April 19, 2024

Food Stamps For The Wealthy – Millionaires Meet Eligibility Requirements

January 19, 2012 by Leave a Comment

Newt Gingrich started a food fight at the last Republican debate by calling Barrack Obama “The Food Stamp President” and suggesting that food stamps were creating dependence on the government.  Mr. Gingrich went on to say that he wanted to “help poor people learn how to get a job” so that they could get off the food stamp dole.

Although Mr. Gingrich’s pitch for individual self reliance and hard work resulted in a standing ovation from the Republican audience, the message may not play out as well across the broad spectrum of American society.

For decades, politicians have told the American public that they are entitled to all sorts of benefits and the public has grown to love them.  Promises of benefit cuts or austerity measures do not win elections. In this regard, Mr. Gingrich may lose more votes than he gains by trying to reduce the number of food stamp recipients.  (The food stamp program is now known as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program or SNAP).

Courtesy: inquisitr.com

All well intentioned government entitlement programs expand exponentially over time.  The number of food stamp recipients has exploded to a record 44.7 million people and this is a voting bloc to be reckoned with.  Newt’s somewhat hostile message to food stamp constituents has probably lost him a considerable number of votes.

Mr. Gingrich, who has an incredible depth of knowledge on most topics, seems to be unaware that food stamps have become an entitlement not just for the poor, but also for many who are financially independent and chose not to work or have retired early.

Here’s an example I looked at for a married couple in Connecticut who both chose to retire at the age of 50 since they are financially independent with $5 million in liquid assets.  Since they will live off their savings until they start receiving pensions at age 60, the couple has no “earned income” and can therefore qualify for a decade’s worth of food stamp benefits.

Exactly how can multimillionaires qualify for food stamps?  The reasons lies in the lack of asset testing for SNAP eligibility.  Connecticut, like 34 other states, does not limit eligibility based on assets.  Most SNAP applicants, except for limited exceptions, do not have to report money in the bank, retirement assets, stocks or other assets.

According to the handy benefit calculator from the Connecticut Department of Social Services, the multimillionaire couple cited above are eligible for food stamps to the tune of $367.00 per month.

The food stamp program has grown not only due to tough economic times but to vastly widened eligibility guidelines.  The SNAP program costs the taxpayers over $75 billion per year.  Here’s a partial listing of who can qualify for food stamps.

  • Non-citizens
  • Unemployed
  • Retired social security recipients
  • Working people with low wages
  • Homeless
  • Legal immigrants
  • College students
  • Millionaires showing little or no earned income

The graph below from The Wall Street Journal shows the explosive growth in the SNAP program since 1970.

Courtesy: The Wall Street Journal

Mr. Gingrich drew some well deserved applause for trying to reassert the basic values of American free enterprise and self reliance.  However, based on the vast voting constituency that is now on the food dole, reducing or eliminating the food stamp program is a political impossibility.

More on this topic:

The Entitlement Society – Million Dollar Lottery Winner Feels Entitled To Food Stamps – “I have bills to pay.”

Filed Under: Connecticut, Government Deficits, Government spending, Have Nots, Jobs, Layoffs, Unemployment Tagged With: , , ,

Obama Jobs Plan Bad Joke For Both Employed and Unemployed

September 9, 2011 by Leave a Comment

The long awaited and hugely hyped Obama “Jobs Solution Speech”, hastily crafted between rounds of golf on the Vineyard, is unlikely to help either the employed or  unemployed.

Obama’s calls his new proposals the “American Jobs Act” but it strongly resembles the $825 billion stimulus spending program of 2009 which was ineffective and failed to stimulate the economy or create new jobs.   Taxpayers will likely fail to see the logic of a $447 billion stimulus program working any better than a $825 billion stimulus program.

The latest proposals out of the White House appear to be another desperate Keynesian attempt to keep the economy on life support long enough to boost Obama’s chances in the presidential election race.  Expecting voters to buy into Obama’s new program pushes the bounds of credibility.  Why would a relatively small $447 billion program work any better than the $4 trillion in deficit financed spending since Obama came into office?

Telling voters that the new half trillion dollar program will be paid for from future mythical budget cuts isn’t likely to fly either after seeing the results of the latest fiasco on deficit reduction talks that lead to a downgrade of the US credit rating.

Half of $447 billion “Jobs Act” program consists of payroll tax cuts for both employers and employees.  While probably adding to aggregate spending, the tax cuts do not address the fundamental problems of unemployment and income stagnation over the past decade.

Why Payroll Tax Cuts Won’t Work

What business bases hiring decisions on a 2% drop in the social security (FICA) tax?  Any business man stupid enough to decide to hire new employees simply because his share of the FICA tax will be slightly lower is already out of business.  New employees are added by businesses when there is added demand for their products and when they are confident that a lasting economic recovery is underway.  Today, there is subdued demand and no confidence – a cut in the FICA tax does nothing to change this situation.

Regarding the payroll tax cut for employees, here’s how one Connecticut resident assessed the situation.

“I am currently making $80,600 per year.   The recent reduction of 2% in the FICA tax resulted in an increase of $31 per week to my paycheck.  Meanwhile, the State of Connecticut just passed the largest tax increase in history, retroactive to the first of the year, which results in paying $17 more per week.  My weekly deduction for medical insurance increased by $12 per week since last year and our employer has suspended pay increases.

My net benefit from the FICA tax reduction is $2 a week.  Meanwhile, the cost of gasoline, home heating, insurance and groceries has risen at least 6% over the past year.  Even if the FICA tax cut was made permanent, an extra $2 per week is certainly not going to motivate me to spend more.

My savings goals for college funding and retirement have been destroyed by a collapsing stock market and zero interest rates on savings.  I  have to cut current spending in order to meet my savings goals and any extra income would be saved, not spent.”

Did Obama talk to any “real people” outside of the group of Washington elites and millionaire celebrity pals he hangs around with?  I think not.

Did Obama talk to any “real businessmen” before coming out with his warmed over and effective stimulus plan?  I think not.

Did Obama talk to “Helicopter Bernanke” about how to spread out the $447 billion of borrowed money?  The government could simply spend the $447 billion by sending every household in America a check for $3,886 attached with a note telling the recipients to thank their grandchildren whose future has been mortgaged.

Voters are rightfully disgusted by the rapid decline in their standard of living, the debasement of the US currency and the self serving dealings of the ruling Washington elites.  To pull out an old campaign slogan, “It’s time for a change”.

There are no easy answers to pulling a debt laden economy out of depression, but increasing transfer payments, small tax cuts, massively increased regulatory burdens, trillions in stimulus spending and zero interest rates have not worked.  Maybe the Washington elites should simply step aside, stop micro managing the $14 trillion dollar US economy and allow the creative forces of capitalism to work

Filed Under: Bailout, Confidence, Connecticut, Economy, Government Deficits, Government spending, Jobs, Stimulus Plan, Unemployment Tagged With: , , , , , , , , ,

Cash Starved Consumers Stop Betting

February 19, 2009 by Leave a Comment

People are no longer willing to wager their last dollar on the hope of striking it rich.   The AP is reporting that Connecticut casinos reported almost a 10% decline in revenue for January 2009.

UNCASVILLE – Slot winnings at Connecticut’s two Indian casinos were down in January from a year ago, continuing to slide with the economy.

The winning at the Mohegan Sun declined 8.7 percent compared to January 2008, the casino’s poorest year-over-year performance since October.

The Mohegan Tribal Gaming Authority, which manages the casino, said slot revenues totaled $62.4 million. The tribe sent $15.6 million to the state under Connecticut’s gaming compact.

Foxwoods Resort Casino and MGM Grand at Foxwoods reported January slot winnings of $52.9 million, 7.3 percent less than Foxwoods reported the previous January. But the performance was better than in December 2008, when Foxwoods’ slots win was off 19.3 percent.

Some months ago Connecticut’s two major casinos also instituted job cuts and wage freezes.  You know things are bad when the casinos show huge drops in business.

The big question – are consumers suddenly very cash poor or are they being sensibly frugal?  Consumers know what they must do and are acting accordingly.  The State of Connecticut has yet to recognize reality and needs to take a lesson from its citizens.

You Cannot Multiple Wealth By Dividing It

Tax Foundation – Connecticut 3rd Highest Tax Burden in Nation

Tax Freedom Day is the day when Americans finally have earned enough money to pay off their total tax bill for the year. In 2008, Connecticut taxpayers had to work until May 8 (the latest in the nation) to pay their total tax bill, 15 days later than the national Tax Freedom Day (April 23).

Connecticut’s State/Local Tax Burden Third-Highest in Nation
Connecticut, currently ranked 3rd highest, has risen 21 places over the last three decades and now holds a place among the nation’s highest-tax states.

Connecticut’s 2008 Business Tax Climate Ranks 38th
Connecticut ranks 38th in the Tax Foundation’s State Business Tax Climate Index. The Index compares the states in five areas of taxation that impact business: corporate taxes; individual income taxes; sales taxes; unemployment insurance taxes; and taxes on property.

Connecticut Levies Sales Tax above National Median; Gasoline and Cigarette Taxes among Nation’s Highest

Connecticut Residents Are Voting With Their Feet

The Connecticut State Data Center says figures from last year show the population growth in the state is very small.

The University of Connecticut-based center says Connecticut’s population grew by less than two-tenths of 1 percent last year.

There is a connection between high taxes, job losses and zero population growth.  Connecticut has become a very high cost state for both residents and employers.  If Connecticut really wants to increase jobs in the state,  attention should be focused on lowering taxes.

“A wise and frugal government, which shall leave men free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned – this is the sum of good government.” Thomas Jefferson

Filed Under: Casino, Connecticut, Layoffs Tagged With: , ,

The Flip Side of Bad News – Still A 90% Employment Rate

February 2, 2009 by Leave a Comment

Disappearing Money

Charles Biderman of TrimTabs gave an interesting interview to Barron’s this weekend.  TrimTabs tracks flows of money in an effort to predict the stock market’s primary trend.

According to TrimTabs, “the first sign of a turnaround will be corporate insiders buying their own stock again and boards announcing new stock buybacks and cash takeovers of other public companies.  Right now, such buybacks are off about 90% year over year.

CEO confidence is at its lowest level since the Conference Board begain measuring in 1976.

Not a very positive assessment for those looking to put funds to work in the market.

In addition, the often cited “huge amounts of cash sitting on the sidelines” (in money markets funds), is also not apt to be a reason for launching the stock market higher either.   According to Mr Biderman,

“of the almost $4 trillion sitting in money market funds, almost two-thirds is institutional money, much of it probably earmarked as reserves against shareholder redemptions or committed to retirement and other long term purposes.  The money coming out of equity mutual funds is greater than that going into bank CD’s, money markets or other savings.  The money is disappearing because people are using it to live on.”

Of course, there are other possibilities as to where the disappearing cash is going.  Consider the  mistrust of the banking system and near zero interest yields on savings.  Perhaps some of these folks who sold their stocks are putting the money under their mattresses.  Or they just might be spending some of it.

Despite talk of consumers spending less and saving more, I have not really seen much evidence of that from one perspective.   I went to three casual dining establishments over the weekend (TGIF’s, Bertucci’s and Ruby Tuesdays) and each place was packed with customers.  There was a 10 to 20 minute wait time at each place for a table.   Maybe Connecticut’s economy is not yet getting hit as hard as other states.  Maybe people have decided to spend some of the money from liquidated equity funds.  Or, maybe things aren’t quite as bad as they say.   After all, even if the unemployment rate is at 10%, that means that 90% are still working and still spending.

Filed Under: Confidence, Connecticut, Economy, Jobs Tagged With: , , ,

Connecticut Discovers How To Eliminate Unemployment

January 26, 2009 by 3 Comments

The State of Connecticut has discovered a method of preventing job layoffs.

