Quantcast

Comments about ‘The breakdown of hunger in America’

Return to article »

Published: Friday, Nov. 15 2013 4:25 p.m. MST

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
high school fan
Huntington, UT

Is this correct in the days of anybody can receive food stamps? It seems that there must be more to the story.

lkm55
Porterviller, CA

what you fail to mention is the percentage of Americans has not changed since the war on poverty began in the 1960;2. We've spent 15 Trillion dollars over the last 50 years and not made any headway. If anything, it's gotten worse int he last 10 years. The government is not the solution, it's part of the problem.

Thinkin\' Man
Rexburg, ID

So which is it -- do we have an obesity epidemic, or are 50% of Americans hungry? IT CANNOT BE BOTH.

These hunger statistics are the most bogus I've ever seen. Look around America. Yes there are hungry people, but only a small fraction of what these "studies" claim.

atl134
Salt Lake City, UT

The amount of money cut from food stamps (5 billion a year) is equal to the entirety of all food banks in the nation. Republicans wanted to cut 40 billion a year from food stamps. It's said that a decline in welfare would be balanced out by people increasing charity. That would not happen.

viejogeezer
CARLSBAD, CA

A great man once said " If ye do it unto the least of these, my brethren, ye do it unto me" I wonder what he is thinking now.

spring street
SALT LAKE CITY, UT

@thinkin man

First of all it is 15% not 50% please at least try to get the facts straight. and the obesity rate is approximately 37% which equals a total of 52 % so please explain why "IT CANNOT BE BOTH?" Please think about what you are saying.

spring street
SALT LAKE CITY, UT

@high school fan

seem to be making to erroneous assumptions, one that anyone can get food stamps and two that the amount of food stamps actually is enough to by enough food for a month to meet basic nutritional food requirements. We still base the amount of food stamp assistance on the 1939 calculations that have been shown that even at the time were significantly under calculated,

spring street
SALT LAKE CITY, UT

as a point of clarification to my last post the calculations were of the number of calories necessary to meet the very most basic nutritional needs to sustain an individual and the amount of such calories from different food sources. This information was used to set the first calculations for the monitory amount to meet those needs and the basis for which we have accounted for inflation over the years.

intervention
slc, UT

@lkm55

actually even after a decade of economic depression according the the bureau of vital statistics the rate of poverty is currently 7.4% lower then it was in 1960.

Unreconstructed Reb
Chantilly, VA

Those questioning why we have so many obesity problems if there's a hunger problem should research the obesity-poverty paradox. The gist is that lower income families spend their money on inexpensive foods, which are largely unhealthy. The issue isn't just food poverty, but a lack of nutritious foods. The result is the seeming paradox of the obese not having enough to eat.

Truthseeker
SLO, CA

SNAP (foodstamp) benefits are one of the fastest, most effective forms of economic stimulus because they get money into the economy quickly. Moody’s Analytics estimates that in a weak economy, every $1 increase in SNAP benefits generates about $1.70 in economic activity. Similarly, the Congressional Budget Office rated an increase in SNAP benefits as one of the two most cost-effective of all spending and tax options it examined for boosting growth and jobs in a weak economy.
(Center on Budget and Policy Priorities)

Food stamp use declined in the 90's and began rising in 2001, with a sharp increase around the economic crisis.

Food stamp use tracks poverty rates.

What in Tucket?
Provo, UT

We have spent a couple trillion or more on the war on poverty LBJ instituted with no change in poverty. Maybe we ought to try something different. Seems to me helping our economy grow would put a lot of people into jobs thus reducing welfare requirements. The inexorable growth of red tape is strangling the goose that lays the golden egg. Business and industry and wicked capitalists are not the problem. Government is. The funny thing is if taxes were lowered tax revenue would surge.

Truthseeker
SLO, CA

Re:WhatinTucket?

"The funny thing is if taxes were lowered tax revenue would surge."

That is a myth which has been thoroughly debunked.

The Treasury Department simulated the economic effects of extending the Bush tax cuts, they found that, at best, the tax cuts would have modest positive effects on the economy; these economic gains would pay for at most 10 percent of the tax cuts’ total cost. Under other assumptions, Treasury found that the tax cuts could slightly decrease long-run economic growth.

Capital gains tax cuts cost money as well. After reviewing numerous studies of how investors respond to capital gains tax cuts, the CBO concluded that “the best estimates of taxpayers’ response to changes in the capital gains rate do not suggest a large revenue increase from additional realizations of capital gains — and certainly not an increase large enough to offset the losses from a lower rate.” That’s why CBO, the Joint Committee on Taxation, and the White House Office of Management and Budget all project that making the 2003 capital gains tax cut permanent would cost about $100 billion over the next ten years.
(CBPP)

Iron Rod
Salt Lake City, UT

If we have hungry people in America.

If we have children who go to bed hungry at night.

Perhaps we ought to stop the practice of borrowing money to give it away in the form of foreign aid to other countries so they can buy our military equipment.

Pagan
Salt Lake City, UT

'Perhaps we ought to stop the practice of borrowing money to give it away in the form of foreign aid to other countries so they can buy our military equipment.'

I agree.

'U.S. suspending $800 million in Pakistan aid' - By Douglas Birch - AP - Published by DSNews - 07/10/11

'WASHINGTON — The Obama administration's decision to suspend $800 million in aid to the Pakistan's military signals a tougher U.S. line with a critical but sometimes unreliable partner in the fight against terrorism.'

$4 trillion dollars spent in Iraq.

Iron Rod
Salt Lake City, UT

How about three billion plus each year to Israel in the form of military aid.

It is nothing more than corporate welfare to our defense contractors.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments