Food Stamp Usage Falls to 37 Million for First Time Since October 2009

Just quote chuckie schumer on the subject:

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) said in 2009 that construction of hundreds of miles of fencing along the southern border made the border "far more secure" because it created a "significant barrier to illegal immigration."

"The first of these seven principles is that illegal immigration is wrong, plain and simple," Schumer said. "When we use phrases like 'undocumented workers,' we convey a message to the American people that their government is not serious about combating illegal immigration, which the American people overwhelmingly oppose."

"People who enter the United States without our permission are illegal aliens, and illegal aliens should not be treated the same as people who entered the United States legally," Schumer continued. "Any immigration solution must recognize that we must do as much as we can to gain operational control of our borders as soon as possible."

https://twitter.com/SenateGOP/status/1075051126079270913/video/1

 

Funny thing is that criminals don't worry about laws, rules, & regulations. That's why they're called criminals.

 

The Democrats forced the banks to make mortgage loans to unqualified minorities. When the Republicans objected to that because it was risky, the Dems shouted, “Racist!”.

 

It was not prolonged by Democratic policies. It was probably lessened by the bipartisan effort to do the hard-to-swallow but ultimately necessary bailouts. Where both parties really failed was in not holding the financial sector's feet to the fire afterwards and creating legislation to ensure that things like that don't happen again or at least that those involved are heavily penalized.

Not disputing the numbers, but lets also face that this wasn't a brag for Trump. It's not even much of a brag for Obama, as it was more a correction as things have slowly picked up after the crash, the same trend we've seen in the economy as a whole.

 

Read the following. This is an often repeated fallacy about the crash.

https://www.federalreserve.gov/econ...ts-role-in-the-financial-crisis-20150526.html

An excerpt from the link:

Conclusion
The CRA provides an incentive structure that could plausibly have motivated banks to originate or purchase loans they would have otherwise considered too risky. However, empirical research indicates that CRA-related loans were a small fraction of the subprime market during the mortgage boom. The literature estimating the effect of the CRA finds small increases in originations--if any at all--and effects on delinquencies that are small or even negative. While we do not have a good estimate of the net costs or benefits of the act, the current best evidence suggests that the CRA was not a significant contributor to the financial crisis.

 

yes, the one I gave you, which is the same one showing republicans killed every single attempt.

 

no they didn't.

no they didn't.

And I've repeatedly shown the congressional voting record from 2001-2007 which shows republicans killing every single bill attempting to regulate fanny/freddy, which directly led to the collapse.

 

Ha Ha so what drives supply Durandal? I'll help you, Demand drives supply. What drives demand. Let's see more income... check, more business's hiring more workers... check, more company expansion... check, more better paying jobs... check, all under Trump. But yes tell us how raising taxes wont hurt every single one of those things, I'm all ears.

 

I think most people are happy to hear that food stamp usage is down to the lowest level in a decade.

And it happened on Trumps watch.

 

*businesses

Yes, yes, it's all one big circle. Got to have demand to have supply, got to have work and income to have demand. Of course, that doesn't mean the junk we consume is the same junk we make. As it happens, we produce a lot of exports and consume a lot of imports, because highly paid American labor isn't the best suited to producing the kind of cheap junk that we let the Chinese produce for us. We do other things instead, and we are still the wealthiest country on Earth for it while simulatenously helping other countries to grow and improve their economies. Everyone benefits.

We have lots of work, and it is not at the expense of any foreign market. Trump isn't waving a magic wand and stealing jobs from China or Mexico. We just have more of the kinds of jobs Americans have long had even in the age of globalisation.

Generally speaking, taxes are too small, especially those on corporations, to have any significant impact. You'll notice, for instance, that aside from the occasional hype news story, businesses thrive in states with higher tax rates, such as California and New York. Taxes don't generally drive them out, and unemployment is not more of an issue in those states than anywhere else.

 

2013 were Obama years, no?

 

Yes, and the republican state legislatures were doing it.

 

Who signed the law?

Also..
http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/obama-signs-food-stamp-cut
When House Republicans originally argued for a food stamp cut of between $20.5 billion and $39 billion, the White House threatened to veto both of those proposals. During his Friday speech, the president did not say whether he was satisfied with the final $8.7 billion figure, or even mention the cuts at all. Instead, he praised the food stamp program and said that the final Farm Bill preserved much-needed benefits.

So the reps wanted 20 to almost 40 billion cut / plan. And Obama signed a not even 9 billion cut / plan. And you call that a Republican plan? lol

 

That showed no dem legislation...only the gop trying to get stuff done. You might want to review it

 

The Republicans fought and fought to reduce SNAP ("food stamps") in the Farm Bill during 2013/2014 against Democrat opposition and without Obama's support. Just because ultimately the bill passed during Obama's presidency does not in any way mean Obama or Democrats deserve any credit for the food stamps reductions, because they fought them every step of the way.

 

A while before that, maybe 2012-an internal USDA study came out that it had been sitting on for years-SNAP was introduced to increase testing scores in schools and it in fact did not do that.

YEARS later, it was released.

 

The Dems actually do get the credit for that, because the reps wanted to reduce up to near 40 billion bucks with that law. And Obama signed a law to reduce that by less than 9 billion bucks. You can't be serious that the law that passed has a massive rep input.

 

You go on with your own reality.

 

And others have concluded differently.

It was a giant bubble. Risky mortgages was part of that bubble.

 

Trump cleans up Obama's food stamp mess

When Obama was elected in November 2008, just under 31 million people received food stamps.

When Trump was elected more than 41 million were on food stamps.



33% rise in Americans dependent on the charity of the state to eat.

As he started his second term, food stamp usage peaked at 47.2 million.

Obama sneered at jobs that do not require a college diploma. Those jobs are not coming back, he gloated.

Trump brought those jobs back and now millions of people can feed themselves.

Breitbart News reported

After 2013, SNAP enrollment plummeted once state legislatures passed laws requiring food stamp recipients to work, attend school, volunteer, or participate in job training for a set number of hours per week to receive benefits.

#Winning!

 

The methods used not only to create those mortgages but then to pass them down the line were not created or legislated by the government. Those were actions purely by the executives at the lending institutions. Those who inflated housing prices and those who practiced predatory lending are the main culprits in the crash.

 

Too much credit = too much money available = inflated housing prices = speculation = bubble

 

So, you want to post something about why these rates have been dropping, or are you suggesting it was just Obama's omnipotence that drove people off food stamps, and Trump is simply reaping the rewards?

 

Point out where I said in my post that Obama gets credit for the turnaround in food stamp usage? What I did, however, is highlight the futility (and actually flat out deception) of the OP and his silly "thank you Trump" threads, when he is looking for causation when there is not even correlation.

But, if you really want to know:

Food stamp usage continued to rise because the country was at risk of flat out deflation until well into 2013.


Notice the reduction in household debt/GDP after the great recession? This is called debt deleveraging and it is deflationary. Luckily, government stepped in and compensated for lack of private spending with public spending, as can be seen in the graph. If that had not been the case (and the GOP fought it tooth and nail to hurt Obama), we would still be in a economic trouble, or even a long-lasting depression.

As you can also see from the graph, the consumer debt deleveraging is over and the consumer is finally ready to spend again. That's the REAL reason why people feel good about the economy right now, not Trump's ill-advised tax cuts, which just fuel the flame at the expense of future readiness of the government to combat the next downturn.

 

Well gee QN, when you write "Care to point out where on the curve Trump took over? Looks like the trend is continuing from the years before Trump, as are unemployment trends etc.", what are you referring to?

Are you aware of the changes States imposed on eligibility that took place beginning in 2013?