Food Stamps - The Black Hole

[iluvatar5150]

2. The last 3 months of this year all 3 show a M/M increase, not a flat line.

That's why I said "almost zero."

3. Even if the line was flat, there has been no improvement, and we still have a record number of Americans on food stamps.

Do you understand the math I'm talking about?

-Dan.

 

[Jeffwhosoever]

That's why I said "almost zero."



Do you understand the math I'm talking about?

-Dan.

Yes, I had 4 calculus classes in college including differential equations in my undergraduate studies, then took 2 post-graduate courses in statistics.

 

[motherprayer]

First...when people have jobs they don't need food stamps. Romney is the one that can do that for America....Obama hasn't and won't.

I would just like to address this. With all due respect, I have a full time job, and I receive food stamps. I need them. I am the sole provider for a family of four, and my husband has congestive heart failure, so until his disability comes in he has no income.

It is not jobs that people need, but affordable expenses. After paying for rent and utilities I am left with roughly enough cash to pay for food for half the month. Without food stamps, we would be pretty stuck.

I'm not a supporter of Obama or Romney, though, and partly because I do not see a reasonable solution coming from either side.

 

[iluvatar5150]

Yes, I had 4 calculus classes in college including differential equations in my undergraduate studies, then took 2 post-graduate courses in statistics.

Great, then you know that the forces on this line are pushing it downward, which means that things are, in fact, getting better than they were when forces were pushing it upward.

-Dan.

 

[1whirlwind]

I would just like to address this. With all due respect, I have a full time job, and I receive food stamps. I need them. I am the sole provider for a family of four, and my husband has congestive heart failure, so until his disability comes in he has no income.

It is not jobs that people need, but affordable expenses. After paying for rent and utilities I am left with roughly enough cash to pay for food for half the month. Without food stamps, we would be pretty stuck.

I'm not a supporter of Obama or Romney, though, and partly because I do not see a reasonable solution coming from either side.

You should consider supporting Romney. I agree that we need "affordable expenses" and the leading cause of the unaffordable ones we presently have....gas for transportation, energy cost for our homes, food to feed our families...is all tied to the price of oil.


Obama: My Plan Makes Electricity Rates Skyrocket - YouTube

► 1:04► 1:04​

​

Obama: My Plan Makes Electricity Rates Skyrocket - YouTubeMar 18, 2009 - 1 min - Uploaded by BattleBornPAC
Barack Obama: "Under my plan of a cap and trade system, electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket ...




His policies, his "green energy" and PROMISE of skyrocketing costs is now realized. It is what we are presently experiencing.

If you don't like it then you must do what you can....vote Romney/Ryan.

 

[Jeffwhosoever]

If you don't like it then you must do what you can....vote Romney/Ryan.

Exactly!

 

[abysmul]

Obviously they should have to sell all their possessions except for the bare necessities if they run into any kind of financial trouble. We should strive to make financial hardship as costly and traumatic as possible and ending food stamps is just one way to make that happen.

Why isn't their first reaction to sell of luxuries and non necessities before expecting the rest of the working population to provide them food stamps so they can keep their several hundred dollar purses and designer clothing and such?

Countless Americans are living on the edge, working hard, paying their taxes, yet it's getting harder and harder in this economy and a big part of the problem is the run away entitlements and crushing government and debt. There are millions of working tax paying citizens (paying for those food stamps) that may never be able to afford one of those purses or to even travel to a Lord and Taylor store (let alone buy anything there), yet how DARE THEY expect someone to sacrifice a designer purse or outfit?

Sorry I don't understand that way of thinking.

 

[motherprayer]

You should consider supporting Romney. I agree that we need "affordable expenses" and the leading cause of the unaffordable ones we presently have....gas for transportation, energy cost for our homes, food to feed our families...is all tied to the price of oil.

Obama: My Plan Makes Electricity Rates Skyrocket - YouTube


? 1:04? 1:04
Obama: My Plan Makes Electricity Rates Skyrocket - YouTubeMar 18, 2009 - 1 min - Uploaded by BattleBornPAC
Barack Obama: "Under my plan of a cap and trade system, electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket ...

His policies, his "green energy" and PROMISE of skyrocketing costs is now realized. It is what we are presently experiencing.

If you don't like it then you must do what you can....vote Romney/Ryan.

That's the thing, though. Romney won't even tough the section of the populace I reside in, that 47% who "will vote for Obama because they rely on government assistance." Uh, even though I won't vote for Obama :-/

So he isn't even offering a promise to me to help people in my situation if he gets to office, unless I missed something.

