Food Stamps Surge But Release Was Strategically Delayed

[AuH20]

9 days overdue. The commissars love altering or delaying key economic data until the election was over.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2012-11-10/foodstamps-surge-most-one-year-new-all-time-record-delayed-release

[angelatc]

Yeah. We bought a foreclosure, so I was pretty well versed in the numbers that were available around here. I noticed that about 6 weeks before the election, the HUD and FNMA listings started dropping off. They were selling the homes that were there, but no new listings were coming to the market. I can only assume that was to keep prices up.

Our county usually had 10 - 15 active HUD listings. It was down to 1 for the past 2 weeks. This week, back up to 7.

[oyarde]

The Food Stamp President should be proud of all of other peoples money he is giving away.

[kcchiefs6465]

The Food Stamp President should be proud of all of other peoples money he is giving away.
Which monies of the people are given to food stamp recipients? I understand the unseen inflation 'tax,' but I was just wondering what part of your taxes goes towards food card recipients? Would you be opposed to slashing the military budget in half? (which is still enough to engage in two simultaneous battles the size of Desert Storm at the same time? SNAP, the last time I'd heard, was roughly 70 billion a year) The 'Defense' budget is upwards of 660 billion. What I really want to ask is are you willing to compromise to feed those born in underhanded situations i.e. children of impoverished families, those in-between jobs, etc. by eliminating some of the obvious waste and preferential contracts (to enable the obvious waste) to the M.I.C.? I feel I know your position well enough to understand that you want to eliminate all 'defense' waste.. I just wonder if you could make a compromise that while cutting 300 billion from the Defense's budget to use roughly a quarter of it to pay for SNAP.

[angelatc]

Which monies of the people are given to food stamp recipients? I understand the unseen inflation 'tax,' but I was just wondering what part of your taxes goes towards food card recipients? Would you be opposed to slashing the military budget in half? (which is still enough to engage in two simultaneous battles the size of Desert Storm at the same time? SNAP, the last time I'd heard, was roughly 70 billion a year) The 'Defense' budget is upwards of 660 billion. What I really want to ask is are you willing to feed those born in underhanded situations i.e. children of impoverished families, those in-between jobs, etc. by eliminating some of the obvious waste and preferential contracts (to enable the obvious waste) to the M.I.C.? I feel I know your position well enough to understand that you want to eliminate all 'defense' waste.. I just wonder if you could make a compromise that while cutting 300 billion from the Defense's budget to use roughly a quarter of it to pay for SNAP.

Ron Paul supports that. Me, not so much. I want to abolish welfare - I don't actually care about the children of other people. When I do, I'll give them money. Until then, they need to stop voting for mine.

I'm am quite weary of the mindset that it's too much to expect people to even feed themselves. But since we have a nation of perpetual children, I would settle for handing the responsibility off to the states. Wealth redistribution isn't the proper role of federal government.

[oyarde]

Which monies of the people are given to food stamp recipients? I understand the unseen inflation 'tax,' but I was just wondering what part of your taxes goes towards food card recipients? Would you be opposed to slashing the military budget in half? (which is still enough to engage in two simultaneous battles the size of Desert Storm at the same time? SNAP, the last time I'd heard, was roughly 70 billion a year) The 'Defense' budget is upwards of 660 billion. What I really want to ask is are you willing to compromise to feed those born in underhanded situations i.e. children of impoverished families, those in-between jobs, etc. by eliminating some of the obvious waste and preferential contracts (to enable the obvious waste) to the M.I.C.? I feel I know your position well enough to understand that you want to eliminate all 'defense' waste.. I just wonder if you could make a compromise that while cutting 300 billion from the Defense's budget to use roughly a quarter of it to pay for SNAP. If you are asking me if I want food stamps eliminated , the answer, is most absolutely, YES! Return that money to the taxpayers and there will not be a need for anything that private charity cannot fulfil. Military spending, would need its own thread , at least there is a role for Fed govt, there, none in the dole business of food , zero.

