A good slippery slope...

[YardleyLabs]

MAXIMUM MONTHLY SNAP (FOOD STAMP) ALLOTMENTS
Continental U.S.
October 2009 - September 2010

Now, if you pulled up the average monthly SNAP benefit, you would find it amounts to about $288/month per family as of July 2010, or $134/person (about $31/week). It is an expensive program that is growing more expensive as more and more people see their incomes fall below the level where they can feed their families. I hate to see the amount of money that is being spent on processed foods. However, I guess all those advertising dollars do have an impact. I haven't seen that many commercials for eggs, or lettuce, or fresh fruit. I wonder why.

[troy schwab]

I would love to see a platform comparison on food stamp recipient's. How bout it Yardley, you seem to be able to find every other statistic? Oh wait, the government probably doesnt want you to see that. I would bet good money on the fact that is grossly democratic registration. SHOCKER!

[YardleyLabs]

I would love to see a platform comparison on food stamp recipient's. How bout it Yardley, you seem to be able to find every other statistic? Oh wait, the government probably doesnt want you to see that. I would bet good money on the fact that is grossly democratic registration. SHOCKER!

I'm not sure what you mean by this. Are you talking about voting behavior of recipients as compared with non-recipients? If so, the answer is pretty clear. Most recipients do not vite at all. Those who do are much more likely to vote for Democrats and against Republicans. Why? Because Republicans systematically favor those who control a disproportionate share of our wealth and income ( the "haves"), while Democrats systematically support those who benefit the least from our economic success.

[luvmylabs23139]

Now, if you pulled up the average monthly SNAP benefit, you would find it amounts to about $288/month per family as of July 2010, or $134/person (about $31/week). It is an expensive program that is growing more expensive as more and more people see their incomes fall below the level where they can feed their families. I hate to see the amount of money that is being spent on processed foods. However, I guess all those advertising dollars do have an impact. I haven't seen that many commercials for eggs, or lettuce, or fresh fruit. I wonder why.

I think using the maximum benefit it actually a better comparison.
That way the comparison is someone who is fully on the taxpayer dime vs what a taxpayer budgets for food.
It shows that those whom we are suporting can spend a lot more money than is required to eat decent meals.
Additionally, if those people have kids in school, they would be getting free lunches for the kids, something the taxpayer has to factor into their food budget.
This doesn't even include WIC benefits.

[troy schwab]

If so, the answer is pretty clear. Most recipients do not vite at all. Those who do are much more likely to vote for Democrats and against Republicans.

I would bet that all changed during the last presidential election. I know that locally, the democratic party targeted these folks for registration.. purposely for this reason. When the voting demographic has this growing population (recipients) included.....Of course they are going to vote for the hand that feeds them.

[YardleyLabs]

I would bet that all changed during the last presidential election. I know that locally, the democratic party targeted these folks for registration.. purposely for this reason. When the voting demographic has this growing population (recipients) included.....Of course they are going to vote for the hand that feeds them.

I tend to think that anything that increases turnout is good. Maybe we should have a reverse "poll tax". If you vote you get a check for $50. In the last election, Obama didn't win because of the "welfare" vote. He won because every major demographic except white men gave him a majority. Some of his biggest majorities were among the poor. However, he also had large majorities among the most affluent and among the most educated. Go figure.

[troy schwab]

In the last election, Obama didn't win because of the "welfare" vote. Some of his biggest majorities were among the poor.

Isnt that a bit of double speak? I think the welfare vote contributed largely to his win. That being said, I wasnt particularly fond of the other option either.

[troy schwab]

My biggest problem with the democratic party is their willingness to grow the entitlement mentality that develops among welfare recipients. The base idea of growing government to support the poor IS socialism. The republicans have their fair share of issues, but supporting the socialistic cause of the democrats is something I just cant bring myself to do.