Greed and Stupidity on the Right.

[Trajan]

Only republicans voted on this and it passed!?!?!

Awesome!

This does not have to do with new law and thus does not need a Senate vote or presidential signature. It has to do with the funding of a bill that has already been passed.
United States to Fall Off ‘Hunger Cliff’ Friday, Hitting Women and Families Hardest

by Emily Crockett, Reporting Fellow, RH Reality Check

October 31, 2013 - 5:32 pm

Advocates are warning that the United States will go over a “hunger cliff” Friday, when benefits to all food stamp recipients will decrease, with women and children particularly affected.

“This is the first time in the history of the program that an across-the-board reduction of benefits will take place,” Triada Stampas, director of governmental relations and public education at the Food Bank for New York City, told RH Reality Check.
http://rhrealitycheck.org/article/2013/10/31/united-states-to-fall-off-hunger-cliff-friday-hitting-women-and-families-hardest/

I suggest you Google "Hunger cliff" for more stories like this.

I suggest a review and comparison of the talking points ( like these, distributed the usual organizational studies and the very loud, raucous demonstrations of angst in the run up to the Welfare reform of 1996, Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (PRWORA). Clinton himself touts is success, the reform would put single mothers in a bind, kids would starve, the streets would be full of indigents thrown out of their domicile who had been stricken from the rolls etc etc etc ....Even Brookings thinks it worked......I think an individual can get by without $11 a month.

 

[ron4342]

the op is troll, who post nothing but hate and division for pot stirring

I have seen all kinds of personal attacks and opinions but what I haven't seen is anybody refute the facts in the OP. And that includes you, Stephanie. What I have seen from Stephanie is ignorance, laziness, and a willingness to spread lies.

you post a title that says, greed and stupidity on the right and then sit here and poo poo your diaper when you are called out for what you are

you are the ignorant, lazy pos and can go to hell

My! My! My! What a sweet and lovely person you are. Go ahead and call me some more names. A foul mouth and disposition seems to be all you have going for you.
Oh and by the way, you have not disproved a single fact I posted in the OP. Every post on this thread has been a personal attack against me while offering absolutely nothing.

 

[ron4342]

Oh, just stop this bullshit about hunger cliff. People earning 400%or even 200% poverty level are absolutely able to feed themselves - children or no children. A family of 4 having 60k per year is not poor - and they are eligible for the SNAP program.

As I said above - the ones at or below powerty level should have been left on it. Everyone else should have been cut off

vox posted:
Instead of lowering it across the board (which another proof of government stupidity and inefficiency) all those who are 400%, 300%and 200% poverty level should have been cut off. A single person making 22 K per year can feed herself without a problem - and that is 200% level.

Ron replied:
Google "Hunger cliff." Once you have educated yourself and know what you are talking about feel free to comeback.

You stupid partisan hack with inability to analyze the written words - an individual earning 22K dollars per year is not hungryand should not be receiving any food stamps whatsoever. Same is pertinent for a family of 4 and having 40k per year - they are not hungry.

If your stupid gubmint does not distinguish between the individuals which really would be affected by the cut and those which should not be on it to start with - that is the problem with stupid gubmint.

I know what hunger is from personal experience, not from phony articles​

Still haven't read the links I gave you.

I AM VOX. I KNOW WHAT I BELIEVE AND I REFUSE TO BE CONFUSED BY FACTS OR TRUTHS.​

 

[ron4342]

the op is troll, who post nothing but hate and division for pot stirring

just look at the title for an Example

Here is a thought stephanie, when I see a troll I ignore the thread. If you feel I am a troll I suggest you ignore my thread. I think we would both be happier.

 

[Stephanie]

trolls a trolling

ugly

 

[depotoo]

Republicans are idiots, they vote to outsource the jobs and offshore the companies then bitch about too many freeloaders !!!!!!!!!!

Yeah the party on the way out !!!!!!!!!!!

who was it that outsourced obamacare's website?

 

[percysunshine]

2008, 28 million people, 38 billion dollars

2012, 47 million people, 75 billion dollars

Proposal; change the $75B to $71B.

Let's do the math on this one. In 2008 people were getting, on average, $1357 per person. In 2012 people were getting, on average, $1596 per person. The proposal is to go to $1,511 per person, on average. It is still better than what that evil Bush regime was doing. All is good in the world.

 

[eagle1462010]

Let's balance this out............

Hmmmmmm..............

Give them Cell phones or food.................

Hmmmmmmmmm............

And as the last poster stated, the amount spent is very large. Spare me the false outrage.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

You're telling me people are going to starve because they recieve $10 less than they currently do?

Even a child could earn $10 in a month.

Hummmmm ...." Even a child could earn $10 in a month." Hummmmm......
So you agree with newt gingrich when he called for the child-labor laws to be repealed. Oh, and here is something you might give a thought to; The phrase "...children under 18, ...." refers to childen under 1 year old, under 2 years old, under 3 years old, under 4 years old, ..., under 18 years old. Pray tell, what kind of a job should 3 year olds be looking for?

You're a fucking moron. You pissed and whined the other day about people not having an "adult" conversation with you and then here you go throwing out these childish (no pun intended) Ad Hominem arguments.

 

[eagle1462010]

And God Made a ?Taxpayer Subsidized? Farmer | FreedomWorks

And this brings us to the Farm Bill.

Every five years congress passes this bloated agricultural bill, spending billions in taxpayer dollars. It gives farmers the option of purchasing cheap crop insurance with a payout coming directly from taxpayers. The federal government first created federal crop insurance in response to the plight of the agriculture industry during the Great Depression in 1938. What the subsidized insurance actually did was ensure the business risk involved in farming was put on the back of taxpayers.

The insurance does not only act as a guarantee against catastrophic losses but also pays out if a harvest is less bountiful than expected or even if crop prices are not as high as originally thought. Essentially the insurance guarantees them a set income.

The current farm bill expired in 2012 but was extended through September of 2013. Over the next month Congress will likely introduce and vote on a new farm bill. The Senate version of the bill is expected to contain over $963 billion in spending over the next 10 years. The house bill proposed by Republicans would spend some $950 billion over the same time frame. These bills both cut subsidies compared to the 2007 incarnation of the bill.

These proposals, however, do very little to improve cost effectiveness of the farm bill. It was determined by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) that the two proposals would actually save less than expected. The Senate bill would save only $13.1 billion over ten years and the savings in the House bill would only amount to $26.6 billion.

More importantly, the proposals fail to address the fundamental issues with the bill. Because of the changing nature of agriculture in the United States, the bill has for decades amounted to a giant corporate subsidy.

Some 80% of the farm bill sends money to cotton, wheat, corn, and soybean growers. There is also, however, another group of producers who are perhaps the biggest beneficiaries of the bill; sugar producers. Big Sugar has long been one of the most successful lobbying groups in Washington. They defend their special status in the farm bill by asserting sugar producers cost the taxpayers almost nothing, especially when compared to cotton, wheat, corn, and soybeans growers. Sugar’s biggest benefit, however, doesn’t come from subsidized insurance.

Instead, sugar enjoys a special trade status which makes the importation of sugar very expensive. This artificially raises the price of American sugar, making candy and soda companies spend more on operating costs. These costs are of course passed along to the consumer. Hence Americans may not be spending many tax dollars helping Big Sugar but they are definitely spending a lot more at the grocery store because of it.

 

[eagle1462010]

Part of the Billions spent is direct payments NOT TO FARM, the rest is insurance in case of drought or some sort of calamity, whether it's real or not.............

Hmmmmmmmmm...............

Paying farmers not to farm. Needing food for snap. Is there a connection there..............

 

[DiamondDave]

Want an extra 20 pounds of rice? Mow a fucking lawn for $10

 

[LogikAndReazon]

A temporary increase . Like temporary tax cuts by definition are um temporary. Let the mindless beggars at the philly coalition of welfare dependents throw their not enough of a handout tantrums......

 

[Antares]

Amazing that republicans managed to get that one signed in all by themselves. Truly amazing.

I repeat, this was not a new bill and thus did not need Senate approval and a presidential signature. It has to do with the funding of a bill that has already been passed and has been in operation for years. As the House handles the pocketbook they are able to lower the money allotted to the SNAP program without any other approval needed. You can cease being amazed.

Anyone want to chip in with me and send this moron the ten bucks he lost so he'll shut up?

 

[Erand7899]

Amazing that republicans managed to get that one signed in all by themselves. Truly amazing.

I repeat, this was not a new bill and thus did not need Senate approval and a presidential signature. It has to do with the funding of a bill that has already been passed and has been in operation for years. As the House handles the pocketbook they are able to lower the money allotted to the SNAP program without any other approval needed. You can cease being amazed.

