• 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!

The Food Stamp Capital of the U.S. is WHITE and REPUBLICAN

Fletch said:
Because the argument against programs like food stamps was never one based on skin color or party affiliation--except in the empty, race-obsessed minds of liberals.
Click to expand...

And what is the argument?
 
SheWolf said:
Read these forums.
Click to expand...

I have. Racists do what you say, and there are racists in both parties. The GOP as a party does not condone or portray what you said. I'm a member of the GOP, and I don't think that poverty or dependence on government programs has anything to do with race.

Race doesn't, and shouldn't, enter into the conversation about Welfare Reform. I live in the country. A rural area where poverty knows no racial boundaries, as is the same everywhere else.

Let me set the record straight for anyone that cares:

1) The GOP is not a racist party.
2) Some people that happen to also be members of the GOP are in fact racist, as are some people that are members of the Democratic Party.
3) I am a member of the GOP, and have been for over 40 years.
4) I feel that Welfare Reform is needed.
5) I am not a racist.

That alone makes your statement inaccurate.

Trust me, I get it. I can understand how you or anyone else could think what you said was true, given the way the media portrays the GOP and how loud the racist few that exist can be. They can suck the oxygen out of any room they show up in. If you wish to call some right wing assholes on here racists when they act racist, then go right ahead. I do, so you should, too. However, don't throw the entire Republican Party under the bus because of a few racist assholes, just as I don't throw the entire Democratic Party under the bus because of a few racist assholes.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
You stated that one loses $0.24 (in SNAP benefits?) for each additional (reported) dollar earned. There is also a payroll (FICA) tax of about $0.08 for each additional dollar earned and many SNAP recipients also qualify for other "safety net" assistance which could also be cut as their (reported) earnings increase. After the 20 hour minimum then each additional hour worked (on the books) at the federal MW ($7.25/hour) nets no more than $4.93/hour - why would you expect anyone to work "on the books" for less than $5/hour? Anyone with even half a brain would work for only the minimum required 20 hours of reported income, get full safety net benefits and then work to earn as much "off the books" income as possible.
Click to expand...

Which would make them full time workers. To do this they would need a skill that someone would pay for, and be willing not to deduct from their own taxes, It's not very likely for the elderly and disabled, who make up 62% of the people receiving SNAP. Since the govt checks out assets on a regular basis, they can't be making much - no new car, etc.
 
Angelus said:
Which would make them full time workers. To do this they would need a skill that someone would pay for, and be willing not to deduct from their own taxes, It's not very likely for the elderly and disabled, who make up 62% of the people receiving SNAP. Since the govt checks out assets on a regular basis, they can't be making much - no new car, etc.
Click to expand...

Which is exactly what I do at age 63. It doesn't take much in the way of special skills to paint, clear brush, haul junk, mend fences, mow grass or to do many other chores (odd jobs) that folks are quite willing to pay cash to have done. I have yet to get paid less than $15/hour.
 
Beaudreaux said:
I have. Racists do what you say, and there are racists in both parties. The GOP as a party does not condone or portray what you said. I'm a member of the GOP, and I don't think that poverty or dependence on government programs has anything to do with race.

Race doesn't, and shouldn't, enter into the conversation about Welfare Reform. I live in the country. A rural area where poverty knows no racial boundaries, as is the same everywhere else.

Let me set the record straight for anyone that cares:

1) The GOP is not a racist party.
2) Some people that happen to also be members of the GOP are in fact racist, as are some people that are members of the Democratic Party.
3) I am a member of the GOP, and have been for over 40 years.
4) I feel that Welfare Reform is needed.
5) I am not a racist.

That alone makes your statement inaccurate.

Trust me, I get it. I can understand how you or anyone else could think what you said was true, given the way the media portrays the GOP and how loud the racist few that exist can be. They can suck the oxygen out of any room they show up in. If you wish to call some right wing assholes on here racists when they act racist, then go right ahead. I do, so you should, too. However, don't throw the entire Republican Party under the bus because of a few racist assholes, just as I don't throw the entire Democratic Party under the bus because of a few racist assholes.
Click to expand...

Wow! Thank you! I agree with every word you say!
 
ttwtt78640 said:
Which is exactly what I do at age 63. It doesn't take much in the way of special skills to paint, clear brush, haul junk, mend fences, mow grass or to do many other chores (odd jobs) that folks are quite willing to pay cash to have done. I have yet to get paid less than $15/hour.
Click to expand...


Good for you! I've been disabled for 10 years now - can't do a damn thing. So should I have my hypothetical food stamps cut because you can work? How do you tell the difference between the two.
 
Beaudreaux said:
I have. Racists do what you say, and there are racists in both parties. The GOP as a party does not condone or portray what you said. I'm a member of the GOP, and I don't think that poverty or dependence on government programs has anything to do with race.

Race doesn't, and shouldn't, enter into the conversation about Welfare Reform. I live in the country. A rural area where poverty knows no racial boundaries, as is the same everywhere else.

Let me set the record straight for anyone that cares:

1) The GOP is not a racist party.
2) Some people that happen to also be members of the GOP are in fact racist, as are some people that are members of the Democratic Party.
3) I am a member of the GOP, and have been for over 40 years.
4) I feel that Welfare Reform is needed.
5) I am not a racist.

That alone makes your statement inaccurate.

Trust me, I get it. I can understand how you or anyone else could think what you said was true, given the way the media portrays the GOP and how loud the racist few that exist can be. They can suck the oxygen out of any room they show up in. If you wish to call some right wing assholes on here racists when they act racist, then go right ahead. I do, so you should, too. However, don't throw the entire Republican Party under the bus because of a few racist assholes, just as I don't throw the entire Democratic Party under the bus because of a few racist assholes.
Click to expand...

It is the way the GOP and individual posters on this site talk about black people and "black issues." Black issues is basically poverty, crime, and welfare, and black people have been taken by the liberals and reduced to living in generational cycles of poverty and government assistance via welfare. It's a major theme in how republicans talk about black voters and their loyalty to the Democratic Party. White people living in poverty and living on welfare and government assistance are largely dismissed. The GOP as a whole should recognize that welfare and poverty isn't about race. There are plenty of white people dependent on welfare and food stamps and voting for the GOP.
 
shrubnose said:
Some people just don't have any empathy for people who are struggling to survive.They wouldn't give a blind man 10 cents for a pencil if they had a pocket full of change.
Click to expand...

Welfare has nothing to do with empathy.
 
Angelus said:
Good for you! I've been disabled for 10 years now - can't do a damn thing. So should I have my hypothetical food stamps cut because you can work? How do you tell the difference between the two.
Click to expand...

Can't do a damn thing and yet you're posting on the internet. I guess you can use a computer just fine. Guess how many ways you can use that to make money from where you sit.
 
Angelus said:
The Food Stamp Capital of the U.S. is WHITE and REPUBLICAN : Political Blind Spot

In spite of the prevailing stereotypes and assumptions about who uses SNAP Food Stamp benefits the most in the United States, the highest usage is not in Compton, Queens, nor the South Side of Chicago. Instead, a city that is 99.22% white and 95% Republican comes in the lead. Owsley County, Kentucky is a community of about 5,000, residents earning the lowest median household income in the country outside of Puerto Rico, according to the U.S. Census.

The decline in the profits from coal, tobacco and lumber industries led to a harsh toll being taken on the community.

The majority of food stamps users are white, Republicans living in the south - a large part of the Republican base. Food stamps are a necessary tool for survival in areas where jobs have disappeared. Work requirements for unemployed food stamps recipients, put in place in 1999, require that able-bodied adults between the ages of 18 and 59, and without dependents, can only receive food stamps for 3 months in a 3-year period unless they are working for at least 20 hours a week or engaged in job training, education, or community service for a certain number of hours each week.

The benefits are intended as short-term assistance for those who can be working, until they can get back on their feet. An increasing number of SNAP households have earnings, which means these are households in which one of the two wage-earners lost their job, or increasing numbers of Americans are in lower-wage jobs or not getting enough hours to cover rising rents, heating, health care costs, and other necessary expenses, including food. 62% of food stamp recipients are either working , disabled, or elderly. Only 18% are able bodied adults with no children.

All of food stamp income is immediately put into circulation in the community - hence cutting food stamps will result in fewer jobs available. Food stamps are structured to encourage people to work more hours - they lose 24 cents for each dollar earned. Overall they are less than 2% of the national budget, all of which goes into support for those living at 130% of the federal poverty rate, and to support stores in the affected areas.

So - now tht a few fcts have been added to the discussion - why are so many here so eager to cut food stamps.
Click to expand...

Who cares. these programs are based on need. Would anyone want it any other way?
 
SheWolf said:
Read these forums.
Click to expand...
Oh...I dont know. I seem to recall numerous times talking about the poverty experienced universally, especially in the Appalachian states which are vastly majority white communities. Which makes the concept of 'white privilege' seem even more inane...right?

Race is not the great qualifier. Poverty is.
 
Angelus said:
Good for you! I've been disabled for 10 years now - can't do a damn thing. 1) So should I have my hypothetical food stamps cut because you can work? [b2) [/b]]How do you tell the difference between the two.
Click to expand...

1) Should I pay for your hypothetical food stamps because I do work or only if I make (or report) "too much"?

2) The two what?
 
SheWolf said:
It is the way the GOP and individual posters on this site talk about black people and "black issues." Black issues is basically poverty, crime, and welfare, and black people have been taken by the liberals and reduced to living in generational cycles of poverty and government assistance via welfare. It's a major theme in how republicans talk about black voters and their loyalty to the Democratic Party. White people living in poverty and living on welfare and government assistance are largely dismissed. The GOP as a whole should recognize that welfare and poverty isn't about race. There are plenty of white people dependent on welfare and food stamps and voting for the GOP.
Click to expand...

Your perceptions of how some people act is not wrong. The people you blame for acting that way, is wrong. As I said, there are racist people, but the Republican Party is not a racist party. Also, as I said, poverty knows no race. Poverty also knows no party.

Some people can't understand why anyone that is living in poverty would want to be a member of the GOP, or vote for any Republican. Some people think that if a poor person votes for a Republican then they are voting against their what's best for them. What it comes down to is one basic question - who do you think should be making your life choices for you - the government, or you? The Republicans believe that it should be you, not the government, as do even some Democrats as well (they are called 'Blue Dog' Democrats).

Both parties believe in the government taking the place of the old style barn raising. What do I mean by that? Back in the day, when a family fell on hard times when their barn burned to the ground, the people from the surrounding area would bring as many boards, nails, tools, etcetera that they could spare and bring them over to family that needed them and then they all as a group built a new barn for that family. The same happens today at funerals, when neighbors bring over food to help out, or cut the grass for you, or run errands for you while you grieve, morn your loss, and deal with the pain of managing a funeral. It's part of our American Culture. To help each other when one of us needs help.

In modern times, it's difficult for the neighbors, family, and your 'church family' to bring to bear the level of help that modern poverty requires. We no longer grow our own food and live a self sufficient and sustainable lifestyle. We need money, not boards or nails to build our barn, or seeds to plant.

For that, we have as a society chosen to allow our government to spread out the costs of helping our fellow citizens in the modern version of the barn raising. On a large scale, we do that through government agencies like FEMA and other agencies on the federal level as well as state and local agencies that rebuild our communities to mitigate hazards, protect life and property, and recover the local economy to the benefit of the community at large. On a smaller individual scale we do the same for individuals and families with food stamps, housing assistance, WIC, Medicaid, and dozens of other programs.

The problem, and the question, is not whether the government should be used by the people to step in when we need help as a community after a major disaster or as an individual when poverty, or disability, or a personal tragedy strikes. The problem, and the question, is how much, for what, and for how long. That's really the only place we differ.

The Republicans want to help. We do not believe that perpetuating poverty through dependence is helping. Within the GOP, we have our own major battles to fight as to how to accomplish the helping, without creating the dependency and without perpetuating harm by not helping the right way. The Democrats, from my personal observations, have the same problems and arguments going on within their own party as the GOP does. The difference, however, is that the Democrats leadership tends to err toward throwing more money at a problem rather than doing the hard part, which is fixing the problem without breaking the financial backs of the tax payers - with the exception of a few like Bill Clinton back when he was President. The Republicans, lately, tend to just complain about budgets, deficits, and debt, rather than coming up with plans or even ideas that might (not can, but at least might) work - with the exception of a few like Paul Ryan when he was on the House Budget Committee.

We're not really as far apart as parties or as people as you may think, and damned sure not as far apart as the media wants us to think we are.
 
Henrin said:
Can't do a damn thing and yet you're posting on the internet. I guess you can use a computer just fine. Guess how many ways you can use that to make money from where you sit.
Click to expand...

Please tell me - and I'll see if I have the skill set. Keep in mind this is a fairly old computer, so any graphics are out. I've worked since I was 15 years old, but right now...not seeing it.

So, you think the disabled and the elderly should find under the table employment, and lose govt help of all sorts?
 
ttwtt78640 said:
1) Should I pay for your hypothetical food stamps because I do work or only if I make (or report) "too much"?

2) The two what?
Click to expand...

I paid toward your roads, libraries, parks. police protection, fire protection. schools, snail mail, hospitals, emergency services, protection against terrorist attacks and a whole helluva lot more. Personally, if you agree never to drive on a road paid by public dollars and never to call the police or the fire department or use any emergency services then - oh, wait, you're already using them. Since you are clearly benefiting greatly from other who have paid and still paid, then you should pay your fair share instead of being a leech.
 
Henrin said:
Welfare has nothing to do with empathy.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...



If you don't see that feeding and housing hungry,homeless people should be done you know nothing about empathy.

It doesn't surprise me to see a comment like this from someone like you.
 
Fletch said:
Because the argument against programs like food stamps was never one based on skin color or party affiliation--except in the empty, race-obsessed minds of liberals.
Click to expand...
A slight tangent, but is an obsession with political labelling any better than an obsession with racial labelling?
 
Angelus said:
I paid toward your roads, libraries, parks. police protection, fire protection. schools, snail mail, hospitals, emergency services, protection against terrorist attacks and a whole helluva lot more. Personally, if you agree never to drive on a road paid by public dollars and never to call the police or the fire department or use any emergency services then - oh, wait, you're already using them. Since you are clearly benefiting greatly from other who have paid and still paid, then you should pay your fair share instead of being a leech.
Click to expand...

I suspect he paid an equal or greater sum toward those services you mention than you did, so he is not being a leech. Plus there is a vast difference between paying for services you mention and direct wealth transfers that simply rob Peter to pay Paul. If you are looking for a leech, it is the Pauls of the world.
 
Angelus said:
I paid toward your roads, libraries, parks. police protection, fire protection. schools, snail mail, hospitals, emergency services, protection against terrorist attacks and a whole helluva lot more. Personally, if you agree never to drive on a road paid by public dollars and never to call the police or the fire department or use any emergency services then - oh, wait, you're already using them. Since you are clearly benefiting greatly from other who have paid and still paid, then you should pay your fair share instead of being a leech.
Click to expand...

Slow down there, Skippy. You are mixing local, state and federal government services and seem to be assuming that they all "must be" funded by (federal?) income taxation. I once paid a bunch in federal income and payroll taxes in the past (like you once did?) so can't I now sit back and insist that I (must have?) paid my fair share (like you did?) too? Texas has no state income tax and yet somehow manages to fund its local and state government services.
 
shrubnose said:
If you don't see that feeding and housing hungry,homeless people should be done you know nothing about empathy.

It doesn't surprise me to see a comment like this from someone like you.
Click to expand...

Welfare can't be empathetic since it doesn't rely on voluntary action.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom