Food Stamps

A forum not related to waterfowl for discussing the more controversial and hot topic issues in our world from immigration, politics, the war, etc..

Moderators: Smackaduck, MM

Food Stamps

Postby TomKat » Sun Sep 01, 2013 10:03 am

And you said all Republicans were heart less??

Kansas and Missouri officials pushed for creation of the food stamp program
August 31
BY MIKE MCGRAW
The Kansas City Star

Kansas and Missouri played important roles in the formation of the food stamp program.

Bob Dole, a Republican U.S. senator, helped father the modern food stamp program in the 1970s and supported a “marriage of convenience” by putting crop subsidies for farmers and food for the poor in the farm bill.

For decades, urban politicians voted for farm subsidies that benefited rural areas. In return, rural politicians supported food stamps that mainly benefited urban districts.

The first food stamp program began in the late 1930s, mainly to shore up farm prices by getting rid of surpluses.

One avenue for disposing of those surpluses was to give them to the poor.

The program debuted in 1939, the same year the first retailer was caught cheating.

That effort ended in the 1940s but was revived in 1964, thanks largely to the efforts of the late Leonor K. Sullivan, a Democratic member of the U.S. House from St. Louis.

Known as the mother of the food stamp plan, Sullivan forced the program through Congress by threatening to block peanut subsidies important to Southern farmers.

In May 1968, “CBS Reports: Hunger in America” helped prompt Dole and the late Sen. George McGovern, a Democrat, to push for a more generous plan.

But as is the case today, controversy and political bickering surrounded the program.

In 1977, Dole and other Republicans pushed to target benefits to the neediest, simplify administration and tighten controls. Democrats wanted easier access.

In the end, Dole said, “I am confident that this bill eliminates the greedy and feeds the needy.”

Participation hit new highs of 28 million in 1994 and declined throughout the 1990s.

But when restrictions were eased in the current economic decline, participation exploded again, leading to this summer’s food stamp debate.
Image
User avatar
TomKat
Dorothy
 
Posts: 11497
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2010 11:18 am
Location: NE Kansas


Re: Food Stamps

Postby Chilidawg » Wed Sep 04, 2013 5:57 pm

Bob Dole would never get elected in today's republican party.
Chilidawg
hunter
 
Posts: 257
Joined: Mon May 13, 2013 6:24 am

Re: Food Stamps

Postby SpinnerMan » Thu Sep 05, 2013 2:04 pm

MIKE MCGRAW wrote:In return, rural politicians supported food stamps that mainly benefited urban districts.
If that is what benefits look like in urban districts, I can't imagine what harming urban districts would look like. Could you even tell?

Fixed it: In return, rural politicians supported food stamps that mainly benefited urban politicians.

I was in Walmart a couple weeks ago. Anyone that has never seen someone use food stamps recently, it's just a standard debit/credit type card. The person goes up to the register with everything, it all gets scanned, and then they hand the cashier the link card and the computer figures out what is covered (the steak, lobster, etc.) and what is not covered (alcohol, etc.), deducts what is covered and then tells the person what they have to pay out of their pocket. I see this often in the Walmart that is in a nice Chicago suburban neighborhood and I'm not even sure where the "poor" people would live that would drive (yes our poor cannot afford food, but they can afford minivans and SUVs) to that Walmart, although none of them look like money is an issue by the way they are dressed or what they are buying? :huh: Any how, this woman in front of me whips out the link card, the cashier swipes it and tell her she still owes 40 bucks or whatever. Holy freaking crap did she whip out a big role of 20's :eek: She had to have at least a couple thousand dollars in her purse and she just took it out peeled off a couple and tossed it back in like I do with a handful of $1's. The few times I've carried that much cash, I've been paranoid I'm going to lose it and I'm sure as hell not flashing at the check out at Walmart even a suburban one.

I witness all the time that Dole had no clue what he was talking about when he said, “I am confident that this bill eliminates the greedy and feeds the needy.” It did not.
A politician thinks of the next election; a statesman of the next generation. A politician looks for the success of his party; a statesman for that of the country. The statesman wished to steer, while the politician was satisfied to drift.
User avatar
SpinnerMan
hunter
 
Posts: 16325
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 11:24 am
Location: Joliet, IL

Re: Food Stamps

Postby Anoldhuntersc » Mon Sep 09, 2013 8:07 pm

Can't even get started. Not sure but was told 1/2 of all people that voted in election received some sort of
Govt aid! Anyone heard this? Or no anything of.
User avatar
Anoldhuntersc
hunter
 
Posts: 465
Joined: Mon Jan 14, 2013 2:41 pm

Re: Food Stamps

Postby rivercountry » Tue Sep 10, 2013 12:22 pm

Anoldhuntersc wrote:Can't even get started. Not sure but was told 1/2 of all people that voted in election received some sort of
Govt aid! Anyone heard this? Or no anything of.

SURPRISE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
True Happiness is in a flooded rice field puttin em in the decoys
User avatar
rivercountry
hunter
 
Posts: 850
Joined: Sat Jun 09, 2012 2:25 am
Location: North Carolina

Re: Food Stamps

Postby ScaupHunter » Tue Sep 10, 2013 4:45 pm

The numbers on voters on government aid are totally flawed. Social Security, and Medicare are not government aid if you paid into them. They are reimbursements of your investments for the future. Welfare slugs on those systems would qualify but are not anywhere near 50%.
Bella's
Decoy Setting Pro Staff
Boat Operator Pro Staff
Duck Shooting Pro Staff
Warm Towel Pro Staff
Snack Supply Pro Staff

He works for free! Who's the B now?
User avatar
ScaupHunter
hunter
 
Posts: 6704
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2012 5:57 am

Re: Food Stamps

Postby assateague » Tue Sep 10, 2013 5:51 pm

But just counting food stamps at close to 50 million, and that the post was regarding "those who voted" only, I don't have much trouble believing the 50% number could easily be possible. No idea if its true or not, but just based on the numbers, I'd say it would (theoretically) be very possible.
WOLVERINES

Give a man a fish and he eats for a day. Let a man vote to give himself a fish and he eats until society collapses.
User avatar
assateague
Emu hunter extraordinaire
 
Posts: 21277
Joined: Tue Oct 06, 2009 12:25 pm
Location: Eastern Shore, People's Republic of Maryland

Re: Food Stamps

Postby TomKat » Wed Sep 11, 2013 5:03 am

assateague wrote:But just counting food stamps at close to 50 million, and that the post was regarding "those who voted" only, I don't have much trouble believing the 50% number could easily be possible. No idea if its true or not, but just based on the numbers, I'd say it would (theoretically) be very possible.


So in other words, 50/50 of 50% ???
Image
User avatar
TomKat
Dorothy
 
Posts: 11497
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2010 11:18 am
Location: NE Kansas

Re: Food Stamps

Postby SpinnerMan » Wed Sep 11, 2013 6:20 am

ScaupHunter wrote:The numbers on voters on government aid are totally flawed. Social Security, and Medicare are not government aid if you paid into them. They are reimbursements of your investments for the future.
:thumbsup:

However, the big government advocates like to lump them together. That way the double speak makes "welfare" sound like a good thing. Hey, if it's good here, it must be good everywhere. Liberal logic at it's finest.

I had a conversation with a political science professor a month or so ago. At first he claimed that there was no more welfare :eek: :eek: :eek: Yep, Clinton apparently ended the only true welfare. Of course, the silliness of that is obvious, so when that self delusional lie was easily shown to be ridiculous, then he immediately flipped and social security being welfare :fingerhead:

When I pointed out that it was supposed to be you getting paid back what you put in, he argued that we get out way more than we pay in, so it really is just welfare. I told him that I did the math and I'm loosing probably at least $100k if not more. He said he did the math too. So I asked him what he assumed and then it was a lot of himming and haaing and well blah blah blah.

Self delusional. I don't think it is lying. It believe it is self delusion. They can't deal with the psychological impact of being wrong. They have been sitting on the mountain top waiting for the mothership to arrive. It's long over due, but they can't admit that they were wrong, so they have to delude themselves to maintain that unshakable faith they have in central planning and centralized control.

This is a professor that is supposed to seek the truth and not push an agenda. It's really sad, but I think very normal in these exremely soft sciences, if you can even call it a science and not just politics minus the science.

ScaupHunter wrote:Welfare slugs on those systems would qualify but are not anywhere near 50%.
They are working on that.

Of course, this is precisely why social security is NOT an individual retirement account. If they invested the money and it had your name on it, they couldn't take it and piss it away and make you beholden upon future polticians to take money from their kids and grand kids to give to you. If they did it right, the politicians would have not power.
A politician thinks of the next election; a statesman of the next generation. A politician looks for the success of his party; a statesman for that of the country. The statesman wished to steer, while the politician was satisfied to drift.
User avatar
SpinnerMan
hunter
 
Posts: 16325
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 11:24 am
Location: Joliet, IL

Re: Food Stamps

Postby assateague » Wed Sep 11, 2013 8:53 am

TomKat wrote:
assateague wrote:But just counting food stamps at close to 50 million, and that the post was regarding "those who voted" only, I don't have much trouble believing the 50% number could easily be possible. No idea if its true or not, but just based on the numbers, I'd say it would (theoretically) be very possible.


So in other words, 50/50 of 50% ???



Precisely. I'll deliver your shirt in December.
WOLVERINES

Give a man a fish and he eats for a day. Let a man vote to give himself a fish and he eats until society collapses.
User avatar
assateague
Emu hunter extraordinaire
 
Posts: 21277
Joined: Tue Oct 06, 2009 12:25 pm
Location: Eastern Shore, People's Republic of Maryland


Return to Controversial Issues Forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests