Quote:
Originally Posted by dogzilla
Even if it was another trillion dollars over 6 years and Obama isn't playing simialr games with other budget items, Obama has doubled the deficit per year over that.
|
There has only been one year (FY 10) under an Obama administration budget and as I noted, the deficit was lower the previous year....so I dont where you get your numbers that Obama has doubled the deficit per year.
Quote:
|
Whether they affect people or not, they need to be cut. Entitlements are getting out of hand. Case in point being the increase in the food stamp programs over the past few years.
|
The SNAP program (food stamps) is probably one of the more stimulative programs.
A WSJ column explains it well.
Quote:
The president's stimulus plan has been aimed primarily at the top of the economy, pumping money into banks and car companies and state and city governments. But it also has put more money into the hands of the poorest Americans by boosting monthly food-stamp allocations. Starting in April, a family of four on food stamps received an average of $80 extra.
Money from the program -- officially known as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program -- percolates quickly through the economy. The U.S. Department of Agriculture calculates that for every $5 of food-stamp spending, there is $9.20 of total economic activity, as grocers and farmers pay their employees and suppliers, who in turn shop and pay their bills.
While other stimulus money has been slow to circulate, the food-stamp boost is almost immediate, with 80% of the benefits being redeemed within two weeks of receipt and 97% within a month, the USDA says.
Boost in Food-Stamp Funding Percolates Through Economy - WSJ.com
|
Or this from CNN - Moody's Economy.com:
Quote:
The industry research firm Moody's Economy.com tracked the potential impact of each stimulus dollar, looking at tax rebates, tax incentives for business, food stamps and expanding unemployment benefits.
The report found that "some provide a lot of bang for the buck to the economy. Others ... don't," said economist Mark Zandi.
In findings echoed by other economists and studies, he said the study shows the fastest way to infuse money into the economy is through expanding the food-stamp program. For every dollar spent on that program $1.73 is generated throughout the economy, he said.
"If someone who is literally living paycheck to paycheck gets an extra dollar, it's very likely that they will spend that dollar immediately on whatever they need - groceries, to pay the telephone bill, to pay the electric bill," he said.
Tracking that single dollar spent through the economic chain shows what economists call the ripple effect, Zandi said. For example, that dollar spent at the grocery store in turn helps to pay the salaries of the grocery clerks, pays the truckers who haul the food and produce cross-country, and finally goes to the farmer who grows the crops.
The report pointed to expanding unemployment benefits as the program that gets the next biggest bang for the buck. That's because, although the unemployed are already getting checks, they need to spend the money. For every dollar spent here, the economy would see a return of $1.64, Zandi said.
http://money.cnn.com/2008/01/29/news...ysis/index.htm
|
So you dont think people who become unemployed through no fault of their own should get temporary food assistance? even the kids? And no more unemployment insurance? Too bad if you're out of work and cant afford to pay your mortgage or feed your family?
Nearly 1/3 of the total stimulus package was for these type assistance programs...the most effective third...not only temporarily helping people in need, but providing the best stimulus as well.
And how would you cut Medicare? Or how will seniors otherwise get affordable health care from the private sector who has no interest or willingness to take on that highest risk group?