Obama is not offering much hope of a bright future either.

Me? I'm stuck in the middle, realizing how little both candidates have to offer the lower middle class, while also being aware that, short of a miracle, one of them will take office at the election.

 

[Jeffwhosoever]

Everyone is helped by turning the economy around. It's a win/win proposition.

 

[abysmul]

Everyone is helped by turning the economy around. It's a win/win proposition.

The only way to effect REAL and lasting change in the economy is to eviscerate the ponderous federal government... too many people are invested in that and can't see win/win if you touch their government spending (both citizens and politicians).

 

[1whirlwind]

That's the thing, though. Romney won't even tough the section of the populace I reside in, that 47% who "will vote for Obama because they rely on government assistance." Uh, even though I won't vote for Obama :-/

So he isn't even offering a promise to me to help people in my situation if he gets to office, unless I missed something.

Obama is not offering much hope of a bright future either.

Me? I'm stuck in the middle, realizing how little both candidates have to offer the lower middle class, while also being aware that, short of a miracle, one of them will take office at the election.

Motherprayer, you must consider....the "47%" that "vote for Obama" because of "government assistance," are very near the 50% mark. How long is that sustainable? Do you or anyone else expect half of this nation to be able to do that and for how long?

Romney's plan...that WILL help all of us...is to be sure jobs are available in a thriving economy in America. Coupled with that he plans more energy independence which will lower costs we're presently having to pay on many necessities.

Make the comparisons. Look at what Obama promised...look at what we are paying...look at the future plans of both men. There is only one clear choice and that is Romney. For us, our families and our nation there has never been such a clear choice!

 

[1whirlwind]

Why isn't their first reaction to sell of luxuries and non necessities before expecting the rest of the working population to provide them food stamps so they can keep their several hundred dollar purses and designer clothing and such?

Countless Americans are living on the edge, working hard, paying their taxes, yet it's getting harder and harder in this economy and a big part of the problem is the run away entitlements and crushing government and debt. There are millions of working tax paying citizens (paying for those food stamps) that may never be able to afford one of those purses or to even travel to a Lord and Taylor store (let alone buy anything there), yet how DARE THEY expect someone to sacrifice a designer purse or outfit?

Sorry I don't understand that way of thinking.

I applaud your way of thinking!

I think our nation needs to simplify things...maybe consider running the government as families...on a budget.

If you spend too much...stop spending. If the item you want to purchase is too expensive...don't buy it. If you owe neighbors...stop borrowing more. Honor your promised payments but be sure those loans carry the lowest fees available. Just as you should get rid of high rates we need to get rid of parasitic governmental abusers and yes, I think there are lots and lots and lots of them.


Or...keep spending while your paycheck gets smaller and smaller. After all, we have children and they'll have children and they can clean up our mess. And too, if they can't then China will own us anyway.


I wonder if we'll be able to fly around like they did in Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon?

 

[mpok1519]

Romney isn't going to turn the economy around with his plan to give the wealthy huge tax breaks. That isn't some magical solution to the problem just because he claims it is.

Question; why is it when a hungry person who applies for assistance they're a mooch but when a wealthy businessman takes advantage of tax breaks they're smart?

 

[1whirlwind]

Romney isn't going to turn the economy around with his plan to give the wealthy huge tax breaks. That isn't some magical solution to the problem just because he claims it is.

Question; why is it when a hungry person who applies for assistance they're a mooch but when a wealthy businessman takes advantage of tax breaks they're smart?

The lie of "huge tax breaks" isn't something you should so readily accept as truth.


Romney: Fewer Tax Deductions for the Wealthy, No Tax Hikes on Middle Class
By Susan Jones
September 10, 2012
Subscribe to Susan Jones's posts

(CNSNews.com) - "We're not going to have high income people pay less of the tax burden than they pay today. That's not what's going to happen," Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney told NBC's "Meet the Press" on Sunday.

"I do want to bring taxes down for middle income people," he said. "In particular, I want middle income Americans not to have to pay taxes on interest and dividends and capital gains."

Asked whether his plan would reduce the deficit, Romney said it would: "And if we limit or eliminate some of the loopholes and deductions at the high end, we keep the current progressivity of the (tax) code and we get the same revenue coming into the government. And one marvelous thing we get is more growth of the economy.

Romney said his tax policy is designed to encourage more hiring: "I'm very concerned that we have 23 million people that are out of work or stopped looking for work or under-employed. And so everything I want to do with regards to taxation follows simple principles, which is bring our rates down to encourage growth, keep revenue up by limiting deductions and exemptions and make sure we don't put any bigger burden on middle income people. In fact, I want to lower the burden on middle income people.

[snip]

Romney: Fewer Tax Deductions for the Wealthy, No Tax Hikes on ...

cnsnews.com › News

 

[DollIsMine]

Why isn't their first reaction to sell of luxuries and non necessities before expecting the rest of the working population to provide them food stamps so they can keep their several hundred dollar purses and designer clothing and such?

Countless Americans are living on the edge, working hard, paying their taxes, yet it's getting harder and harder in this economy and a big part of the problem is the run away entitlements and crushing government and debt. There are millions of working tax paying citizens (paying for those food stamps) that may never be able to afford one of those purses or to even travel to a Lord and Taylor store (let alone buy anything there), yet how DARE THEY expect someone to sacrifice a designer purse or outfit?

Sorry I don't understand that way of thinking.

They already paid into the system via their taxes, no need to sell their lives away if there's a service available which they've already paid for.

 

[abysmul]

They already paid into the system via their taxes, no need to sell their lives away if there's a service available which they've already paid for.

Oh, so foodstamps are only for those that have paid into the system? If you've never paid you don't get any, and you only get what you paid in?

 

[DollIsMine]

Oh, so foodstamps are only for those that have paid into the system? If you've never paid you don't get any, and you only get what you paid in?

No, those who haven't yet paid still deserve support if it's needed, but in that particular those those people had already paid in to the system so they deserve support without qualification.

 

[mpok1519]

And you believe what he says despite his constant flip floppery? He has consistently supported the bush-era tax breaks for the wealthy.

And as for the other part of my post? How would you address that?

Why is a starving person on public assistance a mooch but the wealthy who take advantage of tax breaks are just smart businessmen?

The lie of "huge tax breaks" isn't something you should so readily accept as truth.


Romney: Fewer Tax Deductions for the Wealthy, No Tax Hikes on Middle Class
By Susan Jones
September 10, 2012
Subscribe to Susan Jones's posts

(CNSNews.com) - "We're not going to have high income people pay less of the tax burden than they pay today. That's not what's going to happen," Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney told NBC's "Meet the Press" on Sunday.

"I do want to bring taxes down for middle income people," he said. "In particular, I want middle income Americans not to have to pay taxes on interest and dividends and capital gains."

Asked whether his plan would reduce the deficit, Romney said it would: "And if we limit or eliminate some of the loopholes and deductions at the high end, we keep the current progressivity of the (tax) code and we get the same revenue coming into the government. And one marvelous thing we get is more growth of the economy.

Romney said his tax policy is designed to encourage more hiring: "I'm very concerned that we have 23 million people that are out of work or stopped looking for work or under-employed. And so everything I want to do with regards to taxation follows simple principles, which is bring our rates down to encourage growth, keep revenue up by limiting deductions and exemptions and make sure we don't put any bigger burden on middle income people. In fact, I want to lower the burden on middle income people.

[snip]

Romney: Fewer Tax Deductions for the Wealthy, No Tax Hikes on ...

cnsnews.com › News

 

[abysmul]

No, those who haven't yet paid still deserve support if it's needed, but in that particular those those people had already paid in to the system so they deserve support without qualification.

So we shouldn't expect people to sell of capital (items they own, that are expendable and not necessities) in order to support themselves, they should get it without qualification? I suppose savings accounts, IRA, retirement funds shouldn't be touched either. What about extra cars? That classic 57 Chevy in the garage they never use? What about the jet ski?

 

[DollIsMine]

So we shouldn't expect people to sell of capital (items they own, that are expendable and not necessities) in order to support themselves, they should get it without qualification? I suppose savings accounts, IRA, retirement funds shouldn't be touched either. What about extra cars? That classic 57 Chevy in the garage they never use? What about the jet ski?

They've already paid their insurance premiums as it were so no, they don't need to sell anything to deserve compensation from the services they've already paid for. Just like if you total an insured car you are entitled to a payout regardless of whether or not you have an additional vehicle to drive.

For all my rhetoric against the wealthy I do think that people who have worked hard and saved for their possessions deserve to keep them even if they're unemployed for a time. It's just cruel to ask someone to part with all the fruits of their labor simply because their company decided to move operations to China or whatever.