• 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!

Report: Nearly a quarter of all Americans struggle to afford food

Geeez, I wouldn't go THAT far. :shock:

I do think its high time to apply Bloomberg restrictions on what may be purchased with food stamps though. No sugar or sugary food; no cooking oil; nothing processed like white flour, white rice, white bread, white pasta or things made with them; nothing that contains a certain level of fat content recommended by nutritionists. I'd be willing to bet if these types of restrictions were placed on food stamps, grocery stores and the food industry would begin to stock and market more of the healthier stuff and the whole country would start eating and drinking healthier.

or simply replace food stamps with food warehouses where subsidized healthful food can be had by anyone who would qualify for food stamps.
 
Geeez, I wouldn't go THAT far. :shock:

I do think its high time to apply Bloomberg restrictions on what may be purchased with food stamps though. No sugar or sugary food; no cooking oil; nothing processed like white flour, white rice, white bread, white pasta or things made with them; nothing that contains a certain level of fat content recommended by nutritionists. I'd be willing to bet if these types of restrictions were placed on food stamps, grocery stores and the food industry would begin to stock and market more of the healthier stuff and the whole country would start eating and drinking healthier.

I see you have a good heart, but that good heart is turning you into a bleeding heart liberal. We have to be tough on the uncompetitive and useless or they will just ask for more, more, more. There is no reason why each and every one of them can't be a Bill Gates. But instead of improving themselves they smoke crack all day long.
 
I see you have a good heart, but that good heart is turning you into a bleeding heart liberal. We have to be tough on the uncompetitive and useless or they will just ask for more, more, more. There is no reason why each and every one of them can't be a Bill Gates. But instead of improving themselves they smoke crack all day long.

Qu'il mange de gateaux (excuse the spelling, French class was a long time ago)
Let them eat cake!
 
Only because about 75% of America probably doesn't know how to obtain low cost food or even grow their own.


Read more @: [/FONT][/COLOR]
Report: Nearly a quarter of all Americans struggle to afford food - Salon.com

Looks like many of our citizens are struggling to get one of the basic needs in this world; food. One of the richest countries in the world, no wait THE richest country in the world, and nearly 25% of our citizens are struggling to get food. [/INDENT]
 
Who would that be? I see no starving beggars on the street like in many if not most 3rd world countries.

i do not see starving people
but i see hungry people
about 280 a week these days
i am certain that some could afford to buy a meal for themselves if our soup kitchen was not open
but i am equally certain that most who show up to eat would not have access to a meal otherwise
which tells me we have hunger in the USA
and since the great recession, the numbers have increased
 
i do not see starving people
but i see hungry people
about 280 a week these days
i am certain that some could afford to buy a meal for themselves if our soup kitchen was not open
but i am equally certain that most who show up to eat would not have access to a meal otherwise
which tells me we have hunger in the USA
and since the great recession, the numbers have increased

Soup kitchens feed homeless which have a difficult time getting food stamps and it is a needed service for those that fall between the cracks. Would you agree that most patrons of these kitchens have drug and or alcohol problems?
 
Soup kitchens feed homeless which have a difficult time getting food stamps and it is a needed service for those that fall between the cracks. Would you agree that most patrons of these kitchens have drug and or alcohol problems?

no, i wouldn't
i do know some that do
maybe not a majority, but a significant portion have mental health issues
another substantial number have low level life and work skills. in a booming economy they would probably have low level, nominally sustaining jobs
but in our present economy, they have been displaced by higher skilled/higher functioning applicants
we have a group that exploits every free thing that society offers, including a free (well prepared) meal at the soup kitchen
and we have quite a few who are on the margins; this free meal saves them money they are able to spend on other needs
when we first embarked on this project 4.5 years ago, i expected a huge number of guests with chemical dependency problems. i have been presently surprised to see that number is not very large. but those that are addicted appear to also be among the most vulnerable, like many of those with severe mental health issues
 
Would you like me to link literally dozens of smart phones you can get for free with a two-year contract?

Do you think about the bull**** you regurgitate or do you just parrot it without question?

And you show us where all these dead families are that are starving to death. In fact, show me a poor family that isn't fat. Hard to find these days.

I'm not trying to sound insensitive, but the entitlement mentality in this country breeds people who expect things to be handled for them, and at no real sacrifice. These numbers are vastly overblown.
 
Jesus Christ listen to these right-wingers.

The people who are pointing out the reality? Absolutely. It's better than listening to the left-wingers who are just whining about how bad they feel for people without actually *THINKING* about it.
 
Would you like me to link literally dozens of smart phones you can get for free with a two-year contract?

Do you think about the bull**** you regurgitate or do you just parrot it without question?

And they have to pay that two-year contract month after month. That's money they could easily use to buy food with. If you're starving (and this study does not say that any of these people are starving), using your money to buy anything unnecessary is foolish.
 
I'd like to see their statistics and study method considering the fact that obesity is much more prevalent in poorer areas.
 
25% is not a bad statistic at all when you consider that just 1% of this country owns almost half of the wealth and the next 9% own the rest.

So 90% of the population has no money at all? Are you sure about that?
 
Last edited:
So 90% of the population has no money at all?

10% own just about everything, meaning that 90% don't own much at all in terms of wealth, yet only 25% of people are having problems finding enough food. Now if the bottom 90% had problems, it might be a serious issue, but just 25% means the system is working great and is just pushing the bottom 25% to try harder to make themselves more relevant and useful to those who own the capital.
 
10% own just about everything, meaning that 90% don't own much at all in terms of wealth...

Well that depends on your definition of "don't own much at all in terms of wealth". I earn an average salary, and even I have wealth. I personally know people who earn less than I do, more than I do, and the same as I do who have more wealth and less wealth than I do.

But you said that the top 10% own ALL of the wealth. That is a completely inaccurate and/or ignorant statement.
 
Well that depends on your definition of "don't own much at all in terms of wealth". I earn an average salary, and even I have wealth. I personally know people who earn less than I do, more than I do, and the same as I do who have more wealth and less wealth than I do.

But you said that the top 10% own ALL of the wealth. That i s a completely inaccurate and/or ignorant statement.

this graph supports the presentation that the wealth in the USA is concentrated in the upper 10%:
graph wealth distribution usa.png
It's the Inequality, Stupid | Mother Jones
 
this graph supports the presentation that the wealth in the USA is concentrated in the upper 10%:
View attachment 67148205
It's the Inequality, Stupid | Mother Jones

Which proves what exactly?

Subsidies, soil banking, dept of ag buy ups of surplus goods and stupid crap like gasahol, all have more to do with food prices and inability to buy food than that stupid chart.

You cant cry about income inequality at the same time as taxes and government are used to keep food prices high.
 
this graph supports the presentation that the wealth in the USA is concentrated in the upper 10%:
View attachment 67148205
It's the Inequality, Stupid | Mother Jones

"Concentrated" in the upper 10%" and "all of the wealth is owned by the top 10%", which is what kenc claimed, are two entirely different things.

My advice: If you're envious, become one of the top 10%. A lot of the people who bitch about/are envious of the top 10% could easily become one of them if they applied themselves and worked hard for it. But the problem is, a lot of people think that any old job, from Wal Mart greeter to fastening bolts onto doohickeys at the lawn mower manufacturing plant should provide them wealth that allows them to live like the elite. The world just doesn't work like that.
 
Last edited:
Which proves what exactly?

Subsidies, soil banking, dept of ag buy ups of surplus goods and stupid crap like gasahol, all have more to do with food prices and inability to buy food than that stupid chart.

You cant cry about income inequality at the same time as taxes and government are used to keep food prices high.

it confirms what was presented
the top 1 out of 100 citizens owns more than the combined wealth of the 90 out of 100 citizens
that is an extraordinary disparity
 
"Concentrated" in the upper 10%" and "all of the wealth is owned by the top 10%", which is what kenc claimed, are two entirely different things.

My advice: If you're envious, become one of the top 10%. A lot of the people who bitch about/are envious of the top 10% could easily become one of them if they applied themselves and worked hard for it. But the problem is, a lot of people think that any old job, from Wal Mart greeter to fastening bolts onto doohickeys at the lawn mower manufacturing plant should provide them wealth that allows them to live like the elite. The world just doesn't work like that.
your post assumes that i am not in the top 10%, an assumption you cannot make
you also assume this has anything to do with envy

it has everything to do with equity
it proves what was stated, compared to the top 1 out of 100, the collective 90 out of 100 owns less wealth
there are always going to be winners and losers, but let's keep the playing field level
and economically, it is not. we have the best government money can buy
 
your post assumes that i am not in the top 10%, an assumption you cannot make
you also assume this has anything to do with envy

it has everything to do with equity
it proves what was stated, compared to the top 1 out of 100, the collective 90 out of 100 owns less wealth
there are always going to be winners and losers, but let's keep the playing field level
and economically, it is not. we have the best government money can buy

So the average professional athlete owns a lot more wealth than I do, so what? That is the equivalent of what CEOs and executives are to corporations. They are the extremely talented, not just anyone can do what they do, and that's why they are paid as much as they are. Are they way overpaid? In my opinion yes they are, but it's not my decision on what to pay them.

When I said "you" in my previous post, it was in general, not you specifically. Sorry for the confusion.
 
it confirms what was presented
the top 1 out of 100 citizens owns more than the combined wealth of the 90 out of 100 citizens
that is an extraordinary disparity

Riiiight, so to have a point you would need to prove how that differs from any other point in history and how it impacts starvation stemming from poverty.

My contention is our ag system is inefficient because it has a government subsidy net larger than that for those in poverty. I bet I can make my point a lot easier than you can yours.
 
How much of this percentage is self-imposed hardship resulting from poor financial planning/management? Thats what I would like to know.
 
Well that depends on your definition of "don't own much at all in terms of wealth". I earn an average salary, and even I have wealth. I personally know people who earn less than I do, more than I do, and the same as I do who have more wealth and less wealth than I do.

But you said that the top 10% own ALL of the wealth. That is a completely inaccurate and/or ignorant statement.

Yes, you are right. I was basing that off of a plutocratic report which stated that very soon the top 10% will own all the wealth and the bottom 90% will be at their mercy. I guess I have to wait a little more.
 
Back
Top Bottom