The rich have so much money they do not have the time to spend it all.So they should be taxed higher,and would not even notice it,and even more children could be fed.

Me, personally? No. The ones who do of course will never respond honestly to your question if in fact they deign to respond at all. They do have some cognitive abilities and admitting that they would let people starve to increase their bank accounts...well, you can see the problem. Your incisive questions only reach the choir my friend...how often do you hear from those "others"? You know..the ones that think you're full of beans but are too scared to say so out loud? :(

This is a no brainer. Are the rich suffering that they need to stop paying their share of taxes?. Hunger knows no social nor ethnic boundaries. People have to eat.

I don't accept your premise that Food Stamps feed 1/4th of American children. Where did you get this figure?

I don't believe that. I know they don't in our State. We have free School Lunch Programs, private free food distribution programs and a huge backpack program which sends food for the family home with school children (about 10 %) on Fridays. This would mean that we now feed 1/2 of our children. :):):) And NO, I do not support eliminating the program.

Yes. Cutting food stamps would save enough to slash taxes for the rich again. That in turn will create plenty of high-salary jobs for 10.2% unemployed parents of starving children. So that finally the parents will be able to provide their children quality food. The other things that need to be done is trowing the carbon tax into the gutter together with ethanol fuel tax credits. That will reduce the price of a gallon of milk from $5 to $3. As we can see there is no hope for hungry children until Sarah Palin moves to the Oval Office in 2013, whereas Barack Obama and Joe Biden depart in a manner depicted below:

simple answer is No!

We can't eliminate it because we have created generations of people who are dependent on it, even if they could go out and work. Why should they when everything is given to them for doing nothing? There are tons of things that could be done to eliminate fraud in the welfare and food stamp programs, but when anybody attempts it they are called racist. Why can't people understand that if you raise taxes on the rich it affects all of us? It causes less jobs, higher prices, and hurts the economy.

Our hopes for the future depend on todays children. Food and nutrition of children must get top priority. To fund the food stamps programmes even higher taxes would be justifiable. This is not about politics. This is about future generations. . In India all children attending school get their lunch under the nutritious noon meal program. Some states in India provide breakfasts too. Besides these, footware, free text and notebooks, school uniforms and free or concessional transport are provided to school children in many states. Some states give free bicycles to children above Class VII to arrest the dropout rates. . When a comparatively poor country like India could do all these for the welfare of children, how could the US think of eliminating the Food Stam Program?

Free 'bread and circuses' destroyed Rome. Sure it sounds nice to give food stamps away willy-nilly, but really, using the gov't in this manner only discourages independent entrepreneurship. Rather than dividing the pie into ever smaller slices, why not grow a bigger pie? There is a place for gov't in all this; capitalism does need to be regulated like a fine machine. But it is the most powerful force for feeding the children [and enriching the poor in general] ever seen by mankind. It's foolish to tax it into oblivion.

No I say let's eat the rich and take their money.

No, I can't imagine why anyone would want to eliminate a program that has the potential to do so much good. However I do think that is in need of reform. I have known several people who, legitimately received food stamps, and they always received much more than they needed, or could even use to be quite honest. This is just on of the many problems with the program.

Unfortunately, taxing the rich just makes them want to move themselves and their assets somewhere else. Every state that has increased taxes on the rich has seen them leave in droves. On the other hand, the rich are rich because they know how to get our money best, and I have only seen the trickle-down effect work rarely. There will never be such a thing as an end to hunger, nor an end to unemployment, nor an end to breeding, nor an end to any number of problems that are just human nature. What I support is reform in both our tax code, which is chiefly responsible for this Great Recession, seeing as it is tax code that made and still makes banks hand out credit like water. If we all had less credit, on simpler terms, there would be far fewer problems. The other reform I support is in welfare programs. The food stamp system shouldn't be allowing people to buy a lot of the acceptable items on the list - I've lost count of how many candies and sodas and snacks I've bought on my EBT card. I'd actually have to sit down and look at EBT with a fine-toothed comb to come up with anything else, but still. I don't support all this throwing out what doesn't work, because few people take the time to see the echoes of what happens. My neighbor has a doctorate in child education, and was going to work for a great state preschool, all of whom were convinced it was her books on child development the GenX'ers would be rearing their kids on. Obama slashed a lot of programs, one of them keeping the preschool as well off as it did, and now she works as a door greeter at Wal-Mart. America is a country run by capitalism - that means there's no equality, and there will be many more losers than winners. There will always be a bottom of the barrell, and it will always be hard to give those down there, whether through misfortune or suffering of the echoes of another's actions, who deserve it a leg up. We need a healthier welfare system designed to assist people back into the workforce, but this welfare system has to give the winners and the wealthy a reason to help these people back into the workforce, and punishing being a winner in a plutocracy is just not smart. There's a question the country, in it's moral standard, is afraid to answer: In a country of winners and losers, what do we do with the losers?

I support instead an Economic incentive to get folks off of Food Stamps- it's called a Minimum Wage. Pay folks a "minimum" wage that will pay for their minimal needs. The problem is, most rich folks can't stand paying working class folks even that. Thus rich folks profit margins are (surprise surprise) subsidized by the Government.

my children would starve

We need stats to backup your 1/4th question. I feel this is a trick question, so i will not address that part of it. I will comment and say this: some people desperately need food stamps. others, do not and are milking the government and taxpayers for all they can. its fraud money in their pockets. Food Stamp fraud is out of control. its illegal to buy beer or cigarettes with food stamps. this law is violated every day. food stamps are traded for sex, drugs and just about anything else you can imagine. The Feds could never hire enough investigators or probably never would. why? 20 million illegal immigrants in America is a valid comparison.

Without invoking that same old tired 19th century (that means 1800s for the democrats) marxist class envy, one may just want to consider that a little renewal of work ethic would go a long way. Work ethic was that view by which people used to take 2nd and 3rd jobs to make their obligations, and children are the obligation and responsibility of their respective parents. Work ethic was that view by which people used to serve their country and work their way through higher education when young, in order to better their lives and earning power by the time they had children. Work ethic was that view by which people would struggle in such ways as a matter of pride, in the spirit of "I don't take no charity". With work ethic, children would be fed by the responsibility of their own parents, people would feel the dignity of self-sufficiency, and the need for social welfare would fade on its own.

I don't know anything about how this stuff works, or what it does to the economy or what it doesn't do, but it seems irrelevant when you think about how this is the only way some kids get to eat. Of course their parents could go out and get a job, or stop abusing the system...I can't believe that some parents will deny Christmas to their children so they can get drunk, but there must be some honest people out there who need them, abolishing them would suck for that. I'm sure it prolly needs a reform, but I don't think it should be abolished. Being hungry sucks.

I don't support welfare except in extreme cases. Allowing people to just live off the system is putting a higher tax burden on the rest of us. Cutting Taxes for the rich isn't about the government giving their rich buddies a break, its about giving businesses a break so they can afford to give jobs to more people, who in turn pay for the services they use and then the government can afford to lower taxes for everyone because less people need welfare. I support creating new jobs.

No, I don't support the elimination. BUT the distribution should be controlled, so that the food stamp is not given to Lazy Parents.

No, If the issue was just money, then consider that the US gives about 3 Billion dollars in foreign aid to Israel every year, this is not counting the Aid to other counties. we spend about 5 billion dollars a year on the TANF program. (it is no longer called food stamps, but Temporary Aid to Needy Families, or TANF) basically, if this was a money issue, by all means, stop the foreign aid first

No I do not support getting rid of the Food Stamp program.

Maybe if you would all go out and get a job instead of spending all your time writing on this board,you wouldn't need food stamps.