• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

Food Stamp / Welfware Reform

Page 5 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Doppel

Lifer
Feb 5, 2011
13,313
2
0
The current implementation is unacceptable to virtually everybody. The problem is that to say it as such will cost a politician votes from those who rely or abuse it. Also, fixing it from a moral perspective--making it ow it ought to be, could potentially cost more even than it does now abused.
 

herm0016

Diamond Member
Feb 26, 2005
7,451
414
126
How would that work at checkout counters? That would require imposing some sort of database system on supermarkets and then forcing the supermarkets to enforce it. Again, not a very business-friendly thing to do.
many state programs like michigans bridge card already do this. it is a pain, but i think it is worth it.
 

herm0016

Diamond Member
Feb 26, 2005
7,451
414
126
And doesnt taking my money to pay for other people's children kinda undermine the idea of a free country?
ever heard of child support? THEY DO THIS!!

"other peoples money"?? if you are a parent, you are not "other people"

just like selective food on some programs. THEY ALREADY DO THIS!!

every program should be selective. milk, no name brands, fruit, veggies, wheat bread... etc.

not like EBT, where you can go to Papa Murphy's and get a take and bake pizza paid for by tax payers, or the gas station, or any other place like it.
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
66,705
3,512
126
In other words no, you keep your doors locked because you're selfish and greedy and don't want to share your wealth. You sound like a Republican.
So you don't wander the streets during the day looking for transients to feed, clothe, and house? How... inconsistent of you.
Both of you are famous for your rage that the government would tax you and give to somebody you don't think deserves to exist, but you don't have to project the disgust you feel for yourselves on me. You could hurt my feelings.

Because I am locked up here in the institution and can't wander about freely, I vote to have my vast wealth taxed so others can have jobs giving my money away. It's good for the folk who have those jobs, its good for those who can eat, and it's good for me. It's good for you too, but you are too selfish to notice. I could maybe buy a grain of rice for every hungry person, but when I vote to have yours and every miser's asses taxed along with mine, I can multiply my donation immensely. You may not like it and I don't really care. If we could rely on personal charity to fix the problem there wouldn't be any hungry people. I believe the state is there to do jobs folk can't do individually. You vote to keep your money and let folk suffer. I vote to waste my money to whatever extent it gets wasted so maybe some of it will help. You like your charities and I like mine, the government, and I also get to vote my opinion.

By the way, my institution modest as it is happens to be, situated among many others, most of which are even more fabulously wealthy than mine, so doors open or locked, a matter beyond my control, is of small import. When folk break into the mint, they pay little attention to the garbage cans, just as you two do.
 

LunarRay

Diamond Member
Mar 2, 2003
9,993
1
76
If I didn't know better I'd think that our economic crisis was a contrived effort by the Conservatives to generate support to end all manner of Social programs or drastically reduce them.

There can be no doubt that any Corporation who'd ship jobs overseas or a Government that would permit foreign ownership of our domestic Corporations coupled with allowing foreign ownership of our land is not acting in the best interests of the people of this country.

We need big changes to regain our internal integrity... Why should we care what the economic realities are outside our borders when our own is so dismal... when our poor hunger and when one side with most of the money can use that money to further enrich their members at the expense of the people among whom they are not.

Isolate and rid the United States of foreign equity positions within our borders.
 

BoberFett

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
37,587
9
81
If I didn't know better I'd think that our economic crisis was a contrived effort by the Conservatives to generate support to end all manner of Social programs or drastically reduce them.

There can be no doubt that any Corporation who'd ship jobs overseas or a Government that would permit foreign ownership of our domestic Corporations coupled with allowing foreign ownership of our land is not acting in the best interests of the people of this country.

We need big changes to regain our internal integrity... Why should we care what the economic realities are outside our borders when our own is so dismal... when our poor hunger and when one side with most of the money can use that money to further enrich their members at the expense of the people among whom they are not.

Isolate and rid the United States of foreign equity positions within our borders.
Any time libertarians or libertarian-leaning-Republicans put forth such an idea, they're quickly shouted down by the typical suspects. ISOLATIONISTS! LOL, IDIOTS!

Be careful or they'll revoke your "Liberal" card.
 

LunarRay

Diamond Member
Mar 2, 2003
9,993
1
76
Any time libertarians or libertarian-leaning-Republicans put forth such an idea, they're quickly shouted down by the typical suspects. ISOLATIONISTS! LOL, IDIOTS!

Be careful or they'll revoke your "Liberal" card.
Actually, I'm a fiscal conservative. Social Liberal .. true!

I don't favor one party over another and would support a Perot type if there was a way one of them could actually get elected. It is simple math as I see it... I don't care if the Devil got in office if he'd be independent of anything but the facts.

Ya see, I know the only way we can afford the programs I'd like to see maintained or enacted is for the economy not only of the US but the dang entire world move into a sustained high level growth. I also know that won't happen any time soon... maybe 40 or so years equilibrium might be achieved.

We can't live in yesterday's world but we can sort today's out but, as far as I'm concerned, we have some drastic measures to swallow. Taxing the rich is psycho babble... IF they only had incentive to use those funds productively in the economy... There is no reason to do that atm. We scream for Jobs and that is my view too... but, they don't materialize on their own. What ever the One World thing is is killing us. The Right wants to maintain a world economy and the Left moves in contracting circles - economically.

I figure our Political folks had to know all these bubbles would burst and although not exactly when they would they did allow it to happen... either they are nutty or criminal. I went to school with one and know another of their top Economists and I know they are brilliant... how can such savvy people not convince the law makers to avoid this insanity... I don't know!

Given all the dynamics that I see and assuming I don't need glasses the only way out of the Trend is to move toward Isolationism with the other aspects I mentioned phased in as well. For now, I'd pump a few trillion into LONG term job creation and the debt be damned. This coupled with creating the reason to move manufacturing back while maintaining our Service sector base.

Edit: I disagree with Diamond of MIT that the US can't isolate... Our internal consumption is greater than our productive capacity... We can produce everything our demand would request.
 
Last edited:

BoberFett

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
37,587
9
81
Edit: I disagree with Diamond of MIT that the US can't isolate... Our internal consumption is greater than our productive capacity... We can produce everything our demand would request.
Did you mean "not greater" because otherwise I don't know what you're trying to say here...
 

LunarRay

Diamond Member
Mar 2, 2003
9,993
1
76
Did you mean "not greater" because otherwise I don't know what you're trying to say here...
Maybe inarticulately stated...

We can produce all the stuff we'd demand... the products we'd demand and the services, etc... But, we'd still have to import to meet the volume we'd demand. We'd have to be careful about Alternative consumption demands where imports have a comparative advantage over some group of alternatives cuz we'd then see a move away from our stuff to their stuff or thing. I don't think we have an advantage currently over a China or Mexican entity nor will we in the near term... We need to not only get manufacturing up but also get the marginal cost in line with imported goods... to do this currently we'd need to tariff to that number...

I don't know about today, but, a few years ago I did an exhaustive analysis considering the up and coming economic 'threats' we'd face given NAFTA and all the other Trade treaties... I saw what I thought was the Plan. Considering only China, that plan considered there'd be quite a few relative efficiencies favoring the US while China had many Comparative Advantages. My thinking was that should produce a rather small trade surplus to China. It ought to also allow them to move into other markets where the US also competes but that it should take a while and we'd be able to sustain that IF we didn't start or participate in a global recession... that would shift the advantage across the board to China and any other entity who could manage their cost structure while playing with their currency.

I felt it was NOT a risk worth taking... the downside had no hand holes to climb back up fast enough and the upside seemed to benefit everyone else but the US... The old equilibrium of the World equation... Peace among the Economic participants... everyone...

Clinton and the idiots in Congress pushed for it... and Me and Perot and maybe twenty other people said... Don thee now our gay life jackets... this boat is about to sink.... The first major bubble to burst was the Info Tech... but everyone got into that bubble ... lots of air in there... and what happened before and during our heyday... China and the rest of the Asian community started to make our stuff cheaper given they 'stole' our invested technology and much lower cost structure. A massive Comparative Advantage. Then boom and we have hardly anyone producing in the US what became their economies of scale and our unemployed tech makers... Not all but many. And that is only one sector.


I'll Tell you a funny story...

As I spouted off about what I saw about to happen I was met with all manner of negative comments to the point where I was thought to be the village idiot... (rightly or wrongly) but, I was challenged to sit for this CMA exam thingi... But, I had to do it cold... no prep.. That exam was touted to be the most difficult testing of Financial and Economic knowledge... Assuming one could not regurgitate from an MBA and DBA experience...
So I sat for this test and did quite well... My peers and students who were involved then decided that the test MUST have gotten much easier... but I got Certificate # 018226 for my trouble at least...
And WE got years and years of Trade deficits... I may not have been completely right on every element but right enough I'd think... And here we are today... Bursting bubbles with folks on one side yelling for less regulation to enable the greed motive to sink folks and folks on the other side yelling at the janitor's mop that spilled a bit of water on the shinny brass door that they just shined.

So... In conclusion, I just simply don't care to see Americans starve or enjoy a significant reduction to their standard of living to ensure a Peaceful world... We can ensure Peace a few ways. But, in my opinion, and in the short term (50 years) I see not other way but to move toward isolation both financially and otherwise. The roll of government is to provide the means for all citizens to enjoy those Rights and this current way ain't handling it.
 

CycloWizard

Lifer
Sep 10, 2001
12,353
1
81
Both of you are famous for your rage that the government would tax you and give to somebody you don't think deserves to exist, but you don't have to project the disgust you feel for yourselves on me. You could hurt my feelings.

Because I am locked up here in the institution and can't wander about freely, I vote to have my vast wealth taxed so others can have jobs giving my money away. It's good for the folk who have those jobs, its good for those who can eat, and it's good for me. It's good for you too, but you are too selfish to notice. I could maybe buy a grain of rice for every hungry person, but when I vote to have yours and every miser's asses taxed along with mine, I can multiply my donation immensely. You may not like it and I don't really care. If we could rely on personal charity to fix the problem there wouldn't be any hungry people. I believe the state is there to do jobs folk can't do individually. You vote to keep your money and let folk suffer. I vote to waste my money to whatever extent it gets wasted so maybe some of it will help. You like your charities and I like mine, the government, and I also get to vote my opinion.

By the way, my institution modest as it is happens to be, situated among many others, most of which are even more fabulously wealthy than mine, so doors open or locked, a matter beyond my control, is of small import. When folk break into the mint, they pay little attention to the garbage cans, just as you two do.
Either property has value or it doesn't. If it doesn't, then no one has any need of it and no reason to take it. It's interesting to me that you claim property is worthless with your mouth while trying to take it with your hands.
 

Onceler

Golden Member
Feb 28, 2008
1,264
0
71
Those that choose to remain on welfare after six months should be sterilized(castration for the men).
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY