Thursday, October 10, 2013

Welcome to the New Age: Breaking Down SNAP/EBT Card Usage by Race and County


On November 28, 2009, the New York Times published a map that, were it properly read and studied, would forever end the debate as to whether or not America is still an exceptional nation.

The residue of exceptionalism still exists, though it is being crowded out by massive illegal immigration and completely drowned out in formerly mighty cities now little more than incubators for the next underclass uprising (a la Hurricane Katrina in New Orleans).

The New York Times article carried the title, Food Stamp Usage Across the Country, and featured an interactive map that allowed the user to see the overall percentage – by children, white percentage of the population and black percentage of the population – of people receiving EBT/Food Stamps by county in America.

The map allows you to look at the country (county-by-county) to see all recipients, children, whites, blacks, and change since 2007.

For those ignorant of statistics, an article accompanying the map spells out the racial breakdown in simple percentages [Food Stamp Use Soars, and Stigma Fades, New York Times, 9-28-2009]:
Now nearly 12 percent of Americans receive aid — 28 percent of blacks, 15 percent of Latinos and 8 percent of whites. Benefits average about $130 a month for each person in the household, but vary with shelter and child care costs.

This data is outdated (with food stamp spending doubling since 2008), though it does provide an invaluable foundation to surmising the racial quicksand the historic American population finds itself knee-deep in currently.  [Use of Food Stamps Swells Even as Economy Improves, Wall Street Journal, 3-27-13]:
The financial crisis is over and the recession ended in 2009. But one of the federal government's biggest social welfare programs, which expanded when the economy convulsed, isn't shrinking back alongside the recovery. 
Enrollment in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, as the modern-day food-stamp benefit is known, has soared 70% since 2008 to a record 47.8 million as of December 2012. Congressional budget analysts think participation will rise again this year and dip only slightly in coming years.

Using the data from the New York Times map on food stamp usage, we have put together a breakdown of the racial dynamics of EBT/SNAP usage for America’s biggest cities; it should be quite obvious that the fear of a contagion spreading, turning large segments of the population into ravenous zombies isn’t what’s behind the influencing of preppers/survivalist/gun enthusiasts.

What makes America exceptional is that so few keep this system alive, while simultaneously funding population growth in racial groups that do so little to keep the system alive.

Just look at the disparity in places like Portland (Oregon), Seattle, Madison, Milwaukee, Denver, Minneapolis and St. Paul, and you’ll get an understanding that George Romero is completely wrong in the disaster scenario that needs to filmed.

And remember, these data lacks the past four years of hyper-growth in EBT/SNAP usage; the reliance on food stamps by people of color (and on the continued system of taxing whites to pay for this artificial population growth) represents the greatest threat to stability of the system.

The Day the EBT Card Stops is a moment when places like Macon, Memphis, Rockford, and Akron experience tiny outbreaks of madness (much like the initial instances of a zombie outbreak, when hospitals are overwhelmed with strange ‘bites’ and the police are ill-prepared to deal with an insurgency); it’s vital you use the data above – realizing the numbers are four years old – and consider the implications of living in counties with sizable EBT/SNAP users.

Study this breakdown of just who relies on EBT/SNAP in major cities. Just remember, they lack the past four years of insane growth in the reliance on the EBT/SNAP benefit; but this should give a huge hint at which group is seeing the greatest growth in benefits. 

72 comments:

W74 said...

Considering that Hispanics are counted under the White umbrella, these statistics are still skewed.

It's good to know that there's getting to be a limit to the ways the media/academia/tptb can keep lying and fudging the numbers. We're making progress.

Anonymous said...

Many minorities (especially Black people) are screwed beyond reasonable doubt if SNAP benefits ended. Especially negroes because they have absolutely NO idea on how to live and survive with out government assistance. They don't get jobs, they don't possess any discernible skills (no, soul-food cooking, sewing in weaves and a**-shaking/twerking are not viable skills) and many of them are just a complete waste of space.

When you have fifth/sixth generations of negroes, who make CAREERS out of being welfare roaches leeching off the system, coming to the realization they have to do for self it certainly will be an Apocalypse on biblical proportions.

FlowerBell said...

If I couldn't find a real job I would take in ironing, babysit and bake cakes to sell before I would stoop to public assistance, its the way I was raised.
I just wouldn't be able to stomach others being forced to work hard and be held responsible for me against their own will. Its UN-American.

So CAL Snowman said...

I have a few other sources to add that I think you guys will find beneficial :

The first study comes from the United States Department of Health and Human Services (9/10/13)
Welfare Statistics

-Blacks make up 39.8% of all welfare recipients, while Whites make up 38.8% of all welfare recipients

This study comes from the Pew Research Center (November 2012)

The Politics and Demographics of Food Stamp Recipients

"Democrats are about twice as likely as Republicans to have received food stamps at some point in their lives—a participation gap that echoes the deep partisan divide in the U.S."

". . .women were about twice as likely as men (23% vs. 12%) to have received food stamps at some point in their lives. Blacks are about twice as likely as whites to have used this benefit during their lives (31% vs. 15%). Among Hispanics, about 22% say they have collected food stamps."

And finally a heart warming story that shows exactly why your vote means absolutely shit (Bogolyubski you will love this):

Supreme Court Is Poised to Legalize Corruption

In 2010 the Supreme Court in (Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission) basically swept aside all legislative restrictions on the role of corporations in political campaigns, ruling that they can spend as much as they want to support or oppose individual candidates. This past Tuesday, the Supreme Court expanded on that 2010 decision by allowing wealthy individuals to contribute up to $3.5 million apiece to candidates and parties in each election cycle.

Here is "conservative" Judge Antonin Scalia's rationale for this 5-4 decision :

"It’s not that we’re stopping people from spending big money on politics,” Justice Antonin Scalia argued. “When you add all that up, I don’t think $3.5 million is a heck of a lot of money."

I mean come on puny mortals, you can't scrounge up a measly $3.5 million to support your candidate and party? Ha ha ha ha ha ha.

It gets better though; As Solicitor General Donald Verrilli tried to point out, that means a party can get everything it needs to run all congressional races around the country from just 450 people.

To which Scalia replied :

" it is fanciful to think that the sense of gratitude lawmakers feel toward their big donors is any greater than the sense of gratitude that that senator or congressman will feel to a PAC, which is spending an enormous amount of money in his district or in his state for his election."

America, FUCK YEAH!

Anonymous said...

"It free to swipe yo' EBT"

Now it's become a point of honor:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NzspsovNvII

countenance said...

St. Louis. Wow.

10% of whites, 60% of blacks.

If you would have forced me to guess, I would have guessed maybe 50% of the city's blacks. Boy was I wrong.

Mr. Clean said...

So CAL Snowman said: In 2010 the Supreme Court in (Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission) basically swept aside all legislative restrictions on the role of corporations in political campaigns, ruling that they can spend as much as they want to support or oppose individual candidates.

I am missing it.... why shouldn't any entity (personal, corporate, other) be allowed freedom of speech, providing that the financial contributions are properly handled/recorded? Given that the Washington Post and the Democrats absolutely loathe the Citizens United decision, shouldn't that give you a clue? I am open to correction...

Mr. Clean said...

Anonymous 3:21 PM said: Many minorities (especially Black people) are screwed beyond reasonable doubt if SNAP benefits ended.

To the extent government should be involved at all, welfare should be handled at the state, county or local level, as most of those jurisdictions have balanced budget constraints and thus the hard decisions will be made. These local jurisdictions know their people better than the politicians in DC.

Private charity also works, as the contributions are truly voluntary and can reduced/revoked at any time for any reason. No entitlements here.

If the feds absolutely need to get involved, OK, give the recipients 20 lb. bags of flour, rice, beans, etc. Give them the C-grade fruit and veggies that the supermarkets won't offer. Give them toiletries that make the store brands look, like, totally premium. And so on. Not good enough for you? Then you ain't that needy.....

Mr. Clean said...

FlowerBell saidIf I couldn't find a real job I would take in ironing, babysit and bake cakes to sell before I would stoop to public assistance, its the way I was raised.

+1. I collected unemployment without qualms, but I can't imagine going on welfare. At absolute worst, I would hit up private charity (family, friends, etc) for help, cut way way back, and work at whatever to survive. My parents' son will not be on a welfare roll.

I imagine many whites who do go on welfare, do so as a last resort, and because children are involved. But the negros see it as an entitlement, indeed, as a lifestyle. Parasites. Disgusting.

Anonymous said...

Mr.Clean, just guessing here, but perhaps the Dems have a more organized money-laundering system in place. It would be nearly impossible to find a white-bread Repubber, let alone an office-full, willing to turn cash into checks for the boss' preferred candidate. That leaves the corporation as the only way to fund the lets-play-fair Repubes.
The best solution to the money problem (while honoring the conceptual integrity of "freedom of speech for entities") is to water it down, by adding 4,000 more congressmen. There is no Constitutional limit of "435", only that each represents the same # of people. Kinda OT for this site, anyways.

So CAL Snowman said...

@Mr. Clean

In a perfect world I would agree with you and the Court's decision, that this is basically a free speech issue. But this country is far from perfect and as you well know extreme wealth is concentrated in the hands of a tiny minority of individuals through massive amounts of corruption, manipulation, deceit and flat out theft. This vast accumulation of wealth allows for an incredibly disproportionate ability to influence politicians and parties. How can the average working man possibly hope to compete with billionaires for political influence? He could go rogue and vote for a third party candidate but how likely is that? The only guys that get the big air time and the exposure are the big money candidates. It is for precisely that reason that I believe in campaign finance reform (like it fucking matters at this point, but still). The ability for billionaires and millionaires to outspend the entire American working class with regards to political donations helps to ensure that the 2 party (read 1 party) system continues in perpetuity. IF there was a hard cap on political donations you would see a lot more third party candidates take office, but as it is now, all the big money either goes to the R team or the D team. I understand that the Post and the Democrats hated the Citizens United decision, but even a blind squirrel occasionally finds an acorn. Not every single thing they oppose is a feather in our cap. I'm pretty sure the Founding Fathers would look negatively on the Koch Bros. and George Soros spending untold millions in Super PACs to control American politics.

Thomas Jefferson even alluded to the danger to the United States posed by wealthy corporations :

"If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the people of all property until their children wake up homeless on the continent their Fathers conquered. . ."

As you well know THEY control the Federal Reserve and therefore the flow of money in the United States. They use that money to fund the politicians that they want. They control the money, they control the politicians. It's a completely rigged game and the Supreme Court is basically saying that it's A-OK with them that the American people try to play the game blind folded with both hands tied around their backs. When a few individuals can wield more power and influence than hundreds of millions, I don't think it's a free speech issue any longer. In this instance the Supreme Court is not protecting the American people but is allowing them to be held hostage by the money creators.

Anonymous said...

Mr.Clean: "I collected unemployment without qualms, but I can't imagine going on welfare."
Your employer paid into your state's unemployment fund, while you were employed, so there should be no qualms for that. Welfare and food stamps are harder, though. Aside from pride, the big killer is, you are not allowed to have $2,000 in the bank. This is not a whiff of a problem for the black grasshoppers, but impossible for most white ants. Maybe this is another reason to heed the calls of White Mom & the others, to pull out of the squidbanks, but who wants to keep their life savings in a mattress?

Gwinnett Gladiator said...

Because all kinds of shell corporations have been set up to funnel money to the PACs, resulting in virtually zero transparency. Those private, corporate "citizens" have a right to privacy, so it would require a lawsuit to have any chance of finding out where the money was coming from. The way Hannity, Rove and Conservatism, Inc. explains it, it's just a basic free speech issue. In reality, I'm afraid it's that special kind of sandwich popping up again, albeit served on the freshest French baguette possible, and topped off with a cute little American flag...

GG

Anonymous said...

Please listen to Ann Barnhardt's latest interview. The crash is coming. Biblical proportions is stating it mildly.

Beans, bullets and band-aids. Stockpile all three.

Anonymous said...

Have you been through the ghetto lately? Liquor stores, hair/nail shops, tires/rim shops, takeout places, and shitty grocery stores that take ebt... end it all. all of us likeminded folks should start taking a stand. we don't need to burn crosses in the woods in Arkansas. A hundred people demonstrating against EBT abuse in front of a shitty grocery store in the ghetto could get real attention.

Anonymous said...

The Citizens United decision was about leveling the playing field. It gave corporations the same right to support candidates whose beliefs and platforms aligned with their interests as the unions have long enjoyed.

Bogolyubski said...

W74:
Considering that Hispanics are counted under the White umbrella, these statistics are still skewed.

I know they're listed as "white" when the DOJ counts perps of violent crime (broken out as "Hispanic" when victims are counted). Are they listed as "white" for welfare benefits, too? It would not surprise me.

Jay Santos said...

As PK mentioned a few times, these numbers are years old. And those years saw gigantic growth in food stamps.

Sure, there are farmers, processors, truckers and retailers that are "paid" from this nightmare. Then there's the sweet little cut that JP Morgan/Citibank or whatever nest of vampires receives for running the program. But a nation can't survive this way. We all know that. Where are the elites going to go once it all collapses? Are there really enough big guys with MP 5s to protect them? I don't think so. If you're bright enough to create this scam, you've got to be smart enough to know it will end. Right?

Californian said...

I mean come on puny mortals, you can't scrounge up a measly $3.5 million to support your candidate and party? Ha ha ha ha ha ha.

That is funny in a Kafkaesque sort of way! Now where's my copy of "The Castle?"

Hombre-Lupa Gardner said...

Hello, first of all I must apologize for my bad English. In my opinion socialist measures are always counter-productive: it's a constant in human history. In fact, the lack of government assistance would have a positive impact in the african american community because they should stop blaming whites for their situation and work hard to achieve their particular goals by their own resources. But .... who can explain this point of view to the public opinion without seeming bigot?

Greetings from Spain.

Bogolyubski said...

So CAL Snowman:
And finally a heart warming story that shows exactly why your vote means absolutely shit (Bogolyubski you will love this):

HOAP!

The funniest thing about this is hearing the whine from the left, whose rank and file still consumes a 70-year old shit-sandwich about the Repukes being the party of the rich and the Dhimmis being the party of Joe Sixpack - as if Soros, Blankfein, Bloomberg, Buffet, Carlos Slim and all the other squids were just po' folks.

Anonymous said...

"Gun enthusiasts" ...

(sigh) It's so much easier to say "gun nut".

Anonymous said...

"Many minorities...are screwed beyond reasonable doubt if SNAP benefits ended. Especially negroes because they have absolutely NO idea on how to live and survive with out government assistance."

But what they can and do know how to do are home invasions, snatch and grabs, and robberies. Trust me, the groid parasite comes to whitey for its gibs, with or without an EBT card.

Anonymous said...

To me this all just begs the question: Try and change things thru the system, i.e. voting, etc... or tip the boat over and rebuild ground up using proven methods from the Founders ? I seriously doubt that the numerous elections needed to even BEGIN to turn the tide are even possible, or would be allowed by the progressives who seek their OWN 'ground up' reforming.

Anonymous said...

We need more whites to sign up for food stamps. If white percentages get anywhere near the blacks, the whole system will fail. It's not easy but a few conversations with someone getting benefits will give you the tips you need to successfully work the system. Blacks aren't really that poor, they just know how to look that way on paper. And once you get food stamps, you get a whole bunch of other stuff without even trying.

Times have changed. You can still have pride as a white who takes care of themselves. A white getting benefits is a strike against our rulers - it's the modern version of loading our musket and fighting the redcoats.

Anonymous said...

I think this video should be plastered everywhere across the world wide web...

http://www.angrywhiteguy.com/?p=9701

speaks for itself....and the fact that this black fella gets it is hilarious and I love when he says I want a new race LMFAO!

Californian said...

There was a time when liberals told us that poverty was a "problem" which could be "solved." Well, once again, here we are after half a century of War on Poverty...and poverty apparently won!

The dreary reality is that EBT and the rest of the programs have become a permanent condition, with the government subsidizing dysfunctional behaviors--and creating a dysfunctional demographic.

How's it going to end?

Californian said...

The funniest thing about this is hearing the whine from the left, whose rank and file still consumes a 70-year old shit-sandwich about the Repukes being the party of the rich and the Dhimmis being the party of Joe Sixpack - as if Soros, Blankfein, Bloomberg, Buffet, Carlos Slim and all the other squids were just po' folks.

It's difficult to take the left seriously when they complain about the "1%" when that same One Percent is subsidizing them via every manner of grant and program. And it's also difficult to take the left seriously when they complain about the "corporate media" when that same corporate media is running liberal agitprop 99% of the time.

paulmurray said...

Check out the map for whites. Appalacia. The very people most likely to hate the guvermit. Half on the teat.
Race is not the direct cause - the direct cause is single motherdom. You get that wherever people are illiterate, criminal dirtbags.

Anonymous said...

The financial crisis is over and the recession ended in 2009.

Thanks comrade I needed a good belly laugh today.

rex freeway said...

Whats up with the Midwest groids being a higher percentage? My state gets whacked with the three highest. A special kinda stupid and lazy is my guess.

Unknown said...

My parents came to the US from India. When I was born, they started a college fund for me. They taught me to work hard and get an education. I got my first part time job when I was 14.

I don't think this is rocket science. The other day I was talking to a kid working at Starbucks, a white girl who is 16, and who is starting college next year. I have white friends who told me they mowed lawns, baby sat, etc., as well as working at McDonalds. A Chinese friend of mine worked in his family's Chinese restaurant after school from the time he was 14, bussing tables and washing dishes.

While I am all for helping people when they are down on their luck, I thought welfare, etc., were supposed to be safety nets? Unfortunately it's become a way of life, and for many people it's an intergenerational thing. A friend of mine sent me a video of a black woman on welfare who has had 15 kids. Why are we supporting someone to have 15 kids?

Most of my friends are white Christians because they share the same values I have - sexual chastity, staying faithful to your spouse and getting married before you have children, working hard, helping neighbors, etc. I think that was the way this country used to be, but it's changed a lot.

Unknown said...

BTW, I don't have any issues with any person of any race - black, white, etc., but I have problems with behaviors. I recently read an interesting book, "Blacks vs. Niggers" written by a black man who pointed out that blacks don't have to be niggers and who basically realms niggers a new one. I think it's an important distinction.

People like Thomas Sowell are not niggers. People like Kwame Kilpatrick and your average ghetto thug are.

Anonymous said...

The video at angrywhiteguy.com is interesting. However, that's all it amounts to since even the speakers themselves admit that any solutions to problems in the black community will be soundly rejected by that community.
They're fighting a losing battle because the 80% of "ghetto bastards, thugs, and ghetto whores" they speak of are breeding out of control and will never voluntarily stop.
The two black men speaking would have a better chance of success in going down to the beach with brooms and trying to sweep all the waves back into the ocean. Actually, it'w worse than that as they're facing a veritable tsunami of black stupidity all funded, supported and subsidized by democrats and libtards with other people's money.
However, their prediction that if it keeps up that we'll see Haiti like conditions for the black community in America is spot on but it doesn't make a difference at all- the tsunami is inbound and nothing is going to stop it. Even in the midst of appalling poverty, Haitians still breed out of control and so too will the ghetto bastards, whores and thugs of America. However, when the crunch comes, they won't resort to eating Haitian dirt cookies- they'll be coming for you and all your stuff since it's "all your fault" anyway.
The only way to stop it would be a massive program of sterilization of all the ghetto whores and thugs and their offspring but since that will never be permitted, prepare for interesting times.

Anonymous said...

If America was sane every head of household receiving welfare would have their television and phone service bills automatically sent to the welfare office to be deducted from their benefits.
Television is nonessential and so is phone service beyond a reasonable amount.

I gave up my television service a few years ago because it was providing far more sewage than quality information or entertainment. I watch my favorite shows on Dvd or on my tablet commercial free and have saved a couple thousand dollars as well.
Easy!

Blacks would have to choose between twinkies or teeeveeee, between cheetos or the hypnotic magic negro dreamland, between eloquent phone conversations or skittles.
Not easy.

eah said...

...Blacks are about twice as likely as whites to have used this benefit during their lives (31% vs. 15%).

I'm not going to bother visiting the site, but just going by the language they use to phrase this statement, it appears to be wrong.

Assuming they mean that, at any moment, if you take a snapshot of the population you will find that the named raw percentages of each group either 1) are getting the "benefit" now, or 2) have gotten it in the past, then Blacks are not "twice as likely as whites to have used this benefit" -- say Whites outnumber Blacks approx 5:1 (a good enough guess to make the point); then the average, random Black is actually about 10x as likely as your average, random White to have used Food Stamps.

countenance said...

Leave it for our people to send a thread about ook dominance in food stamps derailed into a discussion about Citizens United.

Anonymous said...

90210

re.
Considering that Hispanics are counted under the White umbrella, these statistics are still skewed.

THE SAME IS TRUE OF CRIME, CHILD ABUSE ETC STATS.
Browns and mulattos are 'thrown in' w Whites to 'create false equality of outcomes'.

Anonymous said...

who is Ann Barnhartd?

Anonymous said...

If you consider affirmative action a form of welfare, which it obviously is, the percentage of the black population that is self-sufficient is even lower than the EBT usage shows. I'd also like to see a breakdown of public housing and section 8 usage.

Mr. Clean said...

Anonymous October 10, 2013 at 5:54 PM said: Mr.Clean, just guessing here, but perhaps the Dems have a more organized money-laundering system in place.

Yes, they excel at that, although that is getting harder to maintain. Their voter fraud system also gives them the edge.

Anonymous October 10, 2013 at 5:54 PM said: The best solution to the money problem (while honoring the conceptual integrity of "freedom of speech for entities") is to water it down, by adding 4,000 more congressmen. There is no Constitutional limit of "435", only that each represents the same # of people.

Sounds like a good idea. As great as the founding fathers were, in many aspects they simply could not imagine the world we live in today. I guess we need this generation's founding fathers. I am not too optimistic on that....

Mr. Clean said...

Anonymous October 10, 2013 at 6:04 PM said: Your employer paid into your state's unemployment fund, while you were employed, so there should be no qualms for that.

I think I also had a very small amount of my earnings deducted each week to that fund.

But I believe that the extended unemployment (past 26 weeks) is entirely on the federal credit card, so it might not be any different from welfare in that respect.

Anonymous said...

"who is Ann Barnhartd?"

Someone who has it figured out.

10mm AUTO said...

I look at this tactically.

Assume that 1/3 of households that are taking the full Monty (food stamps, ETB/SNAP, Section 8 are either unemployed (and therefore have no reserves, no means of getting reserves or are perfectly willing to put a gun in your face (or anyone else's face) to secure their reserves.

So within my operational area, how much of a threat am I facing as I either leave my area due to "difficulties" or hunker down to wait it out like the people in Cyprus did. I am assuming that the Leviathan gets back on its feet a few more times (bail-in's, Gold seizures, asset forfeitures, 401K rape, etc) before BRA really stops its clock.

The Cyprus mess was significant in that the deposits were frozen First. Then the buzzards decided which parts to consume over the course of several weeks, finally settling on 60%. It is significant in that stores in the USA, with their assets frozen, could not pay for deliveries out of their checking accounts, let alone payroll. With everyone having "direct Deposit" today, such a system is particularly loaded for such a disruption. In a disaster, wealthy homeowners could get away with hand written promissory notes cooked up under their signature, as help is poring in from all over the Country and prices of, say generators, is at first huge then falls as the crisis extends. But in a Nationwide banking crisis, there is no "outside". The disaster zone and people within will want "cash on the Barrel", either USA script (at some discount reflected in high prices or hard money, gold or silver. An AR-15 rifle with a 30 round full mag will go from $1K currently to $15K as night falls. A can of chili to a hungry man is worth perhaps two silver rounds. If he has children to feed, maybe more. Cheaper and MUCH more secure would be to offer a man with a rifle bed, food and an ounce of gold a day to be your "eyes behind" so you and you family can sleep instead of fending off the wolves.

D'wanton and Jamal will not have thought this through, their impulse will be to simply steal and rape, not necessarily in that order, using their hooptie to cruise the places where the necessities of life are available after looting Big Screen TV's, etc.

So how many?

Based on the figures for Seattle (I don't live there, but it is reasonably close) there would be 11,308 negros who would be immediately hungry and feral. As this would be complimented by an additional 37,000 negros who would begin to loot for fun and profit and most armed with illegal weapons, mostly handguns and AK's.

48,000 negros is a lot and this is a State with 3% negro population and only 6% of the city. Nearly 50,000 feral animals driving around robbing, looting and supported a hard core 10,000 determined to take what they need.

By the third day, as we saw in L.A., they will start saying to themselves, "I know someone who has money and a pretty daughter", aka Targeted Strikes. In Katrina, the hate turned on the White fast, even to the point of shooting at rescue helicopters, but because of the confusion, the immediate need for water and then the presence of the Military, White casualties were low (The Superdome would have exploded in chaos if there had not been armed Military there to literally remove the Whites to another building.)

Bogo would say that this was the perfect setup. Government Squids cause a banking crisis due to loose money policy to line their pockets; because of the violence caused by a fetid mix of illegals, negros and the crisis, the Squids encourage the declaration of Martial law. "After" the crisis they never relax all of the restrictions because of the threat they caused which gives them control over ALL private wealth (Like Obama's Executive Order allowing seizure of assets during an "emergency". Like the 9/11 Patriot Act but all over the Country. Fun for the Whole family.

White Homeland

Anonymous said...

Californian said...

There was a time when liberals told us that poverty was a "problem" which could be "solved." Well, once again, here we are after half a century of War on Poverty...and poverty apparently won!

The dreary reality is that EBT and the rest of the programs have become a permanent condition, with the government subsidizing dysfunctional behaviors--and creating a dysfunctional demographic.

How's it going to end?


We face three great crises in the near future. Any one of them will cause not only the EBT card to run out, but all government based income, whether justified or not, all big corporate income, most businesses that rely on transportation for their raw materials and to ship finished products (includes Amazon), and anything that needs credit.

Unless you are an independent bricklayer who has his own kiln and a supply of cash paying customers, you are screwed. Read on.

10mm AUTO said...

"But what they can and do know how to do are home invasions, snatch and grabs, and robberies. Trust me, the groid parasite comes to whitey for its gibs, with or without an EBT card.

October 10, 2013 at 11:00 PM"

Oh My God. When you think about it, their entire Culture has been preparing: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gz8l7ezWxsY

CHECK OUT THE LYRICS

Mr. Clean said...

So CAL Snowman said: But this country is far from perfect and as you well know extreme wealth is concentrated in the hands of a tiny minority of individuals through massive amounts of corruption, manipulation, deceit and flat out theft.

I don't well know this. I don't think that everyone with lots of money is inherently greedy or crooked or evil. Some are, and I don't think that any of them are as pure as the wind-driven snow. But many of them are talented, successful, driven, hard-working, etc. In some cases, these are exactly the types of people that you want involved in the political process.

So CAL Snowman said: This vast accumulation of wealth allows for an incredibly disproportionate ability to influence politicians and parties.

I think you are overstating things. Yes, you need money for a campaign, and the more the better, but there have been some extensively financed campaigns which grossly outspent their opponents and yet still lost big.

So CAL Snowman said: How can the average working man possibly hope to compete with billionaires for political influence?

He can't.

But in the end, his vote counts just as much as the billionaire's. Which the billionaire probably sees as highly unfair.

So CAL Snowman said: He could go rogue and vote for a third party candidate but how likely is that? The only guys that get the big air time and the exposure are the big money candidates.

I have seen third-party candidates get major exposure in my lifetime. At this point, third-parties only are relevant to the extent that they can influence one of the two major parties. But that can change.

So CAL Snowman said: It is for precisely that reason that I believe in campaign finance reform (like it fucking matters at this point, but still). The ability for billionaires and millionaires to outspend the entire American working class with regards to political donations helps to ensure that the 2 party (read 1 party) system continues in perpetuity. IF there was a hard cap on political donations you would see a lot more third party candidates take office,

What's stopping those wealthy people from exercising their first amendment rights and generously supporting third party candidates? They would do so if they saw it was in their best interest. If they don't, it's because they don't.

So CAL Snowman said: but as it is now, all the big money either goes to the R team or the D team.

Because that is where the "big money" is best spent, according to the people providing it. And it is their call, because it is their money. Yes, sometimes it is a quid pro quo (particularly for the Democrats), but other times, people are just backing what they see as their best option.

So CAL Snowman said: I'm pretty sure the Founding Fathers would look negatively on the Koch Bros. and George Soros spending untold millions in Super PACs to control American politics.

Who knows what they would think if they were confronted with the realities of 21st century elections?

Bogolyubski said...

Anon:
To me this all just begs the question: Try and change things thru the system, i.e. voting, etc... or tip the boat over and rebuild ground up using proven methods from the Founders ? I seriously doubt that the numerous elections needed to even BEGIN to turn the tide are even possible, or would be allowed by the progressives who seek their OWN 'ground up' reforming.

Remember the "Contract with America" from the 1990s? They were going to "end welfare as we know it." Newt and the Repukes even managed to enact a very mild reform of welfare which Beelzebubba signed. All undone after Pelosi and the gang took over in 2007.

Some like to say there is no difference between the R-jerseys and the D-jerseys but that's not exactly correct. Pelosi, Reed and their troops did something you will never see Repukes do: actually undo the few things enacted by the R-jerseys. The best Repukes ever manage to do is something like the infamous "assault weapons" law of the 1990s, which had an automatic sunset provision. Repukes managed to actually let it expire - even though Imam al-Dubya wanted to renew it with more features.

Last year during the campaign a very revealing story was posted in the discussion threads here. It was about a 1983 consent decree issued by a Federal judge in New Jersey which applies nationally to the Repuke party. The decree basically is a license for massive vote fraud in any district with a significant groid presence. The Repukes made one half-hearted attempt to appeal this decree and gave up.

The D-jerseys actually deliver for their base: more socialism, more gibsmedat, more BRA, more racial preferences, etc. The R-jerseys, while sharing the identical ultimate objective of a totalitarian regime with the D-jerseys, have a differnt role to play. They lie about the real goal and make promises to their base which are never kept. They serve as a phony opposition to draw time, energy, and money away from those who want to reverse the course we are on. They are "conservative" only in the sense that they conserve the progress made towards the ultimate objective by the D-jerseys. Things have been unidirectional for a very long time. Such a rigged system is simply not reformable.

Bogolyubski said...

countenance:
Leave it for our people to send a thread about ook dominance in food stamps derailed into a discussion about Citizens United.

What's more, it's really a high-level discussion of the issue too. You would never see this type of knowledge of the basic facets of the case discussed by the left.

Bogolyubski said...

Jay Santos:
Sure, there are farmers, processors, truckers and retailers that are "paid" from this nightmare. Then there's the sweet little cut that JP Morgan/Citibank or whatever nest of vampires receives for running the program. But a nation can't survive this way. We all know that. Where are the elites going to go once it all collapses? Are there really enough big guys with MP 5s to protect them? I don't think so. If you're bright enough to create this scam, you've got to be smart enough to know it will end. Right?

Interesting question. There is a thing which has been noted about Ponzi schemes (which is what the so-called "free-market economy" we live in boils down to) whereby those in the midst of it are completely unable to see that it will, in fact, come crashing down. Look at Bernie Madoff (a small-time player compared with the self-described "Masters of the Universe"). Madoff was not stupid, yet he somehow could not see that his Ponzi scheme was unsustainable. You see something similar with addicted gamblers - just one more roil of the dice and all will be well.

Related to this is the position held by Ann Barnhardt: The oligarchs think they can manage the collapse in order to use it as a means of setting up their totalitarian utopia. This is a sort of 'end of Weimar Germany' scenario except the great savior will be someone like D'Won Mocha Messiah. It is curious that they rejected Mittens the Underwear-Banksta as their teleprompter-reader since he would have been a far more diligent and effective step-n-fetchit than Housenigga Hussein, who is quite lazy.

There's also the possibility that the oligarchs know very well that it will collapse into chaos and thus plan to be sipping fu-fu drinks on a sunny, groid-free beach on the Eastern shore of the Mediterranean or looking out over a vast remote estancia in South America - ensconced and quite untouchable, smirking at reports of wars, starvations and massacres in the USSA and EUSSR, realizing that the population of sheep, cows and swine they once ruled over will end up significantly reduced. Note also that the one does not rule out the other. Maybe some squids are like the gambling addicts, while others are more warlike, being long term strategists.

Anonymous said...

who is Ann Barnhartd?
Ann Barnhardt's evil twin. She even has the Spock beard.
Seriously, has Google banned your IP?

Don M said...

"There's also the possibility that the oligarchs know very well that it will collapse into chaos and thus plan to be sipping fu-fu drinks on a sunny, groid-free beach on the Eastern shore of the Mediterranean or looking out over a vast remote estancia in South America - ensconced and quite untouchable, smirking at reports of wars, starvations and massacres in the USSA and EUSSR, realizing that the population of sheep, cows and swine they once ruled over will end up significantly reduced. Note also that the one does not rule out the other. Maybe some squids are like the gambling addicts, while others are more warlike, being long term strategists."

Bogo, I think you've hit the bullseye. Why on earth would that enterprising tribe of countryless men ever care whether or not the USSA remained politically unified?

If the USA disintegrated and we found ourselves with a homeland somewhere, you can bet our leaders would be visited by a Mr. Shapiro or Cohen, offering great rates on a loan to buy weapons from IMI or the Chinese to protect said homeland.

Oh, and you can bet Messrs. Shapiro and Cohen would be visiting the Chieftans of Aztlan and Louie Farrakan's "New Mecca" (formerly Chicago) with the EXACT SAME OFFER.

Ever see the movie "The International"? I am surprised it got made at all.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UiN1xHaNDJ0

Money quote: "You see the real value in a conflict, the TRUE value, is in the debt that it creates. You control the debt, you control everything."

So CAL Snowman said...

Bogolyubski said :

"There's also the possibility that the oligarchs know very well that it will collapse into chaos and thus plan to be sipping fu-fu drinks on a sunny, groid-free beach on the Eastern shore of the Mediterranean or looking out over a vast remote estancia in South America. . ."

Funny you should mention South America, as it seems our buddies the Bushes have already made a major real estate purchase in Paraguay. The Bush clan, in 2006, purchased a 100,000 acre ranch in Paraguay that sits atop one of South America's largest natural aquifers. Seems like a smart investment.

Bush Family Buys Ranch In Paraguay

So CAL Snowman said...

@ Don M

Yes "The International" is a very revealing film and I agree that I am surprised that they made it, seeing as how it lays out to a T, the machinations behind the predatory international banking system as it feasts on the world. But then again these people LOVE rubbing it in our faces. They like taunting us, they are sort of like the Zodiac killer in that regard.

james m said...

When I drove around the ghetto in the early 90's you could buy anything you wanted from the Corner Store/Bodega with Food Stamps but the catch was it cost twice as much so: Box of Newports? $5 cash $10-Food Stamps
40 of O-E 8 Hunnit? (Olde English 800 Malt Liquor) $1.50 cash $3.00-Food stamps.
I have been told its even easier today because the store just swipes the card for double anything. Want $20 cash? well just swipe the EBT card for $40 and enter your PIN. $20 for you $20 fo tha sto'
I knew of a corner store that would sell glass crack stems for for $4... in Food Stamps
Crackheads (usually white) would try to pay the taxi fare in Food Stamps. They never understood why I refused take them ( many drivers did) Fuck! I was working 72 hr weeks( back then) and I'm going to the supermarket with Food Stamps?!!! I was too dumb at the time to see how it all worked, now when I drive past one of those stores I know it makes more money than a crackhouse.

Anonymous said...

"Check out the map for whites. Appalacia. The very people most likely to hate the guvermit. Half on the teat.
Race is not the direct cause - the direct cause is single motherdom."

Here is what is racially relevant. Yes, whites do take some government benefits, but you can live, work and walk through their neighborhoods without constant fear for your life. I'll take the Appalachian folks over Detroit detritus any day of the week.

Southron said...

I was at the store a few days ago, and got behind a hispanic woman that was using WIC. Everything she bought was the wrong item, and after about 10 minutes of watching the woman, the cashier, and a front-end manager discuss it, I went to another checkout lane.

The lane I went to this time had a black woman and her boyfriend/husband/whatever. They were using WIC or EBT, and were having a similar problem.

I finally got to a third checkout line, about 20-25 minutes after my first attempt.

I thought it was a perfect metaphor for this country. Minorities clogging up the works because they can't even use freebies correctly while the dumb white guy has to wait to pay for his own groceries.

Jay in DC said...

A few things (not)briefly...

1) james m now has something relevant to say after "shooting his load" against some of the most enlightened, long term, and aware people here. If you want me, at least, I don't speak for anyone else to acknowledge anything you post or say here that isn't reactionary or inflammatory BULLSHIT start with this-- "Maybe I wrong."

Otherwise, fuck off directly...

2) Southron; This is the States circa 2013. I guess you are just getting hip to this shit. I cannot TELL you the number of times I've been in a checkout line in DC w/ the same occurrence. "Oh wait, what da price?" Ok, lemmy pull some stuff outa da cart. What be da price now? "Da Cart" contains at least one welfare kid, while there are at least 2 out of the cart. Africans and Mestizos, all day long... welcome to your future.

3) 10MM AUTO- We are on the same page and I love your conjecture and theory but I think you are too defeatist and/or give hominids to much credit. Just as you'd never expect a chimpanzee to reach the great heights of homo-sapien neither should you expect Africanus-Homonid to either.

Guns and numbers, yes. Planning and strategy... not so much. Piss poor shots, with inferior weaponry. Such a beast will perish soon in a total meltdown as you postulate.

I know a "few" people in and around DC who have diversified their portfolios recently. Dollars/fiat currency are still useful in the short term. Silver/Gold are useful in the medium term as the standard of trade since time immemorial. And in the long term of chaos there are only a few currencies which are largely based on the very correct Maslow Pyramid of Hierarchy of Needs.

As you alluded to- valuation in the future will look like this-- "assault weapons", of any caliber or type, mags/ammo to feed said weapons, heirloom seeds that can breed infinitely unlike Monsanto seeds that experience apoptosis long before they should. Technology particularly that which can be charged by solar power if/when the grid goes down.

Number 3 is a laughable fantasy for most. Black, brown, yellow, or white. As you know your FELLOW MAN is not at fucking all prepared. This is ok. Follow your gut and prosper.

Anonymous said...

90210...
Southron, that really gets to me!

AnalogMan said...

Bogolyubski 11:59 -

Things have been unidirectional for a very long time.

Case in point: this headline on Drudge this morning -

'COMPROMISE' WOULD FUND OBAMACARE, LIFT DEBT CEILING, REOPEN GOVERNMENT AND REVERSE SEQUESTER CUTS...

How is that different from abject surrender?

Anonymous said...

While i can't give you the full stats, i can tell you what i have seen while working for a property management company just south of Atlanta for the past 15 years. We have worked with hundreds of Section 8 recipients and during all this time, only 2 were white. A few years ago, i got into a heated discussion with a friend from Chicago who accused me of being racist, so i took out our statistics & broke it down to the objective facts. When our tenants move out, we do a report of damages & unpaid rent, etc. Over a 10 yr period, blacks moving out had done well over $100, 000 in damages & the housing authorities will not pay our owners for that. Our white tenants had done less than $4000 and more often, made arrangements to pay it off. Numbers don't lie.

SomeGirl003 said...

This is so awful. We need to cut off all welfare and just led the nigs all die. I work 3 jobs and struggle every single day to put food on my table, yet I was denied food stamps for being white. While we pay for nigs to eat well, watch TV, have iPhones, drive Impalas, and basically live the good life never working.

Bogolyubski said...

Anonymous:
While i can't give you the full stats, i can tell you what i have seen while working for a property management company just south of Atlanta for the past 15 years. We have worked with hundreds of Section 8 recipients and during all this time, only 2 were white. A few years ago, i got into a heated discussion with a friend from Chicago who accused me of being racist, so i took out our statistics & broke it down to the objective facts. When our tenants move out, we do a report of damages & unpaid rent, etc. Over a 10 yr period, blacks moving out had done well over $100, 000 in damages & the housing authorities will not pay our owners for that. Our white tenants had done less than $4000 and more often, made arrangements to pay it off. Numbers don't lie.

Not surprised. We do need more hard numbers and facts about Section 8 - which no Repuke has ever mentioned curtailing, much less defunding (I don't even mention the D-jerseys as everyone knows that they always want more). Despite the expenses left to the property owners mentioned, there has to be someone working a Jamie Diamond angle on the program and making money faster than a crack house - hence the complete abscence of opposition to it. Section 8 is a major program used by the refugee-resettlement racket. It could be REITs and property-management outfits who are really vashing in.

james m said...

This is it! The End is Nigh!!!
http://boston.cbslocal.com/2013/10/12/computer-upgrade-blamed-for-nationwide-ebt-system-shutdown-on-saturday/

Californian said...

Here is what is racially relevant. Yes, whites do take some government benefits, but you can live, work and walk through their neighborhoods without constant fear for your life. I'll take the Appalachian folks over Detroit detritus any day of the week.

On top of this: white people collectively take the benefits and turn them into something better: new businesses, functional schools, safe neighborhoods, advanced technologies etc.

Regardless of how one feels about state intervention in the free market, government subsidies have resulted in developments in IT, satellites, aviation. But here's the thing: STEM has largely been a white field. And white people have taken advantage of government programs such as veterans' benefits and highways to build functional suburbs and put themselves through college.

Compare this to the massive government investment in the black demographic: welfare, AA, minority grants, historically black colleges and universities, and etc., etc. What do black collectively turn this largesse into? Well, you get Detroit. And Newark. And Gary. A hundred burned out inner cities. Rap. 70+% illegitimacy. Gangbanging. Massive school dropouts. Huge numbers of black men in lockup. And more racial shakedowns.

In the bigger picture: look at sub-Saharan Africa with all the foreign aid, food shipments, NGO activism, save-the-children(tm), and etc., dumped into it. What do you get, even in mineral rich countries like Congo and Angola? Epic poverty, disintegrating infrastructure, kleptocracies, and even more begging bowl PSAs.

There is a collective black inability to build better societies--even when given the resources and the blueprints to do so. This has a negative impact on everyone else. To keep BRA going means endless transfers of wealth from white taxpayers. Or moving the dysfunction around (via forced integration rackets). Or even more insanely, importing more of the problem (African refugee resettlement). But the cycle continues. Often out of frustration, blacks collectively scapegoat whites (blame it on the old devil "racism") or start destroying things (riots, flashmobbing, ethnic cleansing of whites in southern Africa).

A common enough meme these decadent days is that "things will be worse for my children than for me." But most people do not take it to the conclusion, that the reason things are getting worse is that the government is subsidizing the expansion of the most dysfunctional demographic. It's as if it is taking everything that white people have built since the Renaissance and are tearing it down.

Anonymous said...

@paulmurray:

"Check out the map for whites. Appalacia. The very people most likely to hate the guvermit. Half on the teat. Race is not the direct cause - the direct cause is single motherdom. You get that wherever people are illiterate, criminal dirtbags."

That's the explanation the good, college educated, essay writing boys and girls of NR and WS say. Single motherhood. Ha ha ha ha. Sorry, but that's like saying the alcoholic died of cirrhosis.

The question you have to ask yourself (if you're honest) is why, when black populations find themselves living outside of the U.S., they never seem to differ in their approach to children: Regardless of their situation, they inevitably have more chilluns out of wedlock than any other group of people. It isn't just Africa. Illegitimacy is so common in black populations regardless of the setting as to be the norm worldwide.

You can argue about the details, overlap, and fringe behavior seeking ways to paper this over, but rather than do that, let's consider the Chinese diaspora: Can you name a single Chinese community anywhere in the world where illegitimacy is above 10%? Whether it's Brazil, Russia, U.S., Canada, Norway, South Africa -- despite the presence of welfare, you simply won't find it.

It's more than single motherhood. It's a willingness, innate or conscious, to avoid it. You can change behaviors of populations over a period of time with social pressure and gutting cultural stigmas. So you see a lot of White illegitimacy (roughly 25%) in contrast to 75 years ago in the U.S., but do you honestly believe it will ever top 70%? Do you really think you'll ever see Chinese with rates that exceed 10%?

Yes, black populations a hundred years ago had much smaller illegitimacy rates in the U.S. But they also had Jim Crow and a White law enforcement community that tolerated very little bad behavior. Remove that "unnatural" pressure, and things tend to snap back.

paulmurray said...

"I am missing it.... why shouldn't any entity (personal, corporate, other) be allowed freedom of speech, providing that the financial contributions are properly handled/recorded?"

Because corporations are deeply undemocratic, concentrating all power into the few executives at the top, whose lives are nothing like the lives of ordinary people; and because corporations are synthetic, fictitious persons created by the state itself.

Anonymous said...

Where are these megamillions in tax dollars going?

Into the pockets of transnational Big Ag and Pharma corporations. They are the ultimate recipients of welfare in this case, as in so many others.

This money isn't purchasing basic foodstuffs--like bulk grains and beans--for "the poor" to eat. "The poor" are spending it on high-markup processed ballast that causes obesity (Google weight gain carbohydrates) and inflammation-related health problems (Google inflammation diabetes cardiovascular).

LA Times had a photo of a woman who was complaining about EBT cuts the other day. Photo showed her daughter handing her a box of "taco seasoning." I think that's called "salt" in most places, and you can bet she paid a thousand percent markup for it, with wealth created by and skimmed from the productive.

In 2011, 85 cents of the consumer food dollar went to things like marketing, advertising, packaging, processing, legal and accounting for the food industry.

Only 10 cents went to the farmer.

This means that most of a food dollar is not for food.

Is that bad? I don't think so. It means that productive white workers' tax dollars are creating jobs for workers in professionalized industries. With the exception of food service (some 30 cents of each food dollar goes to that).

http://www.ers.usda.gov/data-products/food-dollar-series/food-dollar-application.aspx

Anonymous said...

Considering we've thrown some $20 trillion at this war on poverty started by LBJ, what do we have to show for it? It hasn't done anything other than create a bunch of welfare leeches and the poverty rate is still not any better. I can see some temp hand ups but no hand outs. I raised 4 kids on a military enlisted salary when the pay really bit the big one without a dime of food stamps. Cut off the hand outs and certainly don't reward more kids with more money. Can't feed em, don't breed em.

Anonymous said...

Blacks are outbreeding Whites. Birth Control forced on White couples. Blacks give name and address and get $1,000 Disability, another $1,000 Welfare and $500 a month EBT while genuine disabled Whites fight for months for help.

Anonymous said...

Great observations by paul and readers...but the real truth is that this money isn't just "going to blacks."

It is washed through them, so to speak, to make up for their lack of establishing purchasing power. (Caused by their genetic and social pathology.)

EBT/SNAP money ends up going to the Big Ag corporations who DEPEND ON THIS WELFARE as part of their profit model. Some of them, like WalMart, admit this.

And at some level I don't have a problem with it, because the EBT/SNAP money is creating jobs in the food and fiber sector. Some 85 or more cents of every consumer food dollar goes to something other than the food itself--processing, packaging, advertising/marketing, transportation, labor, etc.

Those professional jobs are probably largely held by whites...but I don't know that for a fact, and it deserves examination.

Those EBT/SNAP tax dollars prop up the shareholder profits of those companies, which largely benefits the productive employed members of society, in the form of investment earnings/income/profits.

Still, if I were in charge, food assistance would be like the old days: there would be surplus foods made available, and if that weren't good enough for the so-called hungry, then screw them. I'd much rather my money subsidize scientists, engineers, creators/producers, infrastructure geniuses, new technologies (especially sane, rather than boondoggle, efficient/green ones) than pay negroes to produce more bipedal sponges.

Anonymous said...

FlowerBell, so glad to know that you have people who will pay you for ironing, people who will trust you to babysit, and that people will buy the cakes you bake in a non-commercial oven, without health code oversight. Most people aren't so lucky as to live in 1955!