Proven Right Yet Again!

[PoliticalChic]

What level would you reduce the food stamp program to? Or would you eliminate it altogether?

Changing the subject?


A wise move when you're getting thrashed from pillar to post.

I thought the subject of the thread was that you think we spend too much on food stamps.

How much would you spend?

Perhaps you think we don't spend enough to support those who don't work?


"Democrats want extension of unemployment benefits for 2 million Americans as part of fiscal cliff deal

Since the collapse of the economy in 2008, the government has poured $520 billion — an amount equal to about half its annual deficit in recent years — into unemployment benefit extensions.

White House officials have assured Democrats that Obama is committed to extending them another year, at a cost of about $30 billion,..."The White House has made it clear that it wants an extension," said Michigan Rep. Sander Levin, the top Democrat on the House Ways and Means Committee."
Democrats want extension of unemployment benefits for 2 million Americans as part of fiscal cliff deal - NY Daily News

 

[Claudette]

Well when the takers outnumber the providers it will certainly come crashing down.

We're at 49% right now who pay no Fed taxes. Its getting close.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Changing the subject?


A wise move when you're getting thrashed from pillar to post.

I thought the subject of the thread was that you think we spend too much on food stamps.

How much would you spend?

Perhaps you think we don't spend enough to support those who don't work?


"Democrats want extension of unemployment benefits for 2 million Americans as part of fiscal cliff deal

Since the collapse of the economy in 2008, the government has poured $520 billion — an amount equal to about half its annual deficit in recent years — into unemployment benefit extensions.

White House officials have assured Democrats that Obama is committed to extending them another year, at a cost of about $30 billion,..."The White House has made it clear that it wants an extension," said Michigan Rep. Sander Levin, the top Democrat on the House Ways and Means Committee."
Democrats want extension of unemployment benefits for 2 million Americans as part of fiscal cliff deal - NY Daily News

So the subject of the thread wasn't food stamps?

Okay, what's your position on unemployment extension?

 

[NYcarbineer]

Wait....let me get out my Rosetta Stone to translate that.

I've read your blogs. You really aren't in the category of people qualified to school others on spelling and grammar.

I can't but feel that your posts are an attempt to mirror a number of mine.


Wise choice of paradigms!


Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.
Charles Caleb Colton


...but I fear you may have bitten off a bit more than one of your ability can handle.

No. Since I do not repeatedly make spelling and grammar errors, I can't be imitating you.

 

[PoliticalChic]

I thought the subject of the thread was that you think we spend too much on food stamps.

How much would you spend?

Perhaps you think we don't spend enough to support those who don't work?


"Democrats want extension of unemployment benefits for 2 million Americans as part of fiscal cliff deal

Since the collapse of the economy in 2008, the government has poured $520 billion — an amount equal to about half its annual deficit in recent years — into unemployment benefit extensions.

White House officials have assured Democrats that Obama is committed to extending them another year, at a cost of about $30 billion,..."The White House has made it clear that it wants an extension," said Michigan Rep. Sander Levin, the top Democrat on the House Ways and Means Committee."
Democrats want extension of unemployment benefits for 2 million Americans as part of fiscal cliff deal - NY Daily News

So the subject of the thread wasn't food stamps?

Okay, what's your position on unemployment extension?

1. I am overjoyed as your inability to comprehend what appear to me, to be fairly simple ideas.

My joy is that your limitations allow me the opportunity to restate the thesis.


There is too much government spending....

...especially in areas and for purposes not authorized by the 'law of the land.'

The phrase 'law of the land' refers to the United States Constitution. For educated folks, the explanation of the phrase is, I am certain, unnecessary....

...but in writing for you, it is probably an important insertion.



a. As it seems a requirement that everything be explained carefully to you....the omission from today's article, i.e., Democrats demanding extension of unemployment benefits, is the fact that folks seem to find jobs shortly after benefits run out.

This adds credence to the OP, in that Democrats have less interest in solving the problem of unemployment than in creating dependence and infantilizing the electorate.



b. "My calculations suggest the jobless rate could be as low as 6.8%, instead of 9.5%, if jobless benefits hadn't been extended to 99 weeks"
Robert Barro: The Folly of Subsidizing Unemployment - WSJ.com




2. "So the subject of the thread wasn't food stamps?"
No, my little mensa-reject.....

