Food stamps or junk food stamps?

[syrenn]

I'm telling you, I converted on this one, and not too long ago. I sympathize with people on food stamps, I regret they get glared at and spoken to disrespectfully in the store...but I think, considering it's charity, we have the right to determine what exactly we're paying for.

Here's the societal issue regarding this: Government hand-outs aren't considered charity; they have morphed into that special thing known as a "Positive Right".

This is why the government will never limit the usage to healthy foods. "The government owes me that money because I'm poor and I have a right to spend it on whatever food I want."

Real charities hand out food, which is why they are more effective in feeding people than is the government.

Thank God the sane have returned to this thread...I promise I will not feed the trolls again...ugh.

At any rate, you are of course correct.
I said somewhere in these two threads that Food Stamps are not a right in the same manner as it is your right to spend the money you earn as you see fit. The two are NOT the same.
Otherwise why limit food stamps to food, why not just give them debit cards and forget the whole thing.

Because abuse is already taking place. If all stops were taken away that would not be very wise.

Schwarzenegger bans use of welfare debit cards at casinos and liquor stores

 

[manifold]

Let's see if I understand y'all correctly.

Anyone that receives any form of welfare has forfeited their dignity and therefore deserves to be treated like a child and told by the government what to do. That's mighty neighborly of y'all.

 

[syrenn]

Let's see if I understand y'all correctly.

Anyone that receives any form of welfare has forfeited their dignity and therefore deserves to be treated like a child and told by the government what to do. That's mighty neighborly of y'all.

Soda Ban in Effect in San Francisco City Vending Machines | United States | Epoch Times



If the government can do this to people how can PAY for it, then it should dam well do it to people who are using tax dollars to buy junk.

 

[boedicca]

Who decides what is junk food and a luxury food?

They need a Nutrition Panel, where members of the Death Panel could moonlight.

Why stop at that? Let's just give the government 100% of our money and they can give us each month the coupon books for purchases of approved items.

No half measures, bub.

 

[loosecannon]

So vouchers for specific foods then. I'm ok with that.

I don't agree with cutting someone a check, and then telling them what they can and can't buy.

You wanna give me a handout? Tell me exactly what it is you're giving me, and I'll decide if I want to participate or not.

Where we've gone wrong is just handing out money to people.

The grocery chain lobby is probably most responsible for the food stamp program being the failure that it is. They don't care who's eating what, as long as it's being bought at the grocery stores.

The food processing companies are probably the biggest supporters of the program. Trust me, if McDonalds and Burger could get away with accepting food stamps they would do it.

All the profit margins in food are in processing and distribution. Retail and farming pay jack shit.

BTW I agreed with your whole post.

I can't understand why this is a contentious thread topic.

But in an entitlement bent climate......

 

[loosecannon]

Who decides what is junk food and a luxury food?

They need a Nutrition Panel, where members of the Death Panel could moonlight.

dont they already have a panel that decides what is and isnt healthy?


i could have sworn that came under the auspices of the surgeon generals office

Food and Drug admin?

 

[DiveCon]

They need a Nutrition Panel, where members of the Death Panel could moonlight.

dont they already have a panel that decides what is and isnt healthy?


i could have sworn that came under the auspices of the surgeon generals office

Food and Drug admin?

there could be some cross coverage here


like that would be a shock
redundancies in government
LOL

 

[syrenn]

Damn Mani that wasn't very nice negging me ya know!

 

[DiveCon]

Let's see if I understand y'all correctly.

Anyone that receives any form of welfare has forfeited their dignity and therefore deserves to be treated like a child and told by the government what to do. That's mighty neighborly of y'all.

no, they can still buy whatever they want
just not with the tax payer monies

 

[syrenn]

Let's see if I understand y'all correctly.

Anyone that receives any form of welfare has forfeited their dignity and therefore deserves to be treated like a child and told by the government what to do. That's mighty neighborly of y'all.

no, they can still buy whatever they want
just not with the tax payer monies

I am not sure why that concept is so hard to understand.

People on food stamps could buy what ever they wanted and what was not covered by food stamps they would have to pay cash for from their own money.

 

[Paulie]

Charity is what it is. What form it takes is dictated by the people who give, not the people who take.

I understand that to a certain extent. But it doesn't have to be black and white like that.

If I give money to a charity, I don't place special caveats on it. I only request that it goes 100% to the recipients needs. I don't really care how it gets dispersed beyond that.

If I put a couple bucks in a homeless man's cup, I don't tell him he better go buy a salad with it.

 

[ConHog]

That's fine when the money for purchasing is coming from your own pocket, Luissa.

But when it's being given to you, the entity providing it gets to choose how much, what, etc. If a charitable institution wants to just give out white underwear, they can opt to do that.

Likewise, if the government wants to just give out certain types of food, I think it can do that.

There are of course reasons they don't (RE: Hershey and Pepsi make sure they donate to the right people.) and as a matter of respect, I say don't embarrass the many who are fair about the way they handle their SNAP benefits simply because a few make bad choices. If some guy who's been working all day long to house his family uses part of his SNAP benefits to buy a coke and a moon pie at the end of that day, I'm fine with it.

 

[Paulie]

That's fine when the money for purchasing is coming from your own pocket, Luissa.

But when it's being given to you, the entity providing it gets to choose how much, what, etc. If a charitable institution wants to just give out white underwear, they can opt to do that.

Likewise, if the government wants to just give out certain types of food, I think it can do that.

There are of course reasons they don't (RE: Hershey and Pepsi make sure they donate to the right people.) and as a matter of respect, I say don't embarrass the many who are fair about the way they handle their SNAP benefits simply because a few make bad choices. If some guy who's been working all day long to house his family uses part of his SNAP benefits to buy a coke and a moon pie at the end of that day, I'm fine with it.

Some in here are assuming that people who get SNAP don't work at all and just live off the taxpayers.

If you've busted your ass and paid your bills, and have very little money left over to buy nothing other than your basic sundries, gasoline, etc, then I don't see what the problem is with taking a little of your food assistance and buying something "junky".

What the fuck is wrong with you assholes?

I get it that some people are just abusing the system. But does everybody else have to lose out on nice things because some people are pieces of shit?

Instead of bitching about WHAT'S being eaten, why don't you come up with a better idea than what's currently in place.

 

[syrenn]

That's fine when the money for purchasing is coming from your own pocket, Luissa.

But when it's being given to you, the entity providing it gets to choose how much, what, etc. If a charitable institution wants to just give out white underwear, they can opt to do that.

Likewise, if the government wants to just give out certain types of food, I think it can do that.

There are of course reasons they don't (RE: Hershey and Pepsi make sure they donate to the right people.) and as a matter of respect, I say don't embarrass the many who are fair about the way they handle their SNAP benefits simply because a few make bad choices. If some guy who's been working all day long to house his family uses part of his SNAP benefits to buy a coke and a moon pie at the end of that day, I'm fine with it.

I agree about the treat at the end of the day.If he has worked all day, how about he pay for it with the money he earns and not the food stamps?

 

[Paulie]

That's fine when the money for purchasing is coming from your own pocket, Luissa.

But when it's being given to you, the entity providing it gets to choose how much, what, etc. If a charitable institution wants to just give out white underwear, they can opt to do that.

Likewise, if the government wants to just give out certain types of food, I think it can do that.

There are of course reasons they don't (RE: Hershey and Pepsi make sure they donate to the right people.) and as a matter of respect, I say don't embarrass the many who are fair about the way they handle their SNAP benefits simply because a few make bad choices. If some guy who's been working all day long to house his family uses part of his SNAP benefits to buy a coke and a moon pie at the end of that day, I'm fine with it.

I agree about the treat at the end of the day.If he has worked all day, how about he pay for it with the money he earns and not the food stamps?

Why do you keep assuming that just because someone has a job, they have disposable income to buy some soda and snacks?

What if after they pay their bills, their check is gone?

They don't get to enjoy a snack like the rest of us just because they don't make as much money?

 

[ConHog]

That's fine when the money for purchasing is coming from your own pocket, Luissa.

But when it's being given to you, the entity providing it gets to choose how much, what, etc. If a charitable institution wants to just give out white underwear, they can opt to do that.

Likewise, if the government wants to just give out certain types of food, I think it can do that.

There are of course reasons they don't (RE: Hershey and Pepsi make sure they donate to the right people.) and as a matter of respect, I say don't embarrass the many who are fair about the way they handle their SNAP benefits simply because a few make bad choices. If some guy who's been working all day long to house his family uses part of his SNAP benefits to buy a coke and a moon pie at the end of that day, I'm fine with it.

I agree about the treat at the end of the day.If he has worked all day, how about he pay for it with the money he earns and not the food stamps?

How about if you realize that being conservative doesn't mean being a god damned bitch? You do realize there are people who are struggling just to make ends meet right now right? Should we further demean those folks by putting more on them? I got an idea, let's make a special SNAP line at the grocery store and if you are using food stamps you go there once a month and the grocery store gives you what they see fit to give you, based off of Syrenn's approval.

 

[ConHog]

Syrenn, you cheap bitch. You do some figuring for your county and send me a PM on what your share of the entire bill for SNAP is and I'll cut you a check. We wouldn't want you to be out $50 a year to help the poor keep some dignity.

 

[Paulie]

I gotta say, I'm pleased with the amount of conservatives who have chimed in here in support of helping people out on the food issue.

It's one thing I wouldn't feel comfortable denying to someone because they didn't have enough money for it. I would consider it to fall under "General Welfare" in the constitution. A starving nation would not be a pretty one.

 

[ConHog]

I gotta say, I'm pleased with the amount of conservatives who have chimed in here in support of helping people out on the food issue.

It's one thing I wouldn't feel comfortable denying to someone because they didn't have enough money for it. I would consider it to fall under "General Welfare" in the constitution. A starving nation would not be a pretty one.

I consider it basic common decency. I in NO WAY believe it is constitutional, but it doesn't have to be if the people have voted it in and support it.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

Let's see if I understand y'all correctly.

Anyone that receives any form of welfare has forfeited their dignity and therefore deserves to be treated like a child and told by the government what to do. That's mighty neighborly of y'all.

_FAIL_

You did not understand correctly.