Good. The next time they are getting their ass handed to them they can call Sweden for help. We'll keep our army home.
Become a Patron!
GOVERNMENT WATCH!!
- Thread starter ej1024
- Start date
- Status
Good. The next time they are getting their ass handed to them they can call Sweden for help. We'll keep our army home.
Not to mention, ILLEGAL ALIENS CANNOT RECEIVE FOOD STAMPS. It takes a lot of paperwork and a long ass process to see a dime of public assistance, it's virtually impossible for illegal people to receive federal assistance.
That did not look like trump in the pic.
I recall some strange humans complaining about the past president playing golf.
Well you have another one to complain about
Lets hear it.
Or was that just partisan sheep whining?
Well you have another one to complain about
Lets hear it.
Or was that just partisan sheep whining?
Wow.
Let's focus on #3 for a moment. "Every dollar spent on food stamps returns 2 dollars to the US economy."
Where does that two dollars come from? Does it just magically appear? Is it grown on trees?
Something doesn't add up. If I took the statement at face value, the US should not have a deficit nor a debt. Because, for it to be true, it would also equally apply to all government spending. Last I checked, there was a record number of food stamp recipients but GDP has remained stagnant and the US debt is increasing, not decreasing. That's not what I'd expect with a doubling of cash infusion into the economy from money "created" from food stamps. But then, liberal math never adds up.
The number for that specific fact may not have been the most current. The number on this info graphic is the most current I found, the numbers came from congressional budget office. Can't really get a more accurate number than that
The number for that specific fact may not have been the most current. The number on this info graphic is the most current I found, the numbers came from congressional budget office. Can't really get a more accurate number than that
that is because the money is eaten up by retailers who accept the "food stamps".
Yes they sometimes pay more taxes because of it but not always.
It is money into the economy not the govt coffers.
And if I'm not spending my last dollar on groceries to feed my kids (hypothetically) I can now buy them new shoes instead of hand me downs, or a new backpack, etc etc etc
And not only do churches not pay taxes but contributions to them are tax deductible. Which is a negative tax burden that churches cause.
Also the community services? Water, Sewer, police, etc?
Loss of sales tax revenue.
no, all this demostrates is your ignorance of world events.
It was last year... Potus heard about it from faux news.... he used it to scare people in Florida again....
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
no,no,no......don't do it...it's like trying to teach geometry to a fucking chimp.
It wasn't a yes or no question asshole. I asked what's next. What fake bullshit is really next, more of a rhetorical question but you apparently think you know everything there is to know about everything so please enlighten me.
If Democrats spent their own money toward the things they steal other people's money for there would be no homeless people....
He can't. There is no way to have an actual conversation with it. It just growls and snarls and slings insults to disagree with what you say, while having no actual reason to do it. It'll never give you any actual information to back up your claims, instead will call you fat or trailer trash
brilliant really
The number for that specific fact may not have been the most current. The number on this info graphic is the most current I found, the numbers came from congressional budget office. Can't really get a more accurate number than that
The info graphic is too small in my browser. How about a link.
Congress can't balance a checkbook so I really have a hard time taking much from the Congressional Budget Office too seriously, but I'm willing to look at it.
Quite possibly the best "post of the day"
If this feature was used more often, certain members would not have an audience, and would curb the problems in here.
How is it two dollars more into the economy for each dollar spent? How does one dollar spent turn into two dollars?
That's still dollar for dollar. The money you spend is fixed, whether you spend it on food or shoes. The government is still only adding one dollar but that's false also because the government must take the dollar out of the economy by taking it from a taxpayer first(or later through debt).
That does not address the $2 for every dollar spent. All it talks about is how benificial the program is and low fraud. I asked about the $2 per dollar spent.
Other than that, it mention $5 = $9 but does not explain how $5 turns into $9.
Ideally (in a perfect world that will never exist) everyone regardless of income (or non profit status) would pay a set percentage of their income in taxes. Say, 20% or whatever the magic number is. In the case of someone receiving government assistance, they're still paying taxes like the rest (as they already do) but receiving that extra dollar goes to food. So one dollar goes to food, one goes to other goods, both help the economy by ending up with the farmer or producer of said goods. And so on and so forth with the economic cycle.
Obviously the government would have to budget correctly to make it work in this way, but this is how it was originally set up to work.
Okay, I'm with ya on the flat tax. No problem there.
But even with a flat tax, in order for the government to pay out one dollar, it must take one dollar. The government isn't even adding one dollar. It's taking it from a taxpayer that would spend it in the economy and giving it to another taxpayer to spend in the economy. It's the same dollar. The dollar would go to the economy regardless of which taxpayer spends it.
Just as an example. If I pay my tax of one dollar that I would have used to buy a pack of gum and the government gives you that dollar to buy a can of food, that dollar has only changed from my hand to yours and would have went into the economy, as a whole, regardless of which one of us spent it. While you now have one more dollar to spend, I have one less. The net gain is zero for the economy because you'll use your extra dollar that you didn't have to spend on food to buy a pack of gum(or something) that I would have bought anyway.
edit to add; And that is just the initial dollar. We haven't even gotten to how it turns into two dollars.
Last edited:
Sure, there are democrats that claim an economic boost but claiming a thing does not make it true. First there is the fact I presented above. But there is also objective evidence to the contrary. The main one is GDP growth(growth in the economy). Since the 2008 depression(not recession), the welfare rolls have skyrocketed. In the theory you presented, the significant increase in food stamps should have boosted the growth in the economy as measured by GDP. It has not. GDP has remained at zero to very low(1%) growth.
In fact, the article you cite argues against your position.
Hank F. Spankman
Platinum Contributor
Member For 4 Years
Member For 3 Years
Member For 2 Years
Member For 1 Year
I'm guessing you're including yourself in that list.
Last edited:
I will bet he was exactly the same way about GWB.
He cannot help it, he likes to be told what to think.
Lol... he's alt right bro... he doesn't like season polish sausages..
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Nope, staff doesn't have the luxury of that option
more's the pity..oh well I guess we'd all miss your inane memes of talking zebras and dancing chiquaquas which for you passes as wit and insight.
I keep wondering how that Fox and Fox News is not MSM to some?
Who says it isn't?
Trump apparently he seems to love them and talks bad about the MSM.
His supporters seem the same way.
Hmmm. I've seen Trump talk about the lying media, fake news, failed media, and calling them out by name(CNN). I don't recall him using "MSM". FOX news is certainly MSM and he didn't tread lightly on Megyn Kelly.
But he spoke highly of Fox Family and Friends I think the name is.
At this point Fox is probably the only network that will cut him an slack.
- Status