Welfare Queen Meets Food Stamp Millionaire
I live in Pennsylvania. The state is in the process of introducing an asset requirement to receive food stamps. And they are doing it in an astonishing cruel and stupid way.
There is nothing intrinsically wrong with having a personal asset limit to qualify for food stamps. Why should the government pay the food bill of the wealthy? But the amount of assets one should be able to retain and still qualify, which in Pennsylvania is just $2,000 (excluding home and a car) is just plain cuckoo.
People work all their lives to put aside a bit for when they get older, or they have some saved from their work before becoming unemployed. A certain amount of such assets is an absolute necessity to keep from being totally destitute. With just $2,000 in accessible assets, the new Pennsylvania ceiling, you are one car repair, one medical bill, one broken boiler, and four or five weeks of city living away from having nothing at all. Nothing.
There have been times in this country when issues such as the appropriate size of allowable assets to still qualify for government food stamp aid could have been worked out by sensible public officials. They would look at things like actual living costs (much higher in a place like Philly, for example, than rural Mississippi) and come up with a sane and sensible number of allowable retained assets. We no longer live in such a time, however.
On the radio today I heard the administrator of Pennsylvania’s food stamp program explain why the asset qualification was about to be applied. It wasn’t about economics. It certainly wasn’t about fraud (the food stamp fraud rate in Pennslyvania has been estimate at a near non-existent .01 percent). No, the reason is because a lot of people who this administrator identified as “taxpayers” had contacted her department complaining about rich people getting food stamps, possibly because there was a story awhile back about a lottery winner somewhere doing so.
Listening to this woman’s rap, her department’s rationale, threw me back to the early 1980s, and listening to some of the rants coming from Ronald Reagan. On matters of nutrition, he expressed views such as ketchup was a vegetable. But his most famous statement when it came to the undeserving poor and their needs was that there were a lot of welfare queens coming to pick up their welfare checks in Cadillacs.
Food stamp millionaires are today’s welfare queens. Overblown or outright nonsensical excuses for cruel treatment of the needy. The “taxpayers” that complained about food stamps in Pennsylvania were almost certainly Tea Partiers who in former years bought into that welfare queen drivel.
There are sensible compromises that can be made on virtually all issues facing the country today. Certainly on who should qualify for food stamps. Except ideological idiocy is trumping common sense. And in the food realm, much unneeded and undeserved two-meal-a-day pain will result.
Information about this writer’s new book —This God-Awful Political Season (In Verse) — can be found online.
49 Responses to “Welfare Queen Meets Food Stamp Millionaire”
Well at least this one is not how bad the Republicans or Obama is on an issue. Thank you for showing that some states still make their own rules.
You have a choice. Write articles like this and do nothing further, or go out, get petitions, get people to circulate the petitions, obtain signitures and then go to your state capital and deliver the petitions to the legislators and tell them that they need to fix the law and if they don’t, then they will be voted out of office. Get the media involved in your movement and make it clear you support changes to the law that keeps people like Romney from getting food stamps, but allows grandma on fixed income to get them if she needs them.
If the majority of people in your state believe like you do, then you will have no problem getting a boatload of signitures. If they don’t then you will know the majority likes what is done and majority rules.
Complaining here will do no good.
First, this is similar to where you can get your welfare (welfare-welfare, Social Security retirement, disability) benefits reduced (or lose Medicaid health insurance) if you go out and get a job paying anything more than true slave wages. It’s stupid!
Take a look at similar asset requirements (limits to 2,000 individual and I believe 3,000 person with spouse dollar limits) for welfare-welfare (income assistance) as well as for Medicaid nursing home coverage.
So much for savings as well as getting a job with some kind of (real) income.
Social Security disability at least has been changed from earlier because of the real need for people to be rehabilitated and try to work while not losing disability payments (or the Medicare that can be given to these people some time after going onto disability) called a “ticket to work” program. You may be able to work for nine (9) months at any income while collecting disability (a work trial period, officially) that might permit a shrewd worker to save the disability payments (which he or she ought to be doing).
