Food Stamps Put Poor Kids on Path to Success

[Belsnickel]

(12-06-2018, 10:51 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: What more programs do we need, in order to help people to improve their situation?  We have essentially free Community College education for anyone wanting and willing to use it.  Most Community Colleges have their course offerings specifically tailored to meet the job needs of their locality.  A hand up, rather than a hand out..  From my observations in life, proud people don't want "free stuff" as much as they just want to be in a better position to help themselves improve their situation.

That depends on where you are. Here, that's not the case. The availability of job training programs is not something that is adequate across the country. Whether it be cost, transportation, availability of classes, or other factors, community college or vocational training is difficult to access for most people that need it in this country. There are attempts going on to change that, but that is being stymied in many places by some politicians.

I'm advocating for "hand up" types of policies. What I'm saying is that instead of replacing a hand out with a hand up, moves like this are just taking the hand away entirely.

[Benton]

(12-06-2018, 11:27 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: The only real problem I ever had with food stamps/SNAP was there was no directive on what all you could buy with it.

They should have made it so you can only buy fresh (or canned) fruit/vegetables, grains/beans/potatos/etc, meat, and milk (or baby food/formula). The things you actually need to get nutrition and grow up healthy.

Instead you all-too-often see people using their food stamps to get sugar water (kool-aid, pop, popsicles, 0% fruit "juice") and candy.

So I would want some kind of mandate towards buying real food only, or maybe see about having some kind of food delivery program where the government mass produces/buys the canned goods/grains/powered milk or whatnot that you need to get nutrition and packages them and ships them out. It would likely be cheaper when done in huge numbers than sending out SNAP cards loaded with money to use on garbage "food". (And theoretically could be a boost for the USPS.)

That's my biggest issue. Back a million years ago when I worked in a grocery, it would drive me crazy when peeople would come in and buy a bunch on junk with the stamps. Not too long ago a gas station put up a big banner saying "now accepting ebt." No idea what you can get there as it's all some, candy bars, and beef jerky.

[*bfine32*]

(12-07-2018, 10:02 AM)GMDino Wrote: Why do you insist on arguing things people never said?

I said people do not volunteer to be in positions where they NEED SNAP.  Not everyone who needs it signs up for it either.  That is why certain people are eligible even if they do not sign up. But everyone who signs up for the military volunteered.  If it was because they were in a situation that they did not create but they felt it would help them then those people are in the same boat as most of those on SNAP.

The military, like SNAP has steps that potential members/users need to go through


Then why ask other than to be snarky?


Indeed.  Which is why you created another series of posts arguing something that someone didn't say.




"hated military"  

Did you say the difference is people volunteer to join the Military?

Did you mention anything about if people volunteered to be in a position where Military Service is the only way to provide for themselves and their family?

Now answer these questions:

Did I say folks volunteered to be in a position where SNAP is the only way to provide for themselves and their family?

Answer those simple questions and you just might see who actually has it twisted.

My simple assertion was Military Service comes with guidelines one must follow; why don't we emplace the same measures for those that receive SNAP? And you came back with some nonsense about folks volunteering for the Military, well they volunteer for SNAP as well. Conditions that lead to either choice is moot.

[GMDino]

(12-07-2018, 12:42 PM)Benton Wrote: That's my biggest issue. Back a million years ago when I worked in a grocery, it would drive me crazy when peeople would come in and buy a bunch on junk with the stamps. Not too long ago a gas station put up a big banner saying "now accepting ebt." No idea what you can get there as it's all some, candy bars, and beef jerky.

Well it's a "more bang for your buck" thing isn't it?

You can buy more cheap stuff with lots of calories than the stuff that's good for you but costs more so you get less of it.

That aside I  find it interesting that when Michelle Obama suggested school lunches be healthier she was vilified for doing parents jobs, trying to tell people how to eat, etc.  but that people keep talking about how people who get food stamps should be forced to by healthy foods only.

Odd dichotomy to me.

[*bfine32*]

(12-07-2018, 12:42 PM)Benton Wrote: That's my biggest issue. Back a million years ago when I worked in a grocery, it would drive me crazy when peeople would come in and buy a bunch on junk with the stamps. Not too long ago a gas station put up a big banner saying "now accepting ebt." No idea what you can get there as it's all some, candy bars, and beef jerky.

I remember as a kid, my mom returning from the store and telling my father the story of the lady in front of her trying to purchase cat food with Food Stamps. The clerk told her animal food did not qualify, so she returned it and said the cat likes Tuna better away.

WTS, I totally support providing aid for those that need it, but as I said guidelines about content of purchase should be established.

[*bfine32*]

(12-07-2018, 12:51 PM)GMDino Wrote: Well it's a "more bang for your buck" thing isn't it?

You can buy more cheap stuff with lots of calories than the stuff that's good for you but costs more so you get less of it.

That aside I  find it interesting that when Michelle Obama suggested school lunches be healthier she was vilified for doing parents jobs, trying to tell people how to eat, etc.  but that people keep talking about how people who get food stamps should be forced to by healthy foods only.

Odd dichotomy to me.

I don't think anyone should be able to mandate what you eat; if you're paying for it.

[jj22]

(12-07-2018, 12:42 PM)Benton Wrote: That's my biggest issue. Back a million years ago when I worked in a grocery, it would drive me crazy when peeople would come in and buy a bunch on junk with the stamps. Not too long ago a gas station put up a big banner saying "now accepting ebt." No idea what you can get there as it's all some, candy bars, and beef jerky.

Everything. You can even get Malts at UDF. It is pretty lenient on what you can buy. I'm all for the program, but I had a close family member who got them when she first had a child and I was shocked at the number of places that accepted them.

On a side note, maybe going to the card made it less embarrassing and easier to stay on them. I remember when they had to be torn off a paper booklet. Now it just looks like you are paying with a cc and people don't really notice.

Moms used to buy them from people wanting to use the money for cigs (and Lord knows what else). It was a good move as she'd get $50 worth for $30. I remember being embarrassed when she whipped them out her purse.

[*michaelsean*]

(12-07-2018, 12:42 PM)Benton Wrote: That's my biggest issue. Back a million years ago when I worked in a grocery, it would drive me crazy when peeople would come in and buy a bunch on junk with the stamps. Not too long ago a gas station put up a big banner saying "now accepting ebt." No idea what you can get there as it's all some, candy bars, and beef jerky.

I would not allow convenience type stores to accept EBT unless there weren't a grocery store reasonably close.  The price on grocery items is a lot higher.

[GMDino]

Jumping jebus on a pogo stick...

(12-07-2018, 12:50 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Did you say the difference is people volunteer to join the Military

Did you mention anything about if people volunteered to be in a position where Military Service is the only way to provide for themselves and their family?

Yes.  I said people volunteer for the military but don't volunteer to be poor, disabled or born with a low birthweight/premature:

(12-06-2018, 10:33 PM)GMDino Wrote: You volunteer for the military.

People don't volunteer to live below the poverty level or to have a disability that prevents them from working or having chidren who are born premature.

But other than that you nailed it. 

In direct response to your post:

(12-06-2018, 09:14 PM)bfine32 Wrote: There's a phrase for that. We folks try to introduce a separate argument. Wish I could remember what it is called.

As to the OP: Sure give the needy aid; however have them abide to strict guidelines. I know the Military requires it. 

Now, page two:

(12-07-2018, 12:50 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Now answer these questions:

Did I say folks volunteered to be in a position where SNAP is the only way to provide for themselves and their family?

Answer those simple questions and you just might see who actually has it twisted.

Well that's only one question so this should be easy...

Whereas I mentioned the military in reference to money spent you brought it up about the "requirements".  There are requirements for both.  


However I clearly stated that the difference is that the people attempting to receive assistance did not place themselves voluntarily in a position to need them.

Does that mean that some who join the military isn't joining because of a personal situation they did not choose to be in?  Of course not.  But I never said they did or didn't.  

Instead you jumped on me saying people volunteered to join while ignoring that I said people didn't volunteer to be poor.

Than you got all defensive "hated military".

NONE of which has ANYTHING to do with the alleged cost savings I was discussing in the OP and first page until you wanted to argue over the nuances of why people might join the military.

[jj22]

(12-07-2018, 01:04 PM)michaelsean Wrote: I would not allow convenience type stores to accept EBT unless there weren't a grocery store reasonably close.  The price on grocery items is a lot higher.

