People receiving welfare are complaining they now cannot buy candy and soda with tax money they are given

[Woodznutz]

If you`re going to create a story, try something that`s believable. "just one day`s supply"? is a lie.

I saw my 12 y/o nephew consume a half dozen candy bars once, in about 20 minutes, and he wasn't fat.

 

[Papageorgio]

I started my career working the grocery business. Was born into it, Dad was upper level management at a major chain. In fact, at one time, the leading employer in Western North Carolina.

I was a junior manager and was constantly hearing employees complain about people using food stamps. I called a meeting. I lined all the employees up and handed out cards with an equal amount of five numbers, one through five. After distribution I had those five numbers placed in a fishbowl, folded. Then I had an employee draw one of the numbers out. It was four. I asked everyone with the number four to step forward and then I announced, "you are all fired".

Shock is an understatement. I let that sit with them for a moment and then I told them. We do 20% of our business through the EBT program. I can stop that, cancel our contract with the DOA, and these terminations will go into effect. Or, all you guys can keep your jobs and I better not hear a single complaint about customers using the EBT card. Never heard them ***** about it again.

So your daddy got you a job, big deal and you were a tyrant that stopped speech you didn’t like, we get it.

 

[OhPleaseJustQuit]

I saw my 12 y/o nephew consume a half dozen candy bars once, in about 20 minutes, and he wasn't fat.

.

My nephew was that way at about the same age, but he unfortunately became obese because he never learned any discipline.

.

 

[Woodznutz]

.

A bag of sugar can be bought with EBT.

.

And with some peanuts and cream you can make peanut brittle.

 

[Woodznutz]

.

My nephew was that way at about the same age, but he unfortunately became obese because he never learned any discipline.

.

Mine is in his 50's now, slim and fit.

 

[rightwinger]

Yup. typically at a 50% rate for meals, if they are a business meal. Jets are a corporate asset that gets depreciated over time.

The "wealthy" cannot deduct their jets. Corporations can as they are an asset of the corporation, like a building or trucks.

14th time, "the poor" can buy gallons of soda, and cigarettes and beer.

Still a luxury that taxpayers should not be compensating

If the “poor” can be expected to buy their own soda, then corporations can be expected to pay for extravagant jet travel, meals and luxury cars

 

[OhPleaseJustQuit]

And with some peanuts and cream you can make peanut brittle.

.

You can make many, many very tasty treats if you take EBT legal ingredients and a little time.

.

 

[OhPleaseJustQuit]

Mine is in his 50's now, slim and fit.

.

Good to hear. My niece and nephew lost everything, including discipline, when my brother passed and their mother got custody.

.

 

[Woodznutz]

.

You can make many, many very tasty treats if you take EBT legal ingredients and a little time.

.

We used to make 'sugar sandwiches'. A slice of buttered bread with sugar sprinkled on it.

 

[Nostra]

Still a luxury that taxpayers should not be compensating

If the “poor” can be expected to buy their own soda, then corporations can be expected to pay for extravagant jet travel, meals and luxury cars

They do.

Next?

 

[Woodznutz]

.

Good to hear. My niece and nephew lost everything, including discipline, when my brother passed and their mother got custody.

.

If my mother had gotten custody of us kids, it would have been a disaster for us. My mother sought custody but the court ordered my father to take custody of us as only he had the means to support us.

 

[OhPleaseJustQuit]

If my mother had gotten custody of us kids, it would have been a disaster for us. My mother sought custody but the court ordered my father to take custody of us as only he had the means to support us.

.

Glad you escaped what could have been.

.

 

[rightwinger]

They can…..with their own money. Not ours.

Yet you have no problems paying for the luxuries of corporate executives.

You ***** about the poor drinking soda while you support corporate executives flying on private jets and writing off expensive meals

 

[Nostra]

Yet you have no problems paying for the luxuries of corporate executives.

You ***** about the poor drinking soda while you support corporate executives flying on private jets and writing off expensive meals

More Trollwinger lies.

 

[Papageorgio]

Yet you have no problems paying for the luxuries of corporate executives.

You ***** about the poor drinking soda while you support corporate executives flying on private jets and writing off expensive meals

Who created the huge loopholes for corporations to take advantage of?

It was several Congresses with Republicans and Democrats approving and many Presidents Republicans and Democrats signing it into law.

So if you want to get pissed, be pissed at the ruling class of Democrats and Republicans and then continue to be stupid and vote for them and expect everything to change.

 

[toobfreak]

They “need” a candy bar? What about shaving money off elsewhere? Instead of having a breakfast of two eggs that other Americans pay for, they can have one (which I do regularly). They can buy a cheaper cut of beef that other Americans pay for. They can skip a manicure. (Yes, people on food stamps still do this.)

Or….here’s an idea….that can mow lawns or shovel snow for a little extra cash (like I did when I was a kid). Think of all the candy bars and soda you can buy with $50.

No, Lisa, you're still not getting it: some people are on food stamps because they really need them and are barely hanging onto life. There is no shaving any money from anything else, there are no big breakfasts if any breakfasts at all, no cuts of beef ever, and certainly no manicure. People who are crippled, handicapped, very sick or dying, there is no going out shoveling snow, etc.

I'm sure some people on stamps do get manicures, but not all of them. That's the problem: punishing a whole group of people just for the actions of some. Maybe HALF the people of food stamps are ripping us off! But that also means that the other half are legit.

But here is the thing: candy bar, cola or not, none of this saves the taxpayer a dime. NO MATTER WHAT any of these people buy to eat for whatever reason, their allotment to spend does not change, so if they get $100 a month for food, they STILL get $100 a month and every dime of it will still be spent on something, if not candy, then something else, so what is really gained whether they spend 5% of that or not on candy and cola?

And in the process, we are "criminalizing" various products costing many businesses a lot of money for no good reason.

For some people, that occasional Snickers bar snack was the only treat left in their life that they had to look forward to.

Worse, not only does this not save the taxpayer a dime, but--- I'LL SAY IT AGAIN--- it just opens the door by giving the gov more power to eventuality begin telling everyone what and how to eat.

So while everyone beats their chest about what a great victory this is, it actually accomplishes nothing but make a bad situation even worse, and invites it to spread from just "those" people to all of us.

 

[Lisa558]

No, Lisa, you're still not getting it: some people are on food stamps because they really need them and are barely hanging onto life. There is no shaving any money from anything else, there are no big breakfasts if any breakfasts at all, no cuts of beef ever, and certainly no manicure. People who are crippled, handicapped, very sick or dying, there is no going out shoveling snow, etc.

I'm sure some people on stamps do get manicures, but not all of them. That's the problem: punishing a whole group of people just for the actions of some. Maybe HALF the people of food stamps are ripping us off! But that also means that the other half are legit.

But here is the thing: candy bar, cola or not, none of this saves the taxpayer a dime. NO MATTER WHAT any of these people buy to eat for whatever reason, their allotment to spend does not change, so if they get $100 a month for food, they STILL get $100 a month and every dime of it will still be spent on something, if not candy, then something else, so what is really gained whether they spend 5% of that or not on candy and cola?

And in the process, we are "criminalizing" various products costing many businesses a lot of money for no good reason.

For some people, that occasional Snickers bar snack was the only treat left in their life that they had to look forward to.

Worse, not only does this not save the taxpayer a dime, but--- I'LL SAY IT AGAIN--- it just opens the door by giving the gov more power to eventuality begin telling everyone what and how to eat.

So while everyone beats their chest about what a great victory this is, it actually accomplishes nothing but make a bad situation even worse, and invites it to spread from just "those" people to all of us.

Oh FFS. We give them money to offset their rent, hundreds of dollars in food, pay their medical insurance and medical costs, pay them cash for that Earned Tax Credit (which is a scam in many cases), give them TANF money - and you’re complaining they can’t come up with $1 of their own money to buy a Snickers bar?

Get real. I taught financial literacy via a volunteer program, and everyone was on welfare. Most had GEDs. If that. Sometimes, if they had enough kids, their food stamp allotment was so great that they had steaks in the freezer. They also went to bars, and smoked.

They could come up with a few dollars of their own for candy.

 

[toobfreak]

Oh FFS. We give them money to offset their rent, hundreds of dollars in food, pay their medical insurance and medical costs, pay them cash for that Earned Tax Credit (which is a scam in many cases), give them TANF money - and you’re complaining they can’t come up with $1 of their own money to buy a Snickers bar?

Again, you're wrong and confused. You are talking about WELFARE recipients. Most welfare recipients get all that rewarded to them for having a bunch of kids they cannot afford poor and out of wedlock.

I'm talking about just FOOD STAMPS, and there are a lot of people too sick to work with no income, who do not qualify for welfare or cash assistance because they were not a total failure all their life and don't have six hungry babies to feed. But now they are in deep trouble, very sick or something, do not qualify for welfare, and all they get is $98 a month food stamps for food, and now the government is telling them what they can buy and eat with it now while it not saving them, you, me or anyone A SINGLE BUCK.

I just don't get why so many people just assume that all these food stamp people are all living fat on the hog getting welfare too.

It is not about whether they can come up with a few dollars pulled out of their ass to buy a few candy bars or whatever, it is about the government having no business telling people how to eat, especially when it does not save the program any money and again, the new-found power you so willingly give to the government for no good reason over your animus against WELFARE RECIPIENTS who are the real people you are angry with will only be eventually used against all of us.

That is the true irony--- not only is this new rule discriminatory and arbitrary, it is pointless. Not only doesn't it save us a dime, it actually rewards the actual, true offenders, those who can and will still just buy those candy bars (with cash given them via welfare) while punishing the most deserving of them, people truly sick and desperate getting no cash assistance and very little in food stamps--- now being told of whole categories of food they can no longer buy with food stamps, no matter what the need or reason.

 

[Lisa558]

Again, you're wrong and confused. You are talking about WELFARE recipients. Most welfare recipients get all that rewarded to them for having a bunch of kids they cannot afford poor and out of wedlock.

I'm talking about just FOOD STAMPS, and there are a lot of people too sick to work with no income, who do not qualify for welfare or cash assistance because they were not a total failure all their life and don't have six hungry babies to feed. But now they are in deep trouble, very sick or something, do not qualify for welfare, and all they get is $98 a month food stamps for food, and now the government is telling them what they can buy and eat with it now while it not saving them, you, me or anyone A SINGLE BUCK.

I just don't get why so many people just assume that all these food stamp people are all living fat on the hog getting welfare too.

It is not about whether they can come up with a few dollars pulled out of their ass to buy a few candy bars or whatever, it is about the government having no business telling people how to eat, especially when it does not save the program any money and again, the new-found power you so willingly give to the government for no good reason over your animus against WELFARE RECIPIENTS who are the real people you are angry with will only be eventually used against all of us.

That is the true irony--- not only is this new rule discriminatory and arbitrary, it is pointless. Not only doesn't it save us a dime, it actually rewards the actual, true offenders, those who can and will still just buy those candy bars (with cash given them via welfare) while punishing the most deserving of them, people truly sick and desperate getting no cash assistance and very little in food stamps--- now being told of whole categories of food they can no longer buy with food stamps, no matter what the need or reason.

You’re acting as though welfare recipients and food stamp recipients are two disparate groups. There are millions and millions of people on BOTH. They get everything I mentioned - rent subsidies, free medical, TANF - and $1000 a month or more of food stamps if they have enough babies and toddlers. All that - and we have to buy them candy bars too?

And if all the person in your example gets is $98 in food stamps, the LAST thing they should be throwing our money away on is a Kit-Kat bar. They should be buying chicken breasts, inexpensive fish, some cans of veggies and fruits, pasta, tomato sauce, bread, and tuna.

 

[rightwinger]

Who created the huge loopholes for corporations to take advantage of?

It was several Congresses with Republicans and Democrats approving and many Presidents Republicans and Democrats signing it into law.

So if you want to get pissed, be pissed at the ruling class of Democrats and Republicans and then continue to be stupid and vote for them and expect everything to change.

I am just pointing out the irony of denying the poor a liter of soda while we allow corporate executives to deduct their lavish lifestyle