Smart. Sharp. Funny. Fearless.
Sunday, October 23, 2016

For decades, I’ve proudly asserted that “nobody starves to death in America.” The comment has been addressed to acerbic critics of the American government, often foreign visitors, who insist that the United States is a mean-spirited place that casts aside its weak and fragile citizens.

I still contend that nobody starves to death here, but I’ve had to modify my claims about the country’s social safety net. Even if no one dies for lack of basic nutrition, plenty of people go to bed hungry every night. And if Congress’ harsh Republican caucus has its way, some may starve.

That’s because the band of ultraconservatives who control the House are bent on deep cuts to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), otherwise known as food stamps. They passed a farm bill laden with welfare for farmers, but they left out one of its biggest traditional components: food stamps. It was the first time since 1973 that the nutrition program had been left out of the farm bill.

Now, negotiations have started between the Senate and the House to try to reconcile the upper chamber’s more charitable version with the one the lower chamber put together. It will be a tough slog since the two bills are billions of dollars apart. The Senate wants to cut $4 billion from SNAP over 10 years, while the House wants to cut nearly $40 billion.

Perhaps the most appalling thing about the farm bill presented by the ultraconservatives in the House is that it makes little pretense of cutting spending by ferreting out wastefulness or fraud, no feint at an all-out assault on the deficit. Instead, this is just a base and ugly assault on the working poor.

Oh, conservatives claimed that their cuts to food stamps were in response to fraud, as their claque filled the airwaves with the same example of a carefree California surfer enjoying his “wonderful” life on food stamps. They neglected to point to government data which show that SNAP is among the most efficient of government programs, with fraudulent spending restricted to about 2 percent of its budget.

Meanwhile, the same conservatives have said nothing — nothing — about the millions of dollars in fraud related to farm subsidies. A June audit by the Government Accountability Office found that millions of dollars in subsidies have been sent to farmers who’ve been dead for at least a year. That’s just the illegal stuff.

That doesn’t touch the entirely legal fraud: The entire network of agricultural subsidies is a massive boondoggle, welfare to people who hardly need it. While conservatives hector the working poor about their alleged laziness, some agricultural programs pay farmers not to plant. Why don’t Fox News and Rush Limbaugh ever talk about that?

  • Dominick Vila

    While it is, obviously, true that nobody starves to death in the USA, I think it is also evident that both a fairly large segment of our population and many members of Congress are determined to take away the means that allow our most vulnerable citizens to live with a modicum of dignity. The attacks directed at senior citizens, students, the poor, and the lower middle class are part of a concerted effort to maintain and, if possible, enhance the redistribution of wealth from the public to the private sector in the form of direct subsidies, loopholes, and favorable taxation, to those who can least afford a reduction or the elimination of social benefits.
    The same people who remain indifferent when wealthy members of our society, such as Michele Bachman, get a subsidy become enraged when they learn that a single mother serving tables 12 hours is collecting food stamps because she does not earn enough money to feed her child.

    • foundingprinciples

      The issue is really that people think that they are “entitled,” and are getting food stamps despite the fact that they have things like cable TV, computer hookups, pets, iPods, texting services, and on and on. Despite having this, they still expect the citizens to give them food.

      Take a look at this chart, for example, and it is from the US Department of Energy. It shows how putative “poor” households have TWO color TVs, cable, microwave, cell phones, etc., and compares this to “non-poor” homes. Not much difference.

      • Dominick Vila

        There is no question that the government must focus on the elimination of fraud and abuse, which does exist, but that does not mean we should ignore and punish those who truly need help for a variety of reasons. Millions of Americans lost their jobs, their houses, and everything they had during the great recession. Many can’t find good jobs because they don’t have the education needed to qualify for good jobs, some cannot find work because they are over qualified and employers are reluctant to spend money in recruiting and training on people they believe will quit as soon as they can find a better job. The reasons for people being unemployed, poor, and in dire straits are countless and, more often than not, easy to understand. Again, one thing is to focus on the elimination of fraud and abuse, which should be pursued, proposing the elimination of programs that help our most vulnerable citizens, including veterans who cannot find work, people with physical and mental impairments, and those who have been left behind is an entirely different matter, and something that does not deserve to be debated in a country like ours.

        • Suralin

          Agreed. I’ll say again: If conservatives really, genuinely want people to not have to rely on the government, then they should start hiring large-scale, and raise wages.

          Of course, that’ll never happen in the US until our wages are as low as China’s or Mexico’s.

          Heh. I wonder if it’d be possible to organize the formation of unions in China and Mexico, just so the labor prices here in the States are competitive again. Workers of the (rest of the) world, unite! :p

          • Dominick Vila

            Salaries in China and Mexico have been going up steadily during the last decade or so. The reason so many American companies continue to invest in China has more to do with a desire to get market share in a country that has half the population in the world, than taking advantage of low wages and benefits. Companies focused strictly on the bottom line are investing heavily in countries like Bangladesh, and when the economy and salaries in that country start going up, they’ll move elsewhere. The operative word is GREED.
            Needless to say, our goal and focus should be on finding ways to make products made in the USA more competitive, without cutting the salaries and benefits of Americans workers down to Third World levels. Perhaps we should take a look at what Germany and the Scandinavian countries are doing, instead of insisting on a socio-economic model that is not working.

          • Independent1

            Dominick – A resurgence back to America is starting. See this:

            Re-Made in America: 5M Jobs Are Coming Back, Report Says

            By Stacy Curtin | Daily Ticker – Tue, Sep 25, 2012 8:35 AM EDT

            Key findings from the report include:

            In less than three years, the U.S. will have a cost advantage of 5% to 25% over Germany, Italy, France, the U.K., and Japan in a number of industries, including machinery, chemicals, transportation equipment as well as electrical and appliance equipment.

            America’s natural gas boom from shale (commonly referred to as “fracking”) has provided this country with some of the cheapest natural gas prices around the world. For the foreseeable future, natural gas prices will remain 50% to 70% cheaper in the U.S. versus Europe and Japan.

            Labor costs in other developed economies will be 20% to 45% more expensive compared to the costs of hiring U.S. workers.
            The U.S. could grab additional exports from the forementioned nations to the tune of $130 billion annually. Average manufacturing costs in China will only be 7% lower compared to in the U.S in 2015.

            See more at:


          • Dominick Vila

            That is very true, especially the part about fracking and its impact on gas prices in the USA. Unfortunately, much of the gains made involve lowering our standard of living, which I don’t think it is something we should be proud of.
            Contrary to what many Americans believe, our tax rates are among the lowest in the industrialized world, our level of spending on Defense and intelligence is second to none, investment in infrastructure, R&D and education is lacking; and the benefit packages we get from our employers – where there is one – is grossly inadequate.
            Our fiscal problems are caused by our insistence to not pay for what we want and benefit from, because of our refusal to invest public funds in what ought to be our top priorities, rather than blowing our treasure financing Roman empire style legions. And because of the wrong conviction that our system and way of life are the envy of the world. Nothing could be farthest from the truth.

          • Independent1

            What we need is for the truly wealthy, those who are constantly donating money to keep the money suckers in politics, (the GOP politicians of today whose primary intent is to pass legislation that funnels money to themselves and their wealth donors), to realize that they are playing a game of diminishing returns. The more they shift the balance of America’s wealth to themselves and away from the 98%, the less and less the 98% will have to feed their money frenzy.
            The longer that companies like Walmart, Dunkin Donuts, Burger King and other multiNationals insist on paying below poverty level wages, the quicker that the 1 & 2%s’ return on their donations to the money suckers will drain what little money is left in the 98% and the wealthy themselves will start to experience vastly diminishing returns.
            It’s unfortunate that the wealthy and their legislative bidders can’t understand that a rising tide lifts all boats. They just can’t see that by depressing the rabbles’ standard of living, as you described, that they are setting themselves up for failure also. They can’t see that many countries in the world who appear to be prospering, are prospering because of demand from America. The economies of China and India and some other countries are improving, not primarily because of increased internal demand for the products and services made in those countries, but primarily because of their ability to sell their products and services to America.
            Although many of the wealthies may think that if they drain all surplus monies from America’s 98% that they will simply shift to sucking money from other economies, that may well not pan out, because the low wages and earning power of non Americans & non Europeans is so low, that the populations of these countries will have even less monies available for the wealthy to suck than even the depressed 98% of America. Satisfying the greed of America’s 1&2% has to end sometime; and that sometime may come sooner than the 1&2% realize.

          • sigrid28

            Republicans who want to get people off food assistance would look a lot less hypocritical if they supported the American Jobs Act that addresses both jobs (providing two million) and the need to improve the infrastructure–or the establishment of a living wage.

      • CherokeeNative

        So, in your way of thinking, the Median Poor Family with Children should have nothing in the form of comfort or entertainment if they want to eat. In your way of thinking, if / when you lose your job, be sure to sell all your nice electronics and luxury goods immediately Never mind that they were a gift, or you bought them years ago.

        Since you are so good w/charts, you might ask yourself who will also be first in line with a hand out for benefits when they lose a job or fall on hard times, have family to house and feed, and qualify to receive them? That’s right: People like you. The same people who spend a hell of a lot of time claiming that people on government assistance are all undeserving and grifting the system and not really in need because they are, say, clean and are not wearing rags or being extra-careful to only appear in public while exhibiting visible signs of long-term poverty like, say, neglected teeth or unkempt hair and tattered sackcloth outfits.

        Oh, you might also want to sell your car, too, unless it is a Piece Of Shit, because clearly no one receiving unemployment benefits or welfare could possibly have purchased a decent vehicle long prior to losing a job, getting a divorce, having unexpected healthcare expenses that devastated their finances, or just generally falling on hard times. You also don’t ever want to borrow a friend or family member’s car if you DO sell yours to make ends meet, because if it is even slightly nice or of recent vintage, you will be judged as not being needy enough for assistance of any sort.

        Think this is an exaggeration? Some Republicans are busily trying to make it a law that if you own a car of any description, you will be unable to receive SNAP benefits (that’s food for the poor, if you aren’t familiar with the term) until you sell that car. This plan is Rush Limbaugh-approved, so you know it is empathetic and fair and kind-hearted and rational. (Yeah…no.) So while you are struggling to find work, and being told that you need reliable transportation to be hired (try to find a decently compensated job that does not require employees to have their own transportation), and being scorned for being unemployed, Republicans want to take your personal transportation away (while blocking any public transportation-related programs, mind you) or deny you help with food. Nice people.

        Yes, you must sell everything you own that is even remotely nice, you must dress nicely (but not TOO nicely) when you are out in public, and you need to feel like a complete and utter failure before seeking help. Never mind that it is nearly impossible to get by without a mobile phone or reliable transportation these days.

        Hey, poor person; hey, you unemployed person: your phone is too nice and isn’t there public transportation you could be using instead? Of course, anyone who has ever had to rely on public transportation realizes that it is unreliable, often late, sometimes fails to arrive at all, is almost always dirty and smelly and unpleasant, and if you need to get to work or home from work using it, then you get to hang out in unsafe places (often in the dark, and rarely covered to protect you from rain or heat or wind) by yourself (enjoy your mugging).

        Of course, if you do wind up sitting on a sidewalk with a cup, these same assholes will walk past you like you are invisible or hiss “get a job” at you.

        Also, if you are not white, these rules apply double to you. Because the majority of welfare recipients in the United States are white.

        Conservatives, it may fit your personal narrative and make you feel better about your courageous stance of denying the needy any assistance (while protecting tax breaks for corporations and toadying up to the wealthiest people in our country) and assuming that every single person on assistance is lazy and taking advantage of the system and so on, but I do hope you will remember to eat your words with a nice side of crow should you ever be in a position where you or a loved one need a little help from your neighbors. You probably won’t.

        As mentioned above, I’m very familiar with the all-too-common conservative refrain that goes: “All MY problems are 100% not my fault, all YOUR problems are 100% due to bad decision-making and laziness on YOUR part, so while I deserve some help when I am struggling, you need to Learn A Lesson About Personal Responsibility and Pull Yourself Up By Your Bootstraps and Not Be A Beggar.”

        Aren’t you glad that there are some liberal folks who are willing to lend you a helping hand when you fall on hard times? Because you and your conservative friends typically begrudge any kind of assistance to anyone…unless they are already rich or are a business…or unless it is YOU who needs some help.

        The least you can do, if empathy and compassion are too difficult for you, is not be an arrogant dick about your extreme selfishness. Give it a try.

        The newest “funny” anti-welfare meme circulating around Facebook by assholes who enjoy demonizing the poor claims that the poor are spending their welfare checks on luxury goods. O RLY? Do tell.

        • docb

          More hypocrisy from the repub baggers shiftless takers!!..the red states take more out than they put in!

          Another example:

        • foundingprinciples

          No, don’t sell the stuff. But you paint a mythical picture, one that is quite absurd.

          If people are so poor that they cannot afford food, did this come overnight? If you say “yes” you are a liar or an idiot. Or maybe brainwashed by your ideology and hate.

          If one has no savings on which to fall back, what was one doing with cable TV, pets, and computer hookups, then?

          It is bullshit to claim that these things hit them overnight. The people are indulging themselves in the 200-channel cable and such, then lose the job. Oh my God! No money in the bank! No savings! Nothing!

          But shit! I wanna keep my pets, my cable, my text-messaging service, my internet connection! Can’t give up those. Hey, get the FOOD STAMPS. I never saved anything before when I did have a job, but what the heck – the government will give me stuff.

          • allannde

            What people of your persuasion forget is everyone is resourceful and works hard to find ways to maximize the opportunities which they are aware of, not just the rich. I was a professional person before I retired but fell on hard times for a short period. In that time I took a minimum wage job and was amazed that the competition for those jobs was even greater than that for a professional job. People’s needs are not that different who ever they are. To insist that the poor act destitute is to insist that they are not real people.

            That is the problem with your point of view.

          • foundingprinciples

            Well, tell them to give up their 200-channel cable and their pets, and their internet connection. Tell people to be saving WHILE they are working, and do not put out their hands after not disciplining their saving habits for years, expecting those who did to foot the bill for their irresponsibility and lack of self-control.

            You fell on “hard times?” What does that mean?

          • Dominick Vila

            Founding, your argument is vintage Reagan and follows his example of a welfare Queen driving her Cadillac to collect her welfare check. When was the last time you met or went to the house of a poor person or someone who had just lost his/her job and cannot find work? Yes, there are abusers, and effort must be made to get them off the system, but the overwhelming majority of those who don’t have enough money to put food on the table don’t own a PC, don’t have Internet access, don’t have cable TV, and if they ever had a pet they gave it away long ago. Regarding the latter, I got my dog from a young woman with three little daughters who lost her job and could not take care of their dog. I am glad I got him, but I have to admit that it breaks my heart every time those little girls see me walking my dog and come to pet him. People are not poor because they want to be poor, and it is our responsibility, as a society and as members of the richest and most powerful country in the world to help the less fortunate among us get the basic care they need to subsist. Needless to say, our top priority should also be to do everything in our power to ensure they can find a job.

          • foundingprinciples

            Nah. The welfare scammers drive Hondas now.

            WENT to the house of a poor person? Heck, I actually lived among them for a year! That is one, and only one, way I know about the cheating, malingering, scamming, and con artistry. They would BRAG about how they messed up job interviews, so that they could tell the social worker that they “tried,” actually went on an interview, sniff, sniff. The young and healthy lady upstairs would have her boyfriend – the father of her child – come when the social worker was sure not to be around. Didn’t wanna lose the “benefits,” ya know.

            Heck, I was actually asked to give a diagnosis of a child as “disabled” and I was surprised because the kid was normal. My co-worker laughed at me. I did not realize the mother wanted to “collect”: If she could get the kid labeled, she could get her SSI, housing, FOOD STAMPS, whatever…..

            I could go on and on and on with what I experience, saw and heard, pal.

          • plc97477

            Another thing floundering seems to not know is that many of the people who use food stamps are working, sometimes more than one job and still can’t afford food for their families.

          • Dominick Vila

            You are right. Most food stamp recipients work, and those who don’t are eagerly searching for work. In my opinion, the root cause for many of the social problems we have involves the fact that a large segment of our population is unprepared to apply and get jobs that require a higher education. The large number of foreign medical doctors, nurses, engineers, programmers, physicists, chemists and other professionals working in our country are not here because we like their accent, they are here to satisfy demand and offset the effect of so many young Americans pursuing liberal arts degrees.

          • Independent1

            And guess who are ones that are doing this the most?? Republicans in Red States. Isn’t it interesting that clueless GOP legislators in the House are actually trying to take the food out ofthe mouths of the people who voted them into office?? While at the same time funnelling billions of dollars into the pockets of Big Oil, Big Agri-Business and their corrupt weathy donors like the Koch Bros!! The hypocracy is astounding!!!
            And with the actual abuse rate for food stamps at less than 2% (it’s actually closer to 1.5%), attacking this program just hightens the hypocracy when the abuse of several other GOP favored programs like is pointed out in the article – farming subsidies is so much worse AND THEY’RE DOING NOTHING ABOUT THAT!!!
            Get off your high horse you crumbag and go slither back under that rock!!!!!! Your absolutely lack of compassion is actually sickening!!!

          • foundingprinciples

            Does not change anything if people in red states are doing it. Doesn’t change a thing.

          • Dominick Vila

            Four million in Texas.

          • 4sanity4all

            Try to get a job with no internet or text messaging. And should they take their pet out back and shoot it? No one said that poverty hit anyone overnight. It creeps up, and meanwhile, you keep hoping that the new job will come tomorrow, so you put off getting rid of all the things you worked so hard for, and which comfort your family. But I guess in your world, people must immediately put on sackcloth and ashes, to avoid offending judgmental jerks such as yourself.

          • foundingprinciples

            There are computers at the library. Case closed. Oh, give the pet to a relative or the humane society. Stop using taxpayer money to feed the DOG.

          • sigrid28

            SNAP benefits do not cover pet food–or liquor or cigarettes or medicine, for that matter. Only nutrition.

          • foundingprinciples

            Why don’t you read what I wrote? I will write it yet again; I believe it it the FOURTH time. Over and over.

            I never said, implied, hinted, or intimated that FOOD STAMPS covers those things. Never, not even once.

            What I said it that the person actually HAS MONEY, enough to buy stuff, but gets FOOD STAMPS so that he can use the cash he has on beer, cigarettes, and DOG FOOD.

            The taxpayers are therefore subsidizing food for the pets, and who plenty of other stuff!

          • “If people are so poor that they cannot afford food, did this come overnight? If you say “yes” you are a liar or an idiot.”

            Bull. It happens all the time. Stories about people who had the American dream until they got sick or were laid off are depressingly commonplace in America. Thanks to outsourcing, entire cities have been subjected to this.

            If you don’t know anyone who has had such happen to them, you have lived a very sheltered life.

            Your alternative, by the way, is reminiscent of an Ayn Rand porn novel. You’re essentially suggesting that, if anyone does anything other than squirrel away their every paycheck just in case something bad happens in the future, they deserve to starve.

            What, then, would you say to the people who lost millions of dollars when Washington Mutual closed and put a cap on how much they would pay out to them? They did exactly what you are suggesting everyone should do, and they wound up in financial ruin just as suddenly.

          • Antoine

            You heard me? I apologized.

          • foundingprinciples

            More comprehension problems with you.

            Back up and read what I wrote. Stop your distortions by writing only part of what I put up.

            I will be concrete. I will use short sentences. I will write easy words for you.

            Let’s say a person has a job. (Got that so far?) He should be saving. In order to save, he has to cut back expenses to whatever degree possible WHILE HE IS WORKING. (That is what we are talking about, remember? People who are working then get sick or laid off, remember?)

            It is not hard to save. Except for about a year, we always saved. The process is to cut back. And cut back more. Do without cable TV, get an old car, use a bike, whatever it takes to put aside some $. We always did it, saving from 10% to (now) about 60% of our income. Always. Just cut back.

            If one spends right at the limit of one’s income, one cannot save. Then, if one gets sick or laid off, there are big problems!

            But, as I emphasize, it is really – in most cases – the result of past behaviors that the person gets into that situation.

            Then they ask for FOOD STAMPS, and the rest of us who have disciplined ourselves and done without for years… We are expected to pay for their waste and irresponsibility. And the Left-wingers have the audacity to claim that they have “compassion” and want “fairness.” Liars, hypocrites and bullshitters.

        • 4sanity4all

          I wish I could like your post a hundred times.

        • kmkirb

          OMG, spot on. Thank you for taking all the right words out of my mouth. So many times I’ve started to write these very same statements, but I just haven’t had the energy. The cretin you replied to, which some refer to as ‘floundering principles’, & I only refer to as IT, is one selfish, self-absorbed, stingy, disgusting, mental effing midget. IT sits upon IT’s stump & spits on the rest of us for ever having had a life in the past, & now thinks that if any of us have fallen on hard times that we should lose everything we’ve ever built up in our entire lives.

          I’ll never forget when I first was downsized 4.5 years ago, & after several months I needed to go somewhere looking for a tiny bit of assistance. Someone made a remark that I had better hide my smart phone & why was I wearing new sneakers.” I said, “Why? Was I just born today? I never owned anything before I arrived at this place in time?”

          They said, “Well, you know how people judge!” I just replied, “Let them judge away, I do not have to answer to them. I only have to answer to my Father God & the people who are interviewing me for assistance. They are well aware that people did & do own things, or have had things before these terrible circumstances happened that have now changed my/our situation. Oh, & BTW, my phone is over 4 years old, my sneakers were a birthday gift from my sister a couple months ago, & my car was bought used over 5 years ago & was a gift from my mother, one of the very last things I ever received from her before she died. Anything else you’d like to know to set the record straight/!!!” The person just looked at me with the deer in the headlights look. Disgusting morons.

      • Dominick Vila

        The real issue is the fact that the richest and most powerful country in the world is trying to balance its Federal government budget on the backs of those who can least afford a pay cut or fewer benefits. Discontinuing the $40B in food stamps approved by President Obama as part of the stimulus package, while our economy is still struggling to recover, borders on being inhumane.
        How can our government justify cutting food stamps – fraud and abuse notwithstanding – while spending billions of dollars in foreign and military aid to other countries. The FY14 budget includes a total of $18.1B in various types of foreign aid to Israel. We give Egypt about $1B is what is nothing more than bribes, and we give Pakistan, a country where a large segment of its populace hates our guts, almost one billion dollars in aid. How can the U.S. government deny poor Americans, including unemployed veterans and the homeless, one of the most basic necessities – food – while giving billions of dollars to countries that do not need our aid to live in relative comfort and security? Is global influence and the preservation of business interests so important that we are willing to flush our own down the toilet to ensure our entrepreneurs can get a higher ROI by investing abroad?

        • foundingprinciples

          Not true. Welfare dependency is, under Obama, set to increase AFTER the projected end of this downturn! It is not a matter of money, but one of decency, morals, and family. The Left-winger welfare has destroyed the family, the work ethic, and morals. The money is the least of our problems with that cancer growing.

          • Dominick Vila

            Really? Please tell me which perks is the GOP proposing to take away from the wealthiest members of our society? The only thing we hear from them involve proposals to cut Social Security, dismantle MEDICARE, cut MEDICAID, cut food stamps, repeal ACA, and take away everything that benefits those who can least afford to lose what little they have. I do agree on one thing it is, indeed, a matter of decency, morals, and family. In fact, I would add that it is also a matter of social responsibility.
            I don’t support perpetual welfare, but I will gladly contribute to help those who for a variety of reasons cannot work or can’t find a job.

          • foundingprinciples

            The successful are paying the highest % of tax on their incomes, and our corporations just beat out Japan this year, for the Liberal prize of being the highest taxed corporations in the world!

            Sorry, I forgot Dubai. They have a slightly higher rate….

            Liberals think that “decency” is to get the government to confiscate the property of one group and redistribute it to another. Ever heard of the Kulaks? Same basic thing by Left-wingers.

          • Dominick Vila

            The “successful” (read elite) and our corporations have one the lowest tax rates in history, and those tax rates are much lower than what their counterparts pay in Europe and other industrialized parts of the world.
            A better example of redistribution of wealth involves awarding sole source contracts to Friends of Bush when we invaded Iraq. Most of those contracts were never finished. Another example involves the loopholes that make tax rates irrelevant. Many U.S. corporations and individuals pay nothing or as little as 15% on their earnings as a result of loopholes and deductions. Billions of dollars are hidden in tax shelters and/or overseas accounts to avoid paying Uncle Sam his fair share.
            Who is being hit to offset our largesse? The poor and the lower middle class whose earnings potential is decimated and whose government benefits, when they are eligible to collect, are being cut to ensure those who have everything can accumulate more wealth. BTW, most of “our” corporations are actually multi-nationals owned by investors from Japan, Saudi Arabia, Germany and other countries. When we cut actual corporate taxes down to ridiculous levels we are helping foreign investors loyal only to their portfolios.

          • foundingprinciples

            The successful pay proportionally a higher rate than those whose income is less. Don’t do the Left-winger thing and find some exception, some “evil rich” person who pays almost no tax and then engage in Liberal LIES and DECEIT by doing what Liberals do: Present that person as though he represents all “evil rich demons.”

            Our corporate tax rate is the highest in the world. That is a fact, a fact. It cannot be refuted. It is a fact.

          • Dominick Vila

            Business owners and entrepreneurs are not evil rich demons. Alas, some of the wealthiest Americans, people like Bill Gates and Warren Buffett have publicly decried the embarrassing circumstance of paying less, proportionally, than their secretaries.
            Yes, U.S. corporate taxes are the highest in the world, but that is a highly subjective claim when we consider that “our” corporations can and do use a number of deductions and benefit from loopholes that allow them to pay much less than the stated rate. I believe the CORPORATE global tax rates in 2013 were.
            USA – 40%
            Japan – 38%
            Argentina – 35%
            Belgium – 34%
            India – 34%
            France – 33%
            Italy – 31%
            Spain – 30%
            The opposite is true for INDIVIDUAL tax rates. Those in most industrialized countries are much higher than ours. In some foreign countries they also have to pay exorbitant VAT taxes, that are much higher than our state sales taxes.
            The bottom line is that nothing is free, and that while the population of most of the countries listed above benefit from generous social programs, the only thing we can say for the taxes we pay is that we have the most powerful military in the world and that the wealthiest members of our society – the top 2% – own 2/3 of our national wealth. The latter has nothing to do with “evil”, it is a fact and it is, in part, the result of government-friendly policies that allow the richest members of our society – and the foreign entrepreneurs who invest in the USA, to pay a fraction of the tax rate applicable to their earnings before deductions and loopholes allow them to get away with murder.

          • foundingprinciples

            {Bill Gates and Warren Buffett have publicly decried the embarrassing circumstance of paying less, proportionally, than their secretaries.}

            Left-winger lies and deceit. The Liberal Lie is not in those particular people, pointing that out. No, no, no. The Leftist Lying and Deceiving is just what you did: Presenting those people as though they represent the rest of the successful people.

            It is thoroughly dishonest and unethical to do that. If one has any integrity at all, one looks at the aggregate. But keep promoting the deceptions that you glean from your television. Take it in without understanding, then regurgitate it and help with the disinformation and lies presented to the uninformed.

            Perhaps the Liberal mantra will win out and destroy our nation.

          • Dominick Vila

            What is truly dishonest and unethical, and totally devoid of logic and integrity, is to suggest that the statements made by two of the most successful Americans does not have merit…while praising the virtues of predators like Mitt Romney.

            What this country needs is more people like Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, Henry Ford, Edison, Bell and others to transform our country by creating new industries; particularly those who never forgot their roots and the need to help others.

            Nations are not destroyed by those who invest in their country, by those who use their intelligence to create new industries, or by those who help their fellow man. It is destroyed by those whose greed consumes their psyche and drives their decisions, often to the detriment of others.

          • foundingprinciples

            No, you are thoroughly dishonest. First you insist that Romney represents the entire class of the successful people whom you hate and for whom you have unmitigated envy.

            Next, I never praised Romney, either: Your dishonesty increases with every post.

            {others to transform our country by creating new industries}

            Don’t you Liberals realize that your Leftist over-regulating and socialist policies actually DESTROY that incentive? Heck, imagine the Wright Brothers wanting to test their airplane: They would be arrested today. The qualifications, bureaucracy, regulations and freakin Liberal paperwork Liberals have created have stifled creativity. Heck, there have been cases where kids who try to set up lemonaid stands are shut down by the paper-pushers who claim that they have to get official permission and be inspected!

            Thank you, Liberals!

        • plc97477

          I wonder if we are giving money to other countries in the hopes that they will stop hating us so much.

          • Dominick Vila

            Money is not going to change that. Most foreigners like our way of life, envy most of our freedoms, and don’t hesitate to copy our attire and habits. What they hate is our interference in their internal affairs, our arrogance when we impose our values and interests on them regardless of how they feel about it, the deployment of American troops in their countries, and the greed of our corporations.
            Most of the foreign aid we give to other countries has little to do with the need to help those afflicted by famine, disease, poverty, or lack of education. More often than not, that aid is designed to buy influence, protect and/or expand our interests, and as bribes to maintain the status quo.

      • NCSteve

        So, what level of additional misery and impoverishment would be sufficient in order for you to allow people to have food assistance? How much worse off do they need to make their lives before you’ll concede they might be morally worth of a few dollars worth of assistance buying food?

        If someone working two minimum wage jobs can’t make ends meetIf someone loses their job, do they have to go through the summer entirely without air conditioning before you’ll consent to allow them to have a few dollars worth of food, or will it be enough for them to set the thermostat at 90 degrees? , If someone loses their job and has exhausted their savings, do they also have to sell off all their televisions and their furniture and anything that plays music and then spend every waking hour they’re not looking for work staring at the bare walls contemplating how useless and worthless they must be to be unemployed, or can they keep one?

        Is it okay by you if they keep a refrigerator or do they have to prove how needy they are by eating leftovers that have been sitting out on the counter for a week and washing them down with sour milk? Is it okay with you if they keep a stove to cook their food or do they have to eat the food you are so generously providing to them raw? What about a phone? Is it okay if the keep a phone? Will you be providing a list of strictly necessary phone numbers that they’re allowed to call or be called by? Because clearly, if you’re too poor to eat, you shouldn’t be allowed to talk to your mother or a friend on the telephone.

        Oh and obviously, it makes far more sense for them to sell their washing machine, if they have one and take all their laundry down to a laundry mat so they can pay one of their betters for the privilege of having clean cloths. Or do they have to sell all their clothes and run around naked before you’ll believe they’re entitled to any food assistance? Indeed, is it okay if they keep housing, have heat and running water or do they have to live in cardboard boxes and defecate in slit trenches followed by a shovel of quick lime?

        How about if, instead of forcing poor people to make themselves so utterly destitute they can never hope to climb out of poverty again, we just had them scourge themselves with metal tipped whips in front of City Hall or lock them up in stocks for 24 hours for every hundred dollars worth of food assistance? Would that be enough intentional infliction of additional misery upon them for you to agree that they can maybe feed their kids a meal or two a day?

        How much additional misery is enough for you to decide, in your infinite wisdom and compassion, that they are morally worthy of government assistance?

        • Independent1

          Great Post!! What “Foundling” fails to acknowledge is, that a large majority of the people on food stamps are there not because of their own doing, but because of the doing of nitwit GOP legislators. Legislators who together with their clueless Governor severely cut budgets and state services during a recession which drastically curbed demand within their state, resulting in hundreds of thousands of people being laid off suddenly which reduced the income of their families to the point that they needed assistance.
          You paint a great picture of the situation. A totally incompassionate ‘Foundling” tries to paint a picture of greedy self-serving poor folks just stocking themselves up with luxuries while holding their hand out for welfare help. When in reality, the majority of these people are Red State residents who through no fault of their own, had the income to manage all the things he describes, and have suddenly found themselves in dire straights all because of nitwits in the political party that are now trying to starve them to death. Something that’s fairly common for a party that has absolutely NO CLUE ABOUT HOW TO RUN A GOVERNMENT!!!!!!

        • foundingprinciples

          It a person is legally insane, a child or severely handicapped, the government should help him, and it would be best through private charities, of course.

          But if a person shows he cannot afford even food, and does not have a cable TV, pets, computer hookup, texting, and so on, then maybe he should be given FOOD STAMPS.

          I remember seeing a woman in a grocery line with the FOOD STAMPS. She was obese, and she was buying beer, cigarettes, and DOG FOOD! I know she could not use the FOOD STAMPS to buy those things, but having the FOOD STAMPS released enough money so she could buy her booze, tobacco and food for the DOG.

          The Liberals actually demand that working people put up with that garbage.

          • NCSteve

            So this one time you saw a thing that conveniently confirmed all your prejudices and, based on this thing you say you saw one time, you think other people’s children should go hungry.

            There you have it, the modern Republican ethos in a nutshell.

            But about this woman you say you saw who you say was daring to buy liquor and cigarettes and had the unmitigated temerity to be fat and have a pet when she was using food stamps: do you think she should have simply killed her dog or was she supposed to eat it before she was allowed to have food stamps?

            Because heaven forbid that any poor person be allowed even the minor human comforts of a dog,

          • foundingprinciples

            No, parents should be held responsible, of course.

            The fat woman had enough cash to buy her beer, her cigarettes and DOG FOOD. She had a pet in the first place. So, she is actually asking working people to subsidize her booze, cigs, and pet – and most certainly her texting, cable TV and occasional eating out.

          • NCSteve

            So, based on the fact this woman had dog food, you are able to see into her life and know that she occaisionally eats out and then, based on you’re having seen this one woman, you know all you need to know about all others who get food stamps.

            But how do you know the dog food was for a dog?

            Or were you not aware the the FDA requires all pet food to be fit for human consumption because it knows pet food sales spike when the unemployment rate rises?

          • foundingprinciples

            Not only DOG FOOD, but also BEER and CIGARETTES. He “significant other” pulled up in front with a nice car, and the dog was in the back seat. In the middle of the day.

            Guess they went home, fed the dog the subsidized DOG FOOD, got out the BEER, lit up their CIGS, and watched one of their 200 channels on the CABLE TV.

          • Commie Dearest

            I think the point is that there was this one anecdote so OH MY GOD, EVERYONE ON FOODS STAMPS IS A CHISELING, LAZY BLAH PERSON SUCKING MONEY DIRECTLY OUT OF MY POCKET.

      • 4sanity4all

        My cousin was working two part time jobs. One company folded, that left one part time job. Her husband was laid off, and never rehired for three years. They had most of the amenities on your list, because they worked very hard to earn them After two or three years without a paycheck, they may have qualified for SNAP; I never asked. I do know that they cancelled their cable, reduced the units on their cell phone plan, and so on. So, if they were on SNAP. you would condemn them, because they did not throw out their computer, appliances, and so on? The computer and phone and car helped them to look for work, so why would they get rid of them? And why should a poor family not have a color TV? Perhaps it was given to them, and it is their only source of entertainment, replacing bowling, movies out, dance lessons for the kids, you don’t know. Don’t forget, a lot of the poor in this country used to be middle class. Until their jobs disappeared, or their hours and pay were cut.

      • Sand_Cat

        So “typical” households are poor?
        I’m sure we all will be if you and friends get your way.

        • foundingprinciples

          nope. never wrote that

        • foundingprinciples

          You have to go to the site and open up the post. You only saw part.

    • tax payer

      Some Senior Citizens worked hard in their lifetime while being young and able to work to have a good retirement, so which senior citizens are you referring about in your comment? Two senior citizens composed of both ( husband and wife ) should be getting two checks and it has to be enough to make it unless they don’t own their home, and have to pay rent. I consider myself Lower Middle Class, so does that mean I am losing out and should apply for Food Stamps?

      • Dominick Vila

        Most senior citizens worked hard throughout their professional lives, paid taxes, paid Social Security and MEDICARE taxes, and continued to pay MEDICARE fees after they retired. They do deserve to collect the benefits promised to them by the government in exchange for the taxes they paid into the system. Married couples get two separate checks when they are both eligible to collect SS. In the case of stay-home Moms, their SS checks are drawn from their husband’s SS account. SS checks were never meant to be the sole provider after a person retires. Those checks are meant to compensate personal savings, and have helped millions of Americans avoid living in abject poverty when they can no longer work. Those whose income is too low to make ends meet can – and do – apply for MEDICAID. In fact, millions of senior citizens depend on MEDICAID to help cover nursing home and hospice care.
        Neither SS nor MEDICARE are welfare programs. We paid for the benefits we get and we are, therefore, entitled to get what we paid for, the same way a person who buys private sector insurance is entitled to collect what he/she paid for.

        • tax payer

          I am glad they get their Social Security, but there are some that think it’s Welfare and it’s not. Food Stamps is Welfare and Section-8 is Welfare, but Medicare they paid to have same as myself and millions of senior citizens. I know a man that thinks his social security check is low because they gave his wife part of his money and I have tried so many times to explain to him she gets a percentage of what he gets, and nothing is taken out from his own check. I believer it’s about 45% or less for a wive not having worked, but actually did more work at home. One thing we don’t or ever do in our home is to go grocery shopping the first few days of the month since everyone that gets Food Stamps is there getting free food compliments of us the tax payers and it takes too long for them to unload their shopping carts and I wonder why. Full and spilling out.

          • Dominick Vila

            You are correct. Neither SS nor MEDICARE are welfare. We pay for those programs and we are entitled to collect the benefits that were promised to us in exchange for the taxes we paid.

            Something has to be done to end the fraud and abuse that is crippling the welfare system and, especially, food stamp eligibility. The current “work requirement” does not work. A more stringent system must be put in place that ends welfare and food stamp eligibility after a recipient has been informed two or three times of jobs available for persons with his/her expertise and they either don’t apply or simply turn down offers. When that happens, ALL benefits should be terminated immediately.

            Unfortunately, there are a lot of contributing factors that are not easy to overcome. One of them involves the fact that many welfare recipients have a minimum level of education and are only eligible for menial work that pays minimum wage. Those persons only earn enough to cover the basics, usually not enough to pay for groceries, rent, utilities, and clothing, even when they get the latter at the local Goodwill store. The worst problem, for me, is children. The idea of hungry children in the USA is abhorrent to me. A solution may be to give them free breakfast and lunch in school.

          • tax payer

            Children do die of hunger in this country, but not because there wasn’t any food in their homes. Parents have kept food away from them and have been put in prison for not providing food to their children, and that is abuse of the worse kind, when there is food and it’s not given to the children. In our city it has happen maybe twice of children dying because of lack of food. They do get free breakfast and lunch in most schools, if they are low income, but many have to pay and to me ( all children ) should get free food at school, and not just a chosen few.

    • foundingprinciples

      Liberals are OBSESSED with “the poor” and the culture of poverty. For Left-wingers, this culture is an object of fascination and admiration.

      Working people have better things to do than to waste their energies and talents, squander their imagination and attention, on futile attempts to eradicate poverty and salvage the class Liberals call the “poor.” The business of the working people is the construction of civilization, and the business of our society and civilization is holding up standards of excellence.

      • Dominick Vila

        And right winger are OBSESSED with the “wealthy” and the culture of greed. For right wingers, helping the wealthy accumulate more wealth is an object of fascination and admiration.
        The working poor and the lower middle class deserve better than see their hard earned money go to those who already own 2/3 of our national wealth, based on the premise that the more the elite earns the better off the working poor will be. Well, judging by what has taken place since our tax structure and government policies were put in place, ostensibly, to benefit the wealthy, it is readily apparent that trickle down economics is nothing more than a chimera. Admittedly, the tax breaks, loopholes, and subsidies the working poor are giving to the wealthy do allow the latter to invest…in China, Bangladesh and everywhere else where there is a chance to get a higher ROI because of favorable labor conditions and an opportunity to increase sales in emerging markets.
        Being enamored with a rich culture that does not hesitate to take a peanut butter sandwich from a needy child, or that denies access to a higher education to a bright student who does not have the financial means to attend college, is not something to be proud of as individuals and as a society. It is, in fact, a national embarrassment.

        • foundingprinciples

          No, if there is any “obsession” among conservatives, it is for what is anathema to Left-wingers: OUR CONSTITUTION and its principles!

          There is no “premise” that the successful earning more will automatically result in others getting wealth, of course. But it is the successful who create jobs, take risk, innovate and create. The “workers of the world” just show up and do what they are told, and exchange their time for money, money, money.

          • Dominick Vila

            Preamble of the Constitution of the United States:

            “We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, PROMOTE THE GENERAL WELFARE, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”
            If conservatives are obsessed with the Constitution, why do they ignore it when it does not support their arguments or goals?
            Trickle down economics was used as a justification – by a Republican administration – to justify tax breaks and subsidies for the wealthy. I am a firm believer that sustained economic growth and job creation depends on a successful and profitable private industry, but I also believe that government has a role were private industry is reluctant to invest, and at times of socio-economic distress.

          • foundingprinciples

            The “general welfare” is NOT the Left-winger WELFARE STATE.

            You Leftist know nothing about our history or Founding. You profane and malign it.

            The GWC was lifted from the Articles of Confederation which had to do with the common defense, and bound the states to protect and defend one another. Heck, that phrase was going to be left out in the Philly Convention; the Founders thought it unnecessary. Sherman was the one who wanted it added, and he said, “The objects of the Union….WERE FEW [read that, liberal, read it: FEW! F..E..W!!!] – 1st defense against foreign danger; 2nd, against internal disputes; 3rd treaties; 4th, regulating foreign commerce…, etc.”

            All the rest was left up to the states, pal.


      • plc97477

        Liberals are obsessed with the poor because some has to care, you aren’t going to.

        • foundingprinciples

          Getting the government to take the property of some and give it to others is not “caring” at all. It is arrogance and a pretense to morality, but it is a false morality, a show.

  • S1AMER

    There’s only one thing worse than the constant Republican attacks on the poor, and that’s that they suffer few political consequences because most Americans just don’t mind.

    • foundingprinciples

      The “poor” will always be with us. Liberals invented this ridiculous “war” on poverty, the first of any such thing in the history of the world. It is a Left-winger COLLECTIVE war, and part of the Liberals’ general war on CIVILIZATION! Liberals allow normal sympathy to slide into excuses and self-indulgence, and they attack civilization by lowering expectations and standards.

  • tax payer

    Everyone that qualifies for Food Stamps should get only about $200.00 for a family of five people and $75.00 for one single person, and that would prevent all the fraud in this system. If they can’t make it ( they should think of us ) that have to pay for our food and support their families too. Get a part-time job and pay the difference.

    • Budjob

      Tax Payer,Why don’t you try directing your bullshit to the individuals that truly deserve it.Our Congressional Representatives???!! These individuals are nothing more than parasites and leeches! I don’t recall anything in their agenda that would indicate that they are overpaid,underworked,and,VERY OVERBENEFITED! Try serving in the military and then having these worthless bastards inform you that you and 900,000 of your comrades are going to be victimized by these Son of a Bitches!!! We have all heard of MADD (Mothers Against Drunk Drivers) haven’t we.How about a new organization and acronym. MAS,Mothers (Mothers Against Starvation).Excuse my language but this country is hopelessly and irreparably FUCKED UP!!!

      • tax payer

        They have always done nothing for the tax payers. Americans have to accept what they vote on since we have no voice and the voice we put there aren’t listening to the voters. So, next election these people need to be shown the door and hopefully something better comes along, but maybe that’s asking too much.

      • foundingprinciples

        Nobody is starving in America. Many of the putative “poor” are obese! Liberals glorify the sufferer, view him as if he had chosen his own suffering in order to sanctify the rest of us.

        • Lynda Groom

          Don’t be so ignorant. Lack of proper food, or an obundance of healthy food does not conflate directly to being obese. Certainly many ‘poor’ are obese and so is the governor of New Jersey. So what? Keep it real if you able.

          • foundingprinciples

            The proportion of the putative “poor” who are fat is quite high. They eat too much. That is the cause of obesity.

          • plc97477

            They don’t eat too much they are forced to eat unhealthy and high calorie foods because that is all they can afford.

          • foundingprinciples

            Not true. They are voluntarily making choices to eat high-calorie foods because they taste good.

    • foundingprinciples


      In the past, people who were “poor” were lean and physically fit – from working!

      Now, they are obese, diabetic, unexercised, drugged, and slovenly. They have enough money to even drink and smoke, and the time to “experiment” with drugs, buy nice cars, flatscreen televisions and smartphones. Heck they have just as much access to education as most of the rest of us do.

      • tax payer

        Do you think they should thank a tax payer ( like people thank ) a serviceman? No, since they feel we are Obligated to provide for them all of their life. They have as much chance for an education, but may think, if we get educated it will stop our benefits since it means we can work in a high paying job; so there goes the idea of furthering their education.

        • foundingprinciples

          Liberals provide a plethora of excuses: The “evil rich” are suppressing the workers; there is malignant racism; the reactionaries are funneling money (what money?) off to the evil rich; there is not enough funding for education (we are the 2nd highest in the ENTIRE WORLD); and people are “needy” and have “issues,” so we must have “compassion.”

      • Budjob

        Founding,There has to be a special corner in Hell for people such as yourself.As a matter of fact,whenever you do kickoff,I won’t be able to come for the viewing as I have to work.You know it’s business before pleasure!! My comment about our Veterans being victimized stands,as I am one of them.ARE YOU?

        • foundingprinciples

          I now am obliged to state something clearly: I actually DESPISE your using your veteran status to claim points, to set yourself up as invulnerable to criticism, because it would look like one is disrespecting a veteran.

          Why? I am a DISABLED veteran, pal. Stop using it; I find it offensive!

          • Budjob

            You may be disabled as you claim,and you are more than likely receiving benefits due to this disability.However that doesn’t entitle you to shit on the poor and downtrodden with your repulsive,despicable,ignorant rants.One other thing,go ye forth and multiply with thyself!

          • foundingprinciples

            Just don’t pull the “I-am-a-veteran-so-you-can’t-disagree” crapola.

          • Budjob

            Founding,You state that you are a disabled veteran.Would that be a physical or mental disability? I get the impression that if one could extract your brain and place it on the edge of a razor blade,you would think you were on a four lane highway.

          • foundingprinciples

            Typical response from the Left.

  • Lynda Groom

    A nations strength and character are reflected in how it treats the less fortunate among us. We are coming up short yet again.

    • foundingprinciples

      No, that is Rawlsian nonsense. The poor will always be among us. Liberals maintain that standard which is a lowering of standards. Civilizations are judged and bettered by focusing on arts, science, literature, economic prosperity. Liberals have managed to make the behaviors of the poor models that the young emulate.

      • Lynda Groom

        Only an idiot could believe that the poor have not always been among us. That is not the point. The point you are trying to avoid is the way in which a cilivized society responds. Do you actually know any young people who are striving to become poor? Seriously friend?

        • foundingprinciples

          I know young people who do not want to work. And people who have learned to scam. And people whose motivation has reached 0 because of marijuana and other drugs. Who know who to milk the system, and lie to themselves by telling themselves that they will “get it together,” but later, of course….. For now – gimme those FOOD STAMPS.

  • Lynda Groom

    First Rep Fincher has to return the $3.5 million he has received from the government before he can engage his pie hole again. After all he wants fairness..does he not?

  • arch725

    I am not concerned about any other Representative but Vicky Hartzler of Missouri. She is one of the major leaders of this cut and YET she has received almost 1 million dollars for not doing ANY farm work at all. We need a big cleaning out of this House of nuts!!!!

    • sigrid28

      Can we also agree that agricultural policy in the U.S. has long needed overhaul, ever since it became the mode to PAY farmers to be less productive. If this wasn’t a form of government interference with market forces, I don’t know what was. Now that the burgeoning complexities of this policy go well beyond the intellectual capacity of all but the most expert and patient economists to comprehend–not to mention most voters, all of whom eat–Republicans think they can get away with gutting the SNAP program using the weak argument that it represents governmental interference in the free market. Worse yet, by coupling the two, they think this noise will distract from far greater excesses that have been introduced over the years by farm subsidies and other interventions. Before we stop feeding the needy, especially children, we should go back to the beginning by asking ourselves one simple question: Why should the government pay farmers to produce less?

      • allannde

        I fully support you well written comment. However, there is an answer to your question about why farmers are paid not to produce. It goes back to the time when it was determined that the nation needed the reserve of available soil to grow crops. Nature gives us good crop years and bad crop years and we need a steady food supply which does not respond to market demands. The corporate farm has changed much of that so this policy needs to be revised, as you say, to fit the new reality.

        • sigrid28

          Thanks for your helpful compliment. Another factor of the agriculture problem is suggested by your post: the influence of new technologies that have changed the way food products are packaged and preserved. To me it is astonishing that the Republican party, which has always been affiliated with conservatism, would have strayed so far from its origins as to promote excessive subsidies for the wealthiest farm operations and ignore environmental and conservationist concerns. Today, Republican politics is dominated by a cavalier attitude toward precious American agricultural resources–including the aquifer that is threatened by polluting runoff from factory farms–not to mention the GOP’s insistence on protecting enormous tax breaks for large fossil-fuel corporations while ignoring the dangers of oil drilling and pipelines as well as fracking–which ALL also threaten the aquifer. When the Republican party embraces welfare for the wealthiest Americans in tandem with anti-intellectualism, particularly in relation to the environment, it sets in motion forces that threaten the well-being of all American citizens, even the richest 2% they think they are protecting. Getting back to the thorny economics of the thing, whatever Republicans might achieve by cutting food assistance for the most vulnerable Americans will be penny wise and pound foolish until they address the real problem with this legislation, which is outdated agricultural policies that destabilize the marketplace and threaten the environment.

  • charleo1

    The unfortunate thing about what is going on now, wages being clobbered,
    50 million of us going to the ER. One in four children living at or below the poverty
    line. Many more thousands slipping into lives of poverty, than are climbing out.
    One Party is concerned about the growing disparity of wealth. The other about
    the cost of lending a hand to the poor. Because, some may be taking advantage,
    so let’s just it cut all. And that’s the Party that’s winning! There’s no doubt, the
    uber wealthy, with their disproportional influence on public policy, accounts for
    the reason we’re cutting nutritional programs for the poor, in one of the toughest economic times in modern history. While at the same time, increasing subsidies
    to the wealthy. Why the vast majority don’t agree with doing that. But, we’re told very matter of fact like, the funds have run out, and that’s that! So we can’t even influence the conversation anymore. Forget about policy. Ironically, all of these issues are much like the healthcare crisis itself. In that there is no doubt it has been getting bad for some years now, and will become worse. But, they are not quite bad enough, yet. We can say, and do say, there are 50 million uninsured. 60 million!
    But, 80% are covered, and are being told this healthcare law will cause them to lose their insurance. So, they say, why rock the boat? Doesn’t make them ogers. Just easier to convince to be aganist healthcare reform. We can look ahead, and see things could get very bad for many of us. But we worry most about our children, if our course doesn’t change. But for many the sun is still shinning warmly on their shoulders, and they scoff about rumors of a winter being on it’s way.

    • tax payer

      Some Wealthy people have a Business and are providing jobs for Americans. They can always sell their Businesses and enjoy their Wealth, but they instead keep their Businesses to make ( more money ), and hire people; so they can earn a good living. If I was as rich as some of these people I wouldn’t have a Business because you have to know how to run one or go Bankrupt.

  • Sand_Cat

    The Senate wants to cut it by 4 billion, and that’s generous? Only another sign of this country’s descent into pure every-person-for-him/herself evil and disintegration. The GOP leads the way, but the Democrats increasingly seem to be trudging along behind at an increasing pace.

  • Dan England

    From the article: “some agricultural programs pay farmers not to plant.”
    They do not sow, neither shall they reap. And what they do reap is given over to the devourer. Look at America now because of Republican ideology, they sow to the wind and reap the whirlwind. America is not in a good place today. The Republicans are causing so much strife and where strife exists there is every evil thing. While the real preachers slept, the tares like Ted Cruz and his false teacher father Rafael Cruz crept in unawares and have deceived so many. Rafael Cruz “annointed” his boy Ted to “take the wealth of the gentiles” and bring it into the church. In any other age but this one he would be mocked into retirement. But we are at the apex of that “prosperity gospel” and it is on the verge of dying and its last gasps of air in the form of Ted Cruz’s presidential bid are that death. For the most part, if they aren’t allowing the Republican main stream media to deceive them, Ted Cruz’s days are numbered. Maybe not his dads because America is the biggest producer of religious heresy in the world.

  • dana becker

    They can’t find the money to feed us but they always seem to find the money to start a war.