During the eight-year reign of America’s first Muslim socialist leader, the number of Americans living in poverty skyrocketed. It is estimated that those living at or under the poverty level jumped by at least 2 million to 5 million people and possibly more.
Obama’s economic policies intentionally placed more Americans in poverty, making them dependent on the government for welfare, food stamps, Medicaid, and many other forms of assistance. Socialism 101 teaches that in order to subject a nation of people to socialist rule, it is necessary to eliminate the middle class and drive most of those people to the lower class and poverty levels and that’s exactly what Obama was trying to do.
In September 2011, I wrote:
Over the past three years, the face of poverty has changed and children are no longer the majority. Working class people ages 18-64 now account for 60% of those still considered to be living in poverty. This is the highest poverty rate for this age group in 50 years.
Nearly 44 million Americans or 14.3% of the nation’s population are poor and living in poverty. According to census figures that are soon to be released, 8.8 million families are living in poverty and 60% of them have at least one family member who is working.
In July 2012, I wrote:
“While that figure may not seem significant to you, allow me to put it real numbers. According to the U.S. Census Bureau’s Population Clock Projection, the current population of the United States is 314,000,000. 15.1% of 314,000,000 means that there was 47,141,000 American living at or below the poverty level in 2010. In 2012, that figure rose to 49,298,000, for a net increase of 2,157,000 people in just 2 years.”
In February 2013, Philip Hodges wrote:
“And as more people are forced out of employment by Obama’s “economic recovery” measures, more people get signed up on food stamps. During his tenure, food stamp participants have increased by 49%, from 31.9 million to 47.6 million. CNS News reported that the current number of food stamp enrollees now exceeds the population of Spain.”
There are many economic indicators used to judge the success or failure of a political system and one of those is food stamps, formerly known as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). Under Obama’s socialist economic policies, the number of people receiving food stamps rose sharply, indicating that his economic policies were failing to help America and the American people.
Many who supported Obama’s economic policies and who supported Hillary Clinton for president, continue to criticize President Donald Trump and his economic policies. They claim that the tax cuts and other policies are not working when just the opposite is true. In fact, the month of April just set a record by taking in $218 billion more in tax revenue than the government spent, proving just what Republicans had predicted would happen.
So, what about the issue of food stamps under less than a year and half of Trump economic policies?
“Food stamp usage has steadily dropped throughout the Trump presidency; now the USDA numbers, headlining over at the IOTW Report, are a major victory for the Trump administration, which has boosted employment and sought to raise struggling Americans out of welfare dependency…”
“It can be no coincidence that SNAP enrollments have fallen while employment has risen to its highest level in years. The first year of Trump’s administration oversaw a 0.7% fall in unemployment which has now hit 3.9%, the lowest recorded level since the year 2000. The last time unemployment stayed below 4% for an extended period of time was in the 1960s.”
Not only are more people working under Trump’s leadership, but they are taking home more money due to the tax cuts passed by Congress in December. Consequently, more people and families are becoming self-sufficient and relying less on government handouts, including food stamps (SNAP).
This results in a huge benefit to local state and federal governments. The more people working, the more tax revenue is generated. It also means they are spending more which also generates more taxes. With the help of the tax cuts, people are not only taking home more money but they are also spending more money, hence more tax revenue. Additionally, the fewer people on welfare and needing food stamps means less of the financial drain on local, state and federal governments, which helps the increased tax revenue go farther and in time, could reduce the deficits at the local, state and federal levels.
So, what’s wrong with a system like this?