Trump Administration Wants To Decide What Food SNAP Recipients Will Get

originally posted by: moyeti
a reply to: Somethingsamiss

BTW, those people buying high end foodstuffs are making cash under the table. I have seen time and time again pulling up to the cashier with wads of cash in one hand pull out the Lonestar food card. Box their food, send it to them once a week and end the crazy.

We do something like this in Oklahoma called Packed Promise, but its a box of tons of healthy food once a month to every kid under 18 at the house.

a reply to: KTemplar

Doubt it, I know plenty of immigrants who have gotten multiple part time jobs with in weeks of getting a work authorization card.

If the guy you know got fired from his last job for selling drugs in the parking lot, I wouldn’t higher him at my business either, I bet if you owned a business you wouldn’t hire PLENTY of people who walked through the door, because not everyone is trust worthy.

Not 100% of humanity deserves a job, if you wouldnt higher them, why should someone else.

a reply to: liejunkie01

I don't think they'll be any less food consumed overall. The proposal will be healthier intake too. In itself a humanitarian gesture, and also better for their own personal production over a lifetime too. The genesis of the idea is to shrink the government and let the dollars reside in the private domain where they always spend more efficiently. To create incentive to be productive and to lessen fraud too. The dollars (mostly tax dollars from others) are freed up from being spent in/by government will be spent more efficiently in the private sector. Having a much greater churn, or multiplicative effect of changing to many hands, the private sector will actually have a boon and create more jobs. Which is the greater point to ultimately make more economic activity.

This isn't boxes of cheese, but foodstuffs. However using that as a red herring warrants analysis. Utilizing any surplus item that has been subsidized into being by tax dollars just makes the economy efficient. Efficiency allows resources and dollars to flow more freely to beneficial assets and purposes rather than overspending for a given item. Productivity increases and economic opportunity is given a chance. Ideally those subsidies would not exist in the first place. A temporary fix given to too many problems as permanent.

Being efficient in a given activity is by definition the opposite of stagnation. A society cannot spend its' way to success. Production and the adding of value is key. Human creativity thru intellect and/or toil is what drives prosperity.

a reply to: Butterfinger

That is so cool. Wish I had some growing up. Might have been a inch or so taller, more IQ ....

a reply to: fatkid

Companies SHOULD pay their staff a living wage...

But they don't.

People should not be so deathly afraid, and for good reason I might add, to quit jobs offered by employers who are not honourable and decent toward their staff...

But they are.

The government should not make scapegoats out of those caught between that rock, and that hard place, or for that matter, anyone caught between any kind of rock, or any other manner of hard place, no matter how described.

But they do.

Let me ask you something. Someone quits working for their BS employer. Great. Now they do not get to eat, because they did not just get made redundant, they quit. They did not get fired, they quit. They are now a quitter, and the system hates a quitter, makes things impossible for a quitter. And remember, the employee rarely goes looking to be employed by someone who is going to screw them over. They took that job because it was all there was for them, within reach of their means to actually get to in the morning, and get home from in the evening. They took that job because they cannot afford to move to where the other work is, and have no guarantee that employers elsewhere are any fairer.

So what, they are supposed to quit, and starve in protest? Its a powerful notion, but no responsible person is going to do that to their family, or suggest that its a logical step to take, risking suicide by starvation of all things, just because they cannot find a job which pays correctly.

Would it not be better to just damned well accept that a certain amount of unemployment is an unavoidable consequence of living in a capitalist society, and so make plans to allow people who have been unfortunately unable to find work, to live healthy, to be fed right, to have enough to drink and eat, data to learn from, energy to heat their homes and light them, not to mention a roof over their heads that is not as dangerous to them as being outside would be (which is the description of many of the substandard housing projects that people complain about)?

When Trump does something about the fraud and abuse of the Wall St. banksters, then I will support going after those that abuse the welfare system.

originally posted by: TrueBrit
a reply to: Anathros

My stance is no candy...

Agreed. Its the sugar that causes the real problems anