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.
Nearly half (47 percent) of SNAP beneficiaries are under age 18 and another 8 percent were age 60 or older. Working-age women represented 28 percent of the caseload, while working-age men represented 17 percent.
Over the last two decades, large shares of SNAP households have become working households. In 1989, 42 percent of all SNAP households received cash welfare benefits and only 20 percent had earned income. By 2010, over three times as many SNAP households worked as relied solely on welfare benefits for their income.
Despite the large jump in unemployment during the recession, the share of SNAP families with earnings has continued to increase in recent years. This suggests that for a growing share of the nation's workers, having a job has not been enough to keep them out of poverty.
Retail and food services have been the nation's dominate employers since the 80's. These sectors are known for employing part timers because employers want scheduling flexibility and to avoid paying OT.
Technology eliminated 1/3 of all middle class U.S. manufacturing jobs 2000-2010. This is not unique to the U.S. Instead of focusing on the reality, many find it easier to blame presidents and political parties and especially the working poor.
Point us to the thread in which you lambasted Democrats and Bill Clinton for signing NAFTA.
One needs to look at the big picture to determine the true beneficiaries of SNAP.
Major corporations and food groups, including Pepsi, Kraft Foods, Kroger, Coca-Cola and the Corn Refiners of America, also warmly embrace SNAP. All, lobby Congress and/or various states to expand SNAP and make sure that recipients have the most freedom possible in deciding how to use their allowances, including the unlimited purchase of soda and junk food.
Read more: Food Stamps: More Benefit to Big Food Than to the Poor? | TIME.com
Food stamps were replaced with a debit card. It's cheaper to load a card electronically than print and mail stamps each month. As I understand it, some states combine SNAP and TANF benefits onto a single EBT card. While the SNAP balance cannot be used for cash or non approved food items, the TANF balance can.
Turns out there are way more than four major food groups after all.
Society?
Again...personal responsibility. How hard can it be?
Sent from my DROID4 using Tapatalk 4
It was previously unimaginable how global views towards smoking have changed in just one decade.
People taking personal responsibility for their own health was not enough to change behaviors. Governments had to ban smoking and tax the heck out of the product to change behaviors and did so because it was for the greater good.
Unlike China, The U.S. is not likely to ban out of wedlock births or punish the children. It can however, take actions to discourage people from engaging in unprotected sex when they are unable to afford the responsibilities of a child.
This culture of gimme gimme gimme will destroy the fabric of the country. How long are we going to keep our heads in the sand about this, the biggest problem in our future?
Look who are having the most children. Look at how they are raising them?
I guess it's easier to just allow this problem to grow and grow and grow and leave it to our children.
I can't believe this is coming from a democrat. You know that these people are your voting base, right?
Turns out there are way more than four major food groups after all.
PepsiCo employs about 300,000 people world-wide. and their brands are not limited to soda pop. How many of these jobs would be permanently lost if Congress decided to allow only nutritional food to be purchased with SNAP benefits ? How many local economies would be devastated if PepsiCo shut down?
While PepsiCo's direct lobbying expenditures pale in comparison to other things, look at how the expenditures intensified in 2009:
PepsiCo employs about 300,000 people world-wide. and their brands are not limited to soda pop. How many of these jobs would be permanently lost if Congress decided to allow only nutritional food to be purchased with SNAP benefits ? How many local economies would be devastated if PepsiCo shut down?
While PepsiCo's direct lobbying expenditures pale in comparison to other things, look at how the expenditures intensified in 2009:
Above, you appear to be advocating for government intervention in people's lives (ie. smoking) in order to effect the greater good through healthier lifestyles. Here you appear to be advocating for unhealthy lifestyles in order to protect jobs and companies.
You are severely confused it looks like. You don't know whether to give government a high five or to slap conservatives across the face for taking a Twinkie away from Tyrone.
It was a little like that glitch in the banking system that allowed [I]wall street [/I]to fill their carts with money and let the banks fail.
edited
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.
