welfare programs

[dogs4thewin]

If you had people to weed out fraud there's no telling how much you could save. People on disability working under the table, people on section 8 having unauthorized people living with them and charging them rent and what they call "Crazy Checks"
Even the kids say "I don't have to work I can get a check "

As to working under the table that can get a little tricky the way the system is set up. They really do need a better system particularly for SSI ( SSDI is NOT welfare, but they need a better system for disability SSI and SSDI alike when it comes to getting back in the workforce.

 

[BPPLEE]

As to working under the table that can get a little tricky the way the system is set up. They really do need a better system particularly for SSI ( SSDI is NOT welfare, but they need a better system for disability SSI and SSDI alike when it comes to getting back in the workforce.

• Supplemental Security Income (SSI): The largest welfare program in the United States, SSI provides financial assistance to people with disabilities and limited income. SSI is based on need and is administered by the Social Security Administration.

 

[dogs4thewin]

• Supplemental Security Income (SSI): The largest welfare program in the United States, SSI provides financial assistance to people with disabilities and limited income. SSI is based on need and is administered by the Social Security Administration.

I understand that but SSI and SSDI are different programs. SSI is the welfare program for disability people who have not paid into the system for five of the last ten years ( or have not paid in enough ( SSDI on the other hand is the disability for people who have paid into the system through taxes and is NOT a welfare program. People on that type of disability can have as much money as they want coming in a month as long as it is not from work. People on SSI every dollar they have from ANY source offsets their SSI.

For example, my late father was on SSDI for the last month of his life by the time he applied and waited his five months required for most SSDI claimants. Now, in his younger days he was a landlord of a single additional house. He sold that house years ago to build this one along with the house he was living in at the time. Let us say though, that he did not and that he was still collecting rent on that house well he could do so and STILL collect disability because that income would not have been from working. He could be collecing 2k in rent 1k in investment income and still collecting his SSDI ( which was pretty high as far as SSDI goes because of the amount he had paid in to the system ( that would have brought our income to proabaly over 5k a month, but that would be OK for SSDI purposes as 3k of that would have NOTHING to do with M's ability to work or at that point his clear lack of ability.

At the same time, I was collecting SSI ( the welfare disability program) due to having a moderate case of cerebral palsy any money that I received would offset that even if it was a gift ( as was my graduation money that I turned around and help pay my first semester of college and yet still had to pay the government back for an "overpayment" that I had no plans of saving or having that money come in on a regular basis.

 

[BPPLEE]

I understand that but SSI and SSDI are different programs. SSI is the welfare program for disability people who have not paid into the system for five of the last ten years ( or have not paid in enough ( SSDI on the other hand is the disability for people who have paid into the system through taxes and is NOT a welfare program. People on that type of disability can have as much money as they want coming in a month as long as it is not from work. People on SSI every dollar they have from ANY source offsets teir SSI.

For example, my late father was on SSDI for the last month of his life by the time he applied and waited his five months required for most SSDI claimants. Now, in his younger days he was a landlord of a single additional house. He sold that house years ago to build this one almong with the house he was living in at the time. Let us say though, that he did not and that he was still collecting rent on that house well he could do so and STILL collect disability because that income would not have been from working. He could be collecing 2k in rent 1k in investment income and still collecting his SSDI ( which was pretty high as far as SSDI goes because of the amount he had paid in to the system ( that would have brought our income to proabaly over 5k a month, but that would be OK for SSDI purposes as 3k of that would have NOTHING to do with M's ability to work or at that point his clear lack of ability.

At the same time, I was collecting SSI ( the welfare disability program) due to having a moderate case of cerebral palsy any money that I received would offset that even if it was a gift ( as was my graduation money that I turned around and help pay my first semester of college and yet still had to pay the government back for an "overpayment" that I had no pans of saving or having that money come in on a regular basis.

Social Security Disability is not considered welfare because workers and employers pay into it as long as the person is working

 

[dogs4thewin]

Social Security Disability is not considered welfare because workers and employers pay into it as long as the person is working

bingo that is why SSDI was not being addressed in this post. Although there probably is some fraud, but then again the system is not the best at encouraging people to go to work or back to work because of the way it is set not to mention the time it takes to get approvved hince some (though not all) of the working "under the table".

 

[BPPLEE]

bingo that is why SSDI was not being addressed in this post. Although there probably is some fraud, but then again the system is not the best at encouraging people to go to work or back to work because of the way it is set not to mention the time it takes to get approvved hince some (though not all) of the working "under the table".

If you're on disability you can earn about $22,500 a year. I know people making more than that and on disability.

 

[dogs4thewin]

If you're on disability you can earn about $22,500 a year. I know people making more than that and on disability.

you know that they are EARNING or that they have; because if the person is on SSDI the money that they have does not matter it is only money that they actually earn that matters.

 

[BPPLEE]

you knw that they are EARNING or that they have; because if the person is on SSDI the money that they have does not matter it is only money that they actually earn that matters.

