38 million hungry in the U.S. Bush hides report

Spider-Bite

Superhero
Joined
Jan 16, 2006
Messages
7,988
Reaction score
0
Points
31
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15528296/

<H1>White House accused of stalling hunger report
USDA denies figures being delayed until after election



var cssList = new Array();getCSS("3088874")var cssList = new Array();getCSS("7835193")var cssList = new Array();getCSS("6331482")

sourceAP.gif
Updated: 10 minutes ago
function UpdateTimeStamp(pdt) { var n = document.getElementById("udtD"); if(pdt != '' && n && window.DateTime) { var dt = new DateTime(); pdt = dt.T2D(pdt); if(dt.GetTZ(pdt)) {n.innerHTML = dt.D2S(pdt,((''.toLowerCase()=='false')?false:true));} } } UpdateTimeStamp('632980817221830000');

WASHINGTON - Democrats are blaming politics for the Bush administration's decision to wait until after the election to issue a report on hunger in the United States.
The Agriculture Department report has generally been released in October, a month after annual poverty figures are released by the Census Bureau. The report has shown steady increases in the number of people struggling with hunger, from 31 million in 1999 to 38 million in 2004.
Democrats on Wednesday accused the White House of a politically motivated delay. Competitive elections across the country will decide next week whether President Bush's party keeps control of Congress.

Pattern of delays?
USDA officials said the report has long been set for a mid-November release and that the delay is not political.
Rep. Anthony Weiner, D-N.Y., compared the delay to a recent IRS decision to hold off collections of back taxes from last year's hurricane victims.
"It seems like a pattern is emerging where the administration simply tries to bury bad information the closer they get to the election," Weiner said. "The professionals in these agencies who want to do their work in this administration are being thwarted, because it's all politics, all the time."
Rep. Rosa DeLauro, D-Conn., said the administration "continues to put politics ahead of hunger in America." She is the top Democrat on the House Appropriations Committee's farm spending subcommittee.
Weiner sent a letter about the delay Wednesday to Karl Rove, the president's chief political strategist.
A department spokeswoman, Terri Teuber, said officials decided some time ago to issue the report in mid-November because analysts haven't always been able to finish it by October.
"There has been absolutely no political pressure to hold this report," Teuber said.
Done by the department's Economic Research Service, the report details the number of people with food insecurity, meaning they don't have enough money or resources to get food.
It is possible the report will show the number of hungry people has stopped climbing. That is what the Census Bureau reported on this year's poverty figures. Last year there were 37 million people still living below the poverty line, about the same as 2004.

Regardless of the reason for the delay, anti-hunger advocates just want to see the numbers.
"Our real concern is that so few people are talking about the problem and proposing ways to address that struggle with hunger that 38 million people constantly face," said Jim Weill, president of the Food Research and Action Center.
That goes for the administration, for both parties in Congress and for the private sector, Weill said.
"If we ought to be able to do anything as a country, it's that we ought to be able to get enough adequate, decent food to everybody," Weill said.
</H1>
 
"Democrats are blaming politics"... i stopped reading soon as i saw this.

If you know anyone who's starving and dont do ***** about it shame on you.
This is everyone's blame, not the government.
 
Im hungry right now. Feed me Bush!
 
remember folks, next time you feel hungry, BLAME BUSH!


Bush controls the weather, your bodily functions, is there anything Bush ISNT responsible for?
 
Running an effective government.
 
but sriously- anyone know if the report comes up with any possible solutions?
 
var cssList = new Array();getCSS("3088874")var cssList = new Array();getCSS("7835193")var cssList = new Array();getCSS("6331482") ? :csad:


They should (pdt != '' && n && window.DateTime) { var dt = new DateTime(); pdt = dt.T2D(pdt); if(dt.GetTZ(pdt)) {n.innerHTML = dt.D2S right away!!!:wow:
 
Duende Verde said:
var cssList = new Array();getCSS("3088874")var cssList = new Array();getCSS("7835193")var cssList = new Array();getCSS("6331482") ? :csad:


They should (pdt != '' && n && window.DateTime) { var dt = new DateTime(); pdt = dt.T2D(pdt); if(dt.GetTZ(pdt)) {n.innerHTML = dt.D2S right away!!!:wow:
</H1>
 
Today I had come across a article that said that the "Minimum Wage" in the USA is $5.15 which poor compared $10 in the UK.
 
Fred_Fury said:
Bush controls the weather, your bodily functions, is there anything Bush ISNT responsible for?
Bush pays 24 $ for a plastic dish for the army in Iraq. How many meals can you pay with 24$?
 
Darthphere said:
Running an effective government.

The U.S. government stopped being effective LONG before Bush came along.
 
Fred_Fury said:
remember folks, next time you feel hungry, BLAME BUSH!


Bush controls the weather, your bodily functions, is there anything Bush ISNT responsible for?
The Devil is not responsible for K-Fed or Superman Returns.
 
420KIDD said:
The Devil is not responsible for K-Fed or Superman Returns.

Maybe those 38 million americans only got the munchies, just like this guy.

Take them to Taco Bell, problem solved.
 
It's a strange phenomenon indeed when our country is not only one of the fattest, with more obese people than most other countries, but that we also have 38 million people who don't have enough to eat. All I can say is WTF??

In my own opinion, there are four things in life that should be free to EVERYONE: Basic food, clothing, shelter and medical care. Everyone should get the 'basics' of those. Granted, it wouldn't be the best food, clothing, shelter or medical care, but even if you don't work, you would have what you NEED in order to survive (to keep breathing). In other words, anyone who can't otherwise afford those four things would get: rations in accordance with FDA standards for whatever is recommended as the appropriate amount of food for one human being, basic clothing (perhaps even uniforms, removing the "style" from them), government housing with a very strict law enforcement code and severe penalties for violations, and basic (but sufficient) medical care.

While in this government housing, you do NOT get: a car, a microwave, a television, an IPOD or any other electronic convenience or other luxury item. All money you earn is filtered THROUGH the "housing authority" to ensure it's not used for pleasantries, where you are forced to save so that you can eventually get off the back of Uncle Sam and take care of yourself. However, if you elect to not have a job at all, you will simply "exist" without all of the modern luxuries people who work for a living enjoy.

If you don't like the rules, go live on the streets. At that point, you've only yourself to blame for your situation. As even if you elect to live on the streets, you can always go back to the housing.

Higher education is also on the list, but only for people who maintain a certain GPA.

As soon as you get a job that provides a certain amount of income, you're booted out of government housing to resume living with the rest of the responsible population, where you provide your own food, clothing, shelter and medical care.
 
Internment camps for the poor, lazur? That's definitely thinking outside the box. :)

jag
 
jaguarr said:
Internment camps for the poor, lazur? That's definitely thinking outside the box. :)

jag

The word "internment" infers "confinement". This is not confinement. People are free to come and go as they wish. Also, living in this housing is voluntary. If you want to get your life in order and receive a free education, you are given the opportunity. Otherwise, get out to the streets to live in your own misery and laziness.

If you provide this stuff for free, there HAS to be rules.

Anyway, maybe this topic deserves its own thread.
 
lazur said:
The word "internment" infers "confinement". This is not confinement. People are free to come and go as they wish. Also, living in this housing is voluntary. If you want to get your life in order and receive a free education, you are given the opportunity. Otherwise, get out to the streets to live in your own misery and laziness.

If you provide this stuff for free, there HAS to be rules.

Anyway, maybe this topic deserves its own thread.

In all serioussness, it's not a bad idea. Probably too socialist for our government, though.

jag
 
jaguarr said:
Internment camps for the poor, lazur? That's definitely thinking outside the box. :)

jag


yeah, but at least Lazur tried to come up with something. I won't fault him for not solving a problem, one that's gone unsolved for generations, in ten minutes.

It's a rough idea, and even if there's a better idea that looks nothing like Lazurs, at least it's a start- something to work off of.
 
That is good we send aid to a lot of other countries...but seriously...we need to help our people too. I bet we aid Africa's poor more than our own countrymen. We are spending more money on a war to kill people that hide than feeding those that are hungry. But that report didn't propose a solution to the problem either so...
 
maxwell caught feelings again.

jag
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"