4 ms·

What austerity are you talking about? There was no austerity in the US. The US government has spent more money every year throughout the financial crisis. Also

What austerity are you talking about? There was no austerity in the US. The US government has spent more money every year throughout the financial crisis. Also I assume by "outsourcing" you actually meant "offshoring." But this was covered in the article -- it's part of globalization.

crdoconnor 11y ago
>What austerity are you talking about? SNAP cuts were one example of a deliberately inflicted austerian reform. The overall cost was actually pretty low, but the ripple effect is magnified. With less SNAP, low income families are far more reliant on their jobs for sustenance, which turns them into more pliant workers and who accept lower wages/worse hours. >The US government has spent more money every year throughout the financial crisis. Yes, well, funneling ever more money into too big to fail banks and bloated military contractors while cutting food stamps is still austerity as far as 99% of the nation is concerned.
- adventured 11y ago
  The SNAP budget has doubled during Obama's presidency. It hasn't been cut. Here's a chart showing its extreme increase: http://i.imgur.com/tGgtpmL.jpg http://i.imgur.com/tGgtpmL.jpg And as a share of GDP: http://i.imgur.com/4JbxWiT.png http://i.imgur.com/4JbxWiT.png The primary problem in the SNAP program, was the flood of people participating. The per capita sum didn't quite keep up with the large influx of people wanting to be on the program. However, that has been partially offset by increases at the State level as well. The US has never spent more per capita on food programs overall, between the local + state + national level, than it does today. There has hardly been a drop of austerity in anything in the US.
  - crdoconnor 11y ago
    "The per capita sum didn't quite keep up with the large influx of people wanting to be on the program." Which is just a euphemistic way of saying that SNAP benefits have been cut. It may not look like austerity from your oblique perspective, but then again, you're definitely not claiming food stamps.
jellicle 11y ago
> What austerity are you talking about? There was no austerity in the US. http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/02/11/austere-indeed/ http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/02/11/austere-indeed/ http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/02/11/more-about-us-austerity/ http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/02/11/more-about-us-au... http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/04/27/american-austerity-an-update/ http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/04/27/american-austeri... http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/12/12/unprecedented-austerity/ http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/12/12/unprecedented-au...
s73v3r 11y ago
There definitely was austerity from the federal government. There was an across the board 10% cut to all spending. And even if you don't consider that austerity, several states severely trimmed their budgets for public assistance, despite it being a time when it was needed more than before.

crdoconnor 11y ago

>What austerity are you talking about? SNAP cuts were one example of a deliberately inflicted austerian reform. The overall cost was actually pretty low, but the ripple effect is magnified. With less SNAP, low income families are far more reliant on their jobs for sustenance, which turns them into more pliant workers and who accept lower wages/worse hours. >The US government has spent more money every year throughout the financial crisis. Yes, well, funneling ever more money into too big to fail banks and bloated military contractors while cutting food stamps is still austerity as far as 99% of the nation is concerned.

adventured 11y ago
The SNAP budget has doubled during Obama's presidency. It hasn't been cut. Here's a chart showing its extreme increase: http://i.imgur.com/tGgtpmL.jpg http://i.imgur.com/tGgtpmL.jpg And as a share of GDP: http://i.imgur.com/4JbxWiT.png http://i.imgur.com/4JbxWiT.png The primary problem in the SNAP program, was the flood of people participating. The per capita sum didn't quite keep up with the large influx of people wanting to be on the program. However, that has been partially offset by increases at the State level as well. The US has never spent more per capita on food programs overall, between the local + state + national level, than it does today. There has hardly been a drop of austerity in anything in the US.
- crdoconnor 11y ago
  "The per capita sum didn't quite keep up with the large influx of people wanting to be on the program." Which is just a euphemistic way of saying that SNAP benefits have been cut. It may not look like austerity from your oblique perspective, but then again, you're definitely not claiming food stamps.

jellicle 11y ago

> What austerity are you talking about? There was no austerity in the US. http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/02/11/austere-indeed/ http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/02/11/austere-indeed/ http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/02/11/more-about-us-austerity/ http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/02/11/more-about-us-au... http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/04/27/american-austerity-an-update/ http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/04/27/american-austeri... http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/12/12/unprecedented-austerity/ http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/12/12/unprecedented-au...

s73v3r 11y ago

There definitely was austerity from the federal government. There was an across the board 10% cut to all spending. And even if you don't consider that austerity, several states severely trimmed their budgets for public assistance, despite it being a time when it was needed more than before.