When Lefties pitch Socialism do they realize what decent people hear?

[Nosmo King]

Don't have to. We already have Kandsa
Don't have to. We already have Kansas as a recent example, and unfettered capitalism, with cuts to the social safety net, and trickle down tax cuts for the rich has been a proven disaster, has been rejected by the citizens, and one of the most conservative state legislatures in the country rejected the Governors veto by over riding it by a large margin.

Food stamps provide no good things for the average American, except someone else paying for someone else’s shit

Is America better if some Americans can't feed their families? Is making Americans suffer hunger part of making America great again?

Do you pay taxes for parks? If you don't use the parks system, isn't that someone else (you) paying for someone else's stuff? If you have no children, should you pay school taxes?

Personally, I'm all for helping legal Americans that are having difficulty feeding their families, it's only those that decide to making a career of it that I have a problem with....and there are plenty.

Are food benefits handed out without checking the eligibility of the recipients?

Abso---fricken---lutely

Then show proof.

I was the building inspector for my county before my retirement in April of 2017. I can show you incontrovertible proof that section eight benefits were never granted without background checks. I also worked with the Jobs and Family Services agency and I know that food benefits are not granted without background checks.

You have rumor.

Next!

 

[Thinker101]

Food stamps provide no good things for the average American, except someone else paying for someone else’s shit

Is America better if some Americans can't feed their families? Is making Americans suffer hunger part of making America great again?

Do you pay taxes for parks? If you don't use the parks system, isn't that someone else (you) paying for someone else's stuff? If you have no children, should you pay school taxes?

Personally, I'm all for helping legal Americans that are having difficulty feeding their families, it's only those that decide to making a career of it that I have a problem with....and there are plenty.

Are food benefits handed out without checking the eligibility of the recipients?

Abso---fricken---lutely

Then show proof.

I was the building inspector for my county before my retirement in April of 2017. I can show you incontrovertible proof that section eight benefits were never granted without background checks. I also worked with the Jobs and Family Services agency and I know that food benefits are not granted without background checks.

You have rumor.

Next!

WTF, food stamps just disappear from your memory, good thing you can go back and re-read.
In regards to section 8, that's fine, after three years, too fricken bad.

 

[bripat9643]

The laws of economics are not the product of public opinion. That claim goes against logic.

Why don't the laws apply equally in all countries?

They do. Why do you believe they don't?

Because the socioeconomic reality in America is not the same as it is in any other country.
Canada, as an example, has a different health care system than we do.

They both follow the laws of economics. When you establish a monopoly, the price goes up and the service goes down.

Enjoy your red herring.
That has nothing to do with society determining its socioeconomic reality.

I said "the laws of economics." I have no idea what your conception of "socioeconomic reality" is. It has no scientific meaning. the bottom line is that the laws of economics aren't affected by what people believe or what laws they pass. They are as immutable as the laws of gravity.

The laws of economics say government run healthcare is a disaster.

 

[BrokeLoser]

Food stamps provide no good things for the average American, except someone else paying for someone else’s shit

Is America better if some Americans can't feed their families? Is making Americans suffer hunger part of making America great again?

Do you pay taxes for parks? If you don't use the parks system, isn't that someone else (you) paying for someone else's stuff? If you have no children, should you pay school taxes?

Personally, I'm all for helping legal Americans that are having difficulty feeding their families, it's only those that decide to making a career of it that I have a problem with....and there are plenty.

Are food benefits handed out without checking the eligibility of the recipients?

Abso---fricken---lutely

Then show proof.

I was the building inspector for my county before my retirement in April of 2017. I can show you incontrovertible proof that section eight benefits were never granted without background checks. I also worked with the Jobs and Family Services agency and I know that food benefits are not granted without background checks.

You have rumor.

Next!

I should probably let you in on a little secret...one you seem oblivious to. You see, it’s not really the money that causes extreme discontent and hatred toward the poor. Most are vile, filthy, indecent, immoral, criminal, baby making lowlifes...good people have trouble embracing the idea of paying them even $1. Are you starting to get it?

 

[bripat9643]

Don't have to. We already have Kandsa

No matter how it’s cleverly spun or packaged ALL decent people hear it the same way.
“Provide me with shit that other people pay for...I’m entitled to free shit because I stand on U.S. soil.”
Do they realize NOBODY good and decent is shameless enough to make these types of requests?
I’m hoping the pitchmasters such as Mac1958 will weigh in here.

