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

a reply to: macman

i agree but want to go a step further.

no handouts at all.

then employees will truly know how badly they are getting bilked and will join unions and demand fair wages. more strikes for fair pay.

we will return to the labor wars of the 20's and 30's.

With the kind of money he has rolling in as a Congressman and he can't afford steak? He is a liar, plain and simple.

Unless he is spending his money on gambling or drugs.

originally posted by: windword
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!

I mentioned it earlier - Why do they need to buy cookies? Why not have them purchase the things to bake their own cookies? Most of the ingredients that go into cookies can also be used for other, more practical uses, and they can still have their cookies.

I bet all the corporate welfare scum eat lobster and steak.

a reply to: macman

This may be true. I have seen folks load up their groceries bought with EBT into a new Escalade. It happens.

BUT....i have seen the little old lady who also keep only a coin purse with a couple bucks in change type in her PIN with a shaky and crooked finger. I have seen the mom wrestle with 3 kids while putting in her EBT PIN. There are individuals that we are talking about here....not just some abstract "them". Real, individual people.

And in a nation where individual rights are paramount, and must be respected to beat back the mob mentality prevalent in our culture, it is these individuals who matter. On their own, singular, individual basis.

So that thug who buys 6 whole lobsters with his EBT card....he will need to be dealt with a different way. But the rights of the individual are what have to be thought of first. You can't allow that thug with his $70k ride and bag full of lobsters become the avatar for "them".

a reply to: MystikMushroom

I agree that the EBT should cover approved items, but then people whine that we're being too controlling when "their" money. The problem is that it's not exactly their money. If they want to do whatever with it; they need to put themselves in a position where it is their money.

There are many people on food stamps who are completely capable of that with a little education or hard work or both.

The ones who aren't capable of it could still do a very respectable job of feeding themselves if they learned how to cook.

a reply to: ketsuko

Once again, not everyone has the ability to cook. I can go to the dollar store, buy an entire box of cookies for a dollar and it's food for an entire day. If I don't have the ability to cook, which if I'm living on the street I might not, or if I can't afford electricity to cook, those store bought cookies for a dollar is while unhealthy a great cheap option that requires no refrigeration or electricity.

a reply to: Aazadan

i hate that conservative talking point about how rich we are compared to the rest of the world.

we dont live in the rest of the world, we live here and are poor compared to our neighbors.

what do conservatives want? favelas like in brazil? according to conservatives youre not really poor unless you live in a shack made of cast of corrugated tin and pallet flats.

guess what, in this country you need a car to get to work, and a refrigerator to keep all your hungry man meals frozen.

oh, and why do the poor have such nice stuff? could it be predatory lending? like aarons, no credit check! get a room full of furniture at 40% interest rates! just a hundred dollars a month and a 4 year payment plan. phone companies that charge you an arm and a leg, but you get a new phone every year with a two year contract.

the poor cant manage money cause theyve never had any to manage! want to spur the economy, give a poor person a thousand dollars and watch it get spent. more often than not on bills. thats the one thing bush got right. give the poor the money and it will get spent. give the rich the money and they will hoard it.

These elitist vermin are all about control. It does not matter what it is just as long as they can control people and remind them thier bodies belong to the controllers.


If a person spends his food stamps on expensive steak that means he or she will have less to spend for the month. But they are still eating. So what is the problem ?

So this douche nozzle wants to punish people for being poor , as if poor people do not deserve to eat good food. He probably thinks food stamps should be spent on peanut butter and ramen noodles.

Im so sick of these a** holes passing laws against us off a whim simply because they dont like something

a reply to: DarthFazer

No, no, of course not. They should be free to spend the money they take from the tax payers on anything and everything and live it up while we scrimp and pinch pennies to feed ourselves.

a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

Well put!

In all of these cases, people are taking the >1% and making it sound like it is the 99%.

Flying Spaghetting Monster forbid any of these self-righteous individuals end up in a situation where they need help. Though maybe then they would gain some helpful perspective and some empathy.