They have businesses like lawn care, automotive detailing and selling things for other people where they can get paid mostly in cash

 

[Sabertooth]

When I first received SSDI, I had a part-time job as a paper carrier. I reported it and it did not conflict with that income.
The paper was free. I was paid by the publisher.

Now, I am a caregiver to my ASD3 daughter and report that nominal income with no adverse effect on the above.

 

[BPPLEE]

When I first received SSDI, I had a part-time job as a paper carrier. I reported it and it did not conflict with that income.
The paper was free. I was paid by the publisher.

You can earn a certain amount without losing any benefits. If you go over that threshold your benefits can be reduced

 

[A2SG]

The Judge donated $25 but have you checked how much his daughter made off the case?

Not really. Since she didn't preside over the case, it didn't seem all that relevant, frankly.

And neither did the NY Supreme Court:

Defendant has failed to demonstrate that there exists concrete, or even realistic reasons for recusal to be appropriate, much less required on these grounds. The speculative and hypothetical scenarios offered by Defendant fall well short of the legal standard. Defendant's motion for recusal on these grounds is therefore Denied.​

-- A2SG, but you can't blame a guy for trying....

 

[A2SG]

I've posted a number of articles primarily favorable to the Democrat's view (probably paid for with USAID funds). All of them support what I'm saying and if you cannot access any of them, then simply do a Google and you'll get many more liberal papers stating the same thing.

I addressed the issues you raised. You claimed "Trump was not allowed to call any expert witnesses." By your own admission, that was incorrect. You also claimed that Judge Merchan's actions showed bias, but you've yet to support that assertion. The fact that he imposed a gag order but, despite repeated violations of that order, never imposed jail time showed deference to the defendant, rather than a negative bias. For that matter, the sentence he imposed alone showed that Judge Merchan was far more lenient toward Trump than another judge in any other circumstances would likely be.

Several times you state that this was "within the judge's authority. Judges are suppose to conduct hearings impartially. This was not done.

In your opinion. As I said, if the court of appeals feels that Judge Merchan was not impartial in the way he conducted the case, they can so rule. As for us, speaking as two laymen (I'm assuming you are no more a legal expert than I am), we simply disagree.

Every judgement was against Trump and his lawyers.

The verdict was decided by the jury, not the judge.

And the judge suppressed information and issued gag orders so the public couldn't see what was going on.

The gag order was on Donald Trump specifically, not the court proceedings. Those are public record.

For your perusal:

People v Donald J. Trump (Criminal) | NYCOURTS.GOV

Decision & Order: Motion to Terminate Order Restricting Extrajudicial Statements, June 25Presence of Counsel at Presentence Order, June 7Letter to Parties, June 7

ww2.nycourts.gov

And, no, it won't go to appeal because the judge just up and nullified the fine and the sentence. Sweet deal. So no appeal.

Trump can still appeal, and he has, in fact, done so:

https://apnews.com/article/trump-hush-money-appeal-stormy-daniels-249a77a70cab97137595f000fbd49307

Trump is considered a felon and has no way to appeal the ruling.

And yet, he has.

I'm always baffled by people who aren't outraged by this behavior no matter what their political leaning.

I'm similarly baffled by people who continue to trust, let alone vote for, someone who has been proven guilty of fraud in court on multiple occasions. But diff'rent strokes and all that, right?

Imagine a judge controlling a trial to get a particular verdict, gaging the defendant and lawyers so they couldn't say anything to the public,

Trump may not have been able to threaten court officials or witnesses in public, but that never prevented him or his legal team from presenting their case and their defense in court.

and surpressing trial documents so that the outside public couldn't see what was actually going on.

Court proceedings are public record. What has been suppressed?

Again:

People v Donald J. Trump (Criminal) | NYCOURTS.GOV

Decision & Order: Motion to Terminate Order Restricting Extrajudicial Statements, June 25Presence of Counsel at Presentence Order, June 7Letter to Parties, June 7

ww2.nycourts.gov

Some people just don't seem to mind if it happens to people they don't like-until it happens to them.

I have no problem with people being prosecuted for crimes when there is ample evidence for those crimes, regardless of whether the defendant is someone I like or dislike. The evidence should always be the guiding force in any court case, and in this one, the jury viewed that evidence and unanimously decided that Trump was guilty on all counts. You are, of course, free to disagree with their verdict, but you did not see the evidence and testimony they saw, so your opinion may not be as informed as theirs was.

As to your vague accusations of impropriety on the Judge's part, so far, the NY Supreme Court disagrees with you on the matter of recusal, and if the appeals court sees any other legal or procedural improprieties or errors, they'll rule on that when they decide to. I don't see any myself, but I admit, I'm not a lawyer so maybe I missed something. And as for that purported juror's misconduct...well, I know nothing about that, beyond what I've found. So nothing further can be said.

I don't know if you are a lawyer, or what your legal experience is, so maybe you know stuff I don't. But if you don't show me that stuff, I can't know it, and I can't make any conclusions about it.

What we're left with, in the end, is you don't like that Trump was found guilty of fraud, based on the evidence.

Sorry.

-- A2SG, but reality is what it is, whether we like it or not....