It's not a matter of being good,and decent. In fact, to imply as much casts the opposite on those who espouse democratic,socialism.

It's not their alleged goodness and decency that prevents them from doing jderstanding democratic socialism. In fact, plenty of good,and decent people would fight to hold on to the democratic socialism they enjoy, namely Social Security and Medicare.

What keeps them from understanding democratic socialism is their ignorance about what it actually means. Couple that ignorance with a steady diet of propaganda, and their understanding is even more entrenched.

If only reputable pundits were honest with these people,,we wouldn't be arguing points but honestly discussing them.

I am quite sure that, if asked in an unbiased manner, many people would agree that the kind of healthcare system enjoyed in every other industrialized nation would show real benefits here. Canada has universal healthcare, but the Canadian example is never proffered by biased pundits. Instead, they rant about Cuba, Venezuela and China. Are the Canadians as oppressed as the Venezuelans? Are the British as poor as the Cubans? Is there the same degree of freedom in Japan as there is in China?

Many would agree, if asked in an unbiased way, that community college or trade schools should be free of tuition so some may transfer those credits to other colleges or universities or begin a career in a trade. The cost of education is prohibitive now. But we all know that an educated population, a skilled population is vastly more competitive than populations with fewer educated and skilled citizens to fill a work force.

Just blaring the evils of socialism,without explaining the long term benefits hamstrings the discussion at best, and robs America of the potential,of its citizens at worst.

Sounds like it might works.

Let's make a bargain.

Let's get rid of the federal government and the federal reserve, do away with it all together, abolition it entirely.

We'll let the states take over, like 50 seperate nations, doing what ever they like, for say, fifty years.

We'll see how that works. At the end of it, if things are not going any better. . . . We'll take the best of what the states are doing with their socialism, and take the best of all the socialism we see in Canada, Europe, Russia, China, etc., hell, maybe we can make a one world socialist state by then.

But I have a sneaking suspicion, the problem isn't "capitalism," or "socialism," I have a sneaking suspcious that the real problem is government.

See, the wealth inequality, the labor force participation rate, and all these problems the government tries to fix but only makes worse? I have a feeling, it will all get so much better once we just get rid of it all.

Less levels of government, less income inequality, less corruption.

Any town, county, city or state that wants to be socialist?

More power to them.


And like I said, at the end of this fifty year experiment? If having no central government or no central bank makes things better? Well, we can go full on crazy in the opposite direction, we can have your one world socialist bank and government.


The only reason I think we should go with no government first, is we all know how difficult it is to cut as opposed to create laws. Once we create a socialist system, it is going to be for good.

Don't have to. We already have Kansas as a recent example, and unfettered capitalism, with cuts to the social safety net, and trickle down tax cuts for the rich has been a proven disaster, has been rejected by the citizens, and one of the most conservative state legislatures in the country rejected the Governors veto by over riding it by a large margin.

bullshit.

 

[Nosmo King]

Is America better if some Americans can't feed their families? Is making Americans suffer hunger part of making America great again?

Do you pay taxes for parks? If you don't use the parks system, isn't that someone else (you) paying for someone else's stuff? If you have no children, should you pay school taxes?

Personally, I'm all for helping legal Americans that are having difficulty feeding their families, it's only those that decide to making a career of it that I have a problem with....and there are plenty.

Are food benefits handed out without checking the eligibility of the recipients?

Abso---fricken---lutely

Then show proof.

I was the building inspector for my county before my retirement in April of 2017. I can show you incontrovertible proof that section eight benefits were never granted without background checks. I also worked with the Jobs and Family Services agency and I know that food benefits are not granted without background checks.

You have rumor.

Next!

WTF, food stamps just disappear from your memory, good thing you can go back and re-read.
In regards to section 8, that's fine, after three years, too fricken bad.

I mentioned food benefits, you chose not to read about it.

 

[Nosmo King]

Is America better if some Americans can't feed their families? Is making Americans suffer hunger part of making America great again?

Do you pay taxes for parks? If you don't use the parks system, isn't that someone else (you) paying for someone else's stuff? If you have no children, should you pay school taxes?

Personally, I'm all for helping legal Americans that are having difficulty feeding their families, it's only those that decide to making a career of it that I have a problem with....and there are plenty.

Are food benefits handed out without checking the eligibility of the recipients?

Abso---fricken---lutely

Then show proof.

I was the building inspector for my county before my retirement in April of 2017. I can show you incontrovertible proof that section eight benefits were never granted without background checks. I also worked with the Jobs and Family Services agency and I know that food benefits are not granted without background checks.

You have rumor.

Next!

I should probably let you in on a little secret...one you seem oblivious to. You see, it’s not really the money that causes extreme discontent and hatred toward the poor. Most are vile, filthy, indecent, immoral, criminal, baby making lowlifes...good people have trouble embracing the idea of paying them even $1. Are you starting to get it?

I get it. You hold the poor in contempt. You think that poverty is a choice. You think that poverty is a character flaw.

It is neither. It is a tragedy. It is a byproduct of Capitalism.

 

[bripat9643]

Personally, I'm all for helping legal Americans that are having difficulty feeding their families, it's only those that decide to making a career of it that I have a problem with....and there are plenty.

Are food benefits handed out without checking the eligibility of the recipients?

Abso---fricken---lutely

Then show proof.

I was the building inspector for my county before my retirement in April of 2017. I can show you incontrovertible proof that section eight benefits were never granted without background checks. I also worked with the Jobs and Family Services agency and I know that food benefits are not granted without background checks.

You have rumor.

Next!

I should probably let you in on a little secret...one you seem oblivious to. You see, it’s not really the money that causes extreme discontent and hatred toward the poor. Most are vile, filthy, indecent, immoral, criminal, baby making lowlifes...good people have trouble embracing the idea of paying them even $1. Are you starting to get it?

I get it. You hold the poor in contempt. You think that poverty is a choice. You think that poverty is a character flaw.

It is neither. It is a tragedy. It is a byproduct of Capitalism.

Poverty is a choice. It's a series of many choices. The decision to have children out of wedlock is one of those choices.

 

[Nosmo King]

Are food benefits handed out without checking the eligibility of the recipients?

Abso---fricken---lutely

Then show proof.

I was the building inspector for my county before my retirement in April of 2017. I can show you incontrovertible proof that section eight benefits were never granted without background checks. I also worked with the Jobs and Family Services agency and I know that food benefits are not granted without background checks.

You have rumor.

Next!

I should probably let you in on a little secret...one you seem oblivious to. You see, it’s not really the money that causes extreme discontent and hatred toward the poor. Most are vile, filthy, indecent, immoral, criminal, baby making lowlifes...good people have trouble embracing the idea of paying them even $1. Are you starting to get it?

I get it. You hold the poor in contempt. You think that poverty is a choice. You think that poverty is a character flaw.

It is neither. It is a tragedy. It is a byproduct of Capitalism.

Poverty is a choice. It's a series of many choices. The decision to have children out of wedlock is one of those choices.

Given the opportunity to be wealthy, how many of the poor would chose poverty? What demographic group makes up the largest portion of poverty in this country? Children. Next up? The elderly.

 

[Tehon]

Why don't the laws apply equally in all countries?

They do. Why do you believe they don't?

Because the socioeconomic reality in America is not the same as it is in any other country.
Canada, as an example, has a different health care system than we do.

They both follow the laws of economics. When you establish a monopoly, the price goes up and the service goes down.

Enjoy your red herring.
That has nothing to do with society determining its socioeconomic reality.

I said "the laws of economics." I have no idea what your conception of "socioeconomic reality" is. It has no scientific meaning. the bottom line is that the laws of economics aren't affected by what people believe or what laws they pass. They are as immutable as the laws of gravity.

The laws of economics say government run healthcare is a disaster.

I'm not here to dispute your laws of economics in this thread, nor to discuss science. If you wish to engage me in a discussion on what I actually said that would be great.
Let me try to simplify the big words for you.

Definition of SOCIOECONOMIC
: of, relating to, or involving a combination of social and economic factors

My point was that the economy serves a social function and that different societies organize it in different ways.

 

[MisterBeale]

Don't have to. We already have Kandsa

No matter how it’s cleverly spun or packaged ALL decent people hear it the same way.
“Provide me with shit that other people pay for...I’m entitled to free shit because I stand on U.S. soil.”
Do they realize NOBODY good and decent is shameless enough to make these types of requests?
I’m hoping the pitchmasters such as Mac1958 will weigh in here.

It's not a matter of being good,and decent. In fact, to imply as much casts the opposite on those who espouse democratic,socialism.

It's not their alleged goodness and decency that prevents them from doing jderstanding democratic socialism. In fact, plenty of good,and decent people would fight to hold on to the democratic socialism they enjoy, namely Social Security and Medicare.

What keeps them from understanding democratic socialism is their ignorance about what it actually means. Couple that ignorance with a steady diet of propaganda, and their understanding is even more entrenched.

If only reputable pundits were honest with these people,,we wouldn't be arguing points but honestly discussing them.

I am quite sure that, if asked in an unbiased manner, many people would agree that the kind of healthcare system enjoyed in every other industrialized nation would show real benefits here. Canada has universal healthcare, but the Canadian example is never proffered by biased pundits. Instead, they rant about Cuba, Venezuela and China. Are the Canadians as oppressed as the Venezuelans? Are the British as poor as the Cubans? Is there the same degree of freedom in Japan as there is in China?

Many would agree, if asked in an unbiased way, that community college or trade schools should be free of tuition so some may transfer those credits to other colleges or universities or begin a career in a trade. The cost of education is prohibitive now. But we all know that an educated population, a skilled population is vastly more competitive than populations with fewer educated and skilled citizens to fill a work force.

Just blaring the evils of socialism,without explaining the long term benefits hamstrings the discussion at best, and robs America of the potential,of its citizens at worst.

Sounds like it might works.

Let's make a bargain.

Let's get rid of the federal government and the federal reserve, do away with it all together, abolition it entirely.

We'll let the states take over, like 50 seperate nations, doing what ever they like, for say, fifty years.

We'll see how that works. At the end of it, if things are not going any better. . . . We'll take the best of what the states are doing with their socialism, and take the best of all the socialism we see in Canada, Europe, Russia, China, etc., hell, maybe we can make a one world socialist state by then.

But I have a sneaking suspicion, the problem isn't "capitalism," or "socialism," I have a sneaking suspcious that the real problem is government.

See, the wealth inequality, the labor force participation rate, and all these problems the government tries to fix but only makes worse? I have a feeling, it will all get so much better once we just get rid of it all.

Less levels of government, less income inequality, less corruption.

Any town, county, city or state that wants to be socialist?

More power to them.


And like I said, at the end of this fifty year experiment? If having no central government or no central bank makes things better? Well, we can go full on crazy in the opposite direction, we can have your one world socialist bank and government.


The only reason I think we should go with no government first, is we all know how difficult it is to cut as opposed to create laws. Once we create a socialist system, it is going to be for good.

Don't have to. We already have Kansas as a recent example, and unfettered capitalism, with cuts to the social safety net, and trickle down tax cuts for the rich has been a proven disaster, has been rejected by the citizens, and one of the most conservative state legislatures in the country rejected the Governors veto by over riding it by a large margin.

As far as I know, Kansas never seceded from the Union, so you never really understood the crux of my post.

Thank you for trying though.

 

[Tehon]

See, the wealth inequality, the labor force participation rate, and all these problems the government tries to fix but only makes worse?

You think that if there was no minimum wage the capitalists would pay a higher rate for labor?

 

[JWBooth]

All hail the omnipotent state. Have you accepted the state as your lord and savior?

 

[dblack]

All hail the omnipotent state. Have you accepted the state as your lord and savior?

Socialism is a rehash of theocracy. Governments have historically longed for the power inherent in religion. It took us a while, but we finally figured out we're better off avoiding that - we don't want that much power centralized under government. Looks like we're still learning that lesson with socialism.

 

[MisterBeale]

See, the wealth inequality, the labor force participation rate, and all these problems the government tries to fix but only makes worse?

You think that if there was no minimum wage the capitalists would pay a higher rate for labor?

It's much, MUCH more complicated than that.

You absolutely can't get rid of the minimum wage while the Federal Reserve still exists.


You can't just justify socialism for the rich, while denying it to the poor.

As long as corruption is legal in our government, there will be no solution for these problems.

Dollar Devaluation since 1913
Posted on January 23, 2012 by Michael Smith

". . . How does the Federal Reserve devalue the dollar? By printing more money. Printing more money causes monetary inflation. That means there are more dollars in circulation, but just because there is more paper money floating around, that doesn’t mean value has been created. All you really get is price inflation. Here’s an extreme example: Let’s say the Federal Reserve just gave everyone in America $1 million. Wouldn’t that be great if everyone in America became a millionaire over night? Unfortunately, nothing would change, except prices would increase. Think about it. How much would you have to pay the plumber to come to your house, if he’s already a millionaire?"

Dollar Devaluation since 1913 - Compare Gold and Silver Prices
Government elites allow this, because it makes the debt easier to pay off at the expense of the poor. The wealthiest in the nation do not care so much.

On top of this, the rules of the game are rigged in favor of those who control the system. Corruption is LEGAL.



This is why you have socialism and subsidized risk for the elites, and a free market for the poor.

The American Way: Socialism for the Rich, Free Enterprise for the Rest

End the FED, make corruption illegal, and then yeah, if you abolish the minimum wage, you would probably find that economic growth and protection of union's rights in the free market would more than force employers to pay what labor is worth.

It worked in the past, there is no reason to think it wouldn't now. The metrics I have just shown are the reason wealth inequality is getting so bad, not because "capitalism" doesn't work. It is because the ruling elites and government have concentrated their power. And now they are fooling the masses into giving them more, and concentrating their power further, instead of taking their power away.

 

[skews13]

See, the wealth inequality, the labor force participation rate, and all these problems the government tries to fix but only makes worse?

You think that if there was no minimum wage the capitalists would pay a higher rate for labor?

It's much, MUCH more complicated than that.

You absolutely can't get rid of the minimum wage while the Federal Reserve still exists.


You can't just justify socialism for the rich, while denying it to the poor.

As long as corruption is legal in our government, there will be no solution for these problems.

Dollar Devaluation since 1913
Posted on January 23, 2012 by Michael Smith

". . . How does the Federal Reserve devalue the dollar? By printing more money. Printing more money causes monetary inflation. That means there are more dollars in circulation, but just because there is more paper money floating around, that doesn’t mean value has been created. All you really get is price inflation. Here’s an extreme example: Let’s say the Federal Reserve just gave everyone in America $1 million. Wouldn’t that be great if everyone in America became a millionaire over night? Unfortunately, nothing would change, except prices would increase. Think about it. How much would you have to pay the plumber to come to your house, if he’s already a millionaire?"

Dollar Devaluation since 1913 - Compare Gold and Silver Prices
Government elites allow this, because it makes the debt easier to pay off at the expense of the poor. The wealthiest in the nation do not care so much.

On top of this, the rules of the game are rigged in favor of those who control the system. Corruption is LEGAL.



This is why you have socialism and subsidized risk for the elites, and a free market for the poor.

The American Way: Socialism for the Rich, Free Enterprise for the Rest

End the FED, make corruption illegal, and then yeah, if you abolish the minimum wage, you would probably find that economic growth and protection of union's rights in the free market would more than force employers to pay what labor is worth.

It worked in the past, there is no reason to think it wouldn't now. The metrics I have just shown are the reason wealth inequality is getting so bad, not because "capitalism" doesn't work. It is because the ruling elites and government have concentrated their power. And now they are fooling the masses into giving them more, and concentrating their power further, instead of taking their power away.

Yep capitalism has failed the American people. They won’t tolerate a system that favors the few over the many much longer. It’s already happening.

 

[Tehon]

See, the wealth inequality, the labor force participation rate, and all these problems the government tries to fix but only makes worse?

You think that if there was no minimum wage the capitalists would pay a higher rate for labor?

It's much, MUCH more complicated than that.

You absolutely can't get rid of the minimum wage while the Federal Reserve still exists.


You can't just justify socialism for the rich, while denying it to the poor.

As long as corruption is legal in our government, there will be no solution for these problems.

Dollar Devaluation since 1913
Posted on January 23, 2012 by Michael Smith

". . . How does the Federal Reserve devalue the dollar? By printing more money. Printing more money causes monetary inflation. That means there are more dollars in circulation, but just because there is more paper money floating around, that doesn’t mean value has been created. All you really get is price inflation. Here’s an extreme example: Let’s say the Federal Reserve just gave everyone in America $1 million. Wouldn’t that be great if everyone in America became a millionaire over night? Unfortunately, nothing would change, except prices would increase. Think about it. How much would you have to pay the plumber to come to your house, if he’s already a millionaire?"

Dollar Devaluation since 1913 - Compare Gold and Silver Prices
Government elites allow this, because it makes the debt easier to pay off at the expense of the poor. The wealthiest in the nation do not care so much.

On top of this, the rules of the game are rigged in favor of those who control the system. Corruption is LEGAL.



This is why you have socialism and subsidized risk for the elites, and a free market for the poor.

The American Way: Socialism for the Rich, Free Enterprise for the Rest

End the FED, make corruption illegal, and then yeah, if you abolish the minimum wage, you would probably find that economic growth and protection of union's rights in the free market would more than force employers to pay what labor is worth.

It worked in the past, there is no reason to think it wouldn't now. The metrics I have just shown are the reason wealth inequality is getting so bad, not because "capitalism" doesn't work. It is because the ruling elites and government have concentrated their power. And now they are fooling the masses into giving them more, and concentrating their power further, instead of taking their power away.

Not to discount anything you have said, I believe you, but. You can make it as complicated as you want, it isn't that difficult. Capital's only motive is to seek a profit. You can't tell me that in the absence of government, industry will not collude to find the lowest labor rate necessary to sustain its wage labor. Minimum wage laws were not enacted for no reason and they were enacted before the Federal Reserve Act.

 

[MisterBeale]

See, the wealth inequality, the labor force participation rate, and all these problems the government tries to fix but only makes worse?

You think that if there was no minimum wage the capitalists would pay a higher rate for labor?

It's much, MUCH more complicated than that.

You absolutely can't get rid of the minimum wage while the Federal Reserve still exists.


You can't just justify socialism for the rich, while denying it to the poor.

As long as corruption is legal in our government, there will be no solution for these problems.

Dollar Devaluation since 1913
Posted on January 23, 2012 by Michael Smith

". . . How does the Federal Reserve devalue the dollar? By printing more money. Printing more money causes monetary inflation. That means there are more dollars in circulation, but just because there is more paper money floating around, that doesn’t mean value has been created. All you really get is price inflation. Here’s an extreme example: Let’s say the Federal Reserve just gave everyone in America $1 million. Wouldn’t that be great if everyone in America became a millionaire over night? Unfortunately, nothing would change, except prices would increase. Think about it. How much would you have to pay the plumber to come to your house, if he’s already a millionaire?"

Dollar Devaluation since 1913 - Compare Gold and Silver Prices
Government elites allow this, because it makes the debt easier to pay off at the expense of the poor. The wealthiest in the nation do not care so much.

On top of this, the rules of the game are rigged in favor of those who control the system. Corruption is LEGAL.



This is why you have socialism and subsidized risk for the elites, and a free market for the poor.

The American Way: Socialism for the Rich, Free Enterprise for the Rest

End the FED, make corruption illegal, and then yeah, if you abolish the minimum wage, you would probably find that economic growth and protection of union's rights in the free market would more than force employers to pay what labor is worth.

It worked in the past, there is no reason to think it wouldn't now. The metrics I have just shown are the reason wealth inequality is getting so bad, not because "capitalism" doesn't work. It is because the ruling elites and government have concentrated their power. And now they are fooling the masses into giving them more, and concentrating their power further, instead of taking their power away.

Yep capitalism has failed the American people. They won’t tolerate a system that favors the few over the many much longer. It’s already happening.

"Yep capitalism fascism has failed the American people. They won’t tolerate a system that favors the few over the many much longer. It’s already happening."

fixt

 

[Thinker101]

Personally, I'm all for helping legal Americans that are having difficulty feeding their families, it's only those that decide to making a career of it that I have a problem with....and there are plenty.

Are food benefits handed out without checking the eligibility of the recipients?

Abso---fricken---lutely

Then show proof.

I was the building inspector for my county before my retirement in April of 2017. I can show you incontrovertible proof that section eight benefits were never granted without background checks. I also worked with the Jobs and Family Services agency and I know that food benefits are not granted without background checks.

You have rumor.

Next!

WTF, food stamps just disappear from your memory, good thing you can go back and re-read.
In regards to section 8, that's fine, after three years, too fricken bad.

I mentioned food benefits, you chose not to read about it.

You did mention food benefits, and I responded to your post. Then you jumped into Section 8...you really do need to learn to pay attention.

 

[Nosmo King]

Are food benefits handed out without checking the eligibility of the recipients?

Abso---fricken---lutely

Then show proof.

I was the building inspector for my county before my retirement in April of 2017. I can show you incontrovertible proof that section eight benefits were never granted without background checks. I also worked with the Jobs and Family Services agency and I know that food benefits are not granted without background checks.

You have rumor.

Next!

WTF, food stamps just disappear from your memory, good thing you can go back and re-read.
In regards to section 8, that's fine, after three years, too fricken bad.

I mentioned food benefits, you chose not to read about it.

You did mention food benefits, and I responded to your post. Then you jumped into Section 8...you really do need to learn to pay attention.

On paying attention:

I said I was the building inspector and worked with Section Eight. Then I wrote I also worked with Jons and Family Services. They administer the food benefit program. Why are you questioning my attention span when your's is so deficient?