Gov Cuts Funding for Disabled Floridians

30a, you are being gratuitous for your own amusement. to my question...you arguments have no credibility

Could this be why are they "over budget"?

.
Thanks for trying to keep the discussion honest, Poppy.


.

Could this be why are they "over budget"?

facts get in the way of "logic"

Could this be why are they "over budget"?

I would like to see a break down of the budget for this department over the last five years. If in general the amount has remained around 1 billion, I don't see how they could be hurting so badly. The population of Florida hasn't grown much over those years, so the number of cases likely hasn't increased much. This is of course all opinion. Without the numbers we're all guessing.

Regardless of this since the liberals on the board so very dearly want to send another billion or two toward this group, please tell me where it should come from or out of. Need I remind you money doesn't grow on trees, if you want more government spending you're going to have to come up with a way to generate the revenue to cover it.

Higher property taxes? Raise the sales tax? Higher fees when you go to renew your license? Ready.. set.. TAX!

I would like to see a break down of the budget for this department over the last five years. If in general the amount has remained around 1 billion, I don't see how they could be hurting so badly. The population of Florida hasn't grown much over those years, so the number of cases likely hasn't increased much. This is of course all opinion. Without the numbers we're all guessing.

Regardless of this since the liberals on the board so very dearly want to send another billion or two toward this group, please tell me where it should come from or out of. Need I remind you money doesn't grow on trees, if you want more government spending you're going to have to come up with a way to generate the revenue to cover it.

Higher property taxes? Raise the sales tax? Higher fees when you go to renew your license? Ready.. set.. TAX!

What if those who are not hurting financially give up the government welfare they receive?

What if those who are not hurting financially give up the government welfare they receive?

People who are not hurting financially should not be getting welfare, period. Whether the government is hurting financially or rolling in cash, welfare should be based strictly on need and should be difficult to obtain and temporary in nature.

How is slashing the budget for the disabled good for us all? The only "good" would be we aren't affected.

I don't recall saying whether I agree or disagree with this cut. What I said was each government expenditure must be evaluated and cuts should be based on saving the most money against harming the least people. But no matter what, whether you cut expenditures or raise taxes to increase revenue-- someone will be hurt.

People who are not hurting financially should not be getting welfare, period. Whether the government is hurting financially or rolling in cash, welfare should be based strictly on need and should be difficult to obtain and temporary in nature.

I'm happy you agree:

The invisible beneficiaries of welfare

Gregory Rodriguez
Los Angeles Times

Are you one of the millions of Americans benefiting from government handouts? asked Gregory Rodriguez. You sure are, if you claim a home-mortgage-interest deduction, are enrolled in an employer-based health-insurance program, or own a tax-free retirement account. Those three tax subsidies make up almost a third of America?s social welfare spending, creating a ?hidden welfare state.?
It?s become fashionable to rail about Big Government and transfers of wealth. But the reality is that through massive tax breaks, the government helps middle-class Americans buy houses, get medical coverage, send their kids to college, and put away money for retirement. This kind of government help is invisible; because no one sends us a check, we take it for granted.
In a recent survey, 60 percent of people who received a mortgage-interest deduction?worth thousands of dollars each year?insisted that they had ?never used a federal social program.? But they have. The poor aren?t the only beneficiaries of government handouts.

I don't recall saying whether I agree or disagree with this cut. What I said was each government expenditure must be evaluated and cuts should be based on saving the most money against harming the least people. But no matter what, whether you cut expenditures or raise taxes to increase revenue-- someone will be hurt.

And it always seems to effect the ones in the lowest income brackets the most because they have the weakest voices.

I'm happy you agree:

This is where liberals simply do not understand reality. How someone could think a tax cut is welfare is beyond me. I earn 100% of my money and the government seizes about 25% of it. They would take it by force (police action) if I did not give it to them. Without the mortgage deduction, health care exemption and retirement exemption they would seize about 35% of my money. But either way, THEY ARE TAKING MY MONEY! It becomes welfare when the government takes the money it seizes from me and gives it to someone else without that person doing anything to earn that money. Whether the recipient is huge corporation or a crack mother, it is the same thing.

I would prefer the government take a certain percentage of everyone's income with no deductions so everyone pays equally. But if the government chooses to cut my taxes with a deduction then that is not welfare because I earned the money they are not taking.

Could this be why are they "over budget"?

Caregivers for disabled call Scott's emergency 15 percent cuts of their payments 'draconian'

Mismanagement of funds might also be one of the reasons. Generally, in sounds like this state department needs an overhaul. (and it's only seven years old!)

This is where liberals simply do not understand reality. How someone could think a tax cut is welfare is beyond me. I earn 100% of my money and the government seizes about 25% of it. They would take it by force (police action) if I did not give it to them. Without the mortgage deduction, health care exemption and retirement exemption they would seize about 35% of my money. But either way, THEY ARE TAKING MY MONEY! It becomes welfare when the government takes the money it seizes from me and gives it to someone else without that person doing anything to earn that money. Whether the recipient is huge corporation or a crack mother, it is the same thing.

I would prefer the government take a certain percentage of everyone's income with no deductions so everyone pays equally. But if the government chooses to cut my taxes with a deduction then that is not welfare because I earned the money they are not taking.

I posted the article to see how you would respond. Me, me, me, my, my, my, don't touch the federal programs that benefit me because I deserve what I get, go somewhere else. That somewhere else for Republicans is unions, public workers, teachers or the lower income brackets and others who they feel are getting a "free ride" and the subject of this thread, the disabled who rely on others to provide a voice for their well being. I don't pretend to have all the answers or claim everything is perfect but we Liberals are willing to give up a little more to provide for others because we feel it promotes the welfare of us all.

I posted the article to see how you would respond. Me, me, me, my, my, my, don't touch the federal programs that benefit me because I deserve what I get, go somewhere else. That somewhere else for Republicans is unions, public workers, teachers or the lower income brackets and others who they feel are getting a "free ride" and the subject of this thread, the disabled who rely on others to provide a voice for their well being. I don't pretend to have all the answers or claim everything is perfect but we Liberals are willing to give up a little more to provide for others because we feel it promotes the welfare of us all.

A little more? When you figure all the taxes, fees and permits I have to pay from the local, state and federal governments, about 50% of my income goes to "promote the welfare of us all." I can see paying my fair share, but HALF? Why should anyone work hard if half of what they make is taken from them and given to someone else? And then suffer the gall of someone telling me that a tax break that allows me to keep a little more of what I EARNED or allows me to provide my family health care that I WORKED for is WELFARE? I don't want to hurt anyone, I just want to be treated fairly.

A little more? When you figure all the taxes, fees and permits I have to pay from the local, state and federal governments, about 50% of my income goes to "promote the welfare of us all." I can see paying my fair share, but HALF? Why should anyone work hard if half of what they make is taken from them and given to someone else? And then suffer the gall of someone telling me that a tax break that allows me to keep a little more of what I EARNED or allows me to provide my family health care that I WORKED for is WELFARE? I don't want to hurt anyone, I just want to be treated fairly.

:confused: I know your side is against federal and state employees but to say the money is "given" to and not earned by firefighters, police, teachers, municipal workers and others is a pretty sad comment.