Politics House Republicans Cut SNAP

Do you want me to review the above and look for the flaws? Do you simply take this at face value? How does the logic work - one type of dollar returned into the economy by government does one thing and a different dollar does another? And it is due to the fact that people don't spend tax savings, but they spend food assistance dollars??? I have a thought if we increase consumption of corn, compared to increasing our consumption of automobiles, what would have the bigger impact economically? On employment? No farmer is going to hire anyone to increase corn production. Auto makers may hire people to make more cars - or maybe not, but certainly this is worth thinking about and a factor in a multiplier. I bet that might be your flaw without even looking at the methodology.
--- merged: Nov 11, 2013 at 8:34 AM ---

You present false alternatives.

 

I would suggest you read the CBO's analysis of the multiplier effect of the Bush tax cuts as well as its contribution to the current debt...as opposed to SNAP spending.

 

We'll be lucky if SNAP is the biggest program they cut into. I work at Head Start and already we've been cut back. 1,000 less kids are getting the care & meals available in the program in NE Ohio. Some are homeless. Many have disabilities.
It's getting sadder by the month.

 

Oh, those kids are probably just lazy sponges sucking on the teats of hard working 'real Americans.' They should get jobs if they want to eat. Actually in this economy if they want to eat and live indoors they should get two jobs.

 

Maybe it's time for a Swift and modest proposal?

 

Who's defining this concept of "free market?"

 

It is a straw man carrying one bag of groceries when 24 bags are needed.



Food benefits from federal nutrition programs amounted to $96.9 billion in 2011 compared to $4.1 billion distributed by charitable organizations (churches, food banks and other private charities) in the same time period. In other words, federal nutrition programs delivered more than 23 times the amount of food as did charities.

And it is not like private charities are overflowing with funding these days. They certainly aren't in a position to replace $4 billion/year in cuts (requiring doubling their current level of funding).

 

Giving the lower and middle classes more buying power is never, ever a bad thing. All that wage increase will go directly back into th economy.

Giving more tax cuts to rich people who won't spend the money they're saving is pants-on-head retarded

 

Glad that I know you're always kidding & very sarcastic!
--- merged: Nov 14, 2013 at 5:42 PM ---

Man - the "smoke" in Mexico must be powerful.

 

I don't smoke anything. Used to smoke fish and wild game but quit when I moved south.

And you know there's a GOP out of Utah (?) who recently proposed we do away with all child labor laws. I forget his reasoning but remember thinking "what the hell, wonder if he wants that for his children?" when I read it.

 

The House passed a farm bill today, with cuts of $8 billion in SNAP funding....far less than the $40 billion the Republicans wanted, but more than the $4 billion that was the Democrat target.

As it notes, "It’s hardly a progressive breakthrough, but the compromise largely mitigates the most offensive provisions of the House GOP bill."

With compromise, no one is entirely satisfied or in the words of the Rolling Stones, "you cant always get what you want, but you get what you need" and the need is to protect the most vulnerable first.

It should pass through the Senate by the end of the week.

 

So congrats, then?

 

No. I wouldnt go that far.

With $800+ million in cuts per year, nearly 1 million working families may still lose their SNAP benefits while fat cat agri-businesses will still reap $millions even with the most significant reform that eliminates direct payment subsidies for crops they are not even growing.

No family in America should ever go hungry or be forced into choosing between food and other household expenses. But the political reality is that a better bill that puts families over corporate interests would never pass the House.