47M Americans hit by food stamp cuts starting today

[CaseyJones]

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/11/01/food-stamps-snap-cuts-farm-bill/3346341/


Food stamp benefits will be cut to more than 47 million Americans starting Friday as a temporary boost to the federal program comes to an end without a new budget from a deadlocked Congress to replace it.

Under the program, known formally as the Supplemental Nutrition and Assistance Program, or SNAP, a family of four who get $668 per month in benefits will find that amount cut by $36.

SNAP, which benefits 1 in 7 Americans, is administered by the department of Agriculture and is authorized in a five-year omnibus farm bill covering all agricultural programs.

Vulnerable populations will be hardest hit by the cuts. In New York, more than 1 million elderly people or those with disabilities will feel the impact, according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, a progressive think tank. About 2.3 million children in both California and Texas will be affected.

[Zippyjuan]

As is shown, the cuts are very small. Averages about $10 per person in the household a month (33 cents a day). It is the end of a temporary increase made early on in the economic crisis. Won't be that significant.

[eduardo89]

I feel so bad for them :rolleyes:

[mrsat_98]

I feel so bad for them :rolleyes:

I hear that Food Stamp Poisoning is pretty ruff.

[Brian4Liberty]

Small cut in bread, better increase the circuses.

[2young2vote]

Does any family actually get $668 per month? My coworker was telling me how her boyfriends dad gets something like $17 per month and he has to pay for the rest of his family.

[Quark]

Does any family actually get $668 per month? My coworker was telling me how her boyfriends dad gets something like $17 per month and he has to pay for the rest of his family.

My mother got about that much as a single parent with three (teenage) kids when she lost her job, in Pennsylvania. Since I was very young we'd spend whatever we didn't spend on real food on candy, and we purchased things without any regard for being cheap (we'd look at cheaper prices, but never sacrificed if it meant not getting a brand name of something.) It's probably one of the reasons why obesity rates are so much higher among the poor than the middle-class/rich.

Edit: Oh and my mom would sell/trade food stamps for money so she could pay bills.

[HOLLYWOOD]

Could of sustained the current rates of SNAP, instead of increasing the DOD FY14 budget by $28.1 Billion back in June 2013 bill plus supplements for covert OPS around the world for Special Operations Command etc. How about the billions spent on the Department of Propaganda? Department of State $10s of Billions each year to dictators and oppressive regimes around the world. Barry flying Air Force Fun around the planet with it's dozens of support aircraft and thousands of personnel, the waste of government elitist expenditures elsewhere effect the people at home.


Gotta play Devil's advocate to the "dumb-down" American society that has been ingrained with everything being the perception of; Left-Right-Democrypts-Rebloodicans partisan war of Kabuki theater. Government hypocrites are the problem and their nonsense of constant clichés of divide. I'm waiting for Wacko Pelosi to use some of her favorite lines of "Taking away from Children" "Taking food out of babies mouths..." "The republicans..." the partisan crap is recycled, again and again by these con artists it never ends.

Watch closely how politicians play out on this... securing the effects of their partisan congressional districts and their voting drones that occupy those soils/structures.

I have notice and it has been confirmed by grocery clerks I talked to, more and more people using EBT cards. Hooked on .gov crack or hooked because of the destroyed economy by .gov.

Government has created and pushed this dependency-enslavement scheme... and if you think their ideas are horrendous, wait until you see their solutions. Maybe we need subsidence lowered-down to the level of Soylent products before dumbass proletariat wakes up.

[libertariantexas]

My mother got about that much as a single parent with three (teenage) kids when she lost her job, in Pennsylvania. Since I was very young we'd spend whatever we didn't spend on real food on candy, and we purchased things without any regard for being cheap (we'd look at cheaper prices, but never sacrificed if it meant not getting a brand name of something.) It's probably one of the reasons why obesity rates are so much higher among the poor than the middle-class/rich.

Edit: Oh and my mom would sell/trade food stamps for money so she could pay bills.

When I was a young 2LT in the Army (1986), I remember coming out of the field after a week of hard training. Cold, wet, hungry. I stopped at a local grocery store to pick up something to eat. I still remember standing behind a couple of "large and lovely" women with a few rug rats and a cart full of food. All of it name brand, no "generics" for these hard working citizens. They had steaks, chips, candy, soda.

