One thing that should not be cut from the Stimulus Plan: Food Stamps Increase

[Annie]

And if its a republican area they will starve.

Prove it! One fact, one link!

 

[Jon]

I don't agree with increasing food stamps. So many people get food stamps who don't even need them, and a lot of people who don't need them get them and trade them for drugs.

 

[Dis]

And if its a republican area they will starve.

You won't find many republicans on foodstamps. Wonder why that is...

 

[Annie]

And if its a republican area they will starve.

You won't find many republicans on foodstamps. Wonder why that is...

Like me, they tend not to take it. However, in fairness my folks let me and the kids live in their home, even when they first went to FL., as I was finishing up my certification. My family had the means and will to help us out, I'll assume there are people that don't. However, even my friends would have, they offered. For 3 years I didn't have to buy the kids clothes, as my friends were good at handing down really nice clothes, even getting some from their brothers and sisters kids that were older than mine. That kind of help I didn't have a problem with. I'd do the same when able.

With that said, someone else in this or another thread mentioned their church this morning had a food drive-enough food for a month for 100 families. That's what I've seen here and the churches are not just relying on their own members, they put signs out that in 2 weeks drive up and drop off. The lines are staggering. People know that there are people hurting and many would rather go to a food pantry than the government. Funny thing about people living around here, Democrat or Republican, they aren't letting their kids go hungry. The cost of living is high, they are here for the schools. Kids are a priority.

 

[toomuchtime_]

Food Stamps are the Best return on your stimulis dollar.

They return like 1.76 in stimulis for every 1 spent.

Unemployement extensions also return at a great rate.


Tax Cuts produce next to NOTHING in return.

So a dollar of food stamp money spent on groceries produces a large stimulus but a dollar of tax cut money spent on groceries produces no stimulus effect? A dollar unemployment money likewise produces a large stimulus effect but a dollar of tax cut money spent on the same thing produces no stimulus effect?

That's an amazing discovery.

Its in the Moodys study done very recently.

Food stamps offer best stimulus - study - Jan. 29, 2008

Indeed, and the Japanese experience trying to fight their decade long recession by massive government spending showed that money spent on social services and education had a larger stimulus effect that construction projects, but it also showed that both were irrelevant to economic recovery.

We shouldn't confuse stimulus with recovery. In the late 1980's Japan experienced a real estate bubble burst and falling real estate values left Japanese banks holding so many bad investments that they had little money to lend to businesses or consumers and that led to a deep recession. During the 1990's, Japan spent trillions of dollars trying to stimulate the economy into a recovery, but none of this had much effect on the private sector economy, and while this did provide an average 3% growth in GDP, all of it was was dependent on continued deficit spending and gave Japan the largest national debt of any developed nation, 180% of GDP as compared to the US debt to GDP ratio of about 64% a year ago.

When Japan tried to reduce this deficit spending, the economy began to slow down again. The private sector economy only began to recover after the Japanese government bought up the bad debts the banks were holding so that businesses could borrow the capital to begin investing in expansion again and, as a result exports increased and the private sector economy began a recovery within a year.

In the early 1990's, Sweden also experienced a recession after a real estate bubble burst and left Swedish banks holding a lot of bad investments and very little money to lend. Unlike the Japanese, the Swedes immediately addressed the source of the problem, the lack of liquidity in the banks, and provided new capital to the banks in return for the bad assets and equity shares in the banks. Within a year the Swedish economy began its recovery, and when the government sold off the "bad" assets and eventually sold its equity stake in the banks to private investors, depending on the accounting method used, this strategy cost the government either nothing or it may have given it a profit.

There are two lessons we can draw from the Japanese and Swedish experiences. First, government spending on social services and education provides more stimulus effect than construction projects and second, this kind of stimulus is irrelevant to economic recovery.

This bill should properly be called an economic relief bill, not an economic recovery bill. Tomorrow afternoon, Geithner is scheduled to give a speech in which he is expected to lay the administration's real recovery strategy.

 

[Modbert]

I was notified by my children's school that I qualified for food stamps and hot lunch program for the children in the year after my divorce. I didn't take it, was able to make ends meet. They didn't eat 'school lunches' as I knew mine were healthier and way less expensive. Probably would have qualified again as child support dwindled as each child turned 18, but kept picking up extra jobs.

Robert seems to believe that being poor means you slave and get no where or are too stupid or lazy to get things done.

I believe people can run into really tough times, through little or no fault of their own. I think when those things happen, one needs a safety net, I just believe most of us have the resources to find the help within family, friends, churches. If none of those can be availed upon, certainly there should be programs, but the more local, (ie city/county), the better. Why? They know the area, know the job market, know contacts. There is also the support available when one starts picking up the pieces from the crises.

I rarely say this to a woman but Annie, for the part I bolded you can go fuck yourself for mischaracterizing my position. The nerve of you to say such a thing.

 

[Annie]

I was notified by my children's school that I qualified for food stamps and hot lunch program for the children in the year after my divorce. I didn't take it, was able to make ends meet. They didn't eat 'school lunches' as I knew mine were healthier and way less expensive. Probably would have qualified again as child support dwindled as each child turned 18, but kept picking up extra jobs.

Robert seems to believe that being poor means you slave and get no where or are too stupid or lazy to get things done.

I believe people can run into really tough times, through little or no fault of their own. I think when those things happen, one needs a safety net, I just believe most of us have the resources to find the help within family, friends, churches. If none of those can be availed upon, certainly there should be programs, but the more local, (ie city/county), the better. Why? They know the area, know the job market, know contacts. There is also the support available when one starts picking up the pieces from the crises.

I rarely say this to a woman but Annie, for the part I bolded you can go fuck yourself for mischaracterizing my position. The nerve of you to say such a thing.

Robert you are so filled with self-importance and self-righteousness you are clueless to what you are actually saying.

 

[Modbert]

Robert you are so filled with self-importance and self-righteousness you are clueless to what you are actually saying.

Silly me, it seems I must of forgot that you know my position even better then I do Annie. I also seemed to forgot that you're never wrong, ever. How dare I even question your word that is the gospel, especially since your older and must be automatically right.



If I was filled with self-importance and self-righteousness in general, I'd never admit I was wrong. However, I have admitted I was wrong when I am. I've proven you wrong on several things several times; and you've never admitted such a thing.

So I think as always, people in glass houses (you) should not throw stones.

 

[Annie]

Robert you are so filled with self-importance and self-righteousness you are clueless to what you are actually saying.

Silly me, it seems I must of forgot that you know my position even better then I do Annie. I also seemed to forgot that you're never wrong, ever. How dare I even question your word that is the gospel, especially since your older and must be automatically right.



If I was filled with self-importance and self-righteousness in general, I'd never admit I was wrong. However, I have admitted I was wrong when I am. I've proven you wrong on several things several times; and you've never admitted such a thing.

So I think as always, people in glass houses (you) should not throw stones.

Again, wrong. I've admitted to be wrong many a time. Problem with your premise, you were not right. Perhaps I wasn't either. In any case, didn't warrant your comment. You are an adult and should control your temper.

 

[Modbert]

Again, wrong. I've admitted to be wrong many a time. Problem with your premise, you were not right. Perhaps I wasn't either. In any case, didn't warrant your comment. You are an adult and should control your temper.

My temper is quite controlled. But you made such a mischaracterization of my position it'd be like saying me twisting something you said into something negative about your kids (if you have any).

You wouldn't like that very much. Obviously, I have no kids but I find such mischaracterizations to be highly wrong. And the thing that makes it worse is that you are intelligent Annie and know exactly what you're doing.

None of you on this board have even seen me angry. Though I grow tired of having to have character debates instead of debates on the issues daily. It's like finding a needle in a haystack when trying to have a civilized conversation with people on here anymore.

And to think that I'd thought things would get better after the elections. It's quite obvious that many Republicans are still in denial, angry, or throwing temper tantrums. (Not saying you are Annie).

 

[Truthmatters]

I was notified by my children's school that I qualified for food stamps and hot lunch program for the children in the year after my divorce. I didn't take it, was able to make ends meet. They didn't eat 'school lunches' as I knew mine were healthier and way less expensive. Probably would have qualified again as child support dwindled as each child turned 18, but kept picking up extra jobs.

Robert seems to believe that being poor means you slave and get no where or are too stupid or lazy to get things done.

