Missouri Lawmakers Don't Want Food Stamp Recipients To Buy Steak

well its been cheeper,here to buy steak than hamburger.I can buy 3ribyes for 9$ where a lb of hamburger is almost 20$. And i bet that lawmaker claims to be a christian.

a reply to: blackmetalmist

Yes, but his small amount of tax dollars doesn't pay for his entire use. Other tax payers, that don't use it are funding it.

So, "for the children" is the cry of the day, to justify theft and stealing.

a reply to: olbe66

In a perfect world, yes, it would benefit everyone. A lot of these benefits do help the needy that have unfortunately had no other option than that get monetary help from the government. However, it should only be temporary until they get themselves back on their feet and hopefully find a job. I've heard of plenty of stories where some of these women (I have to point out of the obvious because the majority that i've seen are women) would rather just stay home and NOT work and continue getting benefits because it pays them well as oppose to having a real job.

Meanwhile, the rest of us, get up every morning and go to work no matter what our wage is. If everyone did their part, this world would be a much better place. No hard or envious feelings.

a reply to: macman

If my tax dollars are funding a program for children that will eventually create better AND productive society, I have absolutely no problem. That means that in the future perhaps we can finally do away with giving away free money to those who do NOT need it and are abusing the system.

Think of it as a contribution to a society that will eventually benefit everyone.

a reply to: Greathouse

I didn't post any threat at all. As far as rhetoric goes,let me tell you that back in '88 I was on the street with my 2 kids. This was during the Reaganomics 'trickle down' crap. I felt like I had been trickled on for sure. This was in the middle of winter,and once again, my HUSBAND had pulled his stupid crap. We ended up calling everyone we could think of for help. All the shelters were full,the United way wouldn't help us,Salvation Army was out of resources,finally they were telling us to call numbers we had already called and they had told us NO. Reaganomics worked great, FOR THE RICH.

My in laws sent us the money to come to their place,bless them.And I had to find any job I could to bring in some money.(far be it for my ex to get off his lazy butt and do anything at all). I ended up working 12 hour days for little money,then coming home and taking care of my kids,fixing meals and finally caring for my mother in law when she ended up with cancer,until she passed on. I never want to go back to those times again.

I got a job at Ford and left my ex to rot.Which he did. he quit the job he finally got,when he only had 7 more years to work before retiring(all this army and national guard time,plus working a federal job),then sat around on the 'net till he had strokes. In the meantime I was off living my life,my kids were adults now,and I lost my job at Ford when the crash came.They shut the plant down here. I have struggled to make ends meet ever since.

I worked 12 hour shifts until my health went down,then became disabled.So here I sit living hand to mouth on disability wondering how I will pay this months bills. I live frugally,I don't 'game' the system. I have been working since I was 19,and paid into SS all these years.

Now when you talk about people that are eating Lobster and steak,remember this,those the do 'game' the system,aren't about to go on TV and tell you all about it. They are paid actors. This is just to get a story that will evoke emotions. They don't personally know anyone that is doing it,so they find someone and pay them to say they are. The penalty for gaming the system is very high.Jail time and having to pay back the money. Do you REALLY think a poor person,or one that is doing something illegal is going to cut their own throat? Come on,that is just silly. Are there people that game the system? Yep,sure are.But they aren't going to open their mouths and tell anyone about it. This way politicians can point to them and use them as an example to get their party members riled up. You are being played.

I simply do not understand their reasoning behind steak and lobster. Yes, lobster is a luxury item but it is really good for you. Steak is necessary for people who are anemic and have a hard time absorbing iron on a meatless diet. Sure it can also be a luxury item, but I much prefer to see someone buying meats rather than chips and soda.

However, even though I would prefer people get healthier choices the fact that people are trying to control what others eat is pretty frightening and downright wrong. If the lawmakers wanted to encourage healthy options what they should do is start a food stamp program that tracks what is bought (it is already being tracked) and if the food stamp recipients spend less than a certain amount on junk food a month they should be allotted a boost in their monthly food stamps, to continue as long as they continue to make healthy choices. Sure that would require more food stamps given out, but maybe less in healthcare expenses payed out in the long run.

The bottom line is it is not about healthy choices, this is about the government wanting to control as many lives as they can. This will not stop with food stamp recipients.

a reply to: caladonea

we need to strip any and all calvinists or promoters of calvinism of their citizenship and expel them from the us.

this most despicable brand of xtianity teaches Predestination: that people are poor because they're already damned to hell;
and being prosperous, a sign of being of the elect.

a reply to: brandiwine14

I think it's the idea that the average person whose taxes help pay to subsidize the foodstamps struggle to buy steak and lobster that's the point. Why should a person on food stamps have regular access to things that the people paying for the food stamps don't have access to?

OK, so steak is great for people with anemia. Wonderful! You know what? If I have anemia, no one is paying for my steak, but I'm paying for the person with food stamps to have steak.

OK, so lobster is healthy. Wonderful! You know what? If I need access to healthy lobster, no one is paying for my lobster, but I'm paying for the person with food stamps to have lobster.

THAT'S the problem. Maybe people with the food stamps ought to settle for the patio steak or the shrimp? You know, like I do.

a reply to: caladonea

This is nonsense. I'm not on food stamps, but I try to challenge myself to stay within a "food stamp" budget, around $35 a week, but I can afford to splurge. I bought a 3 LB rib eye roast for Easter Dinner that cost $3.78 per LB. That's cheaper than hamburger! I live alone, so that ought to make 6 meals.

As far as cookies go? Pfft. 99 Cent Only Stores have a whole aisle just dedicated to cookies! LOL

i grew up on foodstamps, back when you had to stand in line for government cheese and peanut butter in the cardboard can, so i respect the program and agree with it.

however, it does need to be reformed.

i worked at a convenience store for a while and i saw a couple come in and get $53 worth of icecreams, chips, and soda. i almost lost my job cause when they pulled out their ebt card to pay for it i looked at them and said, "really?".

now, for every person abusing the system, i would say there are more than 20 who still barely scrap by.

the ebt card should only be used at grocery stores and vegetable stands, imho. a convenience store is just too over priced and you cant get any good stuff. you can still get junk at a grocery store, but at least the prices are reasonable and you might get tempted to buy real food instead.

originally posted by: TheJourney
OVER HALF OF PEOPLE ON FOOD STAMPS WORK...but they still can't afford to feed themselves on top of the bills...

So all you people with this attitude, 'why should all these lazy people who don't want to work be able to buy stuff I can't afford with MY tax dollars.' Your tax dollars? Over half of people on food stamps work! Their tax dollars too!

And raising wages is totally unacceptable too! You're not gonna be able to get paid enough to pay bills and eat, but keep working anyways and then we'll give you # for subsidizing your food WHICH YOU CAN'T AFFORD despite the fact that you work.

I just realized something when you brought up the half of people on food stamps work datapoint. The labor participation rate among those on food stamps is higher than those off them.

originally posted by: AdamuBureido
a reply to: caladonea

we need to strip any and all calvinists or promoters of calvinism of their citizenship and expel them from the us.

this most despicable brand of xtianity teaches Predestination: that people are poor because they're already damned to hell;
and being prosperous, a sign of being of the elect.

And those of us who are atheists? Would you strip us of our rights simply because we disagree with the notion of buying votes with handouts?

originally posted by: NavyDoc
I recall that thread. You also had a big bag of tobacco in the background.

That would be someone elses thread, I have never purchased or used tobacco in my life. There have been a couple threads with the same premise.

so some of you think the program should be cancelled.

some of you are all "why should i pay for their food?".

well, i have the secret to get people off foodstamps.

why are people on foodstamps? cause they cant afford food. perhaps if you paid them more then they could afford food and not need foodstamps? crazy thought, i know, paying people enough to buy food, but it just might work.

just remember this factoid. 75% of all people on foodstamps have jobs! sometimes two. if you have a job, it should pay enough to buy food!

largest private employer? wal-mart. largest employer with most employees on foodstamps? walmart. just saying.

originally posted by: blackmetalmist
a reply to: macman

If my tax dollars are funding a program for children that will eventually create better AND productive society, I have absolutely no problem. That means that in the future perhaps we can finally do away with giving away free money to those who do NOT need it and are abusing the system.

Think of it as a contribution to a society that will eventually benefit everyone.

Yet the evidence shows is that these programs have increased poverty, not reduced it, and have not created a better and productive society. LBJ's great society is a failure. What you subsidize, you get more of. Handouts destroy initiative and drive but secure votes for those who provide them.

a reply to: blackmetalmist

And that is exactly what taxes are not designed to do.

But again, just put "It's for the children" in front of what ever, and it will have a base of uneducated backers.

a reply to: NavyDoc

Tutoring is creating increased poverty?? HOW??

Just call it what it is, corporate welfare the long way around.

Any kind of restrictions in place are only there to appease the working stiffs.

It's also a neat system to get tax dollars into the dope game.

What really gets some people going is that EBT can be used to buy Papa Murphy "take & bake" pizza's.

I'm not sure how I feel on that. Personally, if I was on foodstamps I wouldn't waste the little money I was given on a pizza. I'd probably be buying stuff to make crock pot meals with for left overs.

I mean, I know parents might want to "indulge" the kids once a month or something with pizza -- especially to celebrate if they got good grades or something. But maybe they ought to make a pizza from scratch and learn how yeast works to make dough? You probably could make two pizzas for the price of one at Papa Murphy's...and maybe learn something a long the way?

a reply to: macman

But again, just put "It's for the children" in front of what ever, and it will have a base of uneducated backers.

For sure!

For the sake of the children, food stamp recipients will no longer be able to use food stamps to purchase cookies! Sounds legit!