Obviously, you actually believe your bullcrap. No bill passes, including funding bills without being voted on by both houses of congress, and signed by the President. And no, Republicans are not able to lower the money allotted to the SNAP program without any other approval needed.

The sequester, that all you dumbass liberal/socailists hate, was voted into law by both houses of congress, and signed by President Obama. In fact, it was one of Obama's dumb ideas. Now, when it all comes back to biting you in the ass, you want to blame it all on Republicans. Typical loon.

 

[MeBelle]

The bottom line here is that republicans will take food out of the mouths of 97 people because 3 people are committing fraud.
Adding to this stupidity is the fact that the republicans think that most of the people on the SNAP program could be out earning a living by getting a job. That sounds wonderful if you haven't got a brain but here are some unpleasant facts that flush that nonsense down the drain.

"More than 47 million people in the United States now rely on food stamps. That’s about 15 percent of the population, or one in seven Americans. Of those, 47 percent are children under 18, and 8 percent are seniors, according to the USDA."
The fight over food stamps explained

]In other words, over 50% of the people on the SNAP program are either to young to get a job or to old to hold a job.
]And as for the 53% that are of working age, most of them do have jobs. However the jobs they have (McDonald,s,Wal Mart, etc) do not pay a living wage thanks to republicans refusal to raise the minimum wage.
And republicans still argue they are not at war with the poor. How they can do so with a straight face is beyond me.

How you can post this bullshit is beyond me!


From your link:
What happens now?

Food stamps won’t disappear.
If the House legislation became law, they would have to be funded separately through appropriations bills.
Historically, the pairing of food stamps with the rest of the Farm Bill has brought the program support from the agriculture industry and from Republicans in rural states. That protection would be lost. House Republicans would be looking to make deeper cuts in the program.
But for that to happen, the Senate would have to accept the House legislation and President Obama would have to sign it.

In fact, the White House has threatened to veto a farm bill without food stamps.

(WUT?? VETO THREAT???)

And the Senate already passed legislation with more modest food stamp cuts.

(WUT? The SENATE??)

So we’ll have to see what happens when the two chambers try to reconcile their legislation, as Brad Plumer explains.

 

[Antares]

How much money do people like this think we have to give?

 

[LogikAndReazon]

These dependent folk would have no need to go hungry if bleeding heart liberals really cared about them and put their money where their whiny loud mouths and faux compassion derive from...

 

[blackhawk]

Speaking of stupid hows that free healthcare that the Democrats promised and most of their supporters bought into working out?

 

[VaYank5150]

The amount of SNAP benefits a person receives are about to be lowered thanks to republicans voting to lower money going to the SNAP program. The republicans are defending this reduction by saying that there are to many freeloaders in the program. Saying such a thing speaks to the stupidity and ignorance of republicans in the legislature. Here are the facts that are being ignored:
Myth #3: SNAP is rife with fraud and abuse.

FACT: “SNAP has one of the most rigorous quality control systems of any public benefit program,” according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. SNAP fraud has actually been cut by three-quarters over the past 15 years, and the program’s error rate is at an all-time low of less than 3 percent. The introduction of EBT (Electronic Benefit Transfer) cards has dramatically reduced consumer fraud. According to the USDA, the small amount of fraud that continues is usually on the part of retailers, not consumers.
6 SNAP (Food Stamp) Myths | Greater Philadelphia Coalition Against Hunger

The bottom line here is that republicans will take food out of the mouths of 97 people because 3 people are committing fraud.
Adding to this stupidity is the fact that the republicans think that most of the people on the SNAP program could be out earning a living by getting a job. That sounds wonderful if you haven't got a brain but here are some unpleasant facts that flush that nonsense down the drain.

"More than 47 million people in the United States now rely on food stamps. That’s about 15 percent of the population, or one in seven Americans. Of those, 47 percent are children under 18, and 8 percent are seniors, according to the USDA."
The fight over food stamps explained

In other words, over 50% of the people on the SNAP program are either to young to get a job or to old to hold a job.
And as for the 53% that are of working age, most of them do have jobs. However the jobs they have (McDonald,s,Wal Mart, etc) do not pay a living wage thanks to republicans refusal to raise the minimum wage.
And republicans still argue they are not at war with the poor. How they can do so with a straight face is beyond me.

If you believe your first point, then you are dumber than most of the people who think guns kill people....