quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

That's your comeback? You've really got nothing then.

You simply shared one of Marx's essential points, that capitalism is feudalism dressed up.

* shrug *

quote:

ORIGINAL: Marini

There are many ways to make sure people don't go hungry.
There should be locations every where, that provide at least free meals, especially dinner.

Programs like food stamps are not the total answer here.

America can help everyone all over the world, we should be able to provide locations throughout the 50 states,
in which you can get a free meal if you need it.

the little guys should get at least as much of a bailout as wall street, that would be enough to pay for food and medical for everyones lifetime.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

quote:

ORIGINAL: Marini

There are many ways to make sure people don't go hungry.
There should be locations every where, that provide at least free meals, especially dinner.

Programs like food stamps are not the total answer here.

America can help everyone all over the world, we should be able to provide locations throughout the 50 states,
in which you can get a free meal if you need it.

the little guys should get at least as much of a bailout as wall street, that would be enough to pay for food and medical for everyones lifetime.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Termyn8or

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

and that is a wonderful and fully hallucinatory thought, people are starving here and there and everywhere, and nobody is stopping the charities from fixing it, the problem lies in the fact that across the arc of humanity, people are not charitable for this reason or that reason.

Charity if failing epically.

Some people are getting sick of them havig 12 fucking kids. Feed them and then you got 12. Then after a few years you got 144. The after a few more years you got 1,728. And so on.

OK that is an exaggeration but what the fuck are people who cannot feed themselves doing having kids ? Even ONE kid ? When TSHT in Greece due to government being gullible and the international banks sticking it up their asses (well they were also complicit but...) people took their own kids to orphanages because they could not feed them. But at least when they originally had them they could feed them.

I think males on welfare should be given an ample supply oof codoms, and if they are foud to be the sire of a child while receiving benefits they should go to jail. Females should be Norplanted. And the government should give free abortions, but the second one comes with a free tubal ligation so the government doesn't have to keep doing it.

They won't let you do private charity. A musician built cheap little houses for the homeless, not much more than a door and a roof and the government put a stop to it. You can buy a bunch of hobos McDonald's, but you can't make a nice pot of stew and pass out bowls of it, they will literally take you to jail. One is taxable and one is not.

I am too old to learn Russian, otherwise I would be outta here.

T^T

quote:

ORIGINAL: kiwisub22

Basic shelter and a meal sounds like the poorhouse.

In my city, there is an organization called "Our House", that provides shelter and meals for the homeless, for which, said homeless are required to find a job and pay rent. Half of the rent is banked for when they move out and helps pay for rental expenses. There are rules, and if they are broken, there are consequences - a tough love sort of situation. It works - for those who want it to work.

And that would be the sticker - there are those who don't want to deal with consequences, or rules or anything that delays gratification. There are those whose mental health precludes them from benefiting from ANY program. Basically, there are always going to be people who don't or won't live by societies mores for whatever reason, and what do you do with them? Feeding them seems the least .... smelly solution. Human corpses smell - for a while.

quote:

ORIGINAL: tamaka

They will never pass cutting food stamps. Too many moderate republicans have a conscience.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BoscoX

quote:

ORIGINAL: tamaka

quote:

ORIGINAL: BoscoX

quote:

ORIGINAL: tamaka

They will never pass cutting food stamps. Too many moderate republicans have a conscience.

Voting to help the truly needy in a responsible manner, is not the same as affirming that everyone is "entitled" to this or that

What the alt left would do, would be far more destructive than allowing the poor to starve. Going steeply into debt so that leftists can buy votes with trillions in borrowed money is the surest path to destruction known so far for a democratic republic

Except perhaps for suicide by Muslim

We are deeply into debt. And it wasn't just the democrats who put us there.

Drain the swamp

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

That's your comeback? You've really got nothing then.

You simply shared one of Marx's essential points, that capitalism is feudalism dressed up.

* shrug *

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic

Rep. Adrian Smith (R-Neb.) refused to say whether “every American is entitled to eat” and the food stamps program is the best way to ensure that they have the food they need.

NPR’s Scott Simon interviewed Smith on Saturday about the farm bill and President Donald Trump’sproposed cuts to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, commonly known as food stamps. In the president’s budget, the White House is seeking $193 billion in cuts to SNAP over 10 years, an amount equal to more than one-quarter of the program’s cost over that period.

There is room for “very minor shifts” in SNAP that “make sure we do not harm the most vulnerable among us,” according to Smith.

“Especially for people in need we do not want to leave our most vulnerable without nutrition,” he said. “Looking at that, we always want to keep that in mind.”

But Simon pressed Smith on his views about the program’s underlying philosophy.

“Let me ask you this bluntly: Is every American entitled to eat?” he asked.

“Well, nutrition obviously we know is very important and I would hope that we can look to ―” Smith began.

“Well, not just important, it’s essential for life,” Simon interjected.

Smith conceded that nutrition is essential to life.

“So is every American entitled to eat and is food stamps something that ought to be that ultimate guarantor?” Simon persisted.

“I think we know that given the necessity of nutrition, there could be a number of ways that we could address that,” Smith answered.

As Smith later observed, a president’s budget is merely a set of suggestions that reflect the president’s fiscal priorities. It is up to Congress to allot the funds for federal programs. The president can then sign or veto budget legislation they craft.

Smith refused to rule out reductions in SNAP spending as part of that process, however.

“I want to look at our entire budget, look at all of the details,” he said.

Roughly 43 million low-income Americans receive SNAP benefits, which are vouchers to buy food. Enrollment has dropped significantly since 2014 due to improvement in the economy.

Mick Mulvaney, director of the White House Office of Management and Budget, by claiming there are people receiving benefits who do not need them given how long ago the recession was.

The administration has not been clear about its intentions for the means-tested aid program though. Secretary of Agriculture Sonny Perdue, whose department oversees SNAP, has defended SNAP’s performance and claimed that it will be up to Congress to decide how much it wants to reduce the program’s spending.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/gop-congressman-declines-whether-every-173031436.html


im wondering why people are so silent about this....

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic

Starving the poor to pay of the debt is despicable, Cutting SSDI and medicaid to pay off the debt is despicable, the fact that the money saved by slashing food stamps, SSDI< CHIP, Meals on wheels and other community programs is only going to the 1% is barbaric, dangerous and ugly.
I get you dont understand, but then you have never been there.

quote:

ORIGINAL: tamaka

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic

Starving the poor to pay of the debt is despicable, Cutting SSDI and medicaid to pay off the debt is despicable, the fact that the money saved by slashing food stamps, SSDI< CHIP, Meals on wheels and other community programs is only going to the 1% is barbaric, dangerous and ugly.
I get you dont understand, but then you have never been there.

Honestly i don't see how they can cut SSDI because it is an insurance policy people paid for. The only people who can collect SSDI are people who worked many years and paid into the insurance plan and paid taxes all of those years. The people who collect SSDI are not on medicaid, they are on medicare.

quote:

ORIGINAL: AtUrCervix

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic

Rep. Adrian Smith (R-Neb.) refused to say whether “every American is entitled to eat” and the food stamps program is the best way to ensure that they have the food they need.

NPR’s Scott Simon interviewed Smith on Saturday about the farm bill and President Donald Trump’sproposed cuts to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, commonly known as food stamps. In the president’s budget, the White House is seeking $193 billion in cuts to SNAP over 10 years, an amount equal to more than one-quarter of the program’s cost over that period.

There is room for “very minor shifts” in SNAP that “make sure we do not harm the most vulnerable among us,” according to Smith.

“Especially for people in need we do not want to leave our most vulnerable without nutrition,” he said. “Looking at that, we always want to keep that in mind.”

But Simon pressed Smith on his views about the program’s underlying philosophy.

“Let me ask you this bluntly: Is every American entitled to eat?” he asked.

“Well, nutrition obviously we know is very important and I would hope that we can look to ―” Smith began.

“Well, not just important, it’s essential for life,” Simon interjected.

Smith conceded that nutrition is essential to life.

“So is every American entitled to eat and is food stamps something that ought to be that ultimate guarantor?” Simon persisted.

“I think we know that given the necessity of nutrition, there could be a number of ways that we could address that,” Smith answered.

As Smith later observed, a president’s budget is merely a set of suggestions that reflect the president’s fiscal priorities. It is up to Congress to allot the funds for federal programs. The president can then sign or veto budget legislation they craft.

Smith refused to rule out reductions in SNAP spending as part of that process, however.

“I want to look at our entire budget, look at all of the details,” he said.

Roughly 43 million low-income Americans receive SNAP benefits, which are vouchers to buy food. Enrollment has dropped significantly since 2014 due to improvement in the economy.

Mick Mulvaney, director of the White House Office of Management and Budget, by claiming there are people receiving benefits who do not need them given how long ago the recession was.

The administration has not been clear about its intentions for the means-tested aid program though. Secretary of Agriculture Sonny Perdue, whose department oversees SNAP, has defended SNAP’s performance and claimed that it will be up to Congress to decide how much it wants to reduce the program’s spending.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/gop-congressman-declines-whether-every-173031436.html


im wondering why people are so silent about this....

Probably for similar reasons that people were so vocal during Johnson's reign among others where free (everything) was handed out and it changed nothing and in many ways, made things worse.

It was Pres. Clinton who first said "ya'll gotta do something...if you can....no more free anything".

He cut assistance programs across the board by limiting the time span allowed wherein which people could remain on programs designed for a hand up, that had evolved in to programs that were a hand out.

Productivity (for a lot of other reasons) rose faster than at any recorded time in U.S. history and we quickly approached a rare opportunity to pay off the debt (in full) only to watch the next Pres restore many of those assistance programs and raised our debt (for a lot of other reasons) because we "had the money to do so".

But we don't anymore.

And if we simply wrote off the entire debt...all 20 trillion....we still....don't anymore.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic

Starving the poor to pay of the debt is despicable, Cutting SSDI and medicaid to pay off the debt is despicable, the fact that the money saved by slashing food stamps, SSDI< CHIP, Meals on wheels and other community programs is only going to the 1% is barbaric, dangerous and ugly.
I get you dont understand, but then you have never been there.