GOP to Go After Food Stamps
GOP to go after food stamps
Political strategist Newt Gingrich thinks Republicans should go after food stamps as a way to close the deal and get (re)-elected in the November 2010 elections.
While the two parties hash it out over whether tax cuts for the super-wealthy should be allowed to expire, Gingrich wants to frame the economic issues to say that Democrats bring down the economy, Republicans make it all better — debatable considering when the current economic meltdown began but that’s not my point.
My point is, guess who’s caught in the middle? The one in four children who rely on food stamps for dinner!
The Gingrich push to vilify food stamps will go something like, “paychecks, not food stamps,” which, sounds good, sure. But, as with many families including plenty of those who rely on food stamps, a paycheck doesn’t necessarily negate the need for food assistance.
Some paychecks aren’t big enough, especially to cover childcare so that they can be earned. Why not promise bigger paychecks, subsidized high-quality childcare. And while you’re at it, lawmakers, affordable housing. That would certainly cut down the number of kids who need food stamps.
More Posts
New Law Bans 4-Year-Olds from Kindergarten
Eat at McDonald’s for a Month — Win Big
The Making of a Chicken Nugget
Gastric Bypass Surgery and Birth Defects
Louise Brown, Freaky Babies and the Nobel Prize
Why Groupon is Trying to Get You Pregnant
Girls in Sports Will Rule the Boardroom
Check Your Child’s Backpack for Valuable Savings. Ugh.
Act Like a Lady: Good Advice or Totally Sexist?
Tired Moms Won’t Vote This Year
Getting Pregnant at 50: What sas She Thinking?
Top 5 Highest Rent Cities (New York is NOT on the List!)
Why Can’t This Mom Control Her Child’s Fits?
Why Does Everyone Have a Tutor These Days?
Is Your Pre-Tween’s Dentist Pushing Braces?
Could You Handle Postpartum Confinement?
Is Sookie Stackhouse a Good Fit for Sesame Street?
Really Nana? You Can’t Spell the Baby’s Name?
5 Lessons for Your Future Bill Gates
Photo: chattahbox.com
Newt Gingrich must just be mean spirited, because food stamps provide a much better return on the government’s investment than tax cuts. An increase of $1 in food stamp spending generates an increase in GDP of $1.73, whereas across the board tax cuts only generates an increase in GDP of $1.03
http://www.economy.com/mark-zandi/documents/assissing-the-impact-of-the-fiscal-stimulus.pdf
It’s hard to believe there are people who believe that Gingrich and Co. aren’t heartless to begin with. What’s wrong with people?
Alison, that’s fuzzy math and by the way you must be a communist.
I agree that Gingrich is an a$$, but to say “Why not promise bigger paychecks, subsidized high-quality childcare. And while you’re at it, lawmakers, affordable housing…” is silly too. Why not promise sunshine and rainbows and unicorns for all? Things have to *work*, money doesn’t grow on trees, you know. I am all for mild and fair redistribution of wealth via government programs, but comments like that make liberals lose credibility.
Right, Gretchen, and I know what you’re saying. But he wants to frame the discussion by saying that GOP will get you a paycheck (via tax cuts), as if people are making this choice between food stamps and paychecks. And that it’s not just a matter of getting people off food stamps and on a paycheck, because as we well know, not just any paycheck will do (unless there’s also help with childcare and, in some parts of the country, affordable housing). In other words, we can’t afford the tax cuts.
Financial conservatism is one thing but taking the food out of poor kids’ mouths?He is flirting with going to hell when he dies!
I want a unicorn.
A unicorn would be nice…..not sure it would help poor kids any…
Well, I think anyone that knows even a tiny bit about economics knows that tax cuts are NOT the way to go. Those who get the cuts are just going to hang onto more money, not spend it into the economy, and help nobody. So, I guess we agree on the larger points, I just bristle at the mention of people saying “government gimme” when there’s a huge deficit. Gingrich is already hell-bound. Didn’t he cheat on or divorce a wife who was battling cancer? What a creep.
I can’t believe he cheats on a woman who is dying of cancer and then lectures other people about their morals!!!
It is really sad that this guy keeps coming back.
I think of myself as being a relative fiscal conservative, but tax cuts for the highest earners are just stupid. When people make that much money they can only spend so much, so from a percentage standpoint they spend very little. They can afford it. (When I was still earning a paycheck we were in this top tier and trust me, a few percentage points did not change our spending habits.)
The best way to get money circulating in the economy is to have less of an income gap, because people who make less money spend a higher percentage of their income. Taxing the wealthy and giving poor people food stamps is one way to get more money circulating. Keeping these tax cuts just means more money will be sitting around not being spent.
I agree, Madeline. There are two things wrong with the “paychecks, not food stamps” thinking: (1) The old canard that tax cuts actually do something meaningful to stimulate the economy, which has been disproven time and time again, and (2) that people with jobs don’t need food assistance. Most people on food assistance are employed. The minimum wage is $7.25/hour, which for most families is below the poverty line and is not enough to live on. How come raising the minimum wage is never on the table?
Also, Gretchen, your argument is a classic strawman — who exactly do you see as demanding “government gimmes”? Americans, culturally, as a whole, abhor the idea of “handouts” and you don’t generally see people looking to get something for nothing (very, very few people actually choose not to work), so it’s always a mystery to me who conservatives are so angry at. I wonder if this is really a form of coded resentment directed at minorities whom they perceive as “lazy.” And one more comment — liberal arguments for higher minimum wages, subsidized childcare, etc. make total economic sense. It’s conservatives who lose all credibility with their get-tough shtick (and it IS just shtick — mote how fast they backed down when the idea of privatizing Social Security resulted in a huge outcry). And Gingrich in particular is talking lately like he’s off his meds. Seriously, I think he has some sort of undiagnosed problem.
There’s no “strawman” and I’m not a “conservative” as you mean it. I am a realist. I don’t want politicians promising me a bigger paycheck or any of the things listed here. I’d like them to balance the budget. If that means raising taxes to do it, I can certainly accept that. But now is not the time to be promising more when they can’t even manage now. I am for an increase in the minimum wage, certainly. Maybe Americans as a whole abhor the idea of handouts, but Babble commenters sure don’t seem to. And we are likely the ones in the upper middle class who really need the handouts the least, anyway. It’s laughable.
Wow, Ms. Holler, you want the government to take care of everything don’t you – food, shelter, childcare, etc.? What is it that you’re willing to provide for yourself, exactly?
C’mon…you know she is not suggesting that the government pay all her bills.She is commenting on things that would help the very poor.The “war on the poor” is getting old.There is no real republicanism anymore,just ignorance and cruelty.I pray everyday for Obama to get another term even though he has not been our best president.I am scared of how much worse it will get if the republicans get back in.And before you attack me,I work full time and do not receive foodstamps.
@michelle: You hit the nail RIGHT on the head. The coded resentment isn’t as coded as they think. The subtle dogwhistle they think they’re sending out is really a flipping bullhorn to anyone with the brain to put two and two together. The “pull yourself up by your bootstraps” crowd typically is unaware at just how much the government deck is stacked in their favor and against others. They really waltz through this life thinking they earned it all themselves.
The fixation on “balancing the budget” doesn’t hold up under scrutiny. Can anyone say what the rationale is for this? We are constantly told by certain politicians that deficit spending is always and automatically BAD BAD BAD, but can you point to what tangible benefit balancing the budget will have in a deep recession? Deficit spending on antipoverty assistance programs, infrastructure, schools, R&D, etc is almost always good for the economy (with a measurable return on investment) than the kinds of social-spending cuts conservatives want. There is plenty of history to back this up. So are we going to sink our whole economy and take ourselves down with it because we’re angry and want to punish poor people for their supposed laziness (which is not even the case)? I know all this to be true because no one ever talks about cutting spending on pointless foreign wars and expensive military boondoggles. That would do more to cut the deficit than all the other stuff combined, and leave us no less safe. Instead we get all upset the second someone mentions investing in our own citizens. Oh, the horror.
