Posted on 07/01/2012 6:41:01 AM PDT by Kaslin
In their never-ending efforts to buy votes with other people’s money (see the first cartoon in this post), politicians have been expanding the welfare state and creating more dependency.
This is bad for the overall economy because it means a larger burden of government spending and it’s bad for poor people because it undermines their self reliance and self respect.
It also has very worrisome long-run effects on the stability and viability of a culture, as shown by these two cartoons.
A stark example can be seen in the food stamp program, which has morphed from a handout for the genuinely poor to a widespread entitlement for everyone from college students to the Octo-mom, and for products ranging from luxury coffee to lobster.
Here are some of the unpleasant details about the fiscal costs from Veronique de Rugy’s column in the Washington Examiner.
When the food stamp program was first expanded nationally in the 1970s, just 1 in 50 Americans participated. Today, 1 in 7 Americans receive $134 each month… With the bipartisan Farm Bill going through Congress right now, these high levels of dependency may become permanent. Some 70 percent of the nearly $1 trillion Farm Bill recently passed by the Senate will be spent on food stamps — that’s $770 billion over ten years. …An estimated 45 million Americans received food stamps in 2011, at a cost of $78 billion. That’s a twofold increase from just five years ago when 26 million people received benefits at a cost of $33 billion. …food stamp enrollment increased and spending doubled, even as unemployment and the poverty level dropped modestly between 2007 and 2011. The more important part of the story comes from the eligibility changes implemented by the Bush and Obama administrations.
The last sentence is the key. Eligibility has been expanded dramatically. Food stamps are slowly but surely becoming mainstream and that should worry all of us.
But food stamps are just one form of income redistribution. Welfare spending also is a problem.
Here are some excerpts from a New Hampshire story, featuring a store clerk who got fired because she didn’t think welfare cards should be used to buy cigarettes.
Jackie R. Whiton of Antrim had been a six-year employee at the Big Apple convenience store in Peterborough until a single transaction sent her job up in smoke. The store clerk was fired after she refused to take a customer’s Electronic Balance Transfer card to pay for cigarettes. …Whiton said she did not think EBT cards could be used to purchase cigarettes and refused to sell to him. The two “had a little go-around” as the line got longer behind him, said Whiton. “I made the statement, ‘do you think myself, that lady and that gentlemen should pay for your cigarettes?’ and he responded ‘yes,’ ” Whiton said. …Charles E. Wilkins, the general manager of the C.N. Brown Co. that runs the stores, said the EBT cards in the cash phase could be used for any items, including alcohol, tobacco and gambling. Wilkins said the company gave Whiton the option of staying but she said she would not accept the cards anymore. “She didn’t think it was right and just wasn’t going to sell to people in that program anymore,” Wilkins said. Whiton said when she came to work the next day, her manager asked her how much notice she was giving. When she responded “a week,” she was told the home office had just called and fired her.
Ms. Whiton is now one of my personal heroes, joining Mr. Mothershead, another store clerk who had the right reaction when confronted by someone who tried to get something he didn’t earn (albeit using a different tactic).
Last but not least, above is something that arrived in my inbox yesterday.
A bit harsh, but we have gotten to a strange point where the Obama Administration is bribing states to add more food stamp recipients and even running ads to lure more people into food stamp dependency.
So, yes, Billy Fleming (assuming he’s real) has a right to be upset.
P.S. Here’s some more welfare humor.
yeah I was stunned the time my sis told me she voted for whoever promised her programs that would benefit her.........that had never even crossed my beady little mind
Not to mention double- and triple-dipping.
The unmarrieds use each others’ names to collect, sometimes in more than one household (different kids with different parents, girlfriend’s apartments, etc.)
Many have different fake ID’s, and thus have various aliases under which they can collect.
Who dares walk into the barrio or ghetto and demand an audit?
NOBODY. It would be political, as well as literal, suicide.
Babcock, crop insurance, iowa, ewg
The article outlines the cost of crop insurance and the application of public food policy.
Another interesting aspect of the flow of funds through the USDA is the SNAP and WIC programs. Try another Google search on
Professor Marion Nestle 'Why Calories Count from Science to Politics
Fun reading
I meet people like that all the time. What they don’t realize is that for everything thing they could on others to “give” them the less free they are. When you become dependent on the government to provide basic needs like food, healthcare and transportation, few of the recipients realize they are edging towrd slavery.
Once you are dependent on government program it is almost impossible to get off. If you get a better job with more money you could lose the benefit. The only way to keep it is stay trapped. Personally I would rather struggle and do without than become dependent on the government.
I refuse to use Google search, for anything but telephone numbers.
I have learned years ago never to vote for any candidates that make the most promises, because as soon as they get elected they forget their promises
I have learned to despise politicians because they are liars
Welfare State:
The sacrificing of the future, for the temporary comfort of the present, while the politicians selling off that future, gain temporary power over the people through the purchase of the people’s votes with government programs.
You don't even need them for that. There are plenty of search engines out there.
Have the recipients come in for a one time finger print or retina scan in order to collect...
You can be fined $20,000 for feeding dolphins in the wild. Do you think this law would be on the books if dolphins could vote?
Detouring through a slum recently, I saw a big tent set up in front of a (closed, bombed-out) strip mall. A sign on it said that “free” government cell phones could be obtained inside. Perhaps we could expand on that operation, offering one-stop phones, food, and health care free to all comers under the same big tent. (Oh, and voter registration would also be available.)
They’re having enough trouble with ID required to vote - while it would certainly be a good start, the race-baiters would be wailing to high heaven.
The various bipartisan commie factions of the political/regulator/public education/emergency/rescue/pension class will then fight over who gets the money from cuts to food stamps. All of the socialists want more to stock-up on vehicles, weapons, alternative energy power plants, hardened communications buildings/equipment, etc., to perpetrate their SHTF/TEOTWAWKI riots, the various factions against others.
Should be quite a show before long in contemporary politics.
The various bipartisan commie factions of the political/regulator/public education/emergency/rescue/pension class will then fight over who gets the money from cuts to food stamps. All of the socialists want more to stock-up on vehicles, weapons, alternative energy power plants, hardened communications buildings/equipment, etc., to perpetrate their SHTF/TEOTWAWKI riots, the various factions against others.
Should be quite a show before long in contemporary politics.
Receiving multiple EBT card by one individual isn't on the radar screen as far I can tell. Most of the reports of fraud center around selling the card for cash or claiming the card got lost. Showing an ID isn't required for using the card.
Exactly. But it should be. It's been going on for decades.
ALBANY — New York City would have to stop requiring the electronic fingerprinting of food stamp applicants under regulations proposed on Thursday by Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo, who has sided with advocates for the hungry who say it discourages people from seeking benefits.
Good detective work...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.