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

[boilermaker55]

Corporate America and its subsidies.
Check it out if you can get your head out of "the peemeisters" back side.

Now all you are doing is talking out of your twat!~
Because "truly" they are getting money from the tax payers.
But you are "TRULY" do ignorant to know what you are talking about.

Like the multi-national corporations that make $$Billions yet they all want a subsidy. Doesn't that just piss you off!

My Judgemental here is a freaking expert.

Did you knov there are zero Republicans on welfare, food stamps etc. Nope, not a one. Just because Red States lead the pack in government money grubbing does not mean anything. I can hop over the mountain into a county that is one of the most Republican in the State of Pennsylvania ans see lots of people on government assistance.

TanF is a program designed to get people on their own. Most people leave the program through employment. So quit lying about this all the time.

You people want a low minimum wage & when people work those jobs they still need help. That is subsidizing corporrations, your favorite way to spend money.


The fact is you don't know shit why people need help. You are just a selfish little shit.

Yes, I am selfish. What made me that way? Could it be those people I see at the store with their SNAP's cards? You know, they load the belt full of goodies, pay for them with SNAP's, and then whip out that wad of cash for their cigarettes , beer, flowers, huge bags of dog food, cat litter, perfume......

I see it all the time. Now they are in line bugging us to buy some of our food items. They want to check out 30 bucks of our items, and when we get out of line, we pay them 15 bucks for the items they bought for us. The store is working on throwing those people out, but few will take the time to report them.

I know all about those people. In fact had to evict a food stamp family from one of my apartments. Same thing, huge dog, both smoked, Obama phone, three cats, and the woman stayed home all day doing nothing.

No. What pisses me off are when the lying left call tax breaks a subsidy. They really think everybody is as stupid as they are.

To you they are getting taxpayer money because you cradle-to-grave leftists think that all money belongs to government, and what they allow us to keep is a gift from them to us.

 

[boilermaker55]

If there are livable wages for people the graph might have a different scenerio.
However, when corporate "america" keeps the profits for the top 1%, others suffer.
But you refuse to recognize that fact.

Oh no Republicans are starving kids! This shit is never ending.

View attachment 193805

View attachment 193806

 

[OldLady]

Here's the conundrum... I think bringing children into this world that you cannot afford to support is a disgrace and borders on neglect. Now, with that being said, we certainly can't hold the child accountable by not making sure they at least have the basics.

However, this should n't absolve the parents of any requirements of them to get the help.

If it were up to me, a requirement to receive government aid would be getting fixed before you get one red cent. No more having kids while on social programs. You can never eliminate poverty when the government rewards you for making more people in poverty. The apple usually doesn't fall far from the tree.

They tried that in New Jersey years and years ago. Got shot down, probably by the courts, real quick. So try to think of another way without stunting the next generation's brains.

Then maybe it's time to reintroduce it. When you reward people for having kids they can't afford, they will only have more kids. Allowing it to continue means we have a problem we'll never be able to solve.

I agree it would be incredibly stupid to choose to have another child when you're in those straits. Courts said no, though. There are other ways to solve the problem, but it isn't going to happen overnight and disregarding/cutting services to the young kids is the worst idea yet. In ten, fifteen years, they'll be making the choices.

 

[basquebromance]

It's just another attempt to slash nutrition assistance for millions of children and working families and call it “reform.”

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Here's the conundrum... I think bringing children into this world that you cannot afford to support is a disgrace and borders on neglect. Now, with that being said, we certainly can't hold the child accountable by not making sure they at least have the basics.

However, this should n't absolve the parents of any requirements of them to get the help.

If it were up to me, a requirement to receive government aid would be getting fixed before you get one red cent. No more having kids while on social programs. You can never eliminate poverty when the government rewards you for making more people in poverty. The apple usually doesn't fall far from the tree.

They tried that in New Jersey years and years ago. Got shot down, probably by the courts, real quick. So try to think of another way without stunting the next generation's brains.

Then maybe it's time to reintroduce it. When you reward people for having kids they can't afford, they will only have more kids. Allowing it to continue means we have a problem we'll never be able to solve.

I agree it would be incredibly stupid to choose to have another child when you're in those straits. Courts said no, though. There are other ways to solve the problem, but it isn't going to happen overnight and disregarding/cutting services to the young kids is the worst idea yet. In ten, fifteen years, they'll be making the choices.

The problem is every time I see one of these "poor" people, they seem to have three children or more; something you seldom see in a working family these days.

So now "because of the children" the poor have the taxpayers over the barrel. We can't stop them from procreating, we have to feed these kids, and there is nothing we can do to stop it.

It's a good example of why we we should have never started social programs in the first place. The wise words of James Madison should have applied to every generation after. Because once you have a social program in place, it's taken advantage of, gets abused, and it's thereafter considered inhuman to get rid of it.

We are capitalist country that socialism is destroying right in front of our eyes.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

You are backing away twat-face.
Go back and read your response you fool
Just like you and "the peemeister" lie when you get the chance.

"If it were up to me, a requirement to receive government aid would be getting fixed before you get one red cent. No more having kids while on social programs."
Once again you ignorant twat, teabagging fool, these are your words.
So stop trying to "truly" back away from them, you NAZI F*CK>

HEY ALL LOOK it's a F*CKING NAZI!

Forced sterilization.
Nice call you moron!

If it were up to me, a requirement to receive government aid would be getting fixed before you get one red cent. No more having kids while on social programs. You can never eliminate poverty when the government rewards you for making more people in poverty. The apple usually doesn't fall far from the tree.

What do you think working people do when they can't afford anymore kids moron? We get ourselves fixed so we can't have anymore kids.

Who's backing away from them? I said it and stand behind every word. Why do you leftists always try to change the subject when you have nothing to say?

Show me how I'm backing away. You lying left make up shit all the time.

 

[imawhosure]

It's just another attempt to slash nutrition assistance for millions of children and working families and call it “reform.”

Here's the conundrum... I think bringing children into this world that you cannot afford to support is a disgrace and borders on neglect. Now, with that being said, we certainly can't hold the child accountable by not making sure they at least have the basics.

However, this should n't absolve the parents of any requirements of them to get the help.

If it were up to me, a requirement to receive government aid would be getting fixed before you get one red cent. No more having kids while on social programs. You can never eliminate poverty when the government rewards you for making more people in poverty. The apple usually doesn't fall far from the tree.

They tried that in New Jersey years and years ago. Got shot down, probably by the courts, real quick. So try to think of another way without stunting the next generation's brains.

Then maybe it's time to reintroduce it. When you reward people for having kids they can't afford, they will only have more kids. Allowing it to continue means we have a problem we'll never be able to solve.

I agree it would be incredibly stupid to choose to have another child when you're in those straits. Courts said no, though. There are other ways to solve the problem, but it isn't going to happen overnight and disregarding/cutting services to the young kids is the worst idea yet. In ten, fifteen years, they'll be making the choices.

The problem is every time I see one of these "poor" people, they seem to have three children or more; something you seldom see in a working family these days.

So now "because of the children" the poor have the taxpayers over the barrel. We can't stop them from procreating, we have to feed these kids, and there is nothing we can do to stop it.

It's a good example of why we we should have never started social programs in the first place. The wise words of James Madison should have applied to every generation after. Because once you have a social program in place, it's taken advantage of, gets abused, and it's thereafter considered inhuman to get rid of it.

We are capitalist country that socialism is destroying right in front of our eyes.

The biggest problem Americans have is being overweight, or FAT if you are uneducated and can't look it up on Google. I haven't seen anyone in this country starve, have you?

This Leftist is a phony-baloney akin to the squaw, JS, and Humdinger, lololol!

 

[DOTR]

If there are livable wages for people the graph might have a different scenerio.
However, when corporate "america" keeps the profits for the top 1%, others suffer.
But you refuse to recognize that fact.

Oh no Republicans are starving kids! This shit is never ending.

View attachment 193805

View attachment 193806

In other words no fix for this eternal dependency except socialism? We are in economic boom times. You are importing workers from all over the world to drive down wages. But food stamps need to increase? Never ending
I have already, elsewhere, given the reason food stamps never go down. And the proof. Corporate america fights bare knuckles to keep the food stamp gravy train flowing. Coca cola is one of the biggest lobbyists for food stamps.

Be thankful I am not in charge.

 

[Zander]

People are lazy. It doesn't cost more to eat healthy. It simply requires a little effort.

I can buy a dozen eggs for $1.50. A pound of cheese for $3.00, and Kerrygold Butter for $2.75 - that will make 6 very satisfying cheese omelettes for $1.25 per serving. Throw in a piece of toast and it cost $1.35 for a healthy, nutritious, and filling breakfast.

I can buy farm fresh veggies - enough to serve a family of four for $2-3. A full pork tenderloin costs $3.75. Basmati rice- cost a few pennies a serving. A complete balanced healthy meal with steamed veggies, protein, a starch, and healthy fat cost around $3.00 a person.

The only excuse for not eating healthy is laziness and stupidity.

Welfare people always seem to manage to find money for tattoos ,cigarettes, lottery tickets, booze, and weed. But they need help to feed their kids..... Gimme a break.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

People are lazy. It doesn't cost more to eat healthy. It simply requires a little effort.

I can buy a dozen eggs for $1.50. A pound of cheese for $3.00, and Kerrygold Butter for $2.75 - that will make 6 very satisfying cheese omelettes for $1.25 per serving. Throw in a piece of toast and it cost $1.35 for a healthy, nutritious, and filling breakfast.

I can buy farm fresh veggies - enough to serve a family of four for $2-3. A full pork tenderloin costs $3.75. Basmati rice- cost a few pennies a serving. A complete balanced healthy meal with steamed veggies, protein, a starch, and healthy fat cost around $3.00 a person.

The only excuse for not eating healthy is laziness and stupidity.

Welfare people always seem to manage to find money for tattoos ,cigarettes, lottery tickets, booze, and weed. But they need help to feed their kids..... Gimme a break.

You're not kidding. At our grocery store you have to buy your lottery tickets at the main counter. I see these food stamp people leaving the line and running to the main counter to buy lottery tickets. They have that machine spitting out lottery tickets like a fax machine printing out pages of Obama Care.

 

[imawhosure]

People are lazy. It doesn't cost more to eat healthy. It simply requires a little effort.

I can buy a dozen eggs for $1.50. A pound of cheese for $3.00, and Kerrygold Butter for $2.75 - that will make 6 very satisfying cheese omelettes for $1.25 per serving. Throw in a piece of toast and it cost $1.35 for a healthy, nutritious, and filling breakfast.

I can buy farm fresh veggies - enough to serve a family of four for $2-3. A full pork tenderloin costs $3.75. Basmati rice- cost a few pennies a serving. A complete balanced healthy meal with steamed veggies, protein, a starch, and healthy fat cost around $3.00 a person.

The only excuse for not eating healthy is laziness and stupidity.

Welfare people always seem to manage to find money for tattoos ,cigarettes, lottery tickets, booze, and weed. But they need help to feed their kids..... Gimme a break.

Truth be told--------->

Government created this, and now 40% of the people are NOT forced to go out and work to live. Of the 60% of the people who have the work ethic to take care of themselves, the brilliant government decided 47% of them don't have to pay federal income tax. Of those 47%, about 65% get a SUBSIDY meaning...........they get more back then they ever put in.

And we wonder why our country is in debt! We aren't DEMANDING they pay their FAIR SHARE like Lefties always do, we are just asking they pay a buck or two, and quit taking back more than you ever put in. In essence.......SKIN IN THE GAME!

 

[BluesLegend]

People are lazy. It doesn't cost more to eat healthy. It simply requires a little effort.

I can buy a dozen eggs for $1.50. A pound of cheese for $3.00, and Kerrygold Butter for $2.75 - that will make 6 very satisfying cheese omelettes for $1.25 per serving. Throw in a piece of toast and it cost $1.35 for a healthy, nutritious, and filling breakfast.

I can buy farm fresh veggies - enough to serve a family of four for $2-3. A full pork tenderloin costs $3.75. Basmati rice- cost a few pennies a serving. A complete balanced healthy meal with steamed veggies, protein, a starch, and healthy fat cost around $3.00 a person.

The only excuse for not eating healthy is laziness and stupidity.

Welfare people always seem to manage to find money for tattoos ,cigarettes, lottery tickets, booze, and weed. But they need help to feed their kids..... Gimme a break.

You're not kidding. At our grocery store you have to buy your lottery tickets at the main counter. I see these food stamp people leaving the line and running to the main counter to buy lottery tickets. They have that machine spitting out lottery tickets like a fax machine printing out pages of Obama Care.

On Dem party plantations many feel like hitting the lotto is their only hope. And Dem's are only too happy to take the poor's money on rigged lotto games, that keeps them right there on the plantation.

 

[Wyatt earp]

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?

Yet another Conservative dick who would take food away from children as they hand out millions to people like Donald Trump.

Once again unemployment is under 4%

 

[mikegriffith1]

I don't know why the Republicans insist on shooting themselves in the foot with these kinds of proposals. There are tons of federal programs that could and should be reduced. Republicans should look for savings in those programs, not in breakfast and lunch programs for school kids.

Proposing cuts in school breakfast and lunch programs makes the Republicans look heartless and uncaring, not to mention elitist and selfish. And Republicans wonder why they have a hard time with the younger female and soccer mom vote.

I remember all the times back in the '80s when the Republicans tried to cut the WIC program. It made them look awful.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

People are lazy. It doesn't cost more to eat healthy. It simply requires a little effort.

I can buy a dozen eggs for $1.50. A pound of cheese for $3.00, and Kerrygold Butter for $2.75 - that will make 6 very satisfying cheese omelettes for $1.25 per serving. Throw in a piece of toast and it cost $1.35 for a healthy, nutritious, and filling breakfast.

I can buy farm fresh veggies - enough to serve a family of four for $2-3. A full pork tenderloin costs $3.75. Basmati rice- cost a few pennies a serving. A complete balanced healthy meal with steamed veggies, protein, a starch, and healthy fat cost around $3.00 a person.

The only excuse for not eating healthy is laziness and stupidity.

Welfare people always seem to manage to find money for tattoos ,cigarettes, lottery tickets, booze, and weed. But they need help to feed their kids..... Gimme a break.

You're not kidding. At our grocery store you have to buy your lottery tickets at the main counter. I see these food stamp people leaving the line and running to the main counter to buy lottery tickets. They have that machine spitting out lottery tickets like a fax machine printing out pages of Obama Care.

On Dem party plantations many feel like hitting the lotto is their only hope. And Dem's are only too happy to take the poor's money on rigged lotto games, that keeps them right there on the plantation.

Which is why I always said our public schools should have a business class as part of the mandated curriculum, especially in lower income areas. Nothing too involved, just to teach lower income people about interest rates, investments, starting your own business, the stock market, real estate, the commodities market.......

It's a shame when foreigners come here and use the tools to become successful, and the people that live here don't even know they're there.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

I don't know why the Republicans insist on shooting themselves in the foot with these kinds of proposals. There are tons of federal programs that could and should be reduced. Republicans should look for savings in those programs, not in breakfast and lunch programs for school kids.

Proposing cuts in school breakfast and lunch programs makes the Republicans look heartless and uncaring, not to mention elitist and selfish. And Republicans wonder why they have a hard time with the younger female and soccer mom vote.

I remember all the times back in the '80s when the Republicans tried to cut the WIC program. It made them look awful.

The problem is that politicians do worry how they will look instead of doing the right thing. When you live in such a wealty country with so much opportunity, it's embarrassing to think that if you're standing in a room with 13 other people, two of them are being fed by the other 12.

 

[danielpalos]

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?

Yet another Conservative dick who would take food away from children as they hand out millions to people like Donald Trump.

Once again unemployment is under 4%

not solving California's problem.

A fifteen dollar an hour minimum wage and unemployment compensation simply for being unemployed, can.

 

[basquebromance]

With so many farmers already getting hit in the wallet by the Trump tariffs, this Harm Bill makes things worse.

 

[RealDave]

Like the multi-national corporations that make $$Billions yet they all want a subsidy. Doesn't that just piss you off!

My Judgemental here is a freaking expert.

Did you knov there are zero Republicans on welfare, food stamps etc. Nope, not a one. Just because Red States lead the pack in government money grubbing does not mean anything. I can hop over the mountain into a county that is one of the most Republican in the State of Pennsylvania ans see lots of people on government assistance.

TanF is a program designed to get people on their own. Most people leave the program through employment. So quit lying about this all the time.

You people want a low minimum wage & when people work those jobs they still need help. That is subsidizing corporrations, your favorite way to spend money.


The fact is you don't know shit why people need help. You are just a selfish little shit.

Yes, I am selfish. What made me that way? Could it be those people I see at the store with their SNAP's cards? You know, they load the belt full of goodies, pay for them with SNAP's, and then whip out that wad of cash for their cigarettes , beer, flowers, huge bags of dog food, cat litter, perfume......

I see it all the time. Now they are in line bugging us to buy some of our food items. They want to check out 30 bucks of our items, and when we get out of line, we pay them 15 bucks for the items they bought for us. The store is working on throwing those people out, but few will take the time to report them.

I know all about those people. In fact had to evict a food stamp family from one of my apartments. Same thing, huge dog, both smoked, Obama phone, three cats, and the woman stayed home all day doing nothing.

No. What pisses me off are when the lying left call tax breaks a subsidy. They really think everybody is as stupid as they are.

What pisses me off is that you dipshits think it isn't.

It isn't. A subsidy is when the government gives money. A tax break is when government takes less of people's money.

If the government sends you $10K, you call that a subsidy.

If the government gives you a $10k discount, its is not?

Fucked up stupid logic at its best.

 

[danielpalos]

Capital should be finding gains through productivity. A fifteen dollar an hour minimum wage can provide that capital, market based incentive.