No telling what the rules (laws) are in each state about going on disability while collecting unemployment, which no doubt is attractive to many given how low each payment is. (that introduces another subject for another article, which is how low Social Security and unemployment payments are)
Hi RP,
Yours is an excellent description of how changes in a food stamp program should be made. It also has nothing, absolutely nothing to do with the change in the way it is going to be administered in Pennsylvania that I describe in my post.
“Taxpayers” didn’t join together in a public way to contact their legislators and force an open debate that resulted in this new regulation. Rather, some right wingers who heard about a lottery winner collecting food stamps contacted the department in charge of the state food stamp program. and found there people appointed by a right wing governor.
The change I describe was not only made without public debate, it was not even made public — it was simply to be sprung on recipients this May. It only became public because a local newspapers got hold of a memo and ran stories about it.
If you think this is the right way to change rules governing how much people get to eat (most recipients of the program by the way are children), well, what can I say. Policy-wide, goverance-wise, I peg it a total disgrace.
The food stamp program is a joke and should be stopped. The program only encourages people to be dependent of the government to eat. I would also stipulate that the welfare person take a body-fat measurement to determine if they are overweight.
If you can’t afford food, then pick crops. I bet if you did that, there would be a lot less people over-weight. That would cost us, the people, a lot less money.
$2,000.00 not including your house or car? Doesn’t sound so bad. While I may not be so strict what in the hell makes it right for someone to “save” when others are paying for their food bill? We are not talking about disability, social security, unemployment, just food stamps.
What people (ahem EEllis) seem to misunderstand is that making it damn near impossible to get aid also makes it damn near impossible to get off. How in the world are you ever going to get off of foodstamps if you can’t save up more than the cost of a small hospital bill or 2 months rent? Where’s the incentive to get a better-paying job or work longer hours if the money you put away for emergencies is going to take away your ability to feed your kids? And it’s of note that “assets” isn’t just what’s in your bank account, it’s everything. If you’ve been laid off and need help paying for food until you find new work, are you really supposed to hock everything in your home? Jesus, people are heartless and unrealistic.
It’s this same mentality that brings right-wingers to hand-wring about people on welfare or foodstamps having a cell phone (much cheaper than a land-line if pre-paid these days) or a refrigerator (which often belongs to the landlord). If the person doesn’t live in a box, the seeming mentality goes, they must be wealthy enough and doing fine. People who think this way are so out of touch with the realities of living on the edge of poverty (or in poverty) that really their opinions on these subjects should be dismissed immediately.
roro80, seems to think these people are actually starving. These welfare people are basically overweight because they sit on the couch and eat.
IronMike — You are obviously not worth talking to about such things. I could talk about why being overweight corresponds to poverty (hint: it’s not the mounds of caviar they consume), and how weight does not actually correspond to how much nutrition is being consumed, but I fear it would go over the head of someone whose heart and brain are made of ferrous metal.
it is terribly obvious that many cons here on TMV have no iea what it is like to be poor. i hope none of you claim to be christians….
Who says? All they are saying here is that if you build up to big of a bankroll then you need to buy your own food. Food stamps were never supposed to provide a boost but rather to keep people from going hungry.
Only if you believe the govt must be the one to feed your kids. Just take that savings and feed your kids. Again food stamps are to keep your kids from going hungry not to allow someone to bank extra cash.
No it’s not. The article says it’s accessible assets and specifically says it doesn’t include house and car. I would also bet it doesn’t include 401k’s, IRA’s, HSA’s and other assets. Do you really think they are going to check anyones house for the value of their possessions? Quit with the BS.
Again with distortion, BS, and over generalizations. That isn’t the stance of any significant portion of people, and no real politician. Sure people point out when someone is interviewed complaining about lack of funds and there is a flat screen in the picture but I’ve never heard even the most extreme complain about refrigerators and by the way no cell phone plan, that gets used for more than 10 min, is cheaper than the stripped down, low income discount, home phone line.
Part of what pisses me off so much is your assumption that you somehow “know” more than I do. I am all too familiar with living on the poverty line and what it takes and what you have to do. I also seem to know quite a bit more about food stamps and those that use them. Guess what you don’t qualify for food stamps when you are laid off a decent job and are on unemployment, or disability, or normally even social security. Maybe if you were there already because your job sucked but then $2000 is a moot point because the only time you even had a fraction of that is when you income tax check came in, depending on how many kids you have of course.
Personally it’s a non issue because almost no one has the $2000 and if they are “the poor” then it isn’t in the bank anyway. The law will make some feel better but it’s basically unenforceable so big deal. On the other side people whine and cry over what may be 3 people total who they might discover or create who would have an issue with the new laws.
Bit of a waste of time but again the idea that you should be entitled to save large sums of money while being on food stamps is not one I support.
Ok first — let me just issue the following disclaimer: I do not consider myself a church-going Christian.
Having said that I do try to live by some of Christianities tenets–such as “judge not lest ye be judged.”
Or at least don’t judge someone trying to make it by living on food stamps unless you’ve had to do the same. Here in DC some in Congress tried to live on the money allotted to food stamp recipients as an experiment and realized there was no way to eat healthy as the cheapest foods are usually rice, beans,zanned food, bread and potatoes– not fresh fruits or vegetables. Maybe that is why some on welfare have a weight problem.
BS and it’s not Charity when you are forced to give. 10 to 1 I spend more time doing charity than you. By the way I am not a Christian and find that comment unbelievable insulting even so.
Look being poor is hard. I know. I’ve lived and eaten on less than my neighbors get per person in food assistance. It is hard and takes effort. Most people are not willing to put forth the needed effort. How much extra money should someone get so they can take it easier?
I was very poor as a child, raised by a single mother whom worked very hard, very long, for very little. It was before welfare and before food stamps. I didn’t get lunch at school and I had to walk passed many city blocks and cross many streets to get there. For a period of about five years, between 2nd and 7th grade, I missed many meals, took care of myself a lot, and did my home work the best I could. We took charity once after not eating for more than three days. We didn’t even know you could get charity. My mother simply asked the preacher of a Baptist church for help. We didn’t even go to church, but we got help and a little more than we needed.
There are people today that endure what I endured that work as just as hard as my mother did. So as far as I am concerned Capitalism has made NO progress for our people! I get really sick and tired of self righteous basterds running their friggen mouths about the poor getting a government break.
Being FAT is an indication that you aren’t eating healthy and sitting on the couch too long! I have been working out for a long time and I eat a lot of beans and rice and I’m not fat. Most of these food stamp people eat very poorly. They can afford to miss a few meals to lose some fat. I will eat beans tonight and go to the gym tomorrow to work out for 2 hours. I wear a heart monitor and I bet I burn at least 1500 calories tomorrow. Most of these FAT FOOD STAMP people won’t work out and get FATTER. Open that potato chip bag and eat these chips so I can laugh at you!
Iron Mike- You may not be fat, but you are much too offensive to have a discussion with.
Eellis— What about the kids of the food stamp queen? Or are you on Gingrich’s bandwagon about turning them into junior janitors!
Mike you’re a fat pig and you know it. Stop with the alter personality crap. Everybody in Huston is fat.
lol
“it is terribly obvious that many cons here on TMV have no iea what it is like to be poor. i hope none of you claim to be christians”
Shannon, you nailed it. It’s a waste of time trying to reason with such people.
First I want to say that I want nothing to do with the attitude that someone like IronMike shows. I tend to ignore the extremes because to do otherwise just encourages them. Addressing what you said tho there is housing assistance, food stamps, city food banks, welfare, and any number of programs not including religious organizations like you indicated you got help from. If that was not available, as you said, and is available now then how in the heck has there been no improvement? Capitalism has lifted more people out of the dirt than anything else in the history of man but you rant because it’s not perfect!! How much effort do you put into helping others? Oh I get it you want others to help while you go about your life feeling superior.
