IF POLICY DECISIONS ON BUDGET ARE TO HAVE ANY MEANING, it is essential that we assess them against a backdrop of the economic realities being addressed. So it is with the recent GOP House vote to cut $39 billion from the government food stamp program.
If you’re wondering a bit about that, wonder no longer. Rep. Steve King of Iowa has nailed the realities and justifications and fixed his sights on the real problem, according to an Aug. 28 article by Alan Pyke of ThinkProgress (“Congressman: People Without Jobs Are Like Lazy Kids Who Need to ‘Step Up’”):
“Speaking in Charleston, South Carolina on Monday, after arguing that there are over 100 million Americans not even trying to find work, King said, ‘If you had six kids and a third of your kids would say, “I’m not doing the chores, mom …” If any of them say I refuse, I’m not gonna participate, I’m not gonna contribute to the American GDP, pretty soon those kids would be on the “you get to eat after you do the work,” not just in hopes that you might one day do the work.’ After a brief diversion into immigration reform, King added, ‘I wanna see more Americans step up.’”
With all that free food out there? No way!
So there you have it. What’s needed is a little of that righteous can-do American spirit — get off your butt, step up and get to work. One hundred million slackers, a third of the population, man, woman and child! You have to be impressed with the man’s grasp of realities. And math.
Surprisingly, Pyke is not. He notes that “the unemployed, unlike the shiftless children King imagines them to be, seek jobs against huge obstacles. There are currently three job seekers for every job opening in the country — and that is the lowest that ratio has been in years. The severity of the Great Recession has made long-term unemployment far more common than in previous economic downturns, and being unemployed for nine months has the same impact on your odds of getting hired as losing four full years of experience from a résumé. The longer a person’s jobless stint, the worse odds of ending it become. Millions of the people King disparaged as lazy brats on Monday night have gone back to school in hopes of bettering their job prospects, have retired early after failing to find work, or have been looking for jobs for three years without success.
“If King’s analogy is new, the core belief is not. King famously said in 2011 that America has become ‘a nation of slackers’ due to social safety net programs. That view is broadly shared within the conservative media and conservative political movement. Earlier this summer, other congressional Republicans justified their support for food stamp cuts through an erroneous citation of the Bible which they claimed instructs the faithful not to feed anyone who doesn’t work.”
In short, by conservative principle, if you can’t get a job, stop eating! And wouldn’t Jesus Christ be proud to be connected to this lot?
And, of course, we have the famous quote of the GOP presidendial candidate concerning the “47 percent” who just can’t summon up the energy to get off their tails. All in all, a possibly jaundiced view of the American work ethic from those Republicans toiling feverishly and endlessly at the desks in their congressional sweatshops — but certainly sufficient cause for them to question taxpayer funds being thrown away on luxuries like food stamps for those resistant to or incapable of scarfing up an honest job!
At this point it might be useful to consider both where we are economically and the trends in income inequality (or equality) in this blessed land of ours. I offer this piece from ThinkProgress, “Why Income Inequality Has Skyrocketed In the Last 30 Years,” by Travis Waldron and Adam Peck, Nov. 16, 2012:
“American income inequality has skyrocketed over the last 30 years, as compensation for the wealthiest Americans has grown while wages have stagnated for the middle- and lower-classes. … The gap between the rich and poor has grown because incomes for the top 20 percent grew at an annual pace that exceeded the total growth of incomes for the bottom 20 percent over a 30-year period.
“From the late 1970s until the 2000s, the richest 20 percent of Americans saw their incomes grow by $2,550 a year. By contrast, the bottom 20 percent saw total income growth of just $1,330 (total!) over the entire three-decade period the two organizations studied.”
(Do the math: Thirty times $2,550 compared to $1,330! Maybe get Rep. King and ask him to help you work out the arithmetic.)
Highlighting the dramatic gap between executive and worker compensation, the authors note, “Pay for chief executives has risen 127 times faster than worker pay over that three-decade period, according to another recent study. Worker pay has failed to keep up with productivity gains in the workplace, and the minimum wage has failed to keep up with the buying power it once had. Low-wage jobs, meanwhile, are becoming more prevalent, pushing wages for low-income workers down even more. At the same time, tax rates for the wealthy have fallen, and while the wealthy have experienced a solid recovery from the Great Recession, middle- and low-income Americans have largely been left behind.”
Another report by Janet Novack of Forbes, “New Study Using IRS Tax Data Shows Rich Are Staying Richer, Poor Poorer,” March 21, 2013, further dramatizes the disparities, impacts and why Rep. King and his cohorts need to get a clue. It concludes that the rich became permanently richer and the poor permanently poorer from 1987 to 2009.
“Five economists, including one from the U.S. Treasury and two from the Federal Reserve, used data from nearly 34,000 working age households’ 1040s, W-2s and Social Security records to tease out how much of the much-discussed rise in income inequality in the U.S. might simply reflect more volatility in earnings, with families having good and bad years. Their unhappy conclusion: Almost all of the rise in inequality is life-long.
