Return to the Hot Topics Forum | Post a Follow-Up

 o
48 million now on food stamps!

Posted by tobr24u z6 RI (My Page) on
Thu, Dec 6, 12 at 5:05

One out of every seven families needs help just to eat! Have we lost our way as a nation or is this just a temporary blip?


Follow-Up Postings:

 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

It tells me a lot of people aren't bringing home money like they used to. Imagine what it must feel like to find yourself in line for food stamps at Christmas. This is not good.


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

And it doesn't mean they are not working! Most of them are the working poor that we rush to defend and support (during the holidays). America is about the middle class and the rich. Get with it!

The poor were not mentioned during three years of campaigning for the simple reason they have nothing to contribute. (sarcasm)


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

Since much of the cost of the system is embedded in the costs of living (the payment of rent, for instance), the working poor who qualify for food stamps still contribute to the maintenance of those living far better (landlords, for instance).


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

tobr24u, only yesterday I was talking to someone who claimed that he was denied food stamps because he was above the earnings treshold.
He might have been raging when he asserted that the people on food stamps are lying about their earnings in order to qualify.
I know of abuse of some other programs to not dismiss his assertions.
But I have no way of knowing.
Either way, fact or fraud, "48 million" is a shameful statistic.


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

Lying about their earnings? Their earnings are proofed before they are awarded food stamps. The system of checks and balances may be broken if they are able to lie and receive benefits.

Now, there are schemes. Divorced mom of 3 living with man who earns good money but his money doesn't need to be reported. There are many other schemes.


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

Regarding food stamp and other forms of welfare fraud, BY FAR the most common issue we see is welfare recipients lying about household composition and household income. They report their own legit/documented income, but fail to disclose others living with them, plus their incomes.

As far as income reporting is concerned, much of our poor and low income population and others living in their households work for cash/barter, so they're not flagged, plus these cases are tough to investigate and prosecute.

Really, Really, Really Dumb food stamp recipients often lie about "their own" documented income streams. They're chances of getting flagged, investigated and prosecuted high.

It's also pretty common for food stamp recipients to convert food stamp benefits to cash/goods, plus many lend their cards to others.


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

"Over the last 40 years, as the real value of the hourly wage has fallen" down 9.3% since the January 1973 peak"the real retail wage has fallen three times as hard, 28.7%. The decline in weekly wages is even harsher, as workweeks have gotten shorter: down 17.2% in inflation-adjusted terms for all workers, but 38.3%, more than twice as much, for retail workers."


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

Crazy EDD couldn't get them when disability decided he wasn't disabled during one of his hospitalizations (go figure)


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

It's just so easy to get them I think is what I'm saying.


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

On a positive note, we know many that qualify for numerous welfare benefits, yet have too much pride to apply for them.


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

Posted by nikoleta (My Page) on
Thu, Dec 6, 12 at 5:22

It tells me a lot of people aren't bringing home money like they used to. Imagine what it must feel like to find yourself in line for food stamps at Christmas. This is not good.

*

Wait till their paychecks are less come first pay period in January.

Wait till they have to buy health insurance.

Wait till dividend income taxes go up.

Everyone will have LESS expendable income--more will be going to the government. That means less eating out, less buying clothes and electronics, less traveling and vacations, and more restaurants and workers going out of business and losing their jobs, more hotel employees being let go, more mom and pop stores closing.

AIN'T IT GRAND? OBAMA AND THE DEMOCRATS--REDISTRIBUTING TILL THERE'S NOTHING LEFT TO REDISTRIBUTE.


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

Tee hee!


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

Early in the foodstamp cycle, many of our relatives that work as cashiers, baggers, stockers and cart wranglers get most of their scheduled and unscheduled hours.

Many stores in the poor urban areas are busy, busy, busy this time of month, then the business drops off like a rock the second/third week in the food stamp cycle as the "foodstampers" (that's what store employees call them) have exhausted their monthly benefits.

Other supporting services - taxis, transit, cart return services etc are busy early in the month as well.

Supporting employment/income/savings challenged Americans, often from cradle to grave has become a big industry.


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

AIN'T IT GRAND?

Nope it is not grand it is stupid. The part of the country that is most dependent on the government are the ones that are screaming that they hate the Food Stamp President and want the Republican to cut the food from the table that feed their kids.

Stupid not grand.

Paying lower taxes has not worked so what will be the big difference if we pay a higher tax.


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

Tax money that gets recycled into the economy almost immediately, and while it gets food to folks who need it, the money is spent at the stores which in turn pay salaries, buy food stuffs from hard working farmers, supports the taxis and all the rest. Who in turn pay taxes which go to fund the food stamps.

Versus, say, building a few hundred billions' worth of jet fighter planes which can't fly because they're unsafe, and they just sit there.


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

We're currently in the process of transitioning a couple dozen non immediate relatives from 50 plus percent family support to 100 percent taxpayer support, so the numerous welfare benefits will save us tens of thousands per year.


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

REDISTRIBUTING TILL THERE'S NOTHING LEFT TO REDISTRIBUTE.

HOOT!


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

Paying lower taxes has not worked so what will be the big difference if we pay a higher tax.

*

It makes a difference to those people that actually DO CONTRIBUTE to the federal coffers--they won't have as much money to use as they see fit and need because the president and congress and the senate think they know better how what to do with your money than you do.

What's more, they think they have the RIGHT to do with your money what they think best.

It won't make a difference to those that don't pay a dime in federal taxes, though. What do they care?


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

Year after year oh we can't raise the minimum wage it would be bad for business oh we can't raise the minimum wage in an uncertain business environment. Such BS we bargained away the living wages of US citizens while shipping jobs hand over fist to other countries.
Now the whack jobs wanna blame the president the stupidity the hubris is astounding!
Year after year the US workers been ground down in the name of your effing tax cuts & dividends & politicians that didn't have the courage to maintain the US standards of living.
A nation of food stamp collectors & morons disparaging them


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

It makes a difference to those people that actually DO CONTRIBUTE to the federal coffers--they won't have as much money to use as they see fit and need because the president and congress and the senate think they know better how what to do with your money than you do.

Plenty of those people who actually DO CONTRIBUTE to the federal coffers voted for President Obama and approve of the existence of food stamps as part of the social safety net. Plenty of those people who actually DO CONTRIBUTE to the federal coffers agree that persons that have need of government assistance as we're struggling out of the Great Recession should be able to receive it.


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

It tells me a lot of people aren't bringing home money like they used to. Imagine what it must feel like to find yourself in line for food stamps at Christmas. This is not good.
"you keep voting for jerks that demanded their wages stay low"

That mental defective Michelle Bachmann believed we could solve the unemployment problem by getting rid of the minimum wage the sad part is she wasn't joking nor were any of the other Republican bright lights.
You support them you support this take responsibility for who you guys vote in!


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

"Regarding food stamp and other forms of welfare fraud, BY FAR the most common issue we see is welfare recipients lying about household composition and household income. They report their own legit/documented income, but fail to disclose others living with them, plus their incomes. "

This. Com'on down to KY. Where a 35yo, single man who was fired because of his stupidity, lives at home with mommy in a $250k (paid for) house (and she has a 6 figure savings account and no debt), has a paid for car, just bought a $8k lawn tractor, and refuses to get a job (takes away from his 24-hour-a-day WOW game)and lives waaaaay better than me (who pays taxes to help support his lazy @ss) gets $200/month in food stamps. (True story--relative by marriage)

Really?

Seriously.


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

This. Com'on down to KY. Where a 35yo, single man who was fired because of his stupidity, lives at home with mommy in a $250k (paid for) house (and she has a 6 figure savings account and no debt), has a paid for car, just bought a $8k lawn tractor, and refuses to get a job (takes away from his 24-hour-a-day WOW game)and lives waaaaay better than me (who pays taxes to help support his lazy @ss) gets $200/month in food stamps. (True story--relative by marriage

Sounds like many of our non immediate relatives living rent free in my apartments, or rent free in homes/apartments of their parent(s)/grandparent(s).

The only way to get them to seriously look for a full time job, or more than one part-time job is to cut off their housing support.

One of my aunts was providing free rent, heat, how water, water/sewer, electric, cable, broadband and telephone for 4 sons, two daughters and their kids for 5 years.

None ever worked full-time, or seriously looked for full time jobs until they had to move when she sold the homes they were living in.

I'm in the same situation currently only I've been supporting "non immediate" relatives, substantially more relatives, plus supporting them much longer.

They'll have to find full time work, or relocate as there are long waiting lists for subsidized housing, or the lists are closed.

Many are in for major rental price shock as well.


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

"Wait till their paychecks are less come first pay period in January."
"Wait till they have to buy health insurance."
"Wait till dividend income taxes go up."

I've wondered about that. Where are the 48 million Americans who can't fill up their grocery carts without food stamps going to get the money to pay higher taxes and buy Obamacare?


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

Year after year the US workers been ground down in the name of your effing tax cuts & dividends & politicians that didn't have the courage to maintain the US standards of living.

If there's such an aversion to food stamps, let's raise the federal minimum wage so less will need food stamps.


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

I've wondered about that. Where are the 48 million Americans who can't fill up their grocery carts without food stamps going to get the money to pay higher taxes and buy Obamacare?

People who legitimately qualify for food stamps probably fall below the threshold for paying federal taxes and healthcare.


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

I suspect that those on food stamps will neither buy healthcare nor pay additional taxes....they are poor remember?

It is interesting that a large percent of American taxpayers do in fact support an increase in taxes, even for themselves. Including those who are likely to see their income tax rate go up.

Facts are you all got yourself into this financial mess and you all need to contribute to getting out.

Get over it...your taxes are going to go up one way or another. One could argue you have had 12 years of unfunded tax breaks that greatly contributed to the deficit. Time to get off the gravy train.


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

Chase,

We all play a role in the mess, but 10 people are the outstanding performers.

Here is a link that might be useful: Paving the way


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

I guess if I had to make a choice - lie about my income to feed my children or not feed my children.......................

I'd lie, too.

The people I work with, most are eligible for and getting food stamps, work at minimum wage jobs, usually two or three jobs, and still don't have enough money to support a family. Food stamps mean there will be food for most of the month, though the end of the month can get pretty lean.


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

Well then, shame on you Mom. Instead of sucking it up and watching at your poor, pale undernurished children cry for their supper, you would rather scrounge a dollar from a tax payer than pull up those boot straps and get yourself a third for forth job to feed those kids you so irresponsibly spawned? And feel no shame as you take it?

From many, many past thread with responses springing from the idea you put forth Mom, the above is what I get out of them.
They may not mean for it to come out in the way it gets read, but nevertheless, the soul of the intent is always from that vein because the same words are endlessly repeated in pretty much the same way.

"Don't have the kids, don't expect help with your birth control, don't have an abortion and don't expect my help feeding them once you pop them out.
Get a college education but don't ask for help in getting it and if you don't get one it's because you didn't
A. want it badly enough
B. weren't willing to work hard enough to pay for each quarter's tuition as you go, just like I did 25 plus years ago, without begging for tax dollar help, so now-
C. suck it up and pay the price for the lack of four year degree or more, but remember......
D. I just don't wanna hear your sob story. If you have one, refer back to the above A. and read down from there.
However!
Don't you DARE try to say that we are not good, giving people so don't you imply we aren't because you don't know anything about us or the wonderful charities we ceaselessly work with, helping the poor who we decide are worthy of that help, and besides - if you *want* to read what we wrote in that ugly way then there is nothing we can do about it or will attempt to do about it except to say, once again, that we work ceaselessly in our community with the worthy poor who prove themselves to us."

I can see it's time for another H.T. few days break again already, I find my patience even more strained than than normal with the "haves" this season, and my patience with the haves remains on a short leash pretty much all the time since 2008.

I am by no means living with a high income but I am in a reasonable income and I'm incredibly grateful for the luck I have had in this life that allows me to rest assured about the mortgage payment always being met and the deep freezer in the garage being well stocked for two sometimes three people to count on for probably a good six months or more, that we have two reliable vehicles, paid for for several years now, his job security continues, we are never too cold or hot in the house and any human or pet health bills will always be able to be promptly paid for as far in the future as I can see. I could even put in a nice holiday to that mix if things are quiet enough at work to put a few weeks to together for his paid vacation leave he is getting ready to use or lose.

People out there are in a cold sweat about meeting the next rent payment for a roof over their kid's heads, scraping together quarters from under the sofa cushions to get gas money to get to and from work until next payday (been there, done that in my early married life) and I'm so comfortable I can gripe that we can't find the time to go on vacation anytime soon?
What is my place and need in this world,considering the great luck and fortune that I find myself in? To go shopping for yet another pair of shoes I don't need, is that my legacy and how people will remember me...."Well, the charitable part of her heart was as small and tight as a tiny apple but oh, her shoe collection was so nice!

-It's not even all that, anyone in my neighborhood could could out shoe me and I don't even really care about shoes all that much anymore, enough is enough - so then, what? If I am to live maybe two+ full decades longer and really don't have many material wants I lust after anymore, have good family and friends around me - what will I DO to fill those years left to me? What will be my legacy?
What is my place, my purpose, my legacy not to my family and friends but to the world of unknowns who will never meet or know me? I am of this world, the unknowns are as important a part of this world as is my immediate family, they are family, so what is my place with them? With that African woman who holds her starving infant, what is my place in her life.

I am uncomfortably, but fully aware that others right here in my country, in my community, are not in my position, will NEVER EVER be in my position, yet will work harder than Dh and I have worked, for all their lives, just trying to reach my own rather simple station in life - and will cringe under the withering stare of those who watch them pay for necessaries with the card that is issed to them in order for MY tax dollar to be used to help them eat.
I'm grateful to be in the position to be able to pay that tax dollar to be used for just that purpose. There is not all that much I can ever do to change the life of that African woman holding her starving child, and I do grasp and understand that some two cents of my tax dollar might be used in a scam by somebody who doesn't actually require it to get by, but am so grateful that I don't have to spend time worrying about that because I'm also aware that the 98 cents WILL go to people who require it, so it's all good.

It's not my place to judge the person who ends up with MY tax dollar, it's my place to be sure that the tax dollar is available for the purpose, and to write my reps to tell them to be sure that the tax dollar is used responsibly rather than funding another useless war for profit for the 1 percent who don't need the profits anymore.

And mom?
if you ever need it, then you are welcome to it without judgement - take it and go in peace - because I honestly consider the american citizen to to be their brother's keeper - I think of it as a citizen's *responsibility* which comes attached with the fortunate circumstances of being able to have the job that allows the room for taxes to have to be paid.

It's exactly in keeping with how I see my place in this world. If all of us concerned ourselves with being our brother's keeper there would be no wars, no want, no lonliness, no fear. In that case, the angels we seem to love to believe in would be right next door to us, happy to share a cup of hot tea and a smile, even if we only wanted it but didn't actually need it. It seems so easy a solution but I suspect, an inhuman one. We aren't built that way.

Yes, I can see, after re-reading this grumbling ramble of pure irritation that my own heart is lacking non-judgemental charity as well. I doubt I will ever not feel that way about grumbling haves attitude about the poor and the responsiblity I feel we (and they) all have to help them.
But for those haves who are resentful of having to help the poor so much (especially those poor they don't approve of) and wish to impart these ideas on their children, I can only say this:
Don't read the book or let the kiddies watch "A Christmas Carol" as it's message might undo all your hard work.

It's likely you might find it to be subversive hollywood propaganda, the best version (imo, which has been highly contested by friends) being the one which stars George C. Scott as Mr. Scrooge.


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

Just a stat 50% of food stamp recipients leave the program after 10 months!
Not that it will erase a bit of resentment from the professional resenters!


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

mylab, I agree with you 100%, I have started to not read some posters because it upsets me too much to read "how those horrible lazy people want my money". I just have to believe that one day they will see those words again and realize how wrong they have lived their lives before they shut their eyes for the last time.

The good thing.....they are the minority. HT and the recent election proved it is not the feeling of the majority of America. We are more than how much we have and how little someone else has to make us feel good.


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

mylab,I agree with all that you've written.

I consider myself to be very lucky, but I'm also aware that losing a job or a health crisis could snatch away everything I've worked for in a New York minute. A minor health problem last year wiped out our savings, but thank goodness I had savings. I kept thinking over and over what would have happened if we didn't have the money, what about someone who didn't have the money, what happens to them?

We are our brothers keepers, and I gladly pay my taxes and grateful I'm in a position to do so. If you want to be a part of society you have a responsibility to contribute to the betterment of that society as a whole, not just the parts you agree with. I hope that some of my tax dollars will help someone get an education, health care, food and housing, reproductive care, whatever little bit we can do to help them is OK with me.

A society is judged by how it treats it's poorest members.


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

Susan will you be my new best friend?

Well said.....


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

"A society is judged by how it treats it's poorest members."

Tell me about it.

Every single one of us here on this forum, in comparison to the great mass of humanity, are, and this is a fact, part of the global 1%.

Tell me about how good you are. Type it on your IPad, Ipod, Dell while you're sitting in your warm house, sipping wine as you get ready for a nice night's sleep.

You all are such wonderful, caring and kind people.

Hay


 o
I've been shamed

But, I feel shamed.

Tomorrow, after I go buy some very nice beer, I'm going to make a point of dropping the change into the Salvation Army bucket.

I feel so good already, just thinking about it.

Hay


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

Posted by marquest z5 PA (My Page) on Thu, Dec 6, 12 at 19:35

"mylab, I agree with you 100%, I have started to not read some posters because it upsets me too much to read "how those horrible lazy people want my money"."

What a load. Wouldn't it be something if this poster put her money where her mouth is for a change.

Who is this poster quoting? "it upsets me too much to read "how those horrible lazy people want my money".

Seriously?


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

chase, yes we can be BFF's!

"A society is judged by how it treats it's poorest members."

"Tell me about it"

Hay, Whoo Hum.......


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

Whoo hum back to you, whatever that means.

"A minor health problem last year wiped out our savings, but thank goodness I had savings.

....

I hope that some of my tax dollars will help someone get an education, health care, food and housing, reproductive care, whatever little bit we can do to help them is OK with me.

....

A society is judged by how it treats it's poorest members."

It doesn't sound like you're filthy rich. Just guessing.

I can't know how much you must pay in taxes, but I'd imagine it's not a HUGE amount. We've seen chart after chart on this forum about who REALLY pays those taxes that you're feeling so generous about. It's those filthy rich people...

Which basically means that YOUR taxes, I'm guessing here, probably don't even pay for the benefits that YOU get from the government, leaving not one penny to help all those poor people you care so much about.

I'd hazard a guess that dear, kind, caring Romney could have paid more taxes last year than you'll earn over your lifetime.

Maybe I'm wrong about you, personally, but we sure do hear this line from some of the known-to-be-poorest on this forum.

But, God bless all of you, it's the thought that counts.

Hay


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

Just proves that old saying hay. A liberal will give you the shirt off of someone else's back.


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

You can sure tell it's the holiday season. People are concerned about the helpless and the hopeless. After the Superbowl, those folks will be swept under the rug until next November.


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

Mrs, most liberals in both our countries are tax paying , contributing citizens who believe in a fair and just society.

Would be one thing if we weren't willing to share our shirts too, but we are. Be one thing if we weren't willing to pay a bit more in taxes so the cuts for those with less don't have to be quite so severe,but we are.

Be great if some conservatives weren't so bent on protecting the tax rate of the very wealthiest instead of protecting the poor, but they are.

Keep your shirt....


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

Like I said chase. The wealthiest already pay most of the taxes. If libs had their way the top 1% would pay 100% of the taxes. In other words, if you've worked really hard, become rich doing it, and I haven't, it's your duty to take care of me. I have a novel idea...stop spending, let everyone pay a little so we all have a stake in the game.


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

That is blatantly untrue Mrs. Liberals do NOT want the wealthy to pay 100% of the taxes and have never said such a thing. What has been asked for is a fair and balanced approach.

If the top rate for taxes is not raised slightly for the wealthy, which is the proposal, how do you propose that they contribute to the trimming of the deficit?

What do you think they should contribute to solving the problem they helped create? We all know how the poor and middle class will contribute but how do they?

Look forward to your answer.


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

$2 billion spent on presidential campaigns.

Poor? What poor?


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

Trimming of the deficit? You are kidding right? If the government took 100% of everything the "rich" earned, it wouldn't fund the government for five months. As it is, we are talking about 82 billion a year...which would fund the government for days, not months. Plus Obama wants a new 50 billion dollar stimulus package...so at 4 billion a day, the rest will take care of about a week. Nothing but class warfare and redistribution. It's really sad. Instead of making people want to work hard and become wealthy, Obama wants us to grab our torches and pitchforks and go after the most productive of our society.


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

Mrs, that is not an answer my question.

Entitlements will be cut, budgets will be trimmed, spending will be reduced...that's part of the balanced approach.

So how will the rich contribute to spending cuts and deficit reduction? I guess you must believe that the rich have no obligation in terms of addressing the problem. Leave it all on the backs of the poor and middle class...and YOU have the nerve to talk about class warfare?


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

100 people go out to a banquet. 15 of those people eat up 85% of the food. The other 85 people split up the remaining 15% of the food.

How should the bill be paid?


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

Who is cutting? Who is trimming budgets? Certainly not Obama. According to him, raising taxes on the rich will solve all our problems.

I asked before? How much of the tax burden do you think the "rich" should assume? Enough that you don't have to pay any? Would that satisfy? Do you not think they are addressing the problem far greater than anyone else?

Here is a link that might be useful: link


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

I will answer your question even though you don't answer mine.

I think an additional 2% on earnings over 250K is not unreasonable in terms of moving towards a more balanced budget. I do NOT believe the rich should pay more taxes so people like me can pay less. As a matter of fact I pay at the highest marginal rate....so see, I don't want anyone else's shirt.

So I guess based on your logic you think the poor and middle class should pay more in order to make it more fair and equitable for the wealthy.

Maybe you will answer this question.

What do you think is a fair and balanced approach? What would you do to reduce spending and attack the deficit?


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

Start with waste, fraud, then cut out all pork barrel spending. Every spending bill should stand on it's own merit. Means test medicare. Hands off the Social Security Trust Fund, it should never be a piggy bank for the government. Stop any new spending. Once these things are done, then decide if a raise in tax rates is necessary.


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

What part of "temporary" in the temporary Bush tax cuts do conservatives have a problem with understanding?

They knew when they passed the tax cuts that it would explode the deficit, it did, and now, they're busy trying to defend the indefensible.

Want to cut spending? Why don't the Republicans come out and tell us what it is they want to cut. Want to close 'loop holes'? Why don't they come out and tell us which loopholes they want to close?

Fools running around pretending that putting tax rates for the top 2% back to where they were during the Clinton years is going to for sure for sure destroy the economy, although the only 'experts' who believe that are paid hacks with a community college associate degree in advertising, writing columns for World Net Daily.


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

So Obama lied when he said raising taxes in a slow economy was a bad idea? Or was he lying when he said last year the way to raise revenue was by closing loopholes in the tax system? Wait? Is he a republican sometimes? Are you calling him a fool?


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

Do we get to play that fun game of asking idiot questions? Are you incapable of seeing the difference between people earning $250,000 a year paying 2% more in taxes than people earning $35,000 a year? Which do you think Obama was referring to?

How can anyone in their right mind think that the teaparty position: ephemeral, never-identified yet massive, drastic cuts to spending - with no increase in revenue - is a serious negotiating position?


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

Pretty delicious to suggest that all the wealth of the elite class wouldn't "fund" the government for a few months when what we are actually talking about is the result of generations of absurdly low-paid or outright stolen labor worked upon the stolen resources of at least three entire continents.

It is such a massive amount of wealth that isn't possible for single mind to grasp it.


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

Mrs, so if all spending must stand I on its own then by default the temporary tax cuts for everyone have to go....they are unfunded and are contributing significantly to the deficit.

The bill can not stand on its own and must not pass.


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

If and when the deficit gets taken down, it will definitely be the rich, one way or the other, that will end up paying for it.

The debt, roughly 15 trillion, divided by the population, roughly 300 million, works out to about $50,000 per person. Remember that picture I posted of the oil worker's family in the Dakotas with their four kids and one on the way? I don't think, no matter how hard you squeezed them, you're ever going to be getting $350,000 out of that family.

The rich will end up paying.

Or maybe not. The whole thing could simply fall apart someday which I think is where we will end up down the road. Everyone will pay and pay dearly. Right about the time I'll be needing to cash in.

I was listening to a Wall Street report yesterday in which some analyst, not talking about this debt subject, said that the US stock market is worth about $15 trillion, the same amount of our current debt. Just to put things into perspective. Take all the wealth, not just the income, of the rich and we might make a dent in the debt.

And no end in sight. Let's create even more debt!!!! More programs!! Get drunk!!! Party like there's no tomorrow!!!

Hay


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

Corey Booker!!"My third day on the #SNAPChallenge was by far the toughest. Today, I was in motion and at meetings all day. My crazy schedule required that I prepare all of my food in the morning to enable me to eat on the go. In addition to preparing and packaging my meals, I realized early this morning that I am eating too much food per meal. If I do not cut back the amount I am eating at each meal, I will run out of food before the #SNAPChallenge is over. In the days ahead I am now going to eat smaller portion sizes. I decided to eat my dinner of peas, black beans, cauliflower and broccoli in small bites between 3pm and 7pm in between meetings and calls hoping that would allay some of the hunger pains I felt yesterday. This actually worked and something I might try again tomorrow." - Newark Mayor Cory Booker, halfway through is week-long existence on food stamps money.

Got to bring these suckers to their knees before we can work on anything!
We have had a deficit since our nations birth so stop wailing like it's something new as a lever for another effing tax cut! Return the rates to Regan or pre Regan levels stop foreign adventurism!


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

We should also remember that we owe most of that debt to ourselves. Social Security, the Federal Reserve, Federal Civil Service pensions as well as many other pension funds. The amount held by foreign gvts is about a third of it.

Point being that Social Security isn't exactly a loan shark out to bust our kneecaps if we don't pay up.

To use that analogy of a family putting too much on the credit card, we have to remember that the credit card company is owned by Grandpa (social security and other pensions) and Grandma (Federal Reserve) - who has a printing press - printed some money and loaned it to your sister (the federal government) to pay you and your brother (the citizenry) who bought some candy from the neighbor (Chinese) but mostly just kept using the bills in their usual game of paying each other to set the table and do each others chores (the economy). The Chinese are more than willing to take the printed bills and sell you candy, because they can use the bills at home to play their own economic games.

We're worrying about the amount of money that your brother and sister owe Grandpa.


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

We should also remember that we owe most of that debt to ourselves. Social Security, the Federal Reserve, Federal Civil Service pensions as well as many other pension funds. The amount held by foreign gvts is about a third of it.
Point being that Social Security isn't exactly a loan shark out to bust our kneecaps if we don't pay up.

Well, yes, it has to be paid up.

The alternative is that the pensions are held, and the amount Grandma and Grandpa paid into Social Security all those years become, in effect, a retroactive tax going back for decades.

Could you default on the debt owed to Social Security? Yes, you could.

But isn't throwing Grandma under the bus even worse than making the grandkids pay for that debt?


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

Sometimes, I think we all need to remember that money and an economy is, essentially, a confidence game. As long as you have confidence you can trade your cowrie shells / beads / hides / Dollars / Euros for food and shelter, you'll use them. And that if you save up a pile of cowrie shells, you'll still be able to trade them in the future.

Right now, interest rates on US Treasury bonds are at near historical lows, which means that banks and investors from all over the world have confidence that if they put their money in US Dollars, even paying 1 or 2 % interest, their wealth is going to be safe down the road.

Now if the idiots in congress want to force yet another, fabricated crisis over the debt cliff, or again over raising the debt limit, then people will lose confidence in the Dollar. But I don't know just where else they're going to put it.

I agree that the balance of gvt expenditure should be far more closely matched with revenue. We need to reduce sending by cutting the military budget, going to single payer health care, moving up the retirement age due to longer life spans, getting rid of waste like urban-county agriculture extension agents.

Paying interest on the debt can be stifling, even if we're just paying to to ourselves, because that limits what the gvt can spend elsewhere - on infrastructure, security, recovering from climate catastrophes, etc.


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

As to the OP... what does everyone expect to happen when capitalism and government operate sans ethics and honesty in so many areas?

David... as the voice of sanity, here... I fear you're just going to get a headache trying to explain the larger picture of reality to people locked on the other side of that brick wall you're banging your head against.

I hear you, and I get it. Boy, do I get it... but you can't explain it to anyone not willing to listen.


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

Nik: "Where are the 48 million Americans who can't fill up their grocery carts without food stamps going to get the money to pay higher taxes and buy Obamacare?"

Esh: "People who legitimately qualify for food stamps probably fall below the threshold for paying federal taxes and healthcare."

Not everyone on food stamps is destitute. You can be a homeowner and still qualify.

Maybe someone here knows what the law says about Obamacare subsidies. Will homeowners getting food stamps qualify for a subsidy if they can't afford to pay the Obamacare tax?


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

"We should also remember that we owe most of that debt to ourselves....."

In this context, I'm always thinking it's sorta like getting really drunk, taking all of your life savings that you've stashed away in your right pocket and putting it in your left pocket.

You wake up the next morning and look in your left pocket and say, WOW!!!! Forgetting where it came from, you go out for another night of fun.

A week later, you suddenly realize you have nothing left but empty pockets.

Time to pay the piper.

"... banks and investors from all over the world have confidence that if they put their money in US Dollars, even paying 1 or 2 % interest, their wealth is going to be safe down the road.

Or just a little safer than some of the other alternatives? We can indeed print money, unlike the Spaniards and the Greeks.

Gold prices are historically high now. How does that tie into your "safe" scenario?

I'd be happier with the stock market being up most recently if Gold wasn't following the same path.

Hay


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

Sometimes, I think we all need to remember that money and an economy is, essentially, a confidence game. As long as you have confidence you can trade your cowrie shells / beads / hides / Dollars / Euros for food and shelter, you'll use them. And that if you save up a pile of cowrie shells, you'll still be able to trade them in the future.

The Dick Cheney School of Economics


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

Maybe someone here knows what the law says about Obamacare subsidies. Will homeowners getting food stamps qualify for a subsidy if they can't afford to pay the Obamacare tax?

If they are homeowners we are going to assume they are working tax paying poor. Just as they are means tested to qualify for food stamps they will be means tested to qualify for subsidies health care.

It should workout that the Company they work for will have insurance and they will not need to apply for subsidies health care. But if their company does not have insurance the company pay a penalty so really the company they work for will pay for the health insurance through the back door.

There is no Obamacare tax if you have insurance. There is no reason to not have insurance because if you cannot afford insurance you get insurance through the subsidies. If someone is 21 and would rather not have insurance there is a penalty of 95.00. But if that 21 year old gets sick and goes to the hospital he will be treated. The hospital will charge you more through higher treatment cost which will trickle back to you through the higher insurance payment to make up for the cost of the uninsured 21 year old.

Is it acceptable to you to pay for the 21 year old because he/she does not feel he/she needs insurance because of age. This is why this was a Republican Bill/Romney bill. Because of the responsibility platform of the Republican party.


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

The stock market is a long way from representing all the wealth.


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

Gold is right up there with cowrie shells in terms of ephemeral wealth-as-confidence. You can't eat it, smoke it, or do much of anything with it except find another person whose belief system matches yours and is willing to give you something in exchange. And the whole thing depends on increasingly questionable ideas - anything from speculation on future gold production in Ghanian mines, to sharks with smarmy fake British accents and Glenn Beck selling gold coins at 3X the underlying value and so on.

This post was edited by david52 on Fri, Dec 7, 12 at 15:59


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

These metaphors are wonderful Hay this drunken nation has been banging off the walls since it's birth and really tied one on with that there Civil WAR which some idiots haven't given up on with their quaint remembrances & holiday bunting!
Let alone that unfunded fiasco that the Mentally defective crowd headed by Bush conned the Dems into bankrolling!

Now weeeee just must pay for it all & the best way to do it is cut our taxes and screw the crap out of the takers who we have so many anecdotal stories about!


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

"If they are homeowners we are going to assume they are working tax paying poor."

Why would assume that?


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

"If they are homeowners we are going to assume they are working tax paying poor."

Why would assume that?

If you know of a way a person can own a home without an income please share the info.

To be a Homeowner
1. If you are buying and do not have a money tree in your yard you will need a job to secure a home loan (mortgage)
2. If you own the home through inheritance there is up keep, maintenance, taxes that have to be paid to continue to be a "Homeowner" if you do not pay these things. City, State, Bank will own the home.
3. I have not heard of anyone giving you a house in your name free and clear for life and you do not have to pay one dime until you die.


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

Someone explain to me, if Obama's plan is so wonderful, why won't Harry Reid let it come up for a vote?


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

Mrskjun--bypassing the distractions of Saul Alinsky babbling and asking the obvious.

And we get no satisfaction.


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

Mrskjun--bypassing the distractions of Saul Alinsky babbling and asking the obvious.

And we get no satisfaction.

You two are joking right?


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

I don't think I was laughing. Do you have the answer to my not so funny question?

Here is a link that might be useful: link


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

Oh, well that changes everything.


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

oh, you have the answer david?


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

I have no idea why, mrskjun. I googled it, and it seems the only people talking about this is the right wing echo chamber, beginning with the Washington Examiner, your link, then parroted on Foxnews.com and so on. And of course, you bring it up here.

Maybe because the Senate has to look at the actual legislation, you know, the proposed specific laws on paper, and that hasn't been supplied yet by the Administration. And since McConnell knows that, he's just trying to score some points in the posturing over what will come.

Remember how the Republicans in the House voted for the Ryan budget? And there were copies of the budget all over the place so people could see? Like that.


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

At the link is a discussion - too long to copy and paste - of the truth and deceptions that is being spread around re the fiscal cliff.

Its worth a read, if you want to know anything about the actual proposals. And the lies and distortions as well.

Here is a link that might be useful: link


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

  • Posted by ohiomom 3rdrockfromthesun (My Page) on
    Fri, Dec 7, 12 at 19:46

David you have not learned yet how this particular game is played, you and others actually take your time to answer questions and provide documentation and the answers are ignored because some people just like "yanking chains". Kind of reminds me of a two year old, you know how you tell them something and ya know that kid hears you, but they keep going "huh"?? and like a fool we repeat our words. Yep that is the game that is being played.

Why bother...


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

Mom I really think the sad thing here is they really do not understand the legislative process. That is why the talking heads can walk them to the water and make them drink.

You two should go back to your Benghazi rage this is just embarrassing.


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

Ok. I give

Several posts about Fox news, playing games yada yada still no answer to mrskjun's question

Talk about playing games!


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

"If you know of a way a person can own a home without an income please share the info."

People buy homes before they fall on hard times.

Still hoping someone here knows what the law says about Obamacare subsidies.

Will homeowners who qualify for food stamps qualify for a subsidy to pay for their Obamacare tax?


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

I suspect the answer is maybe yes , maybe no. For the very few that may actually be in that situation it will depend on the details.

Highly unlikely that there is a specific clause that states that a homeowner on foodstamps is ,or is not , eligible for a medical insurance subsidy.


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

Will homeowners who qualify for food stamps qualify for a subsidy to pay for their Obamacare tax?

I answered this..... you asked if they are on food stamps. Everybody that gets food stamps are not getting monetary supplements. You specifically asked about people receiving Food Stamps. The majority of food stamps are for children. 79 percent of all food stamps benefits go to households with children, ...

So a husband and wife that are homeowners, and they can be considered a homeowner if they own a trailer. Both of them working making minimum wage and have 2 children would qualify for food stamps. They are the working poor. They would probably be eligible for food stamps and health insurance.

In my state that same couple with the children get a insurance called Chip. If they do not go into the Obama Care the children will probably still get CHIP and as our taxes pay for it now it will continue to pay for health insurance for the children. We have been paying for them for 30 years it will not be any different whether it is ObamaCare or CHIP the state does not think children should go without health insurance we are not heathens.


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

There is no such thing as the "working poor". That's just liberal mythology. If people are working, then they aren't poor.


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

2500 pages of legislation and the answer is "probably."

Mmmnn. Mnnnnn. Mnnnnnn
Mnnnnnn


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

"If people are working, then they aren't poor."
If you make a statement that defies reality as most of us accept it, please state your statistical criteria & other than that your just more methane in the wind!


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

Hay said

"It doesn't sound like you're filthy rich. Just guessing.
I can't know how much you must pay in taxes, but I'd imagine it's not a HUGE amount. We've seen chart after chart on this forum about who REALLY pays those taxes that you're feeling so generous about. It's those filthy rich people...
Which basically means that YOUR taxes, I'm guessing here, probably don't even pay for the benefits that YOU get from the government, leaving not one penny to help all those poor people you care so much about.
Maybe I'm wrong about you, personally, but we sure do hear this line from some of the known-to-be-poorest on this forum."

Really, you believe that because I think people who need help should receive it I have to be poor?
I�m in the 28% tax bracket, I pay more in taxes each year then I paid for my first house. And I pay it gladly and thank my lucky stars that I�m in a position to pay. But why should a multi millionaire pay 13% in taxes when I pay 28%? It�s crazy to think that�s OK. Raise the rate on the top 2%. Capital gains should not be taxed at a lower rate then working income unless the person is retired or disabled.

cornopean said
"There is no such thing as the "working poor". That's just liberal mythology. If people are working, then they aren't poor"

Then what do you call it when someone works one or two jobs and still doesn�t t have enough income to cover the basics, rent, food and health care? Could you please enlighten me?

Jobs which paid a wage someone could raise and educate a family on have been disappearing for years; they are being replaced by jobs with low income and no benefits.

The only way for us to grow and prosper is if there is a stable and large middle class. It�s the middle class that buys new shoes, a new car, takes a vacation and goes to a movie. The middle class drive the economy. If they don�t have money to send their kids on a school trip, or buy a new purse, everything stops. Why is it so hard for people to understand this?
.
And please don�t think the rich will drive the economy by spending money, it just isn�t true. If the people that make shoes or purses or coffee makers could only sell to the rich they would be out of business in a heartbeat.


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

cornopean, Demi, you can call them anything you choose if that makes you feel good.

It does nothing for me personally. If it makes you feel good have at it.

I guess the people that scream like a pig that is poked the description hits where they live.


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

Well, I'm supposing that no one knows why Harry Reid won't let it come up for a vote. Now maybe I don't understand the legislative process all that well, but that usually happens when you know you don't even have enough votes in your own party to pass something.


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

Mrsk, Why don't you give Harry a ring, ask him what's up, and get back to us with details of what's going on?


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

So liberals don't know the answer jmc? Can't call it the republican obstructionists if it's the democratic leader that won't let the bill be voted on. Or could it be that the last time it came up, every democrat voted against it? But I thought it was so wonderful!


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

This independent knows what the process of negotiation involves. Aren't you an antiquer? If you are, I'm quite surprised that you don't seem to be familiar with the process of negotiation.

As was plastered all over the media the last week or so, the Geithner proposal was the first offer. There is no reason in the world that either it OR the Republican's first proposal should have been brought to a vote.

Do I need or even care about more reasoning than that? Nope. don't care.

When there is a final proposal, one that appears agreeable to both parties, then I'll spend energy having an opinion on what it is.


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

Disgraceful statistics..America just made it more difficult to getting this country back on track. Obamas re-election will prove to be a disaster, as was his first term.
The man knows NOTHING about economics and is blinded by his ideaology. A socialist who hates the capitalist system and is willing to destroy everything that made this country the best ever.


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

First of all, most of the people labelled as "working poor" are part-time workers or they are younger than 25. In other words, they are just getting started. Their income will likely rise. My first salary was 26k/year.
So it's foolish to talk about helping the working poor b/c this demographic is constantly changing. It's just another liberal narrative that is so easily punctured by facts. We have something called income mobility in this nation.
Finally, has the poverty rate gone up or down under Obama's admin? :)


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

I guess it is now the function of the federal govt to make sure that everyone has the standard of living they desire. Crazy world we live in.


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

Actually cornopean, it is the conservative mantra....particularly on this forum...that the role of Government IS to make sure everyone gets the life style they deserve. After all they earned it through their actions.


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

Regarding the working poor, by government standards working poor don't actually have to work, they only have to have spent 27 weeks in the labor force, or they're (supposedly) "looking for work" to qualify as working poor.

The working poor are persons who spent at least 27 weeks in the labor force (that is, working or looking for work) but whose incomes still fell below the official poverty level.

We know many households that are poor by government standards, however they're only documented income poor, usually because they only work part-time, temporary or seasonal jobs.

When you add up all the documented/undocumented income, plus numerous handouts -subsidized housing, food stamps, WIC, daycare, HEAP, Emergency HEAP, Medicaid, $X,000 EIC, foodbank supplements, cell phones/minutes etc they're living quite well.

Here is a link that might be useful: Profile Of The Working Poor


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

"If people are working, they aren't poor. That's a liberal myth." Horse hockey. What's mythological is the point of view espoused by cornopean. What of the many who are working 2,3,4 jobs and still can't make it? Look around you. Used to be this was a country of upward mobility but gradually our Middle Class has been eroded in recent decades.

I admire what Newark mayor Corey Booker is doing, re living on what $30 a week can buy. Maybe the message will finally get out there about how hard it is to feed a family on food stamps.


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

@chase which conservative today is saying that the function of the fed govt is to ensure that everyone has the standard of living they want?


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

I agree that poverty is a problem in this nation. What people don't understand is that our govt is the engine of this poverty. But how do you convince a populace that is addicted to the idea of getting free stuff from the govt, that the govt is the PROBLEM, not the solution?
and poverty has gotten WORSE under the Obama admin, not better. This shows how govt anti-poverty programs make poverty worse, not better.


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

I didn't say "want"... I quoted you and said "deserve"


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

@Chase What standard of living do people deserve? and on what basis do they deserve it? Just b/c they breathe?


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

cornopean said - I guess it is now the function of the federal govt to make sure that everyone has the standard of living they desire. Crazy world we live in. (my highlight)

And no, it's not the function of the government, federal or otherwise, to give us the life would would like to become accustomed to! But wouldn't that be fun.

I think the responsibility of the government it to protect the citizens of the country. And, to me, that means, not only defense, but ensuring that people have access to health care, adequate food, good education, can live and work safely, and that pesky pursuit of happiness. If the government doesn't do this, then we are basically back in the dark ages - where life was, and is still for many people, grim, brutal and short for the 99%.

A country is only as strong as it's weakest citizens. Hungry, illiterate, sick citizens make a weak, ineffective government, and a third world country.


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

@momj47 I agree that the govt should ensure that people have access to these things, but our current govt is going far beyond this. They are trying to ensure that people have these things regardless of whether they earn it. It's the old distinction between an equality of opportunity and an equality of results. I say that the govt needs to be sure that everyone has access to life, property, and the pursuit of happiness. but when the govt goes beyond this, they create poverty and dependency which ends up destroying a society. That is what we are seeing today. millions of people now depend on govt handouts (including myself!). This is unsustainable and will eventually drag us all down.


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

Thanks Markjames for that stats!


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

cornopean, my apologizes I read your post as "deserve" not "desire".


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

People have a reasonable expectation of fairness and ethical treatment... is that always a part of today's world?


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

the quickest way to "a reasonable expectation of fairness and ethical treatment" is to let the private sector provide the goods and services. Only the private sector has an incentive to provide the best service at the lowest possible cost. Govt agencies have no such incentive. compare the Post Office to FedEx or UPS. Compare McDonalds to the dept of Motor Vehicles. The private company caters to your every need. They bend over backwards to provide the quickest and best service. They go to great lengths to ensure fairness and ethical treatment. but govt action is ALWAYS going to become corrupt and unethical. There is no way to clean this up. Govt spending is INHERENTLY inefficient. Govt action will always be corrupt and compromised by bribes, kickbacks, back room deals, etc.

The FIRST law of human behavior is that people respond to incentives. and when we think about govt, we have to bear this in mind. govt officials are not angels. they respond to incentives just like we all do. and when they don't have to compete in the marketplace with others, they are going to respond accordingly.


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

Wow...


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

  • Posted by ohiomom 3rdrockfromthesun (My Page) on
    Sat, Dec 8, 12 at 11:59

Put the following in the wrong thread ... Wow indeed Jodik.

Oh yes lets put our infrastructure into the hands of the private companies who will do all of this out of their own pockets. Also lets make sure ALL corporations and companies receive NOT ONE DIME of taxpayer monies.
Dispense with ALL social programs, including social security/medicare/medicaid. Hey if the old folks can't make it, too friggin bad for them. It is not like they are productive members of society any longer.

In fact lets privatize everything, then we no longer need to pay taxes.

What could possibly go wrong ??


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

When you can explain to me why anyone would spend someone else's money more efficiently than they spend their own, then I will sign on to further govt spending on infrastructure.


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

  • Posted by ohiomom 3rdrockfromthesun (My Page) on
    Sat, Dec 8, 12 at 12:33

Corn do you believe that these fictional companies that would take over the infrastructure would not be feeding at the corporate welfare trough? And we have all (well at least those of us that read) know how well private business spends our tax dollars.

I will never understand how "some" condemn social welfare and never ever start a thread condemning corporate welfare, and then when challenged they say something like "oh no I don't like that either". Yeah okay, easy to slam the poor, but don't touch the "golden bull" that y'all worship.

Why bother .. a fundamental mind will never be changed.


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

a reasonable expectation of fairness and ethical treatment" is to let the private sector provide the goods and services. Only the private sector has an incentive to provide the best service at the lowest possible cost.

Yes, just like the long, well-established, fair and equitable performance of private health insurance companies treating everyone the same. Because we all know that if you don't like your health insurance company - say they refuse to cover your hospital stay - you can fire them. And take your pre-existing condition and hospital bill over to another insurance carrier who will be so happy to pay your bills and take you on.

Isn't ideology cute?


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

Ohiomom - ;0)


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

  • Posted by ohiomom 3rdrockfromthesun (My Page) on
    Sat, Dec 8, 12 at 12:52

Okay I am not taking my own advice, so last shot and I am outta here.

""Democrats and Republicans are duking it out in Washington over a deal to avert the slew of spending cuts and tax increases the so-called "fiscal cliff" you've heard so much about that will take start to effect on January 1. Lawmakers on both sides of the aisle have argued that "everything should be on the table" in negotiations toward a deal that trims the nation's debt and avoids the "cliff." Yet notably absent from the debate over what to cut and what to spare in a deal are the tens of billions of dollars in subsidies, tax breaks, and other perks for the hugely profitable oil industry.

(snip)

In case you didn't quite believe it, yes, the US government subsidizes Big Oil shorthand for ExxonMobil, Chevron, BP, Shell, and ConocoPhillips, five of the biggest oil companies. Many smaller drilling and refining companies up and down the supply chain receive subsidies, too. Some of these subsidies date back a hundred years, when the fledgling oil exploration business was risky, even deadly. Today, with a barrel of crude oil costing $90 to $100, Big Oil practically prints money. The big five corporations piled up profits of more than $1 trillion between 2001 and 2011. ExxonMobil alone raked in $16 billion in profits in April, May, and June of this year, the highest-ever quarterly profit for a US corporation.

Despite such staggering windfalls, the federal government continues to subsidize oil companies large and small. Taxpayers for Common Sense, a nonpartisan government watchdog that wants to cut all energy subsidies, estimates that oil companies will receive $78 billion in industry-specific and broader business subsidies from 2012 to 2017. President Obama's budget plan for the 2012 fiscal year called for eliminating 13 subsidies or perks for oil companies, which will save taxpayers $4.6 billion a year over the next decade.""

Here is a link that might be useful: Pigs at the trough


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

@ohiomom I definitely support the complete elimination of all welfare programs both corporate, individual, and any other welfare the govt can think up. and I agree that both parties are in bed with corporations. It can't be any other way.
Again, ALL govt action is both inefficient and will become corrupt. I don't blame corporations for trying to get kickbacks from the govt. Corporations would sell their mother if it would make them a profit. What we need is a govt that says NO to all corporate cronyism. We expect corporations to act that way. How do we fix this?

Simple, pass the FairTax or any other tax plan that eliminates ALL deductions, loopholes, writeoffs, exemptions, etc. A simple flat tax on either income or consumption is the best way to go. Then there is no way for the govt to cozy up to big corporate interests.

Now the truth is...that some GOPers support this. I know of no democrats who support this kind of tax reform. So...on the whole, its Dems who are more corporatist than the GOP.


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

@ohiomom so...you would support tax reform that eliminated all exemptions?


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

Oh goodie another one.


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

Now, back to the subject and facts.

100 people go out to a banquet. 15 of those people eat up 85% of the food. The other 85 people split up the remaining 15% of the food.

How should the bill be paid?

Excellent analogy provided by Barb.

This is the end result of decades of assets vs. wages, also known as suck-up-trickle-down and guess what--wages are losing. What a racket.


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

con said

"the quickest way to "a reasonable expectation of fairness and ethical treatment" is to let the private sector provide the goods and services. Only the private sector has an incentive to provide the best service at the lowest possible cost."

Yeah, let's rely on the private sector who will move all the manufacturing overseas to squeeze a little bit more money out of the record profits they've made, leaving another small town in need of food stamps and unemployment checks.

Great idea!


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

@maddie_athome your analogy is all wrong. It assumes that economics is a zero sum game. It assumes that if someone gets richer, someone else will get poorer. It assumes that our economy is like a set pile of food. If someone eats so much, then that means there is less for everyone else.

Actually, in a free economy, the amount of food gets bigger, the more any one person eats. In other words, the richer any one person gets, the richer we ALL get. This is how it works in a free economy. In any transaction, BOTH sides are better off than they were prior to that transaction.

Here is a link that might be useful: Zero sum fallacy


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

In other words, the richer any one person gets, the richer we ALL get.

Assuming that money flows down at more equal rates than it does now. Wages are stagnant for many people while the rich get richer. The rate of income inequality has been increasing ... we're ALL not getting richer. Only some people are.


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

Posted by esh_ga z7 GA (My Page) on
Sat, Dec 8, 12 at 16:35

"we're ALL not getting richer. Only some people are"

...yea, the people that do what it takes to do better, are.


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

"The quickest way to "a reasonable expectation of fairness and ethical treatment is to let the private sector provide the goods and services. Only the private sector has an incentive to provide the best service at the lowest possible cost."

Pray tell, how does providing the best service at the lowest prices equate to fairness and ethical treatment of either employees or customers? One does not preclude the other...not by a long shot.


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

Our economy is in shambles. I grant you that. we differ as to the cause. You think its George Bush's fault. I think it is the govt's fault regardless of who sits in the Whitehouse. George Bush spent more than any other previous president. Now Obama has even him beat. So....therein lies the problem.


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

Ask a question, get some diversion.

Now where have I seen that before?


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

Oh goodie another one

Another one-note samba joining the conga line to limbo below the bar of personal responsibility - cha cha cha!

Next up - the bunny hop and the hokey-pokey.


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

@david52 do you agree that people spend their own money more efficiently than they spend other people's money? (and the answer is self-evident)

so...applying that to health insurance companies, we would expect these private companies to provide a better service at a lower price than a govt agency providing insurance.

as for pre-existing conditions, it is impossible to know what innovation private companies would invent to cover these, but....I would bet my right arm, they will come up with something. They always do.


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

as for pre-existing conditions, it is impossible to know what innovation private companies would invent to cover these, but....I would bet my right arm, they will come up with something. They always do.

I'm amazed that you don't know. They just refuse to cover them.


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

George Bush spent more than any other previous president. Now Obama has even him beat.

Show me the numbers. And be sure to include the cost of war in Bush's expenditures just like Obama does.


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

"as for pre-existing conditions, it is impossible to know what innovation private companies would invent to cover these, but....I would bet my right arm, they will come up with something. They always do."

I hope you have $50,000 dollars socked away in your emergency fund, you'll lose that arm and a prosthetic one will run you at least 50 grand. Then you'll have a pre-existing condition and no self respecting insurance company will cover you.


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

"I'm amazed that you don't know. They just refuse to cover them."

You didn't hear? All Democrats did was tell insurers they couldn't do that and set a timetable to put an end to that stuff.

They never needed to saddle Americans with trillions in Obamacare obligations to make that happen.


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

All Democrats did was tell insurers they couldn't do that and set a timetable to put an end to that stuff.

Pretty simplistic, don't you think?

The insurance companies never would have agreed to take on any pre-existing condition people - at the same rates as anybody else - unless they could increase the pool, via the Heritage Foundation Obama mandate.

Why would they?


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

"Corn do you believe that these fictional companies that would take over the infrastructure would not be feeding at the corporate welfare trough? And we have all (well at least those of us that read) know how well private business spends our tax dollars.
I will never understand how "some" condemn social welfare and never ever start a thread condemning corporate welfare, and then when challenged they say something like "oh no I don't like that either". Yeah okay, easy to slam the poor, but don't touch the "golden bull" that y'all worship

Why bother .. a fundamental mind will never be changed."

"...a fundamental mind will never be changed."

I take it this should read "a fundamentalist mind will never be changed."

So we're back to religion bashing.

----------------
David: "The insurance companies never would have agreed to take on any pre-existing condition people - at the same rates as anybody else - unless they could increase the pool, via the Heritage Foundation Obama mandate."

"at the same rates as anybody rates as anybody else"--can you (please) point me to where that is written in the ACA, David?



 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

"Guaranteed issue will require policies to be issued regardless of any medical condition, and partial community rating will require insurers to offer the same premium to all applicants of the same age and geographical location without regard to gender or most pre-existing conditions (excluding tobacco use)"

Its all over the place, Elvis. Google anything along the lines of "Same rates preconditions obamacare"


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

Thank you, David. Well, that's great news for the unsured folks with pre-existing conditions (1 in 7?). I sure hope that works out--it may end up being pretty expensive. Although I think most will sympathize with a seriously ill person (it could happen to anyone, after all), it may be hard to swallow that we all have to pay for health problems brought on by morbid obesity, drug abuse, or other irresponsible behavior.

Then again, who knows? Maybe if everyone is paying in (how much?), there will be so much funding available that it works out just fine.

I'm just wondering how that can happen, though. Who will be paying in that will make that happen? How big is that group who can't afford health insurance now, but can afford to kick in a certain amount for this really big pool? This will have to be a huge group of people, reliably and continuously paying in.

What about the food stamp recipients? If they're already unable to afford food, they certainly won't be paying in for health insurance. I'm pretty sure their high health insurance premiums aren't putting them on food stamps.

If this group of people who will now be able to afford health insurance big enough to pay for the no/low income people? I sure hope so; otherwise, it's bustola before it even starts.

According to The Commonwealth Fund:

"As noted by a spokesperson for America�s Health Insurance Plans, this prohibition is made possible in part through the requirement in 2014 that all individuals have health insurance. The individual mandate serves the very important role of spreading individual risks across a large population, thereby keeping average costs lower and premiums affordable. Starting in 2014, insurers will be allowed to vary premium levels only by defined ratios on the basis of age, family composition, tobacco use and geography. After that date, an individual with a history of cancer or a woman of child-bearing age will pay the same premium for the same coverage as anyone else their age."

From The Dept of Health & Human Services website:

First Measure: High-Risk Pool Definition of Pre-Existing Conditions
Individuals likely to be uninsurable were identified in the following manner. An approach developed by the Lewin Group was replicated and identified conditions reported by five or more of the 19 pre-Affordable Care Act state high-risk pools as indicating automatic eligibility for enrollment in the pool.17 This list included the following conditions: alcohol and drug abuse, chemical dependency, acquired immune deficiency syndrome (AIDS), Alzheimer’s disease, angina pectoris, anorexia nervosa, aortic aneurysm, aplastic anemia, arteriosclerosis, artificial heart valve or heart valve replacement, ascites, brain tumor, cancer (excluding skin), cancer (metastatic), cardiomyopathy/primary cardiomyopathy, cerebral palsy/palsy, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), chronic pancreatitis, cirrhosis of the liver, congestive heart failure, coronary artery disease, coronary insufficiency, coronary occlusion, Crohn’s disease, cystic fibrosis, dermatomyositis, diabetes, emphysema/pulmonary emphysema, Friedreichs’s disease/ataxia, hemophilia, active and chronic hepatitis, HIV positive, Hodgkin’s disease, hydrocephalus, intermittent claudication, kidney failure, kidney disease, and kidney disease with dialysis, lead poisoning with cerebral involvement, leukemia, Lou Gehrig’s Disease/amyotophic lateral sclerosis (ALS), lupus erythematosus, disseminate, and lupus, malignant tumors, major organ transplant, motor or sensory aphasia, multiple or disseminated sclerosis, muscular atrophy or dystrophy, myasthenia gravis, myocardial infarction, myotonia, paraplegia or quadriplegia, Parkinson’s disease, peripheral arteriosclerosis, polyarteritis, polycystic kidney, postero-lateral sclerosis, psychotic disorders, silicosis, splenic anemia, True Banti’s syndrome, Banti’s disease, rheumatoid arthritis, sickle cell anemia and disease, Stills disease, stroke, syringomyelia (spina bifida or myelomeningocele), tabes dorsailis, thalassemia (Cooley’s or Mediterranean anemia), ulcerative colitis and Wilson’s disease.18

Individuals were also identified who reported that they had “ever been diagnosed” with the following conditions: coronary heart disease, myocardial infarction, other heart disease, angina pectoris, stroke, emphysema, cancer, and diabetes.

Individuals who were identified by one of these mechanisms were considered unlikely to be insurable in the private non-group market and are the basis of the first estimate. This estimate should be considered a lower bound, as there are potentially more conditions that insurers consider an automatic decline of coverage.

Second Measure: Insurers’ Definition of Pre-Existing Conditions
To construct the second measure, we included additional conditions that are likely to cause an applicant to be denied coverage, be “rated up” (that is, charged a higher premium), or to be sold coverage with a rider that excludes coverage for one or more pre-existing conditions.

Individuals with five common conditions ��" arthritis, asthma, high cholesterol, hypertension, and obesity (BMI > 35) ��" were included in the second measure, as were individuals who had “ever been” diagnosed with arthritis, asthma, high cholesterol, or hypertension. These conditions were found to result in a denial, an exclusion of coverage for that condition, or a higher premium for individuals in all but one of the seven underwriting guidelines we examined.

In addition, individuals who were currently being treated for neurotic and related disorders, stress and adjustment disorders; conduct disorders; emotional disturbances; and including attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) were included in the second measure, as were individuals who had ever been diagnosed with ADHD. These types of mental health conditions were identified in the underwriting guidelines as conditions that would result in denial, waiting periods, condition exclusions or higher premiums. Information from ASPE-conducted interviews with insurance commissioners indicated that individuals in treatment for mental health conditions were generally denied coverage in the individual market. Given the conflicting evidence, a conservative approach was used and these conditions were included in the second and not the first measure. Had these conditions been included in the first measure, the estimate of likely to be uninsurable individuals would have increased from 19 percent to 29 percent."


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

My car insurance rates depend on two things - how many accidents I have and how many accidents other people have. If no one ever had accidents, insurance could be pretty low. But people do, either by pure accident or by being drunk, distracted, careless or what have you.

So in a way, all of those with car insurance pay for those that make mistakes.

Just like all of us that pay for health insurance in some way pay for those that make bad choices. Or are born with pre-existing conditions.

That's what insurance is all about.


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

All true, Esh. My car insurance is not cheap although my driving record is perfect.

If my health insurance premiums under the ACA are no higher than my car insurance premiums though, I won't complain.

Car insurance premiums are different for different situations, though. People are penalized for being bad drivers, or young drivers, or even for being in the wrong place at the wrong time. Not really a great analogy here between auto insurance and health insurance; no offense.


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

My point is that insurance rates in general are affected by how much other people invoke insurance and the decisions they make that cause them to file more claims.


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

I understand, Esh. Believe me, I like the concept of affordable health care for all. I'm just one of those people(surely I'm not the only one) who thinks the ACA is "putting the cart before the horse". I'm for controlling the costs of health care. The way the costs are spiralling out of control, I don't think we can afford the ACA.


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

I understand, change is hard.


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

Not for me ;)

I can see that's true for many, though, especially old people.


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

For libruls only (Darwin quote):

It's not the strongest of the species that survives, nor the most intelligent that survives. It is the one that is the most adapable to change."


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

  • Posted by ENMc none (My Page) on
    Tue, Dec 11, 12 at 16:36

"I understand, change is hard."

What does she care? She has health insurance....most likely, since she works for the State, very good health insurance. And will continue to have it long after she retires.
Probably don't cost her a penny. If it does, you can bet it ain't a "pretty penny", that's for sure.

And some people have the nerve to complain about costs. OTHER people's costs, of course.

E


 o
RE: 48 million now on food stamps!

Posted by esh_ga z7 GA (My Page) on Sun, Dec 9, 12 at 21:49

"I understand, change is hard."
------------------

Posted by ENMc none (My Page) on Tue, Dec 11, 12 at 16:36

""I understand, change is hard.""

"What does she care? She has health insurance....most likely, since she works for the State, very good health insurance. And will continue to have it long after she retires.
Probably don't cost her a penny. If it does, you can bet it ain't a "pretty penny", that's for sure.

And some people have the nerve to complain about costs. OTHER people's costs, of course."

-----------------

What is that? Is Esh a state employee? Whether she is or not, I don't know. In most states, state employees do have decent health insurance, that's true. Depending on various factors, the pay may well reflect that. Some public employees (like me; though not state employed) are paid relatively low wages because the value of the insurance is taken into consideration as part of the pay. Makes sense; I think that's fair. As far as being covered by that insurance after separation; no. That is certainly not the norm.

That was a nasty little case of sour grapes; shame on you :(


 o Post a Follow-Up

Please Note: Only registered members are able to post messages to this forum.

    If you are a member, please log in.

    If you aren't yet a member, join now!


Return to the Hot Topics Forum

Information about Posting

  • You must be logged in to post a message. Once you are logged in, a posting window will appear at the bottom of the messages. If you are not a member, please register for an account.
  • Please review our Rules of Play before posting.
  • Posting is a two-step process. Once you have composed your message, you will be taken to the preview page. You will then have a chance to review your post, make changes and upload photos.
  • After posting your message, you may need to refresh the forum page in order to see it.
  • Before posting copyrighted material, please read about Copyright and Fair Use.
  • We have a strict no-advertising policy!
  • If you would like to practice posting or uploading photos, please visit our Test forum.
  • If you need assistance, please Contact Us and we will be happy to help.


Learn more about in-text links on this page here