Holiday shopping off to record start with $59 billion weekend

 @Tattooed_Angel  @MargeGunderson You're a braver woman than I am for even trying! 

 

Definitely shopping from home – no morons mowing us down in parking lots, no psychos pepper-spraying or stomping us in their rush for tiny discounts, no drunks hitting us on the drive home, no POS breaking our windows to steal all the presents we bought. etc. 

 

Glad you made it out of that day safely! :^D

 @Wolfen  @nokoolaid4me I haven't made a purchase from Sears in 25 years or more. Of course they most likely have other retail store under them I don't know about so still give them money unknowingly. That's the hard thing, trying to figure out all the alliances they have, so when you boycott you can truly boycott.

 @CrankyPanky Food stamps  does not equal unemployed.

 

Think, CrankyPanky, THINK - I do consider you one of the more smarter posters here. You were given a brain, and instead of hwarfing up the same talking points from the Rush Limbaugh show over and over and over again, ask questions, and dig into the REAL data.

 

Here is some real data on Food Stamps - under Bush (43) from 2000 to 2008 Food Stamp recipients increased 64% from 17 million to 28 million. The increase to 46.1 million (ehhh, 50 million, 46.1 million, what's a rounding error on a talking point) follows that 64% rate. Put it on a trend line, despite having the second worst recession in US history, the number of people on Food Stamps did not "accelerate," but grew at pre-recession levels. Admittedly growth is no good, but the rolls grew at the same rate under rather prosperous times with Bush 43. Surprise!

 

So lets look at the statistics behind the 46.1 million number. A whopping 47% of food stamp recipients are - children - 0 to 17 years old. That's 21.67 million children. That means 24.43 million people on food stamps are over 18. Another 20.9% of Food Stamp recipients also get SSI, about 9.63 million people. That means they are disabled and can't work. That leaves 14.8 million people. Wait, there is more. 21.4% of recipients collect only Social Security income. Fixed income, retirees who lets remember, had to have paid into the Social Security system in order to collect Social Security (SSI is broken out as a separate line item above, these isn't disability income).  That's about 9.86 million people.

 

That leaves - 4.94 million people. Non-disabled adults - on Food Stamps. Links below - this is right from USDA government information. There is definitely some statistical overlap for say children who are also collecting SSI (but not Social Security plus SSI unless you're blind or deaf, which is going to be a relatively small percentage), So admittedly the 4.94 million number isn't perfect, but its close.

 

Wait, there is more.

 

Lets dive into older data. Back In 1990, Under Bush (41), just 19% of households (not individuals, households) that got Food Stamps had reportable income. That means made enough money to be required to file an IRS tax return. That number has now grown to 41% of households. That means 2 out of 5 households on Food Stamps have people in the house working, reporting an income and filing tax returns. So for those 41% of homes, the outsourcing, the stagnate wages of twenty years (when you adjust for inflation), the continued squeezing of the middle class is taking its toll. It is also very safe to assume that a percentage of those collecting Food Stamps, both illegal and legal workers, are working under the table - but there is no data to support how many - so lets not confuse the discussion with "what ifs" with no data.

 

And from the two links I provided you down below, in 2011 the number of homes collecting Food Stamps with incomes was just 30% in 2011, it is now in 2012 up to 41%. A more than 1/3 increase in a year of recipients who found work and provided their own income.

 

But that's OK, because even if that $7.25 doesn't pay enough (federal minimum wage which more and more states, including diehard red states are ignoring and passing higher limits), because if you work at Walmart, they will give you all the information you need to get Food Stamps. So we the tax payer supplement their paycheck, the recipient gets tax free income, Walmart avoids payroll, and unemployment taxes (and assorted local taxes), and makes a profit on the Food Stamps WE paid for.

 

Note, I said WE. You - and me. I don't like it either buddy. Well at least for the 41% who are working, and the 4.94 million deadbeats in the system. But 4.94 million is a far cry from the 50 million number the doom and gloomers like to toss around.

 

I mean unless you want to take a food lifeline away from children 0 to 17 who's only crime was to be born into poverty, the so badly disabled they can't work, and little old ladies living off of Social Security, which represents about 90% of the people getting Food Stamps, then please - continue to repeat the point.

 

 

 

http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2012/01/17/gingrichs-uncomfortable-facts-about-food-stamps-hold-water

 

http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2011/09/26/most-food-stamp-recipients-have-no-earned-income/

 

 

Eighty-percent

 @Wildstar HA HA! I confess I lived in Texas for eight years and I do know they have some somewhat unique things written into their statehood. I believe the state could reorganize itself to up to five states was one point explained to me. There is also some really specific language on federal claims to lands and land rights in general.

 

Texas, when it became a country, and then a state, was extremely sensitive on the issue of land rights. That lives on even today. In Texas it is very difficult to get a HELOC or home equity loan. The state laws are very specific and many attempts from the banking industry to remove those barriers were generally met with fierce resistance. I was living there when the door cracked open for HELOCs, but a persons land/home was never looked upon as an ATM machine. Texas' foreclosure rates have generally been lower than the rest of the nation and property values have lagged the rest of the nation because of this. Which is - a good thing.

 

I was also told, but never researched it, that there are very liberal property tax laws in Texas, especially around farming. When I was living there one of the biggest tax dodge and subsidy scams at both a state and federal level (I call it a scam, it was perfectly legal, I believe those loopholes have been closed) was to have - a Christmas tree farm. Yup. Your property was taxed as a farm as far as the state/county/local was concerned, and the USDA treated you as a farm also. You only had to let people onto your property to cut trees every five years. Remember, Texas isn't all semi-arid chapparal, the Big Piney Woods, over one-million acres of forest dominates the eastern 1/3 of the state.

 

I guess the point of these ramblings is that if any state could in the way everything was written secede, it would be Texas. However the nutters don't realize how devestating it would be.

 

One example that clearly the secede folks haven't through through. Keystone XL. What American President, Republican or Democrat, would allow the Keystone XL pipeline to run across US soil for the benefit of Texas refineries and oil exporters. Whoops, guess that doesn't exactly work out anymore.

 

I know one argument they make is all the great hospitals in Texas, but the SUPPLIERS of medical equipment, and the research for pharma, oh wait, that's not in Texas. That's in other parts of the United States. Now you need trade agreements for these things - and that isn't a wave of the magic wand.

 

Other than the Toyota Tundra factory, all other cars would now be "imports" and subject to those rules. Sorry, that F-150 is now "foreign,"

 

The Texas National Guard and Air Guard would likely be able to keep their equipment, but any supplemental monies to pay for it would become due - no more tax credits or Pentagon supplements.

 

Sure, the "country" of Texas would get the empty remains of Lackland AFB and Fort Hood (among others) which are both training facilities - but the federal troops would be reassigned, and anything not nailed to the ground would certainly be removed. Heck, there would be nothing to prevent the US government upon withdrawal from blowing up the buildings - as is protocol in other areas when leaving operating bases in foreign countries.

 

I could go on but when someone with a brain actually looks at the big picture, secession would be moronic.

 

Hamilton was a bastard for federalizing the state debt after the Revolutionary War. He was a genius, but also a bastard. It was one of the worst things to happen to this country, and it was the first big step to gutting states rights. I do "get it" and I do feel that states right are utterly trampled. But secession. Stupidity. But if Texas wants to turn itself into a second-world country overrun by Mexican drug lords, with a demilitarized zone between Texas and Mexico - hey - have at it.