0
   

Speaking of propaganda...

 
 
Reply Thu 3 Apr, 2008 02:06 pm
USA 2008: The Great Depression

Food stamps are the symbol of poverty in the US. In the era of the credit crunch, a record 28 million Americans are now relying on them to survive - a sure sign the world's richest country faces economic crisis

http://www.independent.co.uk/multimedia/archive/00021/queue_21938t.jpg


We knew things were bad on Wall Street, but on Main Street it may be worse. Startling official statistics show that as a new economic recession stalks the United States, a record number of Americans will shortly be depending on food stamps just to feed themselves and their families.


Dismal projections by the Congressional Budget Office in Washington suggest that in the fiscal year starting in October, 28 million people in the US will be using government food stamps to buy essential groceries, the highest level since the food assistance programme was introduced in the 1960s.

The increase - from 26.5 million in 2007 - is due partly to recent efforts to increase public awareness of the programme and also a switch from paper coupons to electronic debit cards. But above all it is the pressures being exerted on ordinary Americans by an economy that is suddenly beset by troubles. Housing foreclosures, accelerating jobs losses and fast-rising prices all add to the squeeze.

Emblematic of the downturn until now has been the parades of houses seized in foreclosure all across the country, and myriad families separated from their homes. But now the crisis is starting to hit the country in its gut. Getting food on the table is a challenge many Americans are finding harder to meet. As a barometer of the country's economic health, food stamp usage may not be perfect, but can certainly tell a story.

Michigan has been in its own mini-recession for years as its collapsing industrial base, particularly in the car industry, has cast more and more out of work. Now, one in eight residents of the state is on food stamps, double the level in 2000. "We have seen a dramatic increase in recent years, but we have also seen it climbing more in recent months," Maureen Sorbet, a spokeswoman for Michigan's programme, said. "It's been increasing steadily. Without the programme, some families and kids would be going without."

But the trend is not restricted to the rust-belt regions. Forty states are reporting increases in applications for the stamps, actually electronic cards that are filled automatically once a month by the government and are swiped by shoppers at the till, in the 12 months from December 2006. At least six states, including Florida, Arizona and Maryland, have had a 10 per cent increase in the past year.

In Rhode Island, the segment of the population on food stamps has risen by 18 per cent in two years. The food programme started 40 years ago when hunger was still a daily fact of life for many Americans. The recent switch from paper coupons to the plastic card system has helped remove some of the stigma associated with the food stamp programme. The card can be swiped as easily as a bank debit card. To qualify for the cards, Americans do not have to be exactly on the breadline. The programme is available to people whose earnings are just above the official poverty line. For Hubert Liepnieks, the card is a lifeline he could never afford to lose. Just out of prison, he sleeps in overnight shelters in Manhattan and uses the card at a Morgan Williams supermarket on East 23rd Street. Yesterday, he and his fiancée, Christine Schultz, who is in a wheelchair, shared one banana and a cup of coffee bought with the 82 cents left on it.

"They should be refilling it in the next three or four days," Liepnieks says. At times, he admits, he and friends bargain with owners of the smaller grocery shops to trade the value of their cards for cash, although it is illegal. "It can be done. I get $7 back on $10."

Richard Enright, the manager at this Morgan Williams, says the numbers of customers on food stamps has been steady but he expects that to rise soon. "In this location, it's still mostly old people and people who have retired from city jobs on stamps," he says. Food stamp money was designed to supplement what people could buy rather than covering all the costs of a family's groceries. But the problem now, Mr Enright says, is that soaring prices are squeezing the value of the benefits.

"Last St Patrick's Day, we were selling Irish soda bread for $1.99. This year it was $2.99. Prices are just spiralling up, because of the cost of gas trucking the food into the city and because of commodity prices. People complain, but I tell them it's not my fault everything is more expensive."

The US Department of Agriculture says the cost of feeding a low-income family of four has risen 6 per cent in 12 months. "The amount of food stamps per household hasn't gone up with the food costs," says Dayna Ballantyne, who runs a food bank in Des Moines, Iowa. "Our clients are finding they aren't able to purchase food like they used to."

And the next monthly job numbers, to be released this Friday, are likely to show 50,000 more jobs were lost nationwide in March, and the unemployment rate is up to perhaps 5 per cent.

Discredited...

Laughing
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 0 • Views: 7,380 • Replies: 200
No top replies

 
Green Witch
 
  1  
Reply Thu 3 Apr, 2008 04:10 pm
Most people who need food assistance do not qualify for food stamps. Our food pantry has seen a 40 percent spike this winter- mostly old people and women with children, but some households are headed by men. These people are paying mortgages/rent, trying to put gas in their cars to get to work and need to keep the heat high enough so the pipes don't freeze. These are the real poor of America, they work, they try, but the economy is so crappy that they just can't keep basic food in the house. It may not seem like a depression to most people, but to these people it sure is creating a life they are not proud of.

I don't expect you understand or have sympathy McG.
0 Replies
 
Rockhead
 
  1  
Reply Thu 3 Apr, 2008 04:15 pm
The working poor are growing, and growing restless...
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Thu 3 Apr, 2008 07:14 pm
Green Witch wrote:
Most people who need food assistance do not qualify for food stamps. Our food pantry has seen a 40 percent spike this winter- mostly old people and women with children, but some households are headed by men. These people are paying mortgages/rent, trying to put gas in their cars to get to work and need to keep the heat high enough so the pipes don't freeze. These are the real poor of America, they work, they try, but the economy is so crappy that they just can't keep basic food in the house. It may not seem like a depression to most people, but to these people it sure is creating a life they are not proud of.

I don't expect you understand or have sympathy McG.


Really? Why is that?
0 Replies
 
Foofie
 
  1  
Reply Fri 4 Apr, 2008 11:20 am
Is this thread supposed to show the virtue of people waiting patiently in a line? I don't understand the initial post, since the "Discredit" link seems to question the virtue of waiting patiently in a line?

I believe there will always be lines of people that wait impatiently, or patiently.

Should this thread have been a survey/poll of who waits in lines patiently, or impatiently?
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Fri 4 Apr, 2008 11:26 am
No, this thread is about propaganda and uses an article as evidence for discussion with a seperate article discussing the first.

Read the article, think about how it makes you feel, how it affects you. What was the purpose of the article and what political position does it forword? How does it go about persuing it's objectives?
0 Replies
 
Foofie
 
  1  
Reply Fri 4 Apr, 2008 11:43 am
McGentrix wrote:
No, this thread is about propaganda and uses an article as evidence for discussion with a seperate article discussing the first.

Read the article, think about how it makes you feel, how it affects you. What was the purpose of the article and what political position does it forword? How does it go about persuing it's objectives?


First let's get the spelling of "seperate" correct (separate).

O.K., now I take both articles as proselytizing different viewpoints on society. The problem is that the line seems to be for those that need something - soup and bread, coats, food stamps, meal tickets, etc., etc.

As a wealthy Christian country (a country with a majority of Christians) I am glad to see that those who need are getting something that will help them survive. I don't believe everyone has the luckiest existence with a support system that ensures that they grow into adults that can weather a competitive society. I don't begrudge anyone, on any line, anything. Not everyone can meet the standards of a harsh world.

For example, I may not have been able to accomplish what you may have accomplished, so far, in this life. But, then again, you may not have been able to accomplish what I have accomplished, so far, in this life. No need to be specific, but we all have our strengths and weaknesses, and some of us have bad luck too.
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Tue 8 Apr, 2008 05:21 pm
Re: Speaking of propaganda...
McGentrix wrote:

Wow that was quite the raving, insane rant.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Wed 9 Apr, 2008 08:10 am
Re: Speaking of propaganda...
nimh wrote:
McGentrix wrote:

Wow that was quite the raving, insane rant.


Indeed. But if we take just the more tempered NRO item linked in the piece, the objection is that the Guardian wrote an article on growing poverty and inequality, then used a picture of the wrong group of poor people. It would be comparable, I suppose, to writing an article on an increasing murder rate in Atlanta and using a photo of a murder victim from Dallas.

But in modern american rightwing ideology, few subjects are less allowable for consideration than those concerning income inequality - the facts of it and the moral or civics questions associated with it. There's a reason for this related to the sources of modern rightwing ideology (the average income earner, even the well above average, and certainly not the poorer among us, had any part in the formation of this ideology).
0 Replies
 
real life
 
  1  
Reply Wed 16 Apr, 2008 10:13 pm
Re: Speaking of propaganda...
blatham wrote:
nimh wrote:
McGentrix wrote:

Wow that was quite the raving, insane rant.


Indeed. But if we take just the more tempered NRO item linked in the piece, the objection is that the Guardian wrote an article on growing poverty and inequality, then used a picture of the wrong group of poor people. It would be comparable, I suppose, to writing an article on an increasing murder rate in Atlanta and using a photo of a murder victim from Dallas.


Actually the article is paired with the pic to imply that these folks are hungry and lining up for food.

They are not.

They are in line to receive donated coats, and few of them seem to lack a coat.


blatham wrote:
But in modern american rightwing ideology, few subjects are less allowable for consideration than those concerning income inequality - the facts of it and the moral or civics questions associated with it. There's a reason for this related to the sources of modern rightwing ideology (the average income earner, even the well above average, and certainly not the poorer among us, had any part in the formation of this ideology).


Really?

And just what is 'rightwing ideology' ?

Who formed it, since you seem to know?

And just what is our civic duty in regard to income differences?
0 Replies
 
Diest TKO
 
  1  
Reply Mon 21 Apr, 2008 02:23 am
Ever stop to think they might be getting coats for their children. Forgive me for speculating, and I'll forgive you fo the same RL.

T
K
O
0 Replies
 
Advocate
 
  1  
Reply Mon 21 Apr, 2008 07:39 am
The people were waiting to buy Hanna Montana tickets.

BTW, did you notice that there is a large growth of food riots around the globe?

One problem is that there are too damn many people. Real would prohibit abortion so that more could starve.
0 Replies
 
joefromchicago
 
  1  
Reply Mon 21 Apr, 2008 08:30 am
McGentrix wrote:
Green Witch wrote:
I don't expect you understand or have sympathy McG.


Really? Why is that?

Dropped on your head as a child? Just plain ornery? There are many possible explanations.
0 Replies
 
real life
 
  1  
Reply Mon 21 Apr, 2008 01:06 pm
Advocate wrote:
The people were waiting to buy Hanna Montana tickets.

BTW, did you notice that there is a large growth of food riots around the globe?

One problem is that there are too damn many people. Real would prohibit abortion so that more could starve.


Actually the diversion of food producing farm lands into the ethanol production by greenies who won't let us drill in ANWR probably has a lot more to do with it.

'Too many people' , eh?

How many would you like to eliminate, and what is your method for doing so?
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Mon 21 Apr, 2008 01:54 pm
One young family in my acquaintance makes a very good income, but their daughter, going through a rebellious phase, was wearing the same outfit to school everyday and refused to wear a coat.

School officials, assuming her limited wardrobe was due to limited means and noting her shivering in cold weather, arranged for a local charity to present her with a beautiful leather jacket somebody had donated. She liked the jacket--after all, it wasn't something her parents had foisted upon her--and she wore it proudly.

When her parents discovered where she had received the coat, they were absolutely horrified and mortified and of course explained the situation to both the school and the charity. (Plus they made a generous contribution to that charity.)

Things are not always what they seem.

Poverty of course is relative. Virtually any of America's poor would be deemed rich in many parts of the world. Where most of the world's poor are hungry and emaciated, obesity is listed as a major health concern among our nation's poorest citizens. But trillions of dollars spent on anti-poverty programs over the last half century has done little to alleviate the poverty that we have. We should probably rethink those programs.

Things are not always what they seem.

In another state, I was working for an organization that was the first agency when approaching from the town's two interstates. As a result we got a lot of transients stopping by asking for (sometimes demanding) charity. They never had identification--it had always been stolen--and they couldn't name anybody we could call from where they had come nor did they have a name or telephone number for the place in the next state or so where they were trying to get to a new job. But they needed gas to get on down the road and they hadn't eaten in days.

So we arranged for a nearby station to provide 5 gallons of gas in return for a voucher we gave the needy person. And we arranged for a nearby restaurant to provide a meal in return for a voucher. I kept track for a year.

In some 250 vouchers for gas and food that we gave out over that year, two tanks of gas were claimed and one meal. One. Both the station and restaurant managers reported that quite a few had tried to redeem the vouchers for cash, but we all stood firm against that.

Of course you do not want to force truly needy people to go without shelter or food or necessities of life. That one hungry person who was fed made the trouble of all those other vouchers worth it.

But things are not always as they seem.

And I think that was McG's point with this thread.
0 Replies
 
Diest TKO
 
  1  
Reply Mon 21 Apr, 2008 06:56 pm
real life wrote:
Advocate wrote:
The people were waiting to buy Hanna Montana tickets.

BTW, did you notice that there is a large growth of food riots around the globe?

One problem is that there are too damn many people. Real would prohibit abortion so that more could starve.


Actually the diversion of food producing farm lands into the ethanol production by greenies who won't let us drill in ANWR probably has a lot more to do with it.

'Too many people' , eh?

How many would you like to eliminate, and what is your method for doing so?

Best way to get rid of people is to vote republican and keep starting wars we can't finish.

T
K
O
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Mon 21 Apr, 2008 07:13 pm
Foxfyre wrote:
But trillions of dollars spent on anti-poverty programs over the last half century has done little to alleviate the poverty that we have. We should probably rethink those programs.

Actually, the anti-poverty programs that were implemented from FDR's New Deal through to LBJ's Great Society had an immense impact.

Much of the unimaginable, grinding poverty that had existed before was eliminated by the combination of economic growth and the way these programs ensured that the poorest benefited as well.

It is since 1980 that the income growth of the lowest income groups has stagnated or even been reversed. Needless to say, this period of 20 years of Reaganite presidencies with a weak Clinton intermezzo of "welfare reform" has not been one of ambitious anti-poverty programs anymore.
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Mon 21 Apr, 2008 07:15 pm
Diest TKO wrote:
Actually the diversion of food producing farm lands into the ethanol production by greenies who won't let us drill in ANWR probably has a lot more to do with it.

Yes, the answer to world hunger is drilling in ANWR.. of course.

<blinks>

A very apt post in light of the thread's title, if I may say so.
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Mon 21 Apr, 2008 07:28 pm
nimh wrote:
Foxfyre wrote:
But trillions of dollars spent on anti-poverty programs over the last half century has done little to alleviate the poverty that we have. We should probably rethink those programs.

Actually, the anti-poverty programs that were implemented from FDR's New Deal through to LBJ's Great Society had an immense impact.

Much of the unimaginable, grinding poverty that had existed before was eliminated by the combination of economic growth and the way these programs ensured that the poorest benefited as well.

It is since 1980 that the income growth of the lowest income groups has stagnated or even been reversed. Needless to say, this period of 20 years of Reaganite presidencies with a weak Clinton intermezzo of "welfare reform" has not been one of ambitious anti-poverty programs anymore.


Sorry Nimh, but that dog won't hunt. FDR's temporary work programs did allow people the dignity of work vs pure charity when the world's economy collapsed, but he would never have envisioned the massive entitlement programs that his predecessors have implemented. Those have enslaved far more people than they have actually helped. There is no better anti-poverty program than a strong economy coupled with human rights and massive freedom to aspire to whatever your heart leads you. To the USA's credit, the poverty threshhold keeps going up up up meaning our poor are less poor than other poor of the world. But we have as many at that threshhold as we have ever had since before and after the Great Depression.
0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Mon 21 Apr, 2008 09:50 pm
Green Witch wrote:
Most people who need food assistance do not qualify for food stamps. Our food pantry has seen a 40 percent spike this winter- mostly old people and women with children, but some households are headed by men. These people are paying mortgages/rent, trying to put gas in their cars to get to work and need to keep the heat high enough so the pipes don't freeze. These are the real poor of America, they work, they try, but the economy is so crappy that they just can't keep basic food in the house. It may not seem like a depression to most people, but to these people it sure is creating a life they are not proud of.

I don't expect you understand or have sympathy McG.


Of course not, because he is not a member of The Victim Cult.

The only people who might go hungry in this country are the insane and the children of entirely worthless parents.

Neither should, and I am all for governmental and community efforts to make sure they don't, but that is a far cry from providing food stamps to people who prefer to watch the Maury Povich (Who is my baby's Daddy?) Show rather than working for wages that can buy food.

The "Working Poor" is a myth perpetuated by Liberals who have come to learn that they can no longer foster sympathy for the "Non-Working Poor."

People make choices in their lives and the quality of their lives depends upon the wisdom of these choices.

Notwithstanding any arguments to the contrary, no youth in America must drop out of high school, and if they should make the unfortunate choice to do so, none of them are prohibited from obtaining a GED.

For those who do make it through High School there is no shortage of community colleges and scholarships to help them advance their education.

In 2008, if you have no option but to work for minimum wage "the fault, dear Brutus, lies not in your stars (or your Society), but in you."

These "Po Folk," who can't keep basic food in their houses or pay to heat them, or for gas for their cars, where do they live; who are they? And do they have cell phones, cable TV, and an active weekend social lives?

The number of people who are utterly incapable of fending for themselves and their families is much much smaller than Green Witch and others would have us believe. Should we as a society take care of such people, regardless of their true number?

Yes.

The problem is that it is in either the political or economic interest of people like Green Witch to grossly exaggerate this number and to include many people who do not truly qualify as in need of our help.

Of course, someone who insists that they are disabled because they lifted a heavy box at work, or who just can't help their addiction to drugs, is going to count themselves among the number, but that doesn't make it so unless there is someone ripe to receive them.

The desire to help these "unfortunates" is born of smug sanctimony and only perpetuates their "misfortune."
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Speaking of propaganda...
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 05/19/2024 at 06:08:11