Follow by Email

Of Politics, Sports and Sex

OK, so there won't be a LOT on here about sex, but tell the truth, that's most of the reason you entered this site, right? So, I'll slip some things in from time to time just to keep you coming...back.

Total Pageviews

Friday, June 7, 2013

Not exciting stuff, but pretty frustrating

And more on Food Stamps, which I first referenced in the article below this one. This time from Paul Krugman:

Estimates from the consulting firm Moody’s Analytics suggest that each dollar spent on food stamps in a depressed economy raises G.D.P. by about $1.70 — which means, by the way, that much of the money laid out to help families in need actually comes right back to the government in the form of higher revenue.
Wait, we’re not done yet. Food stamps greatly reduce food insecurity among low-income children, which, in turn, greatly enhances their chances of doing well in school and growing up to be successful, productive adults. So food stamps are in a very real sense an investment in the nation’s future — an investment that in the long run almost surely reduces the budget deficit, because tomorrow’s adults will also be tomorrow’s taxpayers.
So what do Republicans want to do with this paragon of programs? First, shrink it; then, effectively kill it.
The shrinking part comes from the latest farm bill ...which...would push about two million people off the program. You should bear in mind, by the way, that one effect of the sequester has been to pose a serious threat to a different but related program that provides nutritional aid to millions of pregnant mothers, infants, and children. Ensuring that the next generation grows up nutritionally deprived — now that’s what I call forward thinking.
And why must food stamps be cut? We can’t afford it, say politicians like Representative Stephen Fincher, a Republican of Tennessee, who backed his position with biblical quotations — and who also, it turns out, has personally received millions in farm subsidies over the years.
Look, I understand the supposed rationale: We’re becoming a nation of takers, and doing stuff like feeding poor children and giving them adequate health care are just creating a culture of dependency — and that culture of dependency, not runaway bankers, somehow caused our economic crisis.
But I wonder whether even Republicans really believe that story — or at least are confident enough in their diagnosis to justify policies that more or less literally take food from the mouths of hungry children. As I said, there are times when cynicism just doesn’t cut it; this is a time to get really, really angry.

1 comment:

  1. yes Jamie I really believe that story...mainly because I heard the effects of the cradle to grave government from a black woman...she was being interview on TV and the interview threw out the line just like you just did that republicans believe women in your community are having more babies just to get more money from the government....the interviewer expected the woman to agree that that was crazy...but she did not...she said, sadly there is no planning for children...what they will need , what the cost will be...she said what they mean to some folks on a bigger paycheck at the end of the month and so they have more kids.

    You may say its the exception Jamie...I say we have created a monster and destroyed lives and opportunity with the handouts....we heard in Detroit a woman on welfare with 24 kids...mainly for the bigger check and government is Detroit doing Jamie....think the destruction of the black society in Detroit might just have some little link to women on welfare having 24 children...what do you think those children are doing on the Detroit streets is their level of education, think they will ever know anything but welfare....that where you bleeding heart policies have taken us....destroyed a society, a people...trillions of dollars spent since Johnsons Great Society to end poverty and what do we have to show for it....liberalisms shining City on a Hill...DETROIT