Missouri Republicans are trying to ban food stamp recipients from buying steak and seafood

[Camp]

Neither unions nor taxes send jobs overseas. We control the market. Without making product sales in the USA most of those companies will go out of business. Beer maker Sam Adams is threatening to move off shore. Lets watch what happens. Probably be the end of Sam Adams beer sales in America. Sort of like when Bud got sold to overseas investors. Sale plummeted and little American craft breweries surged. Populism is taking off in Republican and Democratic demo's. Pro America is trending.

Ever-increasing union demands as well as ever-increasing tax and regulation cannot be described any other rational way except a mitigating factor for why corporations outsource labor. If you are too stupid or illiterate to understand what a "mitigating factor" is... can't do much to help ya.

If you read my post entirely, you will see that I listed two more things besides unions and taxes... did you forget to include them? These two things are important to my argument. You see, it was the combination of unions/taxes along with passage of NAFTA and GATT which enabled corporations to send jobs to our new trade partners. Those who were vehemently opposed to NAFTA and GATT (I was one of them) tried to warn you that this was going to happen. Then, just like now, you would not listen. Thi was going to help all these third world countries economically, and that was going to make the world better... share the wealth... It was going to force our companies to be more competitive, it was going to drive wages up in these foreign countries because they would have to compete with the American workers... none of it worked out like your people planned and now our manufacturing sector jobs are all gone.

You sound like one of those condescending ***** that need to make shit up and accuse people of things you could not possibly know. I left out NAFTA and GATT because I happen to believe they helped caused the lose of jobs in America. So, I agreed with half of what you said, but you are too big headed and ego driven to accept anything other than complete and total endorsement of your opinion. You didn't warn me of anything asshole. And your reference to "my people" shows just what a dick you are. Keep stroking yourself and your ego. Sounds like you are in desperate need of some kind of sense of being something you will never be.

 

[Boss]

Neither unions nor taxes send jobs overseas. We control the market. Without making product sales in the USA most of those companies will go out of business. Beer maker Sam Adams is threatening to move off shore. Lets watch what happens. Probably be the end of Sam Adams beer sales in America. Sort of like when Bud got sold to overseas investors. Sale plummeted and little American craft breweries surged. Populism is taking off in Republican and Democratic demo's. Pro America is trending.

Ever-increasing union demands as well as ever-increasing tax and regulation cannot be described any other rational way except a mitigating factor for why corporations outsource labor. If you are too stupid or illiterate to understand what a "mitigating factor" is... can't do much to help ya.

If you read my post entirely, you will see that I listed two more things besides unions and taxes... did you forget to include them? These two things are important to my argument. You see, it was the combination of unions/taxes along with passage of NAFTA and GATT which enabled corporations to send jobs to our new trade partners. Those who were vehemently opposed to NAFTA and GATT (I was one of them) tried to warn you that this was going to happen. Then, just like now, you would not listen. Thi was going to help all these third world countries economically, and that was going to make the world better... share the wealth... It was going to force our companies to be more competitive, it was going to drive wages up in these foreign countries because they would have to compete with the American workers... none of it worked out like your people planned and now our manufacturing sector jobs are all gone.

You sound like one of those condescending ***** that need to make shit up and accuse people of things you could not possibly know. I left out NAFTA and GATT because I happen to believe they helped caused the lose of jobs in America. So, I agreed with half of what you said, but you are too big headed and ego driven to accept anything other than complete and total endorsement of your opinion. You didn't warn me of anything asshole. And your reference to "my people" shows just what a dick you are. Keep stroking yourself and your ego. Sounds like you are in desperate need of some kind of sense of being something you will never be.

Well I guess you need to learn how to communicate with others. You didn't say a thing about agreeing with me on anything. You immediately attacked me and told me what we control, what we're going to do, how things are going to be. Then you take a sissy-slap at Populism for some odd reason.

Now that we've established you understand the enabling of outsourcing, we can focus on what the motivations were for these corporations to do so. When you can have your widget built in Mexico for $3 and hr., why would you pay American workers $20 hr.? If you can avoid millions complying with health care mandates, family leave mandates, all the other mandates regarding employment of a US worker... Why wouldn't you outsource? I'm not even talking about demands from unions yet or ever-increasing tax policies.

My point is, we cannot begin to address this problem until we face the assorted motivations which caused it. It's not as easy as saying... well let's just repeal NAFTA and GATT! Can't do that so easily. US Companies have billions invested now, the trade partners have billions invested, millions of jobs in their countries, entire economies stand to be devastated. Do you want to sever diplomatic relationships with these people and make them our enemies? So we're kind of stuck now with what we did. And perhaps we're also stuck with union thugs pushing around corporations while pinheads cheer them on?

Bottom line: We cannot resolve the crisis with manufacturing jobs leaving America until we address the motivations behind it and why it has happened. Heaping further penalties on the companies who took advantage of NAFTA and GATT is not the answer. Again--- I am telling you that something you are thinking about doing is a dumb and stupid idea--- you're not listening.

 

[Andylusion]

Neither unions nor taxes send jobs overseas. We control the market. Without making product sales in the USA most of those companies will go out of business. Beer maker Sam Adams is threatening to move off shore. Lets watch what happens. Probably be the end of Sam Adams beer sales in America. Sort of like when Bud got sold to overseas investors. Sale plummeted and little American craft breweries surged. Populism is taking off in Republican and Democratic demo's. Pro America is trending.

Ever-increasing union demands as well as ever-increasing tax and regulation cannot be described any other rational way except a mitigating factor for why corporations outsource labor. If you are too stupid or illiterate to understand what a "mitigating factor" is... can't do much to help ya.

If you read my post entirely, you will see that I listed two more things besides unions and taxes... did you forget to include them? These two things are important to my argument. You see, it was the combination of unions/taxes along with passage of NAFTA and GATT which enabled corporations to send jobs to our new trade partners. Those who were vehemently opposed to NAFTA and GATT (I was one of them) tried to warn you that this was going to happen. Then, just like now, you would not listen. Thi was going to help all these third world countries economically, and that was going to make the world better... share the wealth... It was going to force our companies to be more competitive, it was going to drive wages up in these foreign countries because they would have to compete with the American workers... none of it worked out like your people planned and now our manufacturing sector jobs are all gone.

You sound like one of those condescending ***** that need to make shit up and accuse people of things you could not possibly know. I left out NAFTA and GATT because I happen to believe they helped caused the lose of jobs in America. So, I agreed with half of what you said, but you are too big headed and ego driven to accept anything other than complete and total endorsement of your opinion. You didn't warn me of anything asshole. And your reference to "my people" shows just what a dick you are. Keep stroking yourself and your ego. Sounds like you are in desperate need of some kind of sense of being something you will never be.

And yet all during the 1990s, when NAFTA was in full swing, the unemployment rate went..... up or down? Down.

And GATT.... GATT has been around since the 1940s. I'm confused why you could even attempt to blame GATT for anything. If GATT caused job loss, then by now after 70 years, there shouldn't be a single job left anywhere in the world.

What a bonkers claim that is.

 

[Camp]

Neither unions nor taxes send jobs overseas. We control the market. Without making product sales in the USA most of those companies will go out of business. Beer maker Sam Adams is threatening to move off shore. Lets watch what happens. Probably be the end of Sam Adams beer sales in America. Sort of like when Bud got sold to overseas investors. Sale plummeted and little American craft breweries surged. Populism is taking off in Republican and Democratic demo's. Pro America is trending.

Ever-increasing union demands as well as ever-increasing tax and regulation cannot be described any other rational way except a mitigating factor for why corporations outsource labor. If you are too stupid or illiterate to understand what a "mitigating factor" is... can't do much to help ya.

If you read my post entirely, you will see that I listed two more things besides unions and taxes... did you forget to include them? These two things are important to my argument. You see, it was the combination of unions/taxes along with passage of NAFTA and GATT which enabled corporations to send jobs to our new trade partners. Those who were vehemently opposed to NAFTA and GATT (I was one of them) tried to warn you that this was going to happen. Then, just like now, you would not listen. Thi was going to help all these third world countries economically, and that was going to make the world better... share the wealth... It was going to force our companies to be more competitive, it was going to drive wages up in these foreign countries because they would have to compete with the American workers... none of it worked out like your people planned and now our manufacturing sector jobs are all gone.

You sound like one of those condescending ***** that need to make shit up and accuse people of things you could not possibly know. I left out NAFTA and GATT because I happen to believe they helped caused the lose of jobs in America. So, I agreed with half of what you said, but you are too big headed and ego driven to accept anything other than complete and total endorsement of your opinion. You didn't warn me of anything asshole. And your reference to "my people" shows just what a dick you are. Keep stroking yourself and your ego. Sounds like you are in desperate need of some kind of sense of being something you will never be.

And yet all during the 1990s, when NAFTA was in full swing, the unemployment rate went..... up or down? Down.

And GATT.... GATT has been around since the 1940s. I'm confused why you could even attempt to blame GATT for anything. If GATT caused job loss, then by now after 70 years, there shouldn't be a single job left anywhere in the world.

What a bonkers claim that is.

You seem to like connecting things that perhaps have no real significant connection to the points you are trying to make. Because NAFTA and low unemployment occurred in the same decade you connect them. Could there be other factors involved? Perhaps the tech bubble? Did anything else go on in the 90's that would have brought jobs besides as you seem to claim, NAFTA?
GATT turned into the WTO during the Reagan years. In the late 40's it started with a dozen countries making trade and tariff agreements. By the time Reagan got his hands on it, it became almost a hundred counties. It has always been seen as a great benefit to corporations, huge global ones in particular, but not so good for domestic employment. Not for America at least. You can thank GATT for jobs fleeing America in the 80's and continuing to this day. The latest threat, beer maker Sam Adams. Without GATT they could never think about closing down an American brewery and moving it off shore.
GATT doesn't reduce global jobs, it only reduces jobs in America.

 

[Boss]

And GATT.... GATT has been around since the 1940s. I'm confused why you could even attempt to blame GATT for anything.

When I mention GATT, I am talking about the 1994 revision which implemented the WTO.

 

[Andylusion]

Neither unions nor taxes send jobs overseas. We control the market. Without making product sales in the USA most of those companies will go out of business. Beer maker Sam Adams is threatening to move off shore. Lets watch what happens. Probably be the end of Sam Adams beer sales in America. Sort of like when Bud got sold to overseas investors. Sale plummeted and little American craft breweries surged. Populism is taking off in Republican and Democratic demo's. Pro America is trending.

Ever-increasing union demands as well as ever-increasing tax and regulation cannot be described any other rational way except a mitigating factor for why corporations outsource labor. If you are too stupid or illiterate to understand what a "mitigating factor" is... can't do much to help ya.

If you read my post entirely, you will see that I listed two more things besides unions and taxes... did you forget to include them? These two things are important to my argument. You see, it was the combination of unions/taxes along with passage of NAFTA and GATT which enabled corporations to send jobs to our new trade partners. Those who were vehemently opposed to NAFTA and GATT (I was one of them) tried to warn you that this was going to happen. Then, just like now, you would not listen. Thi was going to help all these third world countries economically, and that was going to make the world better... share the wealth... It was going to force our companies to be more competitive, it was going to drive wages up in these foreign countries because they would have to compete with the American workers... none of it worked out like your people planned and now our manufacturing sector jobs are all gone.

You sound like one of those condescending ***** that need to make shit up and accuse people of things you could not possibly know. I left out NAFTA and GATT because I happen to believe they helped caused the lose of jobs in America. So, I agreed with half of what you said, but you are too big headed and ego driven to accept anything other than complete and total endorsement of your opinion. You didn't warn me of anything asshole. And your reference to "my people" shows just what a dick you are. Keep stroking yourself and your ego. Sounds like you are in desperate need of some kind of sense of being something you will never be.

And yet all during the 1990s, when NAFTA was in full swing, the unemployment rate went..... up or down? Down.

And GATT.... GATT has been around since the 1940s. I'm confused why you could even attempt to blame GATT for anything. If GATT caused job loss, then by now after 70 years, there shouldn't be a single job left anywhere in the world.

What a bonkers claim that is.

You seem to like connecting things that perhaps have no real significant connection to the points you are trying to make. Because NAFTA and low unemployment occurred in the same decade you connect them. Could there be other factors involved? Perhaps the tech bubble? Did anything else go on in the 90's that would have brought jobs besides as you seem to claim, NAFTA?
GATT turned into the WTO during the Reagan years. In the late 40's it started with a dozen countries making trade and tariff agreements. By the time Reagan got his hands on it, it became almost a hundred counties. It has always been seen as a great benefit to corporations, huge global ones in particular, but not so good for domestic employment. Not for America at least. You can thank GATT for jobs fleeing America in the 80's and continuing to this day. The latest threat, beer maker Sam Adams. Without GATT they could never think about closing down an American brewery and moving it off shore.
GATT doesn't reduce global jobs, it only reduces jobs in America.

I'm making no such connection. The claim was that NAFTA destroyed jobs. After NAFTA was implemented, and for years following, unemployment went down.

The evidence contradicts the claim. I made no claim. The other person made the claim, and the claim isn't supported by the evidence.

The tech bubble was virtually a non-event from an employment perspective. Most of the (dot com) type companies, employed very few people. The bubble burst in 2000, and the unemployment rate for 2000 was 4%. In 2001, it was only 4.2%. Barely a noticeable difference.

In 2003 the unemployment rate was only 5.8% and declined from there to 4.6% in 2007.

Point being, again, if NAFTA was truly the job killer that some people are screaming it is.... then how is it that 15 years later, the unemployment rate was all they way down to 4.6%?

Again, if GATT had been off shoring jobs since the 1940s, or the WTO since the 1980s... then we should have an unemployment rate of 80% by now. The evidence simply doesn't back the claim.

And I also can't figure out how trade inherently harms one country, but magically benefits every other country. Also, why don't the people of those countries see it that way?

Why is it when the WTO meets in Europe, there are always massive protests?

In 2012, the WTO met in Russia, with protests that this would destroy jobs, and benefit the west.

In 2013, the WTO met in indonesia, where protesters claimed the WTO was only there to benefit the United States at the expense of the local economy.

In 2005, the WTO met in Hong Kong, and protests started claiming that trade would drive all the farmers in South Korea out of business.

Over and over and over, every single place that trade promoted by the WTO, everyone in their country, thinks that they will be harmed at the benefit of every other country.

But these are all mutually exclusive claims. It's impossible that free trade will benefit "everyone else" and always harm "our jobs".

Which is exactly why the doom and gloom sky-is-falling predictions that surrounded the WTO to this day, have never come true.

 

[Claudette]

If they want to buy steak and seafood with that handy dandy EBT card then let em.

When they run out of money before the end of the month it will be just to damned bad.

 

[JOSweetHeart]

^^^ Amen to that. And then next time if there is one for them, they will remember to spend their money more wisely.

God bless you always!!!

Holly

P.S. Actually to me, that is how it should be for anyone. Prioritize and wisely spend and you will have fewer problems.

 

[Boss]

If they want to buy steak and seafood with that handy dandy EBT card then let em.

When they run out of money before the end of the month it will be just to damned bad.

Here in Alabama (not sure if it's the same everywhere) whenever someone makes a purchase on EBT, the register receipt will show their balance after purchase. I've seen folks with EBT balances over $1,500.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Neither unions nor taxes send jobs overseas. We control the market. Without making product sales in the USA most of those companies will go out of business. Beer maker Sam Adams is threatening to move off shore. Lets watch what happens. Probably be the end of Sam Adams beer sales in America. Sort of like when Bud got sold to overseas investors. Sale plummeted and little American craft breweries surged. Populism is taking off in Republican and Democratic demo's. Pro America is trending.

Ever-increasing union demands as well as ever-increasing tax and regulation cannot be described any other rational way except a mitigating factor for why corporations outsource labor. If you are too stupid or illiterate to understand what a "mitigating factor" is... can't do much to help ya.

If you read my post entirely, you will see that I listed two more things besides unions and taxes... did you forget to include them? These two things are important to my argument. You see, it was the combination of unions/taxes along with passage of NAFTA and GATT which enabled corporations to send jobs to our new trade partners. Those who were vehemently opposed to NAFTA and GATT (I was one of them) tried to warn you that this was going to happen. Then, just like now, you would not listen. Thi was going to help all these third world countries economically, and that was going to make the world better... share the wealth... It was going to force our companies to be more competitive, it was going to drive wages up in these foreign countries because they would have to compete with the American workers... none of it worked out like your people planned and now our manufacturing sector jobs are all gone.

You sound like one of those condescending ***** that need to make shit up and accuse people of things you could not possibly know. I left out NAFTA and GATT because I happen to believe they helped caused the lose of jobs in America. So, I agreed with half of what you said, but you are too big headed and ego driven to accept anything other than complete and total endorsement of your opinion. You didn't warn me of anything asshole. And your reference to "my people" shows just what a dick you are. Keep stroking yourself and your ego. Sounds like you are in desperate need of some kind of sense of being something you will never be.

Aaaaand . . . cue the ad hominems.

 

[Camp]

Neither unions nor taxes send jobs overseas. We control the market. Without making product sales in the USA most of those companies will go out of business. Beer maker Sam Adams is threatening to move off shore. Lets watch what happens. Probably be the end of Sam Adams beer sales in America. Sort of like when Bud got sold to overseas investors. Sale plummeted and little American craft breweries surged. Populism is taking off in Republican and Democratic demo's. Pro America is trending.

Ever-increasing union demands as well as ever-increasing tax and regulation cannot be described any other rational way except a mitigating factor for why corporations outsource labor. If you are too stupid or illiterate to understand what a "mitigating factor" is... can't do much to help ya.

If you read my post entirely, you will see that I listed two more things besides unions and taxes... did you forget to include them? These two things are important to my argument. You see, it was the combination of unions/taxes along with passage of NAFTA and GATT which enabled corporations to send jobs to our new trade partners. Those who were vehemently opposed to NAFTA and GATT (I was one of them) tried to warn you that this was going to happen. Then, just like now, you would not listen. Thi was going to help all these third world countries economically, and that was going to make the world better... share the wealth... It was going to force our companies to be more competitive, it was going to drive wages up in these foreign countries because they would have to compete with the American workers... none of it worked out like your people planned and now our manufacturing sector jobs are all gone.

You sound like one of those condescending ***** that need to make shit up and accuse people of things you could not possibly know. I left out NAFTA and GATT because I happen to believe they helped caused the lose of jobs in America. So, I agreed with half of what you said, but you are too big headed and ego driven to accept anything other than complete and total endorsement of your opinion. You didn't warn me of anything asshole. And your reference to "my people" shows just what a dick you are. Keep stroking yourself and your ego. Sounds like you are in desperate need of some kind of sense of being something you will never be.

Aaaaand . . . cue the ad hominems.

Aaaaand ....can you make a coherent point?

 

[Cecilie1200]

If they want to buy steak and seafood with that handy dandy EBT card then let em.

When they run out of money before the end of the month it will be just to damned bad.

Works for me. Besides, sometimes you can get really good prices on that stuff for sales and such. Just last week, my local grocery store had family packs of petite sirloin steaks on sale for less than the ground turkey, AND they had several packages that turned up in the manager's special (meaning it was still there at the end of the day, needs to be used immediately, and has to be sold for reduced price). I see no reason to prevent them from taking advantage of such a deal if they wish, or to insist that they buy lower-quality meat for a higher per-pound price. I personally buy salmon on manager's special all the time, because it's a great price, it's a nice change for my family, and it's very healthy and nutritious. Why the hell not?

But yeah. If you don't manage your shopping dollars well, sucks to be you. Your problem. Why is this such a confusing concept?

 

[Cecilie1200]

Neither unions nor taxes send jobs overseas. We control the market. Without making product sales in the USA most of those companies will go out of business. Beer maker Sam Adams is threatening to move off shore. Lets watch what happens. Probably be the end of Sam Adams beer sales in America. Sort of like when Bud got sold to overseas investors. Sale plummeted and little American craft breweries surged. Populism is taking off in Republican and Democratic demo's. Pro America is trending.

Ever-increasing union demands as well as ever-increasing tax and regulation cannot be described any other rational way except a mitigating factor for why corporations outsource labor. If you are too stupid or illiterate to understand what a "mitigating factor" is... can't do much to help ya.

If you read my post entirely, you will see that I listed two more things besides unions and taxes... did you forget to include them? These two things are important to my argument. You see, it was the combination of unions/taxes along with passage of NAFTA and GATT which enabled corporations to send jobs to our new trade partners. Those who were vehemently opposed to NAFTA and GATT (I was one of them) tried to warn you that this was going to happen. Then, just like now, you would not listen. Thi was going to help all these third world countries economically, and that was going to make the world better... share the wealth... It was going to force our companies to be more competitive, it was going to drive wages up in these foreign countries because they would have to compete with the American workers... none of it worked out like your people planned and now our manufacturing sector jobs are all gone.

You sound like one of those condescending ***** that need to make shit up and accuse people of things you could not possibly know. I left out NAFTA and GATT because I happen to believe they helped caused the lose of jobs in America. So, I agreed with half of what you said, but you are too big headed and ego driven to accept anything other than complete and total endorsement of your opinion. You didn't warn me of anything asshole. And your reference to "my people" shows just what a dick you are. Keep stroking yourself and your ego. Sounds like you are in desperate need of some kind of sense of being something you will never be.

Aaaaand . . . cue the ad hominems.

Aaaaand ....can you make a coherent point?

You signaled that you had lost the debate by resorting to empty personal attacks with no substantive argument.

Sorry I didn't make that clear enough for you. Need me to break out the Crayolas and draw you a nice picture?

 

[Camp]

Lost what debate? A poster interpreted my comments like he was a mind reader and I could tell by his analysis that he was not reading my mind. He was in an aggressive and hostile mode and I objected to him trying to take his frustration out on one of my post. It worked.
Perhaps you are talking about the subject of the OP. Yes, I might have lost that debate. My position from early on was that SNAP should have restrictions similar to WIC that limit types of food available to an approved list of nutritional and economical selections.

 

[Andylusion]

If they want to buy steak and seafood with that handy dandy EBT card then let em.

When they run out of money before the end of the month it will be just to damned bad.

^^^ Amen to that. And then next time if there is one for them, they will remember to spend their money more wisely.

God bless you always!!!

Holly

P.S. Actually to me, that is how it should be for anyone. Prioritize and wisely spend and you will have fewer problems.

Both of you are completely missing the point.

The whole reason that people using their EBT cards to purchase steak and seafood, is that they don't need the money.

If a person was completely impoverished and worrying about where their next meal was coming from..... we wouldn't even be talking about this, because it wouldn't happen.

The whole reason they are doing this is because they are not starving.

In fact, the majority are not even buying food for themselves. They are buying food for someone else, who paid them money for it.

We had this happen right on our production floor. A lady came in with an EBT card, and asked everyone if they wanted to buy it from her.

How does this work? Well if you have an EBT card with $500 on it, you pay the girl $200, and she buys you $500 worth of food. It costs her nothing, and now she's got $200 in cash to buy drugs or a new Iphone.

How was she working a full time job, and yet collecting EBT, which she sold to get more money? Easy. Fraud. We've been telling the left about that for ages.

No one is going to buy steak and shrimp and then go hungry for the rest of the month. They are typically selling the card, and pocketing the cash.

 

[Boss]

No one is going to buy steak and shrimp and then go hungry for the rest of the month. They are typically selling the card, and pocketing the cash.

Not always but it does happen.

What is MORE of a problem is the amount we are now paying is way too much. People can scrimp and save for a few months and accumulate a pretty hefty amount in their account, then go splurge on luxury items. As I said, I've seen balances over $1,500 in their EBT accounts. We are WAY out of whack with regard to realistic expectations. A family of four in Alabama with no income or fixed income, gets about $200 a week on average in food stamps. While a typical family of four is trying to stay below $100 a week.

The entire system needs to go. We need to replace food assistance as we know it with something different. Our government has enormous surplus of food... we ship it all over the world! We feed it to our soldiers! Liberals want the government to control everything... why not have them send out "care packages" with MREs to the hungry disadvantaged? We can do something like that MUCH cheaper!

 

[Andylusion]

No one is going to buy steak and shrimp and then go hungry for the rest of the month. They are typically selling the card, and pocketing the cash.

Not always but it does happen.

What is MORE of a problem is the amount we are now paying is way too much. People can scrimp and save for a few months and accumulate a pretty hefty amount in their account, then go splurge on luxury items. As I said, I've seen balances over $1,500 in their EBT accounts. We are WAY out of whack with regard to realistic expectations. A family of four in Alabama with no income or fixed income, gets about $200 a week on average in food stamps. While a typical family of four is trying to stay below $100 a week.

The entire system needs to go. We need to replace food assistance as we know it with something different. Our government has enormous surplus of food... we ship it all over the world! We feed it to our soldiers! Liberals want the government to control everything... why not have them send out "care packages" with MREs to the hungry disadvantaged? We can do something like that MUCH cheaper!

I think it happens far more than people realize. In fact, I'd say it's the majority of scenarios by far. There's a reason why the obesity rate for the "poor" is higher than the middle and upper class.

Now I do like your MRE idea. That would be fantastic. Of course it'll never happen. The supreme court would ban that as cruel and unusual punishment.

But the problem is... we simply don't need food stamps at all. Why are we giving people food, when there are hundreds of charities for giving out food? I served soup. If they want a meal, they can waddle their over weight butt down to the soup kitchen and get served a full meal.

If they are truly unemployed, they have more than enough time to waddle on down. Of course most of them have a car. Funny how they can't feed themselves without government aid, but can afford a car, and feed it fuel.

 

[BlueGin]

^^^ Amen to that. And then next time if there is one for them, they will remember to spend their money more wisely.

God bless you always!!!

Holly

P.S. Actually to me, that is how it should be for anyone. Prioritize and wisely spend and you will have fewer problems.

No. The government will increase their benefits.

 

[BlueGin]

Albertsons had pkgs of Salmon, Tilapia and Swai on for buy one get three free last week. There is no reason people can't stock up on things when they go on sale and eat well on a budget.

 

[BlueGin]

If they want to buy steak and seafood with that handy dandy EBT card then let em.

When they run out of money before the end of the month it will be just to damned bad.

^^^ Amen to that. And then next time if there is one for them, they will remember to spend their money more wisely.

God bless you always!!!

Holly

P.S. Actually to me, that is how it should be for anyone. Prioritize and wisely spend and you will have fewer problems.

Both of you are completely missing the point.

The whole reason that people using their EBT cards to purchase steak and seafood, is that they don't need the money.

If a person was completely impoverished and worrying about where their next meal was coming from..... we wouldn't even be talking about this, because it wouldn't happen.

The whole reason they are doing this is because they are not starving.

In fact, the majority are not even buying food for themselves. They are buying food for someone else, who paid them money for it.

We had this happen right on our production floor. A lady came in with an EBT card, and asked everyone if they wanted to buy it from her.

How does this work? Well if you have an EBT card with $500 on it, you pay the girl $200, and she buys you $500 worth of food. It costs her nothing, and now she's got $200 in cash to buy drugs or a new Iphone.

How was she working a full time job, and yet collecting EBT, which she sold to get more money? Easy. Fraud. We've been telling the left about that for ages.

No one is going to buy steak and shrimp and then go hungry for the rest of the month. They are typically selling the card, and pocketing the cash.

Same with WIC. We had a girl at work who would hand out jars of peanut butter and boxes if cereal because she " had too many".