Are we are creating a major dependency class?

[AZ Fins Fan 55]

^ I don't know about the situation above, but here's how something like that happens:  My friends.

My friends have a nice, middle class lifestyle, a nice car, a house -- they had nice things.  So, when downsized and out of work, they still own those things, but all of a sudden, they don't have enough money to float their bills.  So, they cut back on new purchases, but have food stamps to float them until their situation is more stable.  ...and why not, they've paid into the program their whole lives.

So, if you saw my friends, dressed nicely, well-groomed, rolling up in a nice car and using food stamps, it'd probably piss you off.

But you don't know their situation, just as you don't know the situation of the guy with the BMW.

^^^I see what you are saying Dave but in all honesty you don't know his situation either. He just as easily could be a worthless piece of shit that mooches off the government. I have no doubt that that things happen like the situation you described, but for everyone of those there are people abusing it too.

How would you know they're on food stamps? Arizona uses a card.

I have no idea what Arizona uses as I have never used them. I saw them with my own two eyes and I was appalled it's something I will never forget.

[Spider-Dan]

That's all cute in black and white but the reality is there is no incentive to change. The aren't living high and mighty by most standards but they get very cheap housing and get to watch Jerry Springer and Oprah every day while "living it up" with whomever. Many of the the low income areas are full of people just like this.

Yes, and their children get to eat every day and have a roof over their head.

Listen, I'm not necessarily disagreeing with the idea you're talking about, but let's not sugarcoat it.  In order to "fix" this problem, one or more of the following needs to happen:

- our society has to be willing to allow low-income children to starve and/or be homeless
- our government needs to be willing to remove starving/homeless children from their parents' custody (and be willing to fund foster care for them)
- our government has to be willing to take more serious steps towards preventing people from having children that they cannot afford to raise

So which of the above do you support?  Because absent the above options, all the talk about people abusing the system is just that: talk.  If you aren't ready to see starving, homeless children on the street, then you can't reduce the government assistance to low-income parents below the point where they can stay at home without working.

Furthermore, as Lil B said, the cost of child care makes the prospect of working just to pay the child care costs that you have incurred by going to work somewhat counterproductive, particularly when conservatives will then turn around and say, "This person is making $xxxx per month, and gets the same benefits as a person who isn't working at all!"  I mean, if that's your goal, why not have the government "hire" one group of welfare recipients to dig holes, and another group to fill them in?  It accomplishes the same thing.

There is no reson that healthy people are not contributing to society in some way. If you refuse to do that then lose your kids because not supporting your kids is a form of child neglect.

Are you saying that you are in favor of the government taking your kids if you are too poor?  Should we spend more on foster care for poor children than we would assisting their families?

[Dave Gray]

He just as easily could be a worthless piece of shit that mooches off the government. I have no doubt that that things happen like the situation you described, but for everyone of those there are people abusing it too.

I don't think this is true.  I'm sure there are people that abuse the system, but I think that the majority of those that use assistance need it.  There's no reason to assume otherwise.  There is no data to support that as many people are scamming as those that need it.

Look, I'm all for reducing dependency.  ...all for it.  I want the same things you do.  But how do you do that, without hurting those that are doing the right thing, but have fallen on hard times?

[Brian Fein]

Dave, if your friend was struggling, why couldn't they sell their fancy car and buy a beater and use the profit to float them for a while?  When you hit rough times, sometimes we have to sacrifice things we want in favor of things we need.

[badger6]

Yes, and their children get to eat every day and have a roof over their head.

Listen, I'm not necessarily disagreeing with the idea you're talking about, but let's not sugarcoat it.  In order to "fix" this problem, one or more of the following needs to happen:

- our society has to be willing to allow low-income children to starve and/or be homeless
- our government needs to be willing to remove starving/homeless children from their parents' custody (and be willing to fund foster care for them)
- our government has to be willing to take more serious steps towards preventing people from having children that they cannot afford to raise

So which of the above do you support?  Because absent the above options, all the talk about people abusing the system is just that: talk.  If you aren't ready to see starving, homeless children on the street, then you can't reduce the government assistance to low-income parents below the point where they can stay at home without working.

Furthermore, as Lil B said, the cost of child care makes the prospect of working just to pay the child care costs that you have incurred by going to work somewhat counterproductive, particularly when conservatives will then turn around and say, "This person is making $xxxx per month, and gets the same benefits as a person who isn't working at all!"  I mean, if that's your goal, why not have the government "hire" one group of welfare recipients to dig holes, and another group to fill them in?  It accomplishes the same thing.
Are you saying that you are in favor of the government taking your kids if you are too poor?  Should we spend more on foster care for poor children than we would assisting their families?

I don't think this is true.  I'm sure there are people that abuse the system, but I think that the majority of those that use assistance need it.  There's no reason to assume otherwise.  There is no data to support that as many people are scamming as those that need it.

Look, I'm all for reducing dependency.  ...all for it.  I want the same things you do.  But how do you do that, without hurting those that are doing the right thing, but have fallen on hard times?

In response to both. If you want to fix the system you have to make people not want to be on the system without pulling the plug on people that need to eat. The way to do that is to make the system as uncomfortable as possible to be on. Limit what can be bought when receiving benefits. Fruits, vegetables, rice, beans, no meat except plain raw chicken or ground beef. No drinks except milk. No junk food, cereal, pre cooked convenience foods. Only foods that you have to cook and prepare, no tv dinners or frozen pizzas. These jokers have all day to sit around and do nothing. Let them learn to cook for themselves from a list of only 30 allowed items. That would get old quick and separate the freeloaders and scam artists from the people that just need basic nutrition to survive. The people that just need to eat would still be taken care of and that's what it's all about. Isn't it ? If I was one of those people I would be thankful even though the menu might not be to my liking. Being a person that somewhat works out and tries to keep in shape at least half the year, I have(choose to) to eat shit that I don't really want to eat a lot of the time. Supposedly, the states with the most obese people are the states with the highest food stamp recipients, that illustrates a serious problem.

[Dave Gray]

Dave, if your friend was struggling, why couldn't they sell their fancy car and buy a beater and use the profit to float them for a while?  When you hit rough times, sometimes we have to sacrifice things we want in favor of things we need.

And perhaps they can.  This stuff sneaks up on you quickly.  Also, perhaps they can't get fair market value and would be taking a considerable net loss on the vehicle, further damaging their long term prospects.  Or perhaps they are upside down on the vehicle and the amount they owe is more than they can sell it for.

I don't really know.  But I know they aren't deadbeats looking for a handout.

[Buddhagirl]

^^^

I have no idea what Arizona uses as I have never used them. I saw them with my own two eyes and I was appalled it's something I will never forget.

Two things: 1. If you've never used  food stamps, how do you know that's what they were? 2. I just double checked and AZ uses cards. They have for years.

[Buddhagirl]

In response to both. If you want to fix the system you have to make people not want to be on the system without pulling the plug on people that need to eat. The way to do that is to make the system as uncomfortable as possible to be on. Limit what can be bought when receiving benefits. Fruits, vegetables, rice, beans, no meat except plain raw chicken or ground beef. No drinks except milk. No junk food, cereal, pre cooked convenience foods. Only foods that you have to cook and prepare, no tv dinners or frozen pizzas. These jokers have all day to sit around and do nothing. Let them learn to cook for themselves from a list of only 30 allowed items. That would get old quick and separate the freeloaders and scam artists from the people that just need basic nutrition to survive. The people that just need to eat would still be taken care of and that's what it's all about. Isn't it ? If I was one of those people I would be thankful even though the menu might not be to my liking. Being a person that somewhat works out and tries to keep in shape at least half the year, I have(choose to) to eat shit that I don't really want to eat a lot of the time. Supposedly, the states with the most obese people are the states with the highest food stamp recipients, that illustrates a serious problem.

Funny since those are also the states that vote Republican.

[AZ Fins Fan 55]

I don't think this is true.  I'm sure there are people that abuse the system, but I think that the majority of those that use assistance need it.  There's no reason to assume otherwise.  There is no data to support that as many people are scamming as those that need it.

Look, I'm all for reducing dependency.  ...all for it.  I want the same things you do.  But how do you do that, without hurting those that are doing the right thing, but have fallen on hard times?

Well I will agree to disagree then because I think there are a ton of people who like to abuse the system and take any handout they can get. I hear the horror stories all the time but either way it is just a difference of opinion.

To your last point I have no idea how to fix it and the last thing I want to see is people who need the help to lose it because other feel the need to abuse it.

[SportsChick]

Case in point....

There is no shame in handouts. Remeber being in the grocery store line and seeing someone using food stamps? Most felt at least some shame. No more...Today, a new program called SNAP proudly endorsed by Obama makes using "government funding" so discreet that most people will never even notice. It looks just like a credit card. Hell, the Dems are so proud of it, they actually were using taxpayer money to advertise it.

I haven't read the whole thread so excuse me if this has been pointed out already however:

I work at Publix in Customer Service. I'm on my second tour of duty, first being in 2000-01. Even back in 2000 the food stamps card was like a debit card and still is.  That is nothing new and if I had time I'd research when the change was made from paper stamps to the debit style card, but it has been around at least a decade.

[AZ Fins Fan 55]

Two things: 1. If you've never used  food stamps, how do you know that's what they were? 2. I just double checked and AZ uses cards. They have for years.

1) When he handed them to the cashier they caught my eye beacuse it was not cash and at first I thought it was like foreign money or something. I don't remember what they said exactly but they were in fact food stamps.

2) That's great glad to hear it maybe it was longer than a year either way I am not sure what you are trying to prove with that as I know what I saw. I certainly hope you are not impying that I am fabricating a story. I have nothing to prove, at the same time I have no reason to lie about such an event.

[Spider-Dan]

The notion of people driving to pick up Medicaid prescriptions in a BMW is a popular conservative myth, originated by Ronald Reagan's "Cadillac-driving welfare queens" stories in the '80s.  There is no basis in fact for these tales of horror, and simple logic (link) contradicts their validity.

Now, I suppose you could argue that when one loses one's job, instead of applying for unemployment and/or other government assistance, you should immediately proceed to selling your house and your car, move to the ghetto, and buy a '93 Escort.  I don't know that that would be the wisest long-term solution (particularly given that as a working taxpayer, you paid into these programs for years), but I guess you could do it.

[Buddhagirl]

1) When he handed them to the cashier they caught my eye beacuse it was not cash and at first I thought it was like foreign money or something. I don't remember what they said exactly but they were in fact food stamps.

2) That's great glad to hear it maybe it was longer than a year either way I am not sure what you are trying to prove with that as I know what I saw. I certainly hope you are not impying that I am fabricating a story. I have nothing to prove, at the same time I have no reason to lie about such an event.

I'm saying that your story is bullshit. That's all, brah.

[bsmooth]

Just an example of a rampant problem of what's going on with the entitlement crowd. At work on a weekly basis I hear certain people bragging about selling their benefits to people for cash. No telling how many times I have heard it.
Ha, ha, ha, who said any of that ? So dramatic, don't shit your pants over it.......

The problem of that receipt is on the store owners and not the recipients. That store wanted to increase profits, so it illegally takes in food stamps for items not covered by food stamp( i.e. the basics.) Of course you ignore this simple fact because then that means business owners are also a main cause of the problem but since they tend to vote GOP the right cannot attack them for their crimes and greed.
Also you use anecdotal evidence of Cadillac drivers using stamps. Even though this does not apply to the majority of users, you continually broadcast it out as the truth about the whole. I grew up in a rural area that had high unemployment( well over 10% in the 80's) and I never once saw the people using food stamps ever leave or arrive in a nice vehicle.
The problem with people selling food stamps? Once again you have businesses who will take food stamps to make profit without insuring that they are not being used illegally.
So at least a couple of the major problems with how food stamps are being used can be combated by vigorously going after the business owners who are enabling the illegal uses of food stamps. Good luck ever getting the GOP to go after those criminals. Poor people do not have a lobby to defend them.

[Brian Fein]

Supposedly, the states with the most obese people are the states with the highest food stamp recipients, that illustrates a serious problem.

Pure supposition and blatantly false.  The underlying assumption of this statement is that over half of the population of the United States is using food stamps.  Do you really believe that, Mitt?

There is no correlation between obesity and food stamps.  This is utterly ridiculous.