GOP Congressman Declines To Say Whether Every American Is Entitled To Eat

Discussion in 'Politics' started by StrangerInAStrangeLand, May 28, 2017.

  1. StrangerInAStrangeLand SubQuantum Mechanic Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    15,396
    Rep. Adrian Smith (R-Neb.) refused to say whether “every American is entitled to eat” and the food stamps program is the best way to ensure that they have the food they need.

    NPR’s Scott Simon interviewed Smith on Saturday about the farm bill and PresidentDonald Trump’s proposed cuts to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, commonly known as food stamps. In the president’s budget, the White House is seeking $193 billion in cuts to SNAP over 10 years, an amount equal to more than one-quarter of the program’s cost over that period.


    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/adrian-smith-food-stamps-eat_us_5929b06ce4b053f2d2acc6c2

    <>
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Tiassa Let us not launch the boat ... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    37,875
    Civilized Society

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!


    Click because it is Forbidden.

    We should not be surprised. It's a bit hard to explain because it's not quite that American conservatives want mass starvation, but, rather, a weird thing about right, privilege, and judgment. And the thing to watch in this trend sounds really, really stupid, but it has to do with religion, so ... right. But start with the idea of the Christian obligation to feed the hungry. Then add Americans: You shouldn't be obliged by the state, the argument goes; one will be more apt to volunteer their giving if they aren't required.

    The bottom line is that American conservatives, regardless of their relgious claims, want the power of judgment. They want the power to say yes and no. They want the power to decide who goes hungry. And that the whole American neurotic complex about human right and necessity, in a nutshell: These conservative Americans don't want to do it unless they can have the thrill of telling someone, "No, you must go hungry, because you are unsatisfactory to my judgment".

    I think it would feel less obvious if not for the perpetual bluster and fury from the so-called Religious Right.

    By the way, have you ever met Jesus the Antisocial? Eventually it arises that there is no Christian obligation to [obligation] because [Jesus was a cryptic, cynical bastard]; it's a weird thing when you first see it, and like the Willke Lie it doesn't seem something people should say in open company, but I know I've encountered it in the faux-libertarian Pauline Evangelism; one or another of the family friends in the organization wrote this bit, once upon a time, about Jesus and government that makes perfect sense if we accept that Christ was an antisocial punk dispensing beatitudes and sermons because He wanted to see just what manner of self-abasement He could con people into: "Look! The dumb cucks actually went and did it!"

    It really is a weird nexus of Anarchism, nihilism, and egotism; what nobody ever does, because nobody, really, can make the the components work together, is connect the pieces in order to present some notion of the whole. What's really weird about it is that a cohesive society is eventually replaced by factional order akin to, well, okay, you know those backwater imams we hear about from time to time sentencing some woman to die for the crime of being raped?

    And if you go back to the beginning, there is a reason why it seems that way. Anne Hutchinson in Massachusetts Bay Colony? Preacher was in charge, and a woman dared speak up. Texas? Well, Republicans have this bill to allow state agents to force sexually abused minor females to bear children as a matter of the state agent's aesthetics; it's a Christian-conscience thing—nor is that a joke, it's a religious freedom bill. We are not clueless as to what conservative notions about civilized society bring.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Beer w/Straw Transcendental Ignorance! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,549
    Congress?

    Decipher something from the senate maybe?

     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. wellwisher Banned Banned

    Messages:
    5,160
    The food stamp program was expanded under President Obama. This expansion made sense when the economy was in the tank, due to the housing crisis President Obama inherited. Under Obama there was a 32% increase in food stamps. If Trump decreases the program 25%, there will still be a net increase since 2008. The economy is no longer in the same tank.

    The problem with government programs, is even when an increase is sold as being temporary, once the increase is started, these programs don't want it to go away even when the times of emergency has gone. The tax payer no longer wants to pay for something that is no longer needed for an emergency.

    Another consideration was the initiative by Michelle Obama to fight obesity. The poor, who are the most likely recipients of food stamps, tend to be more overweight, compared to the population not on food stamps. This shows the poor has access to too much unhealthy food via the current food stamp program. One does not get overweight by starving.

    Although, in a survey format an overweight poor person might say they are hungry all the time, which is often spun into dying of starvation. One way to solve the obesity problem in the poor is to regulate food intake. This is where cutting food stamps has to two fold benefit; cost savings and less obesity. It may also be useful to get redo the EDB cards so only healthy food items can be bought at grocery stores. The poor in NYC can buy the same sugary soft drinks the mayors says are so bad. That is government for you.
     
    Last edited: May 29, 2017
  8. Kittamaru Ashes to ashes, dust to dust. Adieu, Sciforums. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,938
    That is frightfully incorrect on a number of levels, most importantly - it actually makes sense that people on EBT would be overweight, due to the simple fact that cheap bulk food is unhealthy (often by design). Case in point - you can get a twelve pack of Ramen for under three bucks: https://www.walmart.com/ip/Maruchan-Shrimp-Flavor-Ramen-Noodle-Soup-3-oz-12-count/49543487

    A two liter of soda (approx 68 fl oz), on sale, will run you a dollar - by compare, grape juice goes for about four bucks a 96 fl oz bottle - https://www.walmart.com/ip/Great-Value-100-Grape-Juice-96-fl-oz/22210909 - so, it's 1.4 cents per ounce for the soda vs 4.1 cents per ounce for the juice.

    Compare potato chips, microwave pizzas, hot pockets, et al vs proper meals with fresh meats and vegetables... oh, and don't forget to factor in the time it takes to prepare meals!

    Simply put - those on food stamps could probably do with MORE help, not less - lets get them wholesome, filling, healthy foods and help them better themselves so they have a fighting chance to raise themselves out of an impoverished state.
     
  9. StrangerInAStrangeLand SubQuantum Mechanic Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    15,396
    1 thing I have never heard/seen mentioned is the brain naturally works much better with good nutrition.

    <>
     
  10. Kittamaru Ashes to ashes, dust to dust. Adieu, Sciforums. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,938
    Well, the body as a whole works better when it has the proper fuel... much like putting vegetable oil in a diesel engine, while the human body can make due with a bunch of crap, it tends to work better when it has what it actually needs. Our body is incredibly resilient and adaptable... the problem is, that resilience only goes so far. The occasional junk food here and there? No problem. A week without a meal? Sure, it can handle that. A few months without fresh produce and only heavily preserved and packaged pseudo-foods that have been carefully crated to be as enticing as possible whilst being as unfilling/unsatisfying as possible? After a while, the body needs some actual nutrients.
     
  11. StrangerInAStrangeLand SubQuantum Mechanic Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    15,396
    Yes but many seem to not think of the brain when talking about the body.
    My point is that without good nutrition, people can't think as well, make worse decisions than otherwise, cannot learn as well, have less patience & determination, etc.
    I suspect there would be less crime if everyone had great nutrition from birth on.

    <>
     
  12. Baldeee Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,226
    Forgive me for being picky, but your maths is wrong, and doesn't take sufficient detail into account to give an meaningful picture.

    First the maths:
    If we take the level at 2008 as being 100, and then apply a 32% increase we get 132.
    If we now take a 25% cut we are down to 99.

    This means that it would be a 1% reduction from 2008 levels.

    Now the extra detail needed:
    T'internet suggests that in 2008 the participation in SNAP was c.28 million.
    In 2016 it was 41 million, down from a peak of 47 million in 2013.

    So the 100 in 2008 was helping feed 28 million, and the 99 Trump will take it down to will help feed c.40 million.
    That works out at roughly a 1/3 reduction in average benefit.

    Factor in average food inflation of c.2% p.a. over that time, and you're eating (pun intended) into another c.20% of the value of the average benefit since 2008.


    The economy may not be in the same tank, but the state of the economy is not a perfect measure of the level of population in need of assistance.

    It may be that, in time, the economy grows in such a way as to lift many more people out of the need for assistance, but until such time....
     
  13. birch Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,077
    society, world and gov'ts are a joke. they treat life as a haphazard game, expendable and a joke. the way it's run is bs that it's kind of mindboggling as to the pretense of seriousness when it's always been a mess that anyone with a brain cell could recognize. heh, when the economy grows, when this or that, when? it's circular with the same results and people scrambling for lifeboats on a titanic that the idiots or assholes in power never cared or decided there should be enough in the first place BUT people continue to pretend that's not the case and ignore the pink elephant. it's no different than winging it. as long as the design/structure of society remains the same, you will always have the same results. you will always have the poor, disenfranchised, oppressed, disabled, homeless etc. THAT'S HOW IT WAS DESIGNED TO BE IN THE FIRST PLACE! THERE IS NO WAY EVERYONE CAN MAKE IT TO THE TOP BECAUSE THERE ISN'T ENOUGH SPOTS AND SOCIETY ISN'T EGALITARIAN OR HUMANE AS THEY PRETEND TO BE, IT'S TOP-DOWN. THE CARROT ON A STRING IS A MIRAGE FOR MOST. THE LIES, THE BULLSHIT AND THE PRETENSE. poor design, poor planning, poor execution, poor ethics and shoddy everything.

    i am so done with this world and society. it's just a circus pretending it's got more noble agendas..
     
    Last edited: May 31, 2017
  14. birch Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,077
    modern society is sinister, cold and sociopathic in it's ways too. who are the ones in power to shape a cold and cruel society? the lack of wisdom and humanity. the fact children need more sleep as they are growing yet are expected to be in class barely at sunrise and having already eaten breakfast, this goes for younger children in daycare and preschool too. that's actually cruelty, even insane. besides the fact, it is stressful and doesn't consider or coincide with parents and families in how they need to get ready in the morning instead of a mad rush and in many cases, it's just a stressful start of a day every day for many. just as after school programs are needed for parents still at work as kids get out of school before parents get off work. and then there is the short-term maternity leave because of course both parents must be working outside the home as if it's perfectly okay and developmentally sound and healthy to put tender newborns in daycare with total strangers who will treat them mechanically or have no real connection etc in the most vulnerable part of their life/development. that's not even counting the older kids. there should be daycare at your workplace so a parent can see them or check up on them during the day. they provide daycare at gyms, then it can be done for employment.

    why are people having to work eight or more hours per day? what does society think they are accomplishing? four or five hour shifts should be fine for most jobs when it's about getting it done efficently and not milking workforce for all the time (dragging it out) and effort you possibly can which is exploitation. there is a legitimate reason that this is questionable and not the best. people have lives outside of work and especially family obligations which are a huge toll and responsiblility that most people are overly stressed, children and adults alike. the typical day consists of almost very little leisure or connection/quality time because by the time people get home, they must prepare meals, eat, wash, help with homework and it's time for bed already. rinse and repeat.

    there is this frame of mind of almost a mad rush but what is society really accomplishing? what are they serving? whose benefit is it really for or is it some blind, outdated system tethered to like a puppet unquestioningly? just like city planning, who does the societal planning? this is why so many have turned to self-employment as it's a far better alternative for many.

    what's funny is how much production is such a blind un-evaluated driven mantra. why are all the stores open early everyday when just about everybody is at work anyways but open later on the weekends when most people are off work? yeah, most people are at work from 9-5 but usually even earlier so who is going to all these businesses and shops? yes, some businesses need to be open but it's just the inefficiency that is not recognized that is rather silly or bizarre in some sense. granted, society has changed and more people work second and third shifts and that's why 24 hour stores exist. many places should be 24 hours such as libraries, movie theatres, and shops of all kinds. this is to spread out the traffic flow and hustle and bustle as well as workload of society and not just cram most of it all into one shift. science has already discovered or acknowledged that people have different biorythyms and some are preferentially night people and some are day people etc.

    you would have a much more sane and humane society if schools started later so family would have together time and it better coincides with most work schedules too. also no homework except for occasional projects as that does nothing to improve learning and eats away into family and relaxation time. society should also consider night schools as an option for children too as people have flexible schedules and lifestyles.

    hypothetically, the bizarre thing is with even these changes, you would improve quality of life and lessen stress and still not lose materialistically. instead you have societies geared toward blind and compulsory over-production (which isn't benefiting society more literally anyways) at the expense of better balanced health and happiness.
     
    Last edited: May 31, 2017
  15. birch Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,077
    people do realize why many people in the middle to lower class are resentful, right? this is not new though. they are always comparing themselves and worried about what someone else may be getting or not because they percieve a lack in their own lives. many times people have jobs or in professions they hate, dislike or don't fit them. many times people are in positions they are not qualified for or realize it is not a logical and perfect order of a system when jobs are competitive and not always based on merit but other unspoken criteria or just chance/luck. people are frustrated, anxious and tear down each-other or whoever they can which is usually those equal or below them because they know they can't touch or reach those above them getting corporate welfare which they call subsidies or tax breaks, so they attack those on the bottom which society also created. this breeds toxicity in society that is simmering.

    this isn't the only angle as there is also a stigma to status in society so that also breeds resentment which further creates toxicity. many times people feel overworked, underpaid and they may not like their job so they are very resentful about those who may recieve benefits that they are not privy to. sure, there will always be people who will resentful toward others but there is also a sense that people are supposed to be striving to be head and shoulders above their station when in reality, there will always be people needed in all stations in life. this sends a message they are not supposed to be happy, should have lower self-esteem and always think the grass is greener on the other side type of distraction. for most this will translate into pettiness and looking to tear down someone else since they can't reach any higher. if you are looked down upon, then that egotism also breeds toxicity amongst society too. this is all very unhealthy.

    when people enjoy what they are doing and feel fairly or well compensated both in time expended as well as effort/accomplishment, they tend to not care or be anxious about what others may be getting or doing.

    i've noticed every time someone is very nosy about what i do or my lifestyle, they are not happy with their life/job/occupation or want more than they feel they are getting. there are so many communists like this of any race that are born and bred americans who always think those within reach should be equal or below them without understanding or considering the reasons for different situations and assume they are capitalists just because they live in a capitalistic society. there are a shitload of people like this too. one of the best things to come out of technology is the internet and self-employment though. you can make your own way, set your own hours and be your own boss.
     
    Last edited: May 31, 2017

Share This Page