Very good points,ladies.But it has become so easy to attack poor people and get votes that I think it is almost irresistable to a certain kind of politician.I was hopeful maybe people had wised up to this manipulation with Obama getting elected but it appears not.
I would be the first to say cut spending on senseless (all) wars…and also, as I said many times, I am not against a reasonable redistribution of wealth. Things are way out of balance now. The way Holler phrased her call to politicians, though, I found ridiculous and talk like this does nothing to help progressives who want to make things better make their case. Everyone, from individuals to the government, needs to be responsible, frugal and not spend more than they have. I think society has been way dumbed down on one hand, but on the other, people expect alot more today than they did 40 years ago in terms of what their standard of living should be. And, where is the outrage among working class Americans on their own behalf? In France, they’re shutting down the whole damn city with strikes and protests because Sarkozt wants to raise the retirement age to 62. If people are so pressed here (I don’t necessarily doubt that they are) where is the outrage?
SarkozY
I’m not always a big fan of Gingerich, but he is definitely being mischaracterized here. He’s saying that the Dems. are the party that make it so more people need food stamps – not that the people who need them are bad in any way. You can disagree with the idea that the GOP is better for the economy, but arguing that Gingerich is somehow saying that the poor are the enemy is stupid.
The poor and disadvantaged are too busy doing what they can to find jobs and feed their families to strike and protest, Gretchen. Not to mention, could you imagine the shitstorm if just a few too many poor and disadvantaged got together as an angry group and marched on Washington? It sure wouldn’t be received as heartily as the tea party movement, that’s for sure.
@Amanda: So if, using Gingrich’s statement, the Republican party is the party of paychecks and the Democratic party is the party forcing Americans to provide food stamps to the poor, then what is the implied priority if Republicans are elected? Or do you think he doesn’t really mean what he says? Maybe he’s just talking shit to help his party win elections? If that is the case, then he and others who say cynical, horrible things in order to perpetuate these class wars have a profound disrespect…. for those foolish enough to vote them in.
That’s a lame-ass excuse, Scorpio, but people are always making excuses. I regret having even engaged in this discussion. Sure people should be helped and nobody should go hungry or homeless and yes the current system is stacked against whole groups of people. It’s wrong, very wrong, and it goes back THOUSANDS of years. We are living in the most just times ever in America right now, but things still must evolve, for sure. Throwing more money at a corrupt government and at a bunch of dim people is not the best idea, though…it might help in the short term, but bigger changes are needed, and many of those can start with individuals.
Oh, and to be clear, I don’t regret engaging because I feel like I was “pwned” or anything like people so love to say, as though these discussions are some kind of game, I regret it because of the “game-like” tired discourse that’s the same two arguments always going back and forth with little attention to nuance. Politics in America today is like the jocks vs nerds, or drama kids vs cheerleaders, etc. etc. etc., only big people play.
I think more people agree with you than you realize.France is a radical leftist government,Gingrich is radical right.Radicalism tends to create problems anyway you slice it.I am right in the middle,not really liberal exactly but not too conservative either.Basically, I believe in being somewhat fiscally conservative but we need to have compassion too.I think alot of people feel the same way.
Gritch, you should regret joining discussions like this because you are simply not educated enough to participate in them. Your every word betrays your ignorance. The difference is, like so much of what is going on in politics these days, rather than retreating quietly, you bray your ignorance loudly and proudly.
You have alot of nerve, you know no more than me. Just because we don’t have the same opinion doesn’t mean I know any less than you. There are people I know less than, but I really doubt you are one of them. You area a haughty woman, that is one thing I know. Really who do you think you are? I’m working class and I don’t have the white guilt alot of these people have so I’m not gonna pander.
Personnaly, I think raising, lowering or maintaining the tax increases will do nothing for the economy. Look at other countries with more liberal tax rates, they are not doing any better economy wise. I think more government handouts or less will not really affect the economy because we no longer have a local economy but a global economy. When the rest of the world starts coming out of the recession so will we. And personally, I think America has one of the lowest benefits for the poorest in the world for a supposedly wealth nation. I believe this is do to America Citizen’s need for individualism, bad or good that is the way it is.
I read and comprehend, Gritch. I also don’t assume that my little bubble of a life informs everyone else’s reality. I don’t have a bachelors degree, but I can open my mind and consider what life must be like for another human being. What I can’t do, is imagine what it must be like to go through life so closed off, so clueless, so incurious about the experiences of those less fortunate than myself, that I would make sweeping value judgements about what an entire class of people need to do in order to survive. People who are outraged about a handout to the poor, while totally blind to the myriads of corporate welfare plans that we all pay for need to check their freakin humanity gauge, because that shit’s running LOW.
“I don’t have a bachelors degree…”
Well, that might explain your lack of critical thinking skills. Re-read the thread once more, honey.
Ok.This is starting to get ugly.Let’s stop playing “Real Housewives of Babble” and just agree to disagree.
Starting? Have you seen her picture online?
See other thread please. Apology made. I stand by my looks any day, for what that’s worth, but sometimes I act bitchy and I am sorry.
We all practice a little bitchcraft every once in awhile.But attacking someone’s looks Mistress Scorpio? Don’t force me to put you in time out.I always enjoy reading your comments and I have never seen you be that mean.
It’s OK, it was just a turn of a phrase…she knows she can say that because I am hot.
anyway, sorry not just to Scorpio but also for my lack of compassion in general
George Carlin was right. Our owners do not give a damn about us.
lol.Well said.And Gretchen,stop apologizing.Everybody makes mistakes.And I’m sure we have all been guilty of having a knee-jerk reaction without thinking things through,myself included.It gets so frustrating because I think politicians (mostly)want us all to argue and not think.If we think,we may notice that so much of what they do is not in our best interest.So they bait us with statements like this one to get left vs. right crap going.And I find myself taking the bait alot of the time.If we keep talking openly, even when we disagree,we might actually get real accountability from politicians someday.Anyway that’s my two cents.And now I have a microwave pizza to attend to.Yep,a homecooked meal for the family….lol
I don’t know how long you’ve been around here Carrie M., but the apologies are not sincere. It’s all part and parcel of a long-established personality Gretchen has cultivated on Babble. Maybe I shouldn’t attack her looks. But I will maintain that her participation on these boards have long been ugly.
Well Mistress Scorpio,I have been reading Babble on and off for about 2 years.I comment every once in awhile,more often I just read other peoples’s comments.I don’t pretend to know anyone on the site well.But like I said I normally enjoy your remarks.You have a way of being direct that I like.I don’t recognize Gretchen’s name but I have probably seen her on here too.I have never had any problems with her .Like,I said though,I am kind of on again/off again. It sounds like you two know each other a bit and have some kind of beef.It is fine to disagree but maybe if it gets too heated you should hash it out in private (on Facebook,maybe) or something.I don’t want to speak for anyone else but I always enjoy comments more when people express themselves without getting too mean and too personal.Snarkiness is cool just maybe not name calling so much.Anyway,hope we can all get along now.I hate to get in fights that have no real purpose and no possible winner.If only George W. Bush had felt that way…lol.And please,republicans don’t go nuts on me.It was just a joke.
Carrie, the reason you don’t recognize her name is because once enough people get on her case for some particularly outrageous statement, she changes her handle. While her identity on Babble may change, her “voice” never does. In the interest of peace going forward, I will renew my resolve to ignore her posts.
Cool.I am kind of a casual Babble reader and there are things that go on I don’t know about,I’m sure.
Can you imagine – parents may actually have to provide for their own kids? This is America, all they should have to do is say the magic words “in need” and the taxpayers are supposed to throw money at them. If the taxpayers run out we can always borrow from China.
“Mistress_Scorpio” once again, I don’t care about what people on Babble think of me, and, instead of a “handle” like you use (which, as I said before, reminds me of a lowrent call girl) I have the balls to use my real name after you called me out on changing…which I did, like, once. Stop acting like you’re the duenna of Babble or something. You’re just a hormonal breeder who thinks she’s smarter than she is. Peace out.
*pirouette and curtsey with a flourish*