Town Square

Post a New Topic

Corrupt Programs

Original post made by Virgil Stevens on Jul 13, 2013

The failed farm bill and its food stamps program reminds me of the perverse corruption behind our foreign aid programs, which were really meant as a subsidy for our productive farmers while our food's recipients languished in unproductive, self-perpetuating poverty. In a similar scheme, the Democrats' many social programs have led to the creation of vast urban deserts where people are terminally ensconced in unemployment supplemented by welfare and crime, trapped in a lifestyle and perverse incentives that are at best destructive. Give them more food stamps, but dare say nothing about the real causes and hard solutions to their poverty. The only discussion allowed by the Democrats is how to keep alive the dying so they can be rolled out at convenient times for the purpose of voting themselves more of Democrats' slow death.

The only solutions extracted by our government from those who have the imagination and means to constructively help our poor are ever-rising minimum wages and taxes to keep alive those displaced by the rising minimum wages and the resulting illegal labor market. Private initiative is putting to shame our public schools, is profitably employing untold millions in Brazil, Russia, India and China, while here 50 million Americans languish in hunger. Again and again it was proven that only when fundamental economical and social truths are faced without political prejudice and corruption can an economy succeed, and yet we refuse to let go of Democrats' failing dogma.

Comments (12)

Posted by Vigilant Steve, a resident of Menlo Park: other
on Jul 14, 2013 at 12:13 pm

four bucks in food assistance a day, previously established under bi-partisan support for 40 years, caused "many social programs have led to the creation of vast urban deserts where people are terminally ensconced in unemployment"

okay, thanks for sharing your unfounded opinion. How about supporting facts next time?

The food bill has funneled FOUR BILLION dollars of taxpayer money the last decade into just the hands of some rich guys growing cotton, solely because they donate money (i.e. they buy) politicians. Web Link

FOUR BILLION taxpayer dollars for corporate welfare to rich guys vs four bucks a day for a hungry American? Who's drinking the koolaid now, Virgil? Easy to do that in San Carlos. That's where your copy and pasted letter from the Mercury says you hail from.

I will respect the tea party when they stop republicans from giving our tax dollars away in corporate welfare scams. Until then, just a fringe, albeit noisy, bunch of useless loons. Even if they get a letter published in the Merc. Web Link




Posted by Jonny Foster, a resident of another community
on Jul 15, 2013 at 10:04 am

Republicans love them some corporate welfare, especially when it goes to groups that fund their campaigns.

Food aid for the hungry poor? Nope, though the Republicans are the first to inject race into the debate. Yesterday:

- CHRIS WALLACE: "Don't House Republicans run the risk of once again being seen as being insensitive to the needs of the poor?"

- REP. STEVE KING: "Well, I think that that was characterized by the Congressional Black Caucus and the Hispanic Caucus on Thursday in the wrong fashion...."

Yet in that hypocrite Steve King's own district, 85 percent of food stamp recipients were non-Hispanic whites.

We all know that Johnson's War on Poverty was aimed at the millions of white poor in Appalachia, for example, and it worked, lifting more whites out of poverty than ever before. Yet it was Reagan's race war and his mythical welfare cheat with a supposed Cadillac (a location and company named after a Native American tribe, of course) that is all most whites remember about the War on Poverty.

Now, Republicans want to take food aid away from a single mom, trying to work her way up from her two part time jobs at Walmart and mickey d.

Yet Republicans hide behind the false mask of being Christian. No wonder they never get elected around here.


Posted by POGO, a resident of Woodside: other
on Jul 15, 2013 at 11:11 am

When some of us criticize Democrats for their unabashed support of failing social welfare programs, please do not think that means we support the Republicans unabashed support of corporate welfare. Nothing could be further from the truth.

It would appear that an increasing number of voters are finding it increasingly difficult to identify with either of the two major political parties.

As I've said many times before, a pox on both of their houses.


Posted by Jonny Foster, a resident of another community
on Jul 15, 2013 at 11:40 am

False equivalence: taking money from programs helping the poor and hungry, and giving it away as corporate welfare to the rich who have bought the politicians. There is a difference, even if blinder wearing tea bag partiers refuse to see it, or seek to smear both with the same brush.

'failing social welfare programs' yet the discussion is about SNAP: the most effective anti-poverty program in history.

- SNAP and other nutrition programs have helped make severe hunger in America rare. Before the late 1960s, when the federal government began providing nutrition assistance, hunger and severe malnutrition could be found in many low-income communities in the United States. Today, in large part because of these programs, such severe conditions are no longer found in large numbers Web Link

'It would appear that an increasing number of voters are finding it increasingly difficult to identify with either of the two major political parties.' Nope. Just the narrow circle you talk to - proof below

- 2012 Obama 66 million, Romney 61 million, all others < 2 million. all the greens and libertarians = well less than two percent

compare to
- 1992 Ross Perot got 19%, Nineteen Percent!
- 1996 Ross Perot got over 8% Eight Percent
- even John Anderson, 1980, got three times the vote share of The Others of 2012
- George Wallace got 13 percent in 1968

Third parties make more noise these days of 500 channels, but have less impact. They will continue to lessen unless we stop the wealthy from buying politicians and the resulting corporate welfare that returns their contributions at a healthy profit. Please don't bother us with voter reg info of people registering as independents. That's noise, they still vote for their old party affiliation (<2% voted 3rd party in 2012)


Posted by POGO, a resident of Woodside: other
on Jul 15, 2013 at 12:28 pm

False statement. No one has suggested "taking money from programs helping the poor and hungry." But we do want to take it away from those who falsely claim disability (in shockingly increasing numbers) or hardship when there is none. As for America's "hungry," it is ironic that the biggest health issue for our poor is obesity. I'm not saying that there aren't hungry people in America, but that's the first time in world history this has happened.

And, in case you missed it, my criticism extends to corporate welfare too, such as for ADM, Goldman Sachs and even Solyndra.

I don't ignore either largess.


Posted by POGO, a resident of Woodside: other
on Jul 15, 2013 at 12:32 pm

As for party affiliation, you have to start somewhere. And it is clear that the influence of independents is increasing. That will hopefully reverse the polarization in the two major parties who increasingly seem to represent their fringe elements.

Recall that a very small group of voters - the Tea Party - has almost single handedly stymied Congress by electing just 80 Representatives. No, I don't support them, but as Europe knows too well, you don't have to win a majority, you just have to deny a majority to others.


Posted by joe, a resident of another community
on Jul 15, 2013 at 7:54 pm

POGO sez: "As for America's "hungry," it is ironic that the biggest health issue for our poor is obesity."

How insightful.

It reminds me that the America's biggest problem it's the widening gap between those who are hungry and POGOs

Be prepared to be visited by three ghosts.


Posted by Menlo Voter, a resident of Menlo Park: other
on Jul 15, 2013 at 7:56 pm

Nice deflection Joe. Care to actually address the issue?


Posted by POGO, a resident of Woodside: other
on Jul 15, 2013 at 9:08 pm

Actually, not even very good deflection.

But even so, here's a citation from the American Journal of Nutrition: Web Link This journal is THE peer-reviewed publication for these healthcare providers.


Posted by Jonny Foster, a resident of another community
on Jul 15, 2013 at 11:14 pm

Pogo answers his/her own question about the rates of obesity amongst the poor, "..such that energy-dense foods composed of refined grains, added sugars, or fats may represent the lowest-cost option to the consumer". The cheapest food is the worst crap you can eat. Yes, Pogo, it is a 'first in hisory', due mostly to agribusiness being subsidized to pump corn and soy out cheap, and adding salt sugar and fat (coincidentally, the title of the next book in the pile to read.)

As for your "no one has suggested "taking money from programs helping the poor and hungry" - isn't that why the Republicans took SNAP out of the farm bill? As the aforementioned tea bagger Steve King said - he wants to kill it.

"As for party affiliation, you have to start somewhere." Somewhere would have been with the numbers generated by Wallace, Perot or even Anderson, not the feeble <2% figure posted in 2012. The tea bag party is just the extreme edge of the GOP, not even close to an actual 3rd party. They can't even stop the corporate welfare put in place by the corporate wing of the GOP. Have you seen that filibustered or obstructed? See Steve King hollering about that today amongst his tea bagging brethren?

Me, neither.


Posted by freeper fr free republic, a resident of Menlo Park: Belle Haven
on Jul 16, 2013 at 1:03 pm

Joe - nailed it - not a deflection at all, nailed it. Easy for the greedy to want to drop help for the poor. Tea party is the greediest of all - "git yer guvmint hands off my Medicare" Web Link

freepers Web Link


Posted by crown, a resident of Atherton: other
on Jul 17, 2013 at 1:39 pm

The problem is that the Marshal plan set the precedent of misusing US taxpayer dollars, first in Euro than all over the world using various covers of both covert and overt methods.

Just follow the money and we see WHO benefits: military tech corporations and their industrial vertical stack, or horizonal, depending upon where you take the first peek.

Nothing new under the sun, but sure would be nice to have voters that knew not only WHAT was going on, but HOW to vote for the right people to rule over us!!!!!!


If you were a member and logged in you could track comments from this story.

Post a comment

Posting an item on Town Square is simple and requires no registration. Just complete this form and hit "submit" and your topic will appear online. Please be respectful and truthful in your postings so Town Square will continue to be a thoughtful gathering place for sharing community information and opinion. All postings are subject to our TERMS OF USE, and may be deleted if deemed inappropriate by our staff.

We prefer that you use your real name, but you may use any "member" name you wish.

Name: *

Select your neighborhood or school community: * Not sure?

Comment: *

Verification code: *
Enter the verification code exactly as shown, using capital and lowercase letters, in the multi-colored box.

*Required Fields

The dress code
By Jessica T | 24 comments | 2,034 views

September food and drink goings on
By Elena Kadvany | 0 comments | 1,421 views

College Freshmen: Avoiding the Pitfalls
By John Raftrey and Lori McCormick | 1 comment | 1,221 views

Camp Glamp
By Laura Stec | 6 comments | 1,102 views

Council election, and then some.
By Stuart Soffer | 5 comments | 482 views