Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Poverty And Energy Prices Soaring In Tandem In California

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Environment/Energy Donate to DU
 
phantom power Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-23-10 04:40 PM
Original message
Poverty And Energy Prices Soaring In Tandem In California
In September the state of California hit a new high in food stamp benefits, crossing the 6 billion dollar mark on an annualized basis. Over the past year in California alone the total number recipients of the federal SNAP program (supplemental nutritional assistance program) rose by 16.3%. In many of the big counties of California however, food stamp usage rose even faster.

As previous readers of this blog understand, it’s useful to look at the car dependent regions of southern California as they are emblematic of the state’s post peak-oil, economic breakdown. After all the food stamp program is really a food and energy program, which frees up household cash for gasoline. In San Bernardino County, for example, with its population of two million the number of SNAP recipients has now crossed the 300,000 level. Yes, a full 15% of that county is now on food stamps.

But the growth rate in usage is even faster now at 22.7% since last year and has showed no sign of slowing down.


Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/poverty-soars-in-california-2010-11#ixzz168zpbyxQ


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Iterate Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-23-10 08:07 PM
Response to Original message
1. There's a reason it's still administered by the USDA,
as it was originally considered to be a farm subsidy program as well as support for the poor.

Just follow the money though from poor/working poor to ubiquitous low quality food, to farmers locked into commodity agriculture to fuel and chemical intensive agribusiness and you can see why even R's supported it.

The net effect had been a general subsidy for low wages, so I disagree that it needs to be considered simply an energy subsidy. Cheap gas had its own set of causes.

And people thought Mao and Stalin were bad.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-23-10 11:24 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
NNadir Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-23-10 11:58 PM
Response to Original message
3. Not to worry. They have a brazillion solar roofs. Solar energy is free.
Edited on Tue Nov-23-10 11:59 PM by NNadir
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sun May 05th 2024, 10:30 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Environment/Energy Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC