debeda

And pointless foreign aid. When we can't help ourselves it's time to stop paying support.

maximus Loc: Chattanooga, Tennessee

I guess I'm stupid...or am I? Every year since Trump was elected, I have got back every tax cent I paid in. How can you explain this? My stepdaughter got a $1,000 bonus from Walmart, the stingiest family in the world. How can you explain that one?
Well, you just can't. You should change you screen name from straight up to straight down because nothing you have said is true. On average, the middle class American worker's income has increased by $5,800 per year SINCE Trump, NOT before.

As for your second statement, how many have you 'interviewed'? How many have you went out and met? Or helped?

And you said we are cold and heartless? Not enough to kill our own babies.

So, start over and come up with some real facts and figures.

Canuckus Deploracus Loc: North of the wall

Absolutely

debeda

Well said, Maximus

straightUp Loc: California

Wow, really? OK, well I tell ya what. When you're ready to climb out of your time capsule, be prepared because this isn't 1975 anymore. After 40 years of deregulation and stagnant wages, 30 years of outsourcing and 10 years of automation things are very different. All those jobs Trump keeps gloating about? They're sh*t jobs. And I don't mean they're jobs people don't want to do, I mean they're jobs that don't offer a living wage. So today "getting a job" might not be enough. Which is why today, unlike 1975, most of the people asking for food stamps ARE working.

In fact, McDonalds and Walmart have both been caught telling their underpaid employees to apply for food stamps, which is why they've been charged with turning SNAP into their own subsidy program.

Maybe if the retarded Republicans can for once adjust their tack and actually take the side of the American worker instead of ALWAYS siding with the "business" the workers might actually find jobs that can actually pay for their food. BTW, another change since 1975 is that company founders on average don't even control their business anymore, investors do and those investors may or may not even be American.


That really doesn't tell me anything. What, you look at a black woman at the cashier counter digging stamps out of her purse and you say... "this must be her lifestyle" ???

And so what if it is? What does it matter to you? Are you the judge of all your customers? Maybe her son has leukemia and after the medical bills there isn't any left out of her paycheck to cover food. Maybe she's already making as much as her skills and time will allow and maybe her son's leukemia isn't going away tomorrow, so yeah... that would make food stamps a lifestyle.

Look, I know I'm climbing all over your grill, just keep in mind it's more that I'm reacting to a common mind set... "just get a job"... 'Not the first the first time I've heard that reaction. And the personal experience dealing with recipients of government aid? Yeah, a million times.

So, please don't take it personally.

Anyway the point I'm making is that it's too easy to misjudge. It takes effort to be accurate and when you talk about taking food away from people... I just think it deserves that effort.

So... if you want to weed out the recipients of government aid, who are not critically dependent on that aid ( ie., the deadbeats and players) you need to spend more. You need to hire auditors, good auditors to make that effort. Human Services gets a better picture. They can target the cutoffs and minimize the genocide. Next year the president submits his budget, SNAP is cut by 23%... after paying for those auditors.

Just slashing the budget and justifying it with impulsive judgements?
I mean, it's the cheap way to do it...


yeah, so?

when you rely on a corporation for your livelihood, the same thing happens.
hell, when you rely on your own obsession for your livelihood, the same thing happens.

straightUp Loc: California

It's nice to be able to agree with you debeda. Absolutely, I understand the disgust and I recognize the excessive latitude. I'm not if you read my entire post but I did present a solution to all of this... More recently, I posted that solution again - in more detail.

But the bottom line is... you have to invest not cut!

You want a tighter ship? Invest in one. If you cut, the latitude will only increase.

Tell you buddy, Trump. 'Seems like he could use a little help. ;)

straightUp Loc: California

Do you ever ask yourself why a communist country would ever attack us?


Well, thank you for that information big gamer... I didn't know about the seaport, cool. And yes, Cuba's right there, pretty much always has been. Canada? Aw, c'mon those guys are funny. Try drinking with them, you might change your mind.


dude.. our defense budget is more than the defense budgets of China, Russia and the EU put together. And that didn't just happen, it's been like that for a while. So you're telling me we're just getting up to snuff?
Wow, that just sounds like an endless BJ.

I'm going to bed.

Canuckus Deploracus Loc: North of the wall

I love the idea that bigger government spending more money is the solution...

Canuckus Deploracus Loc: North of the wall

Agreed with everything

bggamers Loc: georgia

so true

straightUp Loc: California

Yeah, I know the idea isn't in vogue. But notice my proposal includes a way to make it pay for itself. Sometimes, investments have returns, even when it's a government investment. And yes, sometimes more spending on Monday means less spending for the rest of the week. If we paid more into the program to support a staff of auditors (as in jobs, hello!) it's very possible they could cut enough fraud out of the system not only to pay for themselves but to cut the entire budget.

It would be nice if more people gave it some thought instead of just blowing it off because it doesn't fit the single-track ideology.

Hug

More auditors means more bureaucrats which means more deep state folks that will spread the money around among themselves. How can a government bureaucrat be honest?

straightUp Loc: California

So, my earlier post was deleted. Could be that naughty word with "u" replaced with a "*" I know it wasn't found by an auto-scan because I've seen the same word masked the same way in other posts that haven't been deleted. I'm guessing someone reported it because they don't like my ideas. So much for freedom of expression... lol

Anyway, I'm posting it back - I can use other words to say the same thing, just a little less expressive that's all. But hey, we don't want colorful language to upset the people who are okay with starving Americans not do we? ;)


...and I'm just going by the numbers reported here...

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/nearly-700-000-will-lose-food-stamps-usda-work-requirement-n1095726

I'm not sure how your calculating that but in case you're thinking Trump is cutting ALL of it, he isn't... Just $5.5 billion over 5 years. So $1.1 billion per year. NBC is reporting an estimate of about 688,000 people will lose this critical assistance.

The average SNAP benefit per person is about $126 per month

Even so, I don't like hearing the phrase "lost case anyway". I think a government should do what it can to help its citizens. So, while I agree that people are in serious trouble if they can't survive without a $350/yr subsidy, I think that only means we need to spend MORE money to help them. And I'm sorry but I don't have any tolerance for any of that "uuugh, but taxpayers can't afford it" BS because if tax payers can afford to spend $686 billion in one year on the military, they can certainly spend $1.1 billion in one year to prevent Americans from starving.

And if people are "concerned" that some of those recipients are "gaming the system" Then you know what? Spend MORE... Hire a staff and start investigating the faud to weed out the players. Don't just cut the budget and hope you didn't screw too many of the "deserving" people... or not even care.

Richest country in the world... but with heads so far up our asses, we have to let our own people starve. Yeah KAG

Canuckus Deploracus Loc: North of the wall

The problem with bureaucracy is that it doesn't want to go away...

Hiring these auditers is an idea worth pursuing... But I would prefer a private company...

It presents its own problems... But they are more manageable(IMO) and the money spent would probably be less...

Ultimately we should install greater safe guards to ensure that any such programs only service those who truly need them...

Yet how many politicians would be willing to run on this platform?

Canuckus Deploracus Loc: North of the wall

I deplore when one of my posts gets deleted... Although if I am going to use an unacceptable word I usually don't bother to hide it...

At times Admin does appear rather Puckish with its rulings