WaterMan Posted December 13, 2009 Share Posted December 13, 2009 (edited) http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?.../f130016S00.DTL Half of US kids will get food stamps, study says By LINDSEY TANNER, AP Medical Writer Monday, November 2, 2009 Nearly half of all U.S. children and 90 percent of black youngsters will be on food stamps at some point during childhood, and fallout from the current recession could push those numbers even higher, researchers say. The estimate comes from an analysis of 30 years of national data, and it bolsters other recent evidence on the pervasiveness of youngsters at economic risk. It suggests that almost everyone knows a family who has received food stamps, or will in the future, said lead author Mark Rank, a sociologist at Washington University in St. Louis. "Your neighbor may be using some of these programs but it's not the kind of thing people want to talk about," Rank said. The analysis was released Monday in the November issue of Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine. The authors say it's a medical issue pediatricians need to be aware of because children on food stamps are at risk for malnutrition and other ills linked with poverty. "This is a real danger sign that we as a society need to do a lot more to protect children," Rank said. Food stamps are a Department of Agriculture program for low-income individuals and families, covering most foods although not prepared hot foods or alcohol. For a family of four to be eligible, their annual take-home pay can't exceed about $22,000. According to a USDA report released last month, 28.4 million Americans received food stamps in an average month in 2008, and about half were younger than age 18. The average monthly benefit per household totaled $222. Rank and Cornell University sociologist Thomas Hirschl studied data from a nationally representative survey of 4,800 American households interviewed annually from 1968 through 1997 by the University of Michigan. About 18,000 adults and children were involved. Overall, about 49 percent of all children were on food stamps at some point by the age of 20, the analysis found. That includes 90 percent of black children and 37 percent of whites. The analysis didn't include other ethnic groups. The time span included typical economic ups and downs, including the early 1980s recession. That means similar portions of children now and in the future will live in families receiving food stamps, although ongoing economic turmoil may increase the numbers, Rank said. An editorial in the medical journal agreed. "The current recession is likely to generate for children in the United States the greatest level of material deprivation that we will see in our professional lifetimes," Stanford pediatrician Dr. Paul Wise wrote. Wise said the Archives study estimate is believable. "I find it terribly sad, but not surprising," Wise said. James Weill, president of Food Research and Action Center, a Washington-based advocacy group, said the analysis underscores that "there are just very large numbers of people who rely on this program for a month, six months, a year." "What I hope comes out of this study is an understanding that food stamp beneficiaries aren't them — they're us," Weill said. The analysis is in line with other recent research suggesting that more than 40 percent of U.S. children will live in poverty or near-poverty by age 17; and that half will live at some point in a single-parent family. Also, other researchers have estimated that slightly more than half of adults will use food stamps at some point by age 65. Edited December 13, 2009 by WaterMan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bpwallace49 Posted December 13, 2009 Share Posted December 13, 2009 How can I tie this in with a pity party for executives that have gotten their stock options cut? Cause the Foxulists wont attend otherwise . . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perchoutofwater Posted December 13, 2009 Share Posted December 13, 2009 There was a time that people tried like hell to not accept public assistance. Not so much anymore. It isn't necessarily that there are more "poor" people as there are more people looking to get all they can from the government. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bpwallace49 Posted December 13, 2009 Share Posted December 13, 2009 There was a time that people tried like hell to not accept public assistance. Not so much anymore. It isn't necessarily that there are more "poor" people as there are more people looking to get all they can from the government. That must be the case . . they clearly choose to be poor because of the lavish lifestyle Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gbpfan1231 Posted December 13, 2009 Share Posted December 13, 2009 That must be the case . . they clearly choose to be poor because of the lavish lifestyle I agree with Perch and it also seems as the needy find the need to pop out more kids than they can afford. If you just pay attention and take note of the people that tend to have 4 or more kids they are the people that probably can't afford one. Those four kids come from a crap family and have four kids each - now you have 20. That has to be part of the reason so many need assistance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Delicious_bass Posted December 13, 2009 Share Posted December 13, 2009 (edited) http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?.../f130016S00.DTL Half of US kids will get food stamps, study says By LINDSEY TANNER, AP Medical Writer Monday, November 2, 2009 Nearly half of all U.S. children and 90 percent of black youngsters will be on food stamps at some point during childhood, and fallout from the current recession could push those numbers even higher, researchers say. The estimate comes from an analysis of 30 years of national data, and it bolsters other recent evidence on the pervasiveness of youngsters at economic risk. It suggests that almost everyone knows a family who has received food stamps, or will in the future, said lead author Mark Rank, a sociologist at Washington University in St. Louis. "Your neighbor may be using some of these programs but it's not the kind of thing people want to talk about," Rank said. The analysis was released Monday in the November issue of Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine. The authors say it's a medical issue pediatricians need to be aware of because children on food stamps are at risk for malnutrition and other ills linked with poverty. "This is a real danger sign that we as a society need to do a lot more to protect children," Rank said. Food stamps are a Department of Agriculture program for low-income individuals and families, covering most foods although not prepared hot foods or alcohol. For a family of four to be eligible, their annual take-home pay can't exceed about $22,000. According to a USDA report released last month, 28.4 million Americans received food stamps in an average month in 2008, and about half were younger than age 18. The average monthly benefit per household totaled $222. Rank and Cornell University sociologist Thomas Hirschl studied data from a nationally representative survey of 4,800 American households interviewed annually from 1968 through 1997 by the University of Michigan. About 18,000 adults and children were involved. Overall, about 49 percent of all children were on food stamps at some point by the age of 20, the analysis found. That includes 90 percent of black children and 37 percent of whites. The analysis didn't include other ethnic groups. The time span included typical economic ups and downs, including the early 1980s recession. That means similar portions of children now and in the future will live in families receiving food stamps, although ongoing economic turmoil may increase the numbers, Rank said. An editorial in the medical journal agreed. "The current recession is likely to generate for children in the United States the greatest level of material deprivation that we will see in our professional lifetimes," Stanford pediatrician Dr. Paul Wise wrote. Wise said the Archives study estimate is believable. "I find it terribly sad, but not surprising," Wise said. James Weill, president of Food Research and Action Center, a Washington-based advocacy group, said the analysis underscores that "there are just very large numbers of people who rely on this program for a month, six months, a year." "What I hope comes out of this study is an understanding that food stamp beneficiaries aren't them — they're us," Weill said. The analysis is in line with other recent research suggesting that more than 40 percent of U.S. children will live in poverty or near-poverty by age 17; and that half will live at some point in a single-parent family. Also, other researchers have estimated that slightly more than half of adults will use food stamps at some point by age 65. Yet, childhood obesity has become an epidemic especially amongst minorities? I agree with Perch and it also seems as the needy find the need to pop out more kids than they can afford. If you just pay attention and take note of the people that tend to have 4 or more kids they are the people that probably can't afford one. Those four kids come from a crap family and have four kids each - now you have 20. That has to be part of the reason so many need assistance. Agreed. I dont buy the whole "poor people need to be educated about birth control blah blah blah." No matter how uneducated a person is, they know how kids are made and to keep cranking them out when a person cant feed themselves and/or the kids they already have is a disgrace. People who have kids while on govt assistance should be penalized by having those kids taken away not rewarded by getting increased assistance Edited December 13, 2009 by Delicious_bass Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WaterMan Posted December 13, 2009 Author Share Posted December 13, 2009 I agree with Perch and it also seems as the needy find the need to pop out more kids than they can afford. If you just pay attention and take note of the people that tend to have 4 or more kids they are the people that probably can't afford one. Those four kids come from a crap family and have four kids each - now you have 20. That has to be part of the reason so many need assistance. It's because they can't blow money on strippers/hookers and coke like the rich can, so the poor constantly bang their one lady. And since they can't buy condoms with food stamps, babies happen. Is it really that hard to see? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WaterMan Posted December 13, 2009 Author Share Posted December 13, 2009 People who have kids while on govt assistance should be penalized by having those kids taken away not rewarded by getting increased assistance I agree. We should follow China's example and limit how many kids we can have, like a true free country. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted December 13, 2009 Share Posted December 13, 2009 There was a time that people tried like hell to not accept public assistance. Not so much anymore. It isn't necessarily that there are more "poor" people as there are more people looking to get all they can from the government. I agree with Perch and it also seems as the needy find the need to pop out more kids than they can afford. If you just pay attention and take note of the people that tend to have 4 or more kids they are the people that probably can't afford one. Those four kids come from a crap family and have four kids each - now you have 20. That has to be part of the reason so many need assistance. I love the way you guys tar everyone with the same brush. Middle class to safety net: Recession swells the number of Minnesota food stamp recipients. In three years, the economic meltdown sent Ini Augustine from a congressional honor for running a $400,000-a-year business to food stamps. Three years ago, the National Republican Congressional Committee gave Ini Augustine a Congressional Medal of Distinction, recognizing her prospering temporary-employment business. Today, Augustine is among tens of thousands of Minnesotans forced on to food stamps for the first time by a recession that first imploded the stock market and now has exploded stereotypes of welfare recipients. "I've been working since I was 13," Augustine, 28, said. "I never had trouble finding a job." Until now. As full-time jobs disappeared in a faltering economy, so did the demand for temporary staff. By December 2007, Augustine realized she could not sustain her ProVision Staffing Group that once grossed nearly $400,000 a year. These days, she works 70 hours a week trying to sell insurance and do various human-resource chores on commission. She can't find a salaried job that makes ends meet. She's trying to modify her mortgage to save her four-bedroom home in Lino Lakes from foreclosure. She battles to keep the heat on and the lights burning. In October, the divorced mom finally broke down and applied for food stamps for herself and her young daughter. "Before, I thought people on food stamps just didn't feel like working," said Augustine."Now, it's exactly the opposite. There are people who want to work. But there are no jobs." The Minnesota Department of Human Services paints the changing landscape with numbers: • The state added 89,930 food stamp recipients between June 2007 and June 2009, and the numbers have continued to rise sharply, officials said. • Hennepin and Ramsey counties saw their food stamp rolls grow by nearly 30,000 participants from June 2007 to June 2009. • Carver County's food stamp participation increased by 85 percent in the same two-year span, while Scott County saw a 70 percent rise, and numbers were up 49 percent in Dakota County and 40 percent in Washington County. "The recession is hitting families not used to using government programs," said Chuck Johnson, the state's assistant human services commissioner for children and family services. What's happened, Hennepin County spokeswoman LuAnn Schmaus explained, is that the "solidly middle class have fallen into the safety net." Darlene Maroney, 59, went on food stamps -- technically called "food support" -- to ease the load on her sister, who opened her Minneapolis home when Maroney lost her job. "I had to help my sister out some way," she said. "I certainly hope to get off food stamps. I keep looking for jobs. I keep applying, but I don't hear back." Like so many of those now seeking government aid, Maroney worked for decades and never expected to need any form of welfare. In May 2008, she lost her job scheduling repair orders. Since then, she has applied for hundreds of jobs. A few weeks ago she got an all-too-rare callback. She went through eight interviews in an attempt to get a production job. She made it to the final five but lost out. Coming close doesn't count when you have a family. After putting it off for three months, Denise Jourdain, 45, came to a Catholic Charities food shelf in Minneapolis on Friday morning to apply for food stamps. "The fear of not having enough food" drove her there, she explained. "What if I don't have a job at the end of the month? I have to do this." Jourdain and her husband, who works part time and goes to school, are responsible for seven children, grandchildren and adoptees. Jourdain spent the past 14 years working for a private nonprofit agency helping people sign up for the very services she now requires because the agency laid her off. "I know what they put you through," she said. Roughly half the people trying to get food support in the current push are not eligible because they have too many assets, according to Johnson of the state's human services department. "A lot of people, when they break down and come in, are frustrated when they can't get [food support]," he said. Everyone on food stamps is a feckless wastrel. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gbpfan1231 Posted December 13, 2009 Share Posted December 13, 2009 It's because they can't blow money on strippers/hookers and coke like the rich can, so the poor constantly bang their one lady. And since they can't buy condoms with food stamps, babies happen. Is it really that hard to see? Yep blame the rich. You seem like one of the people that loves to blame other people. Cry me a river. The poor people I see don't really seem to be putting in the effort to get out of poverty. Instead they smoke, text with cell phones, drink Red Bull, get tattoos, play Xbox. Why have kids when already on assistance? I am sick of paying for other people's bad decisions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted December 13, 2009 Share Posted December 13, 2009 Yep blame the rich. You seem like one of the people that loves to blame other people. Cry me a river. The poor people I see don't really seem to be putting in the effort to get out of poverty. Instead they smoke, text with cell phones, drink Red Bull, get tattoos, play Xbox. Why have kids when already on assistance? I am sick of paying for other people's bad decisions. See post #9 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Mucca Posted December 13, 2009 Share Posted December 13, 2009 There was a time that people tried like hell to not accept public assistance. Not so much anymore. It isn't necessarily that there are more "poor" people as there are more people looking to get all they can from the government. Agree, and I have a strange feeling, that's the way Obama wants it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bpwallace49 Posted December 13, 2009 Share Posted December 13, 2009 Yep blame the rich. You seem like one of the people that loves to blame other people. Cry me a river. The poor people I see don't really seem to be putting in the effort to get out of poverty. Instead they smoke, text with cell phones, drink Red Bull, get tattoos, play Xbox. Why have kids when already on assistance? I am sick of paying for other people's bad decisions. Why do you guys use exceptions in a poor way to disprove the rule? You see poor people blowing money on Red Bull. I am sure your extremely tiny representation is clearly indicative of the entire country. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gbpfan1231 Posted December 13, 2009 Share Posted December 13, 2009 See post #9 I read it but I think there are a lot more people that fit the trash side of assistance versus someone who used to be a hard working 70 hour a week worker who now needs assistance. I believe that that woman is smart enough to not start making babies when she can't afford it. Again I a thinking she is in the minority. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bpwallace49 Posted December 13, 2009 Share Posted December 13, 2009 I read it but I think there are a lot more people that fit the trash side of assistance versus someone who used to be a hard working 70 hour a week worker who now needs assistance. If only you ran for office! What good we could all accomplish! mandatory sterilization for poor people! Hurrah! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Delicious_bass Posted December 13, 2009 Share Posted December 13, 2009 I love the way you guys tar everyone with the same brush. Everyone on food stamps is a feckless wastrel. I dont begrudge those who have been forced into dire straits by the current economic challenges. On the contrary, my heart goes out to those folks and I wish them the best that they get back on their feet soon. My commentary was more directed to those people who have been on assistance for lengthy periods(if not all) of their lives who continue to crank out offspring like rabits. I dont have anything against poor people. I do have something against poor people who bring children into a life of poverty and look to someone else to help pick up the tab. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gbpfan1231 Posted December 13, 2009 Share Posted December 13, 2009 Why do you guys use exceptions in a poor way to disprove the rule? You see poor people blowing money on Red Bull. I am sure your extremely tiny representation is clearly indicative of the entire country. It is just an example of the way people spend money when they don't have it. Just open your eyes - you see it all the time. How many poor people have cell phones and not just cheap cell phones - Iphones and Blackberry's. Come to Wisconsin and take a walk through a casino here. It is a bunch of trash people gambling there money away and most are smoking texting instead of maybe saving money and trying to get out of the poor situation they are in. It is easier to just stay poor and get handouts. I have worked my butt off and knowing that a chunk of my money goes to these people pisses me off. We are not all equal and if I have worked hard to get where I am I want to be the one who decides where my money goes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bpwallace49 Posted December 13, 2009 Share Posted December 13, 2009 My commentary was more directed to those people who have been on assistance for lengthy periods(if not all) of their lives who continue to crank out offspring like rabits. I dont have anything against poor people. I do have something against poor people who bring children into a life of poverty and look to someone else to help pick up the tab. `That is like saying "I dont support people that beat puppies." Do you know of ANYONE that does NOT support your statement?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gbpfan1231 Posted December 13, 2009 Share Posted December 13, 2009 If only you ran for office! What good we could all accomplish! mandatory sterilization for poor people! Hurrah! I am way too honest and opinionated to run for office so you can breath a sigh of relief. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gbpfan1231 Posted December 13, 2009 Share Posted December 13, 2009 I dont begrudge those who have been forced into dire straits by the current economic challenges. On the contrary, my heart goes out to those folks and I wish them the best that they get back on their feet soon. My commentary was more directed to those people who have been on assistance for lengthy periods(if not all) of their lives who continue to crank out offspring like rabits. I dont have anything against poor people. I do have something against poor people who bring children into a life of poverty and look to someone else to help pick up the tab. Very well said Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bpwallace49 Posted December 13, 2009 Share Posted December 13, 2009 I hate other people and am too opinionated to run for office so you can breath a sigh of relief. Fixed for accuracy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted December 13, 2009 Share Posted December 13, 2009 I dont begrudge those who have been forced into dire straits by the current economic challenges. On the contrary, my heart goes out to those folks and I wish them the best that they get back on their feet soon. My commentary was more directed to those people who have been on assistance for lengthy periods(if not all) of their lives who continue to crank out offspring like rabits. I dont have anything against poor people. I do have something against poor people who bring children into a life of poverty and look to someone else to help pick up the tab. We all agree with that but the original article was about the increase in people on food stamps. Immediately the right wing parrots started droning on about how everyone on food stamps is a waster. I posted my article to show that is a total crock of $hit. Furthermore, there was another article in the Trib today on people who are working more hours for less pay and how $70k jobs have been replaced by $20k jobs. The Ford plant in St Paul has people doing the same job as before they were laid off but at half the wage. Continental Airlines used the simple tactic of demoting 150 airline captains to First Officer and halving their pay. See a pattern here? I can pull out hundreds of examples of this and the received wisdom about the feckless poor is just outdated. The simple fact is that parroting the same tired old crap just doesn't fit any more. Food stamps - the new normal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bpwallace49 Posted December 13, 2009 Share Posted December 13, 2009 I know! Lets start a thread that states obvious things we are opposed to! I'll start! I am against killing cute fluffy bunnies with machetes in front of young children. Who else wants to contribute? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Delicious_bass Posted December 13, 2009 Share Posted December 13, 2009 I agree. We should follow China's example and limit how many kids we can have, like a true free country. Whoops! I forgot this is a free country. We should encourage everyone to do whatever they please no matter the consequences. While we're at it, we should invite all the poor people from all over the world to our country and have a big ol "Do What You Want and Dont Worry About It" festival Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gbpfan1231 Posted December 13, 2009 Share Posted December 13, 2009 Fixed for accuracy I hate people that abuse the system. There are so many people that cheat the assistance programs. There are a lot of people who need and deserve assistance - I have nothing against that. A week ago I saw a lady use food stamps to buy a bunch of milk at a gas station here and she then goes and sells that same milk at her little convenience store a few miles away. The people at the counter have said they reported her many times but nothing happens. These are the people I am talking about. Forgive me for not shedding a tear for every unfortunate person in this country. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.