mbewane
Knicks: 93 til infinity
I'm sure the effects of cutting off food stamps will trickle down to the poor 
Republicans Try to Cut Food Stamps as 15% of U.S. Households Face Hunger
- Thread starter No1
- Start date
88m3
Fast Money & Foreign Objects
Julius Skrrvin
I be winkin' through the scope
make posts about how people going hungry will be good for them brehs
Nothin like hunger to get a man movin.
okay....enough of the childish, maladjusted, oversimplified, socio-economic analytic. Its adult time now.
You're a serious economic mind, correct? Well please interpret this graph for me. Pay special attention to the relationship between tax rates, the shocks of economic depressions in the 1920s, and 2008, the overall economic distributions of wealth, and the percentage of income trends that go to the very wealthy over time:
http://acivilamericandebate.com/2011/04/10/the-30-year-growth-of-income-inequality/
Keep in mind Im divorcing morality based responsibility here as a society....im simply talking about the health of an economy
To further flesh out....what does this video explain to you?
First off this professor(who did the video/study) is approaching economics from with a zero sum outlook, which is known to be false. He also thinks wealth is "distributed" which it isnt despite liberal attempts to make it seem so. He also uses a lot of catch words like "fair" and "right" and references what we would like it to be and what we think it should be, all subjective measurements.But he is a professor so we'll assume he is 100% correct.
Now, libertarians are just as appalled by wealth inequality in this country, we just disagree with the causation, and reject socialism as the answer--on economic and moral grounds, the latter being more of an issue.
Just because I dont want you to forcibly take money from a law abiding citizen and give it to some one else, doesnt mean i dont care about one of them
, it means i care about both of them.
Now, libertarians are just as appalled by wealth inequality in this country, we just disagree with the causation, and reject socialism as the answer--on economic and moral grounds, the latter being more of an issue.
Just because I dont want you to forcibly take money from a law abiding citizen and give it to some one else, doesnt mean i dont care about one of them
For the sake of accuracy, the video and longitudinal study are from two different sources, and not "one professor". The former is simply a video that analyzes a study conducted by the harvard business review, on what americans think the quantitative measures of wealth inequality are in the US, what they think it should be, and what it actually is. You completely butchered the whole point of the video.
And to that larger point, your overall response is pretty unserious. Why the fck are you talking about socialism, and "stealing", in reference to our system of taxation? Do you know what socialism is? To qualify taxing as "stealing" is really unsophisticated at best. I was expecting a reasoned interpretation of our economic history, and how the health of our economy has acted in concordance w/ various policies over the years, and our approaches to different economic models. Im getting some warned over fox news b.s.
Taxation is legal theft, but that another conversation all together.
I am referencing the entire premise that wealth in this country is "distributed" in the first place, and calling it incorrect. There isn't a pie that's being divided up as many people are led to believe.
Its important to hash out where wealth comes from before we get into where it is/has been/or should be going...
House GOP votes to cut $39 billion from food stamp program
In Plain Sight
-
Thu Sep 19, 2013 1:42 PM EDT
K.Vineys / AP
Chart shows federal food stamp participation since 1969
By Frank Thorp and Carrie Dann, NBC News
With only Republicans voting in support, the GOP-led House passed a bill Thursday to reduce spending for food stamps by $39 billion over 10 years.
The vote was 217-210. No Democrats voted for the measure.
Fifteen Republicans voted against the bill, which the Congressional Budget Office estimates will result in the loss of benefits for an estimated 3.8 million people in 2014.
The bill now goes to the Senate, where a bicameral panel is expected to drastically reduce the amount of cuts to food stamp programs when lawmakers meld it with the legislation passed in the upper chamber.
Republican leaders dispute that the bill “cuts” nearly $40 billion from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) saying it instead eliminates loopholes that have allowed ineligible Americans to continue receiving the benefits.
Many rank-and-file Republicans say that while the SNAP reductions may be deep, they see the food stamp bill mostly as a starting point to blend with the Senate’s version of the legislation, which would result in much more moderate cuts.
But some in the GOP think the food stamp reductions go too deep.
"I just think on balance it's not a good bill," said Rep. Peter King, R-N.Y. who intends to vote against the measure. "Against the whole backdrop of a government shutdown, I just think it's too much."
Iowa Rep. Steve King debates possible cuts to the food stamp program, saying that costs have soared, and reduced spending on the program saying needy people won't be taken off the program, and food won't come out of the mouths of babes.
House Democrats have excoriated the Republican plan.
"A very, very substantial number of families in the richest country on the face of the earth will be adversely affected by the bill, and I expect Democrats to oppose it overwhelmingly," House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer, D-Md., said. "It again is carrying out the agenda of the most hardline factions of the Republican Party."
Wielding a steak, a bottle of vodka and a can of caviar on the House floor, Democratic Rep. Jackie Speier said Republicans who support the cuts are the beneficiaries of generous stipends for overseas travel.
"They somehow feel like crusaders, like heroes when they vote to cut food stamps," she said of GOP backers of the cuts. "Some of these same members travel to foreign countries under the guise of official business. They dine at lavish restaurants, eating steak, vodka and even caviar."
The measure was previously stripped out of a larger farm bill that passed the House in July. GOP leaders were forced to split the bill after conservatives pushed for deeper cuts as Democrats defected, saying the food stamp cuts would hurt poor families.
One of the provisions in the bill expected to pass the House today would toughen work requirements for food stamps, specifically for "able-bodied adults without dependents" between the ages of 18 and 50.
The House bill will require states to only give food stamp benefits to beneficiaries in this group if they obtain employment, participate in job training activities, or perform voluntary community service actives in exchange for those benefits.
The CBO estimates that provision will result in at least 1.7 million people losing benefits in 2014, and an average of 1 million people losing benefits per year over the next 10 years.
The budget agency also calculates that the number of food stamp recipients will be reduced dramatically over the next 10 years, from 48 million in 2014 to 34 million in 2023. But those changes would be due not only to the Republican bill, but an economy expected to rebound during that time.
Anyone co-signing this has lost their mind.
In Plain Sight
-
Thu Sep 19, 2013 1:42 PM EDT
K.Vineys / AP
Chart shows federal food stamp participation since 1969
By Frank Thorp and Carrie Dann, NBC News
With only Republicans voting in support, the GOP-led House passed a bill Thursday to reduce spending for food stamps by $39 billion over 10 years.
The vote was 217-210. No Democrats voted for the measure.
Fifteen Republicans voted against the bill, which the Congressional Budget Office estimates will result in the loss of benefits for an estimated 3.8 million people in 2014.
The bill now goes to the Senate, where a bicameral panel is expected to drastically reduce the amount of cuts to food stamp programs when lawmakers meld it with the legislation passed in the upper chamber.
Republican leaders dispute that the bill “cuts” nearly $40 billion from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) saying it instead eliminates loopholes that have allowed ineligible Americans to continue receiving the benefits.
Many rank-and-file Republicans say that while the SNAP reductions may be deep, they see the food stamp bill mostly as a starting point to blend with the Senate’s version of the legislation, which would result in much more moderate cuts.
But some in the GOP think the food stamp reductions go too deep.
"I just think on balance it's not a good bill," said Rep. Peter King, R-N.Y. who intends to vote against the measure. "Against the whole backdrop of a government shutdown, I just think it's too much."
Iowa Rep. Steve King debates possible cuts to the food stamp program, saying that costs have soared, and reduced spending on the program saying needy people won't be taken off the program, and food won't come out of the mouths of babes.
House Democrats have excoriated the Republican plan.
"A very, very substantial number of families in the richest country on the face of the earth will be adversely affected by the bill, and I expect Democrats to oppose it overwhelmingly," House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer, D-Md., said. "It again is carrying out the agenda of the most hardline factions of the Republican Party."
Wielding a steak, a bottle of vodka and a can of caviar on the House floor, Democratic Rep. Jackie Speier said Republicans who support the cuts are the beneficiaries of generous stipends for overseas travel.
"They somehow feel like crusaders, like heroes when they vote to cut food stamps," she said of GOP backers of the cuts. "Some of these same members travel to foreign countries under the guise of official business. They dine at lavish restaurants, eating steak, vodka and even caviar."
The measure was previously stripped out of a larger farm bill that passed the House in July. GOP leaders were forced to split the bill after conservatives pushed for deeper cuts as Democrats defected, saying the food stamp cuts would hurt poor families.
One of the provisions in the bill expected to pass the House today would toughen work requirements for food stamps, specifically for "able-bodied adults without dependents" between the ages of 18 and 50.
The House bill will require states to only give food stamp benefits to beneficiaries in this group if they obtain employment, participate in job training activities, or perform voluntary community service actives in exchange for those benefits.
The CBO estimates that provision will result in at least 1.7 million people losing benefits in 2014, and an average of 1 million people losing benefits per year over the next 10 years.
The budget agency also calculates that the number of food stamp recipients will be reduced dramatically over the next 10 years, from 48 million in 2014 to 34 million in 2023. But those changes would be due not only to the Republican bill, but an economy expected to rebound during that time.
Anyone co-signing this has lost their mind.
And what service exactly are these welfare recipients providing that I should be ok with paying for?