Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Record 31.8 million on food stamps

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-06-09 03:52 PM
Original message
Record 31.8 million on food stamps
Record 31.8 million on food stamps
Government shows increase of 700,000 food stamp recipients in a single month.

March 5, 2009: 4:00 PM ET


WASHINGTON (Reuters) -- A record 31.8 million Americans received food stamps at the latest count, an increase of 700,000 people in one month with the United States in recession, government figures showed Thursday.

Food stamps, which help poor people buy groceries, are the major U.S. anti-hunger program, forecast to cost at least $51 billion in this fiscal year ending Sept. 30, up $10 billion from fiscal 2008.

"A weakened economy means that many more individuals are turning to SNAP/food stamps," said the Food Research and Action Center. Last summer food stamps were renamed the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP.

The average food stamp benefit is $115 a month for individuals and $255 a month per household.

more...

http://money.cnn.com/2009/03/05/news/economy/foodstamps.reut/index.htm?section=money_latest
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Captain Hilts Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-06-09 04:09 PM
Response to Original message
1. That people who work full-time are on foodstamps is a huge subsidy to business.
Especially retail.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kestrel91316 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-06-09 04:10 PM
Response to Original message
2. Question: What happens when people run out of their alloted time on
food stamps? Do we just let them starve? This is an awful lot of people who whon't necessarily be in an improved financial condition in a year.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OhioChick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-06-09 04:11 PM
Response to Reply #2
4. That was my first thought, as well. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mabus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-07-09 01:42 PM
Response to Reply #2
10. What about the people who have already run out of time?
They aren't included in this total but they should have a pretty good idea how many of them there are. Neither their numbers nor the fact that there is a time limit to the program is are mentioned in this article. This recession was, especially in some areas of the country, was already happening last year and starting to hit those most in need. A lot of people and families will be running of help before long. As the article notes the previous record for food stamp enrollment was 31.6 million in September of 2008, and "included "disaster" stamps for states hit by hurricanes and floods."

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madrchsod Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-06-09 04:10 PM
Response to Original message
3. this does`t factor in the WIC program
this does`t include the people who make just a dollar to much to qualify.

it`s not pretty out there
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-07-09 01:20 AM
Response to Original message
5. .
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gabi Hayes Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-07-09 01:21 AM
Response to Original message
6. this record will last about as long as Ben Johnson's 100m record
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Toucano Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-07-09 01:28 AM
Response to Original message
7. 10 percent of the population, more or less.
But 31.8 million probably represents recipients, or households, not individuals.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tangent90 Donating Member (787 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-07-09 01:31 PM
Response to Reply #7
9. If that's the case the number of individuals is much higher, yes?
:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mabus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-07-09 01:28 PM
Response to Original message
8. Wow.
Incredible. Just incredible.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sun Nov 03rd 2024, 06:59 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC