Abuse of social services

steppinthrax

Active Member
I know a few that abuse the social "safety net" that we have in this country. I'm somewhat of a "bootstrap" type of person because for much of my life I worked hard to get where I'm today. Trump is talking about replacing the SNAP program with a boxes of food. What's wrong with this? Is it maybe because you can't buy unnecessary food items or luxury food items with your food stamp money?

SNAP should be temp, a stepping stone to get you on your feet and out of your situation. Knowing this, what's the issue with just "giving food" that's the purpose of snap. The gov is saving money by providing the "basic necessities" (also within medical discretion) to people.
 

GURPS

INGSOC
PREMO Member
Well Said.

:yay:



Knowing this, what's the issue with just "giving food" that's the purpose of snap.

Well Dear Sappy says it is hypocritical for anyone who bitched about Michelle's School Lunch Program


.... I have seen it reported in the news 'makes beggars out of / is embarrassing for SNAP recipients having to get food boxes ......


IMHO well if someone is 'embarrassed' maybe they will be motivated get off of SNAP
I'd have then line up on the corner to get the boxes of the back of a Deuce and a Half Truck like a proper 'Food Distribution' Enterprise



do you think people in Somali are embarrassed by UN Food Distribution ?
 
Last edited:

vraiblonde

Board Mommy
PREMO Member
Patron
Trump is talking about replacing the SNAP program with a boxes of food. What's wrong with this?

It came from Trump.

They're twisting themselves into amusing little pretzels trying to come up with some reason to oppose it, but the real reason is because it's Trump and they must #resist at all cost.
 

Sapidus

Well-Known Member
Charity and assistance should be given from the goodness of our hearts because it is the right thing to do.

When you start to say what type of charity you re willing to give you it no longer is an act of kindness but an attempt to control the way others live their lives.

Sending people boxes of processed food that don't include meat or vegetables is not efficient. Especially if you are hypocritical enough to say its ok for the government to get involved in what people eat yet you want to shrink government in every other way.

The stereotype of the welfare queen driving a escalade and eating crab legs was made up by the GOP to push their narrative.

These people ( fellow americans) need our help and we should entrust them enough to think they can decide for themselves what is best for their families nutrition. If you are worried about someone gaming the system insist the IRS close the loopholes that allow Trump and co to write off millions every year.

There are already resections on not buying non food items or prepared food with food stamps.
 

steppinthrax

Active Member
It came from Trump.

They're twisting themselves into amusing little pretzels trying to come up with some reason to oppose it, but the real reason is because it's Trump and they must #resist at all cost.

I spoke to someone who uses food stamps. He says they propose in cutting the stamps in half and then providing half of that half with an "American Harvest Box" the rest will be with stamps. It would contain non-perishable food items all made in the United States. The issue is money would be spent to setup the infrastructure for these boxes. So up-front it would not be worth it really.

I asked him what most people spend their SNAP money on. He indicated mostly super "processed" foods (i.e. tv dinners, frozen pancakes). I explained to him that it's junk and that the gov should control what they eat, since it's coming from tax dollars.
 

steppinthrax

Active Member
Charity and assistance should be given from the goodness of our hearts because it is the right thing to do.

When you start to say what type of charity you re willing to give you it no longer is an act of kindness but an attempt to control the way others live their lives.

Sending people boxes of processed food that don't include meat or vegetables is not efficient. Especially if you are hypocritical enough to say its ok for the government to get involved in what people eat yet you want to shrink government in every other way.

The stereotype of the welfare queen driving a escalade and eating crab legs was made up by the GOP to push their narrative.

These people ( fellow americans) need our help and we should entrust them enough to think they can decide for themselves what is best for their families nutrition. If you are worried about someone gaming the system insist the IRS close the loopholes that allow Trump and co to write off millions every year.

There are already resections on not buying non food items or prepared food with food stamps.

If the gov is giving you money, they should be able to control how you use it.

I don't see an issue with this.
 

GURPS

INGSOC
PREMO Member
Sending people boxes of processed food .....

Links :shrug:

Problem is Short Bus, People on SNAP are already showing POOR Decision Making purchasing tons of Snack Foods, Sodas YOU Progressives LOVE TO HATE


The stereotype of the welfare queen driving a escalade and eating crab legs was made up by the GOP to push their narrative.

and proven in the other thread to be accurate


If you are worried about someone gaming the system insist the IRS close the loopholes that allow Trump and co to write off millions every year.


YOUR Obsession with Trump is Pathological .... try starting with the Rich Hollywood Elites, Rich Congress people like Pelosi, Feinstein ... Soros,

If the gov is giving you money, they should be able to control how you use it.

I don't see an issue with this.

If you grant the Gov. power to give you something, you grant the Gov the Power to Control it, or You and to take it away

If your employer is giving you money they should be able to control how you use it.

If the lottery is giving you money they should be able to control how you use it.

One is a JOB, the Other is Winnings From Gambling .... are you really too ignorant to understand

Not to mention over 8% of retail grocery spending in the us is food stamps. Walmart is not going to let this happen

:cds:

OMG NO .... Wal-Mart Controls Welfare Policy

:dork:
 
Last edited:

Sapidus

Well-Known Member
If the gov is giving you money, they should be able to control how you use it.

I don't see an issue with this.

If your employer is giving you money they should be able to control how you use it.


If the lottery is giving you money they should be able to control how you use it.



How are those different?


The govt already controls many items you can and can't buy with benefits.


Not to mention over 8% of retail grocery spending in the us is food stamps. Walmart is not going to let this happen
 

Chris0nllyn

Well-Known Member
If your employer is giving you money they should be able to control how you use it.


If the lottery is giving you money they should be able to control how you use it.



How are those different?


The govt already controls many items you can and can't buy with benefits.


Not to mention over 8% of retail grocery spending in the us is food stamps. Walmart is not going to let this happen

They are different because you and your employer have a contractual obligation. You work, they pay. Totally different.
With the lottery, you win money.

We're talking about a program where you say, "I don't make enough money to support my family. Uncle Sam, can you help me out.". It's more akin to asking your family member for money and they say "Don't go spending this on stupid #### or I won't give you anymore."
 

Bird Dog

Bird Dog
PREMO Member
If your employer is giving you money they should be able to control how you use it.


If the lottery is giving you money they should be able to control how you use it.



How are those different?


The govt already controls many items you can and can't buy with benefits.


Not to mention over 8% of retail grocery spending in the us is food stamps. Walmart is not going to let this happen

Come on now....you are brighter than this.
When an employer gives you money you worked for it it is yours.
When you gamble and win, you earned it because you took a chance.
The government doesn’t control what you buy with “food” stamps. They allow you to buy food.
Plus the government give assistance “cash” with no restrictions.

.......maybe your not brighter than this.........
 

steppinthrax

Active Member
If your employer is giving you money they should be able to control how you use it.


If the lottery is giving you money they should be able to control how you use it.



How are those different?


The govt already controls many items you can and can't buy with benefits.


Not to mention over 8% of retail grocery spending in the us is food stamps. Walmart is not going to let this happen

The money that I get from my employer and clients I WORK for. I PERFORM AGREED WORK AND SERVICES that result in payments.

When taxpayer's money is involved it's a different matter.

When the gov is giving money, it's money from taxpayers. It has special circumstances. The same thing goes with Grants etc. There are stipulations and conditions with the money.
 

Sapidus

Well-Known Member
The money that I get from my employer and clients I WORK for. I PERFORM AGREED WORK AND SERVICES that result in payments.

When taxpayer's money is involved it's a different matter.

When the gov is giving money, it's money from taxpayers. It has special circumstances. The same thing goes with Grants etc. There are stipulations and conditions with the money.



Yes. These stipulations and conditions are already in place. Now you are talking about removing part of the food stamp benefit and deciding what food people should be eating.


Which is exactly what people were mad at Michelle Obama about.

And exactly what people were mad at Bloomberg for enforcing a soda tax.

Yet now that it comes to poor people they shouldn't get a choice in the matter
 

Bird Dog

Bird Dog
PREMO Member
Yes. These stipulations and conditions are already in place. Now you are talking about removing part of the food stamp benefit and deciding what food people should be eating.


Which is exactly what people were mad at Michelle Obama about.

And exactly what people were mad at Bloomberg for enforcing a soda tax.

Yet now that it comes to poor people they shouldn't get a choice in the matter

I get it....your just pi$$ed of you’ll be getting a Box now.......poor baby.
 

GURPS

INGSOC
PREMO Member
Which is exactly what people were mad at Michelle Obama about.

And exactly what people were mad at Bloomberg for enforcing a soda tax.

Yet now that it comes to poor people they shouldn't get a choice in the matter



none of which are remotely related to the topic at hand ..... RE: School Lunch or a Soda Tax
 

Sapidus

Well-Known Member
I get it....your just pi$$ed of you’ll be getting a Box now.......poor baby.

Good one. That's much better then trying to give your opinion or refute anything I said.

If i had to rely on benefits I wouldn't be ashamed as I have paid into the system my entire working life. But it shows how little you think of poor people that you think it is an insult
 

steppinthrax

Active Member
Yes. These stipulations and conditions are already in place. Now you are talking about removing part of the food stamp benefit and deciding what food people should be eating.


Which is exactly what people were mad at Michelle Obama about.

And exactly what people were mad at Bloomberg for enforcing a soda tax.

Yet now that it comes to poor people they shouldn't get a choice in the matter

There are restrictions already in place. Since 2008 they are in-eligible to purchase seafood and steak. However, why the hell could they even do that to begin with and for so long.

The problem is when you add restrictions there are "business" complexities and difficulties in determining what's considered good food and bad food. As a result a lot "passes" thru and they get it anyway.

So let's make this easier. Let the gov control it and give them a box of food. Already worked out and done for them, with no concerns if they are skimming the system or not.
 

stgislander

Well-Known Member
PREMO Member
Which is exactly what people were mad at Michelle Obama about.

Although I believe Michelle had good intentions, she was very short sighted. The little bastages would not eat the food prepared. The majority of it went into the trash. Many of us on here predicted that outcome.
 

Sapidus

Well-Known Member
There are restrictions already in place. Since 2008 they are in-eligible to purchase seafood and steak. However, why the hell could they even do that to begin with and for so long.

The problem is when you add restrictions there are "business" complexities and difficulties in determining what's considered good food and bad food. As a result a lot "passes" thru and they get it anyway.

So let's make this easier. Let the gov control it and give them a box of food. Already worked out and done for them, with no concerns if they are skimming the system or not.



Maybe because 2 lbs of catfish or tilapia is often cheaper than chicken. Are you saying people who are needy can't eat seafood ever?

There are going to be "business complexities" with food boxes. Govt giving the contacts to the food producers to the cheapest and least healthy sources. I wouldn't trust a bunch of govt workers to make up a healthy meal kit for the millions of kids in this country who need it especially since the article says it won't include meat or fresh produce.

I would trust their parents who see them every day and have a vested interest in their health to do it.
 
Top