Posted on 11/01/2013 6:28:06 AM PDT by upchuck
U.S. food stamp cuts taking effect Friday are one of two stimulus safety-net programs ending, an economist said. The other is extended unemployment benefits.
...
It was a temporary increase in the maximum amount of food stamp benefits people could get monthly as part of Washington's response to the Great Recession.
...
Friday's change in the food stamp program, officially known as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, cuts monthly benefits 13.6 percent -- or, more precisely, ends a 13.6 percent increase in SNAP benefits from the stimulus act.
Benefits to a family of four receiving the maximum amount drop Friday to $632 from $668, the U.S. Agriculture Department says.
The maximum benefits for a single adult fall to $189 from $200.
The cuts leave recipients with an estimated average $1.40 to spend on each meal, the department says, citing its Thrifty Food Plan.
The number of people on food stamps jumped to nearly 48 million in July from about 26 million in 2007, before the recession started, the government said.
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
“Food Stamp Cuts Affect 1 in 7 Americans”
The “cuts” will affect a lot more than 1 in 7. Taxpayers, the always looked over group in these hand-wringing stories, while not getting a tax cut from the food stamp “cuts”, at least won’t see as much money borrowed from China that their grandchildren will have to pay back.
Bravo. Cut even more.
What I find disturbing is that the news is about the “cuts” of about about $36 for a family of 4 and not about the fact that 1-7 American households turn to the government for help buying food.
Cut the fraud and you could increase payments to the truly needy by 100% and STILL save the program money.
A thirty six dollar a month drop which still leaves over $150 dollars a week to feed the family. Unless you are living on T-bones and lobster that's plenty to feed the family.
... family of four drop Friday to $632 from $668 (5.4%) .... single adult fall to $189 from $200. (5.5%)
I know math can be tough, but really, how hard is it to figure out the drop of 13.6 percent from a $200 benefit? $27.20, which is far higher than the quoted $11 drop.
I mean, seriously, can't these reporters do a tiny bit of thinking rather than simply spewing whatever is on the web or press releases in their inbox?
By the by, it appears all the bad data comes from here: http://www.cbpp.org/cms/?fa=view&id=3899
Well, I hate to be hard hearted about this, but possibly, just possibly the end of extended unemployment benefits will motivate some people to get off the couch and go look for work.
I know a couple of people who lost their jobs over a year ago, and they haven't even tried to look for work; one guy told me he was going to wait until his Unemployment ran out.
They could try changing their eating habits.
Scouts Out! Cavalry Ho!
Here in NY, they were using their cards at the casinos.
And the “poster girl” in yesterday’s article had quite a few items around her house (and her t-shirt) that shouted out “luxury spending”.
My mother had a cookbook given to her as a wedding present in 1947. In the back of the book was a section titled “How to Feed a Family of 4 on $15 a Week.” $15 a week is funny in light of today’s economy, but many of the pointers in that section are still usable today. You can eat well on less, but you have to work at it. Problem is people would rather just collect benefits than expend any effort to help themselves.
Feral pig is basically organic pork. Price THAT the next time you’re at HEB or Kroger.
It’s not a cut. The raise was a temporary increase.
Watching MSNBC claim that every $1 spent on SNAP adds $1.70 to the local economy. No mention of the $1.70 that was lost when they took the dollar OUT of the economy the previous April 15.
Maybe give up buying soda, beer, steak, chips...etc etc...
Obviously somebody doesn't understand percentages.
If I give you an extra $20 on your $100 pay, you got a 20% increase.
If I take away that $20, you got a 16.6% (approx) decrease.
I'm surprised that politicians don't take more advantage of this - "I'll give you 10% extra, if you'll give me 9% back - you keep the other 1%".
Replace “Cuts” with cutoff and I’m in.
As a volunteer triage interviewer at a local food bank, I can testify that there are many ways to perpetrate food stamp fraud. And the folks I interview are very open about how they do it.
I wonder if the journalists think nobody will notice all the stuff the “poor, starving” subjects have ... not to mention how well-fed they usually look.
It reminds me of the story about how workers in the Soviet Union were shown a film about the American auto industry. They were supposed to observe the dreadful exploitation of the American proletariat by capitalist management, but instead, they saw the acres of parking lots, filled with personal cars owned by the workers.
In liberal speak, this return to the normal level is considerd a cut.
Just as in budget talks, a reduction in the proposed rate of increase in spending is defined by the liberals as a cut. In liberal land, women, children, minorities hit hardest by these “cuts” in spending.
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.