I'd be fine with government run food centers that stocked the essentials as long as kids got fed

Bill.N. Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Bull Shit WingNut.
>
> One huge reason we have all of this welfare crap
> piling up on us is that we have allowed businesses
> to shift their costs of doing business onto
> others. People need at a minimum food, shelter,
> clothing and a certain amount of medical care. In
> this area they are also going to need some form of
> transportation to and from work. If I am
> employing someone to work for me 40 hours per
> week, then I need to be paying them enough to
> cover these costs. If I don't then SOMEONE ELSE
> will have to make up the shortfall. Maybe that
> someone is a family member, maybe it's a charity
> or maybe it's the government. However as an
> employer I should have NO RIGHT to require that
> some third party cover my employees' costs of
> living just so I can acquire their labor at a
> lower cost.

Bill it sounds like you must have audited every businesses books and know exactly what they can afford and withstand.

You are making a good argument AGAINST welfare and SNAP..because you seem to say it encourages employers to pay less to workers with the knowledge that the government will subsidize.

Is your solution for the government to come in and micromanage small businesses? Sounds pretty socialistic- you are going to have problems Billy.


> I am not usually a fan of the "single mother"
> argument. However there are societal costs
> involved with the expectation that employees work
> more than 40-50 hours per week, especially when
> those hours become irregular. Maybe your business
> can make more money by having someone work 60
> hours per week rather than 40. However that means
> my business now needs to have extended hours so
> that we are open when your employees are not
> working. Longer work hours also means less time
> available to maintain the house and car and to
> participate in community activities, meaning the
> neighborhoods start going to crap and more
> community stuff ends up being done by paid workers
> or a handful of volunteers who burn out.

Single mothers are probably the most deserving of food stamps, though I don't have any problem with charities doling out contraceptives and discouraging the rampant breeding that goes unpaid for.

Your argument is garbage that all 40 hour a week jobs should pay enough for a house and a car. Nothing wrong with renting a room and taking the bus, I did it myself for a year or so once to get on my feet and it's not that bad.

Again, you are ridiculous to think you have insight into every business and make such a stupid blanket statement that all employers can afford to pay MORE.I seriously doubt you have ever ran a business in a competitive field or even worked for one.

So you drive a gas guzzling minivan, but yet are on food stamps. Ever heard of the bus?


To the one who does nit care Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I drive a minivan to the one who does not care
> And I'm proud my kids give money to homeless
> How's that bud lite

Not on food stamps. Have worked since I was ten years old. Earned every dime. And car us ten years old

Just don't like hungry kids

You are starving.

This applies to women.

But clearly you like mothers who sell their food stamps for drug money. So basically, by stating you don't want goods handed out instead of this crap you effectively do like hungry kids.


Not on food stamps Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Not on food stamps. Have worked since I was ten
> years old. Earned every dime. And car us ten
> years old
>
> Just don't like hungry kids

Agreed with you on handing out food to make healthy meals and snacks.

To the one who does nit care Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I drive a minivan to the one who does not care
> And I'm proud my kids give money to homeless
> How's that bud lite


Ever see that homeless person hit the bud lite after your kids gave then money? Well, They do. Thanks for supporting that behavior. Dummy.

If they only had the absolute essentials it would make it more likely the kids would get fed. The way it works now:

Welfare queen on drugs gets food stamps. Welfare queen sells food stamps for a price below the value of what it is, but still a great deal to the seller. Welfare queen on food stamps uses money to buy drugs while kids go hungry.

How it should work: Person who actually might need it goes and gets food which won't be of much value to welfare queen. Welfare queen drops out of the system because she can't sell food stamps for drugs and will have to get a birth control shot so she can't increase her drug money for next year.


Food handouts Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I'd be fine with government run food centers that
> stocked the essentials as long as kids got fed

You all have anger issues
You hate ecoverything
You have my sympathy

You people have anger issues Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> You all have anger issues
> You hate ecoverything
> You have my sympathy


Fuck off.

I remember reading a story (I think in Judge Judy's book) about how she went and bought this homeless women a sandwich and coffee and the woman threw it at her and said what am I supposed to do with this. Also keep in mind not all these so called homeless people are homeless. I know that because I once saw one standing on the corner with a sign and I know this person and I know they are not homeless, but that CPS had to be called on them because they have a drug problem.



Captian obvious Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> To the one who does nit care Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > I drive a minivan to the one who does not care
> > And I'm proud my kids give money to homeless
> > How's that bud lite
>
>
> Ever see that homeless person hit the bud lite
> after your kids gave then money? Well, They do.
> Thanks for supporting that behavior. Dummy.

Yes

Milk
Cereal
Bread
Peanut butter
Inexpensive meat
Pasta
Sauces
Fruits
Veggies
Canned beans
Mac and cheese
Juice
Rice
Crackers
Canned Soups
Protein bars
Yogurt
Eggs
Toilet paper
Frozen meals
Flour
Spices
Pancake mix

I don't care Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Don't have kids that you can't afford..It's that
> simple.
> I really don't give a fuck about someone else's
> fucking kid eating. They wanted the kid, they can
> feed the kid.

And how would you enforce this? Just because you don't like paying taxes is not going to stop someone else from fucking and being irresponsible.

They also have a vote, and of course they're going to vote their own interests, which is to keep the money coming in (which really just serves to blunt the worst part of their misery).

You are absolutely checkmated. You know there is nothing you can do about this, because you would do it if you could, so you rage impotently on a message board on the internet.

Socialism

Checkmate this:

Require birth control shots to receive food/food stamps.



Impotent Rage Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I don't care Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Don't have kids that you can't afford..It's
> that
> > simple.
> > I really don't give a fuck about someone else's
> > fucking kid eating. They wanted the kid, they
> can
> > feed the kid.
>
> And how would you enforce this? Just because you
> don't like paying taxes is not going to stop
> someone else from fucking and being
> irresponsible.
>
> They also have a vote, and of course they're going
> to vote their own interests, which is to keep the
> money coming in (which really just serves to blunt
> the worst part of their misery).
>
> You are absolutely checkmated. You know there is
> nothing you can do about this, because you would
> do it if you could, so you rage impotently on a
> message board on the internet.

katiesmith Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Checkmate this:
>
> Require birth control shots to receive food/food
> stamps.

Do you seriously think that there'd be the political will to even consider passing such a law in any legislature in the country, or that it would withstand the most trivial of court challenges? The ACLU would be pissing in their pants and marshal a whole fucking army of lawyers to contest something like this.

In your fantasyland, you might be able to get something like this made into law. However, in the real world, you have exactly zero chance of making it happen, and you absolutely know it.

Impotent Rage Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I don't care Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Don't have kids that you can't afford..It's
> that
> > simple.
> > I really don't give a fuck about someone else's
> > fucking kid eating. They wanted the kid, they
> can
> > feed the kid.
>
> And how would you enforce this? Just because you
> don't like paying taxes is not going to stop
> someone else from fucking and being
> irresponsible.
>
> They also have a vote, and of course they're going
> to vote their own interests, which is to keep the
> money coming in (which really just serves to blunt
> the worst part of their misery).
>
> You are absolutely checkmated. You know there is
> nothing you can do about this, because you would
> do it if you could, so you rage impotently on a
> message board on the internet.


So your going to reward them? yeah, let's help the irresponsible. You are Just Hurting.

Most people posting on here need please keep me from being and sounding stupid shots. Those are shots gov should fund. Line up GOP elite

Stupid shits Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Most people posting on here need please keep me
> from being and sounding stupid shots. Those are
> shots gov should fund. Line up GOP elite


What?

Government needs to create and administer shots to keep people from acting and sounding stupid. What do you mean what?.. Many who post here need to get in line for first vaccinations

Katie, I wish someone would bend you over a fucking chair and fuck the stupid out of you.

State stores would be the best way to control what people can get but wont work.Too many people too big a state.

What will work is placeing yes items in a data base and a state sign the same everywere in Va on the shelf that shows its a a yes allowed item.

And the stores would be allowed top set up a certain register where only food stamp sales would be if they wanted to, they can sell regular items of course too but all the food stamps would have to be in that line, that way if they put a bunch of stuff on the belt they can't have they have to pay for it or let the others waiting in the line bitch them out for being stupid and holding up the line trying to buy things they can't.


But theres got to be a statewide will of the people to do anything...and it seems there is not. Oh well I just have to bitch my selve out for worrying about it. Working stiffs are screwed thats all there is to it.

Someone tell the President
We've solved it

No More Waste Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> State stores would be the best way to control what
> people can get but wont work.Too many people too
> big a state.
>
> What will work is placeing yes items in a data
> base and a state sign the same everywere in Va on
> the shelf that shows its a a yes allowed item.
>
> And the stores would be allowed top set up a
> certain register where only food stamp sales would
> be if they wanted to, they can sell regular items
> of course too but all the food stamps would have
> to be in that line, that way if they put a bunch
> of stuff on the belt they can't have they have to
> pay for it or let the others waiting in the line
> bitch them out for being stupid and holding up the
> line trying to buy things they can't.
>
> But theres got to be a statewide will of the
> people to do anything...and it seems there is not.
> Oh well I just have to bitch my selve out for
> worrying about it. Working stiffs are screwed
> thats all there is to it.

The first part of your suggestion is similar to what's been implemented for the WIC (Women, Infants and Children) program. There's a list of foods that are WIC-approved, meaning you can use a WIC voucher to purchase them, and you can't buy things that aren't on the list.

http://www.vahealth.org/DCN/Publications/Files/PDFs/WICfood%20List%202012%20web%20Eng.pdf

I would imagine that expanding this list slightly and making only those foods available with a SNAP card would go quite a ways towards reducing some of the fraud in the program.

Things that have no nutritive value (such as chips and soft drinks), or are high in fat, sugar, or salt should absolutely be prohibited from being purchased with SNAP benefits. This would have the dual advantage of making both people on SNAP benefits healthier as well as everyone else because manufacturers would start reformulating their products to meet the SNAP guidelines.

Also, there should be limits on how much of a specific product or category of products one could buy. I've heard of scams where people buy large amounts of cheese, which they then resell to a local restaurant for cash. I doubt even the most cheese-loving family could eat more than five pounds a month worth of cheese.

Another thing that should be made part of the law is that if you're using SNAP, you automatically get the discounted price of an item that a holder of a loyalty card would get without having to actually have a loyalty card.

There should be education available (I'm unsure if it should be mandatory) on how to get the best value out of your SNAP benefits and how to prepare nutritious, tasty food, kind of like the old home economics classes.

Lastly, anyone caught abusing SNAP, especially converting the benefits to cash for things like cigarettes or narcotics, should absolutely serve mandatory prison time and be deprived of their parental rights.

@ Sanity in SNAP- some good points there.

I doubt that SNAP could work the cards so they couldn't buy sugary soda and other junk, but I think the ability is there to audit what his been purchased, and inform the user what the no-no's are.

There are so many people in the hood with hypertension and diabetes, a lot of wheelchairs and scooters with amputees in them.

It seems so counterproductive to subsidize peoples with such junk nutrition.

idontlikebeingrightaboutshitlikethisbutiam



Edited 21 time(s). Last edit at 5/31/1967 05:57AM by WingNut.

Last edit at 11/30/2015 01:37PM Last edit at 5/14/2015 03:52PM Last edit at 1/28/2014 05:57AM Last edit at 11/29/2015 01:10PM Last edit at 3/14/2011 11:52PM Last edit at 7/20/2012 04:07AM
Last edit at 6/29/2013 11:18PM Last edit at 3/19/2011 01:02PM Last edit at 3/26/2012 09:07PM

where are the worthless fathers who made the women single mothers? why aren't they considered for sterilization to stop the unwanted procreation? why aren't they helping to feed their own children? why aren't they being blamed and judged?

where Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> where are the worthless fathers who made the women
> single mothers? why aren't they considered for
> sterilization to stop the unwanted procreation?
> why aren't they helping to feed their own
> children? why aren't they being blamed and
> judged?


They are called niggers for a reason.

WingNut Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Bill it sounds like you must have audited every
> businesses books and know exactly what they can
> afford and withstand.

I probably audited more companies' books then most, but that was a couple of lifetimes ago.

As for what companies can afford or withstand, aren't you all the ones who are complaining about INDIVIDUALS stealing money from taxpayers in the form of welfare because they "need it".

> You are making a good argument AGAINST welfare and
> SNAP..because you seem to say it encourages
> employers to pay less to workers with the
> knowledge that the government will subsidize.
>
> Is your solution for the government to come in and
> micromanage small businesses? Sounds pretty
> socialistic- you are going to have problems
> Billy.

So close...and then your Milton Friedman religion kicked in. Still whether you believe that the existence of welfare encourages employers to pay less or the unwillingness of employers to pay adequate wages to exist makes welfare necessary, the result is the same. We as society are using our tax dollars to subsidize someone's business.

BTW this isn't some new socialist concept. But then again anyone whose memory begins with Reagan can't be expected to recognize this. As for problems, we are simply exchanging one set for another.

> Single mothers are probably the most deserving
> of food stamps, though I don't have any problem
> with charities doling out contraceptives and
> discouraging the rampant breeding that goes unpaid
> for.

Well you are more generous on something than I am. Actually my issue with "single mothers" is that it elevates one group of the "deserving needy" over other groups, quite often without considering just how deserving certain members of the group actually are.

> Your argument is garbage that all 40 hour a week
> jobs should pay enough for a house and a car.

I never said that. You read that into what I said. I said they should pay enough to cover housing and transportation. This is much closer to what you suggest. However the problem I have with the "rent a room" argument is that it encourages the kind of rooming house problems that many neighborhoods are experiencing. Argument for another day. The problem with the "take a bus" argument is while it may work for someone going from Fairfax to Tysons, it doesn't work as well for someone living in Stafford and doing construction in Arlington. Compensation needs to take into account the type of transportation the job requires.

> I seriously doubt you have ever ran a
> business in a competitive field or even worked for
> one.

I have been worrying about making payroll for over twenty years, but believe what you want. Frankly my dear, I don't give a damn.

The SNAP list should be the same as the WIC list and quanities limited as the WIC list states, that keeps people from buying for others as much and hopefully the children will get some benefit. The WIC list is a sign of some sanity with all the fraud occuring.

As far as microwave foods, if the people rent say a room and theres no "full" kitchen then I would go along with that but only with the exception of no full kitchen IE: a stove and sink and verified.

@ Bill.N. SO who should set wages, the government instead of a private business owner?

idontlikebeingrightaboutshitlikethisbutiam



Edited 21 time(s). Last edit at 5/31/1967 05:57AM by WingNut.

Last edit at 11/30/2015 01:37PM Last edit at 5/14/2015 03:52PM Last edit at 1/28/2014 05:57AM Last edit at 11/29/2015 01:10PM Last edit at 3/14/2011 11:52PM Last edit at 7/20/2012 04:07AM
Last edit at 6/29/2013 11:18PM Last edit at 3/19/2011 01:02PM Last edit at 3/26/2012 09:07PM

planned parenthood clinics offer free/reduced contraceptives
public schools offer free/reduced lunch & breakfast
dollar store sells household goods, toys, school supplies
thrift stores for clothing--unused & gently used brand-name threads/shoes on the cheap, in various sizes

economical nutritious foods in bulk quantity: dried legumes, eggs, potatoes, turkey, rice, bananas, pasta, broccoli, beef brisket & generic boxed items. dirt-cheap with/without store coupons.

don't hesitate to accept help from family and/or friends if offered. sure beats staining your credit score via govt assistance.

resourcefulness is key. theft, drug-peddling & mooching ultimately contribute to the problem, since those struggling won't be able to afford a lawyer if necessary.
poverty can be a temporary condition, or permanent for those wasteful, indulgent & chronically ignorant.
the last thing people need to hear is god has a plan thus there's no need to worry, or how unplanned out-of-wedlock pregnancies are a holy blessing in disguise. that's the nonsense which promotes cyclic poverty and an astounding lack of personal accountability within poor communities.

The deadbeats, freeloaders and bums are actually heroes. Its not easy to lay around for thirty plus years without working. Do you think it is easy to pop out seven to ten kids and watch Judge Judy all day?

WingNut Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> @ Bill.N. SO who should set wages, the government
> instead of a private business owner?

They will still initially be set by agreement between employer and employee. However if the compensation comes in below a living wage and if the employee then goes on welfare, the employer has to reimburse the government for the welfare benefits paid.

We actually have something similar now. If a parent gets TANF benefits, the state gets to recover those benefits from the other parent.

Bill.N. Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> WingNut Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > @ Bill.N. SO who should set wages, the
> government
> > instead of a private business owner?
>
> They will still initially be set by agreement
> between employer and employee. However if the
> compensation comes in below a living wage and if
> the employee then goes on welfare, the employer
> has to reimburse the government for the welfare
> benefits paid.
>
> We actually have something similar now. If a
> parent gets TANF benefits, the state gets to
> recover those benefits from the other parent.

You are going to achieve the same socialist goal and muddy things up by having the feds determine what fair compensation for this or that is.

Some jobs are not going to pay a living wage, it is just reality. Some jobs are designed for students (who still live with parents) seniors (who just need a little supplemental) or unreliable workers who pick up a little here and there from temp agencies.

If food stamps were scaled back, the workers would deal with employers themselves to get what they need. No reason for Big Daddy Gubmint to get involved.

katiesmith Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> You weed out the 98 percent who are scamming the
> system by:
> 1. Only handing out rice and beans-maybe some
> cheap veggies like carrots
> 2. You require birth control shots.
>
>
>
>
>
> Food for the Hungry Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Ok, how do you feed the hungry who need our
> help?
> > Someone answer this.
> >
> > Some people need help. Not everyone is a bum.
>
> > So give me answers you conversatives.

