Why are republicans so stupid when it comes to Food Stamps?

[Sun Devil 92]

IF you meant after 8 years of Dubya/GOP "job creator" policies why was there a NEED for a $787 billion stimulus, which had 40% tax cuts to TRY to get a few GOP votes?


Economists Agree: The Stimulus Worked

“The stimulus worked” is the overwhelming conclusion of a panel of elite economists surveyed as part of the University of Chicago’s IGM Economic Experts Panel. The survey asked whether the unemployment rate at the end of 2010 was lower than it would have been because of the U.S. government’s 2009 fiscal stimulus act. Out of the 37 panelists who responded, 36 agreed, an even better response than an identical 2012 survey.

Economists Agree: The Stimulus Worked | Moody's Analytics Economy.com

Sorry cupcake, I'm not a right winger, no need to lie

http://nypost.com/2012/01/29/how-the-800b-stimulus-failed/

OPINION? VS ECONOMISTS? Though I agree the 40% of the $787 billion stimulus which Obama put into it to TRY to get a FEW GOP votes was a complete waste

Well list those so-called economist please. And I'd be willing to bet they are all leftists.

SURE CUPCAKE, SINCE YOUR FIRST AD HOM FAILED

Economic Stimulus (revisited) | IGM Forum

The only failure is you.

In a TV interview last month, Vice President Joe Biden said the following:

Every economist, as I’ve said, from conservative to liberal, acknowledges that direct government spending on a direct program now is the best way to infuse economic growth and create jobs.

That statement is clearly false. As I have documented on this blog in recent weeks, skeptics about a spending stimulus include quite a few well-known economists, such as (in alphabetical order) Alberto Alesina, Robert Barro, Gary Becker, John Cochrane, Eugene Fama, Robert Lucas, Greg Mankiw, Kevin Murphy, Thomas Sargent, Harald Uhlig, and Luigi Zingales–and I am sure there many others as well. Regardless of whether one agrees with them on the merits of the case, it is hard to dispute that this list is pretty impressive, as judged by the standard objective criteria by which economists evaluate one another. If any university managed to hire all of them, it would immediately have a top ranked economics department.

UPDATE: Martin Feldstein, whose support last October for a fiscal stimulus is the reed upon which journalists justify their claims about “economists across the political spectrum,” now calls this stimulus bill “an $800 billion mistake.”

Economists against the Stimulus

Uh oh.....

Frutcaketopia just got turned upside down.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Sorry, the debt has never gone down in modern history.

True only BJ Bill paid down the public debt by almost $500 billion though cupcake

Bill didn't do that--the Republican Congress did. Congress is in charge of our spending---not the President.

Sure Cupcake, we saw how it was Congress when BJ Bill had to veto the GOP's $792+ billion tax cut after his first budget surplus to get 3 more Buttercup, THEN Dubya/GOP showed US how fiscally CONservative they were Cupcake

No fruitcake, it was the GOP who brought forth a balanced budget. There was no budget surplus. It was all bogus calculations that never transpired.

Sorry Cupcake, it was the Dems/BJ Bill's 1993 omnibus bill )not a single GOP supported) that created the BUDGET SURPLUSES (3 AFTER VETOING THE GOP'S $792+ BILLION TAX CUT)


Clinton’s 1993 budget bill—officially known as the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993. OBRA, which mainly raised taxes on wealthy people but also raised the gas tax, extended limits on discretionary spending and cut back on some mandatory spending, was signed into law on August 10, 1993. Just five months prior, the Congressional Budget Office projected a 1998 deficit of $360 billion. One month after the bill passed, the CBO’s new estimate of the 1988 deficit was down to $200 billion.

The CBO explained the dramatic improvement this way: “For the first time in two and one-half years, the deficit projections have taken a decided turn for the better… The reconciliation act deserves most of the credit for the improvement over the long run.” Indeed, of the $160 billion improvement from March to September of that year, CBO directly credited OBRA with $143 billion. In fact, OBRA turns out to have been the single largest contributor to the 1998 surplus.

Not So Fast, Newt - Center for American Progress


AND YES THERE WERE 4 BUDGET SURPLUSES CUPCAKE (MORE MONEY COMING INTO GOV'T TREASURY THAN GOING OUT)

Utter bull. What your commie piece is lying about is there was no "projected" surplus until after Gingrich and the Republicans balanced the budget. The Republicans took over leadership of Congress in 1994. But most would agree the surplus was due to the tech bubble boom that brought in much more than they had expected.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

And Pelosi, Reid, and Obama just kept on spending.

Thanks for sharing.

Care to give those laws they passed that created the debt like Dubya/GOP "job creator" policies 2001-2009 did cupcake? You know TWO UNFUNDED tax cuts, TWO UNFUNDED WARS, UNFUNDED MEDICARE expansion that CBO said cost as much as Obamacares does 2013-2020, but Obamnacares was 100+ funded!

Unfortunately cupcake, policy and consequences (like Dubya cheering on the Banksters subprime bubble) don't end the day the next guy enters office

FOS as usual. Here, from one of your own Commie sites, Politifact:

Did George W. Bush 'borrow' from Social Security to fund the war in Iraq and tax cuts?

What's YOUR premise Cupcake, because your link doesn't address ANY of mine! Yes Dubya/GOP put tax cuts/wars on the credit card!

Maybe you should actually read the link instead of just criticizing it. It states that GW did no more than any other President to fund the war. This liberal BS of "undefended" anything is just that--BS.

Cupcake, DUBYA CUT TAXES TWICE, ONCE WHILE GOING TO WAR DUMB*SS

AND NO THE LINK DIDN'T SAY THAT CUPCAKE




Bush Breaks With 140 Years of History in Plan for Wartime Tax Cut

Old question: What did you do in the war, Daddy?

New answer: I pocketed a large tax cut, honey.

Pause.

And then I passed the bill for the war onto you.

That, essentially, is the generational transaction established by the sweeping tax cut President Bush proposed last week. The proposal commits Bush to a goal unprecedented in U.S. history: cutting taxes in wartime.

Forget guns and butter: Bush is now offering bombs and caviar.

....With this push to slash taxes during wartime, Bush broke from 140 years of history under presidents of both parties. In every major conflict the United States has fought since the Civil War (and some minor ones), Washington has raised taxes to pay for the war.





LATIMES
Bush Breaks With 140 Years of History in Plan for Wartime Tax Cut

Trying to change subjects agains I see. Well that's what most people do when defeated.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

Care to give those laws they passed that created the debt like Dubya/GOP "job creator" policies 2001-2009 did cupcake? You know TWO UNFUNDED tax cuts, TWO UNFUNDED WARS, UNFUNDED MEDICARE expansion that CBO said cost as much as Obamacares does 2013-2020, but Obamnacares was 100+ funded!

Unfortunately cupcake, policy and consequences (like Dubya cheering on the Banksters subprime bubble) don't end the day the next guy enters office

FOS as usual. Here, from one of your own Commie sites, Politifact:

Did George W. Bush 'borrow' from Social Security to fund the war in Iraq and tax cuts?

What's YOUR premise Cupcake, because your link doesn't address ANY of mine! Yes Dubya/GOP put tax cuts/wars on the credit card!

Maybe you should actually read the link instead of just criticizing it. It states that GW did no more than any other President to fund the war. This liberal BS of "undefended" anything is just that--BS.

Cupcake, DUBYA CUT TAXES TWICE, ONCE WHILE GOING TO WAR DUMB*SS

AND NO THE LINK DIDN'T SAY THAT CUPCAKE




Bush Breaks With 140 Years of History in Plan for Wartime Tax Cut

Old question: What did you do in the war, Daddy?

New answer: I pocketed a large tax cut, honey.

Pause.

And then I passed the bill for the war onto you.

That, essentially, is the generational transaction established by the sweeping tax cut President Bush proposed last week. The proposal commits Bush to a goal unprecedented in U.S. history: cutting taxes in wartime.

Forget guns and butter: Bush is now offering bombs and caviar.

....With this push to slash taxes during wartime, Bush broke from 140 years of history under presidents of both parties. In every major conflict the United States has fought since the Civil War (and some minor ones), Washington has raised taxes to pay for the war.





LATIMES
Bush Breaks With 140 Years of History in Plan for Wartime Tax Cut

Trying to change subjects agains I see. Well that's what most people do when defeated.

You have to wonder how it feels to wake up thinking you'll get the WH & Senate (and by extension the SCOTUS) only to have your dream crushed.

These lefties are relegated to the sidelines....it's gotta hurt.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

If all Republicans work & don't get any government benefits, why do Red States lead the pack in welfare type programs?

Why not compare cities? Isn't that more accurate?

No it's not more accurate. Cities tend to be liberal, comparing cities just leaves out all the republicans sucking off the government tit outside city limits.

So you think those that live in the suburbs and out in the country are sucking off the government tit more than those in the cities? Better think again. It's the cities that vote strongly Democrat. Republicans are the majority outside of most of those cities and country.

No I think that in welfare (red) states- you see a lot of poverty in rural areas.

States don't get welfare--only people get welfare. To say that everybody in a red state is a Republican is just as ridiculous as saying everybody in a blue state is Democrat.

Hardly surprising, we see that in a two-party split, 60-80% of welfare recipients are Democrats, while full time Workers are evenly divided between parties.

You have similar results in this recent NPR-Poll. Among the Long Term Unemployed, 72% of the two-party support goes to Democrats.

It appears that once more common sense is right and the impression left by the New York Times wrong. Indeed, people who live off the government disproportionally support Democrats.

Are Welfare Recipients Mostly Republican?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

FOS as usual. Here, from one of your own Commie sites, Politifact:

Did George W. Bush 'borrow' from Social Security to fund the war in Iraq and tax cuts?

What's YOUR premise Cupcake, because your link doesn't address ANY of mine! Yes Dubya/GOP put tax cuts/wars on the credit card!

Maybe you should actually read the link instead of just criticizing it. It states that GW did no more than any other President to fund the war. This liberal BS of "undefended" anything is just that--BS.

Cupcake, DUBYA CUT TAXES TWICE, ONCE WHILE GOING TO WAR DUMB*SS

AND NO THE LINK DIDN'T SAY THAT CUPCAKE




Bush Breaks With 140 Years of History in Plan for Wartime Tax Cut

Old question: What did you do in the war, Daddy?

New answer: I pocketed a large tax cut, honey.

Pause.

And then I passed the bill for the war onto you.

That, essentially, is the generational transaction established by the sweeping tax cut President Bush proposed last week. The proposal commits Bush to a goal unprecedented in U.S. history: cutting taxes in wartime.

Forget guns and butter: Bush is now offering bombs and caviar.

....With this push to slash taxes during wartime, Bush broke from 140 years of history under presidents of both parties. In every major conflict the United States has fought since the Civil War (and some minor ones), Washington has raised taxes to pay for the war.





LATIMES
Bush Breaks With 140 Years of History in Plan for Wartime Tax Cut

Trying to change subjects agains I see. Well that's what most people do when defeated.

You have to wonder how it feels to wake up thinking you'll get the WH & Senate (and by extension the SCOTUS) only to have your dream crushed.

These lefties are relegated to the sidelines....it's gotta hurt.

It's like I've always said, the best part about being a liberal is never having to say you were wrong.

 

[Billy000]

If all Republicans work & don't get any government benefits, why do Red States lead the pack in welfare type programs?

Why not compare cities? Isn't that more accurate?

No it's not more accurate. Cities tend to be liberal, comparing cities just leaves out all the republicans sucking off the government tit outside city limits.

So you think those that live in the suburbs and out in the country are sucking off the government tit more than those in the cities? Better think again. It's the cities that vote strongly Democrat. Republicans are the majority outside of most of those cities and country.

No I think that in welfare (red) states- you see a lot of poverty in rural areas.

States don't get welfare--only people get welfare. To say that everybody in a red state is a Republican is just as ridiculous as saying everybody in a blue state is Democrat.

View attachment 130461

Hardly surprising, we see that in a two-party split, 60-80% of welfare recipients are Democrats, while full time Workers are evenly divided between parties.

You have similar results in this recent NPR-Poll. Among the Long Term Unemployed, 72% of the two-party support goes to Democrats.

It appears that once more common sense is right and the impression left by the New York Times wrong. Indeed, people who live off the government disproportionally support Democrats.

Are Welfare Recipients Mostly Republican?

So doesn’t it strike you as significant that full time jobs are evenly split between the two parties?

 

[ScienceRocks]

Republicans love it when the poor suffer! They'll work for less money so the rich can make even more.

They hate helping the poor. But they'll give the rich even more!

 

[EvilCat Breath]

I am all for helping those who are poor, but the current system is broken. Give vouchers that must be used for certain foods only....milk, eggs, bread, milk, cheese, oatmeal, canned meats, fruit/veg, etc. You don't see too many food stamp users buying canned tuna.....just saying

Just because they can buy anything it doesn't mean they do. They could buy caviar, but they would lose their benefits for the month.

Yeah

Jason Greenslate, Food Stamp Surfer, Responds To The Haters | HuffPost

 

[ScienceRocks]

What else the "money" that food stamps pump into a local economy helps the local economy a lot like $$$. More stores, more employees, = more money for the local economy = higher standards of living.

The people getting the food stamps also don't have to go hungry.

 

[francoHFW]

What's YOUR premise Cupcake, because your link doesn't address ANY of mine! Yes Dubya/GOP put tax cuts/wars on the credit card!

Maybe you should actually read the link instead of just criticizing it. It states that GW did no more than any other President to fund the war. This liberal BS of "undefended" anything is just that--BS.

Cupcake, DUBYA CUT TAXES TWICE, ONCE WHILE GOING TO WAR DUMB*SS

AND NO THE LINK DIDN'T SAY THAT CUPCAKE




Bush Breaks With 140 Years of History in Plan for Wartime Tax Cut

Old question: What did you do in the war, Daddy?

New answer: I pocketed a large tax cut, honey.

Pause.

And then I passed the bill for the war onto you.

That, essentially, is the generational transaction established by the sweeping tax cut President Bush proposed last week. The proposal commits Bush to a goal unprecedented in U.S. history: cutting taxes in wartime.

Forget guns and butter: Bush is now offering bombs and caviar.

....With this push to slash taxes during wartime, Bush broke from 140 years of history under presidents of both parties. In every major conflict the United States has fought since the Civil War (and some minor ones), Washington has raised taxes to pay for the war.





LATIMES
Bush Breaks With 140 Years of History in Plan for Wartime Tax Cut

Trying to change subjects agains I see. Well that's what most people do when defeated.

You have to wonder how it feels to wake up thinking you'll get the WH & Senate (and by extension the SCOTUS) only to have your dream crushed.

These lefties are relegated to the sidelines....it's gotta hurt.

It's like I've always said, the best part about being a liberal is never having to say you were wrong.

Because we never are wrong, super dupe?

 

[ScienceRocks]

What the hell is good about taking food stamps away from the needly? Oh'yess, we can give it to the super rich to offshore in their off shored bank account or buy a couple more destroyers to kill some more people on the otherside of the planet. Maybe we can send your son over their to get his brains blown all over the desert!

All while the local economy has less money and we have milllions of hungry Americans.

 

[francoHFW]

If all Republicans work & don't get any government benefits, why do Red States lead the pack in welfare type programs?

Why not compare cities? Isn't that more accurate?

No it's not more accurate. Cities tend to be liberal, comparing cities just leaves out all the republicans sucking off the government tit outside city limits.

So you think those that live in the suburbs and out in the country are sucking off the government tit more than those in the cities? Better think again. It's the cities that vote strongly Democrat. Republicans are the majority outside of most of those cities and country.

No I think that in welfare (red) states- you see a lot of poverty in rural areas.

States don't get welfare--only people get welfare. To say that everybody in a red state is a Republican is just as ridiculous as saying everybody in a blue state is Democrat.

View attachment 130461

Hardly surprising, we see that in a two-party split, 60-80% of welfare recipients are Democrats, while full time Workers are evenly divided between parties.

You have similar results in this recent NPR-Poll. Among the Long Term Unemployed, 72% of the two-party support goes to Democrats.

It appears that once more common sense is right and the impression left by the New York Times wrong. Indeed, people who live off the government disproportionally support Democrats.

Are Welfare Recipients Mostly Republican?

Yes blacks are screwed obviously. How many different ways can you say blacks in code? If you don't count them Republicans and Democrats whites are exactly the same.

 

[ScienceRocks]

Why not compare cities? Isn't that more accurate?

No it's not more accurate. Cities tend to be liberal, comparing cities just leaves out all the republicans sucking off the government tit outside city limits.

So you think those that live in the suburbs and out in the country are sucking off the government tit more than those in the cities? Better think again. It's the cities that vote strongly Democrat. Republicans are the majority outside of most of those cities and country.

No I think that in welfare (red) states- you see a lot of poverty in rural areas.

States don't get welfare--only people get welfare. To say that everybody in a red state is a Republican is just as ridiculous as saying everybody in a blue state is Democrat.

View attachment 130461

Hardly surprising, we see that in a two-party split, 60-80% of welfare recipients are Democrats, while full time Workers are evenly divided between parties.

You have similar results in this recent NPR-Poll. Among the Long Term Unemployed, 72% of the two-party support goes to Democrats.

It appears that once more common sense is right and the impression left by the New York Times wrong. Indeed, people who live off the government disproportionally support Democrats.

Are Welfare Recipients Mostly Republican?

Yes blacks are screwed obviously. How many different ways can you say blacks in code? If you don't count them Republicans and Democrats whites are exactly the same.

No one uses more food stamps then whites!
White southerns use tons of them!

The bastards would starve to death in their trailers if they ever got their way.

 

[tyroneweaver]

1) The cost of food stamps is a small fraction of the overall welfare budget

2) 2/3 of those on food stamps are kids

3) Few people even qualify for food stamps because it is reserved for the poorest of the poor. It's a program way behind on the rate of inflation as well.

4) Some Veterans are on food stamps.

5) Any adult on food stamps has a job

Republicans in congress are either complete assholes or are willfully ignorant.

But hey i get it: it gives republicans hard ons to say "i don't need a handout! I provide! I'm tough as nails! Derp, derp, derp!" They then pretend complete falsehoods or stereotypes about the program because it makes them feel more manly i guess.

Why can't facts ever permeate the republican bubble?

 

[Crixus]

What else the "money" that food stamps pump into a local economy helps the local economy a lot like $$$. More stores, more employees, = more money for the local economy = higher standards of living.

The people getting the food stamps also don't have to go hungry.

Food stamps = a higher standard of living ? That is so fucking stupid. That is as such a stupid statement, one would automatically assume you were an Rderp posting away. Only a stupid mother fucker would say such a thing.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Why not compare cities? Isn't that more accurate?

No it's not more accurate. Cities tend to be liberal, comparing cities just leaves out all the republicans sucking off the government tit outside city limits.

So you think those that live in the suburbs and out in the country are sucking off the government tit more than those in the cities? Better think again. It's the cities that vote strongly Democrat. Republicans are the majority outside of most of those cities and country.

No I think that in welfare (red) states- you see a lot of poverty in rural areas.

States don't get welfare--only people get welfare. To say that everybody in a red state is a Republican is just as ridiculous as saying everybody in a blue state is Democrat.

View attachment 130461

Hardly surprising, we see that in a two-party split, 60-80% of welfare recipients are Democrats, while full time Workers are evenly divided between parties.

You have similar results in this recent NPR-Poll. Among the Long Term Unemployed, 72% of the two-party support goes to Democrats.

It appears that once more common sense is right and the impression left by the New York Times wrong. Indeed, people who live off the government disproportionally support Democrats.

Are Welfare Recipients Mostly Republican?

Yes blacks are screwed obviously. How many different ways can you say blacks in code? If you don't count them Republicans and Democrats whites are exactly the same.

Nobody brought up race except you. It's what you leftists always do when you are losing an argument.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

What the hell is good about taking food stamps away from the needly? Oh'yess, we can give it to the super rich to offshore in their off shored bank account or buy a couple more destroyers to kill some more people on the otherside of the planet. Maybe we can send your son over their to get his brains blown all over the desert!

All while the local economy has less money and we have milllions of hungry Americans.

We have the best economy than we've had in years. Consumer confidence at it's highest point since George Bush first took office.

As other programs have demonstrated, people take food stamps because it's free, not because it's a necessity.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

What else the "money" that food stamps pump into a local economy helps the local economy a lot like $$$. More stores, more employees, = more money for the local economy = higher standards of living.

The people getting the food stamps also don't have to go hungry.

Right, because if people didn't get food stamps, they would just quit eating. My Lord do these Democrat leaders have you people brainwashed.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Republicans love it when the poor suffer! They'll work for less money so the rich can make even more.

They hate helping the poor. But they'll give the rich even more!

The rich don't "get" more, they keep more of their own. Big difference.