http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article...eficiaries-exceed-46000000-38-straight-months Those who wanted to create the Welfare State back in the 20th century can be extremely proud: we are nearing their dream. Dont know though whos going to pay for this dream come true. You know, money doesnt fall from nowhere, somebody gotta pitch in. Whos gonna that be in the 21st century? Any ideas?
What did you expect to happen when wages do not go up but the cost of living does? There will be 60million eligible for food stamps by 2020 if the minimum wage stays the same.
Well, yeah. It's not a welfare state, it's a sign that the current state isn't doing its job of protecting citizens. People haven't gotten lazy or want to be on welfare all of a sudden, this is simply what happens when corporations are put before the people.
Tell you GOP reps to stop with the austerity measures, stop gutting the middle class, and start focusing on rebuilding the middle class instead of pandering to the richest. Then maybe we'll see less people needing assistance. Gosh, that is a real stumper. Who could afford to pitch in?
The number of people on food stamps is now decreasing. After soaring in the years since the recession, use of food stamps, one of the federal government's biggest social-welfare programs, is beginning to decline. There were 46.2 million Americans on food stamps in May, the latest data available, down 1.6 million from a record 47.8 million in December 2012. Some 14.8% of the U.S. population is on the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, down from 15.3% last August, U.S. Department of Agriculture data show. http://www.wsj.com/articles/food-stamps-starting-to-fall-1409606700 Why didn't your article mention that?
reaise the min wage, the working class should not be so poor they need food stamps if were not willing to raise the min wage to a living wage, then I am find with food-stamps employers not paying a living wage are supplementing their labor cost with tax payer dollars .
What's disturbing is that many of those people are working, part-time, but just simply earn very little money; or, if they are hiring themselves out, simply cannot find enough consistent work to stay busy. Sometimes these people could get off food stamps if they really wanted to, but with the limited opportunity available and crappy unpleasant positions, they just are not going to take on more hours, not for minimum wage. There's always work available, the question is would you do it and how much does it pay. When unemployment appears (not when unemployment goes up, but when it even just appears) it signals that work opportunities have become limited. Not many people are really that lazy that they would turn down easy work for decent pay, not when money is in short supply. That's why many employers won't even let their employees sit down in a chair, even when they are stationed in the same exact place for 6 hours straight. If the employee doesn't like it there's plenty of others. You can put the blame on the employer, but I've always thought the problem was that these people are dependent on employment in the first place. Self-sufficiency isn't the same option it might have been. Or one could talk about immigration and say the overall population has increased faster than the pace of employment opportunities could keep up, changing the supply-demand balance, and leading to a negative reinforcing cycle of lower wages.
You don't hear farmers and ranchers complaining, do you? Do away with food stamps and you've killed the most right wing reactionary group of people there is.
