From Conservapedia
This is the current revision of Talk:Welfare as edited by Dinkytown (Talk | contribs) at 14:50, 10 June 2011. This URL is a permanent link to this version of this page.

(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search

On the Reference

Whoever added "Jackson" - needs to fully cite the source in a "references section". Just saying "Jackson, 2005" doesn't really explain anything - and therefore the reference is questionable.--IDuan 15:45, 22 November 2007 (EST)

Citations Needed

This entire article needs citations. Welfare has been growing... It's also too simple. It is no longer called Welfare, and the concept has changed dramatically since its inception. I'm giving anyone who wants to look at it 1 day. After that, I'm giving it the scrubbing of its life. JohnGalt 17:33, 30 November 2007 (EST)


Why's there a picture of a bank on an article about welfare? HDCase 17:00, 30 November 2008 (EST)

I wonder the same thing. The image seems to be a bit of a non sequitur. --Economist 17:27, 13 February 2009 (EST)


Clinton signed GOP legislation cutting back welfare, just so you know who is credited for that success. Also, the U.S. Constitution says to "promote the general welfare", this doesn't mean "fund" the general welfare. Also, it is the same excuse Democrats use for implementing the unconstitutional ObamaCare package. --Jpatt 18:37, 29 October 2009 (EDT)

Sentence fragment

The sentence "Opponents say that, since 50% of Americans pay over 96% of the taxes." is incomplete - what was the intention of the writer? JanW 14:41, 10 June 2011 (EDT)

I fixed it. Add anymore if you wish. One of he sources didn't make sense so I removed it. Article needs work... Dinkytown 14:50, 10 June 2011 (EDT)