Obama Ag Secretary Vilsack: Food Stamps Are A "Stimulus"

[tonyz]

Food stamps and unemployment benefits - touting success?

The embedded video is in the link below - essentially this administration appears to suggest that unemployment benefits and food stamps are good for the country.

Next, we’ll hear that riots are good for urban renewal - gitz you sum unemployment, food stamps and urban renewal - the statists shall provide for all.

Obama Ag Secretary Vilsack: Food Stamps Are A "Stimulus"

Real Clear Politics

Posted on August 16, 2011

Obama's Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack: "Well, obviously, it's putting people to work. Which is why we're going to have some interesting things in the course of the forum this morning. Later this morning, we're going have a press conference with Secretary Mavis and Secretary Chu to announce something that's never happened in this country -- something that we think is exciting in terms of job growth. I should point out, when you talk about the SNAP program or the foot stamp program, you have to recognize that it's also an economic stimulus. Every dollar of SNAP benefits generates $1.84 in the economy in terms of economic activity. If people are able to buy a little more in the grocery store, someone has to stock it, package it, shelve it, process it, ship it. All of those are jobs. It's the most direct stimulus you can get in the economy during these tough times."

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/vid..._stimulus.html

[rdret1]

The logic simply escapes me. Taxpayers are losing money to enable that same money to be reintroduced into the economy by the spending of those who are consuming that money but not making any of their own. Yea, that is stimulus.

[tonyz]

This administration continues to perpetuate big lies - the most direct way to get money back into the economy is to reduce tax rates (i.e., payroll taxes or any number of other taxes) - no middle man bureaucracy needed - like the Department of Agriculture.

Just when you think their logic can’t become more scary - something like this comes out - I thought that Nancy Pelosi was the anomaly, crazy, high ranking standard bearer for this administration - it appears that there are many, many more. Vilsack appears competent in that suit, he speaks with the assuredness of one who is never in doubt…when Reid, Pelosi, Vilsack and others speak, I am reminded of this quote:

“A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murderer is less to fear. The traitor is the plague.”

Marcus Tullius Cicero

I submit that many of our so called elites are responsible for contributing to a nation suffering from chronic Stockholm Syndrome.

[Pete]

Originally Posted by rdret1

The logic simply escapes me. Taxpayers are losing money to enable that same money to be reintroduced into the economy by the spending of those who are consuming that money but not making any of their own. Yea, that is stimulus.

Hmmm, what do we have coming up in September?

9/11 + 10, posible elections in Egypt and the President's new jobs speach.

A payroll tax cut for the "working poor" - not rich folks - has been and idea for D's for years. Wonder if that will be in there? Wonder if any D's will ask "How do we pay for it?" 'cause that will surely bust the bank.

And an increase in food stamps and unemployment payments? Well, we know now this administration considers them a "stimulus".

[steel71]

There's a bit f truth to this, food stamp program supports (stimulates) big agriculture, while the independent farmers and markets are swat teamed out of existence.

[rdret1]

Originally Posted by steel71

There's a bit f truth to this, food stamp program supports (stimulates) big agriculture, while the independent farmers and markets are swat teamed out of existence.

How do food stamp programs stimulate big agriculture? It has little to do with the inventory in a grocery store; the acreage planted by a farmer; the price per pound paid for livestock or the amount of subsidy that a particular farmer or rancher gets for not planting a particular crop or for not grazing a particular amount of acreage.

[tonyz]

Originally Posted by steel71

There's a bit f truth to this, food stamp program supports (stimulates) big agriculture, while the independent farmers and markets are swat teamed out of existence.

And, recall all those old stories of our government overpaying i.e., $600 for a toilet seat and $7,000 for a coffee maker, etc., etc., there is little argument that the economy was stimulated (a bit of truth there, too) - but not in a way that makes good economic sense for taxpayers in the long run.

The fact that the federal government provides food to those truly in need through various programs is a good thing.

The fact that the number of people truly in need - is actually increasing under this administration’s policies - is truly a bad thing.

It seems to me that reducing the number of those dependent on the government is a more laudable goal - not bragging about how many people are increasingly receiving government largess.

Does it not strike you as perverse that states like Florida and Texas are actually considered, in the words of Vilsack, as underperforming because they must not be giving out enough federal money or signing enough people up at the federal trough.

Does it not also seem strange that food stamps - something that is generally considered benevolent - is being equated with government stimulus spending?

I wonder what kind of proposals are coming after the Martha’s Vineyard vacation?

[The Reaper]

A picture is worth 1,000 words.

TR

[Sdiver]

Originally Posted by The Reaper

A picture is worth 1,000 words.

TR

Ewwwww .... who in their right mind drinks Mt. Dew while eating Steak and Lobster ????

But at least they were "smart shoppers" and saved $8.00.

Un-freaking believable. !!!???

[tonyz]

Originally Posted by Sdiver

[COLOR="Magenta"]Ewwwww .... who in their right mind drinks Mt. Dew while eating Steak and Lobster ????

Gotta have something to mix with the Louis Tre.

[steel71]

Originally Posted by tonyz

And, recall all those old stories of our government overpaying i.e., $600 for a toilet seat and $7,000 for a coffee maker, etc., etc., there is little argument that the economy was stimulated (a bit of truth there, too) - but not in a way that makes good economic sense for taxpayers in the long run.

The fact that the federal government provides food to those truly in need through various programs is a good thing.

The fact that the number of people truly in need - is actually increasing under this administration’s policies - is truly a bad thing.

It seems to me that reducing the number of those dependent on the government is a more laudable goal - not bragging about how many people are increasingly receiving government largess.

Does it not strike you as perverse that states like Florida and Texas are actually considered, in the words of Vilsack, as underperforming because they must not be giving out enough federal money or signing enough people up at the federal trough.

Does it not also seem strange that food stamps - something that is generally considered benevolent - is being equated with government stimulus spending?

I wonder what kind of proposals are coming after the Martha’s Vineyard vacation?

Oh, I was saying that in a tongue in cheek fashion.

[alelks]

It's definitely considered a stimulus if you sell the food stamps and buy crack.

[tonyz]

Originally Posted by steel71

Oh, I was saying that in a tongue in cheek fashion.

No worries, bro.

[CloseDanger]

Originally Posted by tonyz

The fact that the number of people truly in need - is actually increasing under this administration’s policies - is truly a bad thing.

For the past three months, every time I have gone to the grocery, I have had to wait on someone with food stamps. This includes this morning.

Though many look like they did not put themselves in that position on purpose, I would feel less embarrassed asking for the Church assistance than running through 5 checks in the check-out line.

[rdret1]

Originally Posted by CloseDanger

For the past three months, every time I have gone to the grocery, I have had to wait on someone with food stamps. This includes this morning.

Though many look like they did not put themselves in that position on purpose, I would feel less embarrassed asking for the Church assistance than running through 5 checks in the check-out line.

I don't know how prevalent it is these days, but when I first enlisted, I knew several young military families that were on food stamps for one reason or another. Young privates with a wife and a couple of kids just didn't make enough money, even with the wife working at a convenience store or restaurant or something.

I think the best way to tell if someone is taking advantage of the program is to follow them to the parking lot. If they get in an old beater, then maybe they actually need the assistance. If they get in a new Escalade with 22" rims, low profile tires, and a sound system that would work in a football stadium; probably not.