Yet another Obama record accomplishment: 48 million on food stamps

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: Yet another Obama record accomplishment: 48 million on food stamps

    In response to jedwardnicky's comment:

    In response to skeeter20's comment:

     

    In response to Reubenhop's comment:

     

    In response to ComingLiberalCrackup's comment:

     

     

    A classic!
    The clueless statist liberal brings up the Soviet Union's  government control of the food supply and resulting starvation of it's own people under to support the position of GOVERNMENT planning preventing starvation.

     

    To paraphrase Ronald Reagan:

    Government planning and control of the food supply is not the solution to starvation, Government planning and control of the food supply is the cause of starvation !!

     

     



    Government causes starvation?  That's like saying trees cause pollution...

     

     




     

    trees expel co2. The Obama EPA has determined hat co2 is a pollutant.

    so much for your tree analogy.

    When government interferes with the private, capitalist market, it causes distortions.  It is possible that this distortion could lead to the unintended consequence of starvation.

     

    after all, it did in the USSR.

     



    "trees expel co2"

     

    You might want to read up a little more on that. While it's true the do give off co2 at night (and during decomposition), they sequester more co2 than they give off.

    And it's not the "Obama" EPA that concluded co2 is a pollutant.



    Oh, I get it. I think I have cracked the code. the throw away point is the only one where the left have some facts on their side.

    the rest of it, the left is clueless.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from jedwardnicky. Show jedwardnicky's posts

    Re: Yet another Obama record accomplishment: 48 million on food stamps

    In response to skeeter20's comment:

    In response to jedwardnicky's comment:

     

    In response to skeeter20's comment:

     

    In response to Reubenhop's comment:

     

    In response to ComingLiberalCrackup's comment:

     

     

    A classic!
    The clueless statist liberal brings up the Soviet Union's  government control of the food supply and resulting starvation of it's own people under to support the position of GOVERNMENT planning preventing starvation.

     

    To paraphrase Ronald Reagan:

    Government planning and control of the food supply is not the solution to starvation, Government planning and control of the food supply is the cause of starvation !!

     

     



    Government causes starvation?  That's like saying trees cause pollution...

     

     




     

    trees expel co2. The Obama EPA has determined hat co2 is a pollutant.

    so much for your tree analogy.

    When government interferes with the private, capitalist market, it causes distortions.  It is possible that this distortion could lead to the unintended consequence of starvation.

     

    after all, it did in the USSR.

     



    "trees expel co2"

     

    You might want to read up a little more on that. While it's true the do give off co2 at night (and during decomposition), they sequester more co2 than they give off.

    And it's not the "Obama" EPA that concluded co2 is a pollutant.

     



    Oh, I get it. I think I have cracked the code. the throw away point is the only one where the left have some facts on their side.

     

    the rest of it, the left is clueless.



    Could you rephrase your response in a more coherent manner? Because as interpret it is that I nullified your "throw away" point. Might you also indicate "throw away" points in future posts? Just put an asterisk next to them so we know.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from MattyScornD. Show MattyScornD's posts

    Re: Yet another Obama record accomplishment: 48 million on food stamps

    In response to skeeter20's comment:

     

    trees expel co2. The Obama EPA has determined hat co2 is a pollutant.


    Moron.  

    They also emit oxygen, i.e., that stuff humans need in order to live, and in much, much greater amounts.

     

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: Yet another Obama record accomplishment: 48 million on food stamps

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:

    In response to skeeter20's comment:

     

     

    trees expel co2. The Obama EPA has determined hat co2 is a pollutant.

     

     


    Moron.  

    They also emit oxygen, i.e., that stuff humans need in order to live, and in much, much greater amounts.

     



    See? The. Throwaway point becomes the main point for the hapless liberals.

     

    so, there'll me.  If we end food stamps today, will there be 48 million dead Americans late next week?

    or, is there some other factor in play, like servitude to the government?

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from jedwardnicky. Show jedwardnicky's posts

    Re: Yet another Obama record accomplishment: 48 million on food stamps

    In response to skeeter20's comment:

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:

     

    In response to skeeter20's comment:

     

     

    trees expel co2. The Obama EPA has determined hat co2 is a pollutant.

     

     


    Moron.  

    They also emit oxygen, i.e., that stuff humans need in order to live, and in much, much greater amounts.

     

     



    See? The. Throwaway point becomes the main point for the hapless liberals.

     

     

    so, there'll me.  If we end food stamps today, will there be 48 million dead Americans late next week?

    or, is there some other factor in play, like servitude to the government?




    Why include a "throw away point" only to complain when we call you out on its erroneous nature? What was your "point" with its inclusion?

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: Yet another Obama record accomplishment: 48 million on food stamps

    In response to jedwardnicky's comment:

    In response to skeeter20's comment:

     

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:

     

    In response to skeeter20's comment:

     

     

    trees expel co2. The Obama EPA has determined hat co2 is a pollutant.

     

     


    Moron.  

    They also emit oxygen, i.e., that stuff humans need in order to live, and in much, much greater amounts.

     

     



    See? The. Throwaway point becomes the main point for the hapless liberals.

     

     

    so, there'll me.  If we end food stamps today, will there be 48 million dead Americans late next week?

    or, is there some other factor in play, like servitude to the government?

     




    Why include a "throw away point" only to complain when we call you out on its erroneous nature? What was your "point" with its inclusion?

     



    Continued focus on the worthless point.

     

    tell me.  If we stopped food stamps today, would we have 48 million dead Americans next Friday?

     

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from slomag. Show slomag's posts

    Re: Yet another Obama record accomplishment: 48 million on food stamps

    In response to skeeter20's comment:

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:

     

    In response to skeeter20's comment:

     

     

    trees expel co2. The Obama EPA has determined hat co2 is a pollutant.

     

     


    Moron.  

    They also emit oxygen, i.e., that stuff humans need in order to live, and in much, much greater amounts.

     

     



    See? The. Throwaway point becomes the main point for the hapless liberals.

     

     

    so, there'll me.  If we end food stamps today, will there be 48 million dead Americans late next week?

    or, is there some other factor in play, like servitude to the government?



    Skeeter, you haven't shown any facts.  Only hunches and back-pedaling.

    SKEETER: Food stamps pretend to solve a problem that didn't exist (HUNCH PROVEN FALSE)

    REALITY: Food stamps can be traced back to the Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1933 which bought surpluses from farms and distributed them to the needy (FACT)

    SKEETER: Well, that was a long time ago, and people don't need help any more (HUNCH) because food finds its way to people in need (HUNCH PROVEN FALSE)

    REALITY: Food doesn't find it's way an inch across the border, where thousands of Mexicans die of hunger every year (FACT)

    SKEETER: Well, that's Mexico, and nothing like that could ever happen again in America (HUNCH).   Food is too cheap and plentiful (SUBJECTIVE OPINION).

    REALITY: What you think is cheap and plentiful depends on your financial situation (OBJECTIVE STATEMENT)

    SKEETER:  My wife and I eat on $60 week.  (EXAGGERATION)

    REALITY: Really?

    SKEETER: OK, maybe $80.  (BACKPEDALING)

    REALITY: Really?

    SKEETER: OK, it's more like $110 (BACKPEDALING)

    REALITY: OK, so a responsible person needs $55/week to eat.  So a family of five needs $275 / week or $1100 / month? (MATH)

    SKEETER: [crickets]

    REALITY: The average outlay for food-stamps is $30/week (FACT)

    SKEETER: Jerk! (EMOTIONAL REACTION)

    REALITY: OK, Man - good luck 

    SKEETER: Well, I guess you libs just can't face facts.

     

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from jedwardnicky. Show jedwardnicky's posts

    Re: Yet another Obama record accomplishment: 48 million on food stamps

    In response to slomag's comment:

    In response to skeeter20's comment:

     

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:

     

    In response to skeeter20's comment:

     

     

    trees expel co2. The Obama EPA has determined hat co2 is a pollutant.

     

     


    Moron.  

    They also emit oxygen, i.e., that stuff humans need in order to live, and in much, much greater amounts.

     

     



    See? The. Throwaway point becomes the main point for the hapless liberals.

