![]() |
Food Stamps Put Poor Kids on Path to Success - Printable Version +- Cincinnati Bengals Message Board / Forums - Home of Jungle Noise (http://thebengalsboard.com) +-- Forum: Off Topic Forums (http://thebengalsboard.com/Forum-Off-Topic-Forums) +--- Forum: Politics & Religion 2.0 (http://thebengalsboard.com/Forum-Politics-Religion-2-0) +---- Forum: P & R Archive (http://thebengalsboard.com/Forum-P-R-Archive) +---- Thread: Food Stamps Put Poor Kids on Path to Success (/Thread-Food-Stamps-Put-Poor-Kids-on-Path-to-Success) |
Food Stamps Put Poor Kids on Path to Success - GMDino - 12-06-2018 **Opinion Piece** https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2018-12-04/verdict-is-in-food-stamps-put-poor-kids-on-path-to-success Quote:Congress is expected to vote this week on a new farm bill, which includes changes to the food stamp program. Lawmakers should take the time to read up on recent research about the program’s effects. Innovative research has demonstrated convincingly that young children whose families receive food stamps benefit later in life. Doesn't take a brain surgeon to understand that less stress about where (of there will even be) a next meal is coming from leads to better students and better people. But they need save some pennies to ![]() RE: Food Stamps Put Poor Kids on Path to Success - michaelsean - 12-06-2018 (12-06-2018, 11:17 AM)GMDino Wrote: **Opinion Piece** Who is cutting food stamps? According to your link the only thing they wanted to do was to raise the work requirement age and that didn't even pass. RE: Food Stamps Put Poor Kids on Path to Success - GMDino - 12-06-2018 (12-06-2018, 12:49 PM)michaelsean Wrote: Who is cutting food stamps? Last I saw the only thing they wanted to do was to raise the work requirement age and that didn't even pass. Trying to cut the number of people on it. https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/food-stamp-work-requirements_us_5c004486e4b027f1097bdc87 Quote:Over the summer, the Senate passed a bipartisan farm bill that included modest anti-fraud provisions, while the House passed a Republican-only bill with new rules that would have reduced program enrollment by more than 1 million over 10 years. They wisely took it out to get it to pass in the Senate. RE: Food Stamps Put Poor Kids on Path to Success - michaelsean - 12-06-2018 (12-06-2018, 01:00 PM)GMDino Wrote: Trying to cut the number of people on it. So everything worked out like it should. Compromise. What everyone claims to want. Were they trying to cut the number of people on it, or reduce the number of people who needed it? I mean reducing it by 1 million people out of 40 million people over ten years isn't exactly a giant budget savings relatively speaking. The results of the study are interesting, I just don't know why it was necessary to add politics. RE: Food Stamps Put Poor Kids on Path to Success - GMDino - 12-06-2018 (12-06-2018, 02:06 PM)michaelsean Wrote: So everything worked out like it should. Compromise. What everyone claims to want. Were they trying to cut the number of people on it, or reduce the number of people who needed it? I mean reducing it by 1 million people out of 40 million people over ten years isn't exactly a giant budget savings relatively speaking. The politics of it is, as you said, SNAP is a drop in the bucket but always ran out by the GOP has a place that needs constant reform to save us money. Meanwhile the military.... Well, ignore that spending. Any social service gets maligned as riddled with fraud and costing too much by our friends on the right. RE: Food Stamps Put Poor Kids on Path to Success - michaelsean - 12-06-2018 (12-06-2018, 02:15 PM)GMDino Wrote: The politics of it is, as you said, SNAP is a drop in the bucket but always ran out by the GOP has a place that needs constant reform to save us money. SNAP isn't a drop in the bucket exactly, but the savings from having 1 million fewer over ten years would be. I'm curious though as to what would cause there to be one million less people. Since the main change would have been work requirement rules it would seem that drop would be from people who don't need it anymore. RE: Food Stamps Put Poor Kids on Path to Success - GMDino - 12-06-2018 (12-06-2018, 02:27 PM)michaelsean Wrote: SNAP isn't a drop in the bucket exactly, but the savings from having 1 million fewer over ten years would be. I'm curious though as to what would cause there to be one million less people. Since the main change would have been work requirement rules it would seem that drop would be from people who don't need it anymore. https://www.cbpp.org/research/food-assistance/presidents-budget-would-cut-food-assistance-for-millions-and-radically Quote:President Trump’s 2019 budget proposes to cut the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP, formerly food stamps) by more than $213 billion over the next ten years — nearly a 30 percent cut — through radically restructuring how benefits are delivered, cutting eligibility for at least 4 million people, and reducing benefits for many others. (See Table 1.)[1] The unemployed, the elderly, and low-income working families with children would bear the brunt of the cuts. These proposals come on the heels of a tax law the President championed that will mainly benefit the wealthy and corporations and that’s expected to add $1.5 trillion to deficits over ten years. Saving about 2 billion a year. https://comptroller.defense.gov/Portals/45/Documents/defbudget/fy2019/fy2019_Press_Release.pdf Quote:Today President Donald J. Trump sent Congress a proposed Fiscal Year (FY) 2019 budget request of $716 billion for national security, $686 billion of which is for the Department of Defense. The National Defense Strategy, which aligns with the National Security Strategy, connects strategy to the FY 2019 budget priorities, enabling the Department to compete, deter, and win. This establishes a foundation for rebuilding the U.S. military into a more capable, lethal, and ready Joint Force. The objectives of the Department are “to be prepared to defend the homeland, remain the preeminent military power in the world, ensure the balances of power remain in our favor, and advance an international order that is most conducive to our security and prosperity.” The FY 2019 budget has been developed to meet these specific objectives. While increasing military spending. That doesn't even include that the savings wouldn't even cover the 5 billion Trump wants for his wall. (He only got 1.6 for the border) RE: Food Stamps Put Poor Kids on Path to Success - michaelsean - 12-06-2018 (12-06-2018, 02:43 PM)GMDino Wrote: https://www.cbpp.org/research/food-assistance/presidents-budget-would-cut-food-assistance-for-millions-and-radically I don't care what he babbles about. He has no say. I'm talking about what the Republicans put forward and what was ultimately passed. You may disagree with what they proposed, but it's not like it was some radical out there proposal. RE: Food Stamps Put Poor Kids on Path to Success - GMDino - 12-06-2018 (12-06-2018, 02:49 PM)michaelsean Wrote: I don't care what he babbles about. He has no say. I'm talking about what the Republicans put forward and what was ultimately passed. You may disagree with what they proposed, but it's not like it was some radical out there proposal. Yep. I disagree with what they proposed AND I think they should be ashamed for proposing it. RE: Food Stamps Put Poor Kids on Path to Success - michaelsean - 12-06-2018 (12-06-2018, 03:07 PM)GMDino Wrote: Yep. I disagree with what they proposed AND I think they should be ashamed for proposing it. You think they should be ashamed that they wanted to change the work requirement rules to go from 49 to 59 and mother's with school age children? OK then. RE: Food Stamps Put Poor Kids on Path to Success - GMDino - 12-06-2018 (12-06-2018, 03:13 PM)michaelsean Wrote: You think they should be ashamed that they wanted to change the work requirement rules to go from 49 to 59 and mother's with school age children? OK then. Indeed. That they look to change social programs while expanding military ones. Poor choices and they should be ashamed. RE: Food Stamps Put Poor Kids on Path to Success - jj22 - 12-06-2018 I think we could get further on the Welfare/Food Stamps debate if political parties didn't paint people as "welfare queens" or act like it's only minorities that get them, and act like everyone just takes advantage of it and lives better then millionaires. Politics has muddied the argument so much that it's more of a protection of the purpose versus and overall review of the program and if it does what it's intended to do.. RE: Food Stamps Put Poor Kids on Path to Success - Belsnickel - 12-06-2018 (12-06-2018, 03:13 PM)michaelsean Wrote: You think they should be ashamed that they wanted to change the work requirement rules to go from 49 to 59 and mother's with school age children? OK then. I think that any attempt to reduce the need for the program needs to come from creating/updating social programs that help to put people to work rather than just changing eligibility around and hoping people get the message and get off their asses. That's not an effective strategy, but it is what the Republican policy banks on. It's voodoo economics, as Bush 41 said about Reaganomics. RE: Food Stamps Put Poor Kids on Path to Success - michaelsean - 12-06-2018 (12-06-2018, 05:20 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: I think that any attempt to reduce the need for the program needs to come from creating/updating social programs that help to put people to work rather than just changing eligibility around and hoping people get the message and get off their asses. That's not an effective strategy, but it is what the Republican policy banks on. It's voodoo economics, as Bush 41 said about Reaganomics. Like I said, disagree if you want, but these weren't some draconian proposals. RE: Food Stamps Put Poor Kids on Path to Success - michaelsean - 12-06-2018 (12-06-2018, 05:08 PM)jj22 Wrote: I think we could get further on the Welfare/Food Stamps debate if political parties didn't paint people as "welfare queens" or act like it's only minorities that get them, and act like everyone just takes advantage of it and lives better then millionaires. Politics has muddied the argument so much that it's more of a protection of the purpose versus and overall review of the program and if it does what it's intended to do.. Or that anybody who wants to change it somehow wants to starve children. We can't seem to merely disagree anymore, but have to paint others as evil. RE: Food Stamps Put Poor Kids on Path to Success - Belsnickel - 12-06-2018 (12-06-2018, 05:35 PM)michaelsean Wrote: Like I said, disagree if you want, but these weren't some draconian proposals. Kicking people off of the program without doing anything to make it so they no longer need it while costs of living are increasing around the country? You may not think it's draconian, but plenty of people would disagree. RE: Food Stamps Put Poor Kids on Path to Success - michaelsean - 12-06-2018 (12-06-2018, 05:41 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Kicking people off of the program without doing anything to make it so they no longer need it while costs of living are increasing around the country? You may not think it's draconian, but plenty of people would disagree. There's already a work requirement. They just discussed expanding it. Especially the one that changes it from 49 to 59. If requiring someone to work 20 hours a week if they are healthy and have no minor dependents and are between 50 and 60 is draconian then I guess that's what i am. We are talking any job, 4 hours a day. I'm not sure what the objection is. Edit: And I wouldn't object to having some sort of job training substituting for working. RE: Food Stamps Put Poor Kids on Path to Success - Belsnickel - 12-06-2018 (12-06-2018, 05:53 PM)michaelsean Wrote: There's already a work requirement. They just discussed expanding it. Especially the one that changes it from 49 to 59. If requiring someone to work 20 hours a week if they are healthy and have no minor dependents and are between 50 and 60 is draconian then I guess that's what i am. We are talking any job, 4 hours a day. I'm not sure what the objection is. It's all subjective. If you have someone who believes in policies like a federal job guarantee or a guaranteed living wage or something like that, then this is absolutely draconian. If you're a neo-liberal, free market type, then it isn't. RE: Food Stamps Put Poor Kids on Path to Success - michaelsean - 12-06-2018 (12-06-2018, 06:17 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: It's all subjective. If you have someone who believes in policies like a federal job guarantee or a guaranteed living wage or something like that, then this is absolutely draconian. If you're a neo-liberal, free market type, then it isn't. This sort of seems like a guaranteed living wage. You get a job and we will supplement your income. Free market would say get a job or starve. I think it's a rather good thing. People can take a job that doesn't maybe pay great, and still keep their benefits. I would throw in child care as well. Which I believe we also do. I can't comprehend why any of this is considered harsh, but to each his own. RE: Food Stamps Put Poor Kids on Path to Success - fredtoast - 12-06-2018 (12-06-2018, 05:53 PM)michaelsean Wrote: If requiring someone to work 20 hours a week if they are healthy and have no minor dependents and are between 50 and 60 is draconian then I guess that's what i am. We are talking any job, 4 hours a day. I'm not sure what the objection is. People in there 50's may not be physically able to take manual labor jobs, or they may not be able to walk long distances for a job. There is no mass transit outside of cities and there are not a lot of jobs either. Plus many of the same people who yell "Get a job" will also refuse to hire a homeless person who does not have clean clothes or the ability to bathe every day. But I guess it is okay to let these people starve so that we don't "weaken" our military. I mean we only spend more than the next 7 largest countries (China, Russia, Saudi Arabia, India, France, United Kingdom, France) COMBINED. |