smitty Posted January 13, 2015 Report Share Posted January 13, 2015 I wonder how the unemployment rate that supposedly is falling is working out for these people?! http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/ali-meyer/food-stamp-beneficiaries-exceed-46000000-38-straight-months Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
77 Posted January 13, 2015 Report Share Posted January 13, 2015 The Yobama legacy! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bullets13 Posted January 13, 2015 Report Share Posted January 13, 2015 The number of food stamp beneficiaries increased by 14.7 million during Bush’s two terms in office, which is slightly higher (at this point) than the number of new beneficiaries since Obama has been in office. As of right now, Obama's numbers are up aabout 14.5 M from where he started, depending on the month, and will likely continue to trend upward throughout the remainder of his tenure. If Obama leaves office with the numbers up 16M, some republicans will try to use this as evidence that Bush did a better job in that regard, at only 14.7M. I'd say it's evidence that both failed. Mr. Buddy Garrity 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smitty Posted January 14, 2015 Author Report Share Posted January 14, 2015 The number of food stamp beneficiaries increased by 14.7 million during Bush’s two terms in office, which is slightly higher (at this point) than the number of new beneficiaries since Obama has been in office. As of right now, Obama's numbers are up aabout 14.5 M from where he started, depending on the month, and will likely continue to trend upward throughout the remainder of his tenure. If Obama leaves office with the numbers up 16M, some republicans will try to use this as evidence that Bush did a better job in that regard, at only 14.7M. I'd say it's evidence that both failed. Proof? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LumRaiderFan Posted January 14, 2015 Report Share Posted January 14, 2015 http://www.downsizinggovernment.org/food-stamp-republicans Big gov Republican and Democrats have failed...both think the fed gov and more money is the answer. Mr. Buddy Garrity and bullets13 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bullets13 Posted January 14, 2015 Report Share Posted January 14, 2015 Proof?you can find the numbers in a lot of places. this seems like a site that you might like, though. Look under the "food stamps" section. it requires a little math, though."FOOD STAMPS – In January 2005 roughly 25 million people participated in SNAP. About 17 million participated in the program in 2001. Under Obama, individuals on food stamps grew from 32 million to 47 million.Read more at http://universalfreepress.com/obama-vs-bush-jobs-food-stamps-debt-and-more/"So if it was 17 Million in 2001, and 32 million when Obama took over(the righty website notes the 8M increase of those receiving benefits in Bush' first term, but fails to mention the 7M increase in his second term), that's an approximately 15 million increase under bush. It has then gone to approximately 47 million under Obama, ALSO a 15 million increase. Of course, the site I provided, they try to downplay what happened under Bush and highlight the problem with Obama. But you can do the same math using "Factcheck.org", where they show the same numbers, while trying to make Bush look bad and Obama look good. Mr. Buddy Garrity 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevenash Posted January 14, 2015 Report Share Posted January 14, 2015 So you are comparing an 8 year total with a 6 year total? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bullets13 Posted January 14, 2015 Report Share Posted January 14, 2015 Because I don't have access to Obama's 8-year total yet. His general totals based on the graph Smitty provided with the original link are actually lower than they were a year and two years ago, so it's not like the number is constantly rising. In my original post I believe I allowed for the number to rise a little, but say I was wrong, and the amount of people who receive benefits under Obama double what happened under bush. 30 million new, vs. 15 million new under bush. I still maintain that they both failed, even if Obama failed much worse. Mr. Buddy Garrity 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PAMFAM10 Posted January 15, 2015 Report Share Posted January 15, 2015 Because I don't have access to Obama's 8-year total yet. His general totals based on the graph Smitty provided with the original link are actually lower than they were a year and two years ago, so it's not like the number is constantly rising. In my original post I believe I allowed for the number to rise a little, but say I was wrong, and the amount of people who receive benefits under Obama double what happened under bush. 30 million new, vs. 15 million new under bush. I still maintain that they both failed, even if Obama failed much worse. What a way to shut up/down a thread. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smitty Posted January 15, 2015 Author Report Share Posted January 15, 2015 you can find the numbers in a lot of places. this seems like a site that you might like, though. Look under the "food stamps" section. it requires a little math, though. "FOOD STAMPS – In January 2005 roughly 25 million people participated in SNAP. About 17 million participated in the program in 2001. Under Obama, individuals on food stamps grew from 32 million to 47 million. Read more at http://universalfreepress.com/obama-vs-bush-jobs-food-stamps-debt-and-more/" So if it was 17 Million in 2001, and 32 million when Obama took over(the righty website notes the 8M increase of those receiving benefits in Bush' first term, but fails to mention the 7M increase in his second term), that's an approximately 15 million increase under bush. It has then gone to approximately 47 million under Obama, ALSO a 15 million increase. Of course, the site I provided, they try to downplay what happened under Bush and highlight the problem with Obama. But you can do the same math using "Factcheck.org", where they show the same numbers, while trying to make Bush look bad and Obama look good. It's hard to keep this sight from going to "like Facebook." So, I can't read what is stated. But, as robust as the economy was for Bush's first 6 years, it's hard to believe. But let's presume it's true, I would not doubt it. Bush allowed the spending to grow. He started off by letting T. Kennedy write the Education bill I knew then that some of Bush's policies were not going to good. The Education Department, for one, should be eliminated. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smitty Posted January 15, 2015 Author Report Share Posted January 15, 2015 What a way to shut up/down a thread. I know you are young, but if you don't take anything away from this sight, take this one thing: is that socialism does not work. Our country was not founded on it. Read your history! Socialism has never worked any where around the world. Capitalism works ever time it's tried! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.