US spending on food stamps at all time high

[WisconsinBillzFan]

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/05/26...debate-welfare/

 

Obama promised change and we're getting change all right.

[PearlHowardman]

President Barack H. Obama is a ditherer - just like Dick Cheney said he is.

[RuntheDamnBall]

"...sparking a debate over whether the roughly 40 million people now receiving the latest version of food stamps at a cost of $73 billion a year are a symptom of a weak economy or are part of a long-term expansion in welfare and related programs."

BTW, if you'd gone on to use your awesome reading skills further, you'd see George W. Bush's food stamp program chair mention that the program "responds to the changing economic conditions of the country." If you have a problem with the program itself, that's fine - mention it, and mention your solution. I'm pretty sure "starve the poor children, they should be responsible for themselves," will go over just fine, as I'm also pretty sure you have no other good ideas.

 

Also, in the context-free zone nobody pays attention to inflation, or diabetes, or the consumption of cheap processed foods [mostly grains] vs. real vegetables and a balanced portion of meats. But I understand; all this would get in the way of reactionary headline-browsing.

 

How are the Klan meetings going lately? Now that we're out of winter the fields must be prime for blazin'!

[Gene Frenkle]

BTW, if you'd gone on to use your awesome reading skills further, you'd see George W. Bush's food stamp program chair mention that the program "responds to the changing economic conditions of the country." If you have a problem with the program itself, that's fine - mention it, and mention your solution. I'm pretty sure "starve the poor children, they should be responsible for themselves," will go over just fine, as I'm also pretty sure you have no other good ideas.

 

Also, in the context-free zone nobody pays attention to inflation, or diabetes, or the consumption of cheap processed foods [mostly grains] vs. real vegetables and a balanced portion of meats. But I understand; all this would get in the way of reactionary headline-browsing.

 

How are the Klan meetings going lately? Now that we're out of winter the fields must be prime for blazin'!

Hey, you gotta look out for #1. I don't need no Motherment taking my money to feed no poor kids (especially the non-white ones) - they can get a job like the rest of us. Barry Hussein Obama can stick those food stamps up his ass. It's all about personal responsibility. How they gonna learn if we just give them free food?! Oops, gotta go, time for church...

 

GOD bless America! USA! USA! USA!

[stuckincincy]

OH Governor Ted Strickland - D, by executive order - has given a $100 bonus to Ohio's welfare recipients out of "stimulus" funds. Only a mere $200M+, in a State that has a 7 billion dollar budget deficit.

 

 

We all wait to see how these recipients will get out and stimulate the economy. Booze, pizza, cigs and potatoe chips sales should see a nice bounce.

[IDBillzFan]

Hey, you gotta look out for #1. I don't need no Motherment taking my money to feed no poor kids (especially the non-white ones) - they can get a job like the rest of us. Barry Hussein Obama can stick those food stamps up his ass. It's all about personal responsibility. How they gonna learn if we just give them free food?! Oops, gotta go, time for church...

 

GOD bless America! USA! USA! USA!

What an absolutely oversimplified babblefest of uselessness this post is. I guess it probably makes you feel better, so that's something.

[Dante]

What an absolutely oversimplified babblefest of uselessness this post is. I guess it probably makes you feel better, so that's something.

I have nothing against food stamps for people who are really in trouble and are out of options. But thats the problem. How many people are abusing them? Using them as a crutch or otherwise. If its too convenient to use the government to pay people are going to abuse it.

[DC Tom]

OH Governor Ted Strickland - D, by executive order - has given a $100 bonus to Ohio's welfare recipients out of "stimulus" funds. Only a mere $200M+, in a State that has a 7 billion dollar budget deficit.

 

 

We all wait to see how these recipients will get out and stimulate the economy. Booze, pizza, cigs and potatoe chips sales should see a nice bounce.

 

That is so absolutely !@#$ing ridiculous, I honestly don't believe you, despite having never known you to lie before.

[IDBillzFan]

I have nothing against food stamps for people who are really in trouble and are out of options. But thats the problem. How many people are abusing them? Using them as a crutch or otherwise. If its too convenient to use the government to pay people are going to abuse it.

To once again paraphrase Dennis Miller: I'm happy to help the helpless. The clueless are on their own.

 

But to some, like Frenkle, that's too complicated to consider, and it's easier to believe that if you don't want to help everyone, then you obviously don't want to help anyone, so you must be a big, selfish "me, me, me" dolt who has no feelings and only cares about yourself. It's the perfect liberal argument to satisfy a completely uncomplicated liberal mind.

[Magox]

What an absolutely oversimplified babblefest of uselessness this post is. I guess it probably makes you feel better, so that's something.

Very similar post from what you would expect from David from Norfolk (or whatever the hell his screen name is).

[Gene Frenkle]

To once again paraphrase Dennis Miller: I'm happy to help the helpless. The clueless are on their own.

 

But to some, like Frenkle, that's too complicated to consider, and it's easier to believe that if you don't want to help everyone, then you obviously don't want to help anyone, so you must be a big, selfish "me, me, me" dolt who has no feelings and only cares about yourself. It's the perfect liberal argument to satisfy a completely uncomplicated liberal mind.

Really jackass? How do you propose we separate the helpless from the "clueless"? Cage match?

[Dante]

Really jackass? How do you propose we separate the helpless from the "clueless"? Cage match?

Would it be a reasonable solution to require welfare recipients to enter some sort of community work program to qualify for benefits? I don't think this would be too much to ask and would make it less attractive for the less motivated to apply for government(our) cash. I look around some of the California highways(especially the L.A. area)and they really could use graffiti cleanup for example. It would be nice to drive under a over pass without ugly gang scribblings on the structure and signs. It would also take a load off the hard working city employees if they don't have to handle this type of cleanup. Is this inhumane to want this?

[IDBillzFan]

Really jackass? How do you propose we separate the helpless from the "clueless"? Cage match?

Begin a two-year program to phase it out. I suspect you'll get your answer sooner rather than later.

[Gene Frenkle]

Begin a two-year program to phase it out. I suspect you'll get your answer sooner rather than later.

What does that even mean? Your sorting solution is to completely cut welfare in two years? Why didn't I think of that?!

[Gene Frenkle]

Would it be a reasonable solution to require welfare recipients to enter some sort of community work program to qualify for benefits? I don't think this would be too much to ask and would make it less attractive for the less motivated to apply for government(our) cash. I look around some of the California highways(especially the L.A. area)and they really could use graffiti cleanup for example. It would be nice to drive under a over pass without ugly gang scribblings on the structure and signs. It would also take a load off the hard working city employees if they don't have to handle this type of cleanup. Is this inhumane to want this?

That sounds like a decent idea. Realistically, of course, you'd have to set up criteria for exceptions, leading back to a sorting problem.

[IDBillzFan]

What does that even mean? Your sorting solution is to completely cut welfare in two years? Why didn't I think of that?!

No, my opening solution is to begin phasing out food stamps in two years. You want to see who really needs it and who doesn't? Tell them you're getting rid of it. Then begin a plan to replace it with an improved system that has higher accountability, tougher approval standards, and limited ability to be extended. Personally, I'd add a rule that says if you receive food stamps and get pregnant, you are off the program, but America's too pussified to do something like that, and ultimately the only upside would be watching folks like you foam at the mouth about it. I'd also start studying what percentage of people on welfare and food stamps came from families who lived on welfare and food stamps, just so we could get a better snapshot of what we're dealing with. A lot of the problem is that many of these people simply don't know any other life.

 

I believe Clinton had pretty good success phasing out an abused welfare system for a more stringent one, and it did wonders to get many people off the books. Let's try something similar with food stamps.

 

And while we're at it, it's time America starts hearing that we won't be able to extend unemployment bennies any more.

[Gene Frenkle]

No, my opening solution is to begin phasing out food stamps in two years. You want to see who really needs it and who doesn't? Tell them you're getting rid of it. Then begin a plan to replace it with an improved system that has higher accountability, tougher approval standards, and limited ability to be extended. Personally, I'd add a rule that says if you receive food stamps and get pregnant, you are off the program, but America's too pussified to do something like that, and ultimately the only upside would be watching folks like you foam at the mouth about it. I'd also start studying what percentage of people on welfare and food stamps came from families who lived on welfare and food stamps, just so we could get a better snapshot of what we're dealing with. A lot of the problem is that many of these people simply don't know any other life.

 

I believe Clinton had pretty good success phasing out an abused welfare system for a more stringent one, and it did wonders to get many people off the books. Let's try something similar with food stamps.

 

And while we're at it, it's time America starts hearing that we won't be able to extend unemployment bennies any more.

So you propose a great big head fake? You want to phase out food stamps and replace the program with...something very similar to food stamps. But this time we'll figure out who really needs them using...magic? Why go through all this when we can just implement your "higher accountability, tougher approval standards, and limited ability to be extended" plan on the existing program? I'd imagine you haven't fleshed out the details of your new, improved criteria, which is really where the rubber meets the road here. Sounds pretty idealistic to me, like you haven't really thought this through and are just parroting your party line.

[keepthefaith]

Really jackass? How do you propose we separate the helpless from the "clueless"? Cage match?

 

Shouldn't be that tough. Those with handcaps can be separated from those that are able-minded and able-bodied.

[IDBillzFan]

So you propose a great big head fake? You want to phase out food stamps and replace the program with...something very similar to food stamps. But this time we'll figure out who really needs them using...magic? Why go through all this when we can just implement your "higher accountability, tougher approval standards, and limited ability to be extended" plan on the existing program? I'd imagine you haven't fleshed out the details of your new, improved criteria, which is really where the rubber meets the road here. Sounds pretty idealistic to me, like you haven't really thought this through and are just parroting your party line.

At least you're consistent. All mock, no conversation.

 

Shouldn't be that tough. Those with handcaps can be separated from those that are able-minded and able-bodied.

No, we must help everyone. It's too hard to figure out who needs it and who doesn't. It's just too gosh darn hard.

[keepthefaith]

So you propose a great big head fake? You want to phase out food stamps and replace the program with...something very similar to food stamps. But this time we'll figure out who really needs them using...magic? Why go through all this when we can just implement your "higher accountability, tougher approval standards, and limited ability to be extended" plan on the existing program? I'd imagine you haven't fleshed out the details of your new, improved criteria, which is really where the rubber meets the road here. Sounds pretty idealistic to me, like you haven't really thought this through and are just parroting your party line.

 

We can't continue the upward spiraling cost to make everybody "comfortable". The numbers say that loud and clear and we all know that there are millions that abuse the system. Many people have to feel pain in order to act. Being unproductive when you could be otherwise should be painful, not comfortable. People need to go to family for help before they go to the government. People need to know that having kids and raising them well is expensive and if they can't afford it, they shouldn't have kids. We need to reward productive behavior and punish unproductive behavior. That's the only way we'll get change. We're doing more of the opposite. We're creating a dependent class and buying their votes with other people's money.

 

That said, we have to find ways to increase jobs not at the expense of taxpayers. When an economic downturn occurs, we have to know that we can extend some rope to those in need while also knowing that it's truly temporary. If governments were more fiscally responsible overall, taxpayers IMO would have little or no objection to extending help to those truly in need.

 

For now the Feds are spending like drunken sailors, adding Federal Government jobs (which creates more defecit spending) and extending greater benefits to the unproductive at the expense of those that are productive now and in the future.