• Welcome to BellGab.com Archive.
 

Is Romney correct about 47% of Americans?

Started by Pragmier, September 18, 2012, 05:23:32 PM

Pragmier

So there's this video going around ... and after reading comments from Romney supporters on various web sites the most common statement is similar to "about time someone tells the truth!"

Can someone prove he's correct? Seriously, according to Mitt 47% (maybe more) of Americans are Obama supporters, dependent on government, have a victim mentality, feel entitled to "you name it", take no responsibility for or care about their lives.

What is the definition of 'dependent'? Can it be true everyone that gets gov financial help is an Obama supporter? Is every poor person irresponsible? Are there no Republican voters on welfare, or receive unemployment, or anything at all from the government? Does every single Republican pay income taxes? What about wealthy Obama supporters?

If Mitt is correct, could someone help me out and point me to the data supporting his assertion?


ziznak

Romney is being a dick.  Yeah you are always going to have people that have no desire to work or support themselves and take advantage of the government to get whatever they can for free but I'm pretty sure a large majority of people receiving government help don't want to be in that position.  There's a TON of working class people unemployed and below the poverty line right now.  The people that depend on welfare to feed themselves and their families aren't in the supermarket stacking up the london broil I assure you this... they're watching their kids fight over the last package of ramon noodles. The gov is going to help you just enough to survive but that's about it... If you're stuck in a position where that's all you have then you are in no way "living it up" while uncle Sam picks up your tab.

BigDave

Quote from: Pragmier on September 18, 2012, 05:23:32 PM
So there's this video going around ... and after reading comments from Romney supporters on various web sites the most common statement is similar to "about time someone tells the truth!"

Can someone prove he's correct? Seriously, according to Mitt 47% (maybe more) of Americans are Obama supporters, dependent on government, have a victim mentality, feel entitled to "you name it", take no responsibility for or care about their lives.

What is the definition of 'dependent'? Can it be true everyone that gets gov financial help is an Obama supporter? Is every poor person irresponsible? Are there no Republican voters on welfare, or receive unemployment, or anything at all from the government? Does every single Republican pay income taxes? What about wealthy Obama supporters?

If Mitt is correct, could someone help me out and point me to the data supporting his assertion?

Damn right Romney is telling the truth!


onan

This is such a stupid statement I am not surprised Romney made it.

First off 47% not paying federal income tax is probably right being that so many are working for salaries that barely make it out of poverty. Then the fucking moron conjoins low wages with personal responsibility... said from a guy that has never had to sweat for a dime. fuck him and his dressage wife and horse.

Michael Cooper for the New York Times writes :

Quote"A major reason that many poor people no longer pay federal income taxes is the Earned Income Tax Credit, which has long been supported by Republicans. The credit was added to the tax code when Gerald Ford was president, and was expanded by President Reagan in 1986 and by George Bush Sr."

So would Romney like to see higher taxes? Or perhaps just for the poor?



Quote from: Pragmier on September 18, 2012, 05:23:32 PM
So there's this video going around ... and after reading comments from Romney supporters on various web sites the most common statement is similar to "about time someone tells the truth!"

Can someone prove he's correct? Seriously, according to Mitt 47% (maybe more) of Americans are Obama supporters, dependent on government, have a victim mentality, feel entitled to "you name it", take no responsibility for or care about their lives.

What is the definition of 'dependent'? Can it be true everyone that gets gov financial help is an Obama supporter? Is every poor person irresponsible? Are there no Republican voters on welfare, or receive unemployment, or anything at all from the government? Does every single Republican pay income taxes? What about wealthy Obama supporters?

If Mitt is correct, could someone help me out and point me to the data supporting his assertion?

Here is what the Wall St Journal had to say, the data is from the US Census Bureau Q2 2011:

http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2012/09/18/the-data-behind-romneys-47-comments/


I would point out that According to the Census Bureau quoted in this article, "49% of Americans in the second quarter of 2011 lived in a household where at least one member received a government benefit".

That is not the same as 49% of the population directly receiving benefits.  If a family of four has granny live with them and she gets Social Security, they are all included in that 49% as 'living in a household where at least one menmber...'  Or if a family of 4 has one parent getting unemployment, etc, etc.


Eddie Coyle


      Love the idea of people making 40 grand a year who think Romney is speaking for "them". DSM-V should have a section especially for them.

