Food Stamp Etiquette: Human Kindness

The Liberals GOP Twin wrote:

zhawke wrote:

The Liberals GOP Twin wrote: Show me where I said that "food stamp fraud is rampant". You can't. Now what I did say it that if there are 46 million people on food stamps in this country (that's about 1 in every 8th citizen) then there is something wrong with our country. You're no proud of all that public dole are you. And yes, you are a socialist. Why do you run away from the truth?

I don't need to "show" you where you said anything. You need to read the post I made:

zhawke wrote: particularly given the fact nobody that I've seen in this thread or anywhere else has verified, though ANY reliable, trustworthy, and/or factual source(s) that food stamp fraud is, in fact, a REAL problem.

and

zhawke wrote: If anyone out there can factually prove this premise to be incorrect, I'd be happy to apologize for my mistake.

There IS something wrong with our country - that's the one issue being debated that I believe virtually everyone can agree on. How to go about rectifying that issue is open to negotiation and discussion. Your posit "You're no [sic] proud of all that public dole are you" is just another irrelevant deflection showing your lack of intellectual ability to debate the issue(s) as presented.

Again, define "socialist". Throwing about these types of assertions with no factual backup once again shows your intellectual incapability to cope with your own questionable "truths".

We know one when we smell one.

Again, define "socialist". Your continued attempts at deflection, anti-intellectualism, and cutting edge snarkiness are transparent.

zhawke wrote:

Arlen wrote: google it

And to your second part: you are a fool, then.

I googled it and could find nothing to support your posit. The only numbers that I could find stated "Food-stamp tally nears 40 million, sets record" taken from http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/05/07/us-food-usa-stamps-idUSTRE6465E220100507 . If you can direct me to a link, or anything at all, to support your posit, please do so. Otherwise, your argument is invalid.

If you are accusing me of being a fool for having compassion and understanding, then I'm guilty as charged, and proud of it. I'd much rather be that than someone who sits in judgement and looks down their nose at others in need,

45,753,078 in May 2011
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/08/03/food-stamp-usage-highest_n_917038.html

USA becomes Food Stamp Nation but is it sustainable?
Altogether, there are now almost 46 million people in the United States on food stamps, roughly 15 percent of the population. That's an increase of 74 percent since 2007, just before the financial crisis and a deep recession led to mass job losses.

Seems closer to my 50 million than your 40 million. So now your argument has no credibility?

If you are accusing me of being a fool for having compassion and understanding, then I'm guilty as charged, and proud of it. I'd much rather be that than someone who sits in judgement and looks down their nose at others in need,

I accuse you of nothing. If you are so bankrupt of the understanding of human nature, then, yes, you are a fool.

You can't make this stuff up.

Obama Ag Secretary: More People On Food Stamps Means More Jobs

[youtube:3qyohf5k][/youtube:3qyohf5k]

zhawke is archer. So, zhawke goes on ignore.

Arlen wrote:

zhawke wrote:

Arlen wrote: google it

And to your second part: you are a fool, then.

I googled it and could find nothing to support your posit. The only numbers that I could find stated "Food-stamp tally nears 40 million, sets record" taken from http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/05/07/us-food-usa-stamps-idUSTRE6465E220100507 . If you can direct me to a link, or anything at all, to support your posit, please do so. Otherwise, your argument is invalid.

If you are accusing me of being a fool for having compassion and understanding, then I'm guilty as charged, and proud of it. I'd much rather be that than someone who sits in judgement and looks down their nose at others in need,

45,753,078 in May 2011
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/08/03/food-stamp-usage-highest_n_917038.html

USA becomes Food Stamp Nation but is it sustainable?
Altogether, there are now almost 46 million people in the United States on food stamps, roughly 15 percent of the population. That's an increase of 74 percent since 2007, just before the financial crisis and a deep recession led to mass job losses.

Seems closer to my 50 million than your 40 million. So now your argument has no credibility?

If you are accusing me of being a fool for having compassion and understanding, then I'm guilty as charged, and proud of it. I'd much rather be that than someone who sits in judgement and looks down their nose at others in need,

I accuse you of nothing. If you are so bankrupt of the understanding of human nature, then, yes, you are a fool.

First, you are right about the numbers, but you are definitely lacking specific proof that the recipients are on food stamps as "a normal way of life". That was my original posit. Totals mean nothing unless there is some factual data to back up your posit that "There are nearly 50 million people on food stamps as a normal way of life (emphasis mine)". Major fail.

Second, when you say, "If you are so bankrupt of the understanding of human nature, then, yes, you are a fool", what is that if not, at the very least, a covert/implied accusation? What is your implied message regarding basic human nature? Are you really that cynical?

Very cynical and very accurate. My cynicism has served me very well over a lifetime.

Arlen wrote: zhawke is archer. So, zhawke goes on ignore.

Bummer - I don't know if I'll be able to go on - my life has ended as I know it.

Arlen wrote: Very cynical and very accurate. My cynicism has served me very well over a lifetime.

In my experience "accuracy" is a relative term. Enjoy your cynicism, I prefer optimism.

zhawke wrote:

Arlen wrote: Very cynical and very accurate. My cynicism has served me very well over a lifetime.

In my experience "accuracy" is a relative term. Enjoy your cynicism, I prefer optimism.

You prefer unrealistic expectations.

The Liberals GOP Twin wrote:

zhawke wrote:

Arlen wrote: Very cynical and very accurate. My cynicism has served me very well over a lifetime.

In my experience "accuracy" is a relative term. Enjoy your cynicism, I prefer optimism.

You prefer unrealistic expectations.

I'll take my "unrealistic" expectations over your incredibly vapid pap every time.

Define "socialism", or are you too cowardly to do that?