[Philosophy_of_Politics]

If people weren't so easily offended . . . the truth is that the people on Welfare should be the one's being taxed. Not the rich. Why? The one's on welfare are the one taking away the public's money, and they have a legal as well as moral obligation to pay back that money.

[oyarde]

Article One, Section Eight, does not cover giving away food, for good reason .

[kcchiefs6465]

If you are asking me if I want food stamps eliminated , the answer, is most absolutely, YES! Return that money to the taxpayers and there will not be a need for anything that private charity cannot fulfil. Military spending, would need its own thread , at least there is a role for Fed govt, there, none in the dole business of food , zero.
You are mistaken when you say, "Return that money to the taxpayers and there will not be a need for anything that private charity cannot fulfil." Families are still going hungry with SNAP and charity. I am not sure you have lived how many have been born unto. Many people receiving the food card would want nothing more than an honest job to afford the bare neccessities. A job isn't always easily available when five thousand people show up to a job fair hiring fifty. I do not want the usual copout of Constitutionality to answer this question: Would you be comfortable to compromise and pay for SNAP (Roughly 70 billion) when eliminating 350 billion from the MIC?

ETA:
Defense spending in 2008 totalled 607,263m ($1,697 per capita)(4%of GDP). U.S. spent more on defense than next 15 highest countries combined with 41.5% of world total. (Although population is less than 5% of world total) U.S. is largest exporter of arms (Worth 14 billion in 2006 or 51.9% world total. In January 2009 we had 2,202 strategic nuclear warheads (intercontinental ballistic missiles, submarine-launched ballistic missiles, and bombers) Also 500 non-strategic warheads. There are a further 2,500 nuclear warheads in reserve and another 4,200 hundred nuclear warheads set to be dismantled.

[tod evans]

I'm in the "it's not the federal governments place" crowd.

Food-stamps are one of many programs used to justify an out of control, self perpetuating federal government by tugging on heartstrings. Welfare is another, Medicade too..

And as a group the citizenry has fallen for this charade so long that now the recipients are an honest to goodness voting block.

Yes the government is out of control, yes undeclared wars are unconstitutional but using federal money to literally breed and feed a voting block is not only unconstitutional it's unethical as well.


Which monies of the people are given to food stamp recipients? I understand the unseen inflation 'tax,' but I was just wondering what part of your taxes goes towards food card recipients? Would you be opposed to slashing the military budget in half? (which is still enough to engage in two simultaneous battles the size of Desert Storm at the same time? SNAP, the last time I'd heard, was roughly 70 billion a year) The 'Defense' budget is upwards of 660 billion. What I really want to ask is are you willing to compromise to feed those born in underhanded situations i.e. children of impoverished families, those in-between jobs, etc. by eliminating some of the obvious waste and preferential contracts (to enable the obvious waste) to the M.I.C.? I feel I know your position well enough to understand that you want to eliminate all 'defense' waste.. I just wonder if you could make a compromise that while cutting 300 billion from the Defense's budget to use roughly a quarter of it to pay for SNAP.

[kathy88]

Just because one may be sympathetic to the premise does not justify the act. Living in a rural community I can assure you up to 80 percent of food stamp recipients are abusing the system. Probably 30 percent sell them and another huge chunk lie about their income to get them, leaving out a household income.

[tod evans]

Who was that said something along the lines of " If you give the people the right to vote themselves access to a nations treasure they will"?

[Occam's Banana]

Who was that said something along the lines of " If you give the people the right to vote themselves access to a nations treasure they will"?

When the people discover that they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic. - Benjamin Franklin

It may well be apocryphal. I've never seen an exact source cited for it. Frankly, it doesn't really sound like something he might have said.

It's also quite similar to the following:


A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the majority discovers it can vote itself largess out of the public treasury. After that, the majority always votes for the candidate promising the most benefits with the result the democracy collapses because of the loose fiscal policy ensuing, always to be followed by a dictatorship, then a monarchy.

That one's been attributed to Alexis de Tocqueville and Alexander Fraser Tytler (a Scottish lawyer).

[CaptUSA]

KC, I'd probably still be against it even if it worked, but let's not fool ourselves into believing that it does.

In order to provide this money, the government first has to take it from somewhere. They can either take it in taxes, borrow it, or deflate the currency by printing more money. All of those options robs the nation of wealth - which, in turn, makes things harder for those in poverty.

I'm with you on cutting the MIC, and yes, we could save loads of cash. However, I believe in charity. When the nation has more wealth, there is a naturally occuring phenomenon that people with excess wealth develop a need to do more. They can satisfy this need with charitable giving. It is not charity to steal from someone to provide for someone else.

[rprprs]

Just because one may be sympathetic to the premise does not justify the act. Living in a rural community I can assure you up to 80 percent of food stamp recipients are abusing the system. Probably 30 percent sell them and another huge chunk lie about their income to get them, leaving out a household income.
Living in an urban community, I suspect the statistics re abuse are no more favorable to the program than in your rural setting.


You are mistaken when you say, "Return that money to the taxpayers and there will not be a need for anything that private charity cannot fulfil." Families are still going hungry with SNAP and charity. I am not sure you have lived how many have been born unto. Many people receiving the food card would want nothing more than an honest job to afford the bare neccessities. A job isn't always easily available when five thousand people show up to a job fair hiring fifty. I do not want the usual copout of Constitutionality to answer this question: Would you be comfortable to compromise and pay for SNAP (Roughly 70 billion) when eliminating 350 billion from the MIC?...
Were I to be "king of the country", I would most certainly attack the MIC first..and hardest. I doubt many here fail to see that, ideally, it should be the primary target in any 'cutback' effort to rein in federal spending. But would I then leave SNAP and other welfare state programs off the hook? I think not.
Said programs are not only unconstitutional and 'unethical' (as tod evans pointed out above), they are largely immoral also. They perpetuate a culture of dependency and consign millions in future generations to a similar fate. Progressive arguments on behalf of these programs totally miss the point that one could not advocate for such an outcome and be truly compassionate. So, under any scenario, would I feel 'comfortable' leaving these programs intact? No, I would not.

[ShaneEnochs]

I had an attitude much the same as most of the people here. I called welfare recipients lazy, leaches, etc. At least I did until I lost my job and health insurance and we didn't have enough money to buy food and medical care. Foodstamps and medicaid are a safety net that I am most grateful for.

[tod evans]

Shane,
I haven't called anybody anything in this thread...But wouldn't it be better for you, your family and your community if aid such as you have used was provided locally?

If the federal government and all of its employees were out of the mix local charities, who have their finger on the local economy, could provide help with work as well as food and medical care.

Expecting Washington to manage or even fund programs that locals can do more efficiently just feeds the beast, and in my opinion Washington and every single person who receives a check from the federal government is part of the "Beast" that's eating our nation from within.

Picking one program or another to attack or support still permits the "Beast" to grow, it may be too late to stop? I hope not for my son's sake.

[angelatc]

You are mistaken when you say, "Return that money to the taxpayers and there will not be a need for anything that private charity cannot fulfil." Families are still going hungry with SNAP and charity

Nonsense. Name one. If a poor kid goes to school, he eats 2 free meals a day. There is also thriving black market in food stamps, meaning that there's waste and fraud rampant in that system too. (No incentive to clean it up - the perps vote Democrat.)

Poor people in America live better than middle class Europeans. Although if we keep spending more and more on government handouts, people will indeed get poorer, which is what the Democrats want.

Sure, we need to stop spending so much on defense, but that doesn't mean we need the government to spend it somewhere else.

[angelatc]

I had an attitude much the same as most of the people here. I called welfare recipients lazy, leaches, etc. At least I did until I lost my job and health insurance and we didn't have enough money to buy food and medical care. Foodstamps and medicaid are a safety net that I am most grateful for.

Congratulations. You're a liberal.

[ShaneEnochs]

Congratulations. You're a liberal.

Awesome.

[rprprs]

You are mistaken when you say, "Return that money to the taxpayers and there will not be a need for anything that private charity cannot fulfil." Families are still going hungry with SNAP and charity...
Moreover, what does THAT say about the efficacy of the program?

[angelatc]

Awesome.

I hope you're being sarcastic. But I think you're not. I think you're just the next generation, to the manner born, unable to fathom a world without government largesse and democratic "benevolence." Big Brother is good, after all. Who'da thunk it?

These programs didn't exist in their current forms when I was a kid. I grew up in a lower working class neighborhood, and nobody starved to death. Nobody died from not going to the doctor. And there were more, better jobs. People your age had savings accounts that they could dip into when they encountered a financial hardship.

These acts of compassion require a government that forcibly takes assets away from people who work and hands them out to people who don't. No It's not charity, it's wealth redistribution. And it's a terribly inefficient method of even that.

[tod evans]

Moreover, what does THAT say about the efficacy of the program?

Tells me there's way too many federal employees sucking on the same tit.

[angelatc]

Moreover, what does THAT say about the efficacy of the program?

That's a really good point too. But liberals just can't wrap their heads around the fact that making people poorer (through higher taxes, including inflation) makes people poorer.

[ShaneEnochs]

I hope you're being sarcastic. But I think you're not. I think you're just the next generation, to the manner born, unable to fathom a world without government largesse and democratic "benevolence." Big Brother is good, after all. Who'da thunk it?

These programs didn't exist in their current forms when I was a kid. I grew up in a lower working class neighborhood, and nobody starved to death. Nobody died from not going to the doctor. And there were more, better jobs.

These acts of compassion require a government that forcibly takes assets away from people who work and hands them out to people who don't. No It's not charity, it's wealth redistribution. And it's a terribly inefficient method of even that.

I'm not sure if that was supposed to offend me or scare me straight or whatever. Either way, it didn't. I got benefits from a program I paid into. Am I supposed to feel bad about that? Because I don't.

[angelatc]

I'm not sure if that was supposed to offend me or scare me straight or whatever. Either way, it didn't. I got benefits from a program I paid into. Am I supposed to feel bad about that? Because I don't.

No, I don't care about that. We're doing the same thing. But you were making noises that sounded like you believed they were a necessary evil.

What I am saying is that if you find yourself in the voting booth choosing the candidate who is promising you other people's money instead of asking you to start a savings account so you can take care of yourself, then their mission has been accomplished.

Believe it or not, that's how we used to do it. Seems barbaric to some people, but it's actually very empowering. Maybe that's the benefit/curse of having a few years on me - I know damned well that people lived better when they weren't sucking the government teat at every opportunity/

My Dad laid carpet. Not a power career by any stretch. Mom stayed home until I started school. They had a house, 2 cars (1 new - they paid cash) and money in the bank. Vacations every year. Then the government started their war on poverty.

[ShaneEnochs]

No, I don't care about that. We're doing the same thing. But you were making noises that sounded like you believed they were a necessary evil.

What I am saying is that if you find yourself in the voting booth choosing the candidate who is promising you other people's money instead of asking you to start a savings account so you can take care of yourself, then their mission has been accomplished.

Believe it or not, that's how we used to do it. Seems barbaric to some people, but it's actually very empowering. Maybe that's the benefit/curse of having a few years on me - I know damned well that people lived better when they weren't sucking the government teat at every opportunity/

I'm actually very good at saving. Before I lost my job, I had about 5 grand saved up (I was 23 at the time). Then I went through a divorce and custody hearings (which burned 3 grand), bankruptcy (1.2 grand), and had to move in order for the judge to give me partial custody which burned the rest of it. It was a shit storm. All that happened about a year ago. But I should be starting my new job soon and I'll be able to save again.

[rprprs]

I'm not sure if that was supposed to offend me or scare me straight or whatever. Either way, it didn't. I got benefits from a program I paid into. Am I supposed to feel bad about that? Because I don't.
Shane, I don't mean to make this personal, and I am not the hard-nosed, dispassionate person that some of my other posts in this thread might suggest I am.
But one might argue that you might have, at least, been able to postpone your reliance on these programs had you NOT first paid into them.
There may be some need for some limited safety nets in society, but it would be hard to support the bloated and abused form they have taken on. What should be a last resort option, has, for far too many, become the de facto first.

[ShaneEnochs]

Shane, I don't mean to make this personal, and I am not the hard-nosed, dispassionate person that some of my other posts in this thread might suggest I am.
But one might argue that you would have, at least, been able to postpone your reliance on these programs had you NOT first paid into them.
There may be some need for some limited safety nets in society, but it would be hard to support the bloated and abused form they have taken on. What should be a last resort option, has, for far too many, become the de facto first.

Well, obviously if I hadn't been taxed I would have been able to keep more of my money, and saved more money, but that's not what happened. I paid taxes. That's the reason Ron Paul collects social security.

[tod evans]

Then the government started their war on poverty.

The crux of the problem....

[rprprs]

Well, obviously if I hadn't been taxed I would have been able to keep more of my money, and saved more money, but that's not what happened. I paid taxes. That's the reason Ron Paul collects social security.
It is also the reason I collect social security.*
But that doesn't make me (or Ron Paul) 'grateful' for the program.

*See, MSM, we are not all teenagers living in our parent's basements. ;)

[ShaneEnochs]

It is also the reason I collect social security.*
But that doesn't make me (or Ron Paul) 'grateful' for the program.

*See, MSM, we are not all teenagers living in our parent's basements. ;)

Well, regardless of how you or Ron Paul feel, I was grateful.

[dinosaur]

The Department of Agriculture budget is about 154.5 billion. Food stamps account for about 80 billion of that. Eliminate the whole Department of Agriculture and we would be at least 10% of the way there towards balancing the budget since the US gov. is expected to take in about 2900 billion and spend about 3800 billion in 2013. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2013_United_States_federal_budget

Worse times are ahead, and it would be good for people to start the process of finding creative ways to produce food for themselves now. The sooner that we get off government dependence, the better.

Edit: We are Americans, we could do this. We could band together as communities and find ways to raise chickens and produce vegetables and milk.

[Antischism]

Welfare only exists to stop Class revolt and keep people complacent in their current situation. While I don't advocate the complete destruction of all safety nets, the sooner we get people away from government dependence, the better off we'll be as a nation. You can't just cut everything off and expect people to listen to the message, though. You have to start chipping away at the social safety nets a little at a time, as it would be easier on the citizenry, while dismantling the Military Industrial Complex and cutting all our overseas spending.

If you want to scare people away from the message of freedom, by all means, keep spouting off about how they're all leeches and their benefits need to be stripped immediately. I see a lot of this, and quite frankly, it makes me cringe. Instead, be more compassionate about the issue, and explain why getting off of government dependence is a good thing, but that limited safety nets can be available for those who truly need it.

You have to realize that the people who are benefiting from wealth redistribution aren't evil; the real evil is in Washington, keeping the nation numb and complacent in order to avoid Class warfare and a revolution. They're buying votes with promises of social benefits.

Why don't we focus more on the idea of ending our occupation of other countries, cutting back on defense and ending the war on drugs when speaking to people who are on benefits and less likely to hear the message otherwise? Most people are very receptive of that.

[tod evans]

We need to do all of the things you've listed, and in my opinion "The People" would be much more receptive to slashing social programs if they saw government employees getting the ax first.

It really doesn't have anything to do with "class warfare", it has to do with one group (govt. employees) still drawing a check while the other group (welfare/foodstamp etc) get cut......So fire the entire alphabet group of government, you know the ones not authorized in the constitution...

[Origanalist]

It's tough to fire a group of people when they have successfully defined themselves as your boss.

[AuH20]

The U.S. is the most obese nation by a sizable margin, and nevertheless the food stamp sickness keeps being expanded to such a degree, that you currently have college students utlizing it in mass numbers. The original spirit of the program was intended to supplement hard cases stricken by extreme poverty as opposed to hipsters.

[Origanalist]

The U.S. is the most obese nation by a sizable margin, and nevertheless the food stamp sickness keeps being expanded to such a degree, that you currently have college students utlizing it in mass numbers. The original spirit of the program was intended to supplement hard cases stricken by extreme poverty as opposed to hipsters.

How the times have changed, I'm old enough to remember shame being attached to living off other peoples money.

[seraphson]

Article One, Section Eight, does not cover giving away food, for good reason .

Sounds simple but when put into practice of an actual argument you have to spend about what feels about a decade on defining the word "general" in the general welfare clause to say, a liberal. Unfortunately most people think "General" means whenever/wherever floats your boat. After explaining what general means they should understand that the general welfare clause was written in such a fashion that it pretty much just covers defense of the nation. What a lot of people don't realize is that virtually all "Great society/new deal" welfare is not "general welfare". It always caters to a specific group as in one set of people gets benefits at the expense of the other. The same cannot be said about a constitutional "just wars" type military. Unfortunately our current military consists of preemptive, war mongering, "democracy spreading", Rome-esq imperialism.

In regards to welfare I'm always pro real compassionate welfare (aka not filling in an oval bubble next to a dictator's name to transfer money around) and say we go all charity (like how it used to be in the "brutish" days, you know, when 90% of society wasn't mulling around gawking at their iPhone); that is after all real compassion that most of these liberals preach about giving from their ivory towers. Unfortunately the government takes about a 1/4 of my entire pay and pretty much handles whatever charity I would have done otherwise. Once again big bro attempts to take over actions I would otherwise do with more individual responsibility and personal discretion and instead they turn it into a combined +$100 Trillion dollar unfunded liability. Of course this doesn't include the near malevolent level of moral hazard big bro created in the first place promising all the patsies the moon and the sun. This just compounded the problem enormously which is why most "pro-welfare" people see voluntary charity as meager and insufficient.

[Meatwasp]

I had an attitude much the same as most of the people here. I called welfare recipients lazy, leaches, etc. At least I did until I lost my job and health insurance and we didn't have enough money to buy food and medical care. Foodstamps and medicaid are a safety net that I am most grateful for.
Oh Fish go to the feed stores and buy sack of wheat and corn. Also a sack of beans. I did kept my family from starving. I am sick of excuses to have welfare.

[ShaneEnochs]

Oh Fish go to the feed stores and buy sack of wheat and corn. Also a sack of beans. I did kept my family from starving. I am sick of excuses to have welfare.

I grew up on cornbread and brown beans.

[oyarde]

Who was that said something along the lines of " If you give the people the right to vote themselves access to a nations treasure they will"? Ben Franklin

[oyarde]

When the people find that they can vote themselves money , it will herald the end of the republic , something to that effect . He was correct , the Republic is dead , the socialists outnumber the rest.The takers outnumber the highly productive , doomed to failure.

[NoOneButPaul]

It gets harder and harder to believe that any of this can be salvaged or saved.

The best thing to do is just prepare for yourself.

[Meatwasp]

I grew up on cornbread and brown beans.
Good .That is a complete protein. Go back to that.

[Feeding the Abscess]

I'm wondering when people in the movement, who correctly see welfare as socialism and wish to end it immediately, will do the same with the military/DoD.

[Brian4Liberty]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=luo40WjBKWI

[Meatwasp]

I greatly wish you could move closer to farms. My two sisters in Missouri has apples falling off the trees rotting. I am sure if you were close to farms you could pick left over vegetables that the workers left. Also Idaho has some private deal going where you can get all the fruit and vegetables you need. Remember the saying," So you shall seek so will you find." Good luck

[tod evans]

I'm wondering when people in the movement, who correctly see welfare as socialism and wish to end it immediately, will do the same with the military/DoD.

The founders proscribed for a national defense, however I seriously doubt the envisioned 20-40% of our GDP being spent on it...

[angelatc]

Well, regardless of how you or Ron Paul feel, I was grateful.

And that's the generational divide. Us older people are pissed because the system is such a burden that it's pulling all of us into it. Poverty for all - hurrah!

Kids like you don't have a clue that it wasn't always like this.

Dude, my husband had a freaking stroke while we were uninsured. We didn't qualify for Medicaid because we still weren't destitute. The Catholic hospital didn't charge us a dime, while the government would have taken everything we owned if we had needed to rely on them. The only bill we had was from the county, for the ambulance. Apparently paying taxes isn't enough to actually cover anything substantial when you need it.

I was grateful for the charity. Not so much for the government.

[liveandletlive]

Many college students are turning to foodstamps too, cant blame em. how the hell can they support themselves with tuition, a part time job with these costs.

[angelatc]

Many college students are turning to foodstamps too, cant blame em. how the hell can they support themselves with tuition, a part time job with these costs.

How about money from home? That's the time-honored tradition.

Students in college should be automatically disqualified from foodstamps. If they're hungry, let them work full time and go to school part time.

[tod evans]

How about money from home? That's the time-honored tradition.

Students in college should be automatically disqualified from foodstamps. If they're hungry, let them work full time and go to school part time.

Pay your own way? :eek: Blasphemy!....

[ShaneEnochs]

And that's the generational divide. Us older people are pissed because the system is such a burden that it's pulling all of us into it. Poverty for all - hurrah!

Kids like you don't have a clue that it wasn't always like this.

Dude, my husband had a freaking stroke while we were uninsured. We didn't qualify for Medicaid because we still weren't destitute. The Catholic hospital didn't charge us a dime, while the government would have taken everything we owned if we had needed to rely on them. The only bill we had was from the county, for the ambulance. Apparently paying taxes isn't enough to actually cover anything substantial when you need it.

I was grateful for the charity. Not so much for the government.

There's no reason to be condescending. I grew up so poor that we had to steal coal from trains to heat our house. I know what it is to be poor.

[heavenlyboy34]

Nonsense. Name one. If a poor kid goes to school, he eats 2 free meals a day. There is also thriving black market in food stamps, meaning that there's waste and fraud rampant in that system too. (No incentive to clean it up - the perps vote Democrat.)

Poor people in America live better than middle class Europeans. Although if we keep spending more and more on government handouts, people will indeed get poorer, which is what the Democrats want.

Sure, we need to stop spending so much on defense, but that doesn't mean we need the government to spend it somewhere else.
Aren't they up to 3 now? I've heard rumblings and rumors of adding dinner to the government school meal program the last year or so.

[tod evans]

Aren't they up to 3 now? I've heard rumblings and rumors of adding dinner to the government school meal program the last year or so.

Why yeah, you don't mind if they devalue your savings just a little more do you?

After all, it's for the children...

[angelatc]

Aren't they up to 3 now? I've heard rumblings and rumors of adding dinner to the government school meal program the last year or so.

Probably in the cities.

[angelatc]

There's no reason to be condescending. I grew up so poor that we had to steal coal from trains to heat our house. I know what it is to be poor.

I don't mean to be condescending. I am sorry, because I actually think the world of you.

[angelatc]

As an example as how much things have changed though, my grandfather dropped dead of a heart attack when grandmother was pregnant with kid #9. There was no social safety net, and I won't pretend that life was easy for them. Heck, life was pretty tough when they had one income.

But she went out and got a job, and they survived.

No way could she do that today.

