Education, economy, health care all burdened
Is this someones idea of a joke? Hunger is the driving force of getting things
done. Hunger is why people work. Hunger is why people need jobs. People work so
they can eat and how well they can eat depends on how well they are paid. Rather
than come out with a study like this to imply government is not spending enough
money on welfare is ludicrous and wrong. A lazy hunger person who
doesn't have to work to get fed is more economically costly than a hunger person
working. Hunger is an economic benefit if you want to keep people working.Is this a government study to establish another control group of
government socialism? Are the poor mongers after more welfare so they don't have
to work to eat? But that defeats the purpose of socialism and government control
to justify taxing the rich(?). The best thing about when a rich
person turns poor, it only affects one person. But a rich person running out of
money to tax, that affects thousands so we better have a back up plan to keep
the rich rolling in money so we can keep taxing them.
We all know we simply cannot believe anything produced by a liberal
organization, don't we?Even if they are right.
They are right we should become a welfare state. There are plenty of examples in
history of countries that have succeeded in this. For example the Soviet Union,
North Korea, Cuba. Everyone in the country should have all the food they want,
live where ever they want and have all the free education they want.
2cents -- that is satire isn't it?I hope so.
Government can't handle this, but government needs to downsize so that the
people have the resources to help.The churches, non-profits, and
other wlefare organizations can make sure that the American people are well
taken care of, and the government can worry about our national security. Not the other way around.
@tom e There are examples of failed democratic republic societies as well,
the democratic republic of Congo comes to mind, so whats your point? No one is
calling for a welfare state. It makes good economic sense (capitalist idea) to
have a healthy, well trained, stable work force. The purely economic price of
hunger (not including any type welfare) totaled up to 167.5 billion dollars in
2010. try reading hte article beofre commenting.
@my2centsDid you bother reading the article before commenting? The
type of hunger we are talking about does not drive productivity it drives poor
performance in the work force and schools and leads to enormous health care
cost. lets not even talk about the heavy value ladder assumptions you are making
that the hungry and poor are just lazy, which frankly tells us all we need to
really know about how serious to take your comments. @tom e Where in the world do you get the Soviet Union, North Korea and Cuba
(totalitarian societies) are/where welfare states?
My 2cents:"A lazy hunger person"Poor grammar as well as
gross exaggerations in your post. Children living in poverty in Washington
County are at 21%, perhaps all those "lazy hunger person" children can
just get a job in the part of the state with unemployment at 9.4 percent. (US
Bureau of labor statistics)The_Kaiser:Must be easy to sit on your
East side SLC computer and say that churches, non profits and others can take
care of the problem of poverty in the US. Haven't you noticed that donations
are way down at all of the above since the recession & need quadrupled. The
Care & Share food pantry in St. George is about to close it's doors as it
has dwindling donations. I've read nonprofits in the northern end of the state
are suffering as well. What both posters fail to recognize is the downward
mobility in the US has citizens that would have been safely out of poverty
before the recession on a trajectory toward a lower standard of living. As long
as the CEO makes 336 times the average employee you two seem to be happy.
@The KaiserNot the other way around. first off please give us some
examples of how the churches, non profits and welfare organizations are dealing
with our national defense. A strange choice of argument on you part, sorry.
Secondly it would seem our government is doing just fine taking care of our
national security lately, do you think perhaps they can do more then one thing
at a time?