Boo Radley
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2009
- Messages
- 37,066
- Reaction score
- 7,028
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Liberal
And if this s the case, then I would have no real concerns.
While I agree that increased food stamp recipients is a bad thing, I really don't see why this is a death knell for the US.
Among other things:
• NYC has a balanced budget -- despite the increase in food stamp spending. In fact, NYC's budget is required by law to balance, and surpluses are held to cover for future deficits. Does YOUR city or state do that? (Answer: Almost certainly not. Few cities or states require balanced budgets.)
• New York State pays more in federal tax revenues than it receives in services. Does YOUR state do that? (Answer: 50% of states pay more than they receive. Many so-called "red" states like KY, VA, AL, LA, AZ etc receive significantly more funding than they pay back in taxes.)
• Public assistance and SSI have been flat in NYC for years:
• The benefits aren't that generous. 1 person gets $200 a month, or $50 a week, or $6 a day, or $2 per meal. Helpful as a supplement, difficult if that's all you've got. Ever try to live off of $6 a day? We're talking beans and rice, not steak and lobster.
And food can cost 10-20% more in NYC than in many other cities. So go on, take the Food Stamp Challenge! See if you can live off of a food budget of $180 a week. Maybe we can make a fad diet out of it, 'cause you will almost certainly lose some weight. :mrgreen:
• The cutoff for food stamps in NYC is (iirc) around $14,000/year. Due to the cost of living, if you live in Brooklyn, that's the equivalent of $8,000/yr in Dallas or Kansas City, or $9,500 in Chicago.
• Bloomberg is a social moderate and an environmentalist, but a fiscal conservative.
In fact, one of the ways NYC saves a lot of money is by focusing on the kinds of environmental issues which reduce the city's energy costs.
So again, while I do see increases in food stamps as a bad thing, and hope it will drop back to normal rates as the economy picks up, it sounds an awful lot like the heathens of NYC are still keeping their budget much more in line than most other cities, that other forms of assistance haven't increased anywhere near as much, and the benefits are not especially generous.
I.e. unless the mere mention of "food stamps" makes you break out in hives, I don't see why this is anything more than an indicator that NYC and the US are still dealing with the effects of the recession.
What a failure progressive policy is....
Just remember who to blame when this all collapses....
What a failure progressive policy is....
Just remember who to blame when this all collapses....
Apparently, quite a few people.Yep. It all looks so good and fair on paper, yet who would be a construction worker, exposed to hard work outside when the same "wages" are offered for a nice safe, comfortable McJob or Walmart greeter position?
But the same wages are not. Minimum wage is still well below those professions. But let me ask you this: how do you value labor? In the 80's, I make $3.50 an hour (and was only paid for 10 of every 24 hours I worked) as a paramedic. At the time, the person hold the stop sign at the construction job made $10 an hour. If you needed emergency care, how much would I be worth?
Nice chat, but that ignores the point that I made. If the minimum wage worker is given $300/month in tax free food stamps then they get $1200/month in paychecks plus free food for $1500/month total pay, or effectively a 25% "pay raise", over the minimum wage worker that does not qualify for those food stamps.
Kind of reminds of how Government's involvement in healthcare is making costs skyrocket so fast more and more people depend on the government, increasing costs more to the point that Universal Health Care is inevitable... because back when doctors made cheap house calls wasn't fair enough.
**** your stupid drug war, prohibition causes more problems and solves nothing.
Yep. It all looks so good and fair on paper, yet who would be a construction worker, exposed to hard work outside when the same "wages" are offered for a nice safe, comfortable McJob or Walmart greeter position? Doctor = McWorker = lawyer = carpenter = truck driver = waiter teacher = chef = farmer = CEO; they all get that same gov't defined "living wage" and will accept and like it because it is "fair".
I couldn't agree more. I believe in order to receive assistance they should be required to do some type of community service. Pick up trash, Plant tree's, work at an apple orchard. Give them something to do beisides sit around and wait for a check. This would likely curb some of the criminal activities we have.
Since the alternative to a living wage is a dying
wage, we can see immediately where the right comes from on this. In a crashed economy where there are no jobs, or at least far fewer jobs than workers, then without welfare those having no work, starve.
So does the government.Walmart teaches its employees how to apply for food stamps.
Well it depends on why their on asstance my step sister's father is blind and on assitance
Make passing a drug test a requirment for food stamps garentee you those numbers will drop
I am certainly not speaking of someone in your Step Sister's fathers condition. I have absolutely no issue with people who have a genuine handicap receiving assistance. I have an Aunt that is mentally handicapped and receives assistance.
In fact I feel these are the only reasons people should get permanent assistance. Those that fall on hard times should only be eligible for short term assistance. These programs are being abused by the dregs of society and make it difficult for those who really need it to receive or survive off of it.
Thanks for clarifaction
I am certainly not speaking of someone in your Step Sister's fathers condition. I have absolutely no issue with people who have a genuine handicap receiving assistance. I have an Aunt that is mentally handicapped and receives assistance.
In fact I feel these are the only reasons people should get permanent assistance. Those that fall on hard times should only be eligible for short term assistance. These programs are being abused by the dregs of society and make it difficult for those who really need it to receive or survive off of it.
Most people on food stamps get off after one year. (Fox Ignores Food Stamp Facts To Push "Dependency" Myth | Research | Media Matters for America)
So does the government.
That has to do with qualifications. But $1500 a month is hardly matching the professions you listed. Which is what I responded too. No one is getting rich on minimum wage.
That's not how the concept of a living wage works.
Again you missed the point. Since a minimum (or low) wage worker need not actually improve their education or productivity to earn more, as now they simply "qualify" for more by adding dependents, that does not encourage them to do so. What it does encourage, however, is simply voting for folks promising to keep that little reward for failure in place or, better yet, to increase it.
It sustained Obama's first term and won him a second. 94% of congress critters won re-election in 2012. It is sustainable until the voters say otherwise. I agree that things will be very, very out of control when "austerity day" finally comes, yet until then, it is not a problem politically. The gov't gets bigger and the rich get richer, when (not if) the deal goes bad then the rich still have many options that the rest of us lack.
That has to do with qualifications. But $1500 a month is hardly matching the professions you listed. Which is what I responded too. No one is getting rich on minimum wage.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?