Obamanomics--Food Stamps

Work-related entitlements aren't the only welfare programs to proliferate because of the down economy and Obamanomics.  Under Obama, food stamp enrollment--or Supplimental Nutrition Assistance Progream (SNAP)--jumped 70 percent (see HERE ), adding 11.133 recipients a day (see HERE), going from 26.3 million in 2007 to around 45 million in 2011. (See HERE and HERE)  The increase during Obama's four years in office was greater than during the eight years of the Bush presidency. (See HERE)

Coincidence?

It is expected that the rate of food stamp usage would increase during hard economic times like what the U.S. has experienced over the last four years. However, the rate of increase seems disproportional to other economic factors. According the the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the unemployment rate has been dropping since the middle of 2009 (see HERE and HERE), while the number of food stamp recipients and average benefits per person has gone up. How can that be?

Apart from what I explained HERE about how unemployment figures can hide negative economic factors, there may be other things contributing to the alarming rise in food stamps.

It is one thing to feed the hungry when they are really in need. This is commendable.

However, it is a whole other thing to actively encourage people, including illegal aliens, to take advantage of the food stamp program, making it all the more vulnerable to abuse (see HERE and HERE and HERE and HERE and HERE), and this when the nation has high unemployment, declining workforce, and is struggling and can't afford to pay for but two-thirds of what it has already committed to, not to mention that the SNAP program doesn't work to curb hunger (see HERE) and is wrought with problems (see HERE).

Yet, such is the Leftist LUNCs of Obamanomics. (see HERE and HERE and HERE and HERE and HERE) The alarming rise in food stamps is, in part, due to the Obama administration fomenting government dependency rather than self reliance, and using food stamps as a handout to get elected.

Were that not inane enough, according to former Speaker, Nancy Pelosi, "the program’s multiplier effect –the amount of money generated in the local economy as the result of the subsidy– far exceeds the nearly $60 billion spent this year by the federal government and is a sure-fire way to stimulate the economy. For every dollar a person receives in food stamps, Pelosi said that $1.79 is put back into the economy. The U.S. Department of Agriculture cites an even higher figure of $1.84...It is the biggest bang for the buck when you do food stamps and unemployment insurance. The biggest bang for the buck." (See HERE and HERE) The Obama white house concurs. (See HERE)

If the gentle reader is a perplexed as I am by the pretzel or inverted logic, you are not alone. If common sense doesn't immediately reject the notion that increased unemployment and entitlements is good for the economy and jobs (were that the case, we should all quite work and go on food stamps and really turn the economy around), then the following statistic should settle the issue: during Obama's first term as president, the explosion of food stamps was 10 to 75 time the rate of job creation (see HERE and HERE),  Also, consider the following (via Zero Hedge): "Since [President Obama’s] inauguration, the US has generated just 841,000 jobs through November 2012, a number [that] is more than dwarfed by the 17.3 million new [food stamps] and disability recipients added to the rolls in the past 4 years." (reported HERE)

Surprised?

Here is a Fox News video on the subject: Food Stamp Outrage

NEXT in SERIES    START SERIES    SUBJECT INDEX

For an explanation as to why this Leftist LUNC has occurred, please see: Gov: Wrong Tool for the Right Job - Strength in Numbers and Cold Nanny,, and  The Politics of Compassion, Emotions, Ignorance, Denial, Blame-Shifting, The Politics of Spending--Intro, The Politics of Spending--Debt, The Politics of Spending--Public vs. Private, The Politics of Spending--Crony-ism, The Politics of Spending--Education, and The Politics of Taxing the Rich. [the unlinked topics will be posted later as they are completed]