Province in West Afghanistan sees 36% of native mutants on food stamps

The province known as Alabama in West Afghanistan (aka The South) has 36% of its citizens now living on food stamps. Why have conservative economic policies failed to produce more prosperity in this province?

 

I think the southern states are not helped with federal money as much because they have opinions that differ from the nrthern way of thinking.

 

Food stamps are a liberal economic policy.

 

That has to be a policy change. Y2Y jump of over 100%, no other state came anywhere close to even being in the same zipcode.

Food supplement programs are a staple of both far left and far right politiconomic regimes.

 

I hope you all know that West Afghanistan is not in the United States.


Anyway, I think opium use is probably a leading cause of people on foodstamps there. (Although I didnt even know afghanistan had food stamps)

 

The OP has, as usual, overlooked the pertinent facts.

 

Cut food stamps and let the Alabamian bastards move to Texas for work.

 

Your mom accepts food stamps.

 

Would that still be considered prostitution?

 

it's really no mystery looking at the around the world

The IMF has forced neo-liberal (conservative) policies 150 time on foreign countries with no success stories to speak of. Although doing the same thing over and over expecting a different result is the clinical definition of madness no one at the IMF or world bank as been committed. Covering for their junk economics, reports about overpopulation, climate, culture, and other excuses fill the void between failures.

Rather than take the scientific approach. Todays neo-liberal,l laissez-faire junk economics uses mathematical models based on false assumptions. Although no country has ever developed without some sort of national economic strategy, including education, protectionism , government funded R&D.
They claim the opposite will bring counties to the promise land. They use , sloganeering, generalities, name calling and theories of the imagination rather then emulation of past success.

In fact this thread has a good example of theories of the imagination

rather than resorting to a false assumption based on one's imagination of what must be. We can look it up. In fact , many conservative state's receive a net gain from the fed. Gov. Alabama, Arizona,South Dakota,Utah,South Carolina,North Carolina, Oklahoma , Nebraska, Montana, Missouri, Places considered socialists leaches like Wisconsin, New York,Minnesota,Michigan,Illinois,California are all subsidizing the “I hate welfare crowd “amazing.

http://www.taxfoundation.org/research/show/22685.html

But this is always the case Wall Street says a bailout of California for a few measly billion would just encourage more irresponsibility after receiving 16+ trillion themselves. The states listed above better hope Cali can keep those welfare checks coming. So we can only save those who have bought our politicians. Or as Michael Hudson explains


“Even more remarkable is the attempt to convince the population that new money and debt creation to bail out Wall Street – and vest a new century of financial billionaires at public subsidy – cannot be mobilized just as readily to save labor and industry in the “real” economy. The Republicans and Obama administration appointees held over from the Bush and Clinton administration have joined to conjure up scare stories that Social Security and Medicare debts cannot be paid, although the government can quickly and with little debate take responsibility for paying trillions of dollars of bipartisan Finance-Care for the rich and their heirs.”

State by state or country by country the ones that go after high education, cutting edge industries, and high wage jobs will have a high standard of living. The others will fall into a low return, low production,resource extraction