I'm standing behind them with 3 packs of cheap chicken franks and and thinking "what the HELL is wrong with this picture?."

Then they took the "change" from the stamps and bought cigarettes and beer.

Nothing has changed, except it's now harder to buy the cigarettes. Candy, steak, etc are still fine.

If they MUST have food stamps, it should only be for BASIC food. No snacks, no candy, no exotic meats, no sodas. Rice, beans, franks, vegetables, milk should be about it.

These freeloaders should NOT be eating better than working folks...

[tod evans]

47M Americans hit by food stamp cuts starting today

Not really even a good start.

[CaptLouAlbano]

I posted this in a separate thread, but it is germane to this thread so I will repost:

I was in a discussion with some friends the other day and the discussion of the cuts in Food Stamps came up. Being among a conservative group of friends, the discussion surrounded the usual issues of fraud and abuse in the system: "Why should people be allowed to buy soda and junk food with them?", "They should require people to volunteer in order to get them", "Someone shouldn't have cable tv and a cell phone and still get food stamps", etc. All valid points, and not the first time any of us at the table have heard them.

I enjoyed the conversation, along with my pie & coffee, and then someone said, "They need to cut out the abuse, so that the people that really need them can get them". At that point I spoke up.

"Why do people need them?" I asked, without waiting for an answer. "You realize that many people who get food stamps have a job, and fail to earn enough income to support themselves, so why is it on our backs to support them? Aren't we then simply subsidizing the poor decisions that others have made in their life? If someone is 30 years old and their time and talents are only valued at $8/hour, who's fault is that? If a senior citizen worked their entire lives, but did not manage to save and invest properly to provide for themselves in their advanced years, who's fault is that? And why is it our responsibility to feed every single mom who's career skills relegate her to a checkout clerk at a gas station, or every senior that didn't bother to build a proper retirement income for themselves?"

Now, I am a charitable person, and do not want to be viewed as cruel. So I added, "Now sure, there are exceptions to this, and that is where charity should step in, provide the person with some temporary help while the charity works with that person to become self-sufficient, but the notion that we have to supplement the income of every person who made some pretty bad decisions in their lives is crazy."

And that got the ball rolling. I could see the light bulbs going on above people's heads as they started to think about it. One guy said, "You know you are right. My daughter's deadbeat husband walked out on her, left her with three kids a mortgage and all kinds of bills, but she was a nurse, earned a good living, and while she struggled for a bit, she never had to rely on the government for help."

And the examples flowed from there.

Now, this isn't anything new philosophically for folks like us, but was a wake up call for this group of conservative people. They never looked at the issue in that light before. They never considered that food stamps (and for that matter all welfare programs) are nothing more than the taxpayers subsidizing the fact that a significant portion of Americans failed to get the education, experience, and training to make their time and talent valuable to an employer.

[jbauer]

Does any family actually get $668 per month? My coworker was telling me how her boyfriends dad gets something like $17 per month and he has to pay for the rest of his family.

So sad. I have to pay for all my food for my family.

[ghengis86]

I posted this in a separate thread, but it is germane to this thread so I will repost:

I was in a discussion with some friends the other day and the discussion of the cuts in Food Stamps came up. Being among a conservative group of friends, the discussion surrounded the usual issues of fraud and abuse in the system: "Why should people be allowed to buy soda and junk food with them?", "They should require people to volunteer in order to get them", "Someone shouldn't have cable tv and a cell phone and still get food stamps", etc. All valid points, and not the first time any of us at the table have heard them.

I enjoyed the conversation, along with my pie & coffee, and then someone said, "They need to cut out the abuse, so that the people that really need them can get them". At that point I spoke up.

"Why do people need them?" I asked, without waiting for an answer. "You realize that many people who get food stamps have a job, and fail to earn enough income to support themselves, so why is it on our backs to support them? Aren't we then simply subsidizing the poor decisions that others have made in their life? If someone is 30 years old and their time and talents are only valued at $8/hour, who's fault is that? If a senior citizen worked their entire lives, but did not manage to save and invest properly to provide for themselves in their advanced years, who's fault is that? And why is it our responsibility to feed every single mom who's career skills relegate her to a checkout clerk at a gas station, or every senior that didn't bother to build a proper retirement income for themselves?"

Now, I am a charitable person, and do not want to be viewed as cruel. So I added, "Now sure, there are exceptions to this, and that is where charity should step in, provide the person with some temporary help while the charity works with that person to become self-sufficient, but the notion that we have to supplement the income of every person who made some pretty bad decisions in their lives is crazy."

And that got the ball rolling. I could see the light bulbs going on above people's heads as they started to think about it. One guy said, "You know you are right. My daughter's deadbeat husband walked out on her, left her with three kids a mortgage and all kinds of bills, but she was a nurse, earned a good living, and while she struggled for a bit, she never had to rely on the government for help."

And the examples flowed from there.

Now, this isn't anything new philosophically for folks like us, but was a wake up call for this group of conservative people. They never looked at the issue in that light before. They never considered that food stamps (and for that matter all welfare programs) are nothing more than the taxpayers subsidizing the fact that a significant portion of Americans failed to get the education, experience, and training to make their time and talent valuable to an employer.

My only quibble is a fact overlooked; our monetary system, banks and fee driven industry are designed to fuck people out of their hard earned money, keep people in poverty, keep them dumb and uneducated about our evil system of debt-money, inflate away their purchasing power, etc. the system is designed to make you a debt serf and keep you there!

Sure, anyone can pull themselves up by their boot straps, go to night school or learn a new skill or work a couple jobs and improve their lot in life. But everybody is handicapped from the start and the rules of the game we're playing are written by the banks and the powerful for their benefit and to screw the serfs out if every last cent.

Since I've experienced wealth and poverty, I see both sides of the coin. However, I still think people have more control over their own destiny and are not the proverbial victims they claim to be.

More on point, if you can't abolish it, fresh veggies, rice and beans are all that should be afforded. It's a Supplemental program; it's not meant to be the sole nutrition source.

[CaptLouAlbano]

My only quibble is a fact overlooked; our monetary system, banks and fee driven industry are designed to fuck people out of their hard earned money, keep people in poverty, keep them dumb and uneducated about our evil system of debt-money, inflate away their purchasing power, etc. the system is designed to make you a debt serf and keep you there!

Sure, anyone can pull themselves up by their boot straps, go to night school or learn a new skill or work a couple jobs and improve their lot in life. But everybody is handicapped from the start and the rules of the game we're playing are written by the banks and the powerful for their benefit and to screw the serfs out if every last cent.

Agreed on both points. The system is designed to keep people on the dole, not to get them off. In fact, there is a disincentive to better oneself. Say a single mom is making $10/hour and works 40 hrs/wk. She likely gets food stamps, the EITC, assistance for child care, and subsidized (or fully paid for) health insurance. Now, if that single mom goes out and gets herself a part time job on the weekend making that same $10/hr and can work 16 hours over the weekend - she will lose some, if not all of the benefits she receives, effectively nullifying the additional income she receives from the part time job. Why would she bother to do so?

As I said, this is by design. The progressives have created a system that will keep people on the system. By doing so, every election they can pander to those who receive benefits, promise them more, and demonize their opponent as being someone who wants to take away their benefits. That's why across the country Dems win in districts that are heavily populated by those who are on the federal/state dole.

And while I do agree that the monetary system handicaps people, it still boils down to person choices. You can take two people that grew up in the same neighborhood, went to the same school, and had the same lot in life - and one of them is a success and the other one is a fuck up. It all depends on the decisions one makes in their life regarding education, work, and gaining experience. If you study hard in school, work a part time job as a kid (and stick with one employer), chances are even with only a high school education (and maybe some additional training) you can make a decent living. Heck, I have a family member who is a waitress. That's all shes ever done: started out working in a coffee shop as a teen, worked at a diner once she graduated high school, moved to a moderate priced restaurant and now she works at a 5-star restaurant. She probably is pulling in $75K per year.

[osan]

As is shown, the cuts are very small. Averages about $10 per person in the household a month (33 cents a day). It is the end of a temporary increase made early on in the economic crisis. Won't be that significant.

Cue rioting in 4, 3...

[jkob]

There is much more egregious government spending than food stamps.

[heavenlyboy34]

edit: dupe

[heavenlyboy34]

When I was a young 2LT in the Army (1986), I remember coming out of the field after a week of hard training. Cold, wet, hungary. I stopped at a local grocery store to pick up something to eat. I still remember standing behind a couple of "large and lovely" women with a few rug rats and a cart full of food. All of it name brand, no "generics" for these hard working citizens. They had steaks, chips, candy, soda.

I'm standing behind them with 3 packs of cheap chicken franks and and thinking "what the HELL is wrong with this picture?."

Then they took the "change" from the stamps and bought cigarettes and beer.

Nothing has changed, except it's now harder to buy the cigarettes. Candy, steak, etc are still fine.

If they MUST have food stamps, it should only be for BASIC food. No snacks, no candy, no exotic meats, no sodas. Rice, beans, franks, vegetables, milk should be about it.

These freeloaders should NOT be eating better than working folks...

The bankers will not have it, mundane! They care for you far too much. :rolleyes: (JPMorgan funds the EBT program in AZ and probably most/everywhere else) Besides, if they can't get the food stamps, they'll figure out how to get on disability (several hundred FRNs a month that can be spent on anything).

[pcosmar]

There is much more egregious government spending than food stamps.

I agree.
And I hate the welfare system with a passion,, but it is a small fraction of Government waste.

I would much prefer that Corporate Welfare be cut off.. That Weapons R&D be cut off. That Empire expansion end and military spending be cut by at least 90%.
(it is NOT defense)

Hell,, simply ending the War on Drugs would be enough to Fully fund a Social safety net.

[VoluntaryAmerican]

Agreed on both points. The system is designed to keep people on the dole, not to get them off.

Absolutely. Problem -- Solution.

They are creating the problem that they will then "solve". This is the same tactics the mafia use.

[MelissaWV]

There is much more egregious government spending than food stamps.

But the spending on food stamps is certainly among the most insidious. In order to have a population that believes Government is the solution, you have to have a population where the majority is composed of people who make money with Government, or who are supported by it. Many of the biggest companies out there have a Government contract or two or twenty, and many people receive some kind of Government benefit.

The moment people HAVE to pay for themselves, their responsibilities, their mistakes, etc., they become a bit more aware of how much they are taxed (at that point there would be something to tax), how the money is spent, and how people who've never had to feed themselves on what little is left after paying for a bus pass and a basement apartment of dubious safety are making the decisions that splurge the nation's money at the expense of future generations.

[CaptLouAlbano]

I agree. And I hate the welfare system with a passion,, but it is a small fraction of Government waste...Hell,, simply ending the War on Drugs would be enough to Fully fund a Social safety net.

Your math is off here. Welfare spending is around $400B, and when you add in Medicaid (which falls under Health Care) it jumps to $700B. Defense spending is right around $860B (about $150B being on vets). The only thing we spend more on is Pensions (Soc Sec and Gov't Pensions). We only spend about $15B per year on the "Drug War".

While I want to see spending cut in all areas of gov't welfare spending is of particular concern for the two points I have made earlier: the system itself is designed to entrap those who are on it, and the system forces taxpayers to pay for the poor decisions of others.

Joe & Mary never have held down a job for more than 6 months. They get fired or quit every low wage job they have. Mary gets knocked up, Joe becomes "disabled" because he found himself a doc that knows how to work the system. Suddenly we are paying for their house, medical care, food, and everything else under the sun. Even if some day Joe decides he wants to get his family off the system, the system has no incentive for him to do so. As soon as Joe gets a job, he loses a ton of his benefits and is possibly in worse shape than when he was on the dole.

It's fucked up and it needs to end.

[69360]

There is much more egregious government spending than food stamps.

I agree. If we cut all the MIC and overseas spending, nobody would care about the welfare spending. Close all the overseas bases, stop all the foreign aid. If the government is going to spend at least spend it here.

[Ronin Truth]

No doubt about it. Best damn government food stamps can buy. :rolleyes:












A government that robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on the support of Paul.
George Bernard Shaw (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/quotes/authors/g/george_bernard_shaw.html)

[Quark]

These freeloaders should NOT be eating better than working folks...

I agree with your whole post except this. The assumption that all or even a majority of people on food stamps don't work is a fallacious one. For example, out of the 20 years of my life, my mother only didn't work a month or two between jobs, and she probably switched her "main" job four times. Last week she worked a 16 hour straight weekend (two jobs), slept for 4 hours, and then went back to work for eight more hours. She works probably 40 hours a week, between two or three part-time jobs (albeit it isn't as consistent so there could be a week she works much less or a week she works much more) and makes minimum wage or a bit more. Most people I have experienced, who are on food stamps, do work, and my experience is coming from a poor family situation, and knowing many other poor families. Having said that, they're not the most fiscally educated or responsible of people. They'll waste their money on cigarettes, alcohol, toys, etc, etc and they don't save (although our government punishes us if we save anyway.) Anyway, it is accurate to say these people might all be unproductive or lag behind others in society for whichever reasons, but to imply that they do nothing and are lazy (albeit some exist) is to stereotype a huge segment of the American population (1/6th to be exact.)

[juleswin]

But but for every dollar spent on food stamps, it generates $1:75 to the local economy. I dont know exactly where that stat came from but I am confident enough to say that it is BS. Americans are hardy people, they will be ok with this cut.

[juleswin]

But but for every dollar spent on food stamps, it generates $1:75 to the local economy. I dont know exactly where that stat came from but I am confident enough to say that it is BS. Americans are hardy people, they will be ok with this cut.

[oyarde]

I agree with your whole post except this. The assumption that all or even a majority of people on food stamps don't work is a fallacious one. For example, out of the 20 years of my life, my mother only didn't work a month or two between jobs, and she probably switched her "main" job four times. Last week she worked a 16 hour straight weekend (two jobs), slept for 4 hours, and then went back to work for eight more hours. She works probably 40 hours a week, between two or three part-time jobs (albeit it isn't as consistent so there could be a week she works much less or a week she works much more) and makes minimum wage or a bit more. Most people I have experienced, who are on food stamps, do work, and my experience is coming from a poor family situation, and knowing many other poor families. Having said that, they're not the most fiscally educated or responsible of people. They'll waste their money on cigarettes, alcohol, toys, etc, etc and they don't save (although our government punishes us if we save anyway.) Anyway, it is accurate to say these people might all be unproductive or lag behind others in society for whichever reasons, but to imply that they do nothing and are lazy (albeit some exist) is to stereotype a huge segment of the American population (1/6th to be exact.)

While many work , many do not ,1/6 of the population draw, only 60 % of the population even works and half of those pay no Fed tax .Three people in ten prop up the bloated govt with deficit spending.There should be no free lunch .

[tod evans]

We only spend about $15B per year on the "Drug War".


Maybe on it's face there's "only" $15B, in reality it's more than 10X that.

All of the axillary costs are the main reason the WOD continues unabated.

[Quark]

While many work , many do not ,1/6 of the population draw, only 60 % of the population even works and half of those pay no Fed tax .Three people in ten prop up the bloated govt with deficit spending.There should be no free lunch .

Yes, but I was contesting the implication that one who receives food stamps does not work. Which is logically fallacious, because it is structured as an "if - > then" statement. There are plenty of people not on food stamps who don't work, as well, including: the retired elderly, children under 18 whose parents don't receive food stamps, etc, etc.

[emazur]

If they MUST have food stamps, it should only be for BASIC food. No snacks, no candy, no exotic meats, no sodas. Rice, beans, franks, vegetables, milk should be about it.

These freeloaders should NOT be eating better than working folks...

Man, have I got an article that'll piss you off:
Hipsters on Food Stamps (http://www.salon.com/2010/03/16/hipsters_food_stamps_pinched/)

In the John Waters-esque sector of northwest Baltimore — equal parts kitschy, sketchy, artsy and weird — Gerry Mak and Sarah Magida sauntered through a small ethnic market stocked with Japanese eggplant, mint chutney and fresh turmeric. After gathering ingredients for that evening’s dinner, they walked to the cash register and awaited their moments of truth.

“I have $80 bucks left!” Magida said. “I’m so happy!”

“I have $12,” Mak said with a frown.

The two friends weren’t tabulating the cash in their wallets but what remained of the monthly allotment on their Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program debit cards, the official new term for what are still known colloquially as food stamps.

...

And in cities that are magnets for 20- and 30-something creatives and young professionals, the kinds of food markets that specialize in delectables like artisanal bread, heirloom tomatoes and grass-fed beef have seen significant upticks in food stamp payments among their typical shoppers. At the Wedge, a market in the stylish Uptown neighborhood of Minneapolis; at New Seasons Market, a series of nine specialty stores in and around Portland, Ore.; and at Rainbow Grocery, a stalwart for food lovers in San Francisco’s Mission District, food stamp purchases have doubled in the past year.

“The use has gone way up in the last six months,” said Eric Wilcox, a cashier who has worked at Rainbow Grocery in San Francisco for 10 years. “We’re seeing a lot more young people in their 20s purchasing organic food with food stamp cards. I wouldn’t say it’s limited to hipster people, but I’m certainly surprised to see them with cards.”


The liberals can just say (if they haven't already) that cutting food stamps would be "bad for the economy" since stores are increasingly relying on their customers to use them. It directly lines up with their argument that partially shutting down government offices was bad for the economy - why without IRS agents working, who will go to the local restaurants at lunch time?

By the way, an adult male can eat quite decently for $75 ~ $100 month (I know, I've had to do it) by cooking for himself. $50 to $60 is OK if only drinking water. Contrary to liberal claims that fast food's cheapness suckers in the poor and makes them unhealthy, it is MUCH cheaper and healthier to buy mostly fresh food.

[pcosmar]

I can't wait for the checks to Government Workers to stop.

State and county offices,, police,, prosecutors,, sundry functionaries..

Then you will see the real "shit fit" starting.

[RickyJ]

a family of four who get $668 per month in benefits

You can get quite a lot of food for that even for 4 people in one month. I don't think losing 36 bucks from this is going to hurt them one bit. I had no idea they got so much, I thought it was a much lower amount than that.

[Rudeman]

That seems like a lot of money for food. Even with the reduction that's almost $160 a month per person or a little more than $5.25 a day. I didn't realize it was that much, wasn't there a politician saying how hard it was for a family to be on food stamps? I could easily live off of that much money for food (I spend less that that right now).

[GunnyFreedom]

One thing that has surprised me so far is that the social services case workers mostly don't like the welfare state, and are unhappy about the fraud and abuse in the FNS program. I expected most of them would be hard-left pro-welfare bleeding heart liberal do-gooders. I was wrong. Most of them so far appear to be more conservative leaning than the average for what precincts they live in. They either finally ended up at a job and committed to do that job as best they can, or started out with a bleeding heart and had their mind changed by seeing how things worked in the real world.

[GunnyFreedom]

That seems like a lot of money for food. Even with the reduction that's almost $160 a month per person or a little more than $5.25 a day. I didn't realize it was that much, wasn't there a politician saying how hard it was for a family to be on food stamps? I could easily live off of that much money for food (I spend less that that right now).

Max benefit until October 31st was $200 per month per person. Max benefit November 1 and forward is $189 per month per person.

Min benefit until October 31st was $16 per month per person. Min benefit November 1 and forward is $15 per month per person.

[RJB]

They either finally ended up at a job and committed to do that job as best they can, or started out with a bleeding heart and had their mind changed by seeing how things worked in the real world.
I agree, many have their eyes opened with that line of work.

However, I'm also surprised at the amount of people who will in one breath decry this system and sound like conservatives or libertarians, but then talk about how awesome Obama is or how Democrats will stop the evil republicans.

[RonPaulFanInGA]

How will this poor woman survive?

http://imageshack.us/a/img404/1423/6zot.jpg

[heavenlyboy34]

Man, have I got an article that'll piss you off:
Hipsters on Food Stamps (http://www.salon.com/2010/03/16/hipsters_food_stamps_pinched/)


The liberals can just say (if they haven't already) that cutting food stamps would be "bad for the economy" since stores are increasingly relying on their customers to use them. It directly lines up with their argument that partially shutting down government offices was bad for the economy - why without IRS agents working, who will go to the local restaurants at lunch time?

By the way, an adult male can eat quite decently for $75 ~ $100 month (I know, I've had to do it) by cooking for himself. $50 to $60 is OK if only drinking water. Contrary to liberal claims that fast food's cheapness suckers in the poor and makes them unhealthy, it is MUCH cheaper and healthier to buy mostly fresh food.
Truth. You can make ~twice as much food fresh as you can buy from a fast food or other type of restaurant. (btw, you should say 'socialist' or 'left liberal'
instead of 'liberal'. "Liberal" has a very specific meaning-see Mises, et al)

[heavenlyboy34]

I agree, many have their eyes opened with that line of work.

However, I'm also surprised at the amount of people who will in one breath decry this system and sound like conservatives or libertarians, but then talk about how awesome Obama is or how Democrats will stop the evil republicans.
It's a cognitive dissonance coping method. Much like those who remain conservative even after being shown its many failures, inner contradictions, and horrifying political theory.