Work for food stamps? What a novel idea

[C N Red]

double post

[C N Red]

http://www.cnsnews.com/commentary/rachel-sheffield/when-kansas-instituted-work-requirements-get-food-stamps-guess-what

[NUance]

Once work requirements were established, thousands of food stamp recipients moved into the workforce, promoting income gains and a decrease in poverty. Forty percent of the individuals who left the food stamp ranks found employment within three months, and about 60 percent found employment within a year.

 

 

Heh, imagine that!

[NUtopia]

Having a decent paying job to support yourself is definitely preferable to gov't cheese.

 

FTR, SNAP, WIC, TANF, etc are by and large administered thru J.P. Morgan Chase Bank--EBT card--which means the banksters are probably receiving nearly as much welfare(thru interest) as the poor, hungry folk. I say the banksters should work for it!

 

JP Morgan’s Food Stamp Empire

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/10/01/jp-morgan-s-food-stamp-empire.html

[ZRod]

Double post oreos!

[cm husker]

Food stamps are a form of corporate welfare, no doube about it.

 

It's one of the prime examples of where the welfare state goes all wrong. Here's how it works:

 

1. We subsidize corporate agriculture to keep not produce (i.e., keep supply down), therefore artificially driving up the cost of food (while also costing taxpayers money in paying for such subsidies).

 

2. We turn around and subsidize welfare/food stamps to purchase food that is artificially more expensive than a free market would dictate (that's also a corporate payoff, though it's pushed under the guise of helping low income people).

 

Note, I used "low income" because our welfare system can actually benefit wealth people who have low incomes, not just "poor" people.

 

Looking at this, who wins? The corporate agriculture industry, mainly, and too a lesser degree low income people who are able to purchase

 

Who gets screwed? The common taxpayer who has to fund not only the subsidies described in 1 and 2, but also pay for artificially expensive food!

 

This is only one example in a system replete with things that screw the middle class income earner.

[C N Red]

No, red velvet oreos. They're frickin good, imo.

[ZRod]

Haven't tried em, don't know if my sexy body can afford to. I love the golden ones though.

[C N Red]

Haven't tried em, don't know if my sexy body can afford to. I love the golden ones though.

The cupcake ones are actually fairly good. The cinnabon ones aren't too bad. The strawberry shortcake ones are horrible imo. The Red Velvet ones may be better than the OGs. Yes, I do have to workout ALOT.

[Moiraine]

I only skimmed the article but Nebraska has required a minimum of 20 hours work or community service in order to get snaps for awhile now.

[NUance]

NOTE: Some of the posts above may seem out of order. C N Red accidentally made two identical threads. Both had posts from others in them when I combined them.

[ZRod]

NOTE: Some of the posts above may seem out of order. C N Red accidentally made two identical threads. Both had posts from others in them when I combined them.

 

Lol did you even read the other thread NUance? You coda delted it hahaha!

[NUance]

 

NOTE: Some of the posts above may seem out of order. C N Red accidentally made two identical threads. Both had posts from others in them when I combined them.

Lol did you even read the other thread NUance? You coda delted it hahaha!

 

 

I just couldn't bring myself to delete your witty banter!

 

(Actually, I didn't read it. lol)

[ZRod]

 

 

NOTE: Some of the posts above may seem out of order. C N Red accidentally made two identical threads. Both had posts from others in them when I combined them.

 

Lol did you even read the other thread NUance? You coda delted it hahaha!

I just couldn't bring myself to delete your witty banter!

 

(Actually, I didn't read it. lol)

It's cool I didn't bother to make a coherent sentence.

[84HuskerLaw]

Food stamps are a form of corporate welfare, no doube about it.

 

It's one of the prime examples of where the welfare state goes all wrong. Here's how it works:

 

1. We subsidize corporate agriculture to keep not produce (i.e., keep supply down), therefore artificially driving up the cost of food (while also costing taxpayers money in paying for such subsidies).

 

2. We turn around and subsidize welfare/food stamps to purchase food that is artificially more expensive than a free market would dictate (that's also a corporate payoff, though it's pushed under the guise of helping low income people).

 

Note, I used "low income" because our welfare system can actually benefit wealth people who have low incomes, not just "poor" people.

 

Looking at this, who wins? The corporate agriculture industry, mainly, and too a lesser degree low income people who are able to purchase

 

Who gets screwed? The common taxpayer who has to fund not only the subsidies described in 1 and 2, but also pay for artificially expensive food!

 

This is only one example in a system replete with things that screw the middle class income earner.

There was a time, about 20 years ago or so, when federal farm programs and regulations did tend to have a production control and limitation aspect as there was a worldwide glut and oversupply of most basic farm commodities, such as corn, wheat, pork, chicken, beef, wheat, and a few others. But the days of over production are long gone and have been for about 10 years now. Federal farm programs which are principally involved with production of commodities which are the 'raw goods' from which most foods are derived today have NOT restricted production significantly. In fact, farmers are encouraged and even PAID (small but not insignificant) sums to produce. We are NOT paying farmers (large or small or any size in between) to NOT produce. In fact, farmers have been producing "fence row to fence row" (i.e. planting every available acre) and maximizing yields and output for decades. Therefore, arguing that government farm programs are "welfare to corporate agriculture" is NOT correct.

Within the lesser commodities (milk, fruits and veggies, etc), some subsidies and controls exist to prevent dramatic production shifts from year to year from one crop to another in overreaction to price changes due to drought and other supply impacts. NONE of these can reasonably be argued to have caused anything but a continuation of the governments' so called "Cheap Food Policies" which have for many generations encourage over production and dramatic over supply of most basic food commodities in order to create an abundant and artificially cheap food supply for American consumers. Farmers have been the economic 'whipping boys' for the cheap food policies keeping them in many years from earning a significant economic profit for their enterprises.

Food stamps are NOT corporate welfare but government enviornmental and other regulations of production agriculture are in fact corporate welfare for the big chemical and seed and other agricultural SUPPLY firms that sell products to their captive buyers (farmers).