I believe people can run into really tough times, through little or no fault of their own. I think when those things happen, one needs a safety net, I just believe most of us have the resources to find the help within family, friends, churches. If none of those can be availed upon, certainly there should be programs, but the more local, (ie city/county), the better. Why? They know the area, know the job market, know contacts. There is also the support available when one starts picking up the pieces from the crises.

I rarely say this to a woman but Annie, for the part I bolded you can go fuck yourself for mischaracterizing my position. The nerve of you to say such a thing.

Its the game she plays.

Shes a smart woman and probably a decent person but in politics some think the any tactic is ok.

She tries to get you riled by saying things like that that even seh knows is complete bullshit. She wants to distract from any salient points you my be making. She wants to lead you into the woods so you forget to make your point heard.

I like Annie on a certain level and she would likely make a good lawyer but I could never stoop to her tactics.

 

[Annie]

Again, wrong. I've admitted to be wrong many a time. Problem with your premise, you were not right. Perhaps I wasn't either. In any case, didn't warrant your comment. You are an adult and should control your temper.

My temper is quite controlled. But you made such a mischaracterization of my position it'd be like saying me twisting something you said into something negative about your kids (if you have any).

You wouldn't like that very much. Obviously, I have no kids but I find such mischaracterizations to be highly wrong. And the thing that makes it worse is that you are intelligent Annie and know exactly what you're doing.

None of you on this board have even seen me angry. Though I grow tired of having to have character debates instead of debates on the issues daily. It's like finding a needle in a haystack when trying to have a civilized conversation with people on here anymore.

And to think that I'd thought things would get better after the elections. It's quite obvious that many Republicans are still in denial, angry, or throwing temper tantrums. (Not saying you are Annie).

Last time I'll try to get you to understand. Both Dis and I showed multiple examples of how families could get the biggest bang for their grocery dollars, food stamps or not. You throw in some bromide that many poor only get a few hours sleep before their next shift. They need processed foods, which are expensive and nutritionally weak. Especially for blacks, with a predisposition to high blood pressure.

Even without the sleep problem, you seem to think they are incapable of making good decisions. I would characterize that as noblesse oblige.

 

[garyd]

Giveme the numbers. By the time you figure in the cost of the bureaucracy needed to administer food stamps and the buildings to house that bureaucracy there is no way in hell you are getting that much of a return on the food stamps themselves. You'd do good to break even. Frankly were it not for the roughly seventeen million government workers in this country -about one in every five workers- the majority of whom have as there job descritpion getting in someone's way - often times that of other bureaucrats- we'd have a lot more jobs and the cost of everything would be significantly lower.

I'm not arguing by the way that some of these government jobs don't need to be done just that we don't need nearly as many people doing them and that they could be done in a far more cost efficient manner.

Probably more than fifty percent of the people in this country are getting some sort of a government check at least monthly. More than half your average working stiff's monthly bills are involved in keeping a roof over his head because we've have opted to build yuppie mansions rather than homes for working people and because of that a lot of working people are having a hell of time findiong affordable housing.

 

[Truthmatters]

Food stamps offer best stimulus - study - Jan. 29, 2008


http://www.moodys.com/cust/default.asp

Moodys is the top of the heap when it comes to economic analysis.

 

[Modbert]

Last time I'll try to get you to understand. Both Dis and I showed multiple examples of how families could get the biggest bang for their grocery dollars, food stamps or not. You throw in some bromide that many poor only get a few hours sleep before their next shift. They need processed foods, which are expensive and nutritionally weak. Especially for blacks, with a predisposition to high blood pressure.

Even without the sleep problem, you seem to think they are incapable of making good decisions. I would characterize that as noblesse oblige.

They can do so, but you can't have a make all solution like yours and apply it to everyone where all the situations are different and not 100% sure it will work for everyone.

They are quite capable of making good situations. I commented on the fact the Cost of Living is growing higher and higher, while wages aren't at the same level. So what's going to happen? People are going to be at a disadvantage already.

That's why this 13% increase in food stamps for everyone is better. Everybody can afford not only better food but buy more food for their families. And the businesses make more money from the people buying the food which translates into both small and large businesses growing and perhaps even more jobs.

 

[Modbert]

I just have to comment in a separate post.

I never thought I would see the day where I'd be arguing with my fellow human beings about the poorest people in the country or ones who meet the very strict guidelines for food stamps about whether they should receive a mere 13% increase to help the burden of the raising cost of living while their wages stay the same.

But then again, I suppose you see everything at least once.

 

[KittenKoder]

Tough choices for America's hungry - CNN.com





I hope we can all agree on that.

It's a disgrace we call ourselves the "richest nation on earth" while 31 million of our citizens or every 1/10 cannot even afford to feed their family or themselves anymore.

Overall I agree with this. However, it still bothers me when I see someone using food stamps who is driving a brand new Cadillac. We all know what I'm talking about. No, not everyone on food stamps drives a nice brand new car, but you know what I'm talking about.

Lets not forget about the lady at the grocery store using her EBT card as she yaks on her cell phone about how expensive her cable bill is.

Okay ... the Cell Phone thing ... though the cable part is certainly bad the phone is a need for some now, thanks to society becoming so "connected" almost all pay phones in some areas are completely gone. In Seattle we have one pay phone every ten blocks, and those rarely work thanks to thieves breaking them to get the change (what, a whole 50 cents ... stupid). So it depends on where you live as to if the phones become needed or not. When I was in the shelter some of them had those prepaid phones with free nighttime calls, during the day it was just for housing or job calls and at night it was to chat with others. They are cheap to, I can find phones (decent ones) for like $5 in my area if you don't mind a slightly used one and prepaid is about $20 a month for most plans.

 

[KittenKoder]

Food stamps ... the only problem is those stores that exchange food stamps for cash. They need harsher punishments for them because it attracts a lot of abusers to the program. Great program for people who need it and use it for actual food, it helps in many ways not just feeding them.

 

[Againsheila]

Overall I agree with this. However, it still bothers me when I see someone using food stamps who is driving a brand new Cadillac. We all know what I'm talking about. No, not everyone on food stamps drives a nice brand new car, but you know what I'm talking about.

Lets not forget about the lady at the grocery store using her EBT card as she yaks on her cell phone about how expensive her cable bill is.

Okay ... the Cell Phone thing ... though the cable part is certainly bad the phone is a need for some now, thanks to society becoming so "connected" almost all pay phones in some areas are completely gone. In Seattle we have one pay phone every ten blocks, and those rarely work thanks to thieves breaking them to get the change (what, a whole 50 cents ... stupid). So it depends on where you live as to if the phones become needed or not. When I was in the shelter some of them had those prepaid phones with free nighttime calls, during the day it was just for housing or job calls and at night it was to chat with others. They are cheap to, I can find phones (decent ones) for like $5 in my area if you don't mind a slightly used one and prepaid is about $20 a month for most plans.

Carrying on a conversation on the cell phone while paying for groceries is just bad manners imo. However, cell phones are a must today and you can get prepaid phones with limited minutes for very little money these days. It's actually cheaper than having a land line.

 

[KittenKoder]

Lets not forget about the lady at the grocery store using her EBT card as she yaks on her cell phone about how expensive her cable bill is.

Okay ... the Cell Phone thing ... though the cable part is certainly bad the phone is a need for some now, thanks to society becoming so "connected" almost all pay phones in some areas are completely gone. In Seattle we have one pay phone every ten blocks, and those rarely work thanks to thieves breaking them to get the change (what, a whole 50 cents ... stupid). So it depends on where you live as to if the phones become needed or not. When I was in the shelter some of them had those prepaid phones with free nighttime calls, during the day it was just for housing or job calls and at night it was to chat with others. They are cheap to, I can find phones (decent ones) for like $5 in my area if you don't mind a slightly used one and prepaid is about $20 a month for most plans.

Carrying on a conversation on the cell phone while paying for groceries is just bad manners imo. However, cell phones are a must today and you can get prepaid phones with limited minutes for very little money these days. It's actually cheaper than having a land line.

Actually it is cheaper, cell phones cost the same for long distance as they do local, while landlines with just local will cost about the same as a low cost prepaid phone. I have a landline, I hate being reachable all the time. When I am out with a friend I an not available. They can email me if it's important enough. But I am just lucky, most people can't live like that, it's almost impossible. My best friend who hates cells had to get one for work, they actually told her to get the job she had to be reachable 24/7, and I know a lot of jobs do that. But yeah, being on the phone when paying for anything is rude, when I worked in food service I would skip them if they were on the phone and move to the next customer, it's rude to the other customers and the employee to talk on the phone at times.