Food Stamp participation is at an all-time high as the Democrats meet in Charlotte to celebrate these four glorious years.
In August 2008, participation was about 29 million people. June 2012 saw the participation of 46.7 million people. 46.7 divided by 29 is....1.61.
A 61% increase in participation in just under four years, most of that time under the Obama administration.
Like every other achievement, it took determined effort to accomplish. Indeed, the Obama Administration devoted great effort and huge amounts of money borrowed from the Chinese, which of course will have to be paid back by us and our children.
A small price to pay for this landmark moment.
In the 1960's, the United States put men on the Moon. In the 1980's, we launched Space Shuttles and took the Soviet Empire down without firing a shot. In the 1990's, American ingenuity put a computer in every home and connected them all together via the internet. In the 2000's, clever things like iPhones and computer tablets appeared and became ubiquitous, and wireless. Internet commerce blossomed. Need we go on?
These paltry events pale in comparison to the crowning achievement of Barack Hussein Obama.
Undoubtedly, Himself will be much too modest to mention it Thursday night.
For a history of food stamps, refer to OS's earlier post.
Showing posts with label Food Stamps. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Food Stamps. Show all posts
Wednesday, September 5, 2012
Wednesday, June 1, 2011
Still Waiting For That Adult Conversation: The Debt Ceiling Vote
OK, OK, OK--it was a bit of Washington theater, staged like only the House of Representatives knows how.
Still, 318-97 is a pretty lopsided vote, as the House Republicans trudge to the White House tomorrow to be treated to TheFullObamaMonty. The condescension oozes out of every pore of every Obama staffer, with that 'Tut-tut, little children' attitude they do so well.
We'll see what happens. In the meantime, Michelle Malkin points out that Obama has put his foot to the floor, pedal to the metal, in signing up just as much of the populace as he can to the Food Stamp program. We're at 14% of the population and counting...
This will not end well, ya'll. It can't. When the axe falls upon the entitlements, that means some proportion of the at 14% will consider its personal ox to have been severely gored. Think Greece, think Spain...remember Watts in 1968, Detroit in 1968...
This could get very ugly, and OS suspects that may be the White House's intended outcome.
Still, 318-97 is a pretty lopsided vote, as the House Republicans trudge to the White House tomorrow to be treated to TheFullObamaMonty. The condescension oozes out of every pore of every Obama staffer, with that 'Tut-tut, little children' attitude they do so well.
We'll see what happens. In the meantime, Michelle Malkin points out that Obama has put his foot to the floor, pedal to the metal, in signing up just as much of the populace as he can to the Food Stamp program. We're at 14% of the population and counting...
This will not end well, ya'll. It can't. When the axe falls upon the entitlements, that means some proportion of the at 14% will consider its personal ox to have been severely gored. Think Greece, think Spain...remember Watts in 1968, Detroit in 1968...
This could get very ugly, and OS suspects that may be the White House's intended outcome.
Thursday, September 16, 2010
What To Say To Billy-Bob? Poverty Rate Climbs, And Keeps Climbing
OldSouth has a good friend, who shall be called Billy-Bob. A good Southern name for a truly decent Southern Gentleman.
OS, for reasons that can never be disclosed here, owes so much of the happiness of his family to Billy-Bob's generosity of spirit. BB made some crucial phone calls a few years back, and changed history in a positive direction for this family. He never had to, and OS didn't even know how crucial those phone calls would be at the time. BB just did it, 'cuz he's a generous soul, and knew it needed to be done. He's one of those kinds of people.
BB is a convicted, passionate, Obama-loving liberal. He also has made some lifestyle choices that OS would not have made. BB's the reason OS scratches his head and wonders about people, and tries not to paint private people with whom he agrees or disagrees with too broad a brush. BB cuts across all expectations and breaks all the rules. And he's one of the most decent people OS has ever had the honor of knowing.
So, BB posts this link on his Facebook page.
From BB's favorite newspaper, the Yew Nork Times:
Forty-four million people in the United States, or one in seven residents, lived in poverty in 2009, an increase of 4 million from the year before, the Census Bureau reported on Thursday.
The poverty rate climbed to 14.3 percent — the highest level since 1994 — from 13.2 percent in 2008. The rise was steepest for children, with one in five residents under 18 living below the official poverty line, the bureau said.
The report provides the most detailed picture yet of the impact of the recession and unemployment on incomes, especially at the bottom of the scale. It also suggested that the temporary increases in benefits in aid provided in last year’s stimulus bill eased the burdens on millions of families.
Those temporary increases are just that, and that money will run out. Congress is not going to authorize another hundreds of non-existent billions in 'emergency spending' to keep welfare benefits and food stamps going indefinitely. OS had to explain to a visitor from overseas last week that one in about seven people in this country are on some sort of public assistance.
It's scandalous, previously unimaginable.
How does OS suggest to BB that the very Democrat people and policies he has so adored for so long have helped create the terrible poverty he now grieves?
The Right, for its part, has really skewed the discussion for years, focusing on a small set of hot-button social issues, and ignoring the obvious overwhelming moral failure of a government that has pushed so many people over the cliff into poverty and despair.
How does OS explain to the Religious Right that, while they were beating their breasts over the social/moral issue of the year (pick one, they have a long list), the very Republican politicians they had passionately supported were systematically destroying the future of their children and grandchildren. Now that's truly a moral issue!
A lot of folks, especially in the Religious Right, won't even speak to BB, because of his way of life. They just assume he's hell-bound, and the sooner the better. BB won't talk to anyone from the Right--they've gone out of their way to be utterly horrible to him. Why should he?
OS fears we are approaching a point where we run out of credible, sane voices in the public square, in every corner of the culture.
We are in profound need of grownups who can understand math, and understand that the Ten Commandments and Our Lord's summary of the law and prophets are not suggestions, nor are they weapons for beating people we don't approve of into submission. He never employed them that way, and neither should we. They are, even for the non-religious, a path to sanity.
And, that in our generation, the bits about not stealing, coveting, murdering, and bearing false witness deserve extra attention.
For the sake of OS and his family, as well as BB and his.
OS, for reasons that can never be disclosed here, owes so much of the happiness of his family to Billy-Bob's generosity of spirit. BB made some crucial phone calls a few years back, and changed history in a positive direction for this family. He never had to, and OS didn't even know how crucial those phone calls would be at the time. BB just did it, 'cuz he's a generous soul, and knew it needed to be done. He's one of those kinds of people.
BB is a convicted, passionate, Obama-loving liberal. He also has made some lifestyle choices that OS would not have made. BB's the reason OS scratches his head and wonders about people, and tries not to paint private people with whom he agrees or disagrees with too broad a brush. BB cuts across all expectations and breaks all the rules. And he's one of the most decent people OS has ever had the honor of knowing.
So, BB posts this link on his Facebook page.
From BB's favorite newspaper, the Yew Nork Times:
Forty-four million people in the United States, or one in seven residents, lived in poverty in 2009, an increase of 4 million from the year before, the Census Bureau reported on Thursday.
The poverty rate climbed to 14.3 percent — the highest level since 1994 — from 13.2 percent in 2008. The rise was steepest for children, with one in five residents under 18 living below the official poverty line, the bureau said.
The report provides the most detailed picture yet of the impact of the recession and unemployment on incomes, especially at the bottom of the scale. It also suggested that the temporary increases in benefits in aid provided in last year’s stimulus bill eased the burdens on millions of families.
Those temporary increases are just that, and that money will run out. Congress is not going to authorize another hundreds of non-existent billions in 'emergency spending' to keep welfare benefits and food stamps going indefinitely. OS had to explain to a visitor from overseas last week that one in about seven people in this country are on some sort of public assistance.
It's scandalous, previously unimaginable.
How does OS suggest to BB that the very Democrat people and policies he has so adored for so long have helped create the terrible poverty he now grieves?
The Right, for its part, has really skewed the discussion for years, focusing on a small set of hot-button social issues, and ignoring the obvious overwhelming moral failure of a government that has pushed so many people over the cliff into poverty and despair.
How does OS explain to the Religious Right that, while they were beating their breasts over the social/moral issue of the year (pick one, they have a long list), the very Republican politicians they had passionately supported were systematically destroying the future of their children and grandchildren. Now that's truly a moral issue!
A lot of folks, especially in the Religious Right, won't even speak to BB, because of his way of life. They just assume he's hell-bound, and the sooner the better. BB won't talk to anyone from the Right--they've gone out of their way to be utterly horrible to him. Why should he?
OS fears we are approaching a point where we run out of credible, sane voices in the public square, in every corner of the culture.
We are in profound need of grownups who can understand math, and understand that the Ten Commandments and Our Lord's summary of the law and prophets are not suggestions, nor are they weapons for beating people we don't approve of into submission. He never employed them that way, and neither should we. They are, even for the non-religious, a path to sanity.
And, that in our generation, the bits about not stealing, coveting, murdering, and bearing false witness deserve extra attention.
For the sake of OS and his family, as well as BB and his.
Friday, May 14, 2010
Remember, They're Not Called Food Stamps Anymore--The Growth Of The SNAP Program
Mish points to a report by Reuters that some 40 million people are now enrolled in the Food Stamp program (Dang it! They ain't food stamps, it's the SNAP program!)
Mrs. OldSouth hears the gasp in her husband's voice, and asks, 'How many were participating before Obama took office?'
Good question! So, OS does a bit of digging, and arrives at the USDA SNAP site, which provides a detailed history of the program from its founding in 1939 by Henry Wallace, then Secretary of Agriculture under FDR. (Wallace served as Vice-President from 1941-1945, but was tossed under the bus in favor of Truman for the 1944 election. Good thing, since it was discovered later that he was a Soviet agent...but back to the subject of FoodSt-dangit-SNAP!)
The First Food Stamp Program (FSP) - May 16, 1939-Spring 1943
The idea for the first FSP is credited to various people, most notably Secretary of Agriculture Henry Wallace and the program's first Administrator Milo Perkins. The program operated by permitting people on relief to buy orange stamps equal to their normal food expenditures; for every $1 worth of orange stamps purchased, 50 cents worth of blue stamps were received. Orange stamps could be used to buy any food; blue stamps could only be used to buy food determined by the Department to be surplus.
Over the course of nearly 4 years, the first FSP reached approximately 20 million people at one time or another in nearly half of the counties in the U.S.--peak participation was 4 million--at a total cost of $262 million.
Hey, it was the Depression! And 262 mil wasn't that much, right? Besides, WWII ended the need for it, although the FDA doesn't mention that per se:
The program ended (in 1943) "since the conditions that brought the program into being--unmarketable food surpluses and widespread unemployment--no longer existed.
Fast forward to The New Frontier:
...in fulfillment of a campaign promise made in West Virginia, President Kennedy's first Executive Order called for expanded food distribution and, on Feb. 2, 1961, he announced that food stamp pilot programs would be initiated. The pilot programs would retain the requirement that the food stamps be purchased, but eliminated the concept of special stamps for surplus foods. A Department spokesman indicated the emphasis would be on increasing the consumption of perishables.
Hey, it was Camelot! And there was all that food laying around, and all those votes to be bought with it. And besides, it was a temporary program.
Next stop, 1964, and Lyndon Johnson's running for the office he had lived his entire life for, only to inherit the job under the grimmest of circumstances.
On Jan. 31, 1964, President Johnson requested Congress to pass legislation making the FSP permanent. Secretary Orville Freeman submitted proposed legislation to establish a permanent FSP on April 17, 1964. The bill eventually passed by Congress was H.R. 10222, introduced by Congresswoman Sullivan. Among the official purposes of the Food Stamp Act of 1964 were strengthening the agricultural economy and providing improved levels of nutrition among low-income households; however, the practical purpose was to bring the pilot FSP under Congressional control and to enact the regulations into law...
[A]ppropriations for the first year limited to $75 million; for the second year, to $100 million; and, for the third year, to $200 million.
The Department estimated that participation in a national FSP would eventually reach 4 million, at a cost of $360 million annually.
Hey, it was The Great Society! We were gonna-by-gum eradicate poverty from the land, while running a war in Asia and keeping the lid on Europe, Japan, and Korea. No way we were gonna screw up the economy, right? Besides, we're helping 4 million poh' folks, and it'll only cost us $90 a head. What could go wrong?
OS will let you read the rest of the grim tale, if you care to.
But there are a couple of obvious items to note: We didn't eradicate poverty, and we did screw up the best economy in history.
And, if that many people are eligible for food aid, we don't have an economic recovery underway.
BTW--in answer to Mrs. OS's question:
By August 2008, participation had reached an all-time (non-disaster) high of 29 million people per month.
Sort of makes one's head, well, snap!
Mrs. OldSouth hears the gasp in her husband's voice, and asks, 'How many were participating before Obama took office?'
Good question! So, OS does a bit of digging, and arrives at the USDA SNAP site, which provides a detailed history of the program from its founding in 1939 by Henry Wallace, then Secretary of Agriculture under FDR. (Wallace served as Vice-President from 1941-1945, but was tossed under the bus in favor of Truman for the 1944 election. Good thing, since it was discovered later that he was a Soviet agent...but back to the subject of FoodSt-dangit-SNAP!)
The First Food Stamp Program (FSP) - May 16, 1939-Spring 1943
The idea for the first FSP is credited to various people, most notably Secretary of Agriculture Henry Wallace and the program's first Administrator Milo Perkins. The program operated by permitting people on relief to buy orange stamps equal to their normal food expenditures; for every $1 worth of orange stamps purchased, 50 cents worth of blue stamps were received. Orange stamps could be used to buy any food; blue stamps could only be used to buy food determined by the Department to be surplus.
Over the course of nearly 4 years, the first FSP reached approximately 20 million people at one time or another in nearly half of the counties in the U.S.--peak participation was 4 million--at a total cost of $262 million.
Hey, it was the Depression! And 262 mil wasn't that much, right? Besides, WWII ended the need for it, although the FDA doesn't mention that per se:
The program ended (in 1943) "since the conditions that brought the program into being--unmarketable food surpluses and widespread unemployment--no longer existed.
Fast forward to The New Frontier:
...in fulfillment of a campaign promise made in West Virginia, President Kennedy's first Executive Order called for expanded food distribution and, on Feb. 2, 1961, he announced that food stamp pilot programs would be initiated. The pilot programs would retain the requirement that the food stamps be purchased, but eliminated the concept of special stamps for surplus foods. A Department spokesman indicated the emphasis would be on increasing the consumption of perishables.
Hey, it was Camelot! And there was all that food laying around, and all those votes to be bought with it. And besides, it was a temporary program.
Next stop, 1964, and Lyndon Johnson's running for the office he had lived his entire life for, only to inherit the job under the grimmest of circumstances.
On Jan. 31, 1964, President Johnson requested Congress to pass legislation making the FSP permanent. Secretary Orville Freeman submitted proposed legislation to establish a permanent FSP on April 17, 1964. The bill eventually passed by Congress was H.R. 10222, introduced by Congresswoman Sullivan. Among the official purposes of the Food Stamp Act of 1964 were strengthening the agricultural economy and providing improved levels of nutrition among low-income households; however, the practical purpose was to bring the pilot FSP under Congressional control and to enact the regulations into law...
[A]ppropriations for the first year limited to $75 million; for the second year, to $100 million; and, for the third year, to $200 million.
The Department estimated that participation in a national FSP would eventually reach 4 million, at a cost of $360 million annually.
Hey, it was The Great Society! We were gonna-by-gum eradicate poverty from the land, while running a war in Asia and keeping the lid on Europe, Japan, and Korea. No way we were gonna screw up the economy, right? Besides, we're helping 4 million poh' folks, and it'll only cost us $90 a head. What could go wrong?
OS will let you read the rest of the grim tale, if you care to.
But there are a couple of obvious items to note: We didn't eradicate poverty, and we did screw up the best economy in history.
And, if that many people are eligible for food aid, we don't have an economic recovery underway.
BTW--in answer to Mrs. OS's question:
By August 2008, participation had reached an all-time (non-disaster) high of 29 million people per month.
Sort of makes one's head, well, snap!
Tuesday, April 20, 2010
Food-Stamp Nation
Mish Shedlock, as always, knows how to paint the picture accurately from both the macro to micro level. He understands that the economy is not about numbers, but about people, culture, behavior, ethics. Look to your right on this page, and allow him to enlighten you.
This post is especially telling.
Quoting below:
[begin copy]
Food stamp usage is up again except the program is now called SNAP Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program.
Inquiring minds are looking at a SNAP Participation Table that shows a record 39,430,724 receive SNAP benefits, a 22.4% increase from a year ago.
Biggest State Increases
Arizona - 32.9%
Colorado - 32.9%
Florida - 38.6%
Idaho - 45.7%
Nevada - 46.9%
Rhode Island - 42.4%
South Dakota - 32.6%
Utah - 37.3%
Wisconsin - 38.9%
Wyoming - 40.0%
Those numbers are as of January 2010
Households
Household SNAP participants increased from 12,728,981 in Fiscal Year 2008 to 15,232,105 in fiscal year 2009, a 16.4% increase. For comparison purposes, watch the growth in household participation.
SNAP Household Participation
FY 2005 - 11,197,377
FY 2006 - 11,734,491
FY 2007 - 11,789,594
FY 2008 - 12,728,981
FY 2009 - 15,232,105
Cost of SNAP Program
FY 2005 - $31.07 Billion
FY 2006 - $32.91 Billion
FY 2007 - $33.19 Billion
FY 2008 - $37.66 Billion
FY 2009 - $53.63 Billion
Household and cost numbers are as of March 30, 2010.
Clearly the recession took its toll, and will continue to do so until there is a dramatic decrease in the unemployment rate.
[end copy]
Since Uncle Sam spent far less in the aggregate of the years cited on keeping people fed than on keeping firms like Freddie, Fannie, AIG, GMAC, Chrysler and GM on life support in 2008 and 2009, (and let's not forget the banks), let's not quibble about numbers. People in large groups who don't have enough to eat or feed their children do desperate and unpleasant things, and listen to people who advocate desperate and unpleasant things. Ask Marie Antoinette...
Still, we have constructed a culture that begins to look a bit like Louis XVI: Massive wealth and luxury flowing to fewer and fewer people connected to the court in Paris, small family business enterprise increasingly bled dry, a large proportion just barely hanging on beneath them (because small business can't expand and hire), and an intellectual/political elite out of touch with reality.
Stir gently, add a tablespoon of accelerant, heat slowly.
We don't want this to happen.
The glorious revolution of the 1790's was followed by the Napoleonic bloodbath, which was followed by...which was followed by...
This post is especially telling.
Quoting below:
[begin copy]
Food stamp usage is up again except the program is now called SNAP Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program.
Inquiring minds are looking at a SNAP Participation Table that shows a record 39,430,724 receive SNAP benefits, a 22.4% increase from a year ago.
Biggest State Increases
Arizona - 32.9%
Colorado - 32.9%
Florida - 38.6%
Idaho - 45.7%
Nevada - 46.9%
Rhode Island - 42.4%
South Dakota - 32.6%
Utah - 37.3%
Wisconsin - 38.9%
Wyoming - 40.0%
Those numbers are as of January 2010
Households
Household SNAP participants increased from 12,728,981 in Fiscal Year 2008 to 15,232,105 in fiscal year 2009, a 16.4% increase. For comparison purposes, watch the growth in household participation.
SNAP Household Participation
FY 2005 - 11,197,377
FY 2006 - 11,734,491
FY 2007 - 11,789,594
FY 2008 - 12,728,981
FY 2009 - 15,232,105
Cost of SNAP Program
FY 2005 - $31.07 Billion
FY 2006 - $32.91 Billion
FY 2007 - $33.19 Billion
FY 2008 - $37.66 Billion
FY 2009 - $53.63 Billion
Household and cost numbers are as of March 30, 2010.
Clearly the recession took its toll, and will continue to do so until there is a dramatic decrease in the unemployment rate.
[end copy]
Since Uncle Sam spent far less in the aggregate of the years cited on keeping people fed than on keeping firms like Freddie, Fannie, AIG, GMAC, Chrysler and GM on life support in 2008 and 2009, (and let's not forget the banks), let's not quibble about numbers. People in large groups who don't have enough to eat or feed their children do desperate and unpleasant things, and listen to people who advocate desperate and unpleasant things. Ask Marie Antoinette...
Still, we have constructed a culture that begins to look a bit like Louis XVI: Massive wealth and luxury flowing to fewer and fewer people connected to the court in Paris, small family business enterprise increasingly bled dry, a large proportion just barely hanging on beneath them (because small business can't expand and hire), and an intellectual/political elite out of touch with reality.
Stir gently, add a tablespoon of accelerant, heat slowly.
We don't want this to happen.
The glorious revolution of the 1790's was followed by the Napoleonic bloodbath, which was followed by...which was followed by...
Saturday, April 17, 2010
Food-Stamp Culture: Nashville, Tennessee
Driving out of town for a weekend trip, OS and his bride had the local NPR affiliate on the car radio. In the neutral tone their news staff are known for, the local reporter calmly reported a shocking statistic: One person in six in Nashville/Davidson County, Tennessee, OS's hometown, are on the Food Stamp program.
1 divided by 6= 16.67 percent of a what has become a large city in the past twenty years or so.
Since there are entire swaths of the county where Food Stamps would almost certainly never be needed or used, that means there must be other swaths where their use is now commonplace.
It's to the point, says our reporter, that the State of Tennessee has hired some six hundred Food Stamp recipients to process the flood of Food Stamp applications. Of course, this full-time employment takes them off Food Stamps themselves, but their salaries are funded by federal 'stimulus' money. Which will run out. Then they'll go back on their Food Stamps...
Well, the claim can be made that 'jobs were created'. But missing in this 'job creation' is one simple fact: These six hundred people are providing a service, and are now employed, but their employment creates no wealth.
And we now have the expansion of a more-or-less permanent underclass in this great city. The social and political implications of having some 16-17% of a population directly dependent upon the government for their food are sobering to contemplate.
Since the early 70's the recessions have come in waves--busts and recoveries, but each recovery leaving more people behind in the ditch, more businesses closed, more productive work sent offshore.
No, Virginia, the Great Recession is not over.
1 divided by 6= 16.67 percent of a what has become a large city in the past twenty years or so.
Since there are entire swaths of the county where Food Stamps would almost certainly never be needed or used, that means there must be other swaths where their use is now commonplace.
It's to the point, says our reporter, that the State of Tennessee has hired some six hundred Food Stamp recipients to process the flood of Food Stamp applications. Of course, this full-time employment takes them off Food Stamps themselves, but their salaries are funded by federal 'stimulus' money. Which will run out. Then they'll go back on their Food Stamps...
Well, the claim can be made that 'jobs were created'. But missing in this 'job creation' is one simple fact: These six hundred people are providing a service, and are now employed, but their employment creates no wealth.
And we now have the expansion of a more-or-less permanent underclass in this great city. The social and political implications of having some 16-17% of a population directly dependent upon the government for their food are sobering to contemplate.
Since the early 70's the recessions have come in waves--busts and recoveries, but each recovery leaving more people behind in the ditch, more businesses closed, more productive work sent offshore.
No, Virginia, the Great Recession is not over.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)