     

     

    so, there'll me.  If we end food stamps today, will there be 48 million dead Americans late next week?

    or, is there some other factor in play, like servitude to the government?

     



    Skeeter, you haven't shown any facts.  Only hunches and back-pedaling.

     

    SKEETER: Food stamps pretend to solve a problem that didn't exist (HUNCH PROVEN FALSE)

    REALITY: Food stamps can be traced back to the Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1933 which bought surpluses from farms and distributed them to the needy (FACT)

    SKEETER: Well, that was a long time ago, and people don't need help any more (HUNCH) because food finds its way to people in need (HUNCH PROVEN FALSE)

    REALITY: Food doesn't find it's way an inch across the border, where thousands of Mexicans die of hunger every year (FACT)

    SKEETER: Well, that's Mexico, and nothing like that could ever happen again in America (HUNCH).   Food is too cheap and plentiful (SUBJECTIVE OPINION).

    REALITY: What you think is cheap and plentiful depends on your financial situation (OBJECTIVE STATEMENT)

    SKEETER:  My wife and I eat on $60 week.  (EXAGGERATION)

    REALITY: Really?

    SKEETER: OK, maybe $80.  (BACKPEDALING)

    REALITY: Really?

    SKEETER: OK, it's more like $110 (BACKPEDALING)

    REALITY: OK, so a responsible person needs $55/week to eat.  So a family of five needs $275 / week or $1100 / month? (MATH)

    SKEETER: [crickets]

    REALITY: The average outlay for food-stamps is $30/week (FACT)

    SKEETER: Jerk! (EMOTIONAL REACTION)

    REALITY: OK, Man - good luck 

    SKEETER: Well, I guess you libs just can't face facts.

     



    You forgot....

    SKEETER: Oh, look, a squirrel (trees "emit" CO2).

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from tacobreath. Show tacobreath's posts

    Re: Yet another Obama record accomplishment: 48 million on food stamps

    In response to slomag's comment:

    In response to tacobreath's comment:

     

    "President Herbert Hoover declared, "Nobody is actually starving. The hoboes are better fed than they have ever been." But in New York City in 1931, there were 20 known cases of starvation; in 1934, there were 110 deaths caused by hunger. There were so many accounts of people starving in New York that the West African nation of Cameroon sent $3.77 in relief."

     



    There aren't any accurate numbers prior to 1932, but even 110 deaths in NYC extrapolates to 4,000 nation-wide, and that is starvation only - there would be many more that are hunger-related or mal-nutrition related leading to disease.  And that was two years after the federal involvement began.

     

    There's a report by a Russian researcher that suggests the number of hunger-related deaths was 7 million ... http://www.infowars.com/researcher-famine-killed-7-million-in-us-during-great-depression/

    I don't believe it was that high, and I'm not suggesting ditching SNAP would throw us into a great depression - I'm just explaining why my count of starving Americans before federal government intervention is vague, but high.

     



    20 deaths in NY City.  The 110 is nation wide.  Re-read the Hoover quote. 

    110 total US in 1934.  That`s hardly "thousands" and no where near "millions".  Again, ONE death is too many, I think we could all agree.  The problem with EBT, SNAP, etc, is abuse.

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from slomag. Show slomag's posts

    Re: Yet another Obama record accomplishment: 48 million on food stamps

    In response to tacobreath's comment:

    In response to slomag's comment:

     

    In response to tacobreath's comment:

     

    "President Herbert Hoover declared, "Nobody is actually starving. The hoboes are better fed than they have ever been." But in New York City in 1931, there were 20 known cases of starvation; in 1934, there were 110 deaths caused by hunger. There were so many accounts of people starving in New York that the West African nation of Cameroon sent $3.77 in relief."

     



    There aren't any accurate numbers prior to 1932, but even 110 deaths in NYC extrapolates to 4,000 nation-wide, and that is starvation only - there would be many more that are hunger-related or mal-nutrition related leading to disease.  And that was two years after the federal involvement began.

     

    There's a report by a Russian researcher that suggests the number of hunger-related deaths was 7 million ... http://www.infowars.com/researcher-famine-killed-7-million-in-us-during-great-depression/

    I don't believe it was that high, and I'm not suggesting ditching SNAP would throw us into a great depression - I'm just explaining why my count of starving Americans before federal government intervention is vague, but high.

     

     



    20 deaths in NY City.  The 110 is nation wide.  Re-read the Hoover quote. 

     

    110 total US in 1934.  That`s hardly "thousands" and no where near "millions".  Again, ONE death is too many, I think we could all agree.  The problem with EBT, SNAP, etc, is abuse.



    I re-read it - I think the whole quote is about New York.  20 died in 1931, 110 in 1934.

    I agree on the abuse - I have no problem with restricting the program to healthier foods.    Same with wellfare and unemployment - if we're picking up the tab, we have a right to expect certain standards.

    I think the corn lobby is the biggest obstacle to that type of reform.

     

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from tacobreath. Show tacobreath's posts

    Re: Yet another Obama record accomplishment: 48 million on food stamps

    In response to slomag's comment:

    In response to tacobreath's comment:

     

    In response to slomag's comment:

     

    In response to tacobreath's comment:

     

    "President Herbert Hoover declared, "Nobody is actually starving. The hoboes are better fed than they have ever been." But in New York City in 1931, there were 20 known cases of starvation; in 1934, there were 110 deaths caused by hunger. There were so many accounts of people starving in New York that the West African nation of Cameroon sent $3.77 in relief."

     



    There aren't any accurate numbers prior to 1932, but even 110 deaths in NYC extrapolates to 4,000 nation-wide, and that is starvation only - there would be many more that are hunger-related or mal-nutrition related leading to disease.  And that was two years after the federal involvement began.

     

    There's a report by a Russian researcher that suggests the number of hunger-related deaths was 7 million ... http://www.infowars.com/researcher-famine-killed-7-million-in-us-during-great-depression/

    I don't believe it was that high, and I'm not suggesting ditching SNAP would throw us into a great depression - I'm just explaining why my count of starving Americans before federal government intervention is vague, but high.

     

     



    20 deaths in NY City.  The 110 is nation wide.  Re-read the Hoover quote. 

     

    110 total US in 1934.  That`s hardly "thousands" and no where near "millions".  Again, ONE death is too many, I think we could all agree.  The problem with EBT, SNAP, etc, is abuse.

     



    I re-read it - I think the whole quote is about New York.  20 died in 1931, 110 in 1934.

     

    I agree on the abuse - I have no problem with restricting the program to healthier foods.    Same with wellfare and unemployment - if we're picking up the tab, we have a right to expect certain standards.

    I think the corn lobby is the biggest obstacle to that type of reform.

     




    Don`t think the abuse is in the kind of foods purchased.  Heck, I don`t care if they buy chips and ice cream.  The problem lies with the purchase of cigs, booze, and lottery.  The problem is 19,000 of the MA people with EBT and SNAP cards cannot be located.  People are scamming the system.  In a way, skeet is correct.  Nobody is starving and nobody will, yet the program and the scams are costing billions and there`s no accountability.

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: Yet another Obama record accomplishment: 48 million on food stamps

    In response to slomag's comment:

    In response to skeeter20's comment:

     

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:

     

    In response to skeeter20's comment:

     

     

    trees expel co2. The Obama EPA has determined hat co2 is a pollutant.

     

     


    Moron.  

    They also emit oxygen, i.e., that stuff humans need in order to live, and in much, much greater amounts.

     

     



    See? The. Throwaway point becomes the main point for the hapless liberals.

     

     

    so, there'll me.  If we end food stamps today, will there be 48 million dead Americans late next week?

    or, is there some other factor in play, like servitude to the government?

     



    Skeeter, you haven't shown any facts.  Only hunches and back-pedaling.

     

    SKEETER: Food stamps pretend to solve a problem that didn't exist (HUNCH PROVEN FALSE)

    REALITY: Food stamps can be traced back to the Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1933 which bought surpluses from farms and distributed them to the needy (FACT)

    SKEETER: Well, that was a long time ago, and people don't need help any more (HUNCH) because food finds its way to people in need (HUNCH PROVEN FALSE)

    REALITY: Food doesn't find it's way an inch across the border, where thousands of Mexicans die of hunger every year (FACT)

    SKEETER: Well, that's Mexico, and nothing like that could ever happen again in America (HUNCH).   Food is too cheap and plentiful (SUBJECTIVE OPINION).

    REALITY: What you think is cheap and plentiful depends on your financial situation (OBJECTIVE STATEMENT)

    SKEETER:  My wife and I eat on $60 week.  (EXAGGERATION)

    REALITY: Really?

    SKEETER: OK, maybe $80.  (BACKPEDALING)

    REALITY: Really?

    SKEETER: OK, it's more like $110 (BACKPEDALING)

    REALITY: OK, so a responsible person needs $55/week to eat.  So a family of five needs $275 / week or $1100 / month? (MATH)

    SKEETER: [crickets]

    REALITY: The average outlay for food-stamps is $30/week (FACT)

    SKEETER: Jerk! (EMOTIONAL REACTION)

    REALITY: OK, Man - good luck 

    SKEETER: Well, I guess you libs just can't face facts.

     



    That's too funny.

    so, back to the point. If we stop food stamps today, will we have 48 million dead Americans next Friday?  

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: Yet another Obama record accomplishment: 48 million on food stamps

    In response to slomag's comment:

     

    In response to tacobreath's comment:

     

    In response to slomag's comment:

     

    In response to tacobreath's comment:

     

    "President Herbert Hoover declared, "Nobody is actually starving. The hoboes are better fed than they have ever been." But in New York City in 1931, there were 20 known cases of starvation; in 1934, there were 110 deaths caused by hunger. There were so many accounts of people starving in New York that the West African nation of Cameroon sent $3.77 in relief."

     



    There aren't any accurate numbers prior to 1932, but even 110 deaths in NYC extrapolates to 4,000 nation-wide, and that is starvation only - there would be many more that are hunger-related or mal-nutrition related leading to disease.  And that was two years after the federal involvement began.

     

    There's a report by a Russian researcher that suggests the number of hunger-related deaths was 7 million ... http://www.infowars.com/researcher-famine-killed-7-million-in-us-during-great-depression/

    I don't believe it was that high, and I'm not suggesting ditching SNAP would throw us into a great depression - I'm just explaining why my count of starving Americans before federal government intervention is vague, but high.

     

     



    20 deaths in NY City.  The 110 is nation wide.  Re-read the Hoover quote. 

     

    110 total US in 1934.  That`s hardly "thousands" and no where near "millions".  Again, ONE death is too many, I think we could all agree.  The problem with EBT, SNAP, etc, is abuse.

     



    I re-read it - I think the whole quote is about New York.  20 died in 1931, 110 in 1934.

     

    I agree on the abuse - I have no problem with restricting the program to healthier foods.    Same with wellfare and unemployment - if we're picking up the tab, we have a right to expect certain standards.

    I think the corn lobby is the biggest obstacle to that type of reform.

     

     



    Interesting history lesson.

    now can we get back to the present?

    if we stop food stamps today, will there be 48 million dead Americans next Friday?  That is the logical conclusion to your food stamps prevents starvation argument, is it not?

     

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from slomag. Show slomag's posts

    Re: Yet another Obama record accomplishment: 48 million on food stamps

    In response to tacobreath's comment:

    In response to slomag's comment:

     

    In response to tacobreath's comment:

     

    In response to slomag's comment:

     

    In response to tacobreath's comment:

     

    "President Herbert Hoover declared, "Nobody is actually starving. The hoboes are better fed than they have ever been." But in New York City in 1931, there were 20 known cases of starvation; in 1934, there were 110 deaths caused by hunger. There were so many accounts of people starving in New York that the West African nation of Cameroon sent $3.77 in relief."

     



    There aren't any accurate numbers prior to 1932, but even 110 deaths in NYC extrapolates to 4,000 nation-wide, and that is starvation only - there would be many more that are hunger-related or mal-nutrition related leading to disease.  And that was two years after the federal involvement began.

     

    There's a report by a Russian researcher that suggests the number of hunger-related deaths was 7 million ... http://www.infowars.com/researcher-famine-killed-7-million-in-us-during-great-depression/

    I don't believe it was that high, and I'm not suggesting ditching SNAP would throw us into a great depression - I'm just explaining why my count of starving Americans before federal government intervention is vague, but high.

     

     



    20 deaths in NY City.  The 110 is nation wide.  Re-read the Hoover quote. 

     

    110 total US in 1934.  That`s hardly "thousands" and no where near "millions".  Again, ONE death is too many, I think we could all agree.  The problem with EBT, SNAP, etc, is abuse.

     



    I re-read it - I think the whole quote is about New York.  20 died in 1931, 110 in 1934.

     

    I agree on the abuse - I have no problem with restricting the program to healthier foods.    Same with wellfare and unemployment - if we're picking up the tab, we have a right to expect certain standards.

    I think the corn lobby is the biggest obstacle to that type of reform.

     

     




     

    Don`t think the abuse is in the kind of foods purchased.  Heck, I don`t care if they buy chips and ice cream.  The problem lies with the purchase of cigs, booze, and lottery.  The problem is 19,000 of the MA people with EBT and SNAP cards cannot be located.  People are scamming the system.  In a way, skeet is correct.  Nobody is starving and nobody will, yet the program and the scams are costing billions and there`s no accountability.



    The same EBT card is used for many programs - SNAP, wellfare, unemployment, disability - in some cases even child support, if coming from garnished wages.  The SNAP portion cannot be used to purchase alcohol, cigarettes or lottery tickets.  You can still scam the system, but I think it's an improvement over the old stamps, which could be traded for drugs at 10 cents on the dollar.

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from slomag. Show slomag's posts

    Re: Yet another Obama record accomplishment: 48 million on food stamps

    In response to skeeter20's comment:

    In response to slomag's comment:

     

    In response to tacobreath's comment:

     

    In response to slomag's comment:

     

    In response to tacobreath's comment:

     

    "President Herbert Hoover declared, "Nobody is actually starving. The hoboes are better fed than they have ever been." But in New York City in 1931, there were 20 known cases of starvation; in 1934, there were 110 deaths caused by hunger. There were so many accounts of people starving in New York that the West African nation of Cameroon sent $3.77 in relief."

     



    There aren't any accurate numbers prior to 1932, but even 110 deaths in NYC extrapolates to 4,000 nation-wide, and that is starvation only - there would be many more that are hunger-related or mal-nutrition related leading to disease.  And that was two years after the federal involvement began.

     

    There's a report by a Russian researcher that suggests the number of hunger-related deaths was 7 million ... http://www.infowars.com/researcher-famine-killed-7-million-in-us-during-great-depression/

    I don't believe it was that high, and I'm not suggesting ditching SNAP would throw us into a great depression - I'm just explaining why my count of starving Americans before federal government intervention is vague, but high.

     

     



    20 deaths in NY City.  The 110 is nation wide.  Re-read the Hoover quote. 

     

    110 total US in 1934.  That`s hardly "thousands" and no where near "millions".  Again, ONE death is too many, I think we could all agree.  The problem with EBT, SNAP, etc, is abuse.

     



    I re-read it - I think the whole quote is about New York.  20 died in 1931, 110 in 1934.

     

    I agree on the abuse - I have no problem with restricting the program to healthier foods.    Same with wellfare and unemployment - if we're picking up the tab, we have a right to expect certain standards.

    I think the corn lobby is the biggest obstacle to that type of reform.

     

     



    Interesting history lesson.

    now can we get back to the present?

    if we stop food stamps today, will there be 48 million dead Americans next Friday?  That is the logical conclusion to your food stamps prevents starvation argument, is it not?

     



    I already answered this question - if we're only talking about food stamps, you're probably looking at increased crime rates, particularly in inner cities. And increased homelessness, as rent money would need to be diverted to food costs.  Basically, you're looking at rising levels of suffering and desperation.  

    If you're talking about all government food spending, and all programs that prevent people from "pulling themselves up by their boot-straps" (medicaid, assisted housing, wellfare, unemployment, farm bills, food subsidies, etc, etc) then yes, I think you're looking at a lot of dead Americans.  Maybe not 48 million, but a far cry from zero.

    As an aside - despite vacant homes and hotel rooms and an abundance of homeless shelters, hundreds of homeless die every year of exposure.  if you had the power to stop SNAP, and the homeless rate increased, and this figure increased, would you draw the conclusion that ending SNAP resulted in the death of many Americans, or would you rationalize it in some other way?

     

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from tacobreath. Show tacobreath's posts

    Re: Yet another Obama record accomplishment: 48 million on food stamps

    In response to slomag's comment:

    In response to tacobreath's comment:

     

    In response to slomag's comment:

     

    In response to tacobreath's comment:

     

    In response to slomag's comment:

     

    In response to tacobreath's comment:

     

    "President Herbert Hoover declared, "Nobody is actually starving. The hoboes are better fed than they have ever been." But in New York City in 1931, there were 20 known cases of starvation; in 1934, there were 110 deaths caused by hunger. There were so many accounts of people starving in New York that the West African nation of Cameroon sent $3.77 in relief."

     



    There aren't any accurate numbers prior to 1932, but even 110 deaths in NYC extrapolates to 4,000 nation-wide, and that is starvation only - there would be many more that are hunger-related or mal-nutrition related leading to disease.  And that was two years after the federal involvement began.

     

    There's a report by a Russian researcher that suggests the number of hunger-related deaths was 7 million ... http://www.infowars.com/researcher-famine-killed-7-million-in-us-during-great-depression/

    I don't believe it was that high, and I'm not suggesting ditching SNAP would throw us into a great depression - I'm just explaining why my count of starving Americans before federal government intervention is vague, but high.

     

     



    20 deaths in NY City.  The 110 is nation wide.  Re-read the Hoover quote. 

     

    110 total US in 1934.  That`s hardly "thousands" and no where near "millions".  Again, ONE death is too many, I think we could all agree.  The problem with EBT, SNAP, etc, is abuse.

     



    I re-read it - I think the whole quote is about New York.  20 died in 1931, 110 in 1934.

     

    I agree on the abuse - I have no problem with restricting the program to healthier foods.    Same with wellfare and unemployment - if we're picking up the tab, we have a right to expect certain standards.

    I think the corn lobby is the biggest obstacle to that type of reform.

     

     




     

    Don`t think the abuse is in the kind of foods purchased.  Heck, I don`t care if they buy chips and ice cream.  The problem lies with the purchase of cigs, booze, and lottery.  The problem is 19,000 of the MA people with EBT and SNAP cards cannot be located.  People are scamming the system.  In a way, skeet is correct.  Nobody is starving and nobody will, yet the program and the scams are costing billions and there`s no accountability.

     



    The same EBT card is used for many programs - SNAP, wellfare, unemployment, disability - in some cases even child support, if coming from garnished wages.  The SNAP portion cannot be used to purchase alcohol, cigarettes or lottery tickets.  You can still scam the system, but I think it's an improvement over the old stamps, which could be traded for drugs at 10 cents on the dollar.

     



    You nailed it. That`s exactly what is happening.  My friend owns a chain of MA, NH, RI, convenience stores and sees the scams on a daily basis. 

    They deal their SNAP and EBT awards for cash, cigs, lottery, cash,etc......

    Nobody on earth would deny the hungry.  American`s don`t starve.  The increase (IMO) in food stamp recipients (SNAP, EBT) is unacceptable and needs to stop.  I watched an interview this morning on MSNBC with "A seat at the table".  They are a group of whining ideologues saying that "50 million Americans are hungry and starving".  Bull-spit!  In fact, Double Bull-spit!!

    They were so dumb the footage shown was a woman using her food stamps and then loading groceries into her Denali with 22" rims.

    Geeeeeeeeeeeesh.

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from Sistersledge. Show Sistersledge's posts

    Re: Yet another Obama record accomplishment: 48 million on food stamps

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: Yet another Obama record accomplishment: 48 million on food stamps

    In response to Sistersledge's comment:




    So , if we end food stamps today, will 48 million people starve to death in a week?

     

Share