“‘It’s not just year-to-year ups and downs that have gotten worse. It’s actually the rich are getting richer and staying richer. The poor, poorer and staying poorer,’ Justin Wolfers, co-editor of the Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, which published the new study, observed in a podcast.”
Next week, a further plunge into the complexities and harsh realities of American productivity, wages and economic contradictions.
But first a final note. Would that Steve King’s views and prescriptions were those of a lone dissenter from GOP orthodoxy. Sadly, as a number of recent votes have demonstrated, he is joined and echoed by multitudes on the right for whom wealth is righteous and poverty the province of sloth.
Jerome Page is a Benicia resident.
Sharing is caring!
And what’s the average pay per hour for Pentagon employees and how many thousands are there and just what do they do for it? And did anybody ever find the trillions misplaced that our former, Bush-era Sec. of Defense said were…unaccounted for? Sorry, I have no respect for gluttony at the military-industrial complex…how many US bucks went into Cheney’s construction firm in Iraq or was it Afghanistan or both? Is anyone reminding these big-spending Republicans where the real waste is in the USA? Food stamps? I think not! Cake for the moguls of imperialistic resource wars? Go figure…pb
I find it interesting that those on the left who seem to always want more government oversight of our lives and increasing the size of government to accomplish it are now complaining that they are getting paid too much. How about a lot less government?
Regulation of perverse “free-market” business practices is not the same as money wasting-gluttony within the military-industrial trough…How many countries must we occupy with our covert forces to assure we are the biggest dogs on every global block?
Bray I am not sure what you are saying. Is not perverse “free-market” business practices and money wasting gluttony within the military industrial trough one in the same? Yes we must have a strong military to stop others from taking stands against other countries that cannot defend themselves. Once they know that we will not allow it, it does make them think twice. Sanctions do work but without a strong military they will be challenged. America is the leader of the world and others look up to us as just that. We must maintain our presence to make sure we can maintain peace. Being strong will stop unnecessary conflicts and will bring our so called enemies right to the table to discuss not negotiate the right solution. When you are strong your position is stong and you hold all the high cards. Sounds authoritarian. Well it is and that is how the enemy will understand it and back away and behave. We all will be much better off. Sorry Bray we must be the biggest dog on every global block. If that was the case Putin would have moved much quicker to resolve the syria issue and we would have had complete backing. See how simple it is.
Pretend I don’t exist, your world will be much simpler and so will mine. Adios! – pb
Bray the simple solution is do not read or comment back on what I post.
It’s too erroneous and laughable, what you post…pb
Sorry Bray I do know what I am talking about and am not afraid to post it. Just post your solutions so we can have something to talk about. Just not liking me will not help.
The Democrats and compromise…
Another viewpoint worth mentioning from the article below for the community to ponder…
Furthermore, it’s entirely logical for conservatives to keep pushing toward their ultimate ideals, since there is no party that consistently and coherently opposes them on fundamental economic or ideological grounds, and since they generally win more than they lose. During the House debate over the food-stamp cuts, several Republican members invoked the name of Bill Clinton, saying that this new punitive legislation followed in the footsteps of the bipartisan welfare-reform bill he signed in 1996, which for the first time compelled welfare recipients to work for their benefits.
In fairness, I should say that no House Democrats voted for this bill, and there were 15 Republican defectors – including Chris Gibson, who represents that poor upstate region of New York I mentioned earlier – making the final vote extremely close. But in the bigger picture, bringing up Clinton’s policy of appeasement and “triangulation,” or Obama’s periodic attempts to forge a “grand bargain” with John Boehner, is entirely fitting. Republicans know from many years of experience that if they push hard enough – on guns, on abortion, on welfare or healthcare or any other bedrock issue – Democrats will ultimately buckle and seek a compromise, even when the public doesn’t want them to.
That’s because the Democratic Party is riven by internal contradictions, no longer represents the interests of working people with any consistency, and is (pardon my French) shit-scared of being portrayed as effete, effeminate and disloyal to the mythology of American exceptionalism. If history is any guide, Republicans will get at least some of what they want, most likely by sinking Obamacare in
bureaucratic quicksand and extracting slightly less onerous cuts in the food stamp program, while liberals try to portray yet another class-war retreat as a victory. Somewhere down the line, I suppose the
rest of us will fight back, and bring the 1-percenters and their ideological shock troops the class war that scares them so much, and that they so richly deserve. But when?
http://www.commondreams.org/view/2013/09/22-1
Thank you, Will! I aways enjoy your take on these political charades…keep us posted! pb
The politics of cruelty
From the above article:
IF POLICY DECISIONS ON BUDGET ARE TO HAVE ANY MEANING, it is essential that we assess them against a backdrop of the economic realities being addressed. So it is with the recent GOP House vote to cut $39 billion from the government food stamp program.
From the article below:
A scholarly analysis of our ‘economic realities’ for the community to consider…
At the heart of neoliberal narratives are ideologies, modes of governance, and policies that embrace a pathological individualism, a distorted notion of freedom, and a willingness both to employ state violence to suppress dissent and abandon those suffering from a collection of social problems ranging from dire poverty and joblessness to homelessness. In the end, these are stories about disposability in which growing numbers of groups are considered dispensable and a drain on the body politic, the economy, and the sensibilities of the rich and powerful. Rather than work for a more dignified life, most Americans now work simply to survive in a survival-of-the-fittest society in which getting ahead and accumulating capital, especially for the ruling elite, is the only game in town. In the past, public values have been challenged and certain groups have been targeted as superfluous or redundant. But what is new about the politics of disposability that has become a central feature of contemporary American politics is the way in which such anti-democratic practices have become normalized in the existing neoliberal order. A politics of inequality and ruthless power disparities is now matched by a culture of cruelty soaked in blood, humiliation, and misery. Private injuries not only are separated from public considerations such narratives, but narratives of poverty and exclusion have become objects of scorn. Similarly, all noncommercial public spheres where such stories might get heard are viewed with contempt, a perfect supplement to the chilling indifference to the plight of the disadvantaged and disenfranchised.
http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/08/12/americas-descent-into-madness/
Thank you, Will…”Les Miserables” is being revisited and re-establishing itself. The French Revolution was not all bad…and now nearly all of us have computers and a US Spring can’t be too far off…pb
Peter,
I am going to send you a private note on Les Mis
DDL: Good, sometimes right and left meet in the middle…pb
Back on track…
From the above article: “On looking for a free ride”
An excerpt from the article below for the community to contemplate…
The GOP House’s slashing $40 billion in food stamps for 48 million Americans suffering from “food insecurity” – the current tragi-comic euphemism for being hungry – is heinous enough, but it becomes just the tip of the brutal iceberg when seen in a broader context best exemplified by North Dakota’s Rep. Kevin Cramer – who answered a constituent challenging him with the Bibilical quote, “If anyone is not willing to work, let him not eat,” and whose district has received $10.4 billion in agricultural subsidies, the most of anyone in the country.
http://www.commondreams.org/further/2013/09/23
Back on track #2.
Climate Change and Hunger
More information about hunger for the community to ponder…
Leaders listening to the latest findings from climate scientists this week must remember that a hot world is a hungry world.” –Tim Gore, Oxfam
“We’ve long known that climate change will mean lost crops, but increasingly we’re seeing its impacts through higher food prices, lower earnings, more health problems and lower quality food too,” said Tim Gore, Head of Policy for Oxfam’s GROW campaign said.
Not only that, but at a time when one in eight people in the world are already going hungry, changes in the climate will reduce production and increase food costs simultaneously, producing shocks which those already stressed by poverty will not be able to absorb, creating a dangerous and deadly spiral.
“Just as the evidence of man-made climate change is becoming stronger” explained Gore, “so too is our understanding of how it hits people, especially around hunger.”
http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2013/09/23-7
Thank you, Will, every butt-sitting Congress member should have to earn their income also, not just occupy dead space. Maybe create a chore list of real work done each day before they get their “handout check and free benefits” package. – pb
Mr Bray, stated: “Is anyone reminding these big-spending Republicans where the real waste is in the USA? Food stamps? I think not! ”
More information for the community to consider…
The decade-long American wars in Afghanistan and Iraq would end up costing as much as $6 trillion, the equivalent of $75,000 for every American household, calculates the prestigious Harvard University’s Kennedy School of Government.
Remember, when President George Bush’s National Economic Council Director, Lawrence Lindsey, had told the country’s largest newspaper “The Wall Street Journal” that the war would cost between $100 billion and $200 billion, he had found himself under intense fire from his colleagues in the administration who claimed that this was a gross overestimation.
Consequently, Lawrence Lindsey was forced to resign.It is also imperative to recall that the Bush administration had claimed at the very outset that the Iraq war would finance itself out of Iraqi oil revenues, but Washington DC had instead ended up borrowing some $2 trillion to finance the two wars, the bulk of it from foreign lenders.
The report goes on to argue: “Among the most severely wounded are 6,476 soldiers and Marines who have suffered “severe penetrating brain injury,” and another 1,715 who have had one or more limbs amputated. Over 30,000 veterans are listed as suffering 100 percent service-related disabilities, while another 145,000 are listed as 70 to 90 percent disabled.”
It reads: “The worst of these casualties have taken place under the Obama administration as a result of the so-called surge that the Democratic president ordered in Afghanistan.”
The report points out: “Massive direct spending on the two imperialist interventions continues. With over 60,000 US troops remain in Afghanistan, it is estimated that the cost of deploying one American soldier for one year in this war amounts to $1 million.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/afghanistan-and-iraq-americas-six-trillion-dollar-wars/5351229
From Will’s comment “The worst of these casualties have taken place under the Obama administration as a result of the so-called surge that the Democratic president ordered in Afghanistan.”
But Will, we have long been told: IT’S ALL GEORGE BUSH’S FAULT!!!!
It is. He’s the one who put us there. Figure it out.
Thank you, Will, I was raised in a disabled household as a result of WWII, Dad lost both hands and the vision in one eye in Germany, I later worked in the Viet Nam era war industry…some profit by war at the expense of others…in some ways we are a nation or species of predators, especially in those countries that have resources that are advantageous to us. Let the warhawks and profiteers send their own offspring to war and pick up the costs as well.–pb
The General and the Neo con–
Mr. Bray, stated:
‘…in some ways we are a nation or species of predators, especially in those countries that have resources that are advantageous to us. Let the war-hawks and profiteers send their own offspring to war and pick up the costs as well.’
