Meet Mark

Let me introduce myself. My name is Mark Sisson. I’m 63 years young. I live and work in Malibu, California. In a past life I was a professional marathoner and triathlete. Now my life goal is to help 100 million people get healthy. I started this blog in 2006 to empower people to take full responsibility for their own health and enjoyment of life by investigating, discussing, and critically rethinking everything we’ve assumed to be true about health and wellness...

Tell Me More
Stay Connected
July 31, 2007

Who Are the Real Welfare Queens?

By Sara
32 Comments

55 Billion Goes to:

School lunch & breakfast programs
WIC (Women, Infants, & Children)
Food subsidies
Food stamps
Nutrition education
Other food and health programs

127 Billion Goes to:

Corporate funding (direct & indirect)
Grants to Fortune 500 companies
Big Agra subsidies (including sugar)

References: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5

Further Reading:

School Vending Machines

Size Matters

Most Popular Posts

Subscribe to Mark’s Daily Apple feeds

TAGS:  big agra, Hype

Subscribe to the Newsletter

If you'd like to add an avatar to all of your comments click here!

Leave a Reply

32 Comments on "Who Are the Real Welfare Queens?"

avatar

Sort by:   newest | oldest | most voted
groovalicious
groovalicious
9 years 1 month ago

Nice. Real…nice.

Oxybeles
Oxybeles
9 years 1 month ago
It deeply saddens me that this website appears to not only lean LEFT, but tilts so far it may topple over! Would you please provide a complete breakdown of the statistics to allow for a valid discussion? Consider the following question, if the Government pays a farmer not to grow the crop, i.e. sugar, would that be good? You do realize there is only one producing Sugar Plantation in Hawaii, correct? All of the other closed. And if one desires that more money be spent on welfare, why not contribute to a private charity and/or volunteer. Okay, off the Right… Read more »
Dana
Dana
5 years 3 months ago
If private charities are so great, why do they always have to beg for money? If private charities are so great, why were so many people still starving and homeless before the New Deal? Many of them children? Don’t get me wrong, I think the welfare system is broken, and turning it from AFDC into TANF made it broken…er. And WIC is a joke. But there was lots and lots of time for social conservatives to come up with a better idea–some 100 years or more. You didn’t. End of story. Excuse me if I happen to think helping the… Read more »
Macy
Macy
5 years 1 month ago
Most non-profits charities (ie Catholic Charities, Christians who Care, et al)were cleaned out 2 years ago. Anyone w/o housing can count on waiting 5+ years for housing this includes the disabled and aged. So where are we going after the government ruined our economy with their wild spending? We are living in garages and porches for those of us lucky enough to have someone who has a real understanding of what is going on and how little the government is doing to correct their greed and disregard to the rest of us humans. Blame it on the people? The people… Read more »
liberty
liberty
4 years 1 month ago
yy greataunt and a number of her brothers and sisters were taken care of by the Catholic church during the depression. your question about the homeless and starving before the New Deal suggest you have proof that the New Deal was responsible for bringing people out of starvation and homelessness. now we now have 78 years of Big Government and 100 years of a central bank. we are 15 trillion in the hole. 1 in 5 Americans are receive foodstamp. We have a sustained 8%+ unemployment rate. unempolyment for those 25 years and younger is probadly closer to 25%. the… Read more »
Lt.Uhura
Lt.Uhura
5 years 3 months ago

My police officer spouse who does child abuse and neglect cases cases can tell you how the private charities are just not as efficient nor as effective as gov’t services for helping the poor, the powerless, the transient, etc. He’s got a case where the children walked by the private child abuse prevention center ever day after having the crap kicked out of them. These kids had black eyes, broken toes, etc.

It was a gov’t agency that discovered the abuse, investigated and ended the abuse.

Lt.Uhura
Lt.Uhura
5 years 3 months ago

PS. Don’t get me wrong. I do love that people give and run charities, and there is a need for them. But again, it just is not as efficient or fair as when done on a larger scale. Each charity has to do all the background screening for assets, income, history of abusing the charity, etc. It is redundant. It only helps people who might have heard about their charity. Most require the people to worship for their assistance.
Most of the welfare system brokenness comes from not having adequate staffing for auditing, investigations, and enforcement.

Brian
Brian
9 years 1 month ago
Left or right I think we can all agree that the government has done more than its share of – pork – special interest spending. Personally I am more of a free market fan for corporations and farmers, if they can’t be profitable then they probably do something else, and yes for ‘national interest’ entities as well. Also, I am a firm believer in the idea that we shouldn’t be just handing out assistance – a person should have to to give something back to society if they are able. I know I read blogs like this to help find… Read more »
Alice E Mechler
Alice E Mechler
5 years 4 months ago

“corporations and farmers, if they can’t be profitable then they probably do something else…”

Small farmers and family farms are disappearing at record rates! (I know, We were one!) When a small/family goes out of business, chances are it will be bought by a corporate farm.

Big corporations (e.g. WalMart) come into a community and suddenly all the family owned small businesses go away.

Both statements are because this is NOT a ‘free market’. The markets are controlled by Wall Street, period.

Elizabeth
Elizabeth
5 years 4 months ago

My impression was that farm subsidies tended to go disproportionately to large corporations. Correct me if I’m wrong but doesn’t that stack the deck even more in favor of corporate farmers?

Oxybeles
Oxybeles
9 years 1 month ago

I am more Free Market for everybody!

Whether it is an Individual or a Corporation. Just say no!

Yes, the truly needy, i.e., those that cannot take care of themselves, not those that choose not to do so and feel entitled or an entitlement, but those who seriously can’t get by without it.

As for education on nutrition, perhaps sites such as this do a better job than the Government. Not perhaps, a much better job. Hence, the Government should reduce it role

Dana
Dana
5 years 3 months ago
Nobody would feel entitled to that tiny of a check every month. It’s actually better to go out and earn your own even if it’s minimum wage IF it is only you getting by on it and you’re not having to support children too. Even Medicaid sucks. I was never on AFDC/TANF but I was on Medicaid and they do the bare minimum to keep from killing you. If you suffer permanent damage from them not doing any more than that, well, that’s your fault for feeling entitled to be poor. [/snark] You need to do a little homework into… Read more »
Lt.Uhura
Lt.Uhura
5 years 3 months ago

“perhaps sites such as this do a better job than the government” You are truly naive if you think seriously poor people have access to the internet. Many rural poor do not even have lights or telephones. I’ve been there. And now with gov’t funding cuts to libraries and schools, you’ll begin to see even the urban poor losing more tools to pull themselves out of ignorance and poverty. They phone companies already yanked phone booths for those who couldn’t afford a telephone.

Mark
9 years 1 month ago

Why thanks, Oxybeles! One positive thing about increasing access to the web is that people can begin to take advantage of tools and information in greater numbers than ever before. Personal responsibility is a must and that’s what we hope to inspire people to strive for. Your health is up to you.

Arthur
Arthur
9 years 1 month ago
Looking through your links, I couldn’t find the 127 billion mark you mention. The first article describes the 55 billion the Department of Agriculture spends on food subsities, which is 60% of the USDA budget, leaving only 36 billion for corporate agriculture subsities. The second article (testimony) does not limit itself to the USDA. It claims 75 billion dollars in corporate welfare. Also note this testimony is 8 years old. The fourth link is a more updated study on broad corporate welfare which puts the number at 92 billion, though the article admits it’s terms were broad, and the Department… Read more »
BillyHW
BillyHW
9 years 1 month ago

It deeply saddens me that this website appears to not only lean LEFT, but tilts so far it may topple over!

And here I thought it was conservative to be pro-free market and thus *against* big government’s corporate subsidies for the agri-business conglomerates.

Brian
Brian
9 years 1 month ago

SHH Billy — that’s a secret — conservatives aren’t suppose to make sense…

terry
terry
9 years 1 month ago

It deeply saddens me that you have found a way to rear the ugly “left vs. right” head in this conversation. When really all that is being discussed is FACT vs. FICTION. We all know that politics is far from fact raising.

Sonagi
Sonagi
9 years 1 month ago
“That being said, on the right side of your comparison chart, you have relabeled the USDA’s budget for FOOD SUBSIDIES as HUMAN WELFARE, and then you compare that to ALL CORPORATE WELFARE (government subsidies to techology companies, transportation businesses, etc.), not just the agricultural end. Isn’t that a bit like comparing apples to oranges? If you just look at agriculture, we’re actually spending less on farm subsidies (CORPORATE) than we are on food subsidies (HUMAN). “ Actually, some food subsidies are corporate subsidies, too. Save for the milk cartons, all of the food served in school breakfast programs is prepackaged,… Read more »
Oxybeles
Oxybeles
9 years 1 month ago

Billy stated,

“And here I thought it was conservative to be pro-free market and thus *against* big government’s corporate subsidies for the agri-business conglomerates.”

True and I agree, wholeheartedly.

However, I read the comparison as not enough is being spent on individuals as compared to corporations and that individuals should increase exponentially to that of the alleged corporate welfare.

Hence, LLTWS! Long-Live-The-Welfare-State.

Sara
9 years 1 month ago

LLTWS – lol, that’s a new one I hadn’t heard! 🙂

Wow, thank you SO much, everyone, for all your criticisms, questions and points. You have no idea how much I appreciate all of you taking the time to voice your ideas and concerns. This truly helps me to do a better job and to learn. Wonderful points, everyone. Until the next graphic! 😉

DeliverUs
8 years 22 days ago

What is being discussed here cuts to the corp of corporate fascism and monopoly and is more extreme right leaning (as in Hitler/Mussolini) than left (Congressman Dr. Paul CD-14 -R- has spoken extensively on this very issue). We would identify corp. welfare queens today as neo-conservatives or corporatist, not true constitutional conservatives, because they really don’t give a damn about your rights, just the company bottom line as supported by your tax dollars in the political “pay to play” system….i.e. we pay while they play. It’s a closed loop with campaign contributions assuring the tax gifts go to the monopolies…..

trackback

[…] does – take up the majority of supermarket square footage. (Not to mention those government farm subsidies, but that’s another post.) Yes, grains are solidly etched into our modern Western psyche – just […]

matty
matty
6 years 2 months ago

sorry i’m a bit late to the discussion, but i’m a newbie here. I just wanted to mention that government farm subsidies hurt farmers. You benefit far more from them the more acres you have. So almost all of the money goes to large industrial farms, and actual farmers see the difference between the price they can charge and the market price increase even further.

BR
BR
5 years 5 months ago

Sorry, reality has a liberal bias.

Jean
Jean
5 years 4 months ago

Medicare and social security are not welfare or entitlements… They are programs we have invested in our entire working lives… So we don’t slip into poverty when we are no longer able to work.

Dana
Dana
5 years 3 months ago

Medicare also kicks in for people with end-stage renal disease, and Social Security helps orphans and widows/widowers. Neither is JUST for the elderly. But we all seem to want to forget that for some reason.

Just like, with all the complaining about Medicare not being a Cadillac entitlement anymore, people tend to forget that Medicaid has *never* been a good program. Some of us would kill for the chance to buy into Medicare, we really would.

Dana
Dana
5 years 3 months ago

Oh, let’s not forget the disabled. Social Security is for the disabled too.

trackback

[…] does – take up the majority of supermarket square footage. (Not to mention those government farm subsidies, but that’s another post.) Yes, grains are solidly etched into our modern Western psyche – […]

trackback

[…] does – take up the majority of supermarket square footage. (Not to mention those government farm subsidies, but that’s another post.) Yes, grains are solidly etched into our modern Western psyche – […]

wpDiscuz