welfare vs wages

[GenuineRisk]

The majority of those who receive SNAP benefits are the elderly and children. Which of them would you cut in your "pruning," Dell? The elderly or the children? Or maybe the disabled? Between those three, that's 83 percent of households receiving benefits.

SNAP has less fraud and waste in it than Medicare. How about we cut Medicare instead, and let old people fend for themselves so the rich doctors defrauding Medicare get their just desserts?

Here are a couple of stats about SNAP. More at the link; well worth reading to understand the program a bit:

The average SNAP household has a gross monthly income of $744; net monthly income of $338 after the standard deduction and, for certain households, deductions for child care, medical expenses, and shelter costs; and countable resources of $331, such as a bank account.[iii]
_
Two-thirds of all SNAP payment errors are a result of caseworker error. Nearly one-fifth are underpayments, which occur when eligible participants receive less in benefits than they are eligible to receive.[viii]
_
The average monthly SNAP benefit per person is $133.85, or less than $1.50 per person, per meal.

http://feedingamerica.org/how-we-fig...realities.aspx

But much better to keep farm subsidies going to millionaires who get paid because their rich dad died and left them fallow farmland than to feed poor kids.

[dellinger63]

Originally Posted by GenuineRisk

But much better to keep farm subsidies going to millionaires who get paid because their rich dad died and left them fallow farmland than to feed poor kids.

Or send billions to countries whose majority want Israel annihilated.

I'm not against cutting farm subsidies or even raising taxes but with a debt that may or may not be payable I suggest using the money and a lot of other subsidy/entitlement money in the future to tackling it.

Bottom line is if you believe the economy has gotten better under Obama, the author's assertion that the SNAP rolls will decrease greatly once the economy improves is not only false, it's the opposite of what actually occurred under the very scenario presented in his article.

Cutting farm subsidies and raising taxes just as raising the debt ceiling will do nothing but be wasted unless it's dedicated to paying down the debt.

Obama's analogy of buying a Ford truck on credit and then needing to pay the note each month was fine only he needed to be paying that note on a credit card, asking the bank to raise his credit limit every year, driving that truck down the road throwing money out the windows.

In the real world he'd be cut off.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by GenuineRisk

The majority of those who receive SNAP benefits are the elderly and children. Which of them would you cut in your "pruning," Dell? The elderly or the children? Or maybe the disabled? Between those three, that's 83 percent of households receiving benefits.

SNAP has less fraud and waste in it than Medicare. How about we cut Medicare instead, and let old people fend for themselves so the rich doctors defrauding Medicare get their just desserts?

Here are a couple of stats about SNAP. More at the link; well worth reading to understand the program a bit:


http://feedingamerica.org/how-we-fig...realities.aspx

But much better to keep farm subsidies going to millionaires who get paid because their rich dad died and left them fallow farmland than to feed poor kids.

so, the old, the young, and the disabled.....perhaps euthanasia is the answer, decrease the surplus population. after all, two of the thrre groups dont have much upside.
an added bonus--more money for corporate subsidies.

[Danzig]

http://news.msn.com/us/many-fast-foo...sistance-study

the pro-labor National Employment Law Project found that the 10 largest fast-food companies in the United States cost taxpayers more than $3.8 billion each year in public assistance because the workers do not make enough to pay for basic necessities themselves.


Overall, families with a working member account for 73 percent of all enrollments, amounting to two-thirds of all public benefits spending, the study said.

In other types of service work, such as maintenance, laundry and personal services, the researchers found that one-third of employees are enrolled in public assistance programs, as were about 30 percent of workers in the retail and hospitality sectors.

[dellinger63]

Originally Posted by Danzig

In other types of service work, such as maintenance, laundry and personal services, the researchers found that one-third of employees are enrolled in public assistance programs, as were about 30 percent of workers in the retail and hospitality sectors.[/b]

Not sure what the point of the article is other than pointing out minimum wage workers in the fast food industry receive public assistance at double the rate as other minimum wage workers.

I think many fast food workers are overpaid judging from my few visits to McDonalds.

[dellinger63]

Originally Posted by dellinger63

Not sure what the point of the article is other than pointing out minimum wage workers in the fast food industry receive public assistance at double the rate as other minimum wage workers.

I think many fast food workers are overpaid judging from my few visits to McDonalds.

My apologies to mickey d workers

Four new items in four months? That's only 30 days to learn the new item before you introduce another. Do you know how hard it is to pronounce blueberry pomegranate smoothie much less identify the button you have to push to make it?

http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/...98432499699844

[Danzig]

http://www.slate.com/blogs/moneybox/...employees.html

'But corporate America as a whole has been so successful in squeezing the labor share of national income lower and lower that it's become a substantial constraint to businesses' ability to sell things to people. The cycle of low wages, low demand, weak hiring, weak bargaining power, and low wages just keeps grinding on.'


you'd think corporations would understand that if they paid more, their employees would spend more, thus driving up demand and creating jobs-with more people making money, spending more, etc

[jms62]

Originally Posted by Danzig

http://www.slate.com/blogs/moneybox/...employees.html

'But corporate America as a whole has been so successful in squeezing the labor share of national income lower and lower that it's become a substantial constraint to businesses' ability to sell things to people. The cycle of low wages, low demand, weak hiring, weak bargaining power, and low wages just keeps grinding on.'


you'd think corporations would understand that if they paid more, their employees would spend more, thus driving up demand and creating jobs-with more people making money, spending more, etc

They only need to paint a pretty picture for the next earnings report so they can dump their options into a market being supported by fed dollars. The race to the bottom continues.