Latest Breaking News

loudsue

(14,087 posts)

10. Actually, no. It would just mean that the really poor minimum wage earners would THEN find

Wed Mar 5, 2014, 11:19 AM

Mar 2014

themselves making too much money to QUALIFY for food stamps. So all that new disposable income of theirs would only go toward spending for the same food they're getting under food stamps.

Unless they also raised the amount you could earn and still qualify for food stamps, which they SHOULD DO, but won't, then we would see a little easing on the burden of the working poor.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

15 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Report: Minimum wage hike would cut food stamp spending by $4.6 billion a year [View all] Redfairen Mar 2014 OP

So wait JustAnotherGen Mar 2014 #1

Actually, no. It would just mean that the really poor minimum wage earners would THEN find loudsue Mar 2014 #10

So let's raise it up! JustAnotherGen Mar 2014 #12

I'd be totally behind raising it up. loudsue Mar 2014 #15

Golly Gee Gomer!!! So a rising tide really DOES lift all boats? MADem Mar 2014 #2

+1 JimDandy Mar 2014 #3

+1000 JustAnotherGen Mar 2014 #5

So it boils down to... KansDem Mar 2014 #4

Corporations pay more they'll make more. safeinOhio Mar 2014 #6

And the government are the taxpayers in that equation. onehandle Mar 2014 #7

Trickle up. Lasher Mar 2014 #8

Ah, but that's not good enough... malthaussen Mar 2014 #9

Kick and Fricking Rec! sheshe2 Mar 2014 #11

Look at this and tell me if anyone can live on this: loudsue Mar 2014 #13

"It�s a simple moral principle�if you work full time, you shouldn�t live in poverty." President O Sunlei Mar 2014 #14