• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

New Mexico to end food stamp supplement

They're cutting the program out completely? 100%? trimming the tree is one thing, but cutting it down is another.
This is the very best way to end a program. Anything else does not end it.
 
Yes the rich are so generous by owning a grocery store in the poor neighborhoods where the poor can trade their food stamps for 5 dollar gallon milk.
Do you object to having grocery stores? Is crime more likely there? Is the store owner taking great risk by providing the goods and services? Do you hate everyone who provides for your needs?
 
I'm really not arguing that individuals have absolutely no fault, but what I am arguing is that the current economic condition of the country is mainly the result of a corrupt government serving bankers and corporations instead of the people. Why else would the government deregulate the banks? The safety nets set up after the Great Depression have been all but removed, and now we see the results of high unemployment and stagnate wages. This didn't happen in a vacuum. And one can, of course, argue that no one who signed these contracts were under duress. But those types of contracts, full of complicated legal terms, are required to be signed for practically everything a person does from turning on their utilities to getting a cell phone. Page after page of terms, conditions, and loopholes that only corporate lawyers can understand. Facts are, we currently have banks and corporations, and a government with no accountability to the American people. We are now seeing the results.

We will continue to see no accountability of our elected representatives as long as the constituents that put them in power continue to do so. No one (certainly not me) is suggesting government or businesses are blamless. I believe EVERYONE played a role then and now. We are completely devoid of leadership in this country on the economy. We continue to prop up an overinflated housing market (if they had let this thing correct itself it would have been resolved long ago). But the citizens are just as desperate for the fed to keep them solvent as are businesses.
 
That's a really stupid reason to not give to a charitable organization. So you wouldn't give to the Catholic Church either? Anyways, I am not 100% sure how SNAP works I thought it was funded through the government but really this sounds stupid to totally cut the program. They -could- cut the wages of the government in the state, temporarily cut any infrastructure spending, border security, and be more stringent on who gets the actual SNAP benefits such as persons with no children under a certain age, make sure they are American citizens, etc. I don't see it possible for them to actually totally ax the program.

It is my money and there are plenty of pro gay charitable organizations out here that I can give to. Yeah I can be picky and still help.
 
It is my money and there are plenty of pro gay charitable organizations out here that I can give to. Yeah I can be picky and still help.

You go girl. Of course...the Salvation Army doesnt ask sexual preference when people are in their soup kitchens, when they are in their free detox centers, etc. Sure...as a Christian organization they may disagree with homosexuality. Thats a GREAT reason to completely discount them as the leading charitable organization in the country. Here is to 'tolerance'.
 
There isn't anything else they could cut? Really? I have a hard time believing that.
 
Fraud and abuse cost as much money to social programs as the actual needy recepients.

Reform before removal; however I don't know the specifics.
 
You go girl. Of course...the Salvation Army doesnt ask sexual preference when people are in their soup kitchens, when they are in their free detox centers, etc. Sure...as a Christian organization they may disagree with homosexuality. Thats a GREAT reason to completely discount them as the leading charitable organization in the country. Here is to 'tolerance'.

Charity Navigator ~ 10 Charities with the Most Consecutive 4-Star Ratings

Charity Navigator ~ 10 Super-Sized Charities

They have other top 10 links you can look at...not once did I notice the Salvation Army in any of em.
 
Irrelevant even if true, and you haven't proven it.

Proven what?

Look, what is the reason for the hard economic times right now? It's not entitlements, it's the banking sector and the big businesses that invested, traded, and short-changed in an unsustainable manner.

Yet it is the poor who are being attacked - the OP is exhibit A. Our government seems to have no problem reducing social services and programs, but I don't see the corporate tax rate increasing. In fact, failing businesses get bailouts.

It's unfortunate that many conservatives are so quick to applaud what New Mexico is doing, but corporate socialism gets a free pass, or, at best, a weak criticism.

I am mainly just pissed off that the institutions who SHOULD be the pariahs right now are instead reclining comfortably out of the limelight, and politicians are still playing chess with populations that experience bare-bones poverty.
 
Charity Navigator ~ 10 Charities with the Most Consecutive 4-Star Ratings

Charity Navigator ~ 10 Super-Sized Charities

They have other top 10 links you can look at...not once did I notice the Salvation Army in any of em.

Yeah...Im sure the University of Miami is helping people in every major city throughout the country. Hell...we are tripping over them as an aid provider... :roll:

From your website...

We don't evaluate The Salvation Army.
Why not? Many religious organizations are exempt under Internal Revenue Code from filing the Form 990. As a result, we lack sufficient data to evaluate their financial health
 
Last edited:
Notice how New Mexico cuts off the disabled and elderly, but not the younger, healthier population. Is that really what's happened here or have I misread the article?

If so, that's an interesting situation since the elderly and disabled can't take to the streets while the younger, healthier foodstamp recipients could. I wonder if that was a decisive move they made to prevent food riots or if I'm just reading too much into this.
 
Our government seems to have no problem reducing social services and programs, but I don't see the corporate tax rate increasing. In fact, failing businesses get bailouts.
One only increases tax rates on things one wants less of. So if you prefer fewer jobs then increase the tax rates on businesses. If you prefer job creation then reduce all tax rates. Oh, and reverse this insane notion tht the poor should not pay income taxes. They should. It gives them a reason to distrust government.
 
Which line item in the budget should I look for to see how much money the government is giving to wealthy corporations?


Geez, maybe conservatives need to find out what their leaders are doing. How does the GOP manage to keeps its constituents so uninformed?

Corporate welfare is a term describing a government's bestowal of money grants, tax breaks, or other special favorable treatment on corporations or selected corporations.



Two Republicans stood by their vows to end the federal subsidies of Big Oil, but in the end, it wasn't enough. The rest of the Senate GOP voted to allow the largest oil companies to keep their taxpayer handouts even as they post near-record profits.

Senators voted 52-48 on Tuesday to block a bill that would have stripped the oil companies of more than $20 billion in subsidies that many argue amount to corporate welfare, particularly when the companies are posting an estimated $3 billion a week in profit.

The tally fell eight votes short of the 60 required to break a filibuster and move to final approval.
Senate Democrats have said that the subsidies to big oil companies should be cut to tame the federal budget deficit before other government programs that many midddle class Americans rely upon.

“Republicans would rather cut college scholarships, slash cancer research and end Medicare than take away taxpayer-funded giveaways to oil companies that are raking in billions in profits. That tells you everything you need to know about their priorities,” Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid declared in a statement after the failed vote.
The Washington Current: Sens. Flip Flop, Let Big Oil Keep Subsidies

 
One only increases tax rates on things one wants less of. So if you prefer fewer jobs then increase the tax rates on businesses. If you prefer job creation then reduce all tax rates. Oh, and reverse this insane notion tht the poor should not pay income taxes. They should. It gives them a reason to distrust government.


Ha,ha, still pushing that fat conservative lie. If tax cuts create jobs, where are the jobs? The tax cuts have been in effect since 2001 - so where are the jobs?

Oh, and the poor should pay but let the corporations keep their subsidies?

How the the GOP manage to dumb down all Reps/cons into believing such an idiotic lie. Tax the poor but ease the taxes on the rich? Geez, unless all Republicans are uber wealthy, they are just like "chickens voting for Colonel Sanders".
 
Corporate welfare is a term describing a government's bestowal of money grants, tax breaks, or other special favorable treatment on corporations or selected corporations.
So given that perhaps it is time for all of us to fight for the fair tax that will end this practice. Are you with me?

Two Republicans stood by their vows to end the federal subsidies of Big Oil,
What were those subsidies again?


but in the end, it wasn't enough. The rest of the Senate GOP voted to allow the largest oil companies to keep their taxpayer handouts even as they post near-record profits.
And how much money does the government take compared to the record profits? Should oil companies be allowed to have any profits? If so what percentage would be fair? Should we take the average profit of all industrial sectors and agree that that much would be fair? And how much should the government take?
 
Ha,ha, still pushing that fat conservative lie. If tax cuts create jobs, where are the jobs? The tax cuts have been in effect since 2001 - so where are the jobs?
Cut more. And eliminate the thousands of pages of regulations that hamper business. Or don't. And die.
 
So given that perhaps it is time for all of us to fight for the fair tax that will end this practice. Are you with me?
You should be posing that question to your Congressmen.


What were those subsidies again?
Didn't you read the article? "taxpayer-funded giveaways"

The measure House Republicans opposed would bring the Big Oil Welfare Repeal Act of 2011 (H.R. 1689) to the floor for consideration. H.R. 1689 would amend the Internal Revenue Code to prohibit major oil companies (the Big 5) from receiving a tax deduction for domestic oil and natural gas production activities.

And how much money does the government take compared to the record profits?
Oh, I see! The corporations are already paying too much? Ha,ha, poor little corporations, they are being sucked out of their profits, it's not unfair that we should be paying so much for gas while they raise the price and make record profits!

Should oil companies be allowed to have any profits?
Of course, they should raise the price of gas to $6 bucks a gallon, why should they be deprived of however much profit they can make?

If so what percentage would be fair?
I don't know - how much more in tax cuts are you GOPers willing to give them?
How much more do you GOPers want to pay for gas?

Should we take the average profit of all industrial sectors and agree that that much would be fair? And how much should the government take?

No, you are right, we should cut Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, Education, teacher's pay and anything that may benefit the middle-class and below, because they are a drag on society. But, please, don't repeal any tax cuts for the rich and corporations, in fact, we need to reduce their taxes even more, so they can create even more jobs than they have already!
 
Geez, maybe conservatives need to find out what their leaders are doing. How does the GOP manage to keeps its constituents so uninformed?

Corporate welfare is a term describing a government's bestowal of money grants, tax breaks, or other special favorable treatment on corporations or selected corporations.



Two Republicans stood by their vows to end the federal subsidies of Big Oil, but in the end, it wasn't enough. The rest of the Senate GOP voted to allow the largest oil companies to keep their taxpayer handouts even as they post near-record profits.

Senators voted 52-48 on Tuesday to block a bill that would have stripped the oil companies of more than $20 billion in subsidies that many argue amount to corporate welfare, particularly when the companies are posting an estimated $3 billion a week in profit.

The tally fell eight votes short of the 60 required to break a filibuster and move to final approval.
Senate Democrats have said that the subsidies to big oil companies should be cut to tame the federal budget deficit before other government programs that many midddle class Americans rely upon.

“Republicans would rather cut college scholarships, slash cancer research and end Medicare than take away taxpayer-funded giveaways to oil companies that are raking in billions in profits. That tells you everything you need to know about their priorities,” Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid declared in a statement after the failed vote.
The Washington Current: Sens. Flip Flop, Let Big Oil Keep Subsidies


No, corporate welfare is a doublespeak term designed to make people think everything belongs to the government and anything that the government is gracious enough to allow the citizen subjects to keep is a handout.

Federal subsidies of Big Oil is doublespeak for “the government owns everything” and oil companies don’t pay enough in taxes.

If you buy into the scare tactics crap Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid is trying to sell, you shouldn’t be lecturing others about finding out what their leaders are doing because you are acting like a total Democratic Party tool.

The Democrats haven’t passed or proposed a budget for how long now? They don’t feel the need to offer real solutions because solutions require real work and political risk. The Harry Reid game plan is to do nothing while criticizing everything the Republicans try to do. What a leader you have. You must be proud.
 
Cut more. And eliminate the thousands of pages of regulations that hamper business. Or don't. And die.


Cut More? Spoken like a true conservative. Yeah, GE already didn't pay any, perhaps all the corporations should be tax free - they certainly deserve it.

And, regulations, yeah, let's do away with them, we already know how well that worked with BP.

Regulations may very well keep us from dying - if regulations had been enforced perhaps those men working for BP wouldn't have been killed during that blowup in the Gulf, it's unregulated companies lthat could do us in, but oh, well, who gives a crap about regular folk, it's the wealthy and corporations that we are trying to keep from being over-taxed!
LOL.gif
 
No, corporate welfare is a doublespeak term designed to make people think everything belongs to the government and anything that the government is gracious enough to allow the citizen subjects to keep is a handout.
No, corporate welfare is real and the middle class is being burdened in order for the corporations to keep more of their money. I'd like to keep more of my money, but guess what, I have to pay a bigger rate than they do.

Federal subsidies of Big Oil is doublespeak for “the government owns everything” and oil companies don’t pay enough in taxes.
Another GOP servant repeating what he is being told! The government doesn't own everything, if it did, perhaps we wouldn't see the greed displayed by most corporations and the wealthy. And, FYI, they don't (pay their fair share).

If you buy into the scare tactics crap Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid is trying to sell, you shouldn’t be lecturing others about finding out what their leaders are doing because you are acting like a total Democratic Party tool.
No, we should listen to the crap being pushed by the GOP, and throw seniors under the bus, because they can go to the Insurance Companies that have proved to be so considerate in the past by dropping whoever might just need a little more care than they are willing to pay for. And, like the other GOPer said, lets tax the hell out of the poor - why should they be excluded, who gives a crap that they don't make enough money. It's their fault, right, they should pull themselves up by their own bootstraps!

The Democrats haven’t passed or proposed a budget for how long now? They don’t feel the need to offer real solutions because solutions require real work and political risk. The Harry Reid game plan is to do nothing while criticizing everything the Republicans try to do. What a leader you have. You must be proud.
The President has submitted a budget, and the Democrats support it, so I don't know what you are talking about. And the solutions the GOP has offered so far is to throw the seniors under the bus, cut out all programs that benefit the middle-class and give the rich and corporations more tax cuts. Could it be that the rich and corporations are able to make big donations to their party, while us middle-class folks only send them $25/$30? Now that is something to be proud of, good for you!
 
Regulations may very well keep us from dying

I noticed you didn't attempt to prove this critical part of your post.
 
I noticed you didn't attempt to prove this critical part of your post.

Geez, I guess Libertarians are just as uninformed as Republicans, oh wait, they vote Republican! Let me know if these articles answer your question, don't know if I can draw you a more explicit picture.

Wiki:
The Deepwater Horizon oil spill (also referred to as the BP oil spill, the Gulf of Mexico oil spill, the BP oil disaster, or the Macondo blowout)[4][5][6] is an oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico which flowed for three months in 2010. It is the largest accidental marine oil spill in the history of the petroleum industry.[7][8][9] The spill stemmed from a sea-floor oil gusher that resulted from the April 20, 2010, explosion of Deepwater Horizon, which drilled on the BP-operated Macondo Prospect. The explosion killed 11 men working on the platform and injured 17 others.[10] On July 15, 2010, the leak was stopped by capping the gushing wellhead,[11] after it had released about 4.9 million barrels (780,000 m3) of crude oil.[2] An estimated 53,000 barrels per day (8,400 m³/d) escaped from the well just before it was capped.[9] It is believed that the daily flow rate diminished over time, starting at about 62,000 barrels per day (9,900 m³/d) and decreasing as the reservoir of hydrocarbons feeding the gusher was gradually depleted.[9] On September 19, 2010, the relief well process was successfully completed, and the federal government declared the well "effectively dead".[12]
The spill caused extensive damage to marine and wildlife habitats and to the Gulf's fishing and tourism industries.[13][14] In late November 2010, 4,200 square miles (11,000 km²) of the Gulf were re-closed to shrimping after tar balls were found in shrimpers' nets.[15] The amount of Louisiana shoreline affected by oil grew from 287 miles (462 km) in July to 320 miles (510 km) in late November 2010.[16] In January 2011, an oil spill commissioner reported that tar balls continue to wash up, oil sheen trails are seen in the wake of fishing boats, wetlands marsh grass remains fouled and dying, and that crude oil lies offshore in deep water and in fine silts and sands onshore.[17] A research team found oil on the bottom of the seafloor in late February 2011 that did not seem to be degrading.[18] Skimmer ships, floating containment booms, anchored barriers, sand-filled barricades along shorelines, and dispersants were used in an attempt to protect hundreds of miles of beaches, wetlands, and estuaries from the spreading oil. Scientists have also reported immense underwater plumes of dissolved oil not visible at the surface[19] as well as an 80-square-mile (210 km²) "kill zone" surrounding the blown well.[20]
The U.S. Government has named BP as the responsible party, and officials have committed to holding the company accountable for all cleanup costs and other damage.[21] After its own internal probe, BP admitted that it made mistakes which led to the Gulf of Mexico oil spill.[22]


An overwhelming body of evidence from investigative hearings, media reports, and Deepwater Horizon rig workers demonstrates that the April 20 explosion and subsequent oil spill was a direct product of the negligence and cost-cutting of BP. In the months, days and hours leading up to the disaster, the energy giant ignored numerous warnings that a blowout was likely so that it could hurry its Macondo well into production.
This blatant disregard for workers’ and environmental safety was possible only due to the near total absence of government regulation. BP and rig operator Transocean could trample over safety concerns in the knowledge that there would be no consequences from the federal agency with primary jurisdiction over deep-sea oil drilling, the Minerals Management Service (MMS) of the US Department of the Interior.

One year since the BP oil spill: A colossal failure of the ?free market?
 
Back
Top Bottom