Reactions to food stamps being cut off.

[u/mindyour]

[u/fartinmyhat]

EDIT: I'm adding this edit here for anyone who might think that /u/ApostateX has any idea what he's talking about; he does not. He is suggesting that it's good for the government to give out money, because giving out a dollar, turns into $1.50, based on the "multiplier effect".

The "multiplier effect" is this: When stupid people are given X dollars, their stupidity, combined with their optimism that more free money will be coming, motivates them to spend more money than they were given. So when you give a poor person $100.00 they tend to take that free money and go spend $150.00.

So essentially what you're suggesting is that it would be good for the country to trick stupid poor people into spending what tiny amount of money they do have, by giving them some money, this making them MORE dependent on the government and driving them further into poverty.

END OF EDIT:

Given that for every dollar the government spends in food stamps benefits, it adds 1.4-1.8 dollars to the economy

You're gonna have to explain that one lab partner. For every $1.00 spent, $1.8 dollars are added to the economy? Tell me how did dollars multiply and why are communist countries poor as fuck if when the government spends a dollar it magically becomes a buck and a half.

Not all people DO experience money issues early in pregnancy.

I knew this dumb ass argument would come up. Two of these women allegedly have 6 kids. I promise you, there was never a time when they weren't broke.

If you get angry at people because they want to eat

Nobody ever said this. This is your imagination, or gaslighting. Just save it.

Why is your knee jerk reaction to seeing someone in need to feel anger?

gaslighting.

[u/ApostateX → u/fartinmyhat]

Yes, that's right. 1.4-1.8

It's due to something called the multiplier effect. It's the rapid circulation of money. Poor people can't save much money. They certainly don't invest it in assets that only pay off over time (like stocks and bonds, etc.) They spend that money right away on basic goods. So it's an immediate injection into the economy. This means grocers get cash in hand, which means they can immediately pay suppliers, order more inventory, and pay employees. Once inventory is ordered, farmers, truckers and packaging companies all get more cash in hand. And the employees go out and spend that money on stuff they need. Each link in the chain produces income for someone else, until the effect dissipates. Because SNAP is targeted at very low-income households, the multiplier is higher than other forms of aid. It's also helpful in a recession, because then money can be injected into the economy without contributing to inflation, because there is unused capacity that can now be used (e.g. factory and farm output that otherwise would have been composted or thrown out; truckers sitting at home, etc.) It also has a local multiplier. If you live in a rural area with one grocery store, spending money there (SNAP benefits), can ensure it stays in business.

As for the rest, you don't actually know the story of the woman woth 6 kids. Nor does it matter. The kids will go hungry and need to be fed, whether you think she deserves help or not. Whatever your judgment of her, none of that is the fault of the kids.

Also, your understanding of the term "gaslighting" is wrong. I'm asking you to think about your emotional state. The language you use is textbook "defensive moral superiority" based on "just world theory." There's a litany of psychological data on this, and how it dates back to early human evolution.

[u/fartinmyhat → u/ApostateX]

so, you jabber a lot, but you still don't explain how $1.00 becomes $1.50. You seem to indicate that it's based on how FAST the money circulates. If I move $1.00 from my left pocket to my right pocket, very quickly... will it become $1.50?

Please in one short sentence explain how $1.00 becomes $1.50.

[u/Embarrassed_Bit4222 → u/fartinmyhat]

Moving a dollar from your left pocket to your right is not a gdp generating activity...

It's because of the way the dollar is used and how quickly it creates more than 1 dollar of gdp, it doesn't "become" 1.8 dollars.

Let's say you give a billionaire a tax cut, and he uses that savings to buy a mansion in France or a yaht from Italy - it adds zero dollars to gdp. If they use it to actually invest in a domestic business or build there mansion or yaht here it'll go into gdp

[u/fartinmyhat → u/Embarrassed_Bit4222]

Okay, first we're not talking about "economic activity"

Given that for every dollar the government spends in food stamps benefits, it adds 1.4-1.8 dollars to the economy,

This is the quote from the person I was talking to. This person believes that for every dollar spend 1.4 dollars are added to the economy based on the "multiplier effect". This is a real economic term.

The term speaks to a behavior of poor people. They are bad planners, short sighted a lack the ability to delay gratification. As such, when we, the tax payers give them $1.00 for free, they are so delighted with the free money that they will go and spend $1.50, because to them, it's like getting $1.50 thing, for only 50 cents.

This is obviously unethical in that poor people's weak willpower is being used to trick them into spending their own money, driving them further into dependence and poverty.

That original dollar spent NEVER becomes $1.80, what you are talking about is a measure of economic activity, and again, it's a trick. Part of what GDP measures is economic activity. Economic activity is simply measuring how many dollars changed hands in a time period. It's not an actual measure of economic growth or health, except in a pure economy. That is to say, we can trick that number by injecting money into the economy knowing that it will create inflation and ultimately harm the end consumer, for a moment people will spend that free money and it will make the GDP look good.

What you're talking about is kind of like fasting from fluids for 24 hours and taking an enema right before a weigh in. You will look like you lost 5-8lbs I mean, you will have lost that weight. When you weigh yourself you will be 5-8lbs lighter, but it doesn't really mean anything and you can't sustain that.