The number of food stamp recipients has climbed by about 10 million over the past two years, resulting in a program that now feeds 1 in 8 Americans and nearly 1 in 4 children.

Food Stamp Usage Across the Country

click for interactive graphic
Food stamps USA

>

Source:
Across U.S., Food Stamp Use Soars and Stigma Fades
JASON DePARLE and ROBERT GEBELOFF
NYT, November 28, 2009

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/29/us/29foodstamps.html

Category: Markets

Please use the comments to demonstrate your own ignorance, unfamiliarity with empirical data and lack of respect for scientific knowledge. Be sure to create straw men and argue against things I have neither said nor implied. If you could repeat previously discredited memes or steer the conversation into irrelevant, off topic discussions, it would be appreciated. Lastly, kindly forgo all civility in your discourse . . . you are, after all, anonymous.

43 Responses to “Food Stamps at Record Highs in US”

  1. Denis says:

    “nearly 1 in 4 children”

    that’s a scary stat… is malnutrition around the corner?

  2. Ducky62 says:

    Although the program is growing at a record rate, the federal official who oversees it would like it to grow even faster.

    What does this say about government?

  3. DL says:

    Today’s QOTD is from Reagan. I thought BR favored higher marginal tax rates on income.

  4. Mannwich says:

    @Ducky62: That line jumped out at me too. Had to re-read it to make sure I wasn’t misunderstanding it.

    @Denis: Aren’t we already at that point? Have you seen how many fat people we have in this country?

  5. Marcus Aurelius says:

    We have debt because we borrow. RR was the king of borrowing.

    As for food stamps, that we need to have them at all is an indication that our system is broken.

  6. Climategate says:

    What did you expect after the Dems increased food stamp benefits, relaxed eligibility requirements (even illegal aliens can get food stamps now) and increased the program by billions?

    Did you really expect the numbers would go down?

  7. hue says:

    let ‘em eat cake. or tell them to get a job.
    spam for everybody http://bit.ly/4Q6vJB

  8. polizeros says:

    Spam for everyone? They would love that in Hawaii. They love spam there. Seriously. I once saw a McDonalds in Maui that had spam on the menu.

  9. Climategate says:

    “Although the program is growing at a record rate, the federal official who oversees it would like it to grow even faster.”

    Yes, instead of creating jobs (Obama administration has done nothing to create a single job), the Obama administration is creating more and more people defendant on the government.

  10. call me ahab says:

    climategate-

    you go dude-

    fucking little people- who needs them-

    haven’t they heard of the $ menu at McDonalds-

    damn Democrats always trying to help people and wasting our money

  11. rtalcott says:

    “…Although the program is growing at a record rate, the federal official who oversees it would like it to grow even faster….:”

    I suspect the individual quoted means that he would like the program to grow faster to capture all those who are eligible to get the assistance to them that they are eligible to receive…
    rt

  12. dougc says:

    Everybody knows if you want to create jobs , you just cut taxes on the rich. If you loved RR, don’t worry, palin is on the way . Could she be RR illegitimate child?

  13. rtalcott says:

    I suspect the individual quoted means that he would like the program to grow faster to capture all those who are eligible to get the assistance

    Wish we could edit..
    rt

  14. ITDog09 says:

    Climategate, your name says all anyone needs to know.

    Ducky62, “What does this say about government?”
    Perhaps, and I hope your holding your head in case it explodes, perhaps that says the federal official would like to see all of the hungry Americans get the food they need! OMG, that’s like he’s doing his job or something. It’s as if he’s more concerned about all the hungry Americans than concerned about the numbers being too big. Should his priority be to cut back the numbers?

    That’s exactly how the guy in charge of the Veteran’s Admin acted with the fantastic number of veterans needing mental health and medical care where coming home from the Iraq war. He didn’t want to believe the numbers. So these Americans who put their lives on the line were being denied care and committing suicide in obscene numbers. All because a bureaucrat didn’t want to believe that so many could be so wanting. He would rather patriotic Americans, their families, and their children all suffer than God forbid he should ask for a bigger budget to administer to all who needed help.

    I vote to give my hungry neighbors food. I’d vote to be taxed to do it. My small business will survive my neighbors being fed at a shared cost to all. Get in line and talk to them. 90% would rather have a J-O-B. Probably the other 10% are mentally ill. But hey you can just do what RR was proud to do. Throw the mentally ill into the streets. By the way some of these garbage pickers and homeless beggars you’d rather see go hungry, and probably go without healthcare or shelter and die, are also veterans who put their lives on the line for the rest of us.

  15. hue says:

    polizeros, yes spam (see the final minute of Art Donovan) with ketchup, a veggie according to the Ronnie Rage WH

  16. ITDog09,

    I’m a little slow ‘on the uptake’, w.this: “Climategate, your name says all anyone needs to know.”

    What would ‘all anyone need to know’, re: Climategate?

    http://news.google.com/news/search?aq=f&pz=1&cf=all&ned=us&hl=en&q=Climategate
    http://clusty.com/search?input-form=clusty-simple&v%3Asources=webplus&query=Climategate
    http://www.icerocket.com/search?tab=blog&fr=h&q=Climategate
    ~~

    to the post,

    why to we pay taxes to subsidize higher Ag prices, and, then, pay taxes to subsidize those that cannot afford the Higher Ag prices?
    (the simple version, please)

  17. Mr. Micawber says:

    A wonderful article, and on a Football Sunday, too!

    Hi, Bread! Meet Circuses!

  18. Jojo says:

    You have to be pretty poor (or lying) to get food stamps!

    http://www.fns.usda.gov/FSP/applicant_recipients/eligibility.htm

  19. IdahoSpud says:

    I am inclined to regard this 1 in 4 children on food stamps number as a failing metric on policies promoting home ownership (aka the asset-dependent “Ownership society”)

    Looks as if the debt required of young families to join the “ownership society” during the bubble resulted in families getting pwned, right up to the point of food insecurity.

    And yes, I would like to see the program expand to cover ALL the hungry in America too. IMHO Jesus is a better role model than John Galt in this case.

  20. Onlooker from Troy says:

    I just hope like heck that these people are using their limited resources most effectively; most assuredly that does NOT mean buying crap like Spam. Though it’s thought of a cheap food, it’s really 2-4 times as expensive as other meat available in the meat department.

    But doing the math seems to be beyond too many people. That goes for all the other processed crap that Hormel and the like package and sell. Not to mention the nutritional differences between those options and others that take minimal preparation but are much better for you. I mean really, how hard is it to make a beef stew, or chicken and veggies over rice, etc.??

    I’m afraid that I’d hate to see the stats on what is actually purchased with food stamps. I’m not confident that it would be a pretty picture. But maybe I could be proven wrong. I hope so.

  21. maynardGkeynes says:

    Short explanation: Farm Lobby.

  22. hue says:

    i vaguely remember seeing a study or TV mag like 20/20 that showed people with the lowest means tend to buy the worse kinds of food, leading to bad nutrition and obesity. part of the reason is that those items — sugary juices, sodas, mac and cheese etc — are cheap and mostly offered in the stores where they live. Whole Foods doesn’t open stores in the inner city. can you use food stamps at Whole Foods or Trader Joes? The haves and the haves lots of calories

  23. thatguydrinksbeer says:

    Overlay a map of red/blue states. Interesting…

  24. Onlooker from Troy says:

    Oh come on hue, you don’t have to be able to go to Whole Foods to get basic, wholesome, nutritious food. People just need to learn some basics and not be lured by the idea that packaged, processed foods are that much easier than basic, homestyle cooking.

    With that said, I do recognize that some inner city areas are woefully lacking even basic grocery stores. That does indeed make it harder, no doubt.

  25. franklin411 says:

    @beerguy
    I was thinking the same thing. Red states have the highest rates of poverty and the highest starvation rates. And many of them have abstinence-only education policies, such as Texas. The result? Childhood pregnancy and STD rates are reversing decades of improvement and heading back up in these states.

    You know, Harry Truman used to have a saying to describe the phenomenon of poor people voting Republican:

    “How many times do you have to get hit over the head before you figure out who’s hitting you?”

  26. Winston Munn says:

    @climategate,

    You seem confused as to whose opinion matters. My advice is to pay attention to the peer review science journals and the National Academy of Sciences. (In case you don’t know, the National Academies are like the Supreme Court of science.)

    See, it really doesn’t matter how many Mobil sponsored non-climatologists are invited onto Fox to be “fair and balanced” and it doesn’t matter that “some people say” global warming is a hoax, and it is still unimportant when Palin and Beck parrot the claims of a scientific conspiracy to obfuscate data.

    The only thing that matters is what is really happening. And what is really happening is that CO2 is being produced faster than the natural processes of Earth can eliminate it.

  27. FrancoisT says:

    Mannwich Says:

    @Denis: Aren’t we already at that point? Have you seen how many fat people we have in this country?”
    —————————–

    What do you think make these people obese?

    Cheap food, a.k.a. food FULL of calories, poor in protein, zero fiber and low vitamins.
    This kind of food spikes the insulin so much that lipogenesis (making of internal fat) is increased severalfold.

    Constant stress will only exacerbates the problem.

    Also, the body react very badly to food insecurity by lowering the metabolism and increasing the fat storage capacity. BTW, that is why drastic diets almost never works; the body has a very robust built-in mechanism of hunger memory.

    In other words, the body “remembers” periods of hunger by boosting all the mechanisms that promotes storage of fat and decreasing output.

    The worst of it all is that this “capacity to remember” will be transmitted to the progeny. There are studies, done with the descendants of the Nazi occupation in the Netherlands and Belgium that back this up.

  28. Climategate says:

    @Winston Munn

    Re: “My advice is to pay attention to the peer review science journals and the National Academy of Sciences.”

    You drink your “peer review science journals” Cool Aid yourself.

    “Peer review” label if a fraud — a very small group of politically motivated 42 scientists who have evolved into professional alarmists in order to reap rewards in research money (more taxpayer funds) and fame. These 42 alarmist are all publishing together and “peer review” each other’s literature — they control all the temperature data and the whole process.
    Dr. Ball explains the entire fraud in his recent interview.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ydo2Mwnwpac

    Re: “See, it really doesn’t matter how many Mobil sponsored non-climatologists are invited onto Fox”

    “Mobil sponsored”?

    What about GE sponsored non-climatologists and their left-wing media propaganda networks?

    You have a lot of reading to do my friend.

    There are much more environmentalists and professional alarmists (Al Gore, Pelosi, Reid, Boxer, Clintons, just to name a few) who are heavily invested in “alternative energy” companies and have millions and billions to gain from the climate-change gravy (taxpayer money flowing into this climate-change hype) train rolling. According to NYT, the biggest gloom and doom alarmists of all, Al Gore plans to become the first “carbon billionaire”. Sensationalism is much more lucrative.
    http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/03/business/energy-environment/03gore.html

    Scientists and alarmists who had millions and billions of taxpayer money to gain by frightening the public fabricated a climate change catastrophe for anxious public. They put forward an ideology that is blind fundamentalism, unrelated to scientific facts. Politicians build new bureaucracies and pose as environmental saviors without having to face the consequences of their actions.

    These crooks even admitted that they only have the cooked (“manually adjusted”) temperature data. They have completely destroyed the original incriminating them in fraud evidence.

    “It means that other academics are not able to check basic calculations said to show a long-term rise in temperature over the past 150 years.”

    Why would they destroy the original data?

    The whole idea of scientific discovery is for other independent scientists to be able to reproduce the results (to verify the claims).

    “Roger Pielke, professor of environmental studies at Colorado University, discovered data had been lost when he asked for original records.”The CRU is basically saying, ‘Trust us’. So much for settling questions and resolving debates with science,” he said.
    http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article6936328.ece

  29. FrancoisT says:

    A) 1 in 4 children in the US is on food stamps.

    B) The US of A is the greatest country in the world.

    Something does not compute here; what could it be?

    Any ideas?

  30. FrancoisT says:

    Climategate,

    You are the living example of the difference between information and knowledge. You have tons of “information” which only use is to reinforce your beliefs.

  31. Climategate says:

    @ More evidence for Cool Aid drinker Winston Munn

    Dems, liberal media (CNN, ABC, CBS, NBC, and all other GE networks [GE is positioned to gain a lot of taxpayer money from the hype]), and Obama administration are all lying to the public about the “scientific consensus”.

    In fact, over 700 prominent international scientists, including many current and former UN IPCC scientists, (more than 13 times the number of UN scientists [52] who authored the media-hyped IPCC 2007 “scientific consensus”), voiced strong skepticism about the so-called man-made global warming.

    More Than 700 International Scientists Dissent over Man-Made Global Warming Claims
    Scientists Continue to Debunk “Consensus” in 2008 & 2009

    “Over 700 dissenting scientists (updates previous 650 report) from around the globe
    challenged man-made global warming claims made by the United Nations
    Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and former Vice President Al Gore.
    This new 2009 255-page U.S. Senate Minority Report — updated from 2007’s
    groundbreaking report of over 400 scientists who voiced skepticism about the so-called
    global warming “consensus” — features the skeptical voices of over 700 prominent
    international scientists, including many current and former UN IPCC scientists, who have
    now turned against the UN IPCC. This updated report includes an additional 300 (and
    growing) scientists and climate researchers since the initial release in December 2007.
    The over 700 dissenting scientists are more than 13 times the number of UN scientists (52)
    who authored the media-hyped IPCC 2007″
    http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Files.View&FileStore_id=83947f5d-d84a-4a84-ad5d-6e2d71db52d9

  32. Climategate says:

    @ FrancoisT

    Look at the facts. Earth is a warm, wet, greenhouse planet. There has been ice on its surface for less than 20 per cent of its history, and in the geological past there have been six great ice ages. Two ice ages were characterised by ice at the Equator, with sea levels rising by up to 5,000ft. That is sea-level change!

    Five of the ice ages saw a far higher atmospheric carbon-dioxide content than at present. So carbon dioxide could not have caused past climate changes. Indeed, early Earth had 1,000 times more carbon dioxide in the atmosphere than now – yet there was no runaway greenhouse effect, tipping points or acid oceans.

    The initial source of the two main greenhouse gases, water vapour and carbon dioxide, was volcanoes. Water vapour is still the main greenhouse gas. Once oceans formed and life appeared, carbon was then recycled between the oceans, atmosphere, soils, life and rocks. Carbon dioxide is a plant food, not a pollutant.

    Human activity produces only three per cent of the world’s carbon-dioxide emissions each year. One volcanic belch can emit as much as that in a day. Carbon dioxide has a short life in the atmosphere and is absorbed by natural processes that have been taking place for billions of years.

    Life thrived during warm times and life suffered in cool times. Great civilisations collapsed when it was cool.

    It was so hot during the 600-year-long ‘Roman warming’ that grapes were grown as far north as Hadrian’s Wall. Sea levels did not rise and polar ice did not vanish. Some Alpine glaciers disappeared, only to appear later. The cold Dark Ages followed: starvation, rampant disease and massive depopulation occurred.

    A 400-year warm period followed. The Vikings grew barley and wheat, and raised cattle and sheep in parts of Greenland that are now uninhabitable. During this ‘medieval warming’, there was so much excess wealth generated from generations of reliable harvests that the great monasteries, cathedrals and universities were built.

    Yet sea levels did not rise and the ice sheets were not lost. And, significantly, humans could not have driven the Roman and medieval warmings by carbon-dioxide emissions, as there was no industry.

  33. Pat G. says:

    The USDA says that only 60% of the folks eligible in this nation are participating. The business of issuing Food Stamps across this country could be more effectively served and efficiently delivered if done by a private enterprise using proprietary software. Any takers? Of all the welfare programs, Food Stamps is fairly straight forward and consistent across the U.S therefore the easiest to streamline.

  34. Adult Franklin411 says:

    Life thrived during warm times and life suffered in cool times. Great civilisations collapsed when it was cool.

    It was so hot during the 600-year-long ‘Roman warming’ that grapes were grown as far north as Hadrian’s Wall. Sea levels did not rise and polar ice did not vanish. Some Alpine glaciers disappeared, only to appear later. The cold Dark Ages followed: starvation, rampant disease and massive depopulation occurred.

    A 400-year warm period followed. The Vikings grew barley and wheat, and raised cattle and sheep in parts of Greenland that are now uninhabitable. During this ‘medieval warming’, there was so much excess wealth generated from generations of reliable harvests that the great monasteries, cathedrals and universities were built.

    You’re fucking kidding me right? ‘Cuz the thermometer was invented in the 16th/17th century. Before that, you get monk diary entries like this:

    June 20, 1125 – Hot today

    Dec 5, 1206 – Cold today. Brother Theodore is sick. Saw a black bird carrying a baby rabbit. Evil omen

    Schmuck.

  35. FrancoisT says:

    Climategate,

    Here is a FACT for you: in a previous post, you accused the CRU to “destroy” and “hide” original data.

    Well, my friend, you suck real bad at thrutiness.

    Yo wanna some raw data, Bro’?
    http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2009/11/wheres-the-data/

    That is where da data is. Make sure to read the posts, since there is a treasure trove of raw data in tons of different links.

    Climate destabilization is real and we have a role in it.

    Get used to it, and do not obstruct the unstoppable march toward green energies and sustainability. I plan to become filthy rich investing in this history-changing paradigm and deniers like you are a tremendous annoyance.

  36. Climategate says:

    @ Adult Franklin411

    The Roman and medieval warmings are 100% established historical facts.

    As well as, of the 186 billion tons of CO2 that enter earth’s atmosphere each year from all sources, only 6 billion tons are from human activity. Approximately 90 billion tons come from biologic activity in earth’s oceans and another 90 billion tons from such sources as volcanoes and decaying land plants.

    At 368 parts per million CO2 is a minor constituent of earth’s atmosphere– less than 4/100ths of 1% of all gases present. Compared to former geologic times, earth’s current atmosphere is CO2- impoverished.

    If we are in a global warming crisis today, even the most aggressive and costly proposals for limiting industrial carbon dioxide emissions would have a negligible effect on global climate!

  37. Food Stamps:

    Who would of thought that in this day and age of the internet that mailing food would be still so popular

    And it is not like you can’t use the internet to mail food. Look at all the spam that is sent across the bandwidth

  38. Weren’t you guys arguing yesterday about what benefits/evil the fed has brought to America. On what side of the ledger do food stamps fall? :(

  39. Climategate says:

    @ all

    Instead of attacking me, all you planet loving environmentalists should be relieved (unless you have to gain millions and billions of taxpayer money from the carbon hype like GE and Al Gore) that not only is our planet safe, but that we need not spend trillions of dollars and forfeit our most basic freedoms in pursuit of remedies for the bogus man-caused climate change.

  40. Climategate says:

    Stephen Schneider (leading advocate of the global warming theory, in interview for Discover magazine, Oct 1989)
    “We have to offer up scary scenarios, make simplified, dramatic statements, and make little mention of any doubts we may have. Each of us has to decide what the right balance is between being effective and being honest.”

    Al Gore:
    “Nobody is interested in solutions if they don’t think there’s a problem. Given that starting point, I believe it is appropriate to have an over-representation of factual presentations on how dangerous (global warming) is, as a predicate for opening up the audience to listen to what the solutions are…”
    http://www.grist.org/news/maindish/2006/05/09/roberts/

    Bill Clinton:
    “In the United States…we have to first convince the American People and the Congress that the climate problem is real.”
    http://www.apfn.org/THEWINDS/1997/08/global_warming.html

    I rest my case.

    Good Luck and Good Night!

  41. On what side of the ledger do food stamps fall?

    Rereading I thought I’d clarify. I meant what side of the ledger would the need for them fall, not the providing of them.

    And here’s a thought. This is in no way meant to be condescending. This actually might change the lives (and thus the destinies) of many families. If they were to hand out coupons for free nutritional counseling and free financial counseling along with the stamps, it might help a few people out of their hole.

    I must assume that at least some of them are there because they are poorly (pardon the pun) taught. Even if that only helps 10% of the people in that line that could do wonders for a lot of American families.

  42. Winnie,

    try some of this: Yet More Stuff We Always Suspected But Its Nice To Have Proof
    November 27, 2009, 11:42 pm
    Many of us have argued for years that much of the measured surface temperature increase has actually been from manual adjustments made for opaque and largely undisclosed reasons by a few guys back in their offices.

    The US Historical Climate Network (USHCN) reports about a 0.6C temperature increase in the lower 48 states since about 1940. There are two steps to reporting these historic temperature numbers. First, actual measurements are taken. Second, adjustments are made after the fact by scientists to the data. Would you like to guess how much of the 0.6C temperature rise is from actual measured temperature increases and how much is due to adjustments of various levels of arbitrariness? Here it is, for the period from 1940 to present in the US:

    Actual Measured Temperature Increase: 0.1C
    Adjustments and Fudge Factors: 0.5C
    Total Reported Warming: 0.6C

    Yes, that is correct. Nearly all the reported warming in the USHCN data base, which is used for nearly all global warming studies and models, is from human-added fudge factors, guesstimates, and corrections.

    I know what you are thinking – this is some weird skeptic’s urban legend. Well, actually it comes right from the NOAA web page which describes how they maintain the USHCN data set. Below is the key chart from that site showing the sum of all the plug factors and corrections they add to the raw USHCN measurements:

    http://www.climate-skeptic.com/2009/11/yet-more-stuff-we-always-suspected-but-its-nice-to-have-proof.html
    ~~
    and for those that execute the pretense of ‘Scientific Inquiry’, this: “…SCIENTISTS at the University of East Anglia (UEA) have admitted throwing away much of the raw temperature data on which their predictions of global warming are based.

    It means that other academics are not able to check basic calculations said to show a long-term rise in temperature over the past 150 years.

    The UEA’s Climatic Research Unit (CRU) was forced to reveal the loss following requests for the data under Freedom of Information legislation.

    The data were gathered from weather stations around the world and then adjusted to take account of variables in the way they were collected. The revised figures were kept, but the originals — stored on paper and magnetic tape — were dumped to save space when the CRU moved to a new building…”
    doesn’t, quite, seem to hold water (or, melt Glaciers, depending, of course, on which side your crumpet is (clotted) creamed..)
    http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article6936328.ece

  43. Jojo says:

    How did this thread get hijacked into something about climate change?