You implement that plan and I would never have a gripe about the food stamp system again, and I'm sure 99% of the other citizens would agree.

Bill.N. Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> WingNut Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > @ Bill.N. SO who should set wages, the
> government
> > instead of a private business owner?
>
> They will still initially be set by agreement
> between employer and employee. However if the
> compensation comes in below a living wage and if
> the employee then goes on welfare, the employer
> has to reimburse the government for the welfare
> benefits paid.
>
> We actually have something similar now. If a
> parent gets TANF benefits, the state gets to
> recover those benefits from the other parent.


While the goal may be admirable, the practical reality is that all wealth is relative and that all money is simply an artificial representation of value. And the value of goods and services, at least without some outside force to control them (and even then largely, it just becomes more hidden), will always rise/fall to meet the determined cost/value within that reality.

More directly, when you have to pay someone higher wages, then the cost of the goods/services they produce will increase in proportion. They as consumers also then are subject to the same resulting cost increases and end up in no better relative position than they were prior to. All you've really done is to change the units of value assigned to the goods/services. e.g., If you pay farm workers $30/hour and it increases the cost of produce (and everything else affected across all of the economy) in a proportional amount, they end up in no better relative position than they were prior to. And whether it's done through wages, or taxes, or monetary manipulation, it's all effectively the same in the end, it just goes through a different cycle of the same system.

There always has been and always will be, regardless of the system/society, relatively rich and relative poor. The relative difference at the extremes may vary at given times/societies, but really haven't changed much. In fact, less here and now versus others. The better measure is the overall absolute "wealth" of the society and, to your concern, that of the lower end. That is, while you may not like that a CEO or entertainer today is relatively much more wealthy than a fast food worker who can't afford a car and a place in the city, that worker is far better off in terms of basic needs on an absolute basis (at least by Western measures) than the most relatively wealthy member of some less wealthy society who had/has no reliable access to basic needs like food, water, medicine, etc.

Also, people who suggest this seem to work from the basis that everyone works for Multi-Mega Corp and there's some huge pool of hidden profits to draw such increases in wages from. That's not the case for the most part. But that's getting into another area.

When you give someone something free with no strings attached they do not appreciate it and usually come back looking for more.

Over simplification
Some people need help

Very true, I've seen a lot of posts from these welfare queens and kings who somehow can't afford food, but can afford the internet along with their smart phones and gas guzzlers.

Biggest bunch of ingrates on the planet.


mo free mo Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> When you give someone something free with no
> strings attached they do not appreciate it and
> usually come back looking for more.

I think the way to push towards implementation of such a plan at this point is too get the word out by posting such a plan wherever you can and talking about it when you can to push it into the mainstream if that makes sense?

Alexander Smith Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> katiesmith Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > You weed out the 98 percent who are scamming
> the
> > system by:
> > 1. Only handing out rice and beans-maybe some
> > cheap veggies like carrots
> > 2. You require birth control shots.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Food for the Hungry Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > Ok, how do you feed the hungry who need our
> > help?
> > > Someone answer this.
> > >
> > > Some people need help. Not everyone is a bum.
>
> >
> > > So give me answers you conversatives.
>
> You implement that plan and I would never have a
> gripe about the food stamp system again, and I'm
> sure 99% of the other citizens would agree.

I am responsible for myself and my family. Period. If you want to take care of others, then you are free to do so on your own dime. Keep your filthy hands off of my hard earned money!

Those of you who are talking about Depo shots and giving free handouts are onto something. Mandating the shots would never work because the ACLU and GOP would kill that proposal before it gained any steam. However, giving a cash incentive to get the shots (say $50 per quarter) each time the woman picked up her check or food stamps would be huge and the demand would be overwhelming. $50 is a lot less than these woman receive in benefits, but a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush. And it's certainly less expensive to the taxpayer than subsidizing education, medical care, feeding and housing for these kids for 18+ years as the cycle of generational poverty continues.

fungolio Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I am responsible for myself and my family.
> Period. If you want to take care of others, then
> you are free to do so on your own dime. Keep your
> filthy hands off of my hard earned money!

Fine. Provided you don't do business directly or indirectly with anyone who is on public assistance or is using employees on some form of public assistance. I suspect you'll find that nearly impossible.