PDA

View Full Version : Food stamps



Matt McKenzie
01-30-2012, 02:35 PM
Don't call him the 'Food stamp President' even after you read this article.

http://biggovernment.com/whall/2012/01/29/obama-administration-offers-75000-grants-to-sign-up-more-food-stamp-recipients/

Why not? Because (all together now), THAT'S RACIST!

Gerry Clinchy
01-30-2012, 08:48 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WAh5uwTT-Kg&feature=player_embedded
This is also interesting.

Marvin S
01-30-2012, 09:57 PM
When I was a young man there was a thing called "Relief". Needy folks could go to the distribution center & get a peck of potatoes, some flour, dried milk & other staples of a balanced diet. No one starved but today most don't even know how to cook :(. Too many fingers in the trough :).

menmon
01-31-2012, 11:59 AM
Gingrich is stretching the truth when he says more people have been put on food stamps by Barack Obama than any president in American history. The program officially called the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program rose by 14.7 million under Bush and has risen an additional 14.2 million under Obama. However, in recent months the number has been falling.

Funny we did not have these post when Bush was president. Hell he got a pass on everything:rolleyes:

road kill
01-31-2012, 12:02 PM
When I was a young man there was a thing called "Relief". Needy folks could go to the distribution center & get a peck of potatoes, some flour, dried milk & other staples of a balanced diet. No one starved but today most don't even know how to cook :(. Too many fingers in the trough :).

Marvin,
Here is the deal my friend.
Go to your local SS office, or Welfare and Subsistance office.

Hundreds, if not thousands of governmant employees taking substantial paychecks.
At the Federal, State and Local levels.

Nuff said...........


RK

huntinman
01-31-2012, 12:25 PM
Gingrich is stretching the truth when he says more people have been put on food stamps by Barack Obama than any president in American history. The program officially called the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program rose by 14.7 million under Bush and has risen an additional 14.2 million under Obama. However, in recent months the number has been falling.

Funny we did not have these post when Bush was president. Hell he got a pass on everything:rolleyes:

Are you Roger reincarnated?

menmon
01-31-2012, 12:39 PM
Are you Roger reincarnated?

Who is roger...that is a hell of a buck!!!

Matt McKenzie
01-31-2012, 12:58 PM
It never fails. Rather than read the article and comment on the fact that the DOA is offering a $75,000 grant to help INCREASE food stamp usage, the liberal goes to the playbook and pulls out ...... Bush. If the policy was put into place during another president's tenure, that would be good information to have and would contribute to the conversation. But at this point, I don't know if the policy existed under Bush or not. What I do know is that our CURRENT government is offering to PAY organizations to encourage people to become more dependent on our government. Why? Is that the best use of our money? Is it even morally right? There's a valid conversation to be had here, but it's easier to blame GWB than think and form an opinion. And we wonder why our political process is so screwed up.

menmon
01-31-2012, 02:23 PM
It never fails. Rather than read the article and comment on the fact that the DOA is offering a $75,000 grant to help INCREASE food stamp usage, the liberal goes to the playbook and pulls out ...... Bush. If the policy was put into place during another president's tenure, that would be good information to have and would contribute to the conversation. But at this point, I don't know if the policy existed under Bush or not. What I do know is that our CURRENT government is offering to PAY organizations to encourage people to become more dependent on our government. Why? Is that the best use of our money? Is it even morally right? There's a valid conversation to be had here, but it's easier to blame GWB than think and form an opinion. And we wonder why our political process is so screwed up.

Just stating a fact....not fiction

Jason Glavich
01-31-2012, 02:36 PM
Are you Roger reincarnated?

If so it is all the fault of Bush! He reincarnates people now too! Everything is his Fault!!!! The messiah is not to blame.

menmon
01-31-2012, 02:47 PM
If so it is all the fault of Bush! He reincarnates people now too! Everything is his Fault!!!! The messiah is not to blame.

No fault of the Messiah

The articles point was to blame the current administration for increased foodstamp use. I thought it might be important to let people know that the previous administration increased foodstamp use as much or more.

See these facts are always structured to make the president look bad.

Cody Covey
01-31-2012, 02:59 PM
No fault of the Messiah

The articles point was to blame the current administration for increased foodstamp use. I thought it might be important to let people know that the previous administration increased foodstamp use as much or more.

See these facts are always structured to make the president look bad.

Either he looks bad or he doesn't....Other people may look bad also but doesn't change the facts...

menmon
01-31-2012, 03:11 PM
Either he looks bad or he doesn't....Other people may look bad also but doesn't change the facts...

selective facts...not the real story

Jason Glavich
01-31-2012, 03:18 PM
selective facts...not the real story

If he is so great and only inherited everything, how long till his great work is seen for how truly great it is?

road kill
01-31-2012, 03:23 PM
If he is so great and only inherited everything, how long till his great work is seen for how truly great it is?

From a historical standpoint.....don't hold your breath.

By any standard, this is a failed Presidency.



RK

menmon
01-31-2012, 03:29 PM
From a historical standpoint.....don't hold your breath.

By any standard, this is a failed Presidency.



RK

RK - You don't really believe that?

So give me an example of a pass president...and please do not say Reagan

Jason Glavich
01-31-2012, 03:41 PM
I think I will feel the pain of it in 2014 when things start kicking in.

road kill
01-31-2012, 03:54 PM
RK - You don't really believe that?

So give me an example of a pass president...and please do not say Reagan

Clinton?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kO4DPI1hegc&feature=related



RK

HPL
01-31-2012, 03:59 PM
No fault of the Messiah

The articles point was to blame the current administration for increased foodstamp use.




No, I believe that the point of the article was that the current administration has a program that is spending our tax money to recruit folks to sign up to take more of our tax money. There is a difference between food stamp use increasing under an administration, and an administration going out and trying to increase dependence on food stamps. Don't know if you can see the difference, but there is one.

HPL

charly_t
01-31-2012, 04:31 PM
No, I believe that the point of the article was that the current administration has a program that is spending our tax money to recruit folks to sign up to take more of our tax money. There is a difference between food stamp use increasing under an administration, and an administration going out and trying to increase dependence on food stamps. Don't know if you can see the difference, but there is one.

HPL

I was wondering when someone would point that out. You did a good job of doing just that :-)

menmon
01-31-2012, 05:23 PM
No, I believe that the point of the article was that the current administration has a program that is spending our tax money to recruit folks to sign up to take more of our tax money. There is a difference between food stamp use increasing under an administration, and an administration going out and trying to increase dependence on food stamps. Don't know if you can see the difference, but there is one.

HPL

The point is that there are many people out there right now that would never dreamed that they would need a handout from the government, so they are trying to help get this to the people that truly need it. The ones that don't need already know how to beat the system.

I have had a fruitful life so far and I'm 50 years old, so I have been blessed! Having said that, I know how easy it is to lose it all to things totally out of my control. Therefore, we need not to forget this and not turn our backs on those of unfortune. Please lay off the poor....this is the Reagan campaign all over again....reduce the national debt, do away with the deficit, by not taking care of your poor. He did none of the above accept take from those that needed help and gave it to those that didn't need it. I guess they feel enough time has passed that you will buy their BS again.

charly_t
01-31-2012, 07:22 PM
No one is saying that people who need it should not get help. What we are against is people getting grants to do this. Bet there are many church groups and other organizations that can and would help with this without government grants. This is just more of the "lets throw some money at it, that will fix it" mentality. That is what is wrong with this country and I don't mean that it is just in one party or by one president. It is "Washington thinking" and this is what we need to stop in it's tracks. Vote them all out as soon as possible. Many church groups already give food away. My daughter-in-law ( and my son to some extent ) have passed food out on a volunteer basis in the past. Other church groups have the angel food program for a small amount of money for those who do have a small income and can pay a small amount. No strings attached to any of this. No one is asked to attend any church services.

HPL
01-31-2012, 08:57 PM
The point is that there are many people out there right now that would never dreamed that they would need a handout from the government, so they are trying to help get this to the people that truly need it. The ones that don't need already know how to beat the system.

I have had a fruitful life so far and I'm 50 years old, so I have been blessed! Having said that, I know how easy it is to lose it all to things totally out of my control. Therefore, we need not to forget this and not turn our backs on those of unfortune. Please lay off the poor....this is the Reagan campaign all over again....reduce the national debt, do away with the deficit, by not taking care of your poor. He did none of the above accept take from those that needed help and gave it to those that didn't need it. I guess they feel enough time has passed that you will buy their BS again.
Well, no, that wasn't the point of the story or the original post. I am sure that in these times there are people who need help. I can't imagine that there are more than a very few who are unaware that help is available. Just because one qualifies for assistance doesn't mean one has to accept it. If you can get by without the assistance and your pride suggests to you that you should stand on your own, then why would we want to pay people with our tax money to convince you that you should forget self reliance and take taxpayer (i.e. my) money? I have never had much money. I don't buy steak. My new vehicle is a '96 F 150. It really annoys me to see someone with several children putting sodas, steaks, and junk food in their basket and then paying with the LoneStar Card. If you need food, beans combined with grain (rice, corn, wheat) will provide all the essential amino acids and are cheap. Powered milk is cheap and nutritious. The water coming out of your tap is perfectly fit to drink in the vast majority of municipal water systems. If you need meat, whole chicken is pretty cheap. Pork butt is $1.00/lb. Whole wheat flour is cheap and good for you. Learn to bake your own bread, etc. If you have a yard, try planting a garden, green beans, broccoli, and lettuce are easy to grow. Public assistance should be the refuge of last resort, not the first place you turn.

Buzz
01-31-2012, 09:31 PM
No one is saying that people who need it should not get help. What we are against is people getting grants to do this. Bet there are many church groups and other organizations that can and would help with this without government grants.

Has it ever occurred to you that in economic times like these when more people are in dire need of help, is exactly when the money flowing into charities dries up?

M&K's Retrievers
01-31-2012, 10:24 PM
Has it ever occurred to you that in economic times like these when more people are in dire need of help, is exactly when the money flowing into charities dries up?

Especially if your looking for donations from Joe Biden.

charly_t
01-31-2012, 10:35 PM
Has it ever occurred to you that in economic times like these when more people are in dire need of help, is exactly when the money flowing into charities dries up?

Yes, sorry to say in some instancs it does. That is not a good reason to start giving out grants. Help for the people who need it not money for people or organizations who do not need or derserve it. Please, keep the two separate.

Hew
02-01-2012, 06:30 AM
Has it ever occurred to you that in economic times like these when more people are in dire need of help, is exactly when the money flowing into charities dries up?
Exactly. When uber-generous Americans decide that they can't afford to give as much as usual that's exactly when it's time for the government to step in and come take it from them. Because in the end, the govt. is way more capable of deciding how/where you should spend your money than you are.

And what do you mean by "economic times like these?" Sambo says these are the best of times. You disagree?

Hew
02-01-2012, 06:39 AM
Especially if your looking for donations from Joe Biden.
LOL. Right on. Or the Obamas who were relatively miserly before they moved on up to the East Side.

This is kind of rhetorical, but if you've been vice president for 4 years and you're about to run for another 4 years, how a) stupid are you, or b) how full of entitlement/let them eat cake attitude are you for you to give a pittance to charity each year knowing full well that your tax returns will be scrutinized? My hunch is a healthy dose of both. I bet everytime Obama looks at Biden he silently curses.

Duck Blind
02-01-2012, 07:09 AM
The "poor"; those that "need" help are two overused terms, IMO. I didn't have much growing up, and by today's standards I would've been classified as poor. My dad and mom both worked low paying jobs, but they did what it took to provide for my brother and I. We were not poor, we were happy. There was no way my dad would take a handout. He was too proud and his work ethic was unmatched. This is not the case for those standing in breadlines today. I know, "not enough jobs", right. --- I would argue there are not enough jobs that pay enough to satisfy the WANTS of people. Plenty of jobs to satisfy the NEEDS of people. It might mean working two or more jobs, but there's work out there.

Jim Danis
02-01-2012, 08:29 AM
The "poor"; those that "need" help are two overused terms, IMO. I didn't have much growing up, and by today's standards I would've been classified as poor. My dad and mom both worked low paying jobs, but they did what it took to provide for my brother and I. We were not poor, we were happy. There was no way my dad would take a handout. He was too proud and his work ethic was unmatched. This is not the case for those standing in breadlines today. I know, "not enough jobs", right. --- I would argue there are not enough jobs that pay enough to satisfy the WANTS of people. Plenty of jobs to satisfy the NEEDS of people. It might mean working two or more jobs, but there's work out there.

Well said! My mother raised 3 kids on her own without any child support or Govt. assistance of any kind. There were more than a few mornings where she heated the house up in the morning by turning the oven on and opening the door. I also remember her eating quite a few PB&J's so her kids would have enough of a real meal to eat for dinner. She worked 2 jobs to keep us in a house, clothes and food on the table. Not rich by any means but we were happy also. I'm sure she could have qualified for food stamps or other assistance but she never applied and wouldn't! It's a shame that type of ethics isn't more prevalent in our society now a days.

Unfortunately WAY TOO many people believe as SAMBO does

Gerry Clinchy
02-01-2012, 08:34 AM
Has it ever occurred to you that in economic times like these when more people are in dire need of help, is exactly when the money flowing into charities dries up?

This is true, but reflecting back to HPL's post.

Could not that $75,000 for organizations for finding food stamp beneficiaries be better spent in some other way?

For example, I have suggested before that our welfare program, use funds to train some of the recipients (those who voluntarily would choose the training) in child care. Then those individuals would have skills to care for the children of other mothers who could train for other jobs. God knows, now there are plenty of vacant houses that agencies could buy at a pittance and use for child care centers.

Not to mention that private child care costs around $150/week in my area, and that's not for the high-end facilities. Child care has become serious business with the growth of 2-family incomes & single-parent homes.

Some of those recipients could also be trained to provide food preparation training for mothers collecting food stamps, so that they could get more mileage out of the food stamps they receive. And food stamps then be limited to basic foods, and not allowed to be used for luxury items. It would be hard to limit food stamps to certain types of meat (steak v. pork butt), but it would be very easy to eliminate certain items like soda.

Since there are many private-sector food banks, would it not make more sense to spend that $75,000 in helping those entities teach food preparation classes to the same end? Maybe tie food-stamp benefits to taking such training classes? Maybe even having such classes for pre-teens and teens so that they will develop these skills early in life? And providing an after-school program simultaneously? (More bang for the buck?)

We are doing poor children no favor by providing money for food that is not nutritious. As a kid, I can remember drinking Kool-Aid because it was cheaper than soda. No better for you than soda, but at least it was cheaper :-)

Possibly the largest problem with having govt take over charitable services is that the rest of us don't have to think about what we can/should do on a personal level; even, perhaps, stifling charitable donations for the very reason HPL mentions?

I guess it all goes back to the basic idea of giving a man a fish or teaching him to fish for himself.

menmon
02-01-2012, 10:15 AM
The bigger message here is that government money is being spent on these things here in America. Yes I agree that many take this money that shouldn't, but when they spend it, American's profit from it:)

Now what you should be mad about is the money being given to other countries, defense contractors, oil and gas producers, etc.:-x

This money gets spent in America and recirculates over and over and over; and taxes are collected on it over and over and over....unlike when they send it to the Iraq, Afganistan, Pakastan, etc....:(

Gerry Clinchy
02-01-2012, 10:23 AM
Sambo, while I have no objection to spending these funds to help Americans before other countries ... we still should be spending tax dollars as effectively as possible.

From previous threads on this forum, it is safe to say that many of the people angry about the waste in these particular funds, are also angry about the other things you mention. There are plenty of issues to be angry about.

Jason Glavich
02-01-2012, 11:18 AM
I realized watching a TV show the other day that some stores have a price for food for cash and a total for food stamps guess whcih one is less. 176 for normal payers, and 127 food stamp cost. Not sure if this is everywhere or not though. This was on a show filming actual grocery stores during transactions. And no i will not name the show to protect my man card. But I assure you it was a manly show.

My question is it government making the prices different or stores or manufacturers that reduce the price of goods for food stamp users?

I think they do have a purpose, they help when needed, but many abuse the system.

Thomas D
02-01-2012, 11:19 AM
There was an artical in the paper down here several days ago that stated there were hundreds of local "farm" type jobs available at $15/hr. Farmers said many people would show up, work several hours and leave...too hard. To be fair, they interviewed some that said they were happy to get the work.

menmon
02-01-2012, 11:55 AM
There was an artical in the paper down here several days ago that stated there were hundreds of local "farm" type jobs available at $15/hr. Farmers said many people would show up, work several hours and leave...too hard. To be fair, they interviewed some that said they were happy to get the work.

1 out 20 I interview at the dog ranch are worth a sh#t, too. Now if we quit giving the hand outs and made work or starve the equation, the price of labor would go to nothing for these low skill jobs. Now tell me how they can afford an iPhone or anything else at $2 per hour?

Just to cut through the chase on this. Under both Dems and Repubs these entitlements exist, so neither party has the balls to cut them. Before every election, the republicans stir people up about them, while coining the democrats as socialist. This is a proven strategy that works well for them. Now ask yourself, why they have not been eliminated during one of your republican presidencies?

Answer: republican rheteric...unfilled promises

Raymond Little
02-01-2012, 12:39 PM
1 out 20 I interview at the dog ranch are worth a sh#t, too. Now if we quit giving the hand outs and made work or starve the equation, the price of labor would go to nothing for these low skill jobs. Now tell me how they can afford an iPhone or anything else at $2 per hour?

Just to cut through the chase on this. Under both Dems and Repubs these entitlements exist, so neither party has the balls to cut them. Before every election, the republicans stir people up about them, while coining the democrats as socialist. This is a proven strategy that works well for them. Now ask yourself, why they have not been eliminated during one of your republican presidencies?

Answer: republican rheteric...unfilled promises

1. Would be alot more skinnies livin in the hood, obesity is a national epidemic with the poor.
2. Why would someone making min wage need a smart phone or a child?
3. Reform has been tried several times with Dems kicking and screaming that children would starve (see #1).
Maybe you should pay $25 per hour and then your labor pool would increase exponetially, per your theory that if you pay more it gets spread around more.:rolleyes:

menmon
02-01-2012, 02:04 PM
1. Would be alot more skinnies livin in the hood, obesity is a national epidemic with the poor.
2. Why would someone making min wage need a smart phone or a child?
3. Reform has been tried several times with Dems kicking and screaming that children would starve (see #1).
Maybe you should pay $25 per hour and then your labor pool would increase exponetially, per your theory that if you pay more it gets spread around more.:rolleyes:

Thatt is the theory....pay your workers more and they spend more. Pay them less and they spend less.

I'm saying that if you left it purely to market forces, no one would be making any money, so they would be buying less. I'm personally ok with that, but the people working for retailers, not manufacturers because they do the manufacturing overseas, would not be too happy

Raymond Little
02-01-2012, 05:53 PM
Thatt is the theory....pay your workers more and they spend more. Pay them less and they spend less.

I'm saying that if you left it purely to market forces, no one would be making any money, so they would be buying less. I'm personally ok with that, but the people working for retailers, not manufacturers because they do the manufacturing overseas, would not be too happy

What economic theory do you subscribe to Sam? Business doesn't exist to provide workers purchasing power, they exist to supply goods and services to consumers. The more consumers of a given product the more employees said businesses need to employ to satisfy demand. Entry level jobs are not and never will be designed to support a life style so many in the lower socio-economic rungs try to live.

huntinman
02-02-2012, 09:29 AM
What economic theory do you subscribe to Sam? Business doesn't exist to provide workers purchasing power, they exist to supply goods and services to consumers. The more consumers of a given product the more employees said businesses need to employ to satisfy demand. Entry level jobs are not and never will be designed to support a life style so many in the lower socio-economic rungs try to live.

True... but they really exist to put money in the pocket and bread on the table of the business owner. If it helps other's in the process, as it should, great.

There is nothing stopping all the deadbeats from going out and starting their own business. Even if it is something simple. If you are willing to work hard, someone will pay for your product or service.