The Food Stamp Discussion (POLL)

[Paulie]

So the county or state shouldn't be involved in running the food banks?

What if the only churches around refuse to serve non-members or persons of a given faith?
Do you not see why we need a secular system? Or would you instead force a church, because it aids one man, to also give to another man whether they can/wish to or not?

The two should compliment eachother.

If that were the case, they would not receive any assistance from the gubmint

Churches shouldn't receive any funds from the government.

The state should do the state's job and the church should be left alone.

Whenever the two begin to mix, it always goes to shit for them both.

Surely, history has shown us that.

Churches waste money just like the government does.

They send missionaries to other countries to "preach", while there are people right here in America who could be eating a meal with the money spent on that vacation.

 

[JBeukema]

Churches waste money just like the government does.

So? So do most people. So long as it's their won money, how is it my concern?

They send missionaries to other countries to "preach", while there are people right here in America who could be eating a meal with the money
spent on that vacation.

Write the church leadership. I'm not a member of any church. I might not agree with their priorities, but that's their prerogative.

Do you not believe in individual liberty? Should I not be allowed to spend my money as I please? Perhaps you'd prefer a 100% income tax? Even Twin Oaks lets people spend their pocket money how they want.

I'm concerned with myself and the State. Let other individuals, which is all a church really is, do as they will so long as they harm noone.

 

[Luissa]

I think people who are on food stamps are probably struggling enough, that they don't need to be told what to buy. Do I thin a FEW abuse the system? Yes

I've known many people on food stamps.

I don't recall many of them making potroast or buying rice.

Do you go over their meal plan for the week?

 

[Paulie]

Churches waste money just like the government does.

So? So do most people. So long as it's their won money, how is it my concern?

They send missionaries to other countries to "preach", while there are people right here in America who could be eating a meal with the money
spent on that vacation.

Write the church leadership. I'm not a member of any church. I might not agree with their priorities, but that's their prerogative.

Do you not believe in individual liberty? Should I not be allowed to spend my money as I please? Perhaps you'd prefer a 100% income tax? Even Twin Oaks lets people spend their pocket money how they want.

I'm concerned with myself and the State. Let other individuals, which is all a church really is, do as they will so long as they harm noone.

I think you're missing my point.

I'm not interested in dictating private expenditure, I'm just pointing out that churches waste money as well. They waste BILLIONS.

So counting on churches to adequately feed the nation's poor and hungry is not going to solve the problem.

 

[Luissa]

People receive crap wages because they work entry level or non-career progressive jobs. That's not my fault. It is theirs.

They work those jobs so they can take care of their families, and in this economy, because many times it is the only job available.

You're making excuses for the last two years. We're taking about a program that has been in place for decades.

EVERYONE works so they can take care of their families. Some of us educate ourselves so we have better jobs. Our money is taken from us to provide programs to support those that didn't do so.

Those same people make your McRibb, check you out the grocery, and take care of the grandmother who hide away in a nursing home.
Someone who loves Walmart so much, shouldn't ***** about the uneducated worker.

 

[JBeukema]

'food plan'?

Few have any such thing.

You've never been homeless, have you? You've never lived in a warehouse, have you? You've never found a crap job and barely made enough to split rent with three other people, have you?

How many single mothers under the age of 23 have you known? How many states have you been homeless in?

Have you ever experienced the difference between hand-outs and a hand up?


When you can answer 'yes' to these questions, I'll consider your opinions of any merit when you claim the system works and is only slightly flawed.

 

[Annie]

Even with my line of argument, I can understand the problem with the candy.

Not so much with soda or potato chips though. Those things actually have nutritional value, as little as it is.

How about while we're going to be stupid enough to give people money on a card, instead of letting them have NONE of this so-called unhealthy food, we place a limit on the amount of it?

Each monthly roll-over of benefits allows one 12-pack of soda, one economy sized bag of chips, etc?

This way, they're not going overboard with the unhealthy crap, but they at least get to enjoy it in some way like the rest of the obese pieces of shit in this country?

I can't believe they've worn you down to making a complex system even more complex. LOL! Seriously it's just more control issues from the progressives that won't be happy until we can all be as 'good and righteous' as they are.

I'm really just putting my feelers out there to see what the opponents of this really think. Is it really about health and what's "best" for them, or is it just about controlling a demographic that they hate?

I think it's just about control and nothing more. You're poor, I'm not, therefore I will not sit idly by and watch you actually manage to get some form of enjoyment out of life.

Speaking of progressives, there's a lot of them on the right

If you are referring to the utter amazement of some, that conservatives are not necessarily for allowing starvation of the poor, yes they're progressives. It's not a desire to hurt the hurting for most conservatives, it's how to address the problems.

In my own discussion and work with PADS, during a better period for myself and the country economically, addictions have a high correlation with homelessness. Often there are AA meetings in the churches, that also serve the homeless. Like I said, other than being actively high or drunk, there are no invitations or requirements to attend the meetings. Same with any religious gatherings. However, there are also no restrictions that they cannot attend, though again they are escorted for their protection as well as the host of the PADS.

JB says there must be 'secular' locales, well funny thing is there are few of those volunteering to house the homeless overnight.

While hunger isn't restricted in any way to the homeless, still seems to me that the local people that would be caring for them, are also those most likely to help them get out of their position-it's networking for those that care too. As I said, in an area with little poverty, there are many willing to give time, support, and help with job skills, donating and helping people learn interview skills. Yes, even the Walmart greeter applicants need some basic skills.

To my mind the real differences between conservatives and progressives regarding 'the poor' or even the homeless is that the former believes that with some support, there is hope, more quickly than many think. The progressives feel these are inferiors that they need to take care of, from cradle to grave. They ask only that they vote to keep them in power.

Maggie Mae and others on another thread show not only their contempt for those they see as inferior, 58% of working class, they state that it's insane they'd turn out the democrats, who give them things.

 

[JBeukema]

I'm not interested in dictating private expenditure, I'm just pointing out that churches waste money as well. They waste BILLIONS.

and?

So counting on churches to adequately feed the nation's poor and hungry is not going to solve the problem.

I said that some time ago. Have you actually read the posts you've been replying to?

The good society must itself, in a fair, secular, and impartial manner, be willing to aid those in honest need of a hand up.

 

[Paulie]

The bottom line is that there are people who use food benefits as a stepping stool to something better in their lives, and there are people who make a living with them.

That will never change, no matter what kind of program is used to help feed them.

You can hand out actual food, where it can be completely controlled, and there will still be people who will be satisfied with that lifestyle.

Stop trying to think you can change people by regulating their choices.

 

[JBeukema]

JB says there must be 'secular' locales, well funny thing is there are few of those volunteering to house the homeless overnight.

They exist. Many homeless shelters are secular. Even many of the efforts organized by churches take a secular or very liberal approach.

The problem is that the State has taken to simply throwing money at the problem- stimulus, SNAP, and bullshit 'back to work education' programs. Many of these programs don't work, because, like everything else in the government today, they think that spending money means you're achieving something.

 

[JBeukema]

Who said anything about changing anyone?

Do you not see the point of reducing waste and abuse when we're talking about publicly financed efforts?

 

[Luissa]

People receive crap wages because they work entry level or non-career progressive jobs. That's not my fault. It is theirs.

They work those jobs so they can take care of their families, and in this economy, because many times it is the only job available.

You're making excuses for the last two years. We're taking about a program that has been in place for decades.

EVERYONE works so they can take care of their families. Some of us educate ourselves so we have better jobs. Our money is taken from us to provide programs to support those that didn't do so.

You are also assuming people who are educated are getting paid well. Many college grads are working at places like McDonalds, because they have no choice.

College Graduates to See Low Wages for Years - WSJ.com

Right now, when graduating from college, McDonalds seems like the only job they can get right now.

 

[Paulie]

Who said anything about changing anyone?

Do you not see the point of reducing waste and abuse when we're talking about publicly financed efforts?

Yes, that is why I advocate doing away with handing out cash on a card and staring over with a new program.

Do you actually read the posts you're replying to? Because I've already said that.

 

[Annie]

JB says there must be 'secular' locales, well funny thing is there are few of those volunteering to house the homeless overnight.

They exist. Many homeless shelters are secular. Even many of the efforts organized by churches take a secular or very liberal approach.

The problem is that the State has taken to simply throwing money at the problem- stimulus, SNAP, and bullshit 'back to work education' programs. Many of these programs don't work, because, like everything else in the government today, they think that spending money means you're achieving something.

That was my point all along. The program I referred to above, is not run by the county. It's also not 'run' by the churches, just volunteer to serve as hosts for the homeless. Oh by the way, the host location must have all licenses for sprinklers, serving food, passed health inspection, commercial grade kitchen.

However, the organization utilizes programs in place by the county, such as low cost/free clinics, clinical social workers, works skills programs, transportation options, that the homeless often don't know about.

The real difference between an organization like this and most government programs is that the people are treated as people. They are not given numbers and gestured to take a seat and wait for 4 hours. The volunteers want the people to feel safe, but also help them get out of whatever situation landed them there. Can't force them to take any steps, but can provide the opportunities, over and over again.

 

[Paulie]

JB, you do realize that the current system of cash on a card is meant to benefit the grocery chains, and Big Food so to speak, who lobbied for the program to begin with, right?

Controlling people's choices in this current system fixes NOTHING.

 

[JBeukema]

You're taking a long time to say 'I support JB's proposal'

 

[JBeukema]

I missed the post where you first introduced the program in question. All your posts I see seem to take place after you introduced it.

Sounds like you're referring to what i had in mind when I said they should compliment eachother. Each does what it can and refers people to wherever can best help them.

Churches will in all likelihood always be best at treating people as human beings, while the state will usually have access to more resources. I don't want the government giving the churches money but I have no problem with any private assistance program, including a church, referring people to state/county/city programs or working alongside government-run programs to achievce the best results.

I just don't want the church running programs that are publicly funded or the government trying to run the church.

Not very well said, but I think you get what I mean.

 

[JBeukema]

JB, you do realize that the current system of cash on a card is meant to benefit the grocery chains, and Big Food so to speak, who lobbied for the program to begin with, right?

Controlling people's choices in this current system fixes NOTHING.

You realize that I've not spoken in support of the current pseudo-debit-card program, right?

 

[Paulie]

JB, you do realize that the current system of cash on a card is meant to benefit the grocery chains, and Big Food so to speak, who lobbied for the program to begin with, right?

Controlling people's choices in this current system fixes NOTHING.

You realize that I've not spoken in support of the current pseudo-debit-card program, right?

You've spoken in support of trying to dictate what people get to eat based on what you think is healthy.

In a thread where we're discussing that, and food stamps, I drew a conclusion.

If it's the wrong one, I'll recognize that.

 

[JBeukema]

Read my posts again.

Yes, a food bank should provide nutritional food and not candy. Nutrition is the entire point of the assistance. If you don't like it, noone's forcing you to take it. We recognize the right of a poor woman's child to have quality nutrition. I recognize no right for you to use someone else's tax dollars to buy junk food.