Safety net effect on children

I realize the right doesn't like spending money on children, but a new study shows a net benefit for children that have access to food stamp programs. Hey, and women, too!
Our findings indicate that the food stamp program has effects decades after initial exposure. Specifically, access to food stamps in childhood leads to a significant reduction in the incidence of “metabolic syndrome” (obesity, high blood pressure, and diabetes) and, for women, an increase in economic self-sufficiency. Overall, our results suggest substantial internal and external benefits of the safety net that have not previously been quantified.

Long Run Impacts of Childhood Access to the Safety Net

Did single women ever stop and think what the net effect is on having children while single?
 
Isn't WIC and food stamps 2 different things?



The OP mentioned the Right being against spending money on social safety nets and referenced this new study on food stamps which shows the proven benefits of this particular safety net...
 
I realize the right doesn't like spending money on children, but a new study shows a net benefit for children that have access to food stamp programs. Hey, and women, too!
Our findings indicate that the food stamp program has effects decades after initial exposure. Specifically, access to food stamps in childhood leads to a significant reduction in the incidence of “metabolic syndrome” (obesity, high blood pressure, and diabetes) and, for women, an increase in economic self-sufficiency. Overall, our results suggest substantial internal and external benefits of the safety net that have not previously been quantified.

Long Run Impacts of Childhood Access to the Safety Net

Did single women ever stop and think what the net effect is on having children while single?
You can't force people to abort. But thanks for stopping by and proving once again you only care about the unborn. :thup:
 
yeah, you cant buy junk food with wic. WIC is for exact items.

That's what I thought.. Post fail

WIC is a safety net, dummy, that Republicans are on record wanting to cut.

It is given to pregnant mothers and post-pregnancy. For milk eggs peanut butter and a couple other things. It is just handed to them. Do not even have to sign up. Just go to the health department to see if your pregnant. Thats what my sons mother did anyways..
 
Time to Stop Social Safety Net Child Abuse

“This is painful for a liberal to admit, but conservatives have a point when they suggest that America’s safety net can sometimes entangle people in a soul-crushing dependency. Our poverty programs do rescue many people, but other times they backfire.”

Kristof finds a number of cases where well-intentioned social-service programs produce perverse incentives that work to keep people in poverty rather than lift them out. Briefly, from a column that should be read carefully in full, those examples include a financial incentive to keep children illiterate, welfare benefits that punish marriage, and the ease in which children move from poverty programs to disability programs as adults.


The result, as Kristof discovered to his discomfiture, is precisely the kind of institutionalized poverty and dependency that safety-net programs produce when designed or expanded poorly. From a societal point of view, it’s a form of child abuse.


If we want to save these programs to help the truly needy and lift people out of poverty, we need to put these programs on solid fiscal footing. That will mean rethinking every such program’s benefits, eligibility, and administration in a way that puts costs at a reasonable and sustainable level. Otherwise, we face a fiscal crash that would discredit these programs forever.


Read more at http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Colum...fety-Net-Child-Abuse.aspx#SQGBv3mmatHgxbe7.99


Read more at Time to Stop Social Safety Net Child Abuse
 
Last edited:
Same thing.


:lol: Don't mind the ankle biter...






House Republicans want to cut WIC by 10%
story.wic.milk.cnn.jpg

House Republicans want to cut WIC by 10% - CNN
Exactly. The rabid KatzandDogz is also a good example of what I'm talking about.





:lol: Check out my new sig line...
 
That's what I thought.. Post fail

WIC is a safety net, dummy, that Republicans are on record wanting to cut.

It is given to pregnant mothers and post-pregnancy. For milk eggs peanut butter and a couple other things. It is just handed to them. Do not even have to sign up. Just go to the health department to see if your pregnant. Thats what my sons mother did anyways..
She'd have to qualify. I won't even ask how she did if you were the parent :confused:

But that is a side issue.
 
I realize the right doesn't like spending money on children, but a new study shows a net benefit for children that have access to food stamp programs. Hey, and women, too!


