Food Stamp Nation...

[CosmicCowboy]

I thought he had an interesting take on the subject...

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=212741

"The lessons of history ... show conclusively that continued dependence upon relief induces a spiritual and moral disintegration fundamentally destructive to the national fiber. To dole out relief in this way is to administer a narcotic, a subtle destroyer of the human spirit."

These searing words about Depression-era welfare are from Franklin Roosevelt's 1935 State of the Union Address. FDR feared this self-reliant people might come to depend permanently upon government for the necessities of their daily lives. Like narcotics, such a dependency would destroy the fiber and spirit of the nation.

What brings his words to mind is news that 41.8 million Americans are on food stamps, and the White House estimates 43 million will soon be getting food stamps every month.

A seventh of the nation cannot even feed itself.

If you would chart America's decline, this program is a good place to begin. As a harbinger of the Great Society to come, in early 1964, a Food Stamp Act was signed into law by LBJ appropriating $75 million for 350,000 individuals in 40 counties and three U.S. cities.

Yet, no one was starving. There had been no starvation since Jamestown, with such exceptions as the Donner Party caught in the Sierra Nevada in the winter of 1846-47, who took to eating their dead.

Get Pat Buchanan's classic, "The Death of the West," autographed at low price

The Food Stamp Act became law half a decade after J.K. Galbraith in his best-seller had declared 1950s America to be the world's great Affluent Society.

Yet, when Richard Nixon took office, 3 million Americans were receiving food stamps at a cost of $270 million. Then CBS ran a program featuring a premature baby near death, and told us it was an infant starving to death in rich America. The nation demanded action, and Nixon acted.

By the time he left office in 1974, the food-stamp program was feeding 16 million Americans at an annual cost of $4 billion.

Fast forward to 2009. The cost to taxpayers of the U.S. food-stamp program hit $56 billion. The number of recipients and cost of the program exploded again last year.

Among the reasons is family disintegration. Forty percent of all children in America are now born out of wedlock. Among Hispanics, it is 51 percent. Among African-Americans, it is 71 percent.

Food stamps are feeding children abandoned by their own fathers. Taxpayers are taking up the slack for America's deadbeat dads.

Have food stamps made America a healthier nation?

Consider New York City, where 1.7 million people, one in every five in the city, relies on food stamps for daily sustenance.

Obesity rates have soared. Forty percent of all the kids in city public schools from kindergarten through eighth grade are overweight or obese.

Among poor kids, whose families depend on food stamps, the percentages are far higher. Mothers of poor kids use food stamps to buy them sugar-heavy soda pop, candy and junk food.

Yet Mayor Michael Bloomberg's proposal to the Department of Agriculture that recipients not be allowed to use food stamps to buy sugar-rich soft drinks has run into resistance.

"The world might be better ... if people limited their purchases of sugared beverages," said George Hacker of the Center for Science in the Public Interest. "However, there are a great many ethical reasons to consider why one would not stigmatize people on food stamps."

The Department of Agriculture in 2004 denied a request by Minnesota that would have disallowed food stamp recipients from using them for junk food. To grant the request, said the department, would "perpetuate the myth" that food-stamps users make poor shopping decisions.

But is that a myth or an inconvenient truth?

What a changed country we have become in our expectations of ourselves. A less affluent America survived a Depression and world war without anything like the 99 weeks of unemployment insurance, welfare payments, earned income tax credits, food stamps, rent supplements, day care, school lunches and Medicaid we have today.

Public or private charity were thought necessary, but were almost always to be temporary until a breadwinner could find work or a family could get back on its feet. The expectation was that almost everyone, with hard work and by keeping the nose to the grindstone, could make his or her own way in this free society. No more.

What we have accepted today is a vast permanent underclass of scores of millions who cannot cope and must be carried by the rest of society – fed, clothed, housed, tutored, medicated at taxpayers' expense for their entire lives. We have a new division in America: those who pay a double fare, and those who forever ride free.

We Americans are not only not the people our parents were, we are not the people we were. FDR was right about what would happen to the country if we did not get off the narcotic of welfare.

America has regrettably already undergone that "spiritual and moral disintegration, fundamentally destructive to the national fiber."

[George Gervin's Afro]

On a side note to the article..


I think the lack of parenting is the primary cause for failing children. My wife has taught for a very long time and she has become numb to that fact that no one comes to the parent -teacher nights. She may get 2 or 3 parents every year but that's aabout it. She is now in charge of babysitting foul mouthed, violent children. Many people on the right like to blame the educational sysytem on teachers unions and bad teachers but the primary cause is the lack of parental inviovement in educating children. How is a teacher supposed to control a child in a learning environment when the parennts can't control the child at home?

She also agrees it is too difficult to get rid of bsd treachers.. she works with a couple of them now.


The underlying issue is bad parenting. Many of these deadbeats reproduce other deadbeats. You mave scores of children who do not have a positive, successfull role model in their lives....

[CosmicCowboy]

On a side note to the article..


I think the lack of parenting is the primary cause for failing children. My wife has taught for a very long time and she has become numb to that fact that no one comes to the parent -teacher nights. She may get 2 or 3 parents every year but that's aabout it. She is now in charge of babysitting foul mouthed, violent children. Many people on the right like to blame the educational sysytem on teachers unions and bad teachers but the primary cause is the lack of parental inviovement in educatiiong children. How is a teacher supposed to control a child in a learning environment when the parennts can't control the child at home?

She also agress it is too difficult to get rid of bsd treachers.. she works with a couple of them now.

The underlying issue is bad parenting. Many of these deadbeats reproduce other deadbeats. You mave scores of children who do not have a positive, successfull role model in their lives....

As long as the US government keeps giving financial incentives for making babies these underclass single mothers will keep spitting them out.

[Trainwreck2100]

lol thinking everyone on foodstamps can't afford to feed themselves

[Crookshanks]

There is something fundamentally wrong when we now have 3rd generations of the same family on government assistance. And these are the same people who will vote for the person (or party) who will continue to coddle them and give them more and more and not demand they do anything for themselves.

[boutons_deux]

living on foodstamps or unemployment or family assistance is not being coddled, as you agree if you had ever tried to live on them. ing "Christians" in name only.

[Trainwreck2100]

living on foodstamps or unemployment or family assistance is not being coddled, as you agree if you had ever tried to live on them. ing "Christians" in name only.

having a baby just to qualify is getting coddled

[boutons_deux]

you people are always ready criminalize the poor as frauds and parasites, but Wall St and the corps do much more damage and you give them a pass.

[coyotes_geek]

Have food stamps made America a healthier nation?

Consider New York City, where 1.7 million people, one in every five in the city, relies on food stamps for daily sustenance.

Obesity rates have soared. Forty percent of all the kids in city public schools from kindergarten through eighth grade are overweight or obese.

Among poor kids, whose families depend on food stamps, the percentages are far higher. Mothers of poor kids use food stamps to buy them sugar-heavy soda pop, candy and junk food.

Yet Mayor Michael Bloomberg's proposal to the Department of Agriculture that recipients not be allowed to use food stamps to buy sugar-rich soft drinks has run into resistance.

"The world might be better ... if people limited their purchases of sugared beverages," said George Hacker of the Center for Science in the Public Interest. "However, there are a great many ethical reasons to consider why one would not stigmatize people on food stamps."

The Department of Agriculture in 2004 denied a request by Minnesota that would have disallowed food stamp recipients from using them for junk food. To grant the request, said the department, would "perpetuate the myth" that food-stamps users make poor shopping decisions.

So there's an obesity problem among those who can't afford to feed themselves. Only in America.

[101A]

you people are always ready criminalize the poor as frauds and parasites, but Wall St and the corps do much more damage and you give them a pass.

Bull .

I rail on govt. waste, abuse and fraud - I didn't vote for McCain because he supported TARP - I changed my registration from Republican to Independent because that party, that I helped get to complete power; lied about their real intentions, and took this country further down the road to oblivion.

You are the blind one, complaining and cursing only one side; seeing everything through tinted, biased glasses.

Stop calling names; you are worse than most.

[Trainwreck2100]

So there's an obesity problem among those who can't afford to feed themselves. Only in America.

The cheapest food is the worst for you

[RoddyBukkake]

Everytime I see some skins at Walmart use the lone star card they're always fat

[Bender]

I hate the way articles in general always use the phrase "abandoned by their fathers" and "deadbeat dads". There's some crappy moms out there too. I should know, I was married to one.

[coyotes_geek]

The cheapest food is the worst for you

For some things. We can still go ahead and not allow food stamps to be used on soda and candy without having to worry about anyone starving to death though.

[MannyIsGod]

As long as the US government keeps giving financial incentives for making babies these underclass single mothers will keep spitting them out.

Sorry, but this is a crock of . I am not going to argue that there are not people out there who have children irresponsibly and may even do so to get more money from the state but I have yet to see anyone prove that people having more children for more government money is actually a sizable portion of these children.

I did love that the article points out that society picks up the tab in the end for these problems because it always does. Unless you're willing to see a lot of children out there starving and the increase in crime and overall poverty please don't advocate eradication of the government programs. The programs are treating symptoms of a very complex problem and elimination of those programs will do nothing more than foster an environment that will only add further problems and complications to our society.

You want to fix it? Lets start in these places:

Better sex education. Abstinence only is the biggest crock of in the world and it does not work. You want people to have fewer babies then educate them better.

In fact educating the population as a whole is necessary as well because the figures show that individuals with higher education levels have fewer children and have them later in life.

This is a generational issue and its not something you fix overnight.

[MannyIsGod]

I hate the way articles in general always use the phrase "abandoned by their fathers" and "deadbeat dads". There's some crappy moms out there too. I should know, I was married to one.

What does that have to do with anything? A deadbeat father isn't a bad father - its one who doesn't care for their children. Yes, there are bad mothers out there and good fathers get the shaft in many different ways in the legal system but none of that changes the fact that the majority of single parents with children are women.

[101A]

Better sex education. Abstinence only is the biggest crock of in the world and it does not work. You want people to have fewer babies then educate them better.

In fact educating the population as a whole is necessary as well because the figures show that individuals with higher education levels have fewer children and have them later in life.

This is a generational issue and its not something you fix overnight.

Your arguments make rational sense.

However, historically we have very high child illegitimacy rates now, despite abortions being legal, and common AND more (public) sex education than at any other time. ...not to mention ready availability of condoms (compared to mid-80's as I can attest), AND the threat of AIDS.

Please explain the disconnect.

"You get what you pay for" is a pretty good argument for a counter-thesis to yours.

[Wild Cobra]

living on foodstamps or unemployment or family assistance is not being coddled, as you agree if you had ever tried to live on them. ing "Christians" in name only.

So...

Are hard working productive citizens suppose to pay for other people's mistakes?

[MannyIsGod]

Your arguments make rational sense.

However, historically we have very high child illegitimacy rates now, despite abortions being legal, and common AND more (public) sex education than at any other time.

Please explain the disconnect.

"You get what you pay for" is a pretty good argument for a counter-thesis to yours.

We live in a far different society than in years past. There are reasons for this such as the Women's movement (women in general being more liberated makes them more likely to walk away from a bad situation) and but I would argue that in today's climate the sex ed we provide isn't enough.

What worked yesterday isn't going to work today and whether or not it worked yesterday is irrelevant to me because our society has changed. Whats important is to find what does work and to me the most obvious location to start is in education.

Its amazing to me, but almost any problem we face as a society always seems to bring me back to one solution: better education. Its astounding the drop in poverty, crime, health problems and virtually all problems you see as you look at the segments of the population that have a higher education level.

[MannyIsGod]

I do wonder why countries in Europe don't have these problems even while living with societies that are far more open sexually.

[101A]

Its amazing to me, but almost any problem we face as a society always seems to bring me back to one solution: better education. Its astounding the drop in poverty, crime, health problems and virtually all problems you see as you look at the segments of the population that have a higher education level.

Not living in poverty, being healthy, not committing crime are all virtues; as is seeking an education.

Education is not a means to those ends, it is simply one of the ends of being virtuous.

[MannyIsGod]

Not living in poverty, being healthy, not committing crime are all virtues; as is seeking an education.

Education is not a means to those ends, it is simply one of the ends of being virtuous.

I don't know if I agree with that at all.

[101A]

I do wonder why countries in Europe don't have these problems even while living with societies that are far more open sexually.

...and also have government assistance programs that are at least as generous. I wonder, as well.

Is it education, as you suggest?

Is it cultural?

[101A]

I don't know if I agree with that at all.

Neither do I.

It's the Socratic method, just play along.

[clambake]

pro-life....until they start eating.