GOP farm bill is a disaster! cuts 23 billion dollars in food assistance to low income children

[Rosy]

When I was growing up it was school bullies that went after kids’ lunch money, it wasn’t the Congress. This is shameful.

Farm subsidies do not feed poor children. You are delusional

In fact Trump is ending subsidies that pay farmers not to grow food

got that kiddy

Hey genius, SNAP is part of the farm bill as are other food assistance programs both foreign and domestic.

Fact the farm bill pays farmers not to farm food.

now grow up kid

how is your stock portfolio doing by the way

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

I never can understand these stupid Moon Bats.

Why is it a disaster to cut out welfare? Only in Socialistland.

I pay my bills and you pay yours, fair deal?

Because their book is titled It Takes A Village.
Our book is titled It Takes Responsibility.

 

[Rosy]

When I was growing up it was school bullies that went after kids’ lunch money, it wasn’t the Congress. This is shameful.

Farm subsidies do not feed poor children. You are delusional

In fact Trump is ending subsidies that pay farmers not to grow food

got that kiddy

try and pretend the farm bill is not a stand alone bill ..

the food program in the bill also effects low-income working families, children, seniors, people with disabilities and veterans.

got that kiddy

The farm bill pays farmers not to farm.....

debunk me dork, and explain how farmers not farming feeds people

 

[Some Guy]

Childhood hunger is a big problem in this country, often the meal at school is the biggest and best meal that many kids get all day.

I volunteer with a food bank/soup kitchen and there are far more children suffering than people are allowed to admit thanks to their partisanship.

Did you know that the vast majority of human evolution has occurred without agriculture? Without ready access to food whenever one wanted it? The human body is designed to be able to go for days, even weeks without eating. The concept of breakfast, lunch and dinner was created by people who saw it as more civilized than simply eating when you felt hungry. "Hunger" is a pure physiological bodily response. It occurs when your body secretes a hormone called ghrelin which prepares your body for the intake of food. If a fat guy skips a meal and is really hungry because of it, it's not because he's going to starve: it's because his body is just used to getting food at that time and therefore is preparing itself for the intake of food. I would know: i'm not the skinniest guy and i've got quite a bit healthier by skipping a meal every day. I'm not hungry until lunch-time anymore cause my body knows it's not going to get any food until then, and sometimes not even at that time.

No, i don't want kids to starve. My only point is that this idea of "hunger" as a justification for governmental theft is a logical fallacy. It assumes that both kids will starve and die without the government and that people wouldn't want to and indeed help in the absence of government. It's just not true.

 

[RDD_1210]

It's the conservative conundrum on children:

Abortion is murder, but once they are born let the little bastards starve.

Republicans don't starve anybody--irresponsible parents do.

Let me guess, you're "pro-life"?

I don't have a position on that. And what difference would it make anyhow?

LOL, you don't have a position on abortion? You're not even a good liar.

 

[OldLady]

When I was growing up it was school bullies that went after kids’ lunch money, it wasn’t the Congress. This is shameful.

Unemployment is under 4% why do we need it?

If parents for WHATEVER REASON can't provide healthy meals to their kids, you can either blame the parents and let the kids grow up malnourished, with all the negatives that go along with that--poorer health and lower IQ--or you can feed the kids so they are healthy and hopefully won't end up as dysfunctional as their parents. Of course, not all parents are dysfunctional, they're just in a temporarily bad spot, but some of them are unemployable for one reason or the other.

 

[OldLady]

low-income working families, children, seniors, people with disabilities and veterans, -

tell the truth .......

It takes $$ money from tight ass RW's and feeds needy people so they gripe about it.

So, government is the only vehicle by which these low-income families, children, seniors and people with disabilities and veterans can receive help?

Take a look at what you've got without the SNAP program. It's great, but it isn't enough or SNAP would already be defunct. As a matter of fact, a lot of SNAP recipients already use the food bank because SNAP is definitely not enough to entirely feed a family for a month. It was designed as "supplemental" and that is what it is. They say we are the most generous nation in the world, and I'm proud of us for that, but your "solution" of relying on charity is not enough and there is no way to ensure it is fairly distributed or is providing what is actually needed. There are provisions in the Ag bill that will cut SNAP benefits. Some states have already instituted these rules, but now it will be federal and will apply to all states. It includes mothers with young children. It's not a good idea.

