One example: SNAP the food stamp program returns about 3.50 for every dollar invested.
If this is true then we should extend the food stamp program to every family in America and we will all get rich. Where do I sign up?
You might post links to studies, available on-line, that demonstrate this 1:3.5 benefit.
P.S.: I support the idea of food stamps to provide nutrition to needy/hungry people (especially kids).
I do not support the idea of providing them with air transportation as a routinely available benefit.
Demanding links to studies (that you can easily find if you searched yourself) after repeatedly ignoring my requests to back up your claims with studies (that I know do not exist). I could write a funnier script but I'll stop wasting my time with you from now on. You are another parody account here to preach your political agenda you do not care about airplanes, the signature made that obvious from day 1.
Excuse me, but:
An increase of $1 billion in SNAP expenditures is estimated to increase economic activity (GDP) by $1.79 billion. In other words, every $5 in new SNAP benefits generates as much as $9 of economic activity.
The jobs impact estimates from the Food Assistance National Input-Output Multiplier (FANIOM) range from the creation of 9,000 to 18,000 full-time-equivalent (FTE) jobs plus self-employment resulting from a $1-billion increase in SNAP benefits. The jobs impact estimate of 9,000 FTE jobs plus self-employment, or 10,000 full-time plus part-time jobs plus self-employment, is the preferred estimate.
Although SNAP benefits are spent exclusively on food, the estimated impact of SNAP benefits on agriculture assumes that food expenditures increase by 26 percent of the increase in SNAP benefits, with SNAP recipients shifting cash expenditures from food to nonfood purchases.
A $1-billion increase in SNAP benefits with the type III multiplier and import adjustment generates $92.6 million of agricultural production, $32.3 million of agricultural GDP or value added, and close to 1,000 agricultural jobs (FTE-jobs plus self-employment). The increase in agricultural GDP is distributed between livestock (38 percent) and crop production (62 percent). The 1,000 agricultural jobs impact from a type III multiplier is a high end estimate, while the jobs impact estimate of 765 FTE-jobs plus self-employed from a type I multiplier is a more conservative estimate.
$5 generating $9 is not is 1:3.5 sir. Nor do we know if that is really the case, since multipliers are a tool that is controversial to say the least.
Multipliers are very tricky little items to base a political debate on, and usually they just show your political biases. Yours show quite clearly. Everybody can make multipliers to show that if the government spends X dollars on their pet programs it will bring X+whatever more to the economy. If that's the case, let's just give the government all the money and they can multiply the benefits to all off us by a fantastic amount! I mean such thinking works real well in places like Venezuela, doesn't it? If we gave that much spending to NASA who knows how much better life could be?
The point of the matter is that the US, like all mixed economies, has a big problem, a huge deficit and IOU's owed because of out of control social spending in the US it is SSI/Medicare/Medicaid. Until that is fixed there is trouble coming. EAS is a tiny sliver of the budget, but to many people in the current administration it is something that could be cut. Obviously you do not want to see any cuts in government except for programs you don't like, and the power and authority the current president and his party has. So please show some respect to other side in this political debate, and the current president who is the legitimately elected President of the US, just like his predecessor was and quit with the knee jerk reactions to people who disagree with you.
Thank you for reading. .