That has nothing to do with tax cutting, deficit shortfalls, or cuts to anything else.
Apparently, you forgot about that.

Bullshit DS,it's called thread drift
No need to start a new thread,it's all patches of the same quilt.

• A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  
• Personal Responsibility
  
• Help for the truly needy
  
• Limited Government
  
• Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)
  

quote:

joether:
Least not forget, that the poor can and do vote as well. If they decide they want better government without Republicans, that is their right.

quote:

ORIGINAL: joether


Least not forget, that the poor can and do vote as well. If they decide they want better government without Republicans, that is their right.

quote:

ORIGINAL: thishereboi

quote:

ORIGINAL: joether


Least not forget, that the poor can and do vote as well. If they decide they want better government without Republicans, that is their right.

Yea, that worked out really good for the folks in Detroit, didn't it?

quote:

ORIGINAL: thishereboi

quote:

ORIGINAL: joether


Least not forget, that the poor can and do vote as well. If they decide they want better government without Republicans, that is their right.

Yea, that worked out really good for the folks in Detroit, didn't it?

quote:

What do most of these ailing cities all have in common? Well, consider that the vast majority are located in states with forced unions, non-right-to-work states.

Right-to-work laws attract people and businesses," says labor economist Richard Vedder of Ohio University. "Non-right-to-work states repel them." His statistics show that cities in states with right-to-work laws have sturdier tax bases and higher employment levels...

Unions control state legislatures and city halls in non-right-to-work states, so it can become politically paralyzing to try to fix the problem of runaway labor costs.

Another common trait of financially troubled cities: years and years of liberal governance.

For at least the last 20 years major U.S. cities have been playgrounds for left-wing experiments — high taxes on the rich; sanctuaries for illegal immigrants; super-minimum wage rules; strict gun-control laws (that actually contribute to high crime rates); regulations and paperwork that make it onerous to open a business or develop on your own property; crony capitalism with contracts going to political donors and friends; and failing schools ruled by teacher unions, with little competition or productivity...

quote:

ORIGINAL: thishereboi

quote:

ORIGINAL: joether
Least not forget, that the poor can and do vote as well. If they decide they want better government without Republicans, that is their right.

Yea, that worked out really good for the folks in Detroit, didn't it?

quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44

quote:

ORIGINAL: thishereboi

quote:

ORIGINAL: joether
Least not forget, that the poor can and do vote as well. If they decide they want better government without Republicans, that is their right.

Yea, that worked out really good for the folks in Detroit, didn't it?

an excellent point, and theres this too:

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

true, if your dumping pigshit in my drinking water is the only way for you to make a buck, our collective market has decided you need to get a job at KFC. Cuz we want clean water.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity


Many small townships suffer financial hardships due to unfunded federal mandates and environmental rules etc

quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44

a number of things:

from what I can tell, you got this from a Wikipedia page.

Actually I copied from the graphic in your post and found it in there.

There is no mention on that page of “91% being republican” (whatever that means) nor could I find that information after a further internet search. so this would be a good place to provide a source.

that said, there are maybe 6 communities in that list that actually qualify, population wise, as cities.

For those who are unaware of what a city is:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/City



That means everything else is a town, which are overwhelmingly not “run” (if that is what you are referring to) by mayors, but rather by often part time “town supervisors “ and a part time “town board.”

Please see above

as far as those cities go, 5 of them are college cities,

Five out of 100

which the site itself points out substantially lowers median income values.

Above you claimed you could not find the site.

Throw the college kids out and the numbers change substantially. Leaving them in renders the data meaningless.

5 out of 100 makes it useless


For the survey, a large city is defined as a city with a population of 250,000 or more.

By this definition there are only 77 in america.



Percentage of residents living below the U.S. government established poverty income level is listed, based on 2012 US Census estimates.[2]

1.Detroit, Michigan 42.3% hasn’t elected a Republican mayor since 1961
2.Cleveland, Ohio 36.1% since 1989
3.Cincinnati, Ohio 34.1% since 1984
4.Miami, Florida 31.7% has never had a Republican mayor
5.Fresno, California 31.5%
6.Buffalo, New York 30.9% hasn’t elected one since 1954
7.Newark, New Jersey 30.4% since 1907
8.Toledo, Ohio 30.1%
9.Milwaukee, Wisconsin 29.9% since 1908
10.St. Louis, Missouri 29.2% since 1949

Your list seems not to mesh well with this one.

Top 101 cities with the most people below the poverty level, excluding cities with 15% or more of residents in college and with the median age below 28 (population 50,000+)

http://www.city-data.com/top2/c3.html


< Message edited by thompsonx -- 4/8/2015 8:31:53 AM >

(in reply to bounty44)

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity


Many small townships suffer financial hardships due to unfunded federal mandates and environmental rules etc

How is that some view those problems as belonging to one or the other political party?

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: slvemike4u

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: slvemike4u

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: MercTech

quote:

ORIGINAL: joether
Amusing that Republicans in Kansas think the poor is a bigger drain on their resources than wealthy corporations that demand everything from reduction in taxes, to prime real estate to build upon. If a wealth person shows up, Republicans will kneel down to suck their cock, but if anyone else has a problem, 'fuck 'em'.
I saw this story last night and thought it just sounded absolutely silly. The ATM cards are limited to $25/day in charges. Most people shop by the week rather than the day. Poor people working 40 hours/week at minimal wage now have to trudge off to the market on their way home to handle the food purchases. Its like Republicans wish to give the wealthy every convenience but be an absolute dick to the poor. Because we all know that being financially poor is such an easy thing to handle....
Yet per many sources, each of these ATM cards charge a fee of $0.85 after the first transaction. So that is six days financial institutions are gaining $0.85 of the poor. In Kansas (per most sources) place the poor at over 15,500 in the last few moments. That's $0.85 per card holder each day. That Republicans want to keep the poor from gaming the system is silly compared to how easily the wealthy do it already.
The Republicans at state and federal levels have been going out of their way to earn bad press. In a time they should be trying to minimize the damages, they are showing they still dont understand the concept of 'running good government'.