True, it's wasteful spending to buy Milk and such from places like Speedway and BP's.

[Benton]

(12-07-2018, 12:51 PM)GMDino Wrote: Well it's a "more bang for your buck" thing isn't it?

You can buy more cheap stuff with lots of calories than the stuff that's good for you but costs more so you get less of it.

That aside I  find it interesting that when Michelle Obama suggested school lunches be healthier she was vilified for doing parents jobs, trying to tell people how to eat, etc.  but that people keep talking about how people who get food stamps should be forced to by healthy foods only.

Odd dichotomy to me.

You need more than just calories though. You can get 2000 calories a day by chugging soda, which has no nutritional value.

(12-07-2018, 12:55 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I remember as a kid, my mom returning from the store and telling my father the story of the lady in front of her trying to purchase cat food with Food Stamps. The clerk told her animal food did not qualify, so she returned it and said the cat likes Tuna better away.

WTS, I totally support providing aid for those that need it, but as I said guidelines about content of purchase should be established.

I think most people are fine with guidelines. But we never hear politicians talk about reforming, just trying to expand or end.

[Belsnickel]

(12-07-2018, 01:23 PM)Benton Wrote: I think most people are fine with guidelines. But we never hear politicians talk about reforming, just trying to expand or end.

That's my rub. "Welfare reform" has just resulted in an increase in food insecurity and a continued expansion of the gaps in our socioeconomic system. Social welfare policies are supposed to work to improve the lives of the people. Welfare is prosperity. We should be helping people prosper, and none of the "reform" efforts have really done that. And note that I am saying help people prosper.

[GMDino]

(12-07-2018, 01:23 PM)Benton Wrote: You need more than just calories though. You can get 2000 calories a day by chugging soda, which has no nutritional value.


I think most people are fine with guidelines. But we never hear politicians talk about reforming, just trying to expand or end.

True but it makes them feel "full".

[Mike M (the other one)]

(12-06-2018, 10:32 PM)GMDino Wrote: I brought it up because of what I wrote about to Mike (The other one):

The GOP claims to want to cut the deficit and spending but they increase more than they claim to save but cutting/changing social programs.

One of the problems I see with "having people work" is that has to be work for them to do.  And who decides if they can or can't work?

I'm not sure why you brought me up.

you discussed Military in posts 5, 7, 11
My first post was 22, and I said I was against increasing military spending and that it doesn't belong in this thread, it needs its' own thread.

[GMDino]

(12-07-2018, 02:13 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: I'm not sure why you brought me up.

you discussed Military in posts 5, 7, 11
My first post was 22, and I said I was against increasing military spending and that it doesn't belong in this thread, it needs its' own thread.

Dang...the other other Mike.  

Sorry about that!

[*michaelsean*]

(12-07-2018, 02:22 PM)GMDino Wrote: Dang...the other other Mike.  

Sorry about that!

I'm not the other one.  If anyone is the other one it's Mike M.

[GMDino]

(12-07-2018, 02:26 PM)michaelsean Wrote: I'm not the other one.  If anyone is the other one it's Mike M.

Mike Brown is the only Mike.  

[Mike M (the other one)]

(12-07-2018, 02:22 PM)GMDino Wrote: Dang...the other other Mike.  

Sorry about that!

(12-07-2018, 02:26 PM)michaelsean Wrote: I'm not the other one.  If anyone is the other one it's Mike M.

(12-07-2018, 02:27 PM)GMDino Wrote: Mike Brown is the only Mike.  

Anyone Ready for Happy Hour besides me??

[Belsnickel]

(12-07-2018, 03:22 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: Anyone Ready for Happy Hour besides me??

I wish. I have to be in our holiday parade this evening. I have to wait far too long to start my weekend drinking.

[*TheLeonardLeap*]

(12-07-2018, 02:13 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: I'm not sure why you brought me up.

you discussed Military in posts 5, 7, 11
My first post was 22, and I said I was against increasing military spending and that it doesn't belong in this thread, it needs its' own thread.

(12-07-2018, 02:22 PM)GMDino Wrote: Dang...the other other Mike.  

Sorry about that!

(12-07-2018, 02:26 PM)michaelsean Wrote: I'm not the other one.  If anyone is the other one it's Mike M.