America Losing Its Global Dominance In Science

[Kidlicious]

I was reading old threads the other day, and Kid actually used to be pretty chill. A bit crazy, but also one of the few people willing to stand up and say that poor people often get treated like **** by our system and that that is wrong.

Of course it's wrong but look at the people who speak the loudest in defense of the poor. It's always the crooks like Obama and Pelosi so now I'm convinced of traditional liberalism not modern liberalism.

[Kidlicious]

Radical liberals are pacifists who distrust both big business and the government and respect human rights. Obama is a neocon.

That's funny because he usually votes against them, lies about them and calls them names just like the rest of the liberals.

[Ban Kenobi]

Is there something in the water in Oklahoma that makes the inhabitants braindead idiots?

[Kidlicious]

Is there something in the water in Oklahoma that makes the inhabitants braindead idiots?

Hmmm You insist Obama is conservative.

[Patroklos]

You mean apart from being $17 trillion in debt with 46m living in poverty and 1 in 7 Americans being food insecure last year? Yeah, I'm sure the Scandinavians are just going green with envy.

Perhaps you missed the thread where it was determined anyone using the term "food insecurity" is either an insufferable idiot or a douchebag liar?

[regexcellent]

I love the term "food insecure." People aren't actually hungry anymore so we have to invent a new term to keep up awareness of a solved, now nonexistent issue.

[Patroklos]

I happened to eat only fruits and no vegetables today, I am food insecure!

[DaShi]

Maybe you two should learn what food insecurity actually means.

[Patroklos]

It's quite obvious you havn't looked at the parameters the US government uses to apply that invented term, which puts you in the first category. Do yourself a favor and take a look.

Just in case you happen to be in the second category:

USDA's labels describe ranges of food security

Food Security
High food security (old label=Food security): no reported indications of food-access problems or limitations.
Marginal food security (old label=Food security): one or two reported indications--typically of anxiety over food sufficiency or shortage of food in the house. Little or no indication of changes in diets or food intake.

Food Insecurity
Low food security (old label=Food insecurity without hunger): reports of reduced quality, variety, or desirability of diet. Little or no indication of reduced food intake.
Very low food security (old label=Food insecurity with hunger): Reports of multiple indications of disrupted eating patterns and reduced food intake.

http://www.ers.usda.gov/topics/food-nutrition-assistance/food-security-in-the-us/definitions-of-food-security.aspx#.UszD7jK9KSM

If the government and those like kentonio were talking about the Very Low category only that would be one thing. They are not, rather they combine the Low category to get their numbers which as you can see from the definition includes anyone who does not eat their vegetables for one day a year. In fact even that is to low a bar, not getting kale and arugula along with your carrots and beans for one meal breaches the suitably vague "variety" metric if you are intent on convincing people Americans are all lined up at soup kitchens.

You will note actual hunger or lack of food stuff has little to do with food security as the USDA defines it. If you are a millionaire and decide to have Jeeves walk past the entire Whole Foods organic vegetable aisle and fill your fridge with HoHos you are food insecure. Is this what you think of when you hear that term bandied about?

Relaxing the standards for food stamps and then claiming there is rise in hunger based on food stamp use is bad enough. This is a whole new level of lying through statistics.

[Kidlicious]

Maybe you two should learn what food insecurity actually means.

[Ban Kenobi]

If the government and those like kentonio were talking about the Very Low category only that would be one thing. They are not, rather they combine the Low category to get their numbers which as you can see from the definition includes anyone who does not eat their vegetables for one day a year. In fact even that is to low a bar, not getting kale and arugula along with your carrots and beans for one meal breaches the suitably vague "variety" metric if you are intent on convincing people Americans are all lined up at soup kitchens.

If your interpretation were correct the government would think 99+% of the population is "food insecure" when that is clearly not the case.

[Patroklos]

It depends on how people answer the surveys. Which just compounds the stupidity given the vagueness of the metrics. You saw the definition above, linked to the USDA's own website, take it up with them.

[kentonio]

Perhaps you missed the thread where it was determined anyone using the term "food insecurity" is either an insufferable idiot or a douchebag liar?

No I posted in that thread where you managed to convince yourself that groups trying to solve very real problems with US health are actually just making **** up. Obviously you know considerably more about the issues based on your 5 minutes reading a definition from their website, than the people who spend their entire lives studying this stuff. Well done, you are obviously very clever.

[Kidlicious]

No I posted in that thread where you managed to convince yourself that groups trying to solve very real problems with US health are actually just making **** up. Obviously you know considerably more about the issues based on your 5 minutes reading a definition from their website, than the people who spend their entire lives studying this stuff. Well done, you are obviously very clever.

You don't understand how the system works. These experts are liars. I don't know much about this issue and I can't keep up with all the bull**** they come up with. They get paid for sitting around making **** up. But I promise you that if you educated yourself on this particular area that you would find out it is bs. What you need to know is how the system works. It's corrupt.

[DaShi]

You will note actual hunger or lack of food stuff has little to do with food security as the USDA defines it. If you are a millionaire and decide to have Jeeves walk past the entire Whole Foods organic vegetable aisle and fill your fridge with HoHos you are food insecure. Is this what you think of when you hear that term bandied about?

http://www.ers.usda.gov/topics/food-nutrition-assistance/food-security-in-the-us/definitions-of-food-security.aspx#.Us3h9fRDuSp

The word "hunger," the panel stated in its final report, "...should refer to a potential consequence of food insecurity that, because of prolonged, involuntary lack of food, results in discomfort, illness, weakness, or pain that goes beyond the usual uneasy sensation."

It's like you just looked at that page for the first time.