Placing limitations on where and for what government subsidies may be used for is a reasonable stipulation and is routinely found in State regulations all around the country. And limiting how much CASH a person can withdraw from a government debit card while placing few limits on PURCHASES made with the debit card is not unusual at all. It isn't a Republican thing, it is a governmental micro management thing.
I'd say $25 a day is low but the limitation concept is valid. The last time I was forced to use an EBT card (drawing unemployment compensation from Illinois) the cash out limit was $100 a day. But no limit on making purchases. And, the Illinois EBT cad was blocked from being used at those third party ATMs you find in casinos and convenience stores. But you could still do debit card purchases at convenience stores.
Move along, these aren't the Republican droids you are looking for.

It doesn't matter that KS will be in the majority in passing a limitation on the usage of EBT cards. It doesn't matter that the limitations are, pretty much, the same as the Federal requirements (+cruise ships). It only matters that it was a Republicans passing it, and something could be written mocking them. That's it.

Let's ignore the rest of it....let's ignore the tax cutting, the deficit shortfall,the cuts to education and other services.
It's a republican gov.and a republican led statehouse,so let's ignore all of that,
LOL

Start a thread about it, Mike. This thread was about the legislation that is being passed, regarding limitations to the use of EBT cards. That has nothing to do with tax cutting, deficit shortfalls, or cuts to anything else.
Apparently, you forgot about that.

Bullshit DS,it's called thread drift
No need to start a new thread,it's all patches of the same quilt.

Gotcha. So, the fact that the KS GOP is being mocked because they are adding cruise ship use to the list of Federal prohibitions that KS EBT receivers can use EBT is okay because of other things? Seriously?

quote:

ORIGINAL: joether

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: slvemike4u

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: slvemike4u

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: MercTech

quote:

ORIGINAL: joether
Amusing that Republicans in Kansas think the poor is a bigger drain on their resources than wealthy corporations that demand everything from reduction in taxes, to prime real estate to build upon. If a wealth person shows up, Republicans will kneel down to suck their cock, but if anyone else has a problem, 'fuck 'em'.
I saw this story last night and thought it just sounded absolutely silly. The ATM cards are limited to $25/day in charges. Most people shop by the week rather than the day. Poor people working 40 hours/week at minimal wage now have to trudge off to the market on their way home to handle the food purchases. Its like Republicans wish to give the wealthy every convenience but be an absolute dick to the poor. Because we all know that being financially poor is such an easy thing to handle....
Yet per many sources, each of these ATM cards charge a fee of $0.85 after the first transaction. So that is six days financial institutions are gaining $0.85 of the poor. In Kansas (per most sources) place the poor at over 15,500 in the last few moments. That's $0.85 per card holder each day. That Republicans want to keep the poor from gaming the system is silly compared to how easily the wealthy do it already.
The Republicans at state and federal levels have been going out of their way to earn bad press. In a time they should be trying to minimize the damages, they are showing they still dont understand the concept of 'running good government'.

Placing limitations on where and for what government subsidies may be used for is a reasonable stipulation and is routinely found in State regulations all around the country. And limiting how much CASH a person can withdraw from a government debit card while placing few limits on PURCHASES made with the debit card is not unusual at all. It isn't a Republican thing, it is a governmental micro management thing.
I'd say $25 a day is low but the limitation concept is valid. The last time I was forced to use an EBT card (drawing unemployment compensation from Illinois) the cash out limit was $100 a day. But no limit on making purchases. And, the Illinois EBT cad was blocked from being used at those third party ATMs you find in casinos and convenience stores. But you could still do debit card purchases at convenience stores.
Move along, these aren't the Republican droids you are looking for.

It doesn't matter that KS will be in the majority in passing a limitation on the usage of EBT cards. It doesn't matter that the limitations are, pretty much, the same as the Federal requirements (+cruise ships). It only matters that it was a Republicans passing it, and something could be written mocking them. That's it.

Let's ignore the rest of it....let's ignore the tax cutting, the deficit shortfall,the cuts to education and other services.
It's a republican gov.and a republican led statehouse,so let's ignore all of that,
LOL

Start a thread about it, Mike. This thread was about the legislation that is being passed, regarding limitations to the use of EBT cards. That has nothing to do with tax cutting, deficit shortfalls, or cuts to anything else.
Apparently, you forgot about that.

Bullshit DS,it's called thread drift
No need to start a new thread,it's all patches of the same quilt.

Gotcha. So, the fact that the KS GOP is being mocked because they are adding cruise ship use to the list of Federal prohibitions that KS EBT receivers can use EBT is okay because of other things? Seriously?

That Republican Legislatures of Kansas needs to clarify where the cards can be used is being mocked. Since from the OP, its asked 'Does Kansas have a port city with cruise ships'? Anyone that knows the state of Kansas, also knows the state is not tied directly to the ocean. Directly with a port city, or by river.

Rather than saying it cant be used on cruise ships to state "This card can only be used within the confines of the State of Kansas". How difficult was that to understand and release? Apparently to much for the dimwitted Republicans in Kansas....