Government wants more people on food stamps

And the reason for that are his policies .

 

They can't if we cut off all help, which is what Republican/conservatives want to do. Ever try and work when you are starving? Guess not, maybe you should try it.

Never said it was the rich folk's fault that the poor are poor, although they don't much give a hoot about changing the situation. It's Republican/conservatives' fault, because they want to cut off all help and don't even suggest a solution. I guess they figure if a crippled, blind person gets hungry enough, they'll try harder to find a job.

Clinton at least reformed Welfare. Reagan tried to do away with Welfare.
As for Obama expanding entitlements, maybe you need to learn the facts, a lot more has to do with Bush's policies and the recession he was responsible for.

Much of that increase has come from mandatory spending, including Medicare, Social Security and Medicaid. Those programs have expanded mostly because of the recession, which has prompted more people to apply for Medicaid and Social Security, as well as the growth in people hitting retirement age.
"How much do you lay at the recession's feet versus the president's policies?" said Josh Gordon, policy director at the Concord Coalition, a fiscal policy group. "The aging of the population can't be blamed on the president."
Many safety net programs, such as Medicaid and food stamps, automatically expand during economic downturns. And in the face of prolonged high jobless rates, Congress has authorized extending federal unemployment benefits to a record 99 weeks. The initial extension was passed under President Bush.

http://money.cnn.com/2012/01/25/news/economy/obama_government/index.htm

 

Democrats need more money to buy more union votes

Democrats cut food stamps subsidy to bailout teachers unions

 

Republicans/Conservatives never have wanted to get rid of entitlements. They just want them reformed.

You really have to stop blaming Bush for Obama's problems. You libs will still blame him even if Obama wins re-election and the economy still sucks 2, 3, 4 years later.

 

Yeah, like Bush did a lot of reforming. Romney adores Ryan's plan - check out to see how Ryan plans to reform Welfare, by slashing it, that is how.

You really have to quit blaming Obama for Bush's problems. When you tank a country, it doesn't get fixed overnight. Bush tanked it, he tanked it good, and it is going to take a lot of time to get it back on track. Romney would just derail it again. You Reps would then blame Obama for Romney's ineptness.

 

Once again, reform is not the same as getting rid of something. I'm glad you finally get it.

You can blame Bush all you want. Most rational folks see past the smoke screen, and see Obama as an empty suit. Don't forget, Dems like Barney Frank are to blame for the housing crisis which led to a lot of other problems we face today. The Obama Admin has been hindering a proper recovery. Can't blame Bush for that.

 

The Repubs want sick people to hurry up and die.
They want hungry people to starve to death.
They want to deprive people of the right to vote.

 

republicans want more people on food stamps so they can whine about how many people are on food stamps, if republicans are not part of the solution then they are part of the problem, look at their actions over the last ten years, I think they speak for themselves

 

The USA is the biggest gross producer of food in the world. I think we can afford Food Stamps for 48 Million Americans personally I think it would be more responsible, too get everyone food then healthcare because healthcare is more expensive in the United States because doctors charge more. We do have 3 of the highest ranking hospitals in the world on top of the fact that our hospitals rank higher then the general then any other nation besides MAYBE France.

Lets feed America first because that is possible Health Care for America is not.

I am not on Food Stamps but it makes me sad to think anyone in this country is hungry.

 

The hungry shall weep no more for the food they can never earn. There are tables spread, every mouth be fed, for the world is about to turn.

 

Because food stamps help the economy.

 

You are correct if the wound is a minor scrape or the like, putting a band-aid over a bullet wound or a severed artery is just useless action. Repealing the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy was expected to bring in about $70 billion a year or $700 billion over ten years. Now when we have over $1.3 trillion a year in deficits that $70 billion is only 5% of the total budget deficit. Or a band-aid on a bullet wound. Repealing the Bush tax cuts for everyone including the poor and middle class was expected to bring in $3.6 trillion over ten years or around $360 billion a year. That is only about 28% of this years budget deficit. Its not a tax problem its a spending problem. All combined federal, state and local government spending as a percentage of GDP is over 40%. To fund that without deficits everyones taxes must be increased greatly.

Maybe if people actually saw the direct cost of government they might start making some intelligent decisions about what they want it to do for them, especially as it is wildly ineffective.

The federal government should not be involved in foodstamps, let the states decide this.

 

That is not always true, the economy isn't such a black and white thing. If food stamps are funded with all debt then their cost is a price that must be repaid in the future. This can become a drain on the economy as the cost of those food stamps becomes greater because of interest. This is especially true as the debt ratio becomes higher which under sane market practices means higher interest rates making borrowing more prohibitive and costly.

If the food stamps are funded directly from taxes I can see the argument that its a wash and has no real effect on the economy work as well. Think of it like this, Tim works, Time earns money, he was going to use that money to buy things. The government says we are going to tax your earnings Tim, so Tim has less to spend. Now the government takes the money they took from Tim and spread it out on Food stamps and other things. You say this is boosting the economy, yet if Tim had the money he would have spent it and that would have boosted the economy as well. Taking money from being spent in one place and spending it in another doesn't have a net growth effect, but it can skew resource use and create bubbles, especially when large purchasing power like that of the federal government is put to use.

 

The foodstamp program is run horribly inefficiently. Why do they just give people money to spend at the grocery store to buy food at marked up prices. Think of how much of that money is just wasted on profits. If the goal was to feed people the government would go to suppliers directly and purchase it from them in bulk at discount and then distribute the food, this would allow for much more food to be bought with the same money. Of course doing this would make it much harder to abuse the system as you don't have a debit card you can sell for cash or use at a store or restaraunt to buy junk food.

 

Well, here's how I see it. Let's say there are two neighborhoods, one is fairly well to do, and one is very poor. If Tim is in the fairly well to do neighborhood, it's likely that him and his friends, even after being taxed are going to keep the essential markets afloat in their community. And now that the poor neighborhood his getting food stamps, they will be able to keep, at least their food market, afloat. That means the food market does well in both neighborhoods rather than extremely well in one and horribly in the other. It makes the economy stronger as a whole, rather than uneven and spotty.

 

The way you see it makes no sense whatsoever, as generally poorer neighborhoods have more people and therefore more customers for food markets. Food as a basic necessity is never going to disappear from an area where more customers are per area. They just have different business models. Markets in poorer areas generally sell mass quantities at lower profits, while more upscale markets that cater to better off people sell fewer higher quality items at larger profit margins. Propping up failing businesses is a horrible use of government funds, I say this because a business that can't stay afloat without them is most likely inefficient thus pouring money into it is taking away better uses for that money. Many people don't understand opportunity costs. If you don't know what that is I suggest you look it up.

 

So if no one can buy food, the market still survives?

 

You will have to back this up with evidence, my liberal friend.

 

I deal with the poor on a weekly basis. They all know how to get that latest smartphone but somehow never seem to find their way to the nearest drug store for contraception. So instead they pop out kids like pez dispensers and rip into the taxpayer funded entitlements. Then they go and blame rich people because they never bothered to take advantage of taxpayer funded education and have the motivational skills of a ping-pong ball.

But somehow this is all the fault of the rich and the republicans. The worst part of the whole thing is there's no one telling these idiots that what they're doing is irresponsible. They're just rewarded for their failures by the liberal party at the expense of other people instead.

This is the future of America. It's quite pathetic.

 

Wouldn't it be a better idea for the Obama voters in the poor neighborhood to find jobs and buy food with the money they earn themselves instead of mooching off Tim?

 

Still wondering why the liberals are calling themselves "progressives" when they promote poverty. Never seen anyone from the liberal camp going into poor neighborhoods telling them maybe they should take a trip to 7-11 or the clinic for some contraception so they don't breed any more children into poverty. Instead they promote it, reward it them blame everyone else for letting it happen.

 

I live in a poor town and in my 10 years of living here I have never seen anyone use food stamps..

 

Excellent post.

Welfare is a way of life for many. Unfortunately, there is an "underground" that helps people exploit the system.

 

Except ducks don't deal with things like housing or health insurance....