It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: jtma508
a reply to: FyreByrd
Woah, woah, woah, there buddy. Are you suggesting we take money out of the pockets of the military industrial complex to help feed the poor? What are you some socialist commie? You want North Korea or East Timor invading the US?
originally posted by: mikell
Well they discovered cutting unemployment extensions made people go back to work maybe cut food to the breeders will make them get out of bed and go looking for work.
originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: SlapMonkey
Because hard work is just that: hard. Why go out and get a job and work when you can sit at home and not, but still get paid for it?
Welfare systems are supposed to be a hand UP, not a hand OUT. Are there people out there who qualify for welfare systems entirely on merit? Absolutely yes. Are there people out there who abuse the system and/or work hard to make sure they qualify for welfare systems? Equally absolutely yes.
originally posted by: anton74
Below is a link to the WSJ article. It appears the OP's source relied heavily on creative editing and sensationalism.
Three months later, on August 1, 2007, News Corporation and Dow Jones entered into a definitive merger agreement. The US$5 billion sale added The Wall Street Journal to Rupert Murdoch's news empire, which already included Fox News Channel, financial network unit and London's The Times, and locally within New York, the New York Post, along with Fox flagship station WNYW (Channel 5) and MyNetworkTV flagship WWOR (Channel 9).
Committee Chairman Mike Conaway (R., Texas), who is leading the charge, said he wants to stay away from the type of party politics that can doom reforms before they are proposed. But as the son of a roughneck on oil rigs, he said he favors the kind of hard work that “built America,” suggesting any changes will lead to a smaller program and fewer recipients.
“The program was structured when malnutrition was a real problem,” said Douglas Besharov, a professor of public policy at the University of Maryland. “It has now become a form of income support.”
The program dates back to the 1930s, when unemployment was high, and was made permanent in 1964.
originally posted by: dreamingawake
More divisive scare tactics. Surely they can't be this naive. Too bad they don't live in areas affected by cuts sorely needed by low income, disable people and rising poverty. Who cares anyway just send in the draconian authorities to take care of the hurting masses(sarc).
originally posted by: Irishhaf
only commenting on the cut the military...
Because if you just scream cut the military, all they will do is cut it ar the boots on the ground level.
Last I heard they still hadn't cut the generals they were supposed to something like 4 years ago.
They won't touch the kick backs that go into awarding contracts, unless the people apply the pressure.
So the next time you mindlessly spew cut the military industrial complex, please be aware the cuts they will make will have an effect on the men and women deploying to a war zone.
Educate and apply the right kind of pressure to actually save money.
End hijack I apologize, I now return you to your regularly scheduled partisan attacks.
In fiscal year 2011, federal expenditures for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP, formerly known as Food Stamps)—$78 billion—and participation in the program were the highest they have ever been
originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: StopWhiningAboutIt
I agree with what you said about the military and so on but the congress thing? Pretty sure that's bunk.
But that's not quite as exciting a tidbit to spout.