It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


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

page: 40
<< 37  38  39    41  42  43 >>

log in


posted on Apr, 8 2015 @ 10:39 PM
a reply to: JohnFisher

buying fancy food on stamps is abusing it

More like they are abusing themselves. If those people have no other income and they buy expensive food on food stamp then they will starve for weeks.

posted on Apr, 8 2015 @ 10:41 PM

originally posted by: Deaf Alien
a reply to: Xtrozero

LOL I don't know if you were being humorous or serious.

Joking except for that dirt is most likely better for you part...

edit on 8-4-2015 by Xtrozero because: (no reason given)

posted on Apr, 8 2015 @ 10:43 PM

originally posted by: Deaf Alien

That is what he claimed. Where are those people that are abusing the system? There are few people who do that. They will be caught anyway. We don't need to worry about that.

Well we both can agree he is an idiot...

posted on Apr, 8 2015 @ 10:57 PM

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
$2.46 a year. That is what is being quibbled over here. Ironically, the amount of money you would save from all those deadbeats buying lobsters wouldn't be enough to buy even a frozen lobster tail.

Ok the guy is a total tool to suggest steak and lobster...I think we all can agree on that, and so the debate has progressed...

I am as frothing at the mouth libertarian as you can get. Like i said...get rid of the entire entitlement system if you wish...we will figure it out one way or another. But if we are going to send money to fund warlords in Africa and the Middle East, can we not at least spend $2.46 a year to try to keep starvation from happening at home? might get abused by some. But its only $2.46 a year....i lose that in my sofa. Heck, if it'd make you feel any more "whole" financially, I'd send you a money order for $2.46 to cover 2015.


Government Pensions $1.2 trillion
Government Health Care + $1.4 trillion
Government Education + $0.9 trillion
National Defense + $0.8 trillion
Government Welfare + $0.5 trillion
All Other Spending + $1.4 trillion
Total Government Spending $6.2 trillion

Washington Times

Americans spend $80 billion each year financing food stamps for the poor, but the country has no idea where or how the money is spent.

Food stamps can be spent on goods ranging from candy to steak and are accepted at retailers from gas stations that primarily sell potato chips to fried-chicken restaurants. And as the amount spent on food stamps has more than doubled in recent years, the amount of food stamps laundered into cash has increased dramatically, government statistics show.

But the government won’t say which stores are doing the most business in food stamps, and even it doesn't know what kinds of food those taxpayer dollars buy.

edit on 8-4-2015 by Xtrozero because: (no reason given)

posted on Apr, 8 2015 @ 11:45 PM

originally posted by: Xtrozero
What the hell does that mean? As an individual what commercial capability did I have, or you have?

Well, for one you have the ability to offer your labor to a corporation. Lots of people offering their labor in a particular area attracts business. Reservations are sparsely populated even by US standards and every one I've ever been to has been in the middle of nowhere. Not exactly prime land for a business to set up.

Thanks for proving my point that people will live the lowest level if free living (no matter how crappy it is) is offered...

I rest my case on your point.

You don't think they try to improve? You make 200k/year, you should be quite comfortable. Just because you make that type of money have you decided to stop earning more? Free accommodations don't cause people to sit in content suffering, it instead causes people to try and improve themselves without having to worry about basic existence. If you want a real world example of this look at Norway, their welfare programs let people live at a fairly basic level with no work. Yet, despite that people go out and work, they goto school, and they better themselves. Regardless of the conditions of the starting point it is human nature to want more.

Ah..the silver spoon theory... I think my spoon was make of wood...

How is that the silver spoon theory? If you look at economic movement, the middle class has drastically shrunk. It's not because more people are becoming rich. Rather it's because more people are becoming poor. The relative purchasing power of Americans has been on a downward trend now for 45 years and every year it hits a new low. $50,000 today the current median wage has the same purchasing power as minimum wage in 1956.

Upward mobility is gone, we're in a race to the bottom.

Why do I make 200k a year and I didn't complete my BA until 30 years after high school?

Are you willing to move anywhere for the job? Sounds like your not due to you suggest that you live in a high risk area.

Very willing to move. But I'm not willing to go into massive debt to finish schooling, instead I can attend less expensive university and save a lot of money long term.

As for why you make 200k, that's easy. Someone decided to pay you that much.

There is no thing as luck... Only the ignorant think that there is...

Only the ignorant fail to recognize the lucky breaks they got in life. You didn't get to where you are on your own. You got the right teachers, someone thought your degree was worth something, you were taught the right things in class, you guessed the right answer on a test, the right customer walked into your store on the right day. Even something as simple as that near miss traffic accident that would have screwed you up financially and left you unable to get to work was averted or you got really sick one week instead of another week. It takes a lot of luck to be successful.

Luck is actually having all the needed requirements to get your feet in the door, then it is all skill and capabilities.

Really? I've been fired from jobs for being too capable. Completely serious here, I worked too fast and they ran out of stuff for me to do. Capabilities have little to do with success. As you yourself admit, the people you manage are all more capable than you. So why are you the one on top?

I manage about 40 people, I cut no one a break, I treat all the same, but some make it to management...

You've never been easier on someone you like in a review, or harder on someone you don't like? Maybe the people you like are the better workers? Or maybe it's your bias that makes you see things that way.

Most of what you talk about start life with poor life choices and end life with poor life can not get ahead with poor life is hard already when you make the right choices...

That's the funny thing about probabilities. You can make the wrong choice and still have it work out some percentage of the time. Similarly, you can make the right choice and not have it work out. People can do everything right and go nowhere in life, they can also do everything wrong and go somewhere in life. Again, that just comes down to luck.

This is typically called the young that are low skill and under educated... As you gain skill/education you should do better...

Management to worker isn't a 1:1 ratio. You manage 40 people I think you said? So it's a 40:1 ratio for your job to others. That means only 1 in 40 can make it to your position. If three people do everything right to get to your job, two of them will fail and end up where they are.

Management is a pyramid structure, the further up you go the fewer jobs there are. This means that every level will have over skilled and over educated people in it that simply can't move up. Why shouldn't those who can't move up due to mathematical impossibilities still have some comfort in their lives?

posted on Apr, 8 2015 @ 11:50 PM
a reply to: Xtrozero

They know precisely what is bought. I would be very surprised if they couldn't pull that data. Then I would want to slap the database designer who didn't include that very basic query ability. They should know on multiple levels. First the store should know what items are being paid for with what payment methods. Second the payment processor should know what items they're paying for. Third spikes of EBT activity should correlate to higher quantities of specific goods being sold which both the inventory managers at the store, and the product suppliers would be able to detect.

posted on Apr, 9 2015 @ 06:51 AM
I know this isn't directly related to the thread but a lot of people on this thread know about it as it came up here so figured I'd say for everyone that might be wondering.

My first day went great, the job is definitely a keeper. So my situation looks to be on it's way to being stable. I'm really glad I got this job when I did.

The fun thing is when I started posting in this thread I was getting desperate and considering applying for SNAP again. Then in the middle of the thread I got a job offer, and now I'm working again

This has been one heck of a roller coaster lol.

posted on Apr, 9 2015 @ 07:17 AM

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: BuzzyWigs

It would be easier to put stamps on the few items not approved. Food stamps are not YOUR money, it's someone else's money. It should be treated as such.

If you don't have money for food and I take you out to dinner, do you order the most expensive item on the menu, or keep it simple?

I always look for the cheaper items, always. I am not asking others to act in a manner I wouldn't act. If I ordered lobster I would feel like a complete prick, rightfully so.

This whole "your money" thing is a joke. Should I have been crying about the quality of education for the children of patents earning $80k/yr being too high, because for years I was paying a disproportionate share of the bill? It was more of my money they were spending than their own.

Not to mention, there are FAR more wasteful things "our money" is being spent on.

