retailers worry over food stamp cut

[Rational Poster]

My salary is you are mom? Interdasting

Go back and read your whole post then come back and apologize.

 

[cincymma79]

Go back and read your whole post then come back and apologize.

My salary is your mom since your going straight to insults.

Everyone finds food stamps so everyone should care when a kid goes hungry while heir parents are getting money from them to feed the child.

 

[Rational Poster]

My salary is your mom since your going straight to insults.

Everyone finds food stamps so everyone should care when a kid goes hungry while heir parents are getting money from them to feed the child.

Can you read this part of the post again then apologize?

"your going straight to insults"

 

[PlayswellwithLawnDarts]

Maybe having a starving kid might motivate mom and dad to not be poor.

Please tell me you have kids and know how expensive that shit is

 

[Long Dark Blues]

Checks payable to the grocer, which can be utilized for certain approved items necessary for the proper development of children and families, just like WIC.

That SNAP is not designed like that blows my mind. I guess that's the difference between a federal and state programs.

WIC offers a lot of food choices, and ensures healthier choices are made. It also has a built-in fraud deterrent in that the checks are in the beneficiary's name and require proper ID to use.

Eggs, milk, bread, meats, fruits, vegetables, beans, grains, cereals, etc.

WIC is by far a superior model.

 

[nac386]

I agree. If you're capable, you should have to do some community service to receive welfare. Pick up trash by he road, volunteer work, etc. It keeps people from becoming dependent and would look better to a potential employer than a long blank space in your work history.

The problem with that is that welfare is meant to provide for children who have no control over what their deadbeat parents do. So limiting welfare only to people who are willing to work would be cutting off assistance to children who have no say in the matter.

Then there's also the women who receive welfare and cannot work because they have children they have to watch. Unless they provide free childcare as part of the welfare system, they cannot require the guardian to spend time working somewhere away from the child.

 

[cincymma79]

Can you read this part of the post again then apologize?

"your going straight to insults"

Fair enough

 

[Rational Poster]

Fair enough

Based off this encounter I'd say your tax contribution is in line with your reading comprehension and grammar therefor you should shut the fuck right up since you might find yourself on the receiving end one day.

 

[PlayswellwithLawnDarts]

Checks payable to the grocer, which can be utilized for certain approved items necessary for the proper development of children and families, just like WIC.

That SNAP is not designed like that blows my mind. I guess that's the difference between a federal and state programs.

WIC offers a lot of food choices, and ensures healthier choices are made. It also has a built-in fraud deterrent in that the checks are in the beneficiary's name and require proper ID to use.

Eggs, milk, bread, meats, fruits, vegetables, beans, grains, cereals, etc.

WIC is by far a superior model.

Papa Murphy’s take and bake pizzeria is another example of playing the system on this level. You can use vision govt assist whatever because it’s not baked yet

 

[panamaican]

McDonald’s?

Any other fast food establishment?


Walmart?


Any other supermarket?


Janitors?


Landscaping/mowing/plowing?



They can find a job.

You realize than none of those jobs get you off welfare, right? You still qualify for SNAP on all of those.

A family of 3 making $25k/yr qualifies. A McDonald's cashier makes ~$18k/yr. A single mom working a 40 hour work week at McD's with 1 kid qualifies for SNAP. Factor in the expenses from sending the 1 kid to day care and she qualifies even more under the net income guidelines.

And those jobs aren't as plentiful as you'd like to pretend. They've all grown slower than the national average in terms of new jobs.

When I said people should discuss the issues, it starts with a realistic understanding of the job market in play. Just saying "People can get a fast food or cashier job," is a pretty good indication that the speaker doesn't really understand what's happening in the employment space.

 

[Quequeg]

Based off this encounter I'd say your tax contribution is in line with your reading comprehension and grammar therefor you should shut the fuck right up since you might find yourself on the receiving end one day.

The poorly educated are "loyal", we see how right he was everyday around here.

 

[Black Helicopters]

McDonald’s?

Any other fast food establishment?


Walmart?


Any other supermarket?


Janitors?


Landscaping/mowing/plowing?



They can find a job.

theres no such thing as a 0% unemployment rate. I support work requirements but not all of them will find jobs for whatever reason

 

[Deleted member 159002]

I agree. But people don't spend a lot of time on "how it is run", they spend the time on why people shouldn't have it and how to minimize it's use, regardless of need.

I always have an issue with stricter work requirements because the people imposing the stricter requirements don't have the ability to guarantee access to work. They don't control the market place. And the areas most likely to need those programs - rural areas and inner cities are already impoverished because employers don't want to go there. So it's a tone deaf approach.

Gov: "You need a job to qualify for benefits."
Person: "Great, I want a job. Where can I get one?"
Gov: "Just look for one."
Person: "I am but I only have a high school education."
Gov: "Well, you shouldn't have had kids then."
Person: "Uhm...how does that help me get a job?"
Gov: "It doesn't but that's your fault."
Person: "Ok, sure. But I still need a job and my government provided education is inadequate for any work that gets me off welfare."
Gov: "Move."
Person: "Ok, sure. But the type of work that I qualify for isn't going to pay for moving expenses."

I could go on but my point is that the issues of low income in this country that lead to low income and use of social service programs are intrinsic to how our economy has evolved. And how the programs are run doesn't work if those elements aren't acknowledged in an honest manner.

It's like when they tell some single mom to go get a job. Well, to go to an interview, she needs someone to watch her kid, transportation fare, etc. That costs money. She needs a job to get the money. So, it's a Catch-22 for her. There are too many issues like that running around.

It's mind boggling how it's so hard for some people to envision a scenario where the simple solution of trying to get a job isn't enough to make ends meet.

 

[freakroor]

i'm confused. Is the article saying people will eat less? why will grocery stores lose money?

if somebody stops getting foodstamps, will that person stop getting food?

 

[PolishHeadlock]

i'm confused. Is the article saying people will eat less? why will grocery stores lose money?

if somebody stops getting foodstamps, will that person stop getting food?

As it stand the government issues an EBT card (a food debit card) and deposit money in it monthly.

You can use this card to buy food at approved vendors and on approved products.

The proposal is to scrap the EBT card system and have the government deliver or hand out boxes of groceries

 

[GOATER]

Definitely more than what I would give. If you are not mentally deficient (Down’s, severe autism, etc.) you should not get food stamps.

Had a kid? Too bad, shouldn’t be poor and having kids. Lost your job? Too bad, have a savings account for six months of costs. Why do people have to take care of lazy fucks all the time because they are successful?

Alright....but also keep these standards for corporations.......Corporate Welfare affects the tax payer way more.


Stock Market crashed? Too bad....Too big to fail? too bad.......Banker, do something illegal? Too bad, you will be in Federal prison, next to rapist/murders and carry on your full prison term

 

[cincymma79]

Based off this encounter I'd say your tax contribution is in line with your reading comprehension and grammar therefor you should shut the fuck right up since you might find yourself on the receiving end one day.

Well then thanks for he lobster. I need more money though my kids be hungry

 

[Literally Bricked]

Alright....but also keep these standards for corporations.......Corporate Welfare affects the tax payer way more.


Stock Market crashed? Too bad....Too big to fail? too bad.......Banker, do something illegal? Too bad, you will be in Federal prison, next to rapist/murders and carry on your full prison term

Agreed. Poor people and poor companies suck. Knowledge that the government is going to take care of them makes them lazy and unwilling to make changes to their business practices to right the ship.

 

[GOATER]

Agreed. Poor people and poor companies suck. Knowledge that the government is going to take care of them makes them lazy and unwilling to make changes to their business practices to right the ship.

Exactly, a loser and failure like trump, after going bankrupt...Should've never gotten help to save his company....Absolute bullshit!

 

[Rational Poster]

Well then thanks for he lobster. I need more money though my kids be hungry

I can't make spending decisions for you.

But I'm willing to give you the chance to make your own bad decisions.