What is the option? Do I think that there is something wrong with kids working? I had a paper route, shoveled snow, mowed lawns, and did odd jobs from about 8. If I could of gotten a job working somewhere I would of been thrilled. Obviously I don’t believe forcing anyone to work is right, smacks of a totalitarianism, but lets say a school district says they’ll give free lunches for students but they have to put in x number of hours helping out at the school. I don’t see a major problem and it lets them earn rather than be given something. I don’t know how it would work, for good or bad, but I’m damn sure others here don’t either. Knee jerk assumption or rejection of the idea just shows that a person has a closed mind.
Unless of course someone knows or been involved in some study or program that examined the issue. So far all I’ve heard is mud slinging no real discussion.
“First I want to say that I want nothing to do with the attitude that someone like IronMike shows. I tend to ignore the extremes because to do otherwise just encourages them.”
EEllis,
I am new here and it is nice to see readers call out others , even if they are from the same party, for their boorishness and offensive manners. It makes your arguments more credible.
Thank you
EEllis and IronMike are so offensive it’s almost unbelievable. I feel no need to further clarify. Yuck.
I don’t know what it is like to be poor, I never have been. But I can’t imagine that it is something that people choose to go through if they can help it. Or so appealing when you are in it that many chose to stay in when they don’t need too.
It is a little unreasonable to kick a large number of people who need help out of the program because a few people abuse it. This seems to be the major difference between the two sides of the argument. One side is afraid that someone is cheating the system. The other side is afraid that there are people who need the program’s help that aren’t getting it. Until someone shows me that a large number of the people in the program are cheating the system, and I mean 50% or more I will say that it is a justifiable cost of helping the people who really need it.
Then why don’t you just ignore me? You respond to my posts with blatant and obvious inaccuracies and when your points and arguments are trashed, because they usually are little more than conservateves are bad, you make some insulting statement, totally off point and violating the site commenting policy. As vile as some people are at least they aren’t trying to pretend to be otherwise.
I have to question the whole idea. Exactly how are these officials supposed to audit a person’s net wealth? I have no clue what a used couch, my clothes, the junk in my garage, or bird cage might be worth. For that matter, $2000 sounds a bit low for food if you have to own a refrigerator, a microwave, and stove to use it, at least for the cheap and healthy stuff.
Even the house exemption is a bit tricky, since a bare house worth two million would qualify, but a run-down house with furniture wouldn’t.
It sounds like an impressively stupid idea.
Michael Silverstein..I agree this is not what the food stamp program should be based on. I agree the way the “fix” was in was done in the wrong way. I agree there needs to be changes as it is unfair.
My point. I go to sites like Allen.com, LonelyConservative.com and this one and in every one of them are articles complaining about actions the right, left or center have taken. They complain about how those actions unfairly impact the rich, poor or middle class. And then people write and agree or disagree. And then NOTHING.
My Point. If we want changes to occur, writing about it, complaining about it, agreeing with the views or not agreeing with the views of the writer is not going to make any differnce. Not until we Americans get off our dead butts and begin real demonstrations like the hippies in the 60-70′s and MLK will any change occur in our current local, state or federal levels of government or the programs they control.
Right now too many people are so engrossed in their smart phones, social media websites, work e-mail, tweets and facebook messages that they can not be bothered with what is happening in government.
I will conclude that one can look at the changes that occurred in the 20′s with technology, music, uncontrolled prohibition controlled by crime families, fundamentalist Christians controlling social values, antiracial hysteria that led to the Quota Act and National Orgins Act and find many parallels to the 2000′s. Lets just hope history does not keep repeating itself as we all know what era followed the 20′s. But if Americans do not pay attention, we could go down that street once again.
I would bet it’s not what some are trying to portray. First it’s rare that single people get aid anyway so it would be a higher exemption for each additional person, probably more like $5000 for a household. Second the phrase accessible assets was used making me think they ask you how much you have in savings person not audit your belongings. I mean however nuts you think the “right wing” is no one is going to pay hundreds of people to go check peoples sofa.
Argue, discuss the post, not other commenters. We have kept a civil living room here for a long time. The commenters rules are at the top of the home page. Abide by them and youre welcome here. Dont, and youre begging to be banned without notice
Archangel/ dr.e
I have been on and (mostly) off food stamps recently (currently off, as most of the time). I am the sole provider for my family of 6. I am disabled (100%) and have been for 14+ years.
1) The $2k is pretty hard and fast. Whenever the people think we have more, we get cancelled.
2) We qualified for the food bank, but the agency in charge of food stamps said my income was ‘unearned’ income, therefor I got too much to qualify.
3) I have two children on disability (actually adults, but living with us) due to the same illness. Their SSI is what allows us to survive the current prices.
4) Our food needs are unique because we keep getting (and sometimes losing) more and more food allergies. This fact is irrelevant to the food stamp geniuses.
5) My IRA did count. My 401k did not count. A second car would count. A ‘nice’ car would count.
6) I live in Massachusetts. Yeah, the supposed super-liberal state has more stringent restrictions on food stamps than Pennsylvania.
7) We made it through the kids childhood years (my youngest is now 18). We did so by the grace of God and the kind people around us. Food stamps? We had them maybe 18-24 total months of the 14+ years.
I reiterate, we lived exclusively on my SSDI for most of those 14 years (not a lot, believe me) and usually could not qualify for food stamps.
Why? Because my wife and I are not idiots. We made sure that we had money in our checking account (to cover the bills). This meant that our checking account had a positive balance that, combined with other things, made it look like we had > $2k. BTW, they do NOT take into account what your balance on your credit cards is. They do take into account how much your car is worth and deduct the outstanding loan from it.
In the end, I finally convinced my wife (or one could say the system did) that trying to qualify for food stamps was just not worth it. The ‘unearned’ income was just too high. Thus: we were being treated like someone who had investment income equal to our income.
Rationality is rarely written into laws. The nature of law and order is that the makers of the laws want them followed–regardless of whether or not those laws improve life for the citizens.
@Rcoutme
That’s not the first time that I’ve heard of “liberal” states making benefits harder to access than “conservative” ones.
What’s to keep people from simply hiding cash (it’s not like banks are paying interest anyway), or stocking up on supplies in order to get around the requirements? Money-sniffing dogs?
I hear you Allen. I grew up below the poverty line. My single mother was on welfare and received food stamps while trying to raise 3 kids by herself. I went to Head Start and received free/discounted lunch throughout K-6.
I know how hard it is to be poor. I’ve seen the stress and worry on my mothers face. The last thing she would have needed was yet another stone in the road keeping her from feeding her kids.
Luckily, people were a little more compassionate back then.
And Ellis, I give thousands to charity…so get off of your high horse.
El… again, you are making assumptions that simply are not true. Why you would assume someone would only give money and not also time is beyond me. I also donate objects…go figure?!? Of course I do it because I have been there, know exactly what these folks are going through, and feel they need the same help I received.
I personally believe that every American deserves at least access to food. I believe the government should be tasked with feeding those less fortunate…with tax payer dollars.
I believe that voting for people that want to take away benefits from the poor and/or elderly (Ryan Plan for instance) is not what Jesus would do.
You may not like the idea that we through our elected officials can decide to help those in need in a way that we, again through our elected officials, as a society believe is best, but this is how we as a society can best keep people from falling through the cracks.
Private charities are a great way to focus on areas of need. Government support is the best way to help the poor and needy as a whole.
I disagree that every American should have access to food. Is that is USA Constitution? The government needs to get out of feeding people and make them responsible for feeding themselves or go to the charities and beg for food. The very least thing an American should be responsible is feeding themselves. What has happened to this great country where it is acceptable to not even be responsible for feeding yourself and your children.
This isn’t just my belief but it is apparently the belief of liberal states passing this $2000 law. If you can’t feed yourself, then you are truly a non-functional basket case that should have no assets when you receive your food stamps.
There are too many people predicting the end of available food and will sell you massive amounts of food for a fee. Then you look around and you see even POOR Americans are FAT and obese. It isn’t just the Americans, the Europeans and Asians are getting FAT and obese. We have more people on earth than ever, they are FATTER and someone is telling us there is a food shortage coming.
“they are FATTER and someone is telling us there is a food shortage coming”
Fat isn’t a measure of good nutrition. Do you seriously not know this?? Many neighborhoods which have been abandon by decent grocery chains have access only to fast food and party stores. If you don’t have reliable transporation you are often at the mercy of a crappy diet.
Rcoutme, thank-you for sharing your story. People who are trying to tough it it out deserve at the very least to not be stereotyped. It’s bad enough when politicians are out of touch, it can be equally bad when fellow citizens are clueless and judgemental.
Hey Mike… so tell me what you think about those fat kids that are starving in Africa. Have you seen their giant bellies?? Geez, how much food would a kid have to eat in order to get THAT fat?
Look I’m not saying there is anything wrong with donating money or objects, good for you, but that wasn’t what I said and the way you’re dancing around it makes me think you know that. Heck your money may help more people than my time but you know that wasn’t my point.
Right now the topic is about defining who needs help. There isn’t some infinite supply of money, and any money given is taken from others, so trying to make sure the help goes where it is needed most is hardly “unchristian”
Also this is “do what I think is right or you are evil.” there is nothing in the bible that could or would lead someone to your conclusion. “You” believe it’s right so why not use Jesus as a bludgeon to try and get people to go along. Beside the fact that it’s not true and a bit despicable, but I guess if it’s for a cause you think is right………
Honestly you really don’t get my beliefs at all. I in no way want to get rid of the food stamp program right now.
@Rcoutme
My thanks, too, for sharing your life experiences and I wish you well.
@ ShannonLee, thank you for putting hunger, starvation and so-called fatness into proper perspective. Shame that some feel they have to continuously conflate hunger, nourishment, poverty, social conditions — and politics …
Both the fatness issue and food stamps are related through the USDA. Farming supplements, which I believe really hurt most farmers, go mostly to the worst kinds of foods. The food stamp program itself was also started to help farmers more than the poor.
Anti-poverty programs would look a lot different if they were designed to help the poor.
Oh come on Mikey, nobody fit goes on about how fit they are….and don’t call me a DA. Didn’t you read Dr.E’s warning?
I did.
Commenters’ rules: no vulgarity, etc. Warning given yesterday to read the commenters’ rules and abide by them. Sorry to say they werent heeded. Consequence in place. Commenters here debate, discuss, teach, and remain ‘on topic,’ and keep to the very few rules we have. This is how we keep the TMV ‘living room’ civil. Thanks.
Archangel/ dr.e
I am sure this thread is dead, but I’ll comment anyway.
Yes EE, youwe are talking about how we determine what “poor” looks like. We are talking about a state making the box smaller and smaller, which makes it more difficult for the people that need help to actually get it.
Believe me, I know there are people out there that are completely happy with living their entire lives on welfare. These people won’t have 2k in assets because they are content with having nothing…being nothing. These are the people that we need to kick out of the system… not the folks that want more but simply cannot… whether it be because there is no work available or say… they have children to take care of and a babysitter would cost more money than they would make in a day.
and my apologies for any possible comment violations… I was probably walking the line .
Not just smaller but in some ways harder and I don’t know that’s bad. My take on it is that I do not want people to go hungry but if aid is effortless those who could get by without it will say “why not” and get aid. Now that isn’t bad in and of itself but since there is no limitless pool of money anything used that isn’t necessary gets taken away from something else. Food stamps as a federal program seems to be targeting those who are chronically poor. That isn’t the temp help situation that you seem to focus on. Not every program is a blanket solution for every situation nor should it be. If disability, SSI, Unemployment doesn’t cover enough then fixing that should be the goal not trying to make sure that other programs fill in gaps.
“Food stamps as a federal program seems to be targeting those who are chronically poor.”
Again, to repeat my very first sentence on this thread: the rules that make aid extremely hard to get on also make it nearly impossible to get off. In the spirit of not making personal insults, I’ll just assume that you’re having a hard time understanding the practicalities here, instead of that your misunderstanding is purposeful. I would urge you to try and think through the practicalities of how best to get people off of food stamps. Try to pretend it’s you and your kids. Please remember that the whole purpose of foodstamps is to NOT give people cash handouts, but to target the aid directly to food, which will of course free up a little cash for things like your kids’ school supplies, a decent pair of winter shoes, etc. Since you seem to have some of your facts a little off, perhaps also look up subsidized cell phone programs for the poor.
Why? In what way does the food stamp program make it hard to get off of food stamps and how in any way does this connect to the current discussion on limiting accessible assets for those receiving food stamps?
You’re changing the programs mission in to what you want it to be not what it is. It’s to provide access to food for those who would go hungry or be malnourished. Period. No save money, no spend on this and that because they have free food, it’s just about the food. Now if you want another program or to expand other current programs good luck but you are trying to blame ignorance and ill will when it’s you who has the programs mission wrong.
Why? Does this make some major point for you? Of course that program only gives 60 min a month and the pre paid companies basically use it to hook new customers and charge them more than average rates for additional min. And the feds have mandated that all local companies provide low cost phone service, sometimes it’s even free, you still don’t seem to have squat for a point and again are incorrect when you state that I am wrong on the facts. The program give $10 off phone service. Companies will take the $10 and give a cell phone with very limited min where the consumer usually will spend a great deal extra, or they can use the program to get a very low cost home phone. How do I know this, my best friend’s wife and I had a conversation when they were trying to decide what would suit them best.
Why? For you it’s theory, for me it’s every day life. While I’m not on any govt programs I have friends, neighbors, and family members who are. I am very familiar with the ins and outs of real life and what it takes to get by. I just don’t see food stamps, and neither was it created, as some “booster” program. There are other programs that are that and you know, people can get off their butts and do it themselves also.
Never mind, I take it back. You are doing this on purpose. That’s some pretty ugly stuff you’ve got going on there. You have fun with that.
Here is an idea, why not talk about the actual issues? So far it’s been
” Jesus, people are heartless and unrealistic.”
“People who think this way are so out of touch with the realities of living on the edge of poverty (or in poverty) that really their opinions on these subjects should be dismissed immediately.”
“I fear it would go over the head of someone whose heart and brain are made of ferrous metal.”
“are so offensive it’s almost unbelievable. I feel no need to further clarify. Yuck”
“I’ll just assume that you’re having a hard time understanding the practicalities here, instead of that your misunderstanding is purposeful.”
“Never mind, I take it back. You are doing this on purpose. That’s some pretty ugly stuff you’ve got going on there. You have fun with that”
This again is how you handle people who disagree with you. Condescension, insults and derision. Some times good people just disagree. You did pose a question that I never addressed
My thoughts would be that we have programs that are designed to do that and it’s not the food stamp program. It isn’t to allow people to buy shoes instead of food but for those who can’t afford either. So we have food programs, school supply programs, and job programs. I don’t expect every program to try and do everything. I think the food program should feed people and allow the other programs designed to assist people trying to get out of poverty to do so. Right now over half the people receiving aid are children and those over 60. They can’t get themselves off of the program. Over 40% of recipients live in households with earned income (not on SSI or welfare). The only thing that will get them off the program is making more money. How can food stamps help someone make more money? Unless it’s selling the food it can’t. Saying let’s increase access to SNAP so people will be able to get off SNAP has no logic that I can see. If people are going hungry we need to increase access but otherwise…….