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.
"Approximately 33.1 million adults and 15.9 million children lived in food insecure households in 2012. According to the USDA definition of food insecurity, this means a full 49 million Americans lived in households that struggled to access enough food due to a lack of resources last year. "
It exists. Right here in this country. In the suburbs, on Indian reservations, in rural areas and in the cities.
What purpose does it serve to try to argue otherwise?
Yes, the US Census Bureau which I posted a few threads back.
You don't believe your government now ?
Why is the government reports saying they are not hungry nor worried about food yet we have this big "Food insecurity" push ?
Why the disparity ?
Why don't we have stories on malnourished kids showing up at school and being taken away from the parents ?
Why don't we have stories on starvation being the cause of death ?
Why, instead are we talking about obesity. If they had NO FOOD they wouldn't be obese would they ?
But when companies shift policy to meet their needs its "rational self interest". LOL. .
There is a difference between a shift in policies to keep your own money, and a shift in policy to get handouts that others have to pay for
Quote:
Originally Posted by radiolibre99
Welfare cost on society is minuscule compared to the costs of corporate subsidies, bailouts, wars and tax cuts.
Oh bull ****. Welfare costs on society are far greater than just the $1T we spend on handouts yearly. There are also crime, police, and other costs on society which have to be paid for because people believe they are owed something.
Quote:
Originally Posted by radiolibre99
What part of wages being stagnated do you people just not get? It's as though that doesn't register but there's a price society pays for corporate "greed".
Of course wages are stagnated, you just encouraged less people to work, and then you went on to not only justify it, but celebrate it as good. What the hell do you think happens to wages with less demand for labor?
Quote:
Originally Posted by radiolibre99
This is why you guys are ridiculed. You guys are just so transparent. Just come out with it and say you hate poor people. You hate working people. Quit beating around the bush.
Oh give it a break. 15 years ago I was homeless. One doesnt get poorer than sleeping in the streets. I'm not even responding to the rest of your nonsensical posting.
But when companies shift policy to meet their needs its "rational self interest". LOL.
Welfare cost on society is minuscule compared to the costs of corporate subsidies, bailouts, wars and tax cuts.
What part of wages being stagnated do you people just not get? It's as though that doesn't register but there's a price society pays for corporate "greed".
This is why you guys are ridiculed. You guys are just so transparent. Just come out with it and say you hate poor people. You hate working people. Quit beating around the bush.
Everything businesses do is apparently rational and in the national interest but when workers attempt any sort of gains for their interest, then its "collectivism" and asking for 1984 "statism".
It's not good to have people dependent on government. But I don't see what you expect people stuck in a cycle with low wages and rising costs?
Just what goes through your heads when poverty is brought up? That everyone mired in it are just losers? Whining failures in life? Did it ever occur to you a lot of people at the bottom have tried and tried hard? But you guys are so stuck on the delusion that all it takes is the right gumption.
How do you people even have a base? You're just a very vocal and well funded minority.
Over $1 trillion a year on means tested programs and growing at 20% annually.
1/3 of what we spend is hardly "minuscule".
Oh give it a break. 15 years ago I was homeless. One doesnt get poorer than sleeping in the streets. I'm not even responding to the rest of your nonsensical posting.
You breaking out of homelessness and ragging in the poor is like kicking away the ladder man.
Quote:
There is a difference between a shift in policies to keep your own money, and a shift in policy to get handouts that others have to pay for
Quote:
Things that are a fundamental right in other nations aren't handouts. They improve the standard of living for all.
And lobbyists and politicians in the hands of big business is terrible. How do you see it as an individual rational self interest?
What do you guys count as welfare? TANF is the only thing that actually counted as real welfare in this country. The rest is mandatory spending.
We have 83+ means tested welfare programs.
TANF is but one of them and the only one with a limitation.
SNAP is not mandatory spending.
The 7 different milk programs are not mandatory spending.
HEAP is not mandatory spending.
None of the means tested welfare programs are mandatory spending.
You breaking out of homelessness and ragging in the poor is like kicking away the ladder man.
Things that are a fundamental right in other nations aren't handouts. They improve the standard of living for all.
And lobbyists and politicians in the hands of big business is terrible. How do you see it as an individual rational self interest?
So what is your answer to eliminating poverty ?
Expand the welfare programs and give them more money ?
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.