 

[Rosy]

When I was growing up it was school bullies that went after kids’ lunch money, it wasn’t the Congress. This is shameful.

Unemployment is under 4% why do we need it?

If parents for WHATEVER REASON can't provide healthy meals to their kids, you can either blame the parents and let the kids grow up malnourished, with all the negatives that go along with that--poorer health and lower IQ--or you can feed the kids so they are healthy and hopefully won't end up as dysfunctional as their parents. Of course, not all parents are dysfunctional, they're just in a temporarily bad spot, but some of them are unemployable for one reason or the other.

Why should I be feeding Mexican kids?

Did they feed me, or help my parents

 

[Rosy]

low-income working families, children, seniors, people with disabilities and veterans, -

tell the truth .......

It takes $$ money from tight ass RW's and feeds needy people so they gripe about it.

So, government is the only vehicle by which these low-income families, children, seniors and people with disabilities and veterans can receive help?

Take a look at what you've got without the SNAP program. It's great, but it isn't enough or SNAP would already be defunct. As a matter of fact, a lot of SNAP recipients already use the food bank because SNAP is definitely not enough to entirely feed a family for a month. It was designed as "supplemental" and that is what it is. They say we are the most generous nation in the world, and I'm proud of us for that, but your "solution" of relying on charity is not enough and there is no way to ensure it is fairly distributed or is providing what is actually needed. There are provisions in the Ag bill that will cut SNAP benefits. Some states have already instituted these rules, but now it will be federal and will apply to all states. It includes mothers with young children. It's not a good idea.

Why should the farm bill pay farmers not to grow food.......

be specific

 

[Harpy Eagle]

When I was growing up it was school bullies that went after kids’ lunch money, it wasn’t the Congress. This is shameful.

Farm subsidies do not feed poor children. You are delusional

In fact Trump is ending subsidies that pay farmers not to grow food

got that kiddy

Hey genius, SNAP is part of the farm bill as are other food assistance programs both foreign and domestic.

Fact the farm bill pays farmers not to farm food.

now grow up kid

how is your stock portfolio doing by the way

The Farm Bill does about 100 more things than that


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

 

[Meathead]

low-income working families, children, seniors, people with disabilities and veterans, -

tell the truth .......

It takes $$ money from tight ass RW's and feeds needy people so they gripe about it.

So, government is the only vehicle by which these low-income families, children, seniors and people with disabilities and veterans can receive help?

Take a look at what you've got without the SNAP program. It's great, but it isn't enough or SNAP would already be defunct. As a matter of fact, a lot of SNAP recipients already use the food bank because SNAP is definitely not enough to entirely feed a family for a month. It was designed as "supplemental" and that is what it is. They say we are the most generous nation in the world, and I'm proud of us for that, but your "solution" of relying on charity is not enough and there is no way to ensure it is fairly distributed or is providing what is actually needed. There are provisions in the Ag bill that will cut SNAP benefits. Some states have already instituted these rules, but now it will be federal and will apply to all states. It includes mothers with young children. It's not a good idea.

In fact it's an excellent idea. People must be disabused of the perpetuity of the welfare state.

Who knows, some babydaddies might even stick around if the think the state won't kick in and feed their babies and some mommas might think twice before getting knocked up in the expectation of more free stuff. Could happen.

 

[Crepitus]

When I was growing up it was school bullies that went after kids’ lunch money, it wasn’t the Congress. This is shameful.

Farm subsidies do not feed poor children. You are delusional

In fact Trump is ending subsidies that pay farmers not to grow food

got that kiddy

Hey genius, SNAP is part of the farm bill as are other food assistance programs both foreign and domestic.

Fact the farm bill pays farmers not to farm food.

now grow up kid

how is your stock portfolio doing by the way

Educate yourself. Come back when you can talk intelligently on the subject.

Have a nice day.

 

[Zander]

If the parents of these low income children simply cut out the cigarettes, lottery tickets, booze, and tattoos -these children would have plenty of food. Shame on them.

 

[BrokeLoser]

If the parents of these low income children simply cut out the cigarettes, lottery tickets, booze, and tattoos -these children would have plenty of food. Shame on them.

I’d add....weed, piercings, big televisions, pit bulls...etc

 

[Skull Pilot]

Wait a minute is this really a cut where there is actually 23 million less dollars in the budget than last year or is it what politicians call a cut but it is really only a reduction of a future increase?

 

[Flash]

Childhood hunger is a big problem in this country, often the meal at school is the biggest and best meal that many kids get all day.

I volunteer with a food bank/soup kitchen and there are far more children suffering than people are allowed to admit thanks to their partisanship.

Did you know that the vast majority of human evolution has occurred without agriculture? Without ready access to food whenever one wanted it? The human body is designed to be able to go for days, even weeks without eating. The concept of breakfast, lunch and dinner was created by people who saw it as more civilized than simply eating when you felt hungry. "Hunger" is a pure physiological bodily response. It occurs when your body secretes a hormone called ghrelin which prepares your body for the intake of food. If a fat guy skips a meal and is really hungry because of it, it's not because he's going to starve: it's because his body is just used to getting food at that time and therefore is preparing itself for the intake of food. I would know: i'm not the skinniest guy and i've got quite a bit healthier by skipping a meal every day. I'm not hungry until lunch-time anymore cause my body knows it's not going to get any food until then, and sometimes not even at that time.

No, i don't want kids to starve. My only point is that this idea of "hunger" as a justification for governmental theft is a logical fallacy. It assumes that both kids will starve and die without the government and that people wouldn't want to and indeed help in the absence of government. It's just not true.

What we call "hunger" in the US is called "eating high on the hog" in a large portion of the world.

 

[Flash]

It's the conservative conundrum on children:

Abortion is murder, but once they are born let the little bastards starve.

Republicans don't starve anybody--irresponsible parents do.

Let me guess, you're "pro-life"?

I don't have a position on that. And what difference would it make anyhow?

LOL, you don't have a position on abortion? You're not even a good liar.

I don't want to speak for my friend Ray but it is my responsibility as a human being to stop you from killing your child but it is not my responsibility to feed your child because you are too sorry to do it yourself.

 

[OldLady]

If the parents of these low income children simply cut out the cigarettes, lottery tickets, booze, and tattoos -these children would have plenty of food. Shame on them.

Shame on you for talking in stereotypes. IF is a pretty big word, and IF you think you can dictate how these low income folks live their lives and spend their money, go for it. I think you might find it difficult. In the meantime, their kids aren't getting the groceries they need for healthy brain development and sturdy bones, etc. Malnutrition is absolutely unforgivable in this nation. Yes, I agree that we need to make a serious effort to get some folks off perpetual welfare; that starts by making sure the current children living in poverty have the best start we can give them. THAT is what changes the situation, eventually. There is no overnight magic wand solution.

 

[Siete]

When I was growing up it was school bullies that went after kids’ lunch money, it wasn’t the Congress. This is shameful.

Farm subsidies do not feed poor children. You are delusional

In fact Trump is ending subsidies that pay farmers not to grow food

got that kiddy

try and pretend the farm bill is not a stand alone bill ..

the food program in the bill also effects low-income working families, children, seniors, people with disabilities and veterans.

got that kiddy

The farm bill pays farmers not to farm.....

debunk me dork, and explain how farmers not farming feeds people

obviously the content of the bill totally escapes you.

youre dismissed

 

[Crepitus]

It's the conservative conundrum on children:

Abortion is murder, but once they are born let the little bastards starve.

Republicans don't starve anybody--irresponsible parents do.

Let me guess, you're "pro-life"?

I don't have a position on that. And what difference would it make anyhow?

LOL, you don't have a position on abortion? You're not even a good liar.

I don't want to speak for my friend Ray but it is my responsibility as a human being to stop you from killing your child but it is not my responsibility to feed your child because you are too sorry to do it yourself.

Right, once they are born let the little bastards starve.