I guess the thought process is, "buy cheap, unhealthy food, so that you can be sickly, lethargic, less likely to start producing your own income, more likely to have higher medical bills, etc."

Yes, the are people who abuse the system, but why target WHAT they buy with the money, when the targeting isn't about health - it's about control. If people gave a damn about their money being wasted, even if they truly believed this drop in the bucket was the best target, why not be concerned with the dollar amount allotted? That way, if they spend wastefully, or shop foolishly, they can run out of money faster and go hungry longer. At least there enough of our money left to pay private armies decent wages.

posted on Apr, 9 2015 @ 08:00 AM
a reply to: Aazadan

There is a rather large portion of HUD residents who are not interested in bettering themselves, not interested in getting a job and not interested in helping their children improve on their lot in life.

I can say this because I spent 3 months interviewing and interacting with people at a HUD community. There were those who were borderline desperate to escape those circumstances, but there was a larger segment who were perfectly content to sit on their butts all day and draw SSI, SNAP and HUD benefits.

BTW, HUD (unless it has changed in the last 2 years) pays all but $25 for an all utilities paid apartment in the community I worked at. The crap apartments were charging the govt over $900 and charging the residents $25. Most of the full-time residents there also drew social security, even though they were as young as their 20s. Now I know where my FICA is going and why there wont be any for me when I retire.

So...when I state that recipients of govt welfare should have to take a drug test, you could say that comes from experience.

So far no one has really explained why a drug user or addict should be entitled to collecting welfare. Or if they did, I certainly missed it.

edit on 9-4-2015 by bbracken677 because: (no reason given)

posted on Apr, 9 2015 @ 08:47 AM
a reply to: Puppylove

Do you have stats to back this?

posted on Apr, 9 2015 @ 08:51 AM
a reply to: Aazadan

Yes, car insurance is voluntary. Purchasing a car is an action. The law requiring one to have car insurance is predicated by operating a vehicle on public streets.

And I have yet to receive close to what I pay into on taxes for many many many years now.

posted on Apr, 9 2015 @ 08:52 AM
a reply to: daskakik

Yes, this "social contract" you speak of.

Can I see this document?

Also, you do realize that I am for States rights. State taxes, State initiated programs fall within the confines of the Countries construction.

posted on Apr, 9 2015 @ 08:53 AM
The food stamp people should get the Beef producers on their side, I am very sure they have more clout over politicians

posted on Apr, 9 2015 @ 08:55 AM
a reply to: BuzzyWigs

What does me having or not having children have to do with relying on the Govt to take from some to give to others.

posted on Apr, 9 2015 @ 08:56 AM
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

It is the principle of the matters.

You of all people should know that.

posted on Apr, 9 2015 @ 08:59 AM
a reply to: BuzzyWigs

$50k was an example.

My income is higher than that.

Why do you.....strike that, how do you get off on telling others how they should spend the money they earned? Yet, have a stink about when the Govt restricts the spending of people receiving taxpayer funds.

posted on Apr, 9 2015 @ 09:15 AM

originally posted by: macman
Yes, this "social contract" you speak of.

Can I see this document?

A social contract is an unwritten agreement but I'm sure you have signed more than one document that establishes/confirms that you are a citizen of the US.

Also, you do realize that I am for States rights. State taxes, State initiated programs fall within the confines of the Countries construction.

The guys with the gun at your head, the same ones taking your money, disagree and the states agree with them. The cut they get probably has something to do with that.

posted on Apr, 9 2015 @ 09:24 AM
a reply to: daskakik

Still waiting on seeing that contract you speak of.

posted on Apr, 9 2015 @ 09:25 AM
a reply to: macman

Back what? I'm lost...

posted on Apr, 9 2015 @ 09:28 AM
a reply to: macman

I already said it is an unwritten agreement.

It really doesn't matter because you are bound by the laws of the US. Public assistance laws are included in that body of laws. What about that don't you understand?

edit on 9-4-2015 by daskakik because: (no reason given)

new topics

top topics

<< 37  38  39    41  42  43 >>

log in