Amazing how many freeloaders that complain about the poor getting anything are here on ATS everyday. Why are there so many freeloaders that do not want to pay taxes and have all day to whine in the ATS forums??? Freeloaders that claim to be business owners or have well paid SO's, yet all they do with their valuable time is whine that some poor slob bought a steak or lobster.

Strange that you have so much time on your hands that you can waste everyday here whining about the mistreatment of the rich and the moral depravity of those less fortunate.

To those Freeloaders that don't want to pay taxes and think it's so easy & great a life gaming the system, why are you working?

Maybe you know it's not easy to get a good job and you know that being poor is not steak & lobster every day, or could it be you just really need to state your disgust of the poor in a public forum?

originally posted by: vonclod
I bet all the corporate welfare scum eat lobster and steak.

Don't forget caviar

And children while drinking the blood of innocents.

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: DarthFazer

No, no, of course not. They should be free to spend the money they take from the tax payers on anything and everything and live it up while we scrimp and pinch pennies to feed ourselves.

You cant buy a flat screen TV with a EBT card

Or gas

Or a XBOX

Or drugs

Just food that is approved by the state.

BTW I drew food stamps once when I lost my job. I got $150.00 a month. That is hardly living it up.

I can by a cheap cut of "steak" that costs less per pound than hamburger meat, throw in a couple weeks worth of vegetable scraps like broccoli and cauliflower stalks, potato and carrot peelings, veggies that are starting to wilt and some seasoning and I have a cheap stew that can last for days.

You can do a lot with stir-fry meat and noodles and stir fry meat and potatoes.

As far as lobster goes, I can't think of why anyone would by it except for the reputation of lobster as being a food of the wealthy, (it's not) so they get it without thinking to try and make themselves feel better.

I can sleep like a baby knowing my taxes are feeding hungry people.

See how the conservative's never bitch and moan about trillions spent on killing brown people in the middle east or trillions spent on a fighter plane that does not work. But millions spent on SNAP programs is destroying America by thier logic.

Sociopaths

And despite the fact that the majority of recepients do work is a well known fact !!

a reply to: DarthFazer

Funny how that works. I have to agree. Corporations have gotten it good by removing jobs and quality from, and practicing greed the US.

The opinions I'm reading in this thread are ridiculous. The average that comes out of "your money" is about $10 a YEAR from tax payers. That works out to $0.02739 (notice the decimal point) per day. That is how much say you get over this topic. The whole "it's MY money they're spending" argument is pure BS.

Suck it up and move on. There are more important things to worry about than how someone spends their $125 a month.

originally posted by: Merinda
And despite the fact that the majority of recepients do work is a well known fact !!

It's also known that they can work the system.

A single mother in Pennsylvania who is working full-time at minimum wage can work the system and have enough disposable income after all her assistance programs to have more at hand than a family of four with a $65K/year income.

So, yes, she is working. The thing is that if she miscalculates, she loses a LOT in terms of income because she will lose her assistance in or more areas. Certainly, she loses more than she could make by going it alone.

However, at what point is it fair for her to be living better off the state than the people who have tax liability to help her realize that standard of living? And second, why should her assistance be all or nothing to the point where it is better for her to mediate herself and her potential to continue to accept all that state assistance to make her living rather than try to climb out of the pit toward full independence?

Well, I can at least answer the last question -- That's because it benefits politicians more to have a pool of voters who are eternally indebted to them for their living. If the single mother is eternally in fear of government taking away her living, she will always vote for the person who promises to never take it away, and she will sound like all of you who accuse those of us who don't want to continually subsidize this woman when we suggest that maybe she ought to be encouraged to find ways to support herself rather than spend her life in fear the government could take away her subsidies tomorrow.

After all, what will happen in places like California and Detroit when the dependent finally understand the hard way ... that the government actually doesn't have an endless supply of free money, that there is no "stash" that never runs out?