27 thoughts on “Food Stamp Usage Isn’t Falling”

  1. I few months back I saw a woman use a link/snap card. When she opened her wallet to pull it out, she had a large wad of bills. As I walked out to the parking lot, I saw her pull away in a Infiniti SUV. This is a true story. I don’t get it.

  2. The economy is improving as a result of asset inflation. If you don’t have assets, your economy has not improved. People still aren’t getting jobs. Most of the improvement in jobs is the result of people giving up looking for work and almost all new job creation is low wage.

    The average payout for food stamps according to the article is $133 per month. Not much to get upset about.

    Many low-wage workers do qualify for food stamps which is a way for government to subsidize low-wage employers like Wal-Mart by picking up the tab for their benefits.

    It’s all part of using government to subsidize business. It’s by design and what you are voting for.

  3. Sure you did. You are a government employee whose entire salary and benefits is part of the corporate welfare state. Oops! Duh.

  4. Sure you are. Just not directly. But all of your salary comes from the govt and almost all of it is corporate welfare.

  5. What’s the difference? If a job exists only to create corporate welfare to pile up rockets so that defense companies will make lots of $$$, we are better off just paying you unemployment and sitting at home. It’s a lot cheaper.

  6. You’re behind the times. I got out of that business about three years ago. Iron Dome, though, has shown that my former work has saved lives. I am quite proud of that.

  7. Yeah right. Missile defense is one of the biggest shams ever. The number of people you might have saved is dwarfed by the number of brown people you’ve put in the ground.

  8. Have you forgotten to renew your prescription?

    That “biggest sham ever” did a fine job of stopping the rockets coming into Israel.

  9. After billions and billions and billions of dollars over 30 years, missile technology has now advanced to the point that it can shoot down a backyard Hamas rocket most of which fall to the ground without ever hitting anything.

    It was all worth it!!!

  10. EXACTLY!!

    Those are actually the HARDEST to hit. They are aloft only a short time, so target acquisition and tracking have to be done in a VERY short time. Then you have to compute a four-dimensional intercept trajectory — solving for highest Probability of Kill (Pk). AND they never leave the atmosphere, so the tracking has much greater “plant noise.”

    Relatively speaking, ICBM’s are much easier. We pick them up while still in boost, track them while there is only gravity acting on them, and can intercept them before re-entry.

  11. The Iron Dome managed to let 75% of Hamas homemade rockets through and several Israelis were killed. The MIT professor who blew the whistle on the U.S. cover-up of the failures of the missile defense program and whose research has been classified because it reveals the fraud has estimated the at the most Iron Dome knocked down 10% of rockets but it is most likely in the single digits and possibly zero which is the number one former Iron Dome Israeli scientist for Rafael estimated.

    Pure propaganda for more funding.

  12. Read more carefully, that MIT idjit specified, “Failed to hit head-on.”

    No kidding. A head-on hit is much harder, because your seeker has no delta to work with. Furthermore, the Pk is much lower if one attempts a head-on collision, because the target cross-section is at a minimum that way.

    “Many rockets… were ‘merely crippled or deflected’ but not destroyed….”

    Which is generally good enough, though not optimal.

  13. It boggles the mind that the most fervent Republicans against government spending are typically government employees, ex government employees collecting fat gov pensions, or private workers whose main funding is tied directly to government spending.

    All my “red” family members and neighbors fit this description, except for one neighbor — though his wife has been collecting SS for at least 6 years now (due to disability).

  14. Well, BG, we have the capacity to make the distinction between government spending which fulfils a Constitutional purpose, such as providing for the Common Defense of the United States, our Air Traffic Control system, and even FEMA, and government spending which does not have such a Constitutional purpose, such as Welfare.

  15. What constitutional purpose is there for spending billions upon billions for building a missile defense program to protect Israel from Hamas’ BB gun attacks?

  16. It provides a test-bed for our target acquisition and tracking algorithms, and for our intercept computation algorithms.

    If your question is more broad, whether there is a national defense purpose to our supporting Israel, I cannot really say.

  17. Call what you have “good enough” (as Retired says), and modify your algorithms to quickly destroy the site where the rockets originate: send an interceptor at the inbound (hey, we might get lucky), and a second bigger missile/bomb to the launch site.

    We are spending billions to solve an intractable problem, when the real target should be the rocket launch sites themselves (destruction of the people/terrorists in the area) — which is a much easier/cheaper problem to solve, and we get a LOT more bang for the buck.

    As for a constitutional mandate for such spending: of course there is none, just like the majority of other government spending.

  18. We’re working on that, too. Of course, the cowards put their launchers next to schools and hospitals. The good guys are willing to endure more attacks instead of killing innocent children. Also, again, that is much easier to do with ICBM launchers. Still, it is a difficult problem, because it requires tracking the missile in the boost phase, when it can maneuver. Thus the FireFinder solution is highly suspect unless the launch is observed.

  19. Error in the launch site detection could be seen as a “feature”. The game is tit-for-tat, and we are losing horribly. We are spending billions and our enemies spend practically nothing.

    If the enemy launches a rocket from a civilian site, and we in return blow said civilian site up (or our best guess of the launch site): then THEIR civilians will stop letting terrorists use civilian sites as launch pads.

    But make know mistake: every launch from them must have a reciprocal and bigger launch from us…or we should just stop playing the game altogether because our strategy is a losing one.

Comments are closed.