Food Stamp Freefall

Dark Soul said:
You realize that economics is a partisan sport, don't you?
Click to expand...

I try to avoid that. I look at cause & try to ascribe reasoning to conclusions. There is much that is outside a President's control regardless, but since food stamps are so tied into employment, it's fair to give both Obama and Trump some credit for the development in the OP.
 
Thing1 said:
I try to avoid that. I look at cause & try to ascribe reasoning to conclusions. There is much that is outside a President's control regardless, but since food stamps are so tied into employment, it's fair to give both Obama and Trump some credit for the development in the OP.
Click to expand...

Fair enough, but that doesn't explain the three year lag between the unemployment peak and the food stamp peak. Especially based on the fact that during the Trump term, the two hit rock bottom nearly simultaneously....
 
Dark Soul said:
Fair enough, but that doesn't explain the three year lag between the unemployment peak and the food stamp peak. Especially based on the fact that during the Trump term, the two hit rock bottom nearly simultaneously....
Click to expand...

Honestly, I'd have to look more into that. My guess right off the top would be that a significant # of jobs in the beginning of the recovery were lower wage & more temporary.
 
Thing1 said:
Honestly, I'd have to look more into that. My guess right off the top would be that a significant # of jobs in the beginning of the recovery were lower wage & more temporary.
Click to expand...

Say it ain't so? You mean the Obama jobs were low wage jobs? Yikes!
 
Dark Soul said:
But but but "shovel ready jobs"! Construction and engineering jobs, especially on FedCo projects, are high paying.
Click to expand...

Eh - you can cherrypick comments if you want to try to discredit it, but most who have followed the economy give the stimulus loads of credit for turning things around.

I know it's hard to give the "other side" any credit, but it's hard to argue w/ results.
 
Thing1 said:
Eh - you can cherrypick comments if you want to try to discredit it, but most who have followed the economy give the stimulus loads of credit for turning things around.

I know it's hard to give the "other side" any credit, but it's hard to argue w/ results.
Click to expand...

"Some say."

However others say, and common sense backs it up, that you can't spend your way out of a bad economy. It's like trying to lift yourself out of a bucket by pulling on the bucket handles.
 
Dark Soul said:
"Some say."

However others say, and common sense backs it up, that you can't spend your way out of a bad economy. It's like trying to lift yourself out of a bucket by pulling on the bucket handles.
Click to expand...

I've never felt that way. I think it's true at times, and I'm generally a deficit hawk, but at that time, the private sector wasn't budging. Austerity measures would have been a disaster (imo).
 
Nordberg said:
Want food stamp use to plummet, increase the min. wage steeply. Then the working poor will not qualify. There are lots of support methods that would drop , like housing allowances and ADC. If companies do not pay a living wage, tax payers will be burdened with making up the difference. Let the wealthy pay.
Click to expand...

The stupidity of the above is astounding. All you are doing by arbitrarily forcing the minimum wage up is raising the cost scale. You are not going to eliminate people in 'poverty' by raising the minimum wage.
 
Thing1 said:
I've never felt that way. I think it's true at times, and I'm generally a deficit hawk, but at that time, the private sector wasn't budging. Austerity measures would have been a disaster (imo).
Click to expand...

Conservative economists agree that in times like in 2007 it is better to cut regulation, cut FedCo spending, ride out the trough and then, in a few months, watch the economy bounce back with vigor. Doubling down of FedCo spending greatly lengthens the time that the private sector needs to recover. And recover they will, but in spite of the politician's actions, not because of them.

Regrettably, both parties see these downturns as an opportunity to seize still more power, under the guise of some economic theory that has never been proven to work.
 
Darth Omar said:
It’s a silly debate.

No president gets to keep his name on the economy after he leaves office, not even Obama lol.

This is Trump’s economy. And if there was even scant question of that, it’s been removed by the Trump tax cuts.
Click to expand...
agree. those who continue to say "Trump inherited the Obama recovery" in an attempt to not give credit to Trump for deregulation and tax reform are disengenuous ( to put it mildly)

The economy is a continuum. However presidential policy does shape the economy under their watch.
It's best to look at what each one did, and the positive or negative results from their initiatives.

Trump took a great unemployment improvement under Obama, and 'improved' on that it for GDP growth and wage growth,as well as continuing the unemployment reductions.

also recall Obama lived on almost zero interest from the Fed, while the Fed is now scheduling regular increases - FYI.
 
Thing1 said:
Prove what claim?

As people become employed, fewer need food stamps. Are you denying that unemployment steadily went down under Obama? Do you ONLY give credit to Trump for this?
Click to expand...

This claim:

You didn't seem to mind when he got the blame when food stamp use went way up after '08.

I don't deny it went down under Obama, however I'm not a partisan hack who only gives one president the credit. Of course you have only credited Obama.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top