Some interesting stats to ponder!

I can't find the source for all of this, but I got it off facebook. Some interesting stats.

THE NEW WELFARE MAP

Make sure you read to the bottom...
Quite an eye opener...
b499391.jpg
These 11 States now have More People on Welfare than they do Employed!
Last month, the Senate Budget Committee reports that in fiscal year 2012, between food stamps, housing support, child care, Medicaid and other benefits, the average U.S. Household below the poverty line received $168.00 a day in government support. What's the problem with that much support? Well, the median household income in America is just over $50,000,which averages out to $137.13 a day. To put it another way, being on welfare now pays the equivalent of $30.00 an hour for a 40-hour week, while the average job pays $20.00 an hour.
Furthermore:
There are actually two messages here. The first is very
interesting, but the second is absolutely astounding - and explains a lot.

A recent "Investor's Business Daily" article provided very
interesting statistics from a survey by the United Nations International
Health Organization.

Percentage of men and women who survived a cancer five years
after diagnosis:

U.S. 65%

England 46%

Canada 42%


Percentage of patients diagnosed with diabetes who received
treatment within six months:

U.S. 93%

England 15%

Canada 43%


Percentage of seniors needing hip replacement who received it
within six months:

U.S. 90%

England 15%

Canada 43%


Percentage referred to a medical specialist who see one within
one month:

U.S. 77%

England 40%

Canada 43%


Number of MRI scanners (a prime diagnostic tool) per million
people:

U.S. 71

England 14

Canada 18


Percentage of seniors (65+), with low income, who say they are
in "excellent health":

U.S. 12%

England 2%

Canada 6%


And now for the last statistic:


National Health Insurance?

U.S. NO

England YES

Canada YES

Check this last set of statistics!!

The percentage of each past president's cabinet who had worked in the private business sector prior to their appointment to the cabinet.
You know what the private business sector is; a real-life business, not a government job. Here are the percentages.
T. Roosevelt.................... 38%

Taft................................ 40%

Wilson ........................... 52%

Harding........................... 49%

Coolidge......................... 48%

Hoover............................ 42%

F. Roosevelt..................... 50%

Truman........................... 50%

Eisenhower................ .... 57%

Kennedy......................... 30%

Johnson.......................... 47%

Nixon.............................. 53%

Ford................................ 42%

Carter............................. 32%

Reagan............................ 56%

GH Bush.......................... 51%

Clinton .......................... 39%

GW Bush........................ 55%

Obama............................. 8%

This helps to explain the incompetence of this administration:
only 8% of them have ever worked in private business!

That's right! Only eight percent---the least, by far, of the
last 19 presidents! And these people are trying to tell our big
corporations how to run their business?

How can the president of a major nation and society, the one
with the most successful economic system in world history, stand and talk
about business when he's never worked for one? Or about jobs when he has
never really had one? And when it's the same for 92% of his senior staff
and closest advisers? They've spent most of their time in academia,
government and/or non-profit jobs or as "community organizers."
They should have been in an employment line.

 

YOU'RE SO GULLIBLE THAT IT BORDERS ON CRIMINALLY STUPID.

http://www.snopes.com/politics/taxes/deathspiral.asp

 

YEAH! IT WAS ON FACEBOOK SO IT MUST BE TRUE.

 

I believe Obama worked at an ice cream shop once when he was a kid. And a deli.

 

I DOUBT THAT ANYONE'S EYES WERE OPENED TO ANYTHING OTHER THAN YOUR COMPLETE STUPIDITY. THANKS FOR CONFIRMING THAT JUST IN CASE SOMEONE WAS ON THE FENCE ABOUT IT AS IF READING ANY OF YOUR POSTS WOULD LEAVING ANYONE IN DOUBT.

 

Did you bother to read that link? Is clearly states that most of the people in those states are on the government's payrolls. Whether or not it is welfare in not that important. Point being they are not advancing the economy.

BTW, I love how you skipped all the medical statistics.

BTW. BTW, I love how you skipped the president's cabinet statistics.

 

Try feeding a family, or yourself, on $100 to $133 per person a month:

http://www.fns.usda.gov/pd/18SNAPavg$PP.htm

 

Did you skip the fact that it is total BS! Of course you did because I have yet to see one of you wing nuts EVER admit to a mistake. It speaks to your flawed personalities. But you never hesitate to jump on others for their mistakes.

 

​

Death Spiral​

​

Claim: Chart shows eleven "death spiral" states where more people are on welfare than are employed. ​

​

​

FALSE​

​

Example: ​

​

[Collected via e-mail, January 2013] ​

​

Death Spiral ​

​

These 11 States now have More People on Welfare than they do Employed! ​

​

And Surprise-Surprise!!! These States vote straight democrat ticket every election - living on the government plantation. ​

​

This Just Proves that The Majority of Americans have No Intentions of Making a Better Independent Life for Themselves and their Families and are content Living on The Tax Payers Dime for Eternity! ​

​

​

​

​

Origins: In November 2012, Forbes magazine published an article listing eleven states (California, Maine, New Mexico, Hawaii, Alabama, Mississippi, New York, Illinois, Ohio, Kentucky, and South Carolina) which it identified as being in financial "death spirals" — that is, according to Forbes, those states were at "high risk of a fiscal tailspin" which made them "danger spots for investors." As elements of this article made their way around the Internet through various repostings and forwardings, the "death spiral" label was simplified into one supposedly denoting states in which the number of welfare recipients was greater than the number of employed persons. That isn't what Forbes originally reported, however. ​

​

First off, Forbesclassified states as being in "death spirals" based on two factors: whether they had more "takers than makers" and where they ranked on a​

​

scorecard of state credit-worthiness. They did not rate states base solely on the first factor, as suggested in examples like the one reproduced above. ​

​

Second, Forbes determined states with more "takers than makers" by defining "the taker count [as] the number of state and local government workers plus the number of people on Medicaid plus 1 for each $100,000 of unfunded pension liabilities. Thus the "taker count" was not derived simply by comparing the number of persons collecting welfare to the number of employed persons in each state: the "takers" total included those who collect any form of Medicaid benefit, those who are gainfully employed but work for the government (rather than in the private sector), and unfunded pension liabilities (a measure which is based on dollar amounts to be paid to retired workers and not on a count of people). ​

​

As for the claim that "these states vote straight Democrat ticket every election," a majority of the eleven states listed (Maine, New Mexico, Alabama, Mississippi, Ohio, and South Carolina) currently have Republican governors, and four of the eleven states listed (Alabama, Mississippi, Kentucky, South Carolina) have not voted Democratic in any presidential election since 1996. ​

​

Last updated: 10 January 2013 ​

​

Urban Legends Reference Pages © 1995-2013 by Barbara and David P. Mikkelson. ​

This material may not be reproduced without permission. ​

snopes and the snopes.com logo are registered service marks of snopes.com.​

​

​

Sources:​

Baldwin, William. "Do You Live in a Death Spiral State?"​

Forbes. 25 November 2012.​

​

​

​

Read more at http://www.snopes.com/politics/taxes/deathspiral.asp#u4QFlFtVbhsUcByu.99​

 

Boy, those medical statistics are troubling, aren't they? You'd of thought we would have paid attention to the history before following Great Britain & Canada down the path of government-controlled medicine. Oh, that's right! Most of us did, didn't we?

 

But Mr. perfect there can't see them. They would upset his applecart. He also cannot understand why "takers" CANNOT possible grow the economy.

Here is the opening lines from the Forbes article cited;

And Mr. perfect wants to argue whether the word "welfare" is correct? Call it anything Mr. perfect likes, but WE need to fix the problem.

 

Sorry, I just can't base my opinions on Bullshit the way you guys do. You are the kings.

 

Tell these people about your bullshit;

And another quote from the Forbes article that YOU touted.

​

 

The Cabinet stats also seem dubious to me. How were the percentages calculated - on a weighted average or something. 8% of 15 Cabinet Positions calculates to 1.2 people.

 

My guess is that it would be 2 out of 25. He has had exactly 25 cabinet members;
Secretary of State

​

• Hillary Clinton (2009–2013)
• John Kerry (2013–present)

Secretary of the Treasury

• Timothy Geithner (2009–2013)
• Jack Lew (2013–present)

Secretary of Defense

• Robert Gates (2009–2011)
• Leon Panetta (2011–2013)
• Chuck Hagel (2013–present)

Attorney General

• Eric Holder (2009–present)

Secretary of the Interior

• Ken Salazar (2009–2013)
• Sally Jewell (2013–present)

Secretary of Agriculture

• Tom Vilsack (2009–present)

Secretary of Commerce

• Gary Locke (2009–2011)
• John Bryson (2011–2012)
• Penny Pritzker (2013–present)

Secretary of Labor

• Hilda Solis (2009–2013)
  Seth Harris (2013–present)*

Secretary of Health and Human Services

• Kathleen Sebelius (2009–present)

Secretary of Housing and Urban Development

• Shaun Donovan (2009–present)

Secretary of Transportation

• Ray LaHood (2009–2013)
• Anthony Foxx (2013–present)

Secretary of Energy

• Steven Chu (2009–2013)
• Ernest Moniz (2013–present)

Secretary of Education

• Arne Duncan (2009–present)

Secretary of Veterans Affairs

• Eric Shinseki (2009–present)

Secretary of Homeland Security

• Janet Napolitano (2009–present)

 

I know several of the names listed practiced law in the private secter. Pritzker - PSP Capital and I really don't feel like researching Cabinet Member bio's but I am sure there is more private secter business experience out of the group.

 

So no comment whatsoever about the false "welfare map" eh?

 

I really doubt practicing law qualifies as private business in this case. Exception might be a corporate lawyer.
FWIW, out of the first 8 I listed, I know no one was in private business.

 

So ignore the BS in your OP and move on to another subject eh?