....it dealt with the bogus government-definition of poverty, and the misuse of taxpayer funds in support of same.




3. U.S. NATIONAL DEBT CLOCK
The Outstanding Public Debt as of 10 Dec 2012 at 08:17:25 PM GMT is:

$16,381,685,260.051.44
The estimated population of the United States is 314,027,240
so each citizen's share of this debt is $52,166.45.
U.S. National Debt Clock



Any of this sinking in yet?

No, huh.....
What a shock.

 

[PoliticalChic]

I've read your blogs. You really aren't in the category of people qualified to school others on spelling and grammar.

I can't but feel that your posts are an attempt to mirror a number of mine.


Wise choice of paradigms!


Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.
Charles Caleb Colton


...but I fear you may have bitten off a bit more than one of your ability can handle.

No. Since I do not repeatedly make spelling and grammar errors, I can't be imitating you.

Your loss.

 

[Wry Catcher]

1. “:…food stamp recipients -- increasing from 33 million people in 2009 to 43 million in 2012 -- as a sign that poverty had skyrocketed under President Obama. But a new study suggests that the reason there has been such an increase in food stamp recipients during the last four years is even more pernicious.

2. …George Mason University's David Armor and Sonia Sousa, argue that the food stamp program can no longer be regarded as an anti-poverty program because nearly half of its recipients are above the poverty line, many of them substantially so.

a. …other anti-poverty programs have an even higher percentage of the non-poor among their recipients.





3. The study examined spending over the last thirty years for federal anti-poverty programs providing nutrition, health care, housing and cash assistance for the supposed poor. They show that the explosion in costs for these programs has little to do with the higher numbers of Americans who have fallen into poverty since the Great Recession…

4. Spending for poverty programs received a big boost during the Bush years, a $100 billion increase over eight years. But the Obama spending spree dwarfed those increases.In his first two years in office, President Obama increased such spending by $150 billion, some of it in the 2009 stimulus package.




5. The portion of the federal budget now attributable to fighting the "war on poverty" is now roughly equal to the entire defense budget ($666 billion compared to $693 billion), slightly less than spending on Social Security ($700 billion), but more than on Medicare ($551 billion).

a. Taken together, federal spending on income transfers and other social benefits are now 2.76 times greater than spending for national defense.

6. The major changes occurred when the government allowed more lenient standards for eligibility for benefits. Most of these programs were originally designed to help those who lived below the official poverty line, which in 2011 was $11,702 for a single person and $22,811 for a family of four. But over the years, the federal government has lowered the threshold so that even those earning twice the income considered below poverty still qualify.

a. …in several states, a family of four with income of over $45,000 a year is eligible to receive benefits.

7. …over half of the recipients of food stamps (now known as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program or SNAP), have income above the poverty line.

a. Of the 40.3 million receiving food stamps in 2010 (the last year for which detailed figures are available), 20.4 were above the poverty cut-off. Of these, a whopping 8 million have income twice the poverty level.





8. …the non-poor receive more benefits than food stamps. Those living at 133-200 percent or more of the poverty level also constitute the greatest number of beneficiaries of Medicaid and the Children's Health Insurance Program.

a. Even Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF), which gives cash benefits to those supposedly in need, now supports those whose incomes are twice the official poverty definition; indeed 40 percent of TANF funds go to families whose incomes are more than 200 percent of poverty.

9. The policy implications of these findings are enormous. What once were programs to provide a safety net for the truly poor are now programs to boost the living standards of the lower middle class.

10. … these changes reflect a sea change in social and economic policy. Those who have warned that America is heading toward a welfare state are wrong. We are already there.” The American Welfare State - Linda Chavez - [page]



This from one of my previous posts:
1. Re-examine the welfare solution for poverty. The very first step is to reinstitute the real definition of “poverty.” It is “no home-no heat- no food.” That’s poverty.

2. The Progressives have corrupted the meaning for several reasons, not the least of which is to maximize the vote from recipients of various bogus programs…such as food stamps.
http://www.usmessageboard.com/politics/265982-obama-and-the-fiscal-cliff.html



You've been lied to...and you bought it like it was on sale!

Say what, Obama voters???




“Some ideas are so stupid, only an intellectual could believe them.” George Orwell

So sad; PC has gone over the cliff and fallen into a full blown OCD crisis. Yes, elections have consequences.

 

[PoliticalChic]

1. “:…food stamp recipients -- increasing from 33 million people in 2009 to 43 million in 2012 -- as a sign that poverty had skyrocketed under President Obama. But a new study suggests that the reason there has been such an increase in food stamp recipients during the last four years is even more pernicious.

2. …George Mason University's David Armor and Sonia Sousa, argue that the food stamp program can no longer be regarded as an anti-poverty program because nearly half of its recipients are above the poverty line, many of them substantially so.

a. …other anti-poverty programs have an even higher percentage of the non-poor among their recipients.





3. The study examined spending over the last thirty years for federal anti-poverty programs providing nutrition, health care, housing and cash assistance for the supposed poor. They show that the explosion in costs for these programs has little to do with the higher numbers of Americans who have fallen into poverty since the Great Recession…

4. Spending for poverty programs received a big boost during the Bush years, a $100 billion increase over eight years. But the Obama spending spree dwarfed those increases.In his first two years in office, President Obama increased such spending by $150 billion, some of it in the 2009 stimulus package.




5. The portion of the federal budget now attributable to fighting the "war on poverty" is now roughly equal to the entire defense budget ($666 billion compared to $693 billion), slightly less than spending on Social Security ($700 billion), but more than on Medicare ($551 billion).

a. Taken together, federal spending on income transfers and other social benefits are now 2.76 times greater than spending for national defense.

6. The major changes occurred when the government allowed more lenient standards for eligibility for benefits. Most of these programs were originally designed to help those who lived below the official poverty line, which in 2011 was $11,702 for a single person and $22,811 for a family of four. But over the years, the federal government has lowered the threshold so that even those earning twice the income considered below poverty still qualify.

a. …in several states, a family of four with income of over $45,000 a year is eligible to receive benefits.

7. …over half of the recipients of food stamps (now known as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program or SNAP), have income above the poverty line.

a. Of the 40.3 million receiving food stamps in 2010 (the last year for which detailed figures are available), 20.4 were above the poverty cut-off. Of these, a whopping 8 million have income twice the poverty level.





8. …the non-poor receive more benefits than food stamps. Those living at 133-200 percent or more of the poverty level also constitute the greatest number of beneficiaries of Medicaid and the Children's Health Insurance Program.

a. Even Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF), which gives cash benefits to those supposedly in need, now supports those whose incomes are twice the official poverty definition; indeed 40 percent of TANF funds go to families whose incomes are more than 200 percent of poverty.

9. The policy implications of these findings are enormous. What once were programs to provide a safety net for the truly poor are now programs to boost the living standards of the lower middle class.

10. … these changes reflect a sea change in social and economic policy. Those who have warned that America is heading toward a welfare state are wrong. We are already there.” The American Welfare State - Linda Chavez - [page]



This from one of my previous posts:
1. Re-examine the welfare solution for poverty. The very first step is to reinstitute the real definition of “poverty.” It is “no home-no heat- no food.” That’s poverty.

2. The Progressives have corrupted the meaning for several reasons, not the least of which is to maximize the vote from recipients of various bogus programs…such as food stamps.
http://www.usmessageboard.com/politics/265982-obama-and-the-fiscal-cliff.html



You've been lied to...and you bought it like it was on sale!

Say what, Obama voters???




“Some ideas are so stupid, only an intellectual could believe them.” George Orwell

So sad; PC has gone over the cliff and fallen into a full blown OCD crisis. Yes, elections have consequences.

"Participation in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or food stamps, reached another high in September, according to new data released by the United Stated Department of Agriculture.

The most recent data on SNAP participation were released Friday, and showed that 47,710,324 people were enrolled in the program in September, an increase of 607,559 from the 47,102,765 enrolled in August."



Read more: Food stamp use reaches another high in September: 47.7 million participants | The Daily Caller

 

[saveliberty]

Hey, anybody know what we're suppose to do with all these starving people people that I'm tripping over?

 

[NYcarbineer]

Perhaps you think we don't spend enough to support those who don't work?


"Democrats want extension of unemployment benefits for 2 million Americans as part of fiscal cliff deal

Since the collapse of the economy in 2008, the government has poured $520 billion — an amount equal to about half its annual deficit in recent years — into unemployment benefit extensions.

White House officials have assured Democrats that Obama is committed to extending them another year, at a cost of about $30 billion,..."The White House has made it clear that it wants an extension," said Michigan Rep. Sander Levin, the top Democrat on the House Ways and Means Committee."
Democrats want extension of unemployment benefits for 2 million Americans as part of fiscal cliff deal - NY Daily News

So the subject of the thread wasn't food stamps?

Okay, what's your position on unemployment extension?

1. I am overjoyed as your inability to comprehend what appear to me, to be fairly simple ideas.

My joy is that your limitations allow me the opportunity to restate the thesis.


There is too much government spending....

...especially in areas and for purposes not authorized by the 'law of the land.'

.

If laws are passed to provide unemployment benefits, how are they being paid without the authority of the law of the land?

 

[NYcarbineer]

I can't but feel that your posts are an attempt to mirror a number of mine.


Wise choice of paradigms!


Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.
Charles Caleb Colton


...but I fear you may have bitten off a bit more than one of your ability can handle.

No. Since I do not repeatedly make spelling and grammar errors, I can't be imitating you.

Your loss.

There is no market for me to imitate someone like you; the world doesn't need another woman who talks too much, nor any imitation of the same.

On that I suspect I can get bi-partisan consensus.

 

[saveliberty]

28,000 posts and politicalchic talks too much...

Hypocritical post is hypocritical.

 

[PoliticalChic]

No. Since I do not repeatedly make spelling and grammar errors, I can't be imitating you.

Your loss.

There is no market for me to imitate someone like you; the world doesn't need another woman who talks too much, nor any imitation of the same.

On that I suspect I can get bi-partisan consensus.

Oooo....look....You didn’t notice that your “check brain” light just came on.

 

[saveliberty]

Could be the low on cheap beer light...

 

[PoliticalChic]

So the subject of the thread wasn't food stamps?

Okay, what's your position on unemployment extension?

1. I am overjoyed as your inability to comprehend what appear to me, to be fairly simple ideas.

My joy is that your limitations allow me the opportunity to restate the thesis.


There is too much government spending....

...especially in areas and for purposes not authorized by the 'law of the land.'

.

If laws are passed to provide unemployment benefits, how are they being paid without the authority of the law of the land?

I’ll slow down…I didn’t realize it was an ‘idiot x-ing.’

Secretly encoded in your attempted post was the belief that the United States Constitution is still in effect.




If you say ‘gullible’ very slowly it sound like ‘oranges.’

 

[Wry Catcher]

1. “:…food stamp recipients -- increasing from 33 million people in 2009 to 43 million in 2012 -- as a sign that poverty had skyrocketed under President Obama. But a new study suggests that the reason there has been such an increase in food stamp recipients during the last four years is even more pernicious.

2. …George Mason University's David Armor and Sonia Sousa, argue that the food stamp program can no longer be regarded as an anti-poverty program because nearly half of its recipients are above the poverty line, many of them substantially so.

a. …other anti-poverty programs have an even higher percentage of the non-poor among their recipients.





3. The study examined spending over the last thirty years for federal anti-poverty programs providing nutrition, health care, housing and cash assistance for the supposed poor. They show that the explosion in costs for these programs has little to do with the higher numbers of Americans who have fallen into poverty since the Great Recession…

4. Spending for poverty programs received a big boost during the Bush years, a $100 billion increase over eight years. But the Obama spending spree dwarfed those increases.In his first two years in office, President Obama increased such spending by $150 billion, some of it in the 2009 stimulus package.




5. The portion of the federal budget now attributable to fighting the "war on poverty" is now roughly equal to the entire defense budget ($666 billion compared to $693 billion), slightly less than spending on Social Security ($700 billion), but more than on Medicare ($551 billion).

a. Taken together, federal spending on income transfers and other social benefits are now 2.76 times greater than spending for national defense.

6. The major changes occurred when the government allowed more lenient standards for eligibility for benefits. Most of these programs were originally designed to help those who lived below the official poverty line, which in 2011 was $11,702 for a single person and $22,811 for a family of four. But over the years, the federal government has lowered the threshold so that even those earning twice the income considered below poverty still qualify.

a. …in several states, a family of four with income of over $45,000 a year is eligible to receive benefits.

7. …over half of the recipients of food stamps (now known as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program or SNAP), have income above the poverty line.

a. Of the 40.3 million receiving food stamps in 2010 (the last year for which detailed figures are available), 20.4 were above the poverty cut-off. Of these, a whopping 8 million have income twice the poverty level.





8. …the non-poor receive more benefits than food stamps. Those living at 133-200 percent or more of the poverty level also constitute the greatest number of beneficiaries of Medicaid and the Children's Health Insurance Program.

a. Even Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF), which gives cash benefits to those supposedly in need, now supports those whose incomes are twice the official poverty definition; indeed 40 percent of TANF funds go to families whose incomes are more than 200 percent of poverty.

9. The policy implications of these findings are enormous. What once were programs to provide a safety net for the truly poor are now programs to boost the living standards of the lower middle class.

10. … these changes reflect a sea change in social and economic policy. Those who have warned that America is heading toward a welfare state are wrong. We are already there.” The American Welfare State - Linda Chavez - [page]



This from one of my previous posts:
1. Re-examine the welfare solution for poverty. The very first step is to reinstitute the real definition of “poverty.” It is “no home-no heat- no food.” That’s poverty.

2. The Progressives have corrupted the meaning for several reasons, not the least of which is to maximize the vote from recipients of various bogus programs…such as food stamps.
http://www.usmessageboard.com/politics/265982-obama-and-the-fiscal-cliff.html



You've been lied to...and you bought it like it was on sale!

Say what, Obama voters???




“Some ideas are so stupid, only an intellectual could believe them.” George Orwell

So sad; PC has gone over the cliff and fallen into a full blown OCD crisis. Yes, elections have consequences.

"Participation in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or food stamps, reached another high in September, according to new data released by the United Stated Department of Agriculture.

The most recent data on SNAP participation were released Friday, and showed that 47,710,324 people were enrolled in the program in September, an increase of 607,559 from the 47,102,765 enrolled in August."



Read more: Food stamp use reaches another high in September: 47.7 million participants | The Daily Caller

OCD interferes with the afflicted persons understanding of Cause(s) and effect; when mixed with politics and/or religion paranoid delusions and even paranoid schizophrenia must be ruled out.

 

[Chris]

Republicans want the middle class to hate the poor, so they won't notice the rich walking away with all the money.

 

[PoliticalChic]

So sad; PC has gone over the cliff and fallen into a full blown OCD crisis. Yes, elections have consequences.

"Participation in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or food stamps, reached another high in September, according to new data released by the United Stated Department of Agriculture.

The most recent data on SNAP participation were released Friday, and showed that 47,710,324 people were enrolled in the program in September, an increase of 607,559 from the 47,102,765 enrolled in August."



Read more: Food stamp use reaches another high in September: 47.7 million participants | The Daily Caller

OCD interferes with the afflicted persons understanding of Cause(s) and effect; when mixed with politics and/or religion paranoid delusions and even paranoid schizophrenia must be ruled out.

I have CDO…it’s like OCD, but all the letters are in alphabetical order, as they should be.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Republicans want the middle class to hate the poor, so they won't notice the rich walking away with all the money.

Never is the effect of Marxist indoctrination more evident than when a Pod Person begins to speak of 'classes' in American society.

There are none.


Economists refer to quintiles, which are a snap-shot of one's economic situation at a particular time.

Now, get this, for it is the hermeneutic key: Due to the economic mobility in this nation....there is no perennial 'rich,' nor a perennial 'poor.'


But, judging by your type of post, there is a perennial aphasiac group.
Hope you get better soon.

 

[koshergrl]

I find it hilarious that NYC actually appears to believe he's a better writer, and smarter, than PC.

What sort of alternate universe do these yahoos hail from?