Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

Current Events & Hot Topics Current Events & Hot Topics

Food Stamp Rolls in America Now Surpass the Population of Spain

Posted by   + Show Post

Food Stamp Rolls in America Now Surpass the Population of Spain

February 11, 2013

food stamps

(AP Image)

(CNSNews.com) – Since taking office in 2009, food stamp rolls under President Barack Obama have risen to more than 47 million people in America, exceeding the population of Spain.

“Now is the time to act boldly and wisely – to not only revive this economy, but to build a new foundation for lasting prosperity,” said Obama during his first joint session address to Congress on Feb. 24, 2009.

Since then, the number of participants enrolled in food stamps, known as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), has risen substantially.

When Obama entered office in January 2009 there were 31,939,110 Americans receiving food stamps. As of November 2012—the most recent data available—there were 47,692,896 Americans enrolled, an increase of 49.3 percent.

According to the 2011 census, Spain had a population of 46,815,916.

Furthermore, between January 2009 and November 2012 the food stamp program added approximately an average 11,269 recipients per day.

President Obama will deliver his fourth State of the Union address Tuesday evening. Obama is expected to focus on jobs and the economy.

by on Feb. 17, 2013 at 5:30 PM
Replies (21-30):
lizzielouaf
by Gold Member on Feb. 18, 2013 at 9:47 AM
Have you reported these people you know who are abusing the system?


Quoting pvtjokerus:

 Do you take into account that there are many that are on the welfare gravy train that does not belong there? Heck, I know several myself that shouldn't be on food stamps that are enjoying steaks off the ole' government.  There needs to be more oversight and there needs to be an investigation on who is getting what.  This has nothing to do with taking kids of welfare.  This is about making the government accountable and making sure that they are doing their job completely.  For as some of us know, the government is a slow moving, lazy machine that does not do it due diligence when it comes to handing out money.....




Quoting Luv.My.Kidz:


Okay so what people are saying "Let's take away this program that feeds kids and families who don't normally have the means to feed their family?" 


I swear some of you ladies never cease to amaze me with your "Take from the poor and give to the rich" mentalities. 


47million plus people are on the program.... oh well... and just as quick as people are getting on it... there are people getting off of it who don't need it anymore.


There are also a lot more eldery today than there were in 2009, more babies, and companies are folding, closing, cutting positions, etc. Really? Do you people not take that into account?




 


Posted on the NEW CafeMom Mobile
candlegal
by Judy on Feb. 18, 2013 at 9:51 AM
1 mom liked this

Of course there were less babies during the depression.  People were responsible for their own.   Now the more they have the more the government pays them, why would they care?

Quoting futureshock:


Quoting Luv.My.Kidz:

Okay so what people are saying "Let's take away this program that feeds kids and families who don't normally have the means to feed their family?" 

I swear some of you ladies never cease to amaze me with your "Take from the poor and give to the rich" mentalities. 

47million plus people are on the program.... oh well... and just as quick as people are getting on it... there are people getting off of it who don't need it anymore.

There are also a lot more eldery today than there were in 2009, more babies, and companies are folding, closing, cutting positions, etc. Really? Do you people not take that into account?

More babies?  There should not be more babies during an economic crisis.  During the Depression people had fewer children.  That is how we should be responding also.

more babies


Momniscient
by Ruby Member on Feb. 18, 2013 at 11:37 AM

lol

It must suck being so miserable.

Momniscient
by Ruby Member on Feb. 18, 2013 at 11:38 AM
1 mom liked this

Oh dear god.

You really like to open your mouth and prove it don't you.

Quoting candlegal:

Of course there were less babies during the depression.  People were responsible for their own.   Now the more they have the more the government pays them, why would they care?

Quoting futureshock:


Quoting Luv.My.Kidz:

Okay so what people are saying "Let's take away this program that feeds kids and families who don't normally have the means to feed their family?" 

I swear some of you ladies never cease to amaze me with your "Take from the poor and give to the rich" mentalities. 

47million plus people are on the program.... oh well... and just as quick as people are getting on it... there are people getting off of it who don't need it anymore.

There are also a lot more eldery today than there were in 2009, more babies, and companies are folding, closing, cutting positions, etc. Really? Do you people not take that into account?

More babies?  There should not be more babies during an economic crisis.  During the Depression people had fewer children.  That is how we should be responding also.

more babies




Naturewoman4
by Platinum Member on Feb. 18, 2013 at 12:28 PM

Yes & so does millions of adults/parents as well.  I think it's quite shocking actually.  Even though all this money is being spend on feeding children, we still hear about children starving?  I wonder why.  Perhaps, because there's a lot of parents that is abusing the system & selling their food stamps for other things.   


Quoting LauraKW:

As I replied the first time this story was posted: Good, that means a lot of children had food today.


 

Naturewoman4
by Platinum Member on Feb. 18, 2013 at 12:31 PM

Yeah & that's how Obama got re-elected. 


Quoting candlegal:

Of course there were less babies during the depression.  People were responsible for their own.   Now the more they have the more the government pays them, why would they care?

Quoting futureshock:


Quoting Luv.My.Kidz:

Okay so what people are saying "Let's take away this program that feeds kids and families who don't normally have the means to feed their family?" 

I swear some of you ladies never cease to amaze me with your "Take from the poor and give to the rich" mentalities. 

47million plus people are on the program.... oh well... and just as quick as people are getting on it... there are people getting off of it who don't need it anymore.

There are also a lot more eldery today than there were in 2009, more babies, and companies are folding, closing, cutting positions, etc. Really? Do you people not take that into account?

More babies?  There should not be more babies during an economic crisis.  During the Depression people had fewer children.  That is how we should be responding also.

more babies



 

LucyMom08
by Gold Member on Feb. 18, 2013 at 12:31 PM
So starving children is a preferable alternative to you?
Posted on CafeMom Mobile
talia-mom
by Gold Member on Feb. 18, 2013 at 12:33 PM

Why is that always the question instead of asking what they think needs to happen?


Is the emotional hyperbole really necessary for a legitimate discussion?


Quoting LucyMom08:

So starving children is a preferable alternative to you?



Naturewoman4
by Platinum Member on Feb. 18, 2013 at 12:40 PM

Do you have facts on where you got those figures?  Because, I don't believe that 47% of Americans live at poverty level.  Also, I don't believe that 98% of Americans received some sort of Gov. support.  I also don't feel how they determine who is living at 'poverty level' is TRUE poverty level.  I mean a lot of these families have cells, internet, cable, more kids then they can afford so that's their fault.  My niece has 6 kids, never worked a paying job a day in her life.  She just kept on having them.  (which I never understood her mindset). 

 Yet, she has always had expensive cell phones (which broke & she bought another), fast internet that cost her $50/mo., cable, 3 pedigree dogs, she smokes/drinks & she also would NEVER buy things from a thrift store.  I believe here in America, there ARE A LOT of people that think this way.  It's sad. 


Quoting stormcris:

Could it be because 47% of America is poverty level?

However 96% of Americans have received some sort of government support. 

And I really do not think the 4% are represented on Cafemom.


 

LucyMom08
by Gold Member on Feb. 18, 2013 at 12:40 PM
Nearly 70% of food stamp recipients are children, elderly or disabled. What am I exaggerating about when I say without food stamps, children will be starving?

Quoting talia-mom:

Why is that always the question instead of asking what they think needs to happen?


Is the emotional hyperbole really necessary for a legitimate discussion?



Quoting LucyMom08:

So starving children is a preferable alternative to you?




Posted on CafeMom Mobile
Add your quick reply below:
You must be a member to reply to this post.
Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

close Join now to connect to
other members!
Connect with Facebook or Sign Up Using Email

Already Joined? LOG IN