The “War On Poverty” Has Cost Three Times What All Of America’s Actual Wars Have Cost

food-stamp

Welfare has grown 19% under President Obama, that’s two and a half times greater than any other welfare increase in the history of the country.

But remember, Obama wears the “food stamps president” title as a badge of honor.

(CNSNews.com) – Federal and state welfare assistance has grown almost 19 percent under President Barack Obama, according to the conservative Heritage Foundation.

All in all, there are 79 means-tested federal welfare programs, at a cost approaching $1 trillion annually, said Heritage Senior Research Fellow Robert Rector.

Rector conducted a comprehensive analysis of spending for government assistance programs, ranging from food, education and childcare programs to housing and medical care.

Since Fiscal Year 2009, federal and state welfare spending has risen from $779.9 billion to $927.2 billion, an increase of 18.8 percent. That fiscal year includes spending from Oct. 1, 2008 to Sept. 30, 2009.

And then there’s this:

According to Rector, the government has spent $19.8 trillion (in inflation-adjusted 2011 dollars) on means-tested welfare since President Lyndon B. Johnson launched the War on Poverty began in the 1960s.

“In comparison,” he wrote, “the cost of all military wars in U.S. history from the Revolutionary War through the current war in Afghanistan has been $6.98 trillion.”

“The War on Poverty has cost three times as much as all other wars combined,” he said.

I’d not say that there is no waste in military spending. The military could use a budget haircut not unlike every other part of the federal budget.

But the most pressing budget problem in America is run-away spending on social entitlements. We just can’t afford them any more.

Rob Port is the editor of SayAnythingBlog.com. In 2011 he was a finalist for the Watch Dog of the Year from the Sam Adams Alliance and winner of the Americans For Prosperity Award for Online Excellence. In 2013 the Washington Post named SAB one of the nation's top state-based political blogs, and named Rob one of the state's best political reporters. He writes a weekly column for several North Dakota newspapers, and also serves as a policy fellow for the North Dakota Policy Council.

Related posts

  • JustRuss

    There are many who would argue that they would much rather spend that 6.8Trillion on people here, than fighting wars over there.

    I am not one of them. And those same people are likely completely unaware of the total amount spent on this.

    • Jamer Morrow

      Without taxes people could spend their hard earned money on what they wanted. If you want to help people through charity you could spend what you want. Same goes for war. War should be paid through volunteer taxation and volunteers to fight the war. If people won’t volunteer is the war worth fighting?

      • robert108

        We already have a volunteer military, so you have no point. Second, national defense is a Constitutional requirement. You know about the Constitution, right?

    • robert108

      Unfortunately for “those people”, the fact that three times as much has already been spent with no results means the money on wars was better spent. We are still free, while the poor are still poor. Facts.

  • robert108

    The casualties of that war include the black family. The Democrat/KKK Party fights on.

    • Gern Blanston

      You mentioned “black family” and you’re a conservative: therefore you are racist!

  • Jamer Morrow

    The total amounts are much more than that. If we did not have government entitlements we would have more people in the work force, people would save more for a rainy day, taxes have moved businesses overseas, employers hire less people, etc… The costs of the war do not include the inflation to pay for the wars, the cost of human lives, future costs of healthcare, rising commodity prices during war time, loss of trade to war battered areas, waste of resources for war, etc… The list of other problems associate with the war on poverty and wars in general is enormous.

  • Neiman

    Conservatives always maintained that you cannot, as the liberals demand, just throw money at problems and if you throw enough, expect them to go away. The War on Poverty was always a fathomless Money Pit.

    The War on Poverty did accomplish two things that we must, if we are honest, give liberals credit for: (1) It enslaved tens of million of Americans to the Democrat Welfare Plantation. (2) It produced a permanent, large voting block for the Democrat Party as voting for them could be counted on to send more money to those same poor people.

    • Jamer Morrow

      Not to mention that money was inflated or borrowed to pay for these things which have bid up prices and raised the cost of living.

    • Emil Kashuntz

      Of course if you throw money at the rich it solves all problems.

      • Neiman

        A. No one is throwing money at the rich.
        B. The rich pay something like 85% of ALL taxes. Poor people in America pay virtually no taxes.
        C. As they prosper jobs are created and everyone prospers. Poor people do not create jobs or prosperity.

        • http://realitybasedbob.sayanythingblog.com/ realitybasedbob

          Old Pal, the rich are richer now.
          When does the trickle down start or why have they failed to create the jobs their tax cuts were supposed to create?

          • jl

            Right- As their waelth increases, so does their share of the tax burden. And the problem would be….

          • donwalk

            Wasn’t the trickle up wealth supposed to have started in January of 2009? Where did it get delayed?

          • http://realitybasedbob.sayanythingblog.com/ realitybasedbob

            We’ve done quite well, considering the do nothing but obstruct gop congress.

          • donwalk

            Oh-h-h, you mean the Senate that blocks everything that comes out of the House OR
            don’t you mean all of the spending, new regulations and policies that are being dictated by your crowned king, B.O.? OR shouldn’t you be referring to the years where LIberals had the House, the Senate and the Presidency?
            Think about it, sometimes it gets really difficult to make an honest decision in your mind.

            Subject: [ndsayanything] Re: The “ War On Poverty” Has Cost Three Times What All Of America’ s Actual Wars Have Cost

          • robert108

            The Congress has done what they were elected to do in the thumping of 2010: stop obama’s crazy deficit spending on his cronies.

          • robert108

            That’s the obstructionist Reid Senate, propagandist.

          • two_amber_lamps

            We’ll all be poorer since your glorious Comrade Obama keeps inflating the currency…. soon the fascist will turn the US into a Weimar republic… or Zimbabwe. But that’s social justice right? We can all be equally poor….

            You libs are sociopathic.

          • Emil Kashuntz

            Thanks for joining the battle. The right wing dingers need to know there are real people who do not watch Fox as the only source of information and who do not face Rush and pray for tax breaks.

          • Onslaught1066

            Does Beatrice know you’ve been stepping out on her?

          • Emil Kashuntz

            How is that lying working for you. Do your homework and see if you can find out what name my wife really uses. Your past performance has shown your inability to get the truth. Since your nature has been exposed what is the point?

          • Onslaught1066

            You have a wife?

            What kind of desperate slut would marry you?

            Anyway, that didn’t answer the question.

            I guess your cowardice streak remains intact.

          • robert108

            Bush’s low tax rates created jobs until Shumer popped the Democrat affirmative action home loan mandate bubble. The jobs started shrinking when obama was elected, and won’t come back until after he’s gone. He is the enemy of private sector growth, and businesses know that.

      • robert108

        Typical liberal brain fart; social spending is throwing money at the poor/low achievers, in the hope that it will somehow turn them into productive citizens. It doesn’t, and just wastes our money on greedy govt.

  • Gern Blanston

    I heard a fascinating discussion about this topic on NPR recently. Insightful, intelligent – except for the part where they addressed the conservative claim that the money spent was for naught. The analysis? “No it wasn’t” When queried about the fact that poverty is no lower now than in 1965, the response was, ” think of how much worse we would have been if we hadn’t spent all of that money.” Deep. Now I know we should continue the spending – clearly there is no other option.

    • Emil Kashuntz

      Spend the money on tax cuts for the rich, the money will trickle down to the poor. Ya sure ya betcha.

      • jl

        Emily, you do realize that because “the rich” (whatever that means) have “x” amount of money, doesn’t mean that you have less, right? It’ not a zero-sum game. However, maybe going on the couch with a professional will help you with your unhealthy fixation on those not like you (the rich).

        • Emil Kashuntz

          I had pizza once and the guy I was with ate 90% of the pizza. Somehow I got less, do you know of some magic math where that does not happen. Oh, yea I forgot. Make a bigger pizza the guy still gets 90%, but now my piece is bigger. Somehow in the real world it ain’t working. The working class is getting less than ever, but you can sell it to the Hoopleheads.

          • Onslaught1066

            Yes, it’s called “don’t take your husband, Beatrice, out to lunch with you” He’s a big fat pig and could stand to lose a pound or 50.

          • Emil Kashuntz

            Phone is working fine, but the coward will not call.

          • Onslaught1066

            When you give me your real phone number I will call you.

          • Bat One

            I’m curious. In your mythical analogy, who pays for the pizza? If you do, you’re a pluperfect moron for allowing the other guy to eat most of what is inarguably your pizza. OTOH, if he paid, then you should be grateful for what little bit he allowed you to have.

            Of course, if the taxpayers paid for your pizza, there is something horribly wrong since the rest of us can’t afford your appetite and shouldn’t be obliged to pay for your pizza or anyone else’s. But come November 6, we will start to put a stop to your abuse of your fellow Americans’ generosity. Buy your own f*cking pizza.

          • Onslaught1066

            It’s most likely a gubbmint cheese lovers pizza.

            Sorry, couldn’t resist.

          • Emil Kashuntz

            Republicans would like us all to believe they bought the pizza. Perhaps you are that gullible, but those same Republicans are now telling us they put the oil under North Dakota.

          • robert108

            Our free enterprise system is capable of supplying as much pizza as you can eat, but you have to work for it, which explains why you are experiencing a personal pizza shortage. Poor baby.

      • donwalk

        Spend the money on creating government dependancy and the poverty will trickle up until everyone is equal and there are no opportunities for our children and grandchildren. Please pass that on to your children that haven’t been aborted.

        • robert108

          If you don’t like redistribution here, wait ’till obama starts with his real agenda, GLOBAL redistribution.

  • Hannitized, Proofs obsession

    You mean American tax payers get something back instead of killing innocent children, women and men in Iraq? Yeah, like that totally bums me out and stuff. /sarcasm

    Great! There are so many wars we shouldn’t have been involved where we needlessly lost American lives and treasure. Better the money stay here to help Americans rather than kill others in other nations, needlessly.

    • robert108

      Fact: Saddam killed more iraqi civilians that any incidental casualties inflicted by our military while the terrorists were using them as human shields.
      The only war we shouldn’t have been involved in was obama’s illegal one in Libya. When we kill the terrorists over there(Iraq), they don’t kill us over here(9/11, and during obama’s reign).

      • Hannitized, Proofs obsession

        Our actions drew Muslim terrorists to Iraq, like our actions drew Muslim terrorists to America. It also created white American terrorists in America. Your ignorance knows know bounds.

        • robert108

          You lie, as AQ was already in Iraq, being supported by Saddam, which was one of the real reasons we went in there. Saddam allowed them to build training areas in N Iraq, where they rehearsed 9/11. obama has created American terrorists at home, and your racism is noted.
          When you lie, I smack you with the truth.

          • Guest

            Any proof of the bullshit you are peddling?

          • robert108

            The facts, not your juvenile profanity.

          • Bat One

            Look up the history of Abu Nidal for starters. Then the bounty paid by Saddam for Palestinian terrorist suicide bombers.

            Finally, the report of the National Commission on Terrorism Against the US, including details of Saddam’s role in international terrorism, can be found here (http://www.9-11commission.gov/hearings/hearing3/witness_yaphe.htm). Let one of the adults know if you have trouble with the long words.

        • Bat One

          White American terrorists” huh? Ah, yes. The race card again. Well, Richard Reid isn’t white. Neither is Carlos L. Bledsoe, aka Abdulhakim Mujahid Muhammad, or Mark Kools, aka Hasan Karim Akbar, or Nidal Hasan, or Farooque Ahmed.

          To be sure, Timothy McVeigh, Eric Robert Rudolph, and Jared Loughner are all white. However there is no evidence to suggest that their terrorist activities were prompted by American foreign or military policy as you’ve suggested.

          Your ignorance knows no bounds… and neither does your race-baiting.

          • Neiman

            Within 45 minutes of 9/11, Katie Couric was blaming Bush Middle East policies and as you can tell by Hannah above, that song is still being sung. Like Obama, to Hannah and most liberals, everything is America’s fault when people hate us, it is not the murderous terrorists, it is nor their fault, they are forced to murder because we are so bad, we make them kill.

            Obama 2012: “Dammit we make them kill!”

          • Hannitized, Proofs obsession

            I see you conveniently ignore the most recent example of an American terrorist, Wade Michael Page, who of course had 9/11 tattoos on his arms and believed that these Indians were Muslims, no doubt.

            That’s not to mention all of the others who have attacked American Sikhs, Muslims and Mexicans since our invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq.

            Then we hae our very own Phil Gray here on SAB, who threatens to kill Americans who don’t bend to his political perversion.

            Perhaps you were just ignorant of the 6 people who were murdered in cold blood? Lord knows there are so many things you simply don’t know.

            It’s important to draw the contrast because sbark is riding his high horse again, pitifully. It’s just balancing the scales.

          • Jamer Morrow

            Republicans love war when Republicans pick the war. Democrats love war when democrats pick the war. Both parties are one and the same. Can you honesty say Obama has not been a huge disappointment in ending the wars?

          • Hannitized, Proofs obsession

            I can honestly say that Obama didn’t bring us into any needless wars like Bumbling-bush had. Obama finished the business in Iraq and did what needed to be done in Afghanistan, although now I say it’s time to come home.

          • Spartacus

            I can honestly say

            No you can’t. You’ve never professed honesty in your tenure here at SAB. You’re a blatant liar, you’re a coward that that uses multiple screen names to bolster support for your feeble arguments and bolster support and approval of your own comments. I think it’s safe to say that the last thing you are, and it probably would kill you if you tried to be, is honest. Good God, you’re the laughing stock of Liberalism and you’re too stupid to know it. I suppose that’s why you’re still here, even HuffPO and the DailyKos won’t accept you. Ever considered Little green Footballs? I hear Chuck’s looking for a few sycophants.

          • Hannitized, Proofs obsession

            Dude, please. Nobody debates you. Nobody cares what you think and you aren’t relevant in your party in ANY way. Show me one picture or any bit of evidence that shows you are relevant in your party.

          • robert108

            You never debate anything, as you don’t know how to do it.

          • robert108

            There you go, little hanni, with your delusions of adequacy and making things up. He’s smacking your lies with the truth.

          • http://proof-proofpositive.blogspot.com/ Proof

            When Hanni started out “I can honestly say…”, I thought maybe it was open mic night at the comedy club.

          • robert108

            You lie again; not only was the war against Saddam totally necessary(imagine an Iran/Saddam partnership today both with nukes and chemical/biological weapons), and obama’s war in Libya was ILLEGAL. No approval from Congress, which is Constitutionally necessary to commit our forces on foreign shores.
            obama cut and run from Iraq, and is doing the same thing in Afghanistan; the only thing he “finished” is our influence in the region.

          • Hannitized, Proofs obsession

            (imagine an Iran/Saddam partnership today both with nukes and chemical/biological weapons),

            That’s about what it would have to take, heaving imagination, because there ain’t no way that was going to happen. I bet not even you believe your own lies.

          • robert108

            No, little hanni; that’s the reality without our deposing Saddam by going into Iraq; in addition, Libya would be aggressive, since they backed off when they saw what we did to Saddam(you and the Democrats/KKK didn’t do it, of course), and add in Syria with Russia on their side, and you have a real mess. Thank God for President Bush’s vision and courage to fight the Democrat/KKK traitors and the terrorists, all at once. What a hero!

          • Bat One

            I notice you have offered no PROOF of Mr. Page’s motives. Merely speculation and a flippant, “No doubt.”

            I am no more ignorant of those 6 murders than I am of the more than 150 mostly minority kids slaughtered this year on the streets of Rahm Emanuel’s Chicago. But murders of all sorts occur every day, in the US and elsewhere. The subject here however was your race-baiting innuendo that US foreign and military policy is the cause of anti-US terrorism, both abroad and at home, and that those home-grown terrorists are white.

            And both your suggestions are bullshit.

          • Hannitized, Proofs obsession

            Oh yeah, all of the attacks on Sihks around the country where their attacker confused them with Muslim’s, referencing Osama Bin Laden, “this is for destroying our country”, and all of the other evidence of hatred and ties to 9/11 should just be dismissed so Americans can continue to pretend this was “just an isolated incident”.

            Of course there is always the possibility that Wade Page just randomly picked a sikh temple……sheer coincidence.

          • robert108

            There you go again, more racist fabrications.

          • Bat One

            As expected… more racist fabrications, more race-baiting, and the predictable clumsy attempt to avoid having to back up your leftist talking points suggestion that terrorism, here and abroad, is in response to US foreign and military policy. Once again, you’ve let your over exuberant mouth overload your juvenile ass.

          • Hannitized, Proofs obsession

            First of all, how can it be race-baiting to say our foreign policy is the cause for the terrorist attacks that occur in the U.S., Muslim terrorists included? Your ignorant and immature responses reveal that you haven’t the faintest idea of what you speak of.

            Secondly, I can’t help it that a white supremest is responsible for the murder of non-white, non-Muslim Americans. Only a juvenile nit-wit like you would ignore and defend the actions of Wade Page. That certainly doesn’t do much to your credibility for those on this site who would not be surprised to learn that you both ignore and defend the likes of a white supremacist.

            Also, you are the one race-baiting. For all of your dismissal of terrorism in America, created by the hands of whites, you do a lot to dismiss it in favor of your complaints of gang violence, blacks being the culprits. And how, based on your own criteria, does this NOT make you a race-baiter, hmmm?

            Lastly, it was a white, veteran who took multiple bullets from this white terrorist, and who asked that the other victims be tend to first, even before his own well-being. This represents the majority of Americans. Americans that haven’t been taken over by the radicals of your party who believe themselves and others to be more American than others, a trait that is shared with white supremacists.

            You haven’t the slightest idea what’s happening, do you?

          • Bat One

            Another helping of race-bating, this time with a topping of name-calling. Typical liberal menu: lots of fluff and little to no substance. Your implication that domestic terrorism is somehow a white-only endeavor is fetid nonsense, while your suggestion that terrorism world-wide is the result of American foreign and/or military policies is vile and despicable.

            And of course it’s worth noting that you STILL have not offered any proof that Mr. Pagan’s murders were committed either n response to US policies or as anti-Muslim vengeance.

          • Hannitized, Proofs obsession

            Stop lying and creating straw man arguments, Bat. Without lying you can’t make an argument. May I remind you of what I actually said, vs. your lies?

            “Our actions drew Muslim terrorists to Iraq, like our actions drew Muslim terrorists to America. It also created white American terrorists in America. Your ignorance knows know bounds.”

            So you lied, again. I never said domestic terrorism was white only, much like how you and your friends present Muslims and terrorism. May I also remind you that I clearly stated by mentioning white terrorism in the U.S. I was merely balancing the scales?

            “It’s important to draw the contrast because sbark is riding his high horse again, pitifully. It’s just balancing the scales.”

            I notice you didn’t rush to balance the scales and defend against sbarks race-baiting, hmmm?

            Again, without your healthy doses of race-baiting and pretending to be the victim, you really don’t have any sort of argument at all. All you have is pitiful name-calling. But, what else is new. It’s not like you ever had and argument.

            You ain’t got shit, kid.

          • robert108

            Our actions didn’t draw muslim terrorists to Iraq, and didn’t draw any muslim terrorists to America. That is the goal of islamic terrorism, to “kill all the infidels” and make the entire world a muslim country. They have been doing that for over 1400 years.

          • robert108

            And it was a muslim “soldier of allah” who murdered American soldiers at Fort Hood. Are you trying to make a point, or just doing your usual dancing, trying to change the subject when you get smacked with the truth?

          • robert108

            Typical little hanni fabrication; you cherry-pick one insane murderer, and try to play the race card and the victim card all at once.

          • Hannitized, Proofs obsession

            He murdered because he was white and wanted to punish dark skinned people who he didn’t consider Americans.

            Don’t call me racist for calling out a racist for his murders, you fucking asshole.

          • robert108

            Another homicidal maniac you misidentify as a “terrorist” to justify your lies.

          • robert108

            Those three were criminals, not terrorists. They weren’t trying to take over our country by terrorizing the citizens into surrendering.
            That’s the goal of terrorism.

    • sbark

      so by your terminology “stay here to help americans”……means to put them on infinite generational welfare?
      That is the cruelest most dispicable thing that can be done to a human being…..

      • Hannitized, Proofs obsession

        Ugh, no, that’s not what I said, but I’m sure all of our veterans, old folks collecting Social Secrity, students obtaining loans are eager to hear your hatred for them by telling them they are incapable of taking care of themselves.

        • sbark

          hmmm…..your quote: by telling them they are incapable of taking care of themselves?????
          ironic isnt it….you feel a student needing gigantic student loans which just funds Big Educ ……..is taking care of themselves?—wouldnt keeping Educ costs so that a student could work himself thru college be more in line with “taking care of themselves”?

          ….old folks needing a generational wealth distribution ponzi scheme that steals from students needing gigantic student loans is “taking care of themselves”?

          your version of people “taking care of themselves” is definitly diff than how I’d see it……but a persons love for big govt is proportional to their contempt for fellow citizens.

          • Hannitized, Proofs obsession

            “..you feel a student needing gigantic student loans which just funds Big Educ ……..is taking care of themselves?”

            Clearly you don’t understand the economics of a loan. How do you think start ups are funded, by their own finances? No, they get investments, which hopefully pays off….sometimes not.

            It’s no different. Banks get paid back with interest.

            You must really hate students and be anti-education if you don’t support the Americans system. Your version of investment and understanding loans is quite different from mine. Clearly all you care about is big business and not the American people. That’s not what the Founding Father cared about, big business. They cared for the American people.

            Me: Of the people, by the people, for the people.

            You: Of the people, by big business, for big business.

          • robert108

            Again, a liberal simply doesn’t know the difference between spending and investment. A business loan gets paid back with interest, but if there’s a default, the lender gets the capital equipment and possibly accounts receivable to cover some of the debt. Students just stop paying, and there’s nothing to recover, so it’s not “the same thing”.

        • Dave

          Says the troll who hates the military…except when he has one of them in the high grass on the golf course.

    • robert108

      Only your muslim terrorist buddies kill men women and children on purpose. That’s why it’s called TERRORISM. If they attacked the military, it would be called WAR. Get it?

      • Hannitized, Proofs obsession

        Didn’t your buddy Wade kill women on purpose at the Sikh temple? Yeah, I think so, and you still defend him from the accusation of terrorist. Get it?

        • robert108

          Not my buddy, so that’s lie number one. That left wing whack job is more like you, and he’s a murderer, not a terrorist. As with all liberals, you use words without knowing what they mean.

          • Hannitized, Proofs obsession

            The right wing terrorist had more in common with Arizona conservatives and their hate group looks like any conservative tea party gathering we have seen across America. Their beliefs are thoroughly in line with right wing extremism.

          • robert108

            Again, you lie. Terrorism is the exclusive tactic of the left wing, bent on killing all the “rich people” so that they can take over. “Right wingers”(royalists) are the targets of terrorism. As usual, little hanni, you simply parrot your talking points while knowing nothing about the words you are programmed to use.
            It’s liberals like you who preach hate, day in and day out.

          • Kerry

            Yawnnnnnn…willie the broken record…..so boring, such a parrot.

    • JustRuss

      “Those People” as I said.

  • http://nofreelunch.areavoices.com/ Kevin Flanagan

    Where’s my EBT card? Why am I being discriminated against?

  • Emil Kashuntz

    Lets talk about the cost of the war on poverty. Lets not talk about the 700 billion the Bush Tax cuts for the rich cost. Lets not talk about Mitt hiding his taxes. Lets blame Obama and the poor for all our problems. Try this one Rob. The bottom 20% of the population only gets one percent of the GDP. The top 1 percent gets 20%. Now, lets ask who the greedy pigs are?

    • Neiman

      Unless you honestly compare the percentage of taxes those top 1% pay and the amount they contribute to the GDP, as compared to the lower 20%, you are being dishonest.

    • jl

      “The bottom 20% gets only one percent of the GDP.” Wow, those lib websites you go to are really getting deperate. GDP, WTF? But let’s play along- Ok, why should they more, seeing as they pay zero income taxes?

      • jl

        “receive more”

    • sbark

      Lets talk about the long term effects of the Lefts War on Poverty……single family parents: which then of course greatly raise the odds of the next generation remaining in the same economic class
      After World War II, according to the president, “a child who was born into poverty had a slightly better than 50-50 chance of becoming middle class as an adult…. [I]t’s estimated that a child born today will only have a one-in-three chance of making it to the middle class.”……..that is a direct result of the war on Poverty committing generations to ghetto crime, drugs and single parent family’s
      Liberalism is the problem…we just beotch about the symptoms of Liberalism.

    • http://proof-proofpositive.blogspot.com/ Proof

      “Lets (sic) not talk about the 700 billion the Bush Tax cuts for the rich cost.”

      The Bush tax cuts were across the board, not just for the “rich”, your BDS, apostrophobia and attempt at class warfare notwithstanding.

      How much did they cost? Nothing. Letting people keep more of their own money doesn’t “cost” the government anything. It is only when you have the perverted notion that the government owns everything and only allows you to keep a portion of it, that tax cuts “cost” government anything. You have things backwards as usual, Lime.

    • robert108

      “…the 700 billion the Bush Tax cuts for the rich cost.” The truth is that they didn’t cost, they paid for themselves, and more. When you leave more money in the hands of private sector Americans, it generates more wealth, where taxes kill the economy and jobs.

    • Onslaught1066

      “Women are sluts, and the poor are worthless welfare cheats.”
      Mike Quinn August 11 2012.

  • Emil Kashuntz

    The war on working people has cost 700 billion. The rich have been given 700 billion in tax breaks under the Bush tax cuts. The lack of income to the government has meant the cut back in teachers, health care, and the list goes on. The rich now have the lowest tax breaks in 80 years and unemployment is the worst in many years. The hoopleheads love to believe in trickle down, and sadly they are hurt the worst.

    • Onslaught1066

      “Women are sluts, and the poor are worthless welfare cheats.”
      Mike Quinn August 11 2012

    • robert108

      Simple tax law for idiots: taxes TAKE money from those who earn it, they don’t GIVE anything to anybody but the greedy Democrat politicians for vote buying purposes.

  • Emil Kashuntz

    Women are sluts, and the poor are worthless welfare cheats. That is the Republican mantra as they beg for more tax breaks. These agents of Satan have no mercy on working people, children, or single mothers. Rush spews hate and they sop it up. This is the modern Republican party driven insane by greed. Nothing will stand between the Republicans and their drive for tax breaks for the wealthy. If children are hurt in the process so what. The unmitigated greed has blinded the Republicans to any sense of social responsibility.

    • Onslaught1066

      “Women are sluts, and the poor are worthless welfare cheats.”
      Mike Quinn August 11 2012.

      Your name will live in infamy Lime.

      • robert108

        Are you sure it’s name isn’t Mike Hunt?

  • $8194357

    When will folks wake up to the last hundred years of leftist social policies line up perfect with the stated agendas of communist deconstruction of a free western culture?
    The Democrats are following the agenda to the letter and folks just keep buying the lies…..
    So SAD. Globalists are steering us just like the sheople Stalin and Lennin said we were.

  • Rob Hys

    People are throwing around numbers about how much we have spent on welfare and war. The best I could figure as you stated is that Robert Rectors report started all this nonsense. His numbers on spending for welfare are in today’s dollar. So no we haven’t spent anywhere near what he claims. The value of a dollar today is not any were near what it was worth 40 some years ago. He has intentionally inflated the cost of welfare and intentionally deflated the cost of war. The number he gave for our cost of war were based on what we spent in all “Shooting” wars. I have to wonder what parts of our defense industry were excluded because they were not used in a shooting wars. Was it all the ICBM’s and our nuclear arsenal, nuclear submarines. What about training, and bases in the U.S. not involved in shooting wars. Or our vast intelligence gathering.communities. I for one am so vary tired of all the misleading statement made by the so called right. We need to call ya’ll the immoral and wrong.

    • Tim Hines

      Good point on the numbers! The other bit that caught my eye was 70-some “federal welfare” programs….wow… That’s a BIG number, in my opinion, and after trying to count the ones that usually qualify as welfare on my fingers and having a few digits left over, I’m curious as to what constitutes “welfare” in this analysis from The Heritage Foundation….

Top