Jump to content
43oh

Total "food stamp" recipients exceed population of 24 states combined


Recommended Posts

http://www.breitbart...States-Combined

 

In November, the U.S. Department of Agriculture reported that a record 47,102,780 individuals receive food stamps.

 

According to US. Census Bureau data, that figure exceeds the combined populations of: Alaska, Arkansas, Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, Hawaii, Idaho, Iowa, Kansas, Maine, Mississippi, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Oregon, Rhode Island, South Dakota, Utah, Vermont, West Virginia, and Wyoming.

 

Please note- this is a "record", meaning never before in history have this many people been on food stamps. Mind you, this is the 4th year of the current administration and we're up for 4 more.

 

Say what you will about the economy getting better and the housing market being up; historically relevant numbers of people on the welfare dole is not good no matter which way you slice it... and may even be a sign of impending doom.

 

How can the economy and housing go up if ~1/6 of the population are receiving public assistance?

 

 

 

 

Sorry- had to vent for a moment.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Funny, thats not much more than when Bush was in office.

 

And really, the number is useless without context, ie population increase, inflation, population density.

1/3! of the US population lives in four states. 105 million in just Cali, Texas, NY and Florida. Hell, NYC has 9 million people, more than the 8 least populous states combined.

 

Wyoming only has half a million. My 105sq mile county has more than that entire state.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not trying to start an argument here, but breitbart.com is hardly big media. More along the lines of "right wing" oriented, if you ask me.

 

But, I'd think there is more than a bit of change since Bush was in office (note the data comes from the Fed):


  • Image credit
http://thinkprogress...gh/?mobile=nc- a left-leaning site.

foodstamp.jpg

 


  •  

As for Cali... yes, I live here. Not sure I would move out of state though.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You know half the problem with food-stamps are companies that wont pay a decent wage to their employees and play the law so they work their employees right under the limit to get benefits, for example Walmart employees more people that make just under the poverty level than any other company, so most of their employees can get food-stamps which are probably then spent at Walmart and we the taxpayers end up subsidizing Walmart.

 

But to be honest, I don't see the need to why everyone points at food-stamps as if they are magically what will cure the economy if we take them away. Look at disability, it's basically another form of welfare, I know there are people that are disabled and should get it, but I also know people that get $1,500 a month because their ears ring and another that gets them because of headaches. Then you have social security and medicare which are costing billion to taxpayers because of fraud and waste.

 

And then you have taxes, the rich can pay less in taxes than me because they have accountants that can play the books and investments that are taxed much lower than payroll taxes, then you have some people who pay no taxes at all! I think everyone should pay the same share of taxes.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I could argue Al Gore Sr. was a Democrat and voted against civil rights.

And Abraham Lincoln was a Republican, as was Martin Luther King Jr.

Lincoln was a republican when republicans ran the north eastern, anti-slave states, and the grand old party was a fresh faced, 4th party system. And then a few decades happened, and the states that ran republican ended up switching to democrats. Saying Lincoln was a republican ignores that civil war era republicans were today's liberal democrats.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You know half the problem with food-stamps are companies that wont pay a decent wage to their employees and play the law so they work their employees right under the limit to get benefits, for example Walmart employees more people that make just under the poverty level than any other company, so most of their employees can get food-stamps which are probably then spent at Walmart and we the taxpayers end up subsidizing Walmart.

 

But to be honest, I don't see the need to why everyone points at food-stamps as if they are magically what will cure the economy if we take them away. Look at disability, it's basically another form of welfare, I know there are people that are disabled and should get it, but I also know people that get $1,500 a month because their ears ring and another that gets them because of headaches. Then you have social security and medicare which are costing billion to taxpayers because of fraud and waste.

 

And then you have taxes, the rich can pay less in taxes than me because they have accountants that can play the books and investments that are taxed much lower than payroll taxes, then you have some people who pay no taxes at all! I think everyone should pay the same share of taxes.

I have to laugh at the concept of "decent wage". I lived on my own, rented an apartment and such, paid my bills and "got by" on minimum wage back in the late '80s. I also noticed that as minimum wage went up, so did rent, fuel, food and such... almost "lock-step": when minimum wage was raised, the cost of everything else went up leaving me in exactly the same position I was in before, despite the promises saying increasing minimum wage would put more money in my pocket. Years later, when my education and experience permitted me to earn more than minimum wage, I found myself in the odd position of having people "promoted" to making as much as I did due to increases in minimum wage: people making minimum wage got paid more and more while my wages didn't increase.

 

I also learned the importance of "budgeting" in order to finance things I wanted. Wouldn't it be nice if the current "administration" of the US could make a budget, at least once, and stick to it instead of legislating spending "bills" that push paying for the expenditures out past the end of their term in office? Even Clinton had to shut down the government for a while because of not having a budget, yet Obama is getting carte blanche to continue on? I do not spend money I do not have so why should the government be any more priveledged?

 

Interesting you mention WalMart. WalMart doesn't pay their employees any less than Target, or any other generic retail outlet does. They all abide by the labor codes and laws. I don't see or hear anyone up in arms about McDonalds, Jack-in-the-Box, 7-Eleven, Subway, Best Buy... or any other company that pays minimum wage. A friend of ours has a brother who works for WalMart and the store he works at had a catering company prepare tri-tip and other goodies for the employees who worked "Black Friday". Yet Target, where my wife works, ordered Subway, bulk Chinese and cooked fried chicken from their own freezer. Providing employees benefits above and beyond wages is not a legal requirement, at least until "Obamacare" takes full effect. I work in the telecom industry and my employer doesn't provide health care.

 

In the '70s and '80's no one complained about Gemco, Zody's, Montgomery-Ward, TG&Y, Kinney's Shoes and other companies paying minimum wage and offering no benefits... interestingly enough, where are they now? But, why the big fuss now? ... The "entitlement mentality" is the only explanation I can reasonably arrive at.

 

My whole life has seen ups and downs, and I've even had to resort to unemployment insurance a few times. But I do my best to avoid those situations. Were I really in need, I would work at WalMart or even out in the field picking lettuce before resorting to the way of life of Welfare. Sadly, too many people lack the resolve to actually do anything other than receive Welfare assistance... now don't get me wrong here- it's a program to help people in dire need and I applaud the fact it is available, but it is not a way of life. It was intended as a "trampoline", if you will, to catch one when they fall so they can rebound and recover. It is now a program that is easy to fall in to and nearly impossible to get out of.

 

 

 

As for the rich and taxes... perhaps they should pay more than they do. But I don't believe a progressive, sliding tax scale is fair either... as in the more one earns the more one pays. I also don't believe it's fair to tax one's income, then tax again when the money is spent. That is just a ploy for the government to get their grubby hands into one's wallet and finance their whims.

 

In my opinion, the only way to be fair is to either allow everyone to earn what they can, unencumbered by taxes, and then tax what they buy, or tax their income and allow them to spend unencumbered by taxes. Either way, everyone will contribute to the system in proportionate amounts. If you cannot afford it, don't buy it.

 

I think, most annoyingly, that driving through the parking lot at the local DPSS office, people receiving welfare were getting in to Escalade's and such whilst my wife and I are out working and get to drive a '91 Toyota pickup. I either suck at gaming the system or the system sucks and penalizes people for doing the right thing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Lincoln was a republican when republicans ran the north eastern, anti-slave states, and the grand old party was a fresh faced, 4th party system. And then a few decades happened, and the states that ran republican ended up switching to democrats. Saying Lincoln was a republican ignores that civil war era republicans were today's liberal democrats.

Which states changed from republican to democrat?

 

But beyond that, you're saying Lincoln would be a Democrat were he alive today?

In one manner of thought, I would be compelled to agree, as in he valued the monetary contribution to the economy the southern states made to the Federal government and could not let that income go. And his actions did also ensure government involvement into too many aspects of one's personal life. However, the issue of slavery was a most fortunate benefactor of his actions.

 

 

So, how do you reconcile MLKjr being Republican, and the Democrat party's co-opt of civil rights after having voted against it?

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is all very interesting. I live in a state with one of the highest unemployment rates in the country , and I would be willing to wager , one of the highest number of citizens on assistance. I grew up in a moderate city , that was once booming. My father was a welder back in the "glory days" and banked a good bit of money. He was a country boy , youngest of 12 living in a one room house on the side of a hill (12 not including mother, father , grandparents , and local kids that had no one else). My mother has always had health issues , but worked 70hrs/wk when I was younger. I have been instilled with the attitude that second hand is just fine as long as I can fix it or make it work until I can afford better.

 

What I see a lot of , is people using the system. Several grown men I work with , have kids only for the tax break , and assistance. They treat thier kids like dogs , and use the money they make on thier own selfish whims. I actually get flak for consulting my wife on any purchase over 10$. The area of town I grew up in was a minority sector , and I saw a metric crapton of people on welfare/foodstamps/SSI , etc. A good percentage of the assistance families drove brand new vehicles , wore the nicest clothes , and a lot of time , sold drugs on top of getting the government to pay for housing/food/cash assistance. I am not talking about race , as there were many white/hispanic/native american families doing the same ; so dont think I am lumping one group into this category. I have also seen a lot of SSI fraud. People getting disability for the reason "I dont work well with others ; social problems" , my back hurts , I cant work , and even things like "i cant read , so i cant work" .

 

The only thing that steels my hope , is that my wife is a nurse. She is a great trachea/ventilation nurse , and has taken care of quadrapalegics , and everything up to underdeveloped infants. One gentleman she took care of , was a manager at a local KFC , and was robbed one night while leaving. He gave the crooks the money , and they shot him a few times , leaving him to die. They didnt know he was the father of two special needs children , and his wife had copd and esophogeal(sp) cancer. He was paralized from the neck down , and had to rely on others to do even the most basic of tasks for him , where he had only recently been the rock of the family. Instead of giving up and taking the easy road , he has tried repeatedly to get jobs at places like wal-mart being a greeter , or things that he could do like that. While he requires 24hr skilled nursing , he could not get hired anywhere because of discrimination. I understand he may not be the most productive worker , but if a man who cant even feed himself is trying to get a job ,then there is no reason that anyone should be unemployed.

 

 

I dont want to rant , but I have seen my share of abuse of the system , and until we put a stop to it , its only going to continue to get worse. My theory is this: There are vacant/abandonded homes all across the country , and there are people who would do anything to have a home . There are also people who are on assistance that dont have any skills or any motivation. If you want assistance , you either help out at a shelter (or something along these lines) , or you help to rebuild the abandoned homes . If you help rebuild a home , you could have a chance to be given the home (again , just an idea) . This would instill pride in the recipients , which in turn would keep a lot of this from continuing.

 

 

I dont have all the answers , but drug testing recipients is step 1 in my opinion. If you're on welfare/assistance , I sure as hell dont want to pay my taxes , that end up in your pocket , while you sit at home and drink/smoke/get high. Even if you're not using the gov't money for smokes or booze , any personal money shouldnt go to that either. This also touches on the helth subject of assistance recipients. I work 60+ hours a week , with no affordable healthcare , while people who do nothing get free medical care. That really bugs me.

 

 

good discussion so far , I like the civilized tone we keep here.

-hov

Link to post
Share on other sites

Forgot to mention , I worked for walmart for a while. I made well over minimum wage , and had reasonable benefits. (single,not married or no childrens) . I also had enough to buy stock in the company , which when I left a couple years later had gone up quite a bit. I dont know how it is now , this was back in 99/00. I actually really liked working there. They had a lot of policy that I didnt agree with , but that was my personal battle with them.

 

-hov

Link to post
Share on other sites

Normally, someone would say that for "every bad apple in the bunch there are a dozen good ones", but unfortunately the reciprocal is not true.

No one will ever tell you "one out of every twelve is good", but that's about where we are... one out of every six people are on the welfare dole.

And all the people want are more government hand-outs.

 

Is it possible for people to be self-reliant when the government is right there, ready to prop 'em up?

 

And who pays for it? People like me, on the bottom end of the "working class".

 

My brother-in-law hasn't had a proper job in his 43 years of existence, is a two-strike felon, has used his son's social security number for employment (first-hand knowledge: I landed him an $18 hour job at the company I work for and he got drunk and spilled the beans to the president of the company, and promptly lost his job, so you can't claim "hear-say"), and he really isn't worth the butter he spreads on his toast, yet he gets "earned income child credit" and such on his taxes, whilst I work and pay my taxes and bring home less than he does from his "under the table" jobs.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...