Welfare Fraud

chanel

Silver Member
Jun 8, 2009
12,098
3,202
98
People's Republic of NJ
A New Jersey food store owner and two employees have been sentenced to prison and ordered to pay restitution for defrauding the federal food stamp program of more than $280,000.

Prosecutors say the men regularly rang up fraudulent charges on customers' electronic benefit transfer cards, giving customers part of the amount in cash and keeping the USDA's payment for the full value.

New Jersey 101.5 FM - Prison Terms For Three NJ Men in Food Stamp Fraud

$280,000 here; $280,000 there. Soon we are talking about a lot of money. NO MORE ENTITLEMENTS UNTIL THEY SORT THIS SHIT OUT!
 
Only one person? Well, thank goodness for that. I do not mean denying KIDS food; I mean finding a better way before we flush more money away. I'd like to see "communal food markets" where only basics can be purchased. Do you support people using cash assistance for booze and acrylic nails Jillian? Because rumor is that's more than one person.
 
A New Jersey food store owner and two employees have been sentenced to prison and ordered to pay restitution for defrauding the federal food stamp program of more than $280,000.

Prosecutors say the men regularly rang up fraudulent charges on customers' electronic benefit transfer cards, giving customers part of the amount in cash and keeping the USDA's payment for the full value.

New Jersey 101.5 FM - Prison Terms For Three NJ Men in Food Stamp Fraud

$280,000 here; $280,000 there. Soon we are talking about a lot of money. NO MORE ENTITLEMENTS UNTIL THEY SORT THIS SHIT OUT!

As long as we cut off all money to the military in Iraq till they find the missing billions there.
Fair nuff?
 
Nope. We still have that annoying deficit problem to deal with. Do you think using the children's food and clothing money for weed is no biggie?
 
Nope again. Being somewhat familiar with the social service system, I have total compassion for hungry kids.But I have zero respect for their able bodied parents who steal their kids' money to go "clubbing" And rumor is that's more than one person.

Although skeptical, I give Obama credit for recognizing that 500 billion in Medicare fraud could be cut. How about food stamps, Medicaide, SSI? That's something most Americans would back him on.

Any suggestions in assisting him with this? Or should we just add more people?
 
Only one person? Well, thank goodness for that. I do not mean denying KIDS food; I mean finding a better way before we flush more money away. I'd like to see "communal food markets" where only basics can be purchased.

I like that idea. They should only have generics and fresh fruits and vegetables should be subsidized to be less expensive than canned, so that maybe people would be encouraged to eat more healthy.
 
Go back to commodities where we actually give them food. Why route the money thru the retail grocery merchants.
 
Nope again. Being somewhat familiar with the social service system, I have total compassion for hungry kids.But I have zero respect for their able bodied parents who steal their kids' money to go "clubbing" And rumor is that's more than one person.

Although skeptical, I give Obama credit for recognizing that 500 billion in Medicare fraud could be cut. How about food stamps, Medicaide, SSI? That's something most Americans would back him on.

Any suggestions in assisting him with this? Or should we just add more people?

Couldn't agree more.

Got quite a few out there living off the taxpayers of America. They have no sense of responsibility. Why should they when they don't have to pay for anything and there are no consequences for their irresponsibility??
 
Malthus told us that feeding the poor just results in more poor.

We will always have poor, because some are too lazy to work hard and some have no marketable skills or the wit to obtain said. But when we give to the poor we encourage laziness among those who might otherwise be productive.
 
Malthus told us that feeding the poor just results in more poor.

We will always have poor, because some are too lazy to work hard and some have no marketable skills or the wit to obtain said. But when we give to the poor we encourage laziness among those who might otherwise be productive.

Yeah lets weed out the ones with defective genes as well....
 
Malthus told us that feeding the poor just results in more poor.

We will always have poor, because some are too lazy to work hard and some have no marketable skills or the wit to obtain said. But when we give to the poor we encourage laziness among those who might otherwise be productive.

Yeah lets weed out the ones with defective genes as well....
Well then goodbye, we won't miss you.
 
Malthus told us that feeding the poor just results in more poor.

We will always have poor, because some are too lazy to work hard and some have no marketable skills or the wit to obtain said. But when we give to the poor we encourage laziness among those who might otherwise be productive.

Yeah lets weed out the ones with defective genes as well....
Well then goodbye, we won't miss you.

Several will, but perhaps only one on here.
 
"Like most people in my country, I have a job. I work, they pay me. I pay my taxes and the government distributes my taxes as it sees fit. In order to get that paycheck in my case, I am required to pass a random urine test (with which I have no problem). What I do have a problem with is the distribution of my taxes to people who don't have to pass a urine test.

So, here is my Question: Shouldn't one have to pass a urine test to get a welfare check because I have to pass one to earn it for them? Please understand, I have no problem with helping people get back on their feet.. I do, on the other hand, have a problem with helping someone sitting on their ass - doing drugs, while I work. . . . Can you imagine how much money each state would save if people had to pass a urine test to get a public assistance check?"
Author unknown

I guess we could title that program, 'Urine or You're Out.'
 
Here is an honest to God welfare story for you. When I lived in California, because I was stationed there in the Navy, there was a young lady in our apartment complex that my wife at the time became good friends with. She was on welfare. She was single and had a child and pregnant with another. She married the father of the unborn child shortly before it's birth and they moved to Ohio. About 60 days later, this same young girl returned (without the new husband) and was living in the same apartment that she moved out of. When my wife went over to visit her and find out why she was back in California so quickly, she told my wife she came back because California had such a good welfare system it was better for her to live there. True story. Pretty sad, huh?
 
"Like most people in my country, I have a job. I work, they pay me. I pay my taxes and the government distributes my taxes as it sees fit. In order to get that paycheck in my case, I am required to pass a random urine test (with which I have no problem). What I do have a problem with is the distribution of my taxes to people who don't have to pass a urine test.

So, here is my Question: Shouldn't one have to pass a urine test to get a welfare check because I have to pass one to earn it for them? Please understand, I have no problem with helping people get back on their feet.. I do, on the other hand, have a problem with helping someone sitting on their ass - doing drugs, while I work. . . . Can you imagine how much money each state would save if people had to pass a urine test to get a public assistance check?"
Author unknown

I guess we could title that program, 'Urine or You're Out.'

I would love to see a required perodic urine test on all of congress and ALL elected offcials and their staff.
You know if they are a druggie they can be blackmailed by the commies about it.

And yes Jay I think all mothers recieving dependent child care dollars should have to pass perodic drug tests. For the safety of the children, which we are now paying for so the mother gives up some rights if she wants the money.
 
Last edited:
"Like most people in my country, I have a job. I work, they pay me. I pay my taxes and the government distributes my taxes as it sees fit. In order to get that paycheck in my case, I am required to pass a random urine test (with which I have no problem). What I do have a problem with is the distribution of my taxes to people who don't have to pass a urine test.

So, here is my Question: Shouldn't one have to pass a urine test to get a welfare check because I have to pass one to earn it for them? Please understand, I have no problem with helping people get back on their feet.. I do, on the other hand, have a problem with helping someone sitting on their ass - doing drugs, while I work. . . . Can you imagine how much money each state would save if people had to pass a urine test to get a public assistance check?"
Author unknown

I guess we could title that program, 'Urine or You're Out.'

I would love to see a required perodic urine test on all of congress and ALL elected offcials and their staff.
You know if they are a druggie they can be blackmailed by the commies about it.

What if the politicians aren't doing drugs but just appear to be dumb asses? Could commies blackmail them then? If so, Nancy Pelosi better beware.
 
Go back to commodities where we actually give them food. Why route the money thru the retail grocery merchants.
That would be socialism and an attack on the stores and free market....
 

Forum List

Back
Top