[heavenlyboy34]

Probably in the cities.
I should write a satirical story about how kids are born and raised in government schools in the future. It would be depressingly hilarious. :D

[oyarde]

All charity has to be handled at a local level to be effecient. No person must agree with me. Please understand, no argument you can make will change my mind . Congress has no , I say again , no authority to tax and spend on food. Any person who votes for this has broken an Oath to uphold the Supreme Law of the Land and has stolen from the people.

[oyarde]

Many college students are turning to foodstamps too, cant blame em. how the hell can they support themselves with tuition, a part time job with these costs. In that case , they do not belong in school ,they should be working. I never pd for any school , my employers pd . , they did so willingly , very little cost to them for me to continue making them money. Facinating concept, I know , get a job first , instead of running up debt, looking for a free meal from someone who works harder than you to pay for it.

[Feeding the Abscess]

In that case , they do not belong in school ,they should be working. I never pd for any school , my employers pd . , they did so willingly , very little cost to them for me to continue making them money. Facinating concept, I know , get a job first , instead of running up debt, looking for a free meal from someone who works harder than you to pay for it.

Problem is, thanks to government, tuition costs today aren't anywhere near as affordable as they were when you went to school. Most kids who want to go to school today don't have a choice other than going into debt.


The founders proscribed for a national defense, however I seriously doubt the envisioned 20-40% of our GDP being spent on it...

While that may be, government run defense is still socialism, just as Social Security, Medicare, or food stamps are.

[oyarde]

Yes, there are choices , tuition , has, and always will be expensive,it is not for everyone,regardless of what bunk people have been lead to believe and in the current economy , not wise for most ,if someone thinks things are suddenly going to heal themselves and be 1950 or 60, that is foolish.

[oyarde]

You pay for it, or, you do not ,choice, some kid, busting his ass for 12 or 13 dollars an hour , 50 hours a week , should not have tax money going to a meal or education for someone else.Failure to understand this, sadly , no hope for any of you :). This is the Liberty board, I feel liKE I am on some OTHER , type of board...

[angelatc]

You pay for it, or, you do not ,choice, some kid, busting his ass for 12 or 13 dollars an hour , 50 hours a week , should not have tax money going to a meal or education for someone else.Failure to understand this, sadly , no hope for any of you :). This is the Liberty board, I feel liKE I am on some OTHER , type of board...

You're not alone here. I started off paying my own tuition, 1 or 2 classes a semester, at night, at a Jr college. Then I got a job at a company that paid tuition. I just checked - they still pay tuition.

This sense of entitlement is what will stop the Revolution. Life's too hard, and/or expensive without government, it seems.

[idiom]

From the OP:


Finally, going back to the start of the official start of the depression in December 2007. In the 57 months from then until August 2012, there have been 4.6 million jobs lost even as Americans on foodstamps and disability have risen by 21.2 million.

http://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/images/user5/imageroot/2012/10-2/Jobs%20vs%20Foodstamps%20and%20Disability%20August _0.jpg

[angelatc]

Yes, there are choices , tuition , has, and always will be expensive,it is not for everyone,regardless of what bunk people have been lead to believe and in the current economy , not wise for most ,if someone thinks things are suddenly going to heal themselves and be 1950 or 60, that is foolish.

I found a new talking point that drives progressives into the name-calling mode ASAP: When they claim that we all need college educations, tell them that we certainly don't want to be India.

[Feeding the Abscess]

You pay for it, or, you do not ,choice, some kid, busting his ass for 12 or 13 dollars an hour , 50 hours a week , should not have tax money going to a meal or education for someone else.Failure to understand this, sadly , no hope for any of you :). This is the Liberty board, I feel liKE I am on some OTHER , type of board...

I was discussing kids going into debt to go to school, not necessarily getting loans from the government. I'm obviously opposed to the government paying for school.

[heavenlyboy34]

I found a new talking point that drives progressives into the name-calling mode ASAP: When they claim that we all need college educations, tell them that we certainly don't want to be India. LOL!! You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to angelatc again. :(