Who are the war-hawks and cheerleaders?
A passage from the article below for the community to consider…
Johns Hopkins University Professor Eliot Cohen recently penned a Washington Post op-ed decrying U.S. Army Gen. Martin Dempsey, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. He charges the general with breaching “proper civil-military relations” and tacitly violating our Constitution by publicly expressing misgivings about the likelihood of solving our problems with Syria by meddling in the nation’s civil war.
But the professor is wrong about Dempsey’s unique role in this debate and owes the general an apology.
Dempsey ran afoul of Cohen apparently because he has urged caution in the rush to war against the Damascus regime of Bashar al-Assad. The general announced that while the application of U.S. power might tip the balance in the ongoing civil war pitting Assad against a wide range of insurgent groups, it likely would fail to resolve or mitigate “the underlying and historic ethnic, religious and tribal issues that are fueling this conflict.”
http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/listen-to-general-dempsey/
Thanks, I read your linked piece. I respect the voice of seasoned military leaders and cultural historians who might speak up and tell us that involvement anywhere is sheer stupidity. who serves as a check on corporate profiteers, lobbyists, and warhawks??…To hell with the profiteers and the Halliburtons and the Bechtels who rush in for greed’s sake; Bechtel is reported to have lost 50 employees in the Iraq or Afghanistan mess before they pulled out to say enough’s enough…not 10, 15, 25, 35, or 45, but 50…What price war for profit? What was so important in French Indo China all those years for Kennedy to send in boots on the ground to support the French? And later decide to pull out…despite Lyndon deciding to ramp it up? What frinking sheer stupidity. What did we gain? At what cost? The Military-Industrial complex sucks pondwater…I worked in it as a young engineering graduate once upon a time ago…sheer stupidity, man’s greatest proof of moronic, imperialistic behavior; warring ants haven’t any better sense…pb
JLB,
It is also interesting that after five years we have two regular posters still carping about Dick Cheney. If they did not have Dick Cheney to spit on, that would lash out at someone else… the Koch Brothers. Oh wait they do that as well.
Here we had Clinton Multi Billion dollar contracts to Haliburton/KBR, we also now have 0bama, 568 Billion to the same company on a no bid basis. Do they even mention that?
As I have said before, when you measure both sides equally, the Dems always come up short.
568 Billion to the same company on a no bid basis
Correction: 568 Million, not Billion
Far too many inconsistencies in their commentaries. Could that be what some would call Hypocrisy? Hmmm …
Hahahaha. The low information scolds strike (out) again!
Petyr how many bucks went into Cheney’s construction firm? You seem to know.
There seems no end to the amount of semantic excrement that flows into, through and out of the “conservative mind,” much of which sticks and stays in there, permanently. Perhaps it has to do with what comes out the back end of the elephant into the rightists’ misinformation bubble. The bubble is maintained by its viscosity through which no contradicting fact can penetrate. The viscosity consists of deluded self-interest.
Concerning KBR, it is sad to note that Pentagon procurement and congressional appropriation lack tight integration and singular oversight and control. The military-industrial-financial-complex is sprawling, lacks transparency and runs wild behind a fog of rhetoric and crafty bookkeeping, led by people who juggle the law where laws are made. It’s a magic act. Nobody knows where all that money went that Bremer poured into Iraq, and that’s small potatoes. But the travesty of it all is made possible by people who don’t give a crap about decency, rules or reality. Nothing but power and status. Dick Cheney, for instance.
From the piece: the GOP presidendial candidate concerning the “47 percent” who just can’t summon up the energy to get off their tails
Good point Jerry!
We need to do more for the 47% because those greed SOB’s in that 53% group who do pay taxes (that was actually what Romney was talking about) are not doing enough to support those who do not.
Correct Romney was referencing the fact that 47% of wage earners in America pay no federal income tax. Given that little concept that they have well locked down, why would they vote for someone who may potentially upset their apple cart. He point was correct and well taken. It’s just the fact.
Keep lapping at Jerry’s heels. You’ll never be in his league. And you should be ashamed for calling him Jerry. It’s Mr. Page to you, Lund.
Oh, my, Lund’s not cherished by everybody…What else is new?–pb
It’s Mr. Page to you, Lund.
Actually, no. When he called me at my house some time ago, he introduced himself to me as Jerry Page. He asked me to work with him on a mutual project, an offer I thanked him for, then declined.
I believe it to be customary to refer to a person by the name to which he referred to himself as, when making the introduction.
Your pretentiousness and attempted diminishment of me has failed.
Lund you diminish yourself better than I ever could. But tell me, who would ever introduce themselves as “Mr.” or “Mrs.” so and so? You are ridiculous. Show some respect to your superiors.
His name is “Jerome” Page.
When he called, as I stated, he referred to himself in the familiar; ‘Jerry’.
All this is just ‘argle bargle’ from a piss ant, as yourself, who serves no humanly possible purpose.
So you would require him to introduce himself as “Mr. Page”? Rank stupidity, even for one such as yourself who serves only to misinform, obfuscate and distort.
DDL “Actually, no. When he called me at my house some time ago, he introduced himself to me as Jerry Page. He asked me to work with him on a mutual project, an offer I thanked him for, then declined.”
Quite true. The project which I suggested that we cooperate on a few years back was a property tax increase for the schools; with both liberals and conservatives (Page and Lund) agreeing that funds were needed. Not certain I was thanked for the offer since DDL opposed the raise and simply asserted that if parents wanted to support a program in which their children participated, including some sport, they could just contribute to that activity. Since I hardly regarded that as a serious solution to the needs of all the children, end of communication.
Jerome Page:Not certain I was thanked for the offer since DDL opposed the raise and simply asserted that if parents wanted to support a program in which their children participated, including some sport, they could just contribute to that activity.
My reasons for declining the offer were a bit more involved then that, but that is a minor quibble and one I will not delve into here, as it would serve to distract from the original intent of the article.
If I did not convey a note of appreciation during our conversation, I will do so now, as the offer was one that was appreciated.
I will also add that I was disappointed that the second project in which we were involved did not develop further, as I was looking forward to the next phase of the process.
Regards
Dennis
Too little too late, Dennis…way to go!…nice allusion to “that other project,” like you were really going to be the benevolent Easter Bunny in another fantasy story—all gas, rhetoric, and no mileage…as usual…pb
Petr brayed:Dennis…way to go!…nice allusion to “that other project,”
One of two things holds true here Petr:
1) You know exactly which project I am referring to, as it involved multiple contributors to the BH, since you were not one of the participants, one can easily read into your comments a level of extreme bitterness and petty jealousy.
2) You have no idea what the project is to which I refer and have made yet another post on which you have no knowledge and offer nothing of substance. I think that would be 389th time this has occurred.
You’re beyond shallow, Dennis…I said it was an allusion to “another project” which you didn’t define…that’s all I said…Don’t you have some weekend chores to do? Must you always attempt to edit others’ free speech? Why don’t you initiate your own newspaper here in town? “The Narrow-View Illusory Bugle”…there, I’ve even named it for you…ask all your fans to help you promote it with fundraising and deep-pocket ads…call it all an exercise in the “free market”…you so dearly love with adequate govt. offshore loopholes (we have lots of shoreline) and “the usual corporate subsidies…” – pb
Dennis that project you are talking about would have been a great one. I know it got started and faded. I did see some of the work and it was great and very well represented. I think all that were a part of it did a good job. The folks that took part would have shocked the local residence. Bray again just shows his personal dislike of you and your ideals. Then goes off on a comment that makes no sense at all. I also get the feeling that you are correct. He was not included as was offended. The creator is a friend of his so if Bray is not in, it could only be an allusion. Bray is just not important. Sorry to see the project not get some legs. It was good.
Should designation of requested salutations be reserved for the addressee?
Mr. Page I do not doubt your figures on the difference between the rich AND poor. But what I believe is more important is why is that the case. Are the jobs that the middle income had in the past being regulated out of the market. Is this group now unable to transfer their skills to other similar paying jobs and now must take lower paying less skilled jobs. Coal industry, oil drilling, pipeline construction are just a few examples that could cause some regional differences. This country has changed dramatically in the last fifty years. There are areas in the USA where your figures just do not hold up. Try Silicon Valley, Texas, Dakatos and many other areas of the USA. Yes Detroit and other rust belt areas are suffering. Now lets look at a very simple solution. Lets start drilling for fossil fuels with regulations like California will now have. If it is there to be had the companies will go after it. Natural gas and coal are good examples of opportunity for jobs. We must build more natural gas and coal export ports. Natural gas we only have two at present with others being held up by guess who. I have no problem with regulations if they are using science and hi-tech to make the process clean. It can be done but I do believe we have just a very few anti fossil fuel agenda driven groups holding it up. Get our unemployment rate down under 4% and this country is golden. The income gap will close dramatically if we just let it happen. Stop the hold ups. This will solve s/s, medicare financial issues. It will also put plenty of money toward education, health, renewable energy and infrasture needs. The solution is simple not the barriers we must hurdle. We must start moving toward energy independence and a net exporter of coal, fuel and natural gas. Natural gas is already bring new business in the USA and many foreign countries are now looking at the USA because our energy is cheaper. Mr. Page political attacks is not the answer it is the destruction of growth. Both sides do it. I look at conservatives as for big business and liberals for more government. If we get the growth both will get along very well. That will not happen until we understand that we must grow with what we have and that is fossil fuel.
I think if we did what you say RL along with reforming the tax code we would be back in pretty good shape in record time. We need to abolish the IRS and institute a fair consumption tax. Everyone pays the same percentage. This would get EVERYONE contributing, whether you were an illegal, a gang banger, drug dealer or what ever. You buy gas, you pay a tax. You buy food, you pay a tax. If you have low income and spend less, you pay less in taxes. If you are wealthy and spend a lot, you pay higher taxes. That is the epitome of fairness, which is what the “O” keeps calling for, right? Do this along with opening up our resources and get the government out of the way, we would be back on track in no time!
How does taking away from millions of people the ability to feed their families and themselves, while simultaneously fighting tooth and nail against efforts to provide them with affordable health care, bring us closer to this bright future of yours?
How does taking away from millions of people the ability to feed their families
Using Jerry’s number of a 39 Billion dollar reduction along with the June 2013 numbers for total SNAP recipients and assuming 100% of that reduction comes out of money sent to recipients (a very generous assumption), that means the reduction per person is less than $16.00 a week.
The reduction of 39 billion also represents a 5% decrease. Hardly earth shattering.
Tell that to someone struggling to make ends meet, you pompous gasbag.
Oh, Dennis…looks like I’m not your only adversary…too bad, compassion for your living peers is not your strongest suit…good luck with all your other aspirations…pb
Petr,
You place yourself on a pedestal by calling yourself an advisory. I see you more as a source of irritation, like a fly circling one’s head.
The pesky animal serves no useful purpose, regurgitates it’s own bile, and is not dissuaded by attempts to shoo it away.
The word was “adversary,” Dennis…not “advisory,” check your glasses or dictionary if you have one, and try to read what’s posted…I suspect all your reading and research is equally flawed…try proofreading your own mediocre output…you’ll look 10-15 IQ points brighter…maybe…see Livesay for advice, he may have a 12th century dictionary he can lend you…pb
ahh, Petr, again with the pesky sidetracks, always intended to inflate your long ago deflated feelings of self importance. You may have noticed this site now has a spell check feature, and the word was a typo that was automatically corrected.
But you are right, I did not proof read before hitting “Post Comment”. I should have done that though and corrected the mistake, but if I had think of all the fun you would have missed by not being able to take a small amount of juvenile pleasure from braying on while ridiculing other people. That does seem to be the highlight of your day, at least when not changing light bulbs for people.
“Changing light bulbs for people” is that beneath you, Mr. Arrogant? See how easily you turn from your own shortcomings to an attack on other people? You have no idea how many seniors, widows, single parents, and standard families I have helped maintain their homes in the last eleven years…and that’s after 30 years of corporate experience, 6 years of college, a Masters with Honors from Berkeley and a UCXtension Graphic Design certificate and web design classes from Los Medanos Community College in Pittsburgh, CA…What have you accomplished from your limited right-wing alcove or tree branch? My ego is just fine, I have enough self-esteem to joust weekdays and Sundays with you. . .plus humilty to spare…how about you? Any humilty at all?.
.pb
Harrison said:you pompous gasbag.
How Allan Braueresque, of you.
A gas bag is a gas bag. I think it’s a rather apt description. And very visual, almost whimsical, but more serious.
that means the reduction per person is less than $16.00 a week.
I will correct myself on the above point. The 39 Billion (5%) decrease, if applied equally to all factors of the SNAP program would result in a loss of benefits of $6.10 per recipient.
Gawd, Dennis! We owe so much to those bright, humanitarian Repubs, that’s just great! What a blessing! Now if they’ll just close down the US government, everything will be just spectacular! What a dull collection of Do-nothings…Keep the larger pork going to the Pentagon and CIA though…you should be as proud as McConnel…GREAT JOB!–We’re counting on you guys!!—pb
79% of SNAP recipients include children and elderly poor; 83% live below the poverty level ($15 per yr. or less); 46% of SNAP recipients are EMPLOYED; 47% of SNAP recipients are children under the age of 18; 48 million people in the US receive SNAP benefits and there is, according to Atlantic Monthly and SNAP statistics, 3.8% error – REPEAT, 3.8% error (compare to error rate or loss of $$$ for military and miliatry contractors – who built it all THEMSELVES); SNAP recepients receive the equivalent of $1.50 per meal per month (compare to corporate and Congressional meal allowances); large numbers of military enlistsed families and veterans (accurate statistics are not available, other than huge rise in SNAP use in commissaries over the past few years and veterans are not separately identified).
THIS IS THE BOTTOM LINE; THE REST IS BUSHWA. THE MARK OF A CIVILIZATION IS ILLUSTRATED BY HOW THE LEAST ARE TREATED.
We have a political party which is happy to illustrate, to one and all, how the least of us “should be” treated and I, for one, am very, very ashamed to live in a country where a bill to cut food for the above mentioned folks is considered A-OK, while giving huge payouts to agribusinesses, some of whom are owned by the very congress people who are perpetuating this disgrace is also considered A-OK.
3.8% error – REPEAT, 3.8% error
Previously it was stated that there is a 1.3% “fraud rate” (that equates to over 1.3 billion dollars), now there is a 3.8% error rate. Is that inclusive of fraud?
Are we now up to 3.8 billion in waste or now over 5 billion (1.3 + 3.8)?
We have all seen the news reports of rampant abuse of the system with widespread use of free money for alcohol, cigarettes, gambling and strip clubs. Yeah that is all BUSHWA!
You cannot use a SNAP card for alcohol, gambling, cigarettes or strip clubs. The cash register will refuse to record it. I would love to know a)where those news reports come from (3 guesses – the first 2 don’t count) and b)name one establishment which sells or offers those products/pleasures which has accepted a SNAP debit card to pay for them. This is just more poor-bashing. And I just LOVE how DDL zeroed in on one statisitic which I offered, did not answer my request as to which year or years he was talking about and totally ignored the rest, which is, simply, pointing out that 48 million of our fellow citizens do not make enough money to feed themselves in the richest (or almost richest) country on earth; that of those millions, almost half are children, who couldn’t get off their lazy butts to work even if they wanted to; that almost half of them already get off their lazy butts every day and go to work, which doesn’t pay them enough to eat OR got to a doctor and that us Christians give them about $1.50 per meal per day. So, if there is money lost, I frankly would rather have it lost in this cause than in making more corporations richer and richer on government contracts (I know, I know they really, really built it themselves), i.e. MY tax dollars.
If you read my post carefully you will see that I did not say SNAP money I said, free money, which is various forms of handouts which may not be SNAP but other things. Do your own research as to the exact source of the funds if you really matters to you. It is just a fact and is indisputable.
JLB,
You are correct. These are headlines for some of the pieces I looked at before writing my last piece. There are many others.
Buffalo Man Sentenced for Food Stamp Fraud ($143,000)
Word Press seems to have issues with more than one link, so these headlines can be googled:
Three NE Ohio men charged with food stamp fraud at convenience stores ($780,000)
Man pleads guilty in food stamp fraud case ( Waco – $350,000, second case also cited)
Man pleads guilty to $400,000 food stamp fraud (Atlanta $400,000)
Former Milwaukee Man Convicted of $778,000 Food Stamp Fraud
So the system worked. Fraudsters were caught. Tell us again why do you want to starve innocent children?
I see one person claim there is no fraud (of the type referenced), and you assume that “the system worked” meaning that all fraud was caught. Neither of those statements are factual.
I see one person unconvincingly make the case that his prescribed cure isn’t worse than the disease.
his prescribed cure isn’t worse than the disease.
To which “prescribed cure” are you referring?
Do you mean to suggest that you aren’t a water-carrying propagandist for the GOP party line? Now I have heard everything.
That makes three times on this thread alone that you have made comments referencing things “I have said”, when no such statements have been made.
You are a master insinuator and have little basis of facts to back up anything that you have said.
No go crap on another chessboard, because any thing else you say serves to prove:
Arguing with a liberal is like playing chess with a pigeon. No matter how well you play chess, the pigeon just knocks over all the pieces, craps on the board, spews some unintelligible profanities, and struts around like he won.” – Mathew Braken
Now go ahead, and comment back, I know you must.
Ha ha, very good quote. Arguing with a conservative is like arguing with a tree stump.
http://www.addictinginfo.org/2013/09/20/you-can-lead-a-republican-to-facts-but-you-cant-make-him-think-new-research-confirms-it/
When five caught represents nearly 2.5 million dollars I think it is safe to say the problem is “sort-of” big.
Need to know where that stat comes from? Is the 5 B for one year or over a period of time? Compared to 300+ B in military/contractor waste (including the 8B totally lost a few years ago), this would seem like chump change, although ANY waste is BAD, BAD!
Yep, time to starve millions to save that drop in the federal budget bucket! Kind of like purging millions from voting rolls to stop a dozen vote fraudsters! Brilliant!
Just what is the issue? Waste and fraud? If that is the case then all programs must be cut. Or is it to keep a ring in the nose of voters who need help. I hope that is not the case. I firmly believe this is a non political issue. We must have a strong military. We must take care of the needy but at the same time give them an opportunity to get out from government subsidies. My above comment gives a very simple solution on the work side. The other solutions are the tax issue, payroll tax issue and we must put a stop to grant money. Who do we hurt on grant money? That is correct the middleclass and others. Bridge tolls go up and who does it hurt? Middleclass, poor and the low income folks. That is just one example. The solution is simple, get the unemployment down under 4% and all problems solved. Stats do not resolve important issues nor does political badgering. Politics and stats will always be there put must be used to improve the situation not stall it. At present some regs are stalling important issue because of politics. That is where voters must step in and make changes at the highest levels. It does work and the voters will do it. Just watch.
Same question: How does taking away from millions of people the ability to feed their families and themselves, while simultaneously fighting tooth and nail against efforts to provide them with affordable health care, bring us closer to this bright future of yours?
Dazzle me with your argle bargle.
Hank if you have read anything I said you would understand what I mean. Not on this program but the overall solution. Hank I believe it is called giving to the ones that need it not the ones that do not. Hank what income limit on say a family of four should be the guide? Take into consideration regions that cost more. Should it be as high as $90,000 a year? It appears the big issue is the management of SNAP not the program it self. We must have much stronger inforcement and punishment for abuse. Try 25 years in jail. As far as healthcare goes Hank we do provide many options for the poor and needy. Just use medicare as a start and then review city, county and state aid for the needy and poor. This country spends plenty on helping those in need. There are simply solution to both . One very easy one is to do a payroll tax based on income {use a base of say starting at $40,000 a year} with a rising rate as income rises. The only problem with that is the same as s/s and medicare. Over the years the politicians will keep adding benefits to it. It is difficult but full employment solves all the issues. That is what we should be talking about.
Livesay: You are out of touch. My daughter Cathy died from Crohn’s Disease at age 44 in 2012…she had 20 years of minimal SS disability support, and 20 years of crappy health service from county ER hospitals…you don’t know squat about the “poor and disabled” in this country–try living outside your plastic castle without your toasted white bread for a week…and please loan Lund some reading glasses so he can read what’s posted under his nose…and define “adversary” to him, he thinks it’s “advisory.” The Two Zippety-Do-Dah Boys!–pb
Sorry for your loss.
Fifty comments on this run at about a 50/50 pro/con. I do not believe that Dennis or any other conservative should be targeted the way they are targeted by a few on this run. Good comments are healthy and contribute to the success of an article.
Who’s keeping score, Bobbo? Errors and omissions…half-baked bread not worth counting…pb
I believe you have in the past Bray. Again no solutions just whimsical comments.
No one has any real solutions posted here, only opinions…those are not solutions, solutions are activities carried into law and enforcement, seagull jabber is only mocking seagull jabber. Whimsy shows the fruitlessness of barking seals and those of us that Bray to the sounds of jabber…None of this is serious debate, it’s all prefaced with half-baked opinions and half-baked research…that’s why I never take you and Lund seriously, nor should anyone but your fan base. pb
Even when politicians offer solutions they may never be carried into law. The solutions offered on any comment section are answers to the problem and yes could be considered an opinion. But they still are solutions. Bray the solutions brought up here are just answers to the problems that exist. Bray being part of a comment section can broaden your thoughts and it also could make all of us aware of things we did not know. I do not expect people to take every comment seriously if it is not presented in a serious manner. That is why I think it is important to keep personal attacks out of the comment section. But I will admit personally attack me and I will come back. So as we all can see it is all about how the comment is written.
Livesay:
So is “Enviro-Greenie” an OK term for you to use? How about “Burned-out Brownies” in the case of the non-science advocates for more CO2 and coal burning or Alberta Tar Sands the better or “Drill, Baby Drill” or “Frak, Baby, Frak Then Ignite It”? for all those in frakking areas where the kitchen tapwater ignites? See the movie “Gasland” and hurry before it’s all sold out—Mind you, these are all “opinions” that you don’t like…How’s it feel? You still an advocate for Free Speech? I suspect not. Free speech for Conservatives, but surely not those dissenting “Meanie Liberals” or Moderates or Progressives…who “pick on poor Conservatives’–Can’t have it all your way, Bobbo…pb
I think most here are for free speech but I think the conversation would be better served by conversation alone even though you disagree and leave the personal attacks out. They serve no purpose and at the end of the day, no matter how much you disagree we are still in this thing together till the end. I think personal attacks shine a bright light into the soul of the attacker and reveal much.
Petr that term Enviro Greenie is an ID. I have never used the term “Burned-out Brownies”. I have used the term Drill Baby Drill. I have never used the term ” Frak, Baby Frak Then ignite it. Petr I love free speech but at the same time I do know it comes with consequences. You are perfect example of that person.
1..There is fraud in most systems: The question is waht is the percentage and how many are caught? The bigger question is what is the benefit of the system? Does it provide basic services to many, or provide perks to the rich few(Pentagon and corporate welfare).
2. Lets realistically analize who pays taxes and what proportion of their income: Working people pay 7.65% up to $108K on Social Security Medicare,, there for a CEO making $5m/yr only pays $8,200 or .016%, a subsidy of about $375,000 that he use for a second home, live in help, tuition for his children to Harvard. Taxes also consist of sales tax, fuel tax, proprty tax, import tax, etc; what percent of all these taxes do the 99% pay directly or indirectlyn compared to the 1% as a percentage of income? Secondly the critical thinkers must ask what percentage of his income goes to food, housing, clothing, mredical care, entertianment, vacations comapred to the guy that makes $30,000 per year and cannot save hardly anything? If Daddy warbuscks pays another 5 to 10% in taxes how will that effect his life style, will he be stressing out about paying for tomorrows meals, housing, health care, college tuition for his children? The bottom line is taht thereris very little “Trickle Doiwn”, the ration of job making in the fossil fuel industry is very low compatred to alternative energy or industry in general. Look at the ratio of jobs from Exxon or Chevron per sales dollars comapred to the low paying hospitality industry. Botton line is that Consertvative fat cats(not all) are mostly greedy,egomaniacal, narcisisstic, selfish, apathetic people who would not loose any sleep over the plight of the 99% if the economic desparity got to the point of wherer it is in Mexico and many South American countries. For some people with billlions and billions, its never enough hording of money, because money is their drug and addiction. Money is not the root of all evil, the “Love of Money” is the root of much evil. When certain elites start and finance wars and want to take away more minimal entitlements from the poor, it patently shows the pychopathy and emotional depravation of the elite group. These rich egotistical money hoarders are not “Christian Like” Christians or Jews for that matter.