The war on poverty: 50 years old

[star seed 7]

I'm pro-farm subsidies. But then again, I'm pro-America, too.

So explain to me the difference between subsidies and food stamps?? Other than 1 helps out affluent white people and the other helps out poor people?

I'd hazard a guess that there's a lot more people who get off their ass and work among subsidy recipients than welfare recipients. So there's one difference, I guess. But again, we should scale both back. The same goes for energy subsidies and all other forms of wealth redistribution and cronyism.

Our defense spending is a bigger wealth redistribution system and cronyism than farm subs and welfare put together, but you don't care because defense kills brown people

[Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!)]

Defense spending is our most effective form of economic stimulus. I'm always stunned when keynsian leftist retards rail against it.

As for farm subsidies, we sort of need to ensure a somewhat ready and consistent food supply, so yeah, we need it.

Welfare spending funnels mass amounts of money to Walmart, dollar general, Philip Morris, Tyson and other stuff leftists hate, and that amuses me. As noted in the OP it doesn't do anything to curtail poverty, and may cause more of it.

[chuckjames]

Defense spending is our most effective form of economic stimulus. I'm always stunned when keynsian leftist retards rail against it.

As for farm subsidies, we sort of need to ensure a somewhat ready and consistent food supply, so yeah, we need it.

Welfare spending funnels mass amounts of money to Walmart, dollar general, Philip Morris, Tyson and other stuff leftists hate, and that amuses me. As noted in the OP it doesn't do anything to curtail poverty, and may cause more of it.

Kinda agree, but it's a vicious circle of poor wages by those companies causing poor people on food stamps too. I'm a big believer in a guaranteed income for everyone, but that is probably a bridge too far for most of you to consider. It would be more efficient and cheaper than welfare and food  stamps. IMO

[chuckjames]

Also I disagree domestic infrastructure spending is the most effective way to stimulate an economy. But yea military spending is second.

[Kat Kid]

Defense spending is our most effective form of economic stimulus. I'm always stunned when keynsian leftist retards rail against it.

As for farm subsidies, we sort of need to ensure a somewhat ready and consistent food supply, so yeah, we need it.

Welfare spending funnels mass amounts of money to Walmart, dollar general, Philip Morris, Tyson and other stuff leftists hate, and that amuses me. As noted in the OP it doesn't do anything to curtail poverty, and may cause more of it.

It is, but that does not make it the ideal.  But the most efficient parts of the stimulus are the employment, and benefits spending, not the R&D/defense contracts.  Those are incredibly bad deals in terms of $/job. 

[john "teach me how to" dougie]

I'm pro-farm subsidies. But then again, I'm pro-America, too.

So explain to me the difference between subsidies and food stamps?? Other than 1 helps out affluent white people and the other helps out poor people?

I'd hazard a guess that there's a lot more people who get off their ass and work among subsidy recipients than welfare recipients. So there's one difference, I guess. But again, we should scale both back. The same goes for energy subsidies and all other forms of wealth redistribution and cronyism.

Our defense spending is a bigger wealth redistribution system and cronyism than farm subs and welfare put together, but you don't care because defense kills brown people

Defense spending, while not always a great value, is the country buying a product, hiring labor, and funding research. The exact opposite of redistribution.

[star seed 7]

the terrible "value" is exactly what redistribution is.  taking money from tax payers and giving it to corporations at ludicrous conversion rates.  the fact that you neocons get your panties in a twist about minimal amounts of money being lost in welfare fraud but do not give a single eff about the huge inefficiencies of defense spending is pretty god damn mind blowing.

[Asteriskhead]

the terrible "value" is exactly what redistribution is.  taking money from tax payers and giving it to corporations at ludicrous conversion rates.  the fact that you neocons get your panties in a twist about minimal amounts of money being lost in welfare fraud but do not give a single eff about the huge inefficiencies of defense spending is pretty god damn mind blowing.

[star seed 7]

neocon platform:  it's ok to fleece the government, as long as you're not poor

[Asteriskhead]

neocon platform:  it's ok to fleece the government public, as long as you're not poor frame it correctly.

[michigancat]

Defense spending is our most effective form of economic stimulus. I'm always stunned when keynsian leftist retards rail against it.

As for farm subsidies, we sort of need to ensure a somewhat ready and consistent food supply, so yeah, we need it.

Welfare spending funnels mass amounts of money to Walmart, dollar general, Philip Morris, Tyson and other stuff leftists hate, and that amuses me. As noted in the OP it doesn't do anything to curtail poverty, and may cause more of it.

It is, but that does not make it the ideal.  But the most efficient parts of the stimulus are the employment, and benefits spending, not the R&D/defense contracts.  Those are incredibly bad deals in terms of $/job. 

Is it really more effective than giving straight cash to the public and letting them spend as they please?

[john "teach me how to" dougie]

the terrible "value" is exactly what redistribution is.  taking money from tax payers and giving it to corporations at ludicrous conversion rates.  the fact that you neocons get your panties in a twist about minimal amounts of money being lost in welfare fraud but do not give a single eff about the huge inefficiencies of defense spending is pretty god damn mind blowing.

The only thing that makes defense spending a poor value for taxpayers is the same thing that makes welfare fraud a multi billion dollar a year enterprise: poor oversight of taxpayer dollars, or "other people's money".

[Rage Against the McKee]

Defense spending is our most effective form of economic stimulus. I'm always stunned when keynsian leftist retards rail against it.

As for farm subsidies, we sort of need to ensure a somewhat ready and consistent food supply, so yeah, we need it.

Welfare spending funnels mass amounts of money to Walmart, dollar general, Philip Morris, Tyson and other stuff leftists hate, and that amuses me. As noted in the OP it doesn't do anything to curtail poverty, and may cause more of it.

It is, but that does not make it the ideal.  But the most efficient parts of the stimulus are the employment, and benefits spending, not the R&D/defense contracts.  Those are incredibly bad deals in terms of $/job. 

Is it really more effective than giving straight cash to the public and letting them spend as they please?

I think it probably is. Do you have a study to show that it isn't?

[michigancat]

Defense spending is our most effective form of economic stimulus. I'm always stunned when keynsian leftist retards rail against it.

As for farm subsidies, we sort of need to ensure a somewhat ready and consistent food supply, so yeah, we need it.

Welfare spending funnels mass amounts of money to Walmart, dollar general, Philip Morris, Tyson and other stuff leftists hate, and that amuses me. As noted in the OP it doesn't do anything to curtail poverty, and may cause more of it.

It is, but that does not make it the ideal.  But the most efficient parts of the stimulus are the employment, and benefits spending, not the R&D/defense contracts.  Those are incredibly bad deals in terms of $/job. 

Is it really more effective than giving straight cash to the public and letting them spend as they please?

I think it probably is. Do you have a study to show that it isn't?

No, I searched. I figured something so obvious and widely agreed upon would have studies supporting it.

[michigancat]

I saw this, but defense spending wasn't included and it's more of a discussion of temporary measures.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2010/06/research_desk_whats_a_dollar_o.html

http://www.economy.com/mark-zandi/documents/Senate-Finance-Committee-Unemployment%20Insurance-041410.pdf

[michigancat]

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RL31176.pdf

[Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!)]

Defense spending is our most effective form of economic stimulus. I'm always stunned when keynsian leftist retards rail against it.

As for farm subsidies, we sort of need to ensure a somewhat ready and consistent food supply, so yeah, we need it.

Welfare spending funnels mass amounts of money to Walmart, dollar general, Philip Morris, Tyson and other stuff leftists hate, and that amuses me. As noted in the OP it doesn't do anything to curtail poverty, and may cause more of it.

It is, but that does not make it the ideal.  But the most efficient parts of the stimulus are the employment, and benefits spending, not the R&D/defense contracts.  Those are incredibly bad deals in terms of $/job. 

Is it really more effective than giving straight cash to the public and letting them spend as they please?

Yes, because econ 101

[Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!)]

the terrible "value" is exactly what redistribution is.  taking money from tax payers and giving it to corporations at ludicrous conversion rates.  the fact that you neocons get your panties in a twist about minimal amounts of money being lost in welfare fraud but do not give a single eff about the huge inefficiencies of defense spending is pretty god damn mind blowing.

This is complete fantasy.

[Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!)]

Someone should tell Washington,  South Carolina and Missouri to stop fighting so hard to get Boeing defense work in their state. Michigancat thinks welfare is more efficient government stimulus.