new foodstamps figures out today

Jan, 2009 when BO took office.... 31.9M

Sept 2012.....46+M

And it's only going to get worse because of not only the new directive to Social Services in States to relax the work requirement at their discretion, but also all the money spent via USDA ads (pulled in the USA but still going strong in Mexico) with instructions on how to apply.

Discussion is locked
Reply to: new foodstamps figures out today
PLEASE NOTE: Do not post advertisements, offensive materials, profanity, or personal attacks. Please remember to be considerate of other members. If you are new to the CNET Forums, please read our CNET Forums FAQ. All submitted content is subject to our Terms of Use.
Reporting: new foodstamps figures out today
This post has been flagged and will be reviewed by our staff. Thank you for helping us maintain CNET's great community.
Sorry, there was a problem flagging this post. Please try again now or at a later time.
If you believe this post is offensive or violates the CNET Forums' Usage policies, you can report it below (this will not automatically remove the post). Once reported, our moderators will be notified and the post will be reviewed.
- Collapse -
Since you didn't provide a link.....

......I'm doing it:


Look at the second chart. That will give you the truth as to how these numbers have changed since 1975. For example, when W took office there were around 17 million Americans on food stamps. By the time he left, that number was up to 33 million. In other words, the number of Americans on food stamps just about doubled during his presidency.

Note also that the biggest drop occurred during the Clinton Administration.

I'm sure that's not why you opted not to include a link. Wink

- Collapse -
By your own account

the numbers via Bush.........Katrina upped the ante tremendously as did the workers losing their jobs in 2007-2008. Since BO has been in office in 2009-2012, the totals have jumped from 31.9M to 46M....explain why, please?

I didn't provide the link not because I OPTED not to, but because I had just seen the numbers on the television screen when I typed them.........

- Collapse -
The post-Katrina change....

....is actually one of the smaller increases during Bush's presidency. At least you admit that the economic collapse is partially responsible, and ripple effects from that collapse continued into 2010 as more companies found themselves having to lay people off.

The site I linked to explains that there was a big spike in 2011 due to a swarm of tornadoes that spring that added a million newly-homeless people to the food stamp rolls. The change from 2011 to 2011 appears pretty flat though.

How do you excuse....um, I mean "explain" the big jumps in 2002, 2003, 2004 and 2005? And remember, those are all years before those horrible Dems took control of Congress.

- Collapse -
I know there were many families

that were survivors of the WTC attack that went on foodstamps for a long period of time as well because paychecks were gone and monetary help from the government was very long in coming. Home owners were also being foreclosed on for a few years before the total collapse hit of the market...those foreclosures were happening without much media coverage. If I remember correctly, there were swells of illegals also coming in (Bush wanted immigration reform and was blocked by a number of his own party) because work at that time was still plentiful. I think I also remember seeing a documentary type show about many military families getting foodstamps during the two wars.

I'm getting real tired of liberals (especially you three musketeers) believing that they have a lock on being horse's asses with their comments, Josh. Try to keep civility in your responses for a change.......

- Collapse -
Good, then you acknowledge....

......that the ripple effects of an economic crash can go on for years. The rate of increase appears to be declining, which is more than could be said during any of Bush's 8 years in office. You think there are a lot of people on food stamps now? Wait and see what happens if Romney gets elected.

- Collapse -
With the taxpayer funded ads

by the USDA in Mexico (and stopped here in the USA recently) giving instructions to people in another country how they can apply for food stamps when they get here, even illegally, it isn't going to increase because of Romney, Josh.........

When's the last time you saw a Republican president advertise in another country with instructions on how to rip off our system?

- Collapse -
Kindly link....

.....to where a US government agency advertised in another country explaining how its citizens can come into the US illegally and then apply for food stamps.

Face it, Toni, the number of people on food stamps increased more during the Bush years than it has under Obama, the number has increased during almost every administration since the program started, and the only noteworthy decline in those numbers happened during the Clinton administration. This is just another attempt by you to cherry-pick the facts in order to smear Obama.

- Collapse -
From what I understand

after doing some searching after your link, this was originally done when Bush was trying to get immigration reform done, was blocked from doing it, and the ads either stopped or were never put into place. BO has revamped it and made it more aggressive.

- Collapse -
Did my post meet the requirements of your questtion?

Republican President, advertise in another country and how to rip off the system?

And MY link came from YOUR Google link.

- Collapse -
And ROFL to you calling for civility.....

.....after just having called someone an idiot. Don't dish it out if you can't take it.

- Collapse -
Civility is what I've given to all of you guys

since I've been back here, and I've gotten nothing but insults from all of you. I've had enough of it. Make a complaint if you don't like that I sounded off to JP......I didn't do it to you, did I? I thought you were better than what you've been dishing out only because of how long we've known each other....I guess I was wrong. You don't agree with me, fine......I don't agree with you either, but I haven't gotten down into the dirt towards you like you have with me. JP is an antagonist deliberately by his own admission......he IS an idiot and gives nonsense posts 99% of the time. If he actually lived here and had a say in what happens with our politics instead of being a lover of entitlements when he contributes nothing to society except stand around with his hand out looking for whatever the government and the union wants to give to him and he's perfectly content with that attitude, even in his OWN country, I might be able to tolerate his crap more. He's not one I would be able to respect enough to even be nice anymore to him. IF he could control his nonsense enough to have a civil debate, I would be happy, but I am not holding my breath waiting for that to happen.

- Collapse -
RE:JP is an antagonist deliberately by his own admission....

Said the person that gets so carried away that she doesn't realize what she is typing.

- Collapse -
Getting carried away with a message I post

(like you guys aren't guilty of the same accusation) is nowhere near the level of antagonizing crap you toss with every post, JP. There are times when I may have posted to the wrong person, or had a software glitch (it hasn't happened since I started using Firefox for SE only, so it was in my IE software somewhere) that I got beat up over when I couldn't get posts to show up correctly and it turned out it really WAS a software glitch, just not at CNET but rather with the browser itself (I'll take your apology anytime you feel the urge), but I have NOT gone out of my way to deliberately be nasty to any of you, and you know it. I've taken the crap for months now....I've tried reasoning with you all over it....all to no avail. I'm not a Moderator here anymore so I don't have to play nice, and I won't any longer. Hell, I had pushed back more when I WAS a Moderator than I have since I've come back and I still can't get you to step back even a little with the garbage and nonsense. I suspect that all liberals, like BO, CALL for civility, but don't really know what the word means because none of you practice it.

- Collapse -
How to antagonize.

Statements like this are antagonistic

Showing or feeling active opposition or hostility toward someone or something.

all liberals, like BO, CALL for civility, but don't really know what the word means because none of you practice it.

You say I do it deliberately....So I guess you think you aren't being antagonistic.

Well I think you are. You don't think you are. In my opinion you are ignorant(of the fact you're being antagonistic) AND antagonistic.

Poking with a stick, making the same statements, over and over are all antagonistic actions

being a lover of entitlements when he contributes nothing to society except stand around with his hand out looking for whatever the government and the union wants to give to him and he's perfectly content with that attitude,

- Collapse -
talking about BO

is not talking about you. Maybe you don't understand the word "personal"?

- Collapse -
RE: is not talking about you.

Maybe you don't understand the word "personal"?

She considers me a liberal and

in the post addressed to ME

none of you practice it.

- Collapse -
(NT) NSS. First word No, last word Sherlock. Rob
- Collapse -
(NT) another inspiring post
- Collapse -
RE: another inspiring post

thank you.

Toni talking about Obama and NOT me?

being a lover of entitlements when he contributes nothing to society except stand around with his hand out looking for whatever the government and the union wants to give to him and he's perfectly content with that attitude,

Sure sounds like Toni's opinion of me.

Obama gives out entitlements...I receive them (according to Toni) now that she's a senior she to is standing around with HER hand out.

- Collapse -
- Collapse -
Yes, we've known each other a long time

And with the possible exception of the 2004 election and your anti-Kerry rants, I don't remember you ever behaving the way you have lately. Don't make this sound one-sided, Toni. I can find the multiple threads in which you posted "Bite me" in response to one of my posts.

I think that's what I find most shocking about what you've become lately, the fact that we have known each other a long time (for anyone else reading this, it's around fifteen years), and the Toni I'm seeing here lately is not the Toni I remember fondly from those days. I joined SE during the Clinton administration and while there was a lot of criticism of him here, I don't remember you going off on him, certainly not to this degree.

- Collapse -
Hey, maybe you could

even out that attack and go after some others in the forum who attack peoole worse than she does and constantly. Odd you can't see or say anything about those.

- Collapse -
Clinton was a ***** cat compared to BO

and you know it.....and you know that HIS policies with bipartisan support was what worked...there even instances where a Republican idea caught on and was adopted by Clinton....BO is now trying with Clinton's help last night to convince people that Clinton's policies are pretty much the same as what HE's trying to do and it's bull and you and I both know it. BO is radical, off the deep end of the swimming pool with his agenda and it doesn't even RESEMBLE what Clinton did. BO along with Pelosi and Reid has rejected every single bill and even gone to the point of swearing to VETO a bill before it was even presented. There is no way he or you can ever convince me that this prez is good for this country.

Clinton was a presidential ****.........so was JFK......and probably a number of Republican presidents that didn't get any publicity over......but that didn't stop them from being effective, country-first presidents. I would prefer to have BO sleeping with every staff member, female OR male, but be a responsible president who looks out for our country......instead he is a totally irresponsible, inexperienced in everything but faithful to his wife guy who belongs ANYWHERE but in the Oval Office.

And I have posted one "bite me" response to you since I've been back. You claim multiples....I remember multiples way back in the past.......not currently. And that one response was because you were beneath civil in your post.

- Collapse -
Liberal Mentality

They can toss a thousand cow patties, but when you pick up a couple and toss them back, then suddenly YOU are the bad person. They give each other a pass. That's the Liberal game.

- Collapse -
Poor Toni, nobody understands her.

So Bush Doubled Food Stamp usage, and Barack Obama in the wake of the Bush Wall Street Crash increased it by only 50%, and that makes Obama worse???

Please send the coordinates of your planet, because there appears to be a problem with its Math.

The admittedly sometimes uncivil, but not this time,

- Collapse -
Best link in the Trivisonno data



This runs down disasters by State each year, and clearly offers data on Katrina, the cost of which is of course appalling.

Following Hurricane Hazel in 1954, which hit Toronto incredibly hard judging by the pictures and the death toll for a place that doesn't get Hurricanes, the Metropolitan Government which had only been formed the year before went through the Flood Plain maps and forbade building on any of them. Therefore there are tracts of land following all the rivers in Toronto which however attractive, are barred from building. The one exception they made was to site an expressway down one of the river tracks, which is subject periodically to land slippage and blockage during heavy periods of rain. (Stupidity occurs everywhere.) As a result of the Great Toronto Fire of ?1907? all buildings were required to be built of brick. There are no frame houses in Toronto anymore. The greatest good for the greatest number, not freedom to do as you please and then beg the government to bail you out.

When you look at the assistance Louisiana has received over this short period (?10 years) it makes you wonder why they don't simply do the same thing there. If it's subject to flooding, don't allow building. Since the Mississippi requires dredging periodically, why not spend the next 100 years filling in the spaces liable to flooding with clean building debris, bricks cement rocks what have you followed by clean fill until there are no flooding areas. All the land is filled up to the height of the levees or higher. Then you build, but only if you've armoured the banks of the Mississippi so it doesn't erode them and put houses at danger.

If the Dutch can recover land from the sea, and in particular that massive inlet formerly called the Zuider Zee, why can't the United States, a country far wealthier than Holland create the concrete tetrapods used to prevent erosion in order to recreate the barrier islands which protected New Orleans. In fact why not do it for the whole Gulf Coast including Texas, so that the Government doesn't have to continually bail out those bastions of Republican short-sightedness, formerly bastions of Democratic short-sightedness. Then again Dutch companies are more honest than are most American Corporations not least because they've been fighting the sea for Centuries, and take protecting people seriously, and not as a scam to bilk the government of money.

The same is true in the Mid-West which suffers flooding from the Mississippi every spring. In Manitoba, which is subject to the same melt and runoff conditions they have created safety channels to carry runoff away from inhabited areas and onto farmland. Farm houses are required to be built in areas free from flooding, or to be built on mounds that raise them above flooding. All the farm buildings are built on a raised area about 20 feet higher than the surrounding ground, and all are safe from flooding. The flooding rarely lasts much more than a week, and besides every farm has a boat or boats.

It's ludicrous that the same people in newer houses built in the same places have their hands out for relief every couple of years. And these are honest people.

Oh, and Toni, did you notice that White folk account for 35% of all Food Stamps? Hispanics account for less than their share of the population for Food Stamps.


- Collapse -

CNET Forums