     

BigDave

Quote from: Eddie Coyle on September 18, 2012, 06:44:23 PM
      Love the idea of people making 40 grand a year who think Romney is speaking for "them". DSM-V should have a section especially for them.

     

Progressives don't speak for Me because Morality is very important to Me and I don't like and wont back Socialism

Pragmier

Quote from: onan on September 18, 2012, 06:29:14 PM
First off 47% not paying federal income tax is probably right being that so many are working for salaries that barely make it out of poverty. Then the fucking moron conjoins low wages with personal responsibility...

This is my problem with his comments. He's taking it upon himself to judge your moral character based on economic circumstances. And then he says they're all Obama supporters.

The Pew Research Center, reports that in 2009 15% of those with income under $20k identified themselves Republican, 35% as independents, and 42% Democrats. That's about half of the poor, not affiliated Dems, who he's writing off.

Quote from: Paper*Boy on September 18, 2012, 06:38:06 PM

Here is what the Wall St Journal had to say, the data is from the US Census Bureau Q2 2011:


That WSJ article stated:

Mr. Romney implied that anyone receiving government benefits wouldn’t likely be one of his voters. But there’s no clear partisan split among beneficiaries, especially for broad-based federal retirement and health-care programs.


Quote from: BigDave on September 18, 2012, 05:50:41 PM
Damn right Romney is telling the truth!

Mitt supporters who think he's correct - back up your comments with facts.








b_dubb

we bailed out the bankers. that wasn't socialism? it's the white. Olaf welfare that's breaking our back

Quote from: Eddie Coyle on September 18, 2012, 06:44:23 PM
      Love the idea of people making 40 grand a year who think Romney is speaking for "them". DSM-V should have a section especially for them.

     

It's not about voting for someone that is going to give you something if you are poor, or voting for someone that will lower your taxes if you've finally made it to the point where you are doing well. 

But that's exactly precisely what the D's and their allies in the Phony Media want people to believe - Class Warfare, it's the only way they can get and keep power.


The dirty secret is, statistically speaking, there are very few permanent rich or permanent poor in this country.  People getting started out of school don't have the skills and experience to command a big salary, or if they are just starting a small business it takes time to build it up.  Over the next few decades, they are worth more and more to their employers, or their business begins to do well.  Their last working years they make the most - but they are also saving for retirement and paying for their kids education (and they are much wiser at spending their own money than any government is). 

We have a dynamic society, not static.  Most other countries are static with permanent rich and permanent poor.  That's one of the things that sets the United States apart, and the very thing Obama and the 'Progressives' are trying to destroy.

The D's don't get any of that and never will.  Their policies are making all of us poorer and will continue to do so.  Since understanding this is completely beyond them, they need to be defeated on every front at the ballot box, starting now.

onan

Quote from: Paper*Boy on September 18, 2012, 07:19:25 PM

It's not about voting for someone that is going to give you something if you are poor, or voting for someone that will lower your taxes if you've finally made it to the point where you are doing well. 

But that's exactly precisely what the D's and their allies in the Phony Media want people to believe - Class Warfare, it's the only way they can get and keep power.


The dirty secret is, statistically speaking, there are very few permanent rich or permanent poor in this country.  People getting started out of school don't have the skills and experience to command a big salary, or if they are just starting a small business it takes time to build it up.  Over the next few decades, they are worth more and more to their employers, or their business begins to do well.  Their last working years they make the most - but they are also saving for retirement and paying for their kids education (and they are much wiser at spending their own money than any government is). 

We have a dynamic society, not static.  Most other countries are static with permanent rich and permanent poor.  That's one of the things that sets the United States apart, and the very thing Obama and the 'Progressives' are trying to destroy.

The D's don't get any of that and never will.  Their policies are making all of us poorer and will continue to do so.  Since understanding this is completely beyond them, they need to be defeated on every front at the ballot box, starting now.

If anyone here is making class warfare it is Romney. He was the one saying he should just ignore the 47% because they won't vote for him.  Even though some of that 47% identify themselves as republican.

And it is laughable to suggest the rich don't get handouts. Those handouts cost us much more than welfare.




Quote from: onan on September 18, 2012, 07:33:16 PM
If anyone here is making class warfare it is Romney. He was the one saying he should just ignore the 47% because they won't vote for him.  Even though some of that 47% identify themselves as republican.

And it is laughable to suggest the rich don't get handouts. Those handouts cost us much more than welfare.

Yes, he didn't understand the statistic either, that the "49% of Americans in the second quarter of 2011 lived in a household where at least one member received a government benefit" didn't mean 47% or 49% directly received a check.  I understand his confusion, sometimes it sure seems like it.  We're so poorly educated in math and stats (along with everything else).

I don't thnk anyone should be getting a government check - tried that, it's a failure that's bankrupting us all.  The last generation decided to fund the previous generations retirement through Social Security, I don't see why our generation is bound to doing the same for them. 

The other handouts come with no strings.  Lets go back to people that fail to educate themselves, fail to work, fail to save for retirement fall back on their families or friends, and not the rest of us.  Charities can take care of the people falling thru the cracks.  One thing about charities and most families and friends - there are strings attached, and that's a good thing.


analog kid

Mitt Romney will probably get 95 electoral votes from ‘moocher’ states. Obama will probably get 5.

Red states draw the most welfare and food stamps. You might be able to argue that the population percentage might work out to minorities or Obama voters being a higher percentage of overall social programs users, but I would argue that this is irrelevant, as welfare is in no way exclusive to the left by any means.

Also, food stamps give the highest return in terms of stimulating the economy, while tax cuts for the rich gives the lowest. If you give a poor person $1,000, it feeds them and their families for a month. If you give a rich person $1,000, it pays for lunch.

I am drinking scotch, but my point is that it isn't all black and white.

Quote from: analog kid on September 18, 2012, 07:59:59 PM
Mitt Romney will probably get 95 electoral votes from ‘moocher’ states. Obama will probably get 5.

Red states
If you give a poor person $1,000, it feeds them and their families for a month. If you give a rich person $1,000, it pays for lunch.


How about if the Fed just said to us "Take this $1000 and do some good with it."
I think there would be far more homeless people fed and good done with the money.

MV/Liberace!

Quote from: Eddie Coyle on September 18, 2012, 06:44:23 PM
      Love the idea of people making 40 grand a year who think Romney is speaking for "them". DSM-V should have a section especially for them.

     


Amen.

Frys Girl

Quote from: onan on September 18, 2012, 07:33:16 PM
If anyone here is making class warfare it is Romney. He was the one saying he should just ignore the 47% because they won't vote for him.  Even though some of that 47% identify themselves as republican.

And it is laughable to suggest the rich don't get handouts. Those handouts cost us much more than welfare.
This is a true statement. I have relatives whose businesses have benefitted handsomely from government subsidies. Oh and count me in as a welfare mama. My income is tied to GOVERNMENT grants. A bunch of communist Islamist Jews getting free chex. No wonder this are as bad as they are.....

Eddie, the 40K yuppies who ride with Romney are just voting for the fantasy. They like the cozy feeling, and I doubt they understand what will hit them in the ass. Disclaimer: I dislike both candidates. I'm a supporter of the shaw, however.

Juan

I stand corrected on the 49% figure.  That's an interesting statistic - and like many, rather meaningless.

I've been conflicted for some time about what our social contract should be.  I don't like big government, but it wasn't the government that made stupid financial decisions and eliminated my job last week - it was an extreme right wing capitalist.  And it wasn't the government who made stupid financial decisions and eliminated my job four years ago - it was a left winger who thinks Obama is too conservative.

What do we owe each other?  Years ago, I would have said nothing, but I find myself in the position of being willing to work, but having no one who will hire me.

Thus my decision to try to avoid working for someone else again.  At least if I make stupid financial decisions, they will be my decisions.

onan

Quote from: UFO Fill on September 19, 2012, 04:45:08 AM
What do we owe each other? 

My answer... a lot. I am not sure how we got to a place where helping others is not considered the most important aspect of being human.

To bring this back to Romney, how is it that one, anyone can so quickly cast away such a large number of people? Even if the statement is only about getting elected. How does one toss off such a large segment of differing belief?

It seems easier to vilify differing beliefs than to find a middle ground.

Yeah I am wearing my pollyanna suit.

11angeleyes11

New statistic:  Romney has sealed his fate with that that comment.

.00000000001% of Americans are losers on election day:  Romney and Paul Ryan.

Juan

Quote from: onan on September 19, 2012, 06:10:05 AM
My answer... a lot. I am not sure how we got to a place where helping others is not considered the most important aspect of being human.

To bring this back to Romney, how is it that one, anyone can so quickly cast away such a large number of people? Even if the statement is only about getting elected. How does one toss off such a large segment of differing belief?

It seems easier to vilify differing beliefs than to find a middle ground.

Yeah I am wearing my pollyanna suit.
I think we got here in large part because, rather than rely on charity, government began taking money from people, using a large part of it to make payoffs to cronies, and handing out a smaller part to those in need.  It bred cynicism.

As for Romney, I interpreted what he said as realizing that 47% of people will never vote for him - which I think is realistic. I'm not sure he was casting them off as much as thinking they had cast him off.

It does, indeed, seem that vilification is easier than compromise.

Quote from: onan on September 19, 2012, 06:10:05 AM
My answer... a lot. I am not sure how we got to a place where helping others is not considered the most important aspect of being human

Yes, we do.  The question is should it be forced upon us by a very powerful elite that is incredibly wasteful, careless, and tends to mostly reward their supporters and cronies, or left up to the individual to decide how much and to who?


Quote from: onan on September 19, 2012, 06:10:05 AM
It seems easier to vilify differing beliefs than to find a middle ground.

You do hear what he D's and Libs have to say about people that don't agree with them, right? 

Last time around candidate Obama was addressing his supporters at a 'private' fundraiser, and  was caught on tape dissing way more than 47% of the people in this country - people who were still 'clinging to their guns and religion'.  A lot of it depends on how the Phony Media reports it - if they even do, and whether they give the  story 'legs'.

Eddie Coyle

Quote from: Frys Girl on September 19, 2012, 04:40:23 AM

Eddie, the 40K yuppies who ride with Romney are just voting for the fantasy. They like the cozy feeling, and I doubt they understand what will hit them in the ass. Disclaimer: I dislike both candidates. I'm a supporter of the shaw, however.
I miss the shaw myself, I wasn't a fan of Eyeatoller Koo Maney.

onan

Quote from: Paper*Boy on September 19, 2012, 09:07:12 AM

Last time around candidate Obama was addressing his supporters at a 'private' fundraiser, and  was caught on tape dissing way more than 47% of the people in this country - people who were still 'clinging to their guns and religion'.  A lot of it depends on how the Phony Media reports it - if they even do, and whether they give the  story 'legs'.


Yes I remember Obama's statement. And it is significantly different. There is some attempt to understand those that are embittered. But if you only heard the NRA's version then it seems like he is using some form of class warfare.

Listen to Obama's statement.

Barack Obama's small town guns and religion comments

No one should be forced. And it is common to have opposite views on issues. The problem is not with the media. The problem in what media we choose to use.



onan

Quote from: UFO Fill on September 19, 2012, 07:19:16 AM
As for Romney, I interpreted what he said as realizing that 47% of people will never vote for him - which I think is realistic. I'm not sure he was casting them off as much as thinking they had cast him off.

To some extent that is the point. If elected he will be the president of even those who wouldn't vote for him. He doesn't have the luxury to disregard them. And for Romney to take that position so effortlessly means there is little thought to understand their position.


BigDave

Quote from: onan on September 19, 2012, 10:05:51 AM

Yes I remember Obama's statement. And it is significantly different. There is some attempt to understand those that are embittered. But if you only heard the NRA's version then it seems like he is using some form of class warfare.

Listen to Obama's statement.

Barack Obama's small town guns and religion comments

No one should be forced. And it is common to have opposite views on issues. The problem is not with the media. The problem in what media we choose to use.

Barry was awfully damn condecending to People who are Religion and believe in the right to own firearms. I'll call Him Barry because I don't respect His Bill Ayres radical Chicago Communist inspired ass.

onan

No they didn't have all the tape. But there is nothing darkly secret or misleading in what wasn't available on the YouTube video.

You can find the transcript of Romney's fundraiser with discussion from audience:

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/09/full-transcript-mitt-romney-secret-video

onan

Quote from: BigDave on September 19, 2012, 10:30:36 AM
Barry was awfully damn condecending to People who are Religion and believe in the right to own firearms. I'll call Him Barry because I don't respect His Bill Ayres radical Chicago Communist inspired ass.

I own lots of guns. I didn't find it condescending. Doesn't your religion talk about forgiveness?

And Jesus (I am assuming you are Christian) was quite the socialist? wouldn't you agree?


Juan

Jesus was not at all socialist - in fact the origin of separation of church and state begins with his render unto Caesar quote. He advocated charity, not government seizure of property.

Powered by SMFPacks Menu Editor Mod