Officials say food insecurity is a major problem in northeast iowa articles wcfcourier.com static electricity zapper

####

I have a lot of concerns about why people are hungry. Are food cards that inadequate??? Do people truly not get enough $$$ on the food cards or are they making poor choices?? We already provide breakfast before school and school lunches. Do you really not have enough to feed your kids at night?? I hope the Courier prints a chart of how much people get. Maybe DHS or the Food Bank need to offer classes on ways to stretch your food dollars. When I saw the number people the food bank employs, it seems that a large amount of money is being spent on staff. I do think it is really crazy that people cannot use the cards to buy laundry soap, bath soap and toilet paper. Do poor people not need those items??? I’d rather see the cards used for that than all the frozen pizzas and soda that is being purchased. I suspect the reason people can’t make the EBT cards last is they don’t want to cook. All of us who live on a food budget know you can really cut your costs if you do that good, old-fashioned thing called COOKING.

FIRST ‘SOURCE’: This link states (with NO EVIDENCE – JUST RHETORIC WITHOUT FACT), that in "46 of the 50 states… if one of the members is illegally present in a household of four, for instance, then the gross income of the household is reduced by a fourth for Food Stamp eligibility purposes" and that thus "Four legals, with income of $36,000 a year – NOT eligible for Food Stamps" but "Three legals + one illegal with household "income" calculated at $27,000 a year – BINGO – eligible for Food Stamps." This is false. Actual EVIDENCE go to http://www.snap-step1.usda.gov/fns/ and enter in stats for a household of 4 (two adults) with an income of EACH at $18000 per year (total of $36000) and no matter if the household is all U.S. citizens or one of them is not — they DO NOT qualify for food stamps. Thus WHTnationalist your ‘source’ of information is feeding you a bunch of food you (all too eagerly it seems) swallow… the rest of us try to stamp out this rotten food stamp garbage (if you have an actual SOURCE that states the ‘reduced by 1/4’ with actual EVIDENCE. Feel free to post it. As to your other sources: they do NOT support your assertion that the U.S. and USDA work to "make certain illegal immigrants get food stamps". In fact they REFUTE your assertion. So if you think they actually support your assertion that Obama admin is seeking to "make certain illegal immigrants get food stamps" please supply you analysis, but I’m thinking your reading/comprehension skills are clouded by ‘something’.

Who is arguing ‘simple economics’? I’m all for not spending money for needless and unpaid wars and tax breaks for the very wealthy or corporations… that is why I vote democrat for president since the vast amount of federal debt prior to the economic meltdown was accrued under republican executive ‘management’ and the current federal debt was accrued in an effort to get us out of the hole created by said ‘management’. On a personal note, I know lots of farmers and the work HARD and the ‘joke’ is not funny. What ‘highlights’ the ‘problem’ is seeking to give tax cuts to the extremely wealthy while trying to lambaste efforts to feed the poor and provide food stamp assistance to them (not sure how you feel about the former but you engage in the latter).

I can’t speak on ‘people vote for those who serve their interests best’ but I don’t think most people who vote for ‘more perfect union’ do so regardless and sometimes in spite of ‘their interest best’ fashion. Everything does indeed come at a cost but the clear understanding of who pays this ‘cost’, who avoids this ‘cost’, and who accumulates from this ‘cost’ is seen by ‘following the money’… and those needing ‘food on the table’ (aka food stamps) don’t need to be demonized or their food jeopardized by those supporting a party that protects the wealthiest’s banquet.

‘SOURCE ONE’- make an outrageous assertion re: illegal immigrants and then quote a news source that specifically says ‘illegals’ don’t qualify "promote awareness of nutrition assistance among those who need benefits and meet all program requirements under current law.” So the GOAL is to ‘feed those who are hungry’ that qualify under the law and that this worthy goal is being met means… ‘illegals’. LOL Talk about a screwed up ‘news’ source. ‘SOURCE TWO AND THREE- quotes the stated goal of this effort "USDA and the government of Mexico have entered into a partnership to help educate eligible Mexican nationals living in the United States about available nutrition assistance" but then on this stated goal of feeding those ELIGIBLE who are hungry" "Ay caramba!".

No wonder you arrive at false, unsubstantiated assertions. A person (or a site) can scream to the heavens "illegal immigrants" but that does not then prove a point of fact. NO evidence that ‘illegal immigrants’ receive food stamps are in your ‘sources’ — just empty (w/o fact) assertion and given the ‘ay caramba’ the only ‘evidence’ is the mean-spirited, empty-hearted dismay that hungry eligible Mexican nationals are being fed. Are they upset that some eligible and hungry ‘white’ foreign nationals are being fed? or just "Mexican nationals"? And any reply of ‘no it’s about the illegal ones’ when NO EVIDENCE this occurs is disingenuous for those upset (and that seems to include you) lift up Mexican nationals with NO PROOF of ‘illegal’.

There is also no requirement to keep eligible senior citizens or disabled food separate from the rest of the family. Therefore the entire family benefits from food purchased with food stamps applied for in the senior/disabled person’s name. So you are railing against that TOO in this article about food insecurity in Northeast Iowa… RIGHT? Oh wait… your aren’t… HMMMM You are ascribing nefarious "’illegal immigrants getting food stamps" claims (with NO PROOF) toward the legitimate food stamps given to eligible American children of Mexican descent but you aren’t ascribing nefarious "able bodied getting food stamps" claims toward legitimate food stamps given to eligible Americans who are disabled or senior citizens. HMMM. Why? Are the ‘nefarious’ "stealing" claims only legit in your mind toward one group and not the other? What is the distinguishing factor? Re: the "reduced by 25% I have addressed below (there is no documentation from the CIS of how that occurs — maybe they are like you and can’t keep up with facts? or maybe this 25% occurs at the state level — and if so… then your primary (and false) assertion re: Obama and Mexico and USDA promotion is only more clearly false (i.e. it would be THE STATES and NOT OBAMA).

1. The site is listed in the post second down from the above quoted post. 2. I am not sure what you are stating re: "Plus not all states follow the "25% deduction…" I was merely postulating that perhaps the quoted 25% reduction, which the CIS (w/o any documentation that it actually exists) asserts, MAY be at the state level and if so then the ones who "make certain illegal immigrants get food stamps" (by virtue of this reduction) are STATE officials and NOT FED. ones — thus your assertion that Obama in Mexico was trying to "make certain illegal immigrants get food stamps" was in this ‘scenario/assertion’ was false too.

In response to your "don’t argue with a fool" musing: supply ONE fact that proves your assertion that Obama’s goal in Mexico was to "make certain illegal immigrants get food stamps" and not those eligible. You haven’t and can’t and the sites you DO put forth specifically refute your assertion. Thus the facts and your own sites prove who the fool is that argues with the facts… and that it seems is you.