Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Mark Thompson on XM Radio stated it as "fact" and then went crazy on a caller who said that maybe everyone should be on Food Stamps.
nancy pelosi also stated that food stamps were "stimulative".
I mean, really!
To follow this assertion to its logical conclusion, wouldn't everyone being on food stamps be even better?
I hope you all see my sarcasm.
This is why liberalism is a mental disorder.
The concept is really a way to keep farmers in business and a safety net to prevent a repeat of the 1930's bread lines. But since the conservative economic policies of the last 30 years have put us in the current condition you need to come up with some new ideas that will work better then what the current crop of Repub. have
The concept is really a way to keep farmers in business and a safety net to prevent a repeat of the 1930's bread lines. But since the conservative economic policies of the last 30 years have put us in the current condition you need to come up with some new ideas that will work better then what the current crop of Repub. have
Food stamps are akin to federal agents emptying the cash register of the store owner and then handing the money to customers walking in and then claiming that the store owner sold a lot of food.
All men are created equal.
Why are some more deserving of free food and some are required to foot the bill?
Location: Just transplanted to FL from the N GA mountains
3,997 posts, read 4,144,523 times
Reputation: 2677
The couple that live across the road from us are very, very liberal. Nice folks and we get along great. But, during a discussion about politics (which we try to avoid usually), she told me and I quote, "Our national debt is good, it's like credit card debit. And that's the best kind of debt. So we can keep paying for all our social programs, like food stamps."
The couple that live across the road from us are very, very liberal. Nice folks and we get along great. But, during a discussion about politics (which we try to avoid usually), she told me and I quote, "Our national debt is good, it's like credit card debit. And that's the best kind of debt. So we can keep paying for all our social programs, like food stamps."
You should have asked her for some food assistance.
The concept is really a way to keep farmers in business and a safety net to prevent a repeat of the 1930's bread lines. But since the conservative economic policies of the last 30 years have put us in the current condition you need to come up with some new ideas that will work better then what the current crop of Repub. have
Correct and that person the OP was listening to is right. The poor have little for even basic needs such as food, in such nothing to keep businesses open especially in poor areas. With food stamps, every penny goes right back into the economy to keep local grocery stores open, their workers employed, farmers to make a living, etc,..
Location: Just transplanted to FL from the N GA mountains
3,997 posts, read 4,144,523 times
Reputation: 2677
Quote:
Originally Posted by TempesT68
Correct and that person the OP was listening to is right. The poor have little for even basic needs such as food, in such nothing to keep businesses open especially in poor areas. With food stamps, every penny goes right back into the economy to keep local grocery stores open, their workers employed, farmers to make a living, etc,..
I don't think that anyone in their right mind wants people to go hungry or kids to starve... I sure don't. That's what food stamps are designed for correct? To help people not be hungry. It was not designed as a stimulus and there is no way it should be used for that. If it helps in the long run, great. But to say, everyone should be on food stamps? Come on...
Too many people are like a five-year-old standing by the checkout with their mom screaming, "More candy! More candy!" Mom can't afford it anymore. And telling Mom to write a check just doesn't cut it. Mom may have checks, but the checkbook balance is zero folks! Instead of putting more folks on food stamps, this mom thinks we need to figure out a way to get real food on the table of those who need it and leave the candy on the shelf.
The big question is " do we want this type of a economy?" Lets go over a couple of points, our economy is based on 72% consuming and 28% production. With that if you take 60 billion {unofficial} that is spent on food programs would that hurt consumer spending? Of course it would, and too use a old {R} mantra that adding a million to the economy created X amount of jobs. If that is true then it would also have to be true in reverse.
As long as we have a economy that is out of balance and we depend on borrowing 1T $ to prop up consumer spending then the lefts theory is correct. I or no body else wants this type of a economy but what are we doing and who are we voting for that is going to change the imbalance?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
