The FACTS on Food Stamps

[Billy000]

"without adequate food" =/= starvation. It means they may skip a meal here and there.

Get a grip. Categorical eligibility is 185 percent of the federal poverty level...

I never said 1 in 6 are starving. However with in that 1 in 6 are people who really are starving.

 

[koshergrl]

"without adequate food" =/= starvation. It means they may skip a meal here and there.

Get a grip. Categorical eligibility is 185 percent of the federal poverty level...

I never said 1 in 6 are starving. However with in that 1 in 6 are people who really are starving.

 

[Immanuel]

What so because the system isn't perfect that means the whole thing is a sham? Is that really what you believe?

Not only do the stats prove that mooching isn't wide spread, but there really isn't much incentive to do it. Okay so a guy with an official reported shitty income is receiving both SNAP and expensive gifts and money from his parents, right? Why would a guy bother going through the rigourous process of receiving only $133 a month when his rich parents are fiddling him? While your anecdotal story may be true about this Rolex guy, there is no reason to believe many people in the same situation would do the same thing if all they would get is peanuts. That story of yours is completely atypical.

Also, because recipients do get peanuts, why the **** do you even care if people blow all of their SNAP on steak? If they buy goddamn steaks, they wouldn't be able to buy much else now would they? It doesn't ******* matter what these people buy as long as they get the same amount of money each month which is less than $1.50 a meal!

You seem to be pretty good at putting words in people's mouths.

Who in this thread has stated it was a sham? Why is it that liberals cannot deal with reforms of their failed programs? Reform does not mean elimination. It means improvement.

Note: after I wrote this I see Asterism's "scrapped and replaced" comment. You might claim he is calling for elimination. By his calling for a replacement, I will argue with you on that.

Immie

Now, if you don't think mooching is a wide spread problem, then what makes a failed program? What is your point?

Don't be stupid. Just because he didn't use the word sham that doesn't mean that isn't what he meant.

K then douche. How do we reform the program?

Oh, you ARE one of those morons that cannot hold a polite conversation when they are getting their ass kicked?

I don't care how widespread it is. It needs to be fixed.

If you managed a business, I doubt you do with your skills, and you found that an employee had taken a book of parking tickets that would allow him to park in the building free for a month, would you ignore it? How about if the person managing petty cash was caught red handed stealing a measly twenty bucks one day? Would you continue to trust him with your finances? He only got caught once. You going to trust him with a multi-million dollar business?

How about if you find that just 3% of your employees are scamming you out of thousands of dollars a month by clocking each other in and out? Will you let that slide or will you do something to put a stop to it?

Immie

 

[Pete7469]

It's also not just an issue of SNAP, there are program after overlapping program designed to help "the poor".

Do we have less poor people than before? **** no.

So I'd have to say the only real proven way to get someone out of poverty is by making them become independent and productive. How many times have we heard stories of people winning the lottery, and still ending up broke?

What could happen to you: tales of big lottery winners - U.S. News

However we have hordes of people crossing our southern border, and plenty of them manage to find jobs and some even start businesses in spite of being non-white, illiterate, with little or no english speaking skills. They were motivated to fix those problems, yet our "poor" people can't?

 

[syrenn]

How little income should a family of 4 have to receive food stamps?

Is it 1000 a month?

750 a month?

500 a month?

What is the number at which you assholes will quit bitching about people getting help with food.

Come on you food stamp hating rethugs. What is the maximum income that a family of 4 could have and still receive food stamps?

That's the problem you haters have. You can ***** and moan and complain but you can't figure out a solution. To ANYTHING. Just hate and more hate. Pitiful.

see...i dont have a problem with them getting help to buy FOOD.


chips, cakes, candy, cookies soda, coffee, lobster, caviar, filet mignon, starbucks, fast food.........are not food. They are luxuries that you don't require to live.

 

[syrenn]

It just astounds me how dumb and willfully ignorant you are. I've met some whoppers on this forum, but you are just unbelievable.

1. No, a family of 6 cannot eat well with 952.00 a month. Why? Because that 952 has to cover all of their expenses, not just food, jackass. Maybe you can squeak by if you bought the dollar menu from McDonald's everyday, but that's not an ideal diet for a child now is it?

2. The income of the entire household is considered. For Christ's sakes, I've been saying that over and over. It says it in my sources. Do you just choose not to read what I put? It doesn't matter who is living in the house or how they are all related to each other. It is the gross income of the household. Period.

3. Audit lifestyles? Are you kidding me? Are you not a conservative who believes in the value of keeping one's privacy from the government? Talk about double standard. Once again it doesn't ******* matter what these people buy every month if they get the same amount every month. If these people want to buy stupid things with their money, that is their problem. It is their own stupidity. It's not like they can buy a bunch of expensive crap anyway.

4. Same point as 3. And No frozen dinners? Are you kidding me? Those are the one reliably cheap product there is. True, it could be more nutritious, but it is a reliable source for protein at least and its still worlds better than fast food.

5. People are obese for more reasons than self control. What if they have a thyroid issue or an unusually slow metabolism. Another contributing factor is that they are not being smart about what they are buying. If anything, educate them on a proper diet.

6. Once again, people learn quickly. If they are getting nothing but peanuts, they realize early on they need to be economical.

7. NONE OF THEM COULD POSSIBLY AFFORD TO BUY 500 HOTDOGS A WEEK.

8. There already are proper consequences when fraud is discovered and once again, it is rare.

9. That is the only intelligent thing you have said thus far. Chances are, markets do it anyway.

10. Based on what they get, a roll over policy is completley fair.

You are something else, dude.

EDIT: it also needs to be said that one of the food restrictions is hot food, so they couldn't buy something like fast food.

Some gems that show you are not the one to be accusing others of being ignorant:

No, a family of 6 cannot eat well with 952.00 a month. Why? Because that 952 has to cover all of their expenses, not just food, jackass.

And No frozen dinners? Are you kidding me? Those are the one reliably cheap product there is.

NONE OF THEM COULD POSSIBLY AFFORD TO BUY 500 HOTDOGS A WEEK.

Chances are, markets do it anyway.

it also needs to be said that one of the food restrictions is hot food, so they couldn't buy something like fast food.

You don't want reforms, you don't think they are needed. Fraud doesn't bother you. This is the mindset of most in the bureaucracy which is why it's so wasteful and why it needs to be scrapped and replaced.

The reform it needs is changing the standards on eligible income. People are starving. Something needs to be done about it.

Fraud is inevitable. Fortunately, it is rare. That is what's important.

 

[koshergrl]

It's also not just an issue of SNAP, there are program after overlapping program designed to help "the poor".

Do we have less poor people than before? **** no.

So I'd have to say the only real proven way to get someone out of poverty is by making them become independent and productive. How many times have we heard stories of people winning the lottery, and still ending up broke?

What could happen to you: tales of big lottery winners - U.S. News

However we have hordes of people crossing our southern border, and plenty of them manage to find jobs and some even start businesses in spite of being non-white, illiterate, with little or no english speaking skills. They were motivated to fix those problems, yet our "poor" people can't?

The reforms signed into existence during Clinton's presidency had a huge positive impact on welfare....the Jobs programs and ofset programs, geared towards getting people back into the workplace resulted in fewer people on the rolls...

But Obama pulled all that funding. His primary objective is to make as many people as possible as dependent upon the government, as quickly as possible...and to give the government control over their food supply. That's the way Marxists control the masses.

 

[KissMy]

Matthew 25: 34 “Then the King will say to those on his right, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world. 35 For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, 36 I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.’

37 “Then the righteous will answer him, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? 38 When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? 39 When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?’

40 “The King will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.’

41 “Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. 42 For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, 43 I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.’

44 “They also will answer, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?’

45 “He will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.’

46 “Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life.

 

[Billy000]

It's also not just an issue of SNAP, there are program after overlapping program designed to help "the poor".

Do we have less poor people than before? **** no.

So I'd have to say the only real proven way to get someone out of poverty is by making them become independent and productive. How many times have we heard stories of people winning the lottery, and still ending up broke?

What could happen to you: tales of big lottery winners - U.S. News

However we have hordes of people crossing our southern border, and plenty of them manage to find jobs and some even start businesses in spite of being non-white, illiterate, with little or no english speaking skills. They were motivated to fix those problems, yet our "poor" people can't?

The reforms signed into existence during Clinton's presidency had a huge positive impact on welfare....the Jobs programs and ofset programs, geared towards getting people back into the workplace resulted in fewer people on the rolls...

But Obama pulled all that funding. His primary objective is to make as many people as possible as dependent upon the government, as quickly as possible...and to give the government control over their food supply. That's the way Marxists control the masses.

Yeah, that's it. I'm losing the argument.

The rare incidence of fraud doesn't make it a failed program. You never answered my question. What is your reform plan?

 

[Papageorgio]

The reform it needs is changing the standards on eligible income. People are starving. Something needs to be done about it.

Fraud is inevitable. Fortunately, it is rare. That is what's important.

How many are starving?

1 in 6 people are without adequate food. Republicans won't tell you that, but its true.

So, how many are starving?

What does "without adequate food" mean?

 

[Billy000]

How many are starving?

1 in 6 people are without adequate food. Republicans won't tell you that, but its true.

So, how many are starving?

What does "without adequate food" mean?

What the **** else does it mean? It means people do not get adequate amount of food everyday. I dont know how else to put it to you.

There are different levels of hungry. Some food insecure people get more than others, which means some of those 1 in 6 would be starving, wouldn't they?

You people nit pick over really dumb things just for the sake of winning an argument. If you want to challenge the 1 in 6 statistic, then find stats of your own, otherwise don't bother arguing with it.

 

[Gadawg73]

You could give people $1000 a month a person and their kids would still starve every month.
When will you dumbasses ever figure out that the worst thing you can give to irresponsible people that have kids they can not feed is money or access to food for free?
These same kids on food stamps come to school every day HUNGRY.
WELL DUH!
Girl gets pregnant at age 18 and what do we do? Give her free housing, money, free food and medical care and what does she do next?
Get pregnant again for more cash.
Food stamp program was lobbied for and written by the grocery lobby.
If we really want to feed hungry people make them work for it, distribute it wholesale and if people keep having children they can not raise themselves then adopt them out to families that will love and nourish them.
We have created an underclass of uneducated poor single parent households with the current delivery system of "help".

 

[Gadawg73]

If parents can not find adequate food everyday with the food stamp program and the Must Ministries and other food banks in this country they are dumb as a box of rocks.
Why are people having children they can not feed? That is the real problem.

 

[Gadawg73]

If people were really interested in feeding the hungry they would get off their fat and lazy asses and go and feed the hungry IN THEIR OWN COMMUNITIES.
Instead of doing that the lazy ***** cry for more government to pay for it while they sit on their asses eating Cheetos.

 

[koshergrl]

1 in 6 people are without adequate food. Republicans won't tell you that, but its true.

So, how many are starving?

What does "without adequate food" mean?

What the **** else does it mean? It means people do not get adequate amount of food everyday. I dont know how else to put it to you.

There are different levels of hungry. Some food insecure people get more than others, which means some of those 1 in 6 would be starving, wouldn't they?

You people nit pick over really dumb things just for the sake of winning an argument. If you want to challenge the 1 in 6 statistic, then find stats of your own, otherwise don't bother arguing with it.

Actually, no, that's not what it means.

In THIS country, hunger is not defined as inadequate food..it's defined as skipped meals. If there are skipped meals, that's considered "hunger" in this country.

But "adequate" food means a total of around 3000 calories per child. So if kids get an average of 3000 calories, regardless of whether they are skipping meals or not, they are receiving "adequate" food. And then some.

Inadequate food leads to medical problems....failure to thrive, malnutrition and all that goes with it, and death. Our "hungry" are not suffering from starvation, except that they are just too stupid or drug addled to feed themselves.

 

[Papageorgio]

1 in 6 people are without adequate food. Republicans won't tell you that, but its true.

So, how many are starving?

What does "without adequate food" mean?

What the **** else does it mean? It means people do not get adequate amount of food everyday. I dont know how else to put it to you.

There are different levels of hungry. Some food insecure people get more than others, which means some of those 1 in 6 would be starving, wouldn't they?

You people nit pick over really dumb things just for the sake of winning an argument. If you want to challenge the 1 in 6 statistic, then find stats of your own, otherwise don't bother arguing with it.

So how many are starving? You brought up people starving, then you jump to "without adequate food." You want to discuss facts yet the facts seem to bother you.

 

[Billy000]

If people were really interested in feeding the hungry they would get off their fat and lazy asses and go and feed the hungry IN THEIR OWN COMMUNITIES.
Instead of doing that the lazy ***** cry for more government to pay for it while they sit on their asses eating Cheetos.

Food banks are not adequate. They are not sufficient nor are they consistent. People are not as altruistic as you would like to believe. What the hungry needs is consistency. The only way to get that is through the government. And yeah, that requires tax payer money. That is the nature of paying taxes. You can't always decide where your taxes go. I pay taxes and you don't see me complaining.

 

[koshergrl]

Talk to China about consistent government nutrition.

Oh wait, you can't...all the people who depended on the government to feed them starved to death.

Wait...let's talk to North Koreans...oh...hmmm...

How about Russians? No?

Ps, you're a ******* moron. If people need food, the #1 way to get it is to get a ******* job and buy it. But nobody in this country starves, unless they do it deliberately, or they are mentally ill.

 

[Billy000]

So, how many are starving?

What does "without adequate food" mean?

What the **** else does it mean? It means people do not get adequate amount of food everyday. I dont know how else to put it to you.

There are different levels of hungry. Some food insecure people get more than others, which means some of those 1 in 6 would be starving, wouldn't they?

You people nit pick over really dumb things just for the sake of winning an argument. If you want to challenge the 1 in 6 statistic, then find stats of your own, otherwise don't bother arguing with it.

So how many are starving? You brought up people starving, then you jump to "without adequate food." You want to discuss facts yet the facts seem to bother you.

No, the facts bother you. So far you haven't come up with any. Just baseless GOP propaganda. I have been coming up with facts this entire time.

I don't know how many people are starving, but if 1 in 6 people are with food insecurity, it is common sense a percentage of those people are starving.

 

[koshergrl]

No, you really haven't.