Paul Krugman: Cutting Successful SNAP Program "An Awesome Combination of Ignorance And Cruelty"

[Hissyspit]

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/09/21/more-snap-judgments/

September 21, 2013, 1:21 pm Comment

More SNAP Judgments

- snip -

Does this look like an out-of-control program to you? Spending as a percentage of GDP was no higher in 2007 than it had been in 1990. It then soared when we experienced the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression — which is exactly what should have happened. True, spending didn’t fall during the Bush-era economic expansion, but as I’ve already explained, that expansion didn’t trickle down to the people who use food stamps.

- snip -

But what about all those claims of soaring spending on means-tested programs? They’re driven to some extent by the Earned Income Tax Credit, which rewards work, but mainly by Medicaid.

The idea that food stamps represent a problem — not a small blessing that has made this ongoing economic disaster marginally less awful — represents an awesome combination of ignorance and cruelty.

MORE AT LINK

[Wounded Bear]

1. Dr Krugman nails it again...K & R..nt

[pscot]

2. Ignorance and cruelty pretty much sums up

the basis for what passes as Republican policy.

[Enthusiast]

17. Fascism cannot exist in an environment free from cruelty and intollerance.

It's like an aerobic bacteria.

Those that promote intolerance and cruelty are clearly Fascists.

Now, listen to this.

[Igel]

3. The entire debate is simplistic.

It's billed as cutting money.

As far as I can tell the monetary cuts are projections based on the ability of current (and future) recipients to meet new eligibility requirements. Many of the new ones are actually just old ones restored, with waivers by the states to expand coverage ruled out. The reason given for relaxing the requirements was the economic downturn. As unemployment falls, either that reason stops being valid or the reason given is shown to be false. Or a different reason that didn't exist and is now important has to be produced.

Now, the debate seems to be "they're cutting this much" or "they're cutting that much," as though actual dollar amounts were specified. The debate should be on the continued need for the reduced/relaxed eligibility requirements, the populations affected, and the reasonableness of the work/volunteer or training requirements.

[hobbit709]

4. More cruelty than ignorance.

[Demeter]

7. Hear, hear!

[Cryptoad]

5. Warren / Krugman 2016 !!!!! nt

[silvershadow]

6. I could do that! :) nt

[indepat]

8. Not ignorance Dr. Krugman, just inhumanely dispensing diabolical cruelty

[alfredo]

9. It is not ignorance, it is 100% cruelty.

[noiretextatique]

20. it is 100% cruelty

from people who have no shame or consciences. Some call them sociopaths.

[alfredo]

21. I call them assholes

[noiretextatique]

22. me too

[BillyRibs]

10. It's the outword show of,

Making those damned poor people who caused this economic catastrophe suffer for it. get a job you lazy bums! Leave the incomes and the small bit of money the 1% make alone.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

11. Republicans have conviced their Base that the country's finacial crisis is due to welfare spending..

So in order to fix the economy all you have to do is kick everyone off of welfare and get their lazy asses out the door to get a job so the rest of us aren't paying to support them.

Because, you know, "work" makes money out of thin air.

Which is news to a housewife doing all of the cooking and cleaning and raising kids.

Oh, wait,...that's not "real" work. That's hanging around the house all day watching TV. Right?

[drynberg]

12. Right Idea, Paul, however I see the repukes as spiteful, aware of the pain they are inflictiing

Which is even worse than you've written. Vote all these meanies out in '14!

[NutmegYankee]

13. Extreme cruelty.

I was in a big debate with a few co-workers over this. They were raising hell about fraud at first. I countered that fraud is historically no more than 5%, and that corruption losses in any system is a given. Just like no thermal system is 100% efficient, no human system is free from losses either. (we're all engineers) Then one guy moved onto how he was sick of paying for the lazy. He said they needed to get jobs and I countered with employment facts. I lashed into him pretty good. I drove him off but he highlighted the "Don't give a fuck about them" attitude of the right pretty well.

[Nika]

14. Thankyou Mr. Kugman

I've had to use the SNAP program since this back economic downturn started until finally found work again. It is a valuable resource that helps many people through a pinch. It should be left alone.

[Cha]

15. K&R for Krugman calling out the Ignorance!

[Enthusiast]

16. K&R

They're evil, Hissyspit

[muriel_volestrangler]

18. SNAP was got through Congress by George McGovern and Bob Dole

The program was revived in the early 1960's, and received national attention after CBS aired a documentary in 1968 called Hunger in America, which showed children dying of severe malnutrition many years after the Depression, and shocked the nation into expanding food stamps as part of the War on Poverty. In 1977, U.S. Senators Bob Dole and George McGovern created the program as we know it today, through landmark legislation that expanded participation and eliminated the process of purchasing food stamps.

As part of the "Farm Bill" changes made in October of 2008, the name of the program nationally was changed to Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). The new name represents the program's focus on nutrition and putting healthy food within reach for low income Oregonians.

http://oregonhunger.org/history-food-stamps-and-snap

Dole co-wrote an op-ed with Tom Daschle about this a few days ago. With the Republicans also sinking the UN Disabilities Treaty, they've well and truly thrown their 1996 presidential nominee under the bus. They can't stand any conservative who shows a bit of compassion.

The special relationship in the legislative process between agriculture and those who need assistance from the SNAP program is also built on this tradition. In the modern era, funding for this vital program has been extended as part of the farm bill with relatively little partisan bickering — until now. By stripping the nutrition title from the legislation this year, the House has severed the vital tie that helps connect our food system with those who struggle with hunger in our own backyard.

Over time, we have worked hard to improve the program’s efficiency and effectiveness. In 2011, SNAP lifted 47 million people out of poverty, and 72 percent of its participants were families with children. The error rate — the combined rate for underpayments and overpayments — has been on a steady decline since the 1990s. And a 2008 Moody’s Analytics study shows that every $1 spent to help reduce hunger has resulted in $1.70 in economic activity.

Tackling our nation’s hunger issues has always resulted in a win-win situation for farmers, low-income families and our economy. The latest proposal from the House is an about-face on our progress fighting hunger. It would eliminate food assistance for 4 million to 6 million Americans.

If Congress lets this bill fall victim to the misguided and detrimental partisan politics we face today, the results for families and children challenged with hunger will be severe. In a country struggling to emerge from the worst economic recession since the Depression, this is no time to play politics with hunger. As friends and colleagues, we hope that the House will do the right thing and follow the Senate’s lead in passing a farm bill with adequate funding for food assistance. Our nation’s future depends on it.

http://psdispatch.com/news/othercommentary/840649/

[Solly Mack]

19. K&R