Long Run Impacts of Childhood Access to the Safety Net

Did single women ever stop and think what the net effect is on having children while single?
You can't force people to abort. But thanks for stopping by and proving once again you only care about the unborn. :thup:

we have to pay for their birth control, tell them to use the damn stuff.
 
WIC is a safety net, dummy, that Republicans are on record wanting to cut.

It is given to pregnant mothers and post-pregnancy. For milk eggs peanut butter and a couple other things. It is just handed to them. Do not even have to sign up. Just go to the health department to see if your pregnant. Thats what my sons mother did anyways..
She'd have to qualify. I won't even ask how she did if you were the parent :confused:

But that is a side issue.

We were not married know-it-all. She didnt ask for it. They gave it to her. I dont know if they pre-qualified her or not. I just know they gave her a pamplet and she didnt ask for it. She didnt need to. She knew I was going to take care of her. I accept my responsibilities, which IDK if you know what that means
 
WIC is a safety net, dummy, that Republicans are on record wanting to cut.

What you call a "safety net" others call "a way of life".
The study shows you to be incorrect.I shouldn't be amazed at how married you nutters are to your beliefs but I am.


And you keep ignoring this:


Time to Stop Social Safety Net Child Abuse

“This is painful for a liberal to admit, but conservatives have a point when they suggest that America’s safety net can sometimes entangle people in a soul-crushing dependency. Our poverty programs do rescue many people, but other times they backfire.”

Kristof finds a number of cases where well-intentioned social-service programs produce perverse incentives that work to keep people in poverty rather than lift them out. Briefly, from a column that should be read carefully in full, those examples include a financial incentive to keep children illiterate, welfare benefits that punish marriage, and the ease in which children move from poverty programs to disability programs as adults.


The result, as Kristof discovered to his discomfiture, is precisely the kind of institutionalized poverty and dependency that safety-net programs produce when designed or expanded poorly. From a societal point of view, it’s a form of child abuse.


If we want to save these programs to help the truly needy and lift people out of poverty, we need to put these programs on solid fiscal footing. That will mean rethinking every such program’s benefits, eligibility, and administration in a way that puts costs at a reasonable and sustainable level. Otherwise, we face a fiscal crash that would discredit these programs forever.


Read more at Time to Stop Social Safety Net Child Abuse
 
What you call a "safety net" others call "a way of life".
The study shows you to be incorrect.I shouldn't be amazed at how married you nutters are to your beliefs but I am.


And you keep ignoring this:


Time to Stop Social Safety Net Child Abuse

“This is painful for a liberal to admit, but conservatives have a point when they suggest that America’s safety net can sometimes entangle people in a soul-crushing dependency. Our poverty programs do rescue many people, but other times they backfire.”

Kristof finds a number of cases where well-intentioned social-service programs produce perverse incentives that work to keep people in poverty rather than lift them out. Briefly, from a column that should be read carefully in full, those examples include a financial incentive to keep children illiterate, welfare benefits that punish marriage, and the ease in which children move from poverty programs to disability programs as adults.


The result, as Kristof discovered to his discomfiture, is precisely the kind of institutionalized poverty and dependency that safety-net programs produce when designed or expanded poorly. From a societal point of view, it’s a form of child abuse.


If we want to save these programs to help the truly needy and lift people out of poverty, we need to put these programs on solid fiscal footing. That will mean rethinking every such program’s benefits, eligibility, and administration in a way that puts costs at a reasonable and sustainable level. Otherwise, we face a fiscal crash that would discredit these programs forever.


Read more at Time to Stop Social Safety Net Child Abuse
Someone's repeating of nutter talking points isn't credible.
 
Do you misunderstand the phrase increase in economic self-sufficiency?

i am pretty sure other study's could show the opposite effect.
From what I can tell, this is the most non-partisan group out there so I doubt it. But feel free to find an equally non-partisan group that comes to the opposite conclusion.

i am not going to search the web for studies to support my POV. I did not say foodstamps dont benefit some in the way the study claims. I said...foodstamps have other effects as well.

i am also pointing out... that it also turns some into a lifelong entitlement habituals expecting to be provided for.
 

Forum List

Back
Top