The elephant in the food stamps question

Flagged not for language, but because it's a topic that is going to upset some people.

How much of our economic situation is related to the people who have been supported financially and economically through aid programs? And I'm not talking about the mythical racism stereotype with the manicure and an Escalade - I'm talking all the elderly people who's life-spans have increased by 30 years on average. To put it bluntly, people who would've died years ago if we did not have the programs we have today.

If the men who passed those laws nearly 75 years ago knew how much they would cost by now, or how many people would be struggling in a different kind of poverty, warehoused in substandard nursing homes, eating catfood because their social security + food stamps still doesn't last the month, even as we spend exponentially more every year - would they have passed them anyway? Or would they have pursued different solutions?

(and before anyone gets their panties in a twist, I'm not suggesting we need to kill all the old and disabled people, only pointing out that this problem isn't as simple as a recent president or two who can't balance a checkbook)

Answer Question

SHARE THIS QUESTION:

Asked by NotPanicking at 4:22 PM on Aug. 22, 2012 in Politics & Current Events

337535 Level 49

Answers (15)

"If the men who passed those laws nearly 75 years ago knew how much they would cost by now, or how many people would be struggling in a different kind of poverty, warehoused in substandard nursing homes, eating catfood because their social security + food stamps still doesn't last the month, even as we spend exponentially more every year - would they have passed them anyway? Or would they have pursued different solutions?"

NP- this is a question that, we, in the medical field, have discussed almost daily. It's nothing that should offend everyone. It makes perfect sense and I do believe they would have pursued different solutions.

Answer by m-avi at 4:26 PM on Aug. 22, 2012
Credits: 258496 Level 47 Politics & Current Events Major

Found an answer to your question?
Like us on Facebook!
Not sure what the ans is here. I'm glad we have the medical advances we have that help save or prolong lives. My mom grew up in the 50's & said that times were simpler & easier back then. And they had those programs then. Everything was so much cheaper & yes wages were lower, but somehow people still managed to get by & still save. And as far as balancing a checkbook, I don't think Washington is capable of doing that task.

Answer by mrsmom110 at 4:28 PM on Aug. 22, 2012
Credits: 163866 Level 43 Politics & Current Events Major

Found an answer to your question?
Like us on Facebook!
I do not think that law makers (past) realized how many people would take advantage of the system in the future and how dependent people would become on the government. I do think if this was realized they would have explored other avenues.

Answer by amazinggrace83 at 4:30 PM on Aug. 22, 2012
Credits: 48550 Level 31 Politics & Current Events Major

Found an answer to your question?
Like us on Facebook!
realized how many people would take advantage of the system in the future and how dependent people would become on the government.

But this isn't about the magic woman who can shop in 50 stores on the same day in every state with the 10' tall food stamp card - this is about elderly people using the services they are intended to use - social security, medicare which was added 30 years later, food stamps that fill in the gap when ss isn't enough. That's the exact purpose for those programs, they just never imagined people who used to be lucky to live to 60 would eventually live to 103 and get Willard Scott to call them out on national tv once a year.

Comment by NotPanicking (original poster) at 4:33 PM on Aug. 22, 2012
Credits: 337535 Level 49 Politics & Current Events Degree
I think that as the life expectancy has increased, so should the age required to receive benefits

Answer by missanc at 4:48 PM on Aug. 22, 2012
Credits: 136993 Level 41 Politics & Current Events Minor

Found an answer to your question?
Like us on Facebook!
I think that as the life expectancy has increased, so should the age required to receive benefits
Answer by missanc a minute ago

^^^ Does that mean raising the retirement age? There could be problems w/ that since age-ism is alive & well in the corp. world. Most companies don't want old timers around. They cost too much in wages & actually have the gall to use their vacation time! And just b/c someone lives to be 100, (which is not the avg. life expectancy) doesn't mean they can still physically hold down a job.

Answer by mrsmom110 at 4:51 PM on Aug. 22, 2012
Credits: 163866 Level 43 Politics & Current Events Major

Found an answer to your question?
Like us on Facebook!
I understand the point, that's what I meant, just didn't explain it well lol. It was meant for the elderly and everyone else began taking advantage and becoming dependent in addition to medical advances that prolong our lives. My point is, if they would have know that all these things would take place they would have explored something else.

Answer by amazinggrace83 at 4:52 PM on Aug. 22, 2012
Credits: 48550 Level 31 Politics & Current Events Major

Found an answer to your question?
Like us on Facebook!
Yes it is a complicated problem and can not be pinned to only on instance or law or president.
IMO The emphasis should not be on who did what when but how can we change this for the better. The fix, like the problem can not come with one law or change or one president. But the beginning of change is the recognition of the problem..

Answer by Dardenella at 4:54 PM on Aug. 22, 2012
Credits: 199795 Level 45 Politics & Current Events Degree

Found an answer to your question?
Like us on Facebook!
I think it's just a necessary part of this day and age. Welfare was supposed to get us out of the Great Depression. It wasn't meant to be permanent.

Answer by HHx5 at 5:35 PM on Aug. 22, 2012
Credits: 16828 Level 23 Politics & Current Events Minor

Found an answer to your question?
Like us on Facebook!
I think the benefits age should have had a gradual increase. I support raising it.

I also think they should expand SS & Medicare options. My dh and I haven't included either our retirement plans. I would however like to get some of what we have paid in to SS...an option for partial benefits would be nice.

I also think the safety net is a vicious circle...it helps, but people get accustomed to it and less inclined to plan for themselves.

It is a complex problem. We better start looking for answers though because these programs are operating on almost 50% borrowed money.

Answer by yourspecialkid at 8:05 PM on Aug. 22, 2012
Credits: 74449 Level 35 Politics & Current Events Degree

Found an answer to your question?
Like us on Facebook!