Skip to content

It’s a Food Stamp Epidemic

July 15, 2012

I never thought I’d be saying this, but Newt Gingrich was right. Obama is, in fact, “the best food stamp president in American history.” In 2008, 28.2 million people received food stamps. In 2009, it was 33.5 million. And now, that figure has soared to a staggering 46 million (source).


But that’s not enough. A new government initiative is underway to further increase food stamp usage. You heard me correctly. Forget the fact that our public debt stands at $16 trillion, or that the unfunded liabilities are nearing $120 trillion (source). The government just came up with a brilliant new idea. Let’s waste money for food stamp commercials so that we can waste even more money. Make sense? The question answers itself.

If there was ever any doubt that the United States was a full-fledged welfare state, this is the nail in the coffin. 46 million Americans on food stamps. Think about it. That’s about 15% of the entire US population. One out of every seven people in America is dependent on the government for FOOD. Of all things. The most elementary of all survival necessities. Isn’t it pathetic? A seventh of the US population needs the government’s assistance in putting food on the table.

The food stamp problem is a perfect example of government intervening to fix problems it created in the first place. Who’s fault is it that people aren’t allowed to work for less than the legal minimum wage? Who’s responsible for the regulatory thicket of hell? Who’s to blame for saddling corporations with a 35% income tax? If government wasn’t such an impediment to job creation, everybody who wanted to be employed would have that opportunity. You wouldn’t have bums lying on their couches, without a care in the world, stealing dollars from the taxpayer. You’d actually have people working and paying their own bills. People growing and expanding an economy that finds itself in the doldrums.

Once again, this reflects the distorted paradigm in American society. It’s wrong for a drifter to put a gun to my head and take $100 dollars out of my pocket for food. And yet, somebody like this would be perfectly justified in doing so. The inevitable question proceeds: why? What makes one forceful taking of money fundamentally different from the other? I have yet to hear an adequate response from a statist.

Leave a Comment

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: