Food Stamp Recipients Outnumber Populations of 24 States Combined

Originally posted by sonnny1

Originally posted by MisterMarbles



The amount of money they receive is the same regardless of how they spend it, so you shouldn't care how they spend it.

WRONG.

I pay into it.

Use it for Necessities, or allow me to opt-out into subsidizing for it.

There is no checks and balances. Its designed to break America, and keep people impoverished.

A welfare check and food stamps are different things

and

regardless of your opinion on how the poor should spend their benefits, the dollar amount of benefits remains the same. In other words, you wouldn't pay less taxes if there were additional restrictions on what they can buy.

Originally posted by FlyersFan

Originally posted by magma
Which people do not know about the problem? Pretty sure that the people who use food stamps are well aware of a problem.

There is a problem with the government .. not with people using food stamps when they need it. The problem is the policies of the government CAUSING so many people to be on food stamps. The people who are on food stamps aren't the problem.

And I dont know if people on food stamps know that the government is the problem. How many of them voted this last time around? Did they vote for something different to try to change the problem or did they go with the status quo ?? If they are aware of the government policies being the problem .. who did food stamp recipients vote for and why??

I don't know those stats ...

My brother and a friend of mine, both have two children and work for near minimum wage, voted for Gary Johnson as I advised. But many of the people around here, on food stamps or not, cling to their bibles and would NEVER vote for a democrat, so of those who did vote, most voted for Mitt Romney. So nope... Most of them are not voting for change because they either voted for Romney or Obama.

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by FlyersFan

 

Perhaps you would find Canada to be less unsavory? I have a hard time understanding what you're still doing here if you find American policy to be so distasteful.

Doubtful, as Canada and a good portion of the world is democratic socialist, but hey let's fear it. I don't understand threads like this, neither side truly has the answers. The far left and the far right treat their political ideologies like a religion that should never be questioned..... Sigh.

Oh please, we live in a country where people fight over cell phones.



How many of those people are on food stamps I wonder? First world problems.

I see this as a matter of national security in a way-You keep em fed and they will leave you alone. If they are willing to fight like this over cell phones imagine what they would do if they had to fight for their food.

Either way, I see no real solutions being discussed here. A lot of complaining, not much else.

reply to post by sonnny1


Un-earned income makes it sound like these people were jobless bums on foodstamps. The large portion of un-earned income was SS, which means retired old people and SSI, disabled people. And then children.

40% of food stamp recipient households had jobs
42% of food stamp recipients were on SS

Many SNAP participants had jobs. Nearly 30 percent of SNAP households had earnings in 2010, and 41 percent of all SNAP participants lived in a household with earnings. For most of these households, earnings were the primary source of income.


The primary form of income among SNAP
participants shifted from welfare to work. In
1990, 42 percent of all SNAP households received
cash welfare benefits and only 19 percent had
earnings. In 2010, only 8 percent received cash
welfare, while 30 percent had earnings.

The majority of SNAP households did not
receive cash welfare benefits. Only 8 percent of
all SNAP households received Temporary
Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) benefits
and another 4 percent received State General
Assistance (GA) benefits.

Over 21 percent of SNAP households received Social Security and nearly 21 percent received Supplemental Security Income (SSI) benefits given to the aged and disabled. SNAP


Most SNAP households were small. The
average SNAP household size was 2.2 persons,
but varied considerably by household composition.
Households with children were larger, averaging
3.3 members. Households with elderly
participants were smaller, averaging 1.3 members.

www.fns.usda.gov...

In the richest country on earth 1% of this nation owns half of all the wealth. 1 in 7 Americans can't afford to feed themselves. You tell me who's more evil?

Originally posted by antonia


Either way, I see no real solutions being discussed here. A lot of complaining, not much else.

In order to find solutions, the problems have to be identified first.

Originally posted by gladtobehere
reply to post by FlyersFan

 

So how long do people think this can continue?

All of these giant failed government programs will be pointless not if, but WHEN THE GOVERNMENT GOES BANKRUPT as did Iceland's, Ireland's, Greece, Latvia, Spain etc.

Funny you should mention Iceland.... The problem there was greedy bankers who crashed the economy, sound familiar? They didn't blame each other and differing political alignments for the problems, they got together as a nation peacefully overthrew their government, drafted a new constitution, elected new officials, and imprisoned the greedy bankers, and corrupt officials who caused the crash. I see them as an inspiration, and I feel you have unfairly lumped them together Greece especially.

The system needs an overhaul here, but instead of working together we're being divided by TPTB so they can continue to subjugate us.

reply to post by Osiris1953


The TPTB want you to blame poor people for all the worlds problems, when it is the 1% and .0001% that cause the majority of the problems. They practically want you to worship them, they even give them double-think names like "job creators".

Iceland should be an inspiration.

Originally posted by jimmiec
Obviously it buys votes. When government tries to help the poor they hurt the poor because people abuse the system. If the government really wants to help the poor they would do it at the community level. People in the community know the people who need help and what it will take to get them back on their feet. The FED just cuts checks. Getting a check from the FED hurts the poor because there is less to help them with due to the abuse. It corrupts our voting system and is wasteful beyond belief.

When the right is in charge those with the most money abuse the system. When the left is in charge those with the least money abuse the system. What's the answer? I don't know, but it is not social Darwinism or pointing fingers at each other.

reply to post by Trustfund


The way I see the current problems is this: the right caused the crash that made increased social programs a necessity and the policies of the left have made it impossible for those already on public assistance to get off of it. Either way greed and selfishness will continue to make things in this country exponentially worse.

Originally posted by Osiris1953

Originally posted by gladtobehere
reply to post by FlyersFan

 

So how long do people think this can continue?

All of these giant failed government programs will be pointless not if, but WHEN THE GOVERNMENT GOES BANKRUPT as did Iceland's, Ireland's, Greece, Latvia, Spain etc.

Funny you should mention Iceland.... The problem there was greedy bankers who crashed the economy, sound familiar? They didn't blame each other and differing political alignments for the problems, they got together as a nation peacefully overthrew their government, drafted a new constitution, elected new officials, and imprisoned the greedy bankers, and corrupt officials who caused the crash. I see them as an inspiration, and I feel you have unfairly lumped them together Greece especially.

The system needs an overhaul here, but instead of working together we're being divided by TPTB so they can continue to subjugate us.

Interesting as part of Iceland's recovery involved keeping social services strong and closing the gap between the richest and the poorest.

Iceland also took unorthodox steps in other areas, forgiving around 200 billion crowns' ($1.54 billion) worth of household debt and providing big tax benefits to the lowest income households.

It severely cut back state spending in some areas, but preserved the social safety net.

"We cut the budget but we preserved as much as possible in education, health, social security and infrastructure like law enforcement," Sigurdardottir said. "In the years leading up to the crisis, the gap between the richest and the poorest in society widened and our measures in the crisis focused on diminishing this gap, with more equality."

The relief boosted consumption, lifting growth to 4.5 percent year-on-year in the first quarter this year, in sharp contrast to stagnation or recession in much of the euro zone.

www.reuters.com...

Originally posted by FreebirdGirl
I get that because of all the things government spend money on some choose this topic to whine about.

- Exposing the FACT that the number of food stamp recipients outnumber the populations of 24 states combined isn't 'whining'. It's stating a fact. It's adult conversation.

- People are capable of discussing ALL of what the government spends our tax money on. We don't have to just pick one thing at a time.

- People are upset about the number of people who need food stamps ... not the food stamp program itself. You don't think that it's a big deal having food stamp recipients outnumbering the populations of 24 states combined. That number of people on food stamps tells you the government is doing a good job? Really?

So IMO food stamps must have a direct impact on the people who are complaining.

You missed the entire premise of the thread. Try reading it again.

Originally posted by kaylaluv
You have any suggestions on how to stop these things without regulations?

Achieving that balance between a free economy and power grabbing is tricky.
So far .. the USA has not been able to achieve that balance.
No other country has either ...
That includes countries with and without all those regulations.

Originally posted by FreebirdGirl
You never answered the question. How many food stamp recipients work?

I haven't looked it up. WHY DOES IT MATTER? People are not happy with how the government is being mismanaged. That many people shouldn't need federal aid. This isn't a discussion about if the people deserve help or if the program should be in place. It's about MISMANAGEMENT or POWERGRABBING by the government that is causing people to need the help.

reply to post by Anundeniabletruth

I also voted third party ... Gary Johnson. I don't know if that would have broke the stranglehold that both the democrats and republicans have on Washington .. but at least I know I tried something different.

well if it makes you feel any better,...

I've been unemployed for almost a year, financially screwed and the and the IRS already wants to levy my non-existant property over 2k that didn't get payed when my former employer messed up my w4, not a single job offer that even comes close to what my unemployment pays (which me being employed paid into so don't give me that crap) so i'm not going to work 40 hours a week to bring home less

and lets not forget that "income" is defined as profits gained from operating a company, so me trading 40 hours of my time for money is not "income" and is not taxable, it is direct and apportioned, so all of us w4 employees are being robbed by the government anyway, and they're robbing you too but you didn't notice since you were on your pedestal

.... but i'm not on foodstamps

Originally posted by ConspiracyBuff
reply to post by FlyersFan

 

47,102,780 "Democratic" Votes.

Normal everyday working people will only wake-up to the pit-falls of Fascist Socialism after they do not receive any income taxes back one year and then the next year are taxed @ 75% flat rate to pay for this insanity, with eroded purchasing power to boot.

The next "Civil War" will be fought over slavery. Slavery to those who do not wish to contribute...

edit on 24-11-2012 by ConspiracyBuff because: (no reason given)

75% Pluheese. Sorry but you could not be more wrong. And what does that last line of your post even mean. Slavery to those who do not wish to contribute? You will need to clarify that statement because it doesnt make sense.

Originally posted by Osiris1953
The way I see the current problems is this: the right caused the crash that made increased social programs a necessity and the policies of the left have made it impossible for those already on public assistance to get off of it.

The way I see it .. the right and the left caused the financial mess in this country and neither side has any kind of policy that can get people off public assistance. So ... are they putting people on public assistance to better control them? Or are they there just because of greed and corruption in DC (from both the right and left) run crazy?

reply to post by kaylaluv


True and socialist programs have a place in most successful modern societies. The problem is people mistake this for shifting towards a socialist or communist state which simply isn't true. We have lived in a mixed economy that has aspects of capitalism and socialism....and have for quite a long time. I see no reason to change that now... What I would like to see is compromise in this nation, because No One has all the answers, and those who think they do are only following the ideology of ignorance.