[QUOTE="LOXO7"]

[QUOTE="l4dak47"] http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog/robbins-report/2011/aug/19/obamas-food-stamp-economy/ When you talk about the SNAP program or the food stamp program, Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack said this week, you have to recognize that it's also an economic stimulus. Every dollar of SNAP benefits generates $1.84 in the economy in terms of economic activity."l4dak47

They're not buying it though. The government is granting people free stuff. How do you pay that which is free? It's true though, someone did have to stock it, package it, shelve it, but they all just did it for free. The government will provide. No one has to work for money anymore.

Here's what Peter Schiff says on food stamps. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CNzIc8oZM4c

The government doesn't own any money. They tax people, or borrow it from the Federal Reserve Bank and it get's put in the debt. If anyone thinks this is going to continue like this, and the debt limit will never reach it's end, they are living in a dream.

[QUOTE="sSubZerOo"][QUOTE="LOXO7"]

Oh no! A mandatory gun law for the head of household is required for residence in Kennesaw. Well at least we know that this plan works. Crime rate went down. Police jobs went down. The horror.

[quote="Chuck_Baldwin"]

The New American magazine reminds us that March 25th marked the 16th anniversary of Kennesaw, Georgia's ordinance requiring heads of households (with certain exceptions) to keep at least one firearm in their homes.

The city's population grew from around 5,000 in 1980 to 13,000 by 1996 (latest available estimate). Yet there have been only three murders: two with knives (1984 and 1987) and one with a firearm (1997). After the law went into effect in 1982, crime against persons plummeted 74 percent compared to 1981, and fell another 45 percent in 1983 compared to 1982.

And it has stayed impressively low. In addition to nearly non-existent homicide (murders have averaged a mere 0.19 per year), the annual number of armed robberies, residential burglaries, commercial burglaries, and rapes have averaged, respectively, 1.69, 31.63, 19.75, and 2.00 through 1998.

With all the attention that has been heaped upon the lawful possession of firearms lately, you would think that a city that requires gun ownership would be the center of a media feeding frenzy. It isn't. The fact is I can't remember a major media outlet even mentioning Kennesaw. Can you?...

Netherscourge

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1818862/posts

True. It's ok to mandate the ability to send people to the hospital, but it's not ok to mandate that they be covered for their hospital visits.

lol

[QUOTE="WhiteKnight77"]

[QUOTE="l4dak47"] Food stamps are one of the largest returns to the government and it's actually helping our people in a tangible and significant way. l4dak47

How are food stamps a return for the government? As it is, the majority of people on food stamps are not working and are not paying taxes. Any taxes that are collected on food goes to state coffers, not the federal governments which is where money for food stamps come from. If you do manage to have a job, you lose food stamp money based on how much is earned each week. Once a person earns x amount, they lose all food stamps.

They're not buying it though. The government is granting people free stuff. How do you pay that which is free? It's true though, someone did have to stock it, package it, shelve it, but they all just did it for free. The government will provide. No one has to work for money anymore.

Here's what Peter Schiff says on food stamps. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CNzIc8oZM4c

Oh no! A mandatory gun law for the head of household is required for residence in Kennesaw. Well at least we know that this plan works. Crime rate went down. Police jobs went down. The horror.

The New American magazine reminds us that March 25th marked the 16th anniversary of Kennesaw, Georgia's ordinance requiring heads of households (with certain exceptions) to keep at least one firearm in their homes.

The city's population grew from around 5,000 in 1980 to 13,000 by 1996 (latest available estimate). Yet there have been only three murders: two with knives (1984 and 1987) and one with a firearm (1997). After the law went into effect in 1982, crime against persons plummeted 74 percent compared to 1981, and fell another 45 percent in 1983 compared to 1982.

And it has stayed impressively low. In addition to nearly non-existent homicide (murders have averaged a mere 0.19 per year), the annual number of armed robberies, residential burglaries, commercial burglaries, and rapes have averaged, respectively, 1.69, 31.63, 19.75, and 2.00 through 1998.

With all the attention that has been heaped upon the lawful possession of firearms lately, you would think that a city that requires gun ownership would be the center of a media feeding frenzy. It isn't. The fact is I can't remember a major media outlet even mentioning Kennesaw. Can you?...

Chuck_Baldwin

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1818862/posts

[QUOTE="LOXO7"]Now lets say it's illegal to own firearms. Instead of a salesman coming to your door it's a twisted police officer. He came to let himself in and rob you. You are defenseless and wouldn't dare assault him to protect your stuff. After all he is the law. He robs you and then leaves. Horray for the removal of the 2nd amendment!MrGeezer

That's what it would be. There would be more stories about people victimized by the military and police. That's why the world governments are cracking down on the Internet. To strict the communication between these stories to make people aware. We have to pay closer attention to these Internet freedom bills and the reason we are against guns.

And we'll be paying for almost every single one of them on unemployment. Awesome.

airshocker

[QUOTE="l4dak47"]I doubt ALL will be on unemployment. I never said you wanted to cut the military; I said the Republicans wanted cuts. However, you are a fan of cutting things so why is the military an exception? airshocker

I'm sure SOME will find jobs, but the vast majority will be on unemployment.

The military benefits everyone in this country. Social programs should be cut and our economy should be growing before we start cutting personnel.

The government doesn't have any money. What it has, is from what it takes by taxes or granted by the Fed. That we have to pay for in the end anyway.

No one benefits from war. Unless war used correctly. Defend your country. Win. Then end it. America is having trouble with the last part. Wars cost too much. It takes money and lives away from people.

Having a government job is like being on welfare.

[QUOTE="Bucked20"]

[QUOTE="LOXO7"]

What some black people think of Ron Paul. They're probably actors though.

AdamPA1006

I know plenty of black people that like Ron Paul,you act like its impossible

I hope they arent actors, thats a great video.

Yeah, it's Obama's fault! He's the one that didn't pass any legislation when failure to do so would lead to automatic cuts that both sides would dislike!

Seriously, guys, the Republicans agreed to a poison pill provision specifically because they wanted there to be incentive for both sides to pass legislation, and then when THEY shot down what was on the table they tried to get the side of the poison pill that they didn't like (but not the side that they did like) retracted, and now they're trying to pin this on President Obama? Please.

Also, is this an admission that government spending leads to jobs? I suppose next time there's a Republican governor trying to lay off teachers you're also going to be out there complaining about all the jobs lost as opposed to belly-aching about how government shouldn't spend money on anything, right?

theone86