Blumenthal Wants Connecticut Regulators To Block AT&T Job Cuts – The Hartford Courant

AT&T said last month that it would pare its Connecticut workforce, which totals about 6,800, by 400 jobs and transfer another 60 jobs to Michigan. A day after the news broke, Attorney General Richard Blumenthal, flanked by union leaders, implored state regulators to block the cuts with the force of law while the state investigates the impact on customer service.

“This is not about AT&T. This is not about Blumenthal. This is about the kind of message Connecticut is sending to business — a state that has no positive job growth and [has] people who are falling over themselves to prove that they’re pro-consumer by showing they’re anti-business,” AT&T spokesman Dave Mancuso said.

State regulators have so far denied Blumenthal’s requests, without listing specific reasons.

Blumenthal’s call for a stay on layoffs has only intensified AT&T’s growing frustration with operating in Connecticut. During an economic conference in September, AT&T’s eastern regional manager urged government officials to scale back regulation and let the company do its job.  “We don’t need policy-makers stepping in and telling us how to do it or where to do it,” Chad Townes said at the conference.

Though parts of AT&T are regulated, the company is increasingly operating in a competitive marketplace that demands lower costs and lower prices.

“In order for them to be competitive with other carriers, this is what they have to do,” Kagan, the telecom analyst, said. “If they have to start worrying about how many jobs they have to leave in how many states … the company would be doomed.”

Layoff Bans Are Counter Productive

Under the guise of preserving customer service the Attorney Generals attempt to block job cuts will only further destroy Connecticut’s ability to draw new businesses to the State.  The Attorney General should know better and his actions seem more directed to pandering for votes rather than improving the business climate in Connecticut.

If prohibiting job layoffs is a great idea, why not extend the theory of a centrally planned economy even further?  Prohibit all layoffs by every business operating in Connecticut.  Extend this logic further and pass a law forcing AT&T and every other business in the State to hire new employees until the unemployment rate reaches zero?   Excuse me for saying so Mr. Blumenthal, but this tactic has failed in every socialist state on the planet.

Attempting to prohibit layoffs is total lunacy and it will not work.  My advice to the Attorney General – Instead of creating a hostile business environment,  Connecticut should be focusing on sensible issues that will foster economic and job growth.

If the Attorney General really wants to help Connecticut’s economy, here’s something sensible that he can work on.

Tax Foundation – Connecticut 3rd Highest Tax Burden in Nation

Tax Freedom Day is the day when Americans finally have earned enough money to pay off their total tax bill for the year. In 2008, Connecticut taxpayers had to work until May 8 (the latest in the nation) to pay their total tax bill, 15 days later than the national Tax Freedom Day (April 23).

Connecticut‘s State/Local Tax Burden Third-Highest in Nation
Connecticut, currently ranked 3rd highest, has risen 21 places over the last three decades and now holds a place among the nation’s highest-tax states.

Connecticut’s 2008 Business Tax Climate Ranks 38th
Connecticut ranks 38th in the Tax Foundation’s State Business Tax Climate Index. The Index compares the states in five areas of taxation that impact business: corporate taxes; individual income taxes; sales taxes; unemployment insurance taxes; and taxes on property.

Connecticut Levies Sales Tax above National Median; Gasoline and Cigarette Taxes among Nation’s Highest

Connecticut Residents Are Voting With Their Feet

The Connecticut State Data Center says figures from last year show the population growth in the state is very small.

The University of Connecticut-based center says Connecticut’s population grew by less than two-tenths of 1 percent last year.

There is a connection between high taxes, job losses and zero population growth.  Connecticut has become a very high cost state for both residents and employers.  If Connecticut really wants to increase jobs in the state,  attention should be focused on lowering taxes.  Foolish, politically motivated schemes such as prohibiting layoffs will only lead to further job losses.

Filed Under: Connecticut, Economy, Jobs Tagged With: ,