Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr

Forum Post: Isn't It Ironic?

Posted 7 years ago on March 8, 2012, 7:42 a.m. EST by foolend (12)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

The food stamp program, part of the Department of Agriculture, is pleased to be distributing the greatest amount of food stamps ever.

Meanwhile, the Park Service, also part of the Department of Agriculture, asks us to "Please Do Not Feed the Animals" because the animals may grow dependent and not learn to take care of themselves.



Read the Rules
[-] 5 points by shoozTroll (17632) 7 years ago

This is what happens when you outsource and offshore all the good paying jobs, while at the same time allowing WallStreet and their market speculation partners to gouge whoever still has some money left....

What were you expecting?

[-] 4 points by beautifulworld (23059) 7 years ago

One-half of all jobs in this country pay less than $26,000 per year. Blaming poor people for their situation when the economic system they live within provides them with no opportunity is shameful.

Most people on food stamps work at low paying jobs such as those provided by Wal-Mart. But, I'll bet you have no problem with the fact that six members of the Walton family have as much wealth as the bottom 30% of Americans combined. And, who are the entitled, lazy ones? In my mind it is people like the Walton's the greedy grubbers who run off with all the profits without sharing fairly with the laborers who earn that profit for them.

[-] 2 points by GirlFriday (17435) 7 years ago

This is a clear demonstration of idiocy. The comparison is completely and totally out of line.

[-] 1 points by TitusMoans (2451) from Boulder City, NV 7 years ago

A foolend his sense are soon parted. You were parted at birth.

[-] 0 points by foolend (12) 7 years ago

seems like I offended some welfare queens here

[-] 1 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 7 years ago

So you're comparing animals to poor people. Wow.


[-] 0 points by foolend (12) 7 years ago

You do not get it?? Some people have become so dependent on welfare that it has become their way of life.

[-] 4 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 7 years ago

NOBODY is dependent. It is a right wing myth invented by Reagan.

There is a 5 year lifetime limit on benefits, and in order to qualify for $140.00 per MONTH, one is required to do 120 hours of unpaid community service. That comes to $1.16 an hour. So the very poorest people have to work as slaves. Yet people do it because they must UNTIL they can get back on their feet. And at a time when there are 4 applicants for every 1 job available, it is at least a lifeline. Apparently, you would rather they starve to death.

You don't understand the basic difference between temporary need and permanent dependence.

What I get is that you compared feeding animals with feeding people who have fallen on hard times. That makes you an asshole.

[-] 0 points by foolend (12) 7 years ago

What about the ones that trade food stamps for drugs, alcohol, etc

[-] 2 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 7 years ago

And now you're changing the subject instead of replying honestly. What does your post say about "dependency"? Nothing.

Which ones? How many? Where are the numbers? What percentage of the 45 MILLION people who are today forced into the humiliation of needing food stamps do what you say?

Are there abuses? I'm sure there are. Does the number of them negate the need for the programs, or support you fact-free assertion that it somehow creates dependence? Or are you simply regurgitating the right wing talking points you heard on talk radio?

You spout the myths, but never the facts.

[-] -1 points by slammersworldwillnotbecensored (-184) 7 years ago

foodstamps are "welfare" as is AFDC......

as are programs that provide cell phones, transportation, healthcare, and other services without charge.......don't play semantics to shit on the guy's point....he is right, you are wrong....it's that simple

[-] 2 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 7 years ago

He was talking about food stamps, troll, and comparing people who get them to park animals. Read the OP.

He's right? How? Where is the evidence that the 45 million people in this country forced to be on food stamps are like animals?


How many times have you been banned so far?

[-] -1 points by slammersworldwillnotbecensored (-184) 7 years ago

yeah...that post has been making the rounds on facebook

and it's true, humans become dependent too....fool

have you ever been to an inner city housing project.....the living conditions are worse than animals, they renovate and the ungrateful bastards destroy it again in short order...I used to have a contract job in Atlanta providing windows to the housing project by the Olympic stadium, they were constantly replacing them due to vandalism and tenant destruction......many are worse than park animals and shouldn't be fed either.....

I have been voted down twice, but I consider it a badge of honor....

You on the other hand appear to be an OWS suck-ass who parrots the opinions of the rest of the lazy and shiftless losers on this site.....

you should be proud, do a dance around your grandma's basement.......and have another pop tart...

[-] 1 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 7 years ago

I grew up in the inner city, and later lived for years in one the poorest neighborhoods in New York. And my experiences were completely at odds with yours. As usual, you right wingers operate form the fallacy of generalizing from the particular.

Your rank judgements are starkly at odds with the basic facts regarding social programs. Federal budget and Census data show that, in 2010, 91 percentof the benefit dollars from entitlement and other mandatory programs went to the elderly (people 65 and over), the seriously disabled, and members of working households. People who are neither elderly nor disabled — and do not live in a working household — received only 9 percent of the benefits.

Moreover, the vast bulk of that 9 percent goes for medical care, unemployment insurance benefits (which individuals must have a significant work history to receive), Social Security survivor benefits for the children and spouses of deceased workers, and Social Security benefits for retirees between ages 62 and 64. Seven out of the 9 percentage points go for one of these four purposes.

A small number of discretionary (i.e., non-entitlement) programs also provide substantial benefits to individuals, but the lack of full funding for some of these programs means they do not reach all eligible recipients. Indeed, in some cases — such as in low-income rental assistance programs — the vast majority of people who are eligible receive nobenefits because of program funding limits. If we broaden the universe of programs examined to include the principal discretionary programs that provide benefits — low-income housing programs, the WIC nutrition program for low-income women and young children, and low-income energy assistance — the result is essentially unchanged. Some 90 percent of the benefit dollars still go to the elderly, the disabled, and working households.

If we look only at entitlement programs that are targeted to people with low incomes, the percentage of benefit dollars going to people who are elderly or disabled or members of working households remains high. Five of every six benefit dollars in these programs — 83 percent — go to such people.

If anything, these figures understate the percentage of the benefits that generally go to people who are elderly, disabled, or members of working households. As noted, these data are for fiscal year 2010, a year when the unemployment rate averaged 9.6 percent and an unusually large number of Americans were in economic distress. In fiscal year 2007, the share of entitlement benefits going to people who are elderly or disabled or members of working households was a bit higher.

Now let's look at who is really most "dependent":

The top fifth of the population receives 66 percent of tax-expenditure benefits (compared to 10 percent of entitlement benefits).

The middle 60 percent of the population receives a little over 31 percent of tax-expenditure benefits (compared to 58 percent of entitlement benefits).

The bottom fifth receives just 2.8 percent of tax-expenditure benefits (compared to 32 percent of entitlement benefits).

The top 1 percent of the population receives 23.9 percent of tax-expenditure benefits — more than eight times as much as the bottom fifth of the population, and nearly as much as the middle 60 percent of the population.

So you can take your "dependency" myths and shove them back up your ass.

[-] -1 points by slammersworldwillnotbecensored (-184) 7 years ago

please source your data....I'll respond tomorrow, after some research...

[-] -1 points by foolend (12) 7 years ago

Wow I struck a nerve and there must be a lot of welfare rats in this forum

[-] 2 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 7 years ago

No asshole, you're just an asshole that's been exposed.

And you STILL haven't provided ONE SINGLE FACT. It's all smoke out of your ass, which you mistake for your brain.

[-] 1 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 7 years ago

The current LIFETIME limit for receiving benefits is FIVE YEARS.

Even when it wasn't, the AVERAGE stay for ALL citizens on ANY welfare program was 2 years.

So your dependence myth is full of shit.

Keep lying.

[-] -1 points by slammersworldwillnotbecensored (-184) 7 years ago

TANF is limited to 60 months...foodstamps, public housing, AFDC, and other programs administered by the states with federal money do not have those limitations....and many go from dependents of parents on programs to being on the same programs themselves...sometimes three generations living in the same public housing projects......so much for "helping" people get out of poverty...

your misdirection of using only TANF is a lie, and you are more than full of shit, fool...

do some research, instead of being a fucking media parrot...

[-] -1 points by foolend (12) 7 years ago

Hey numbNuts do not worry and your welfare will not be cut because of this posting. Now get your useless ass back to the park bench

[-] 1 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 7 years ago

Hey, shit-for-brains: no facts yet, huh?

[-] 3 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 7 years ago

Anecdotal stories are not evidence, they are anecdotes. Clearly, you have never learned the difference, as you have never learned what it means to feel anything but contempt for people less lucky than you.


Go tell it to the Heritage Foundation, creep.


[-] -1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 7 years ago

WTF is that?

[-] 1 points by RedSkyMorning (220) 7 years ago

We should make them all stand in soup kitchen lines while the grocery stores are boarded up so that people can see how many people we are talking about. Grumble, grumble.

[-] -1 points by sunstar (-14) 7 years ago

What an excellent post. Judging by the Liberal outrage and indignation you've stirred up I'd say that nerve was struck most deeply.

Without dependence on Government,Democrats have nothing. It's the basic foundation of support that keeps them in power along with class warfare and race baiting. These are their fundamental elements they need to foment to keep people voting for them. The very fact that you've received so much vitriol and aggression is a stamp of approval.

[-] 0 points by foolend (12) 7 years ago

Thanks for the comment and it is the only positive one I got so far. What I posted is the truth and liberals cannot handle the truth.

[-] -2 points by Carlitini99 (-167) 7 years ago

you must be a lottery winner to qualify for food stamps. Just kidding, some people really need them, but there is a lot,a lot, of abuse and fraud.

[-] 1 points by foolend (12) 7 years ago

That's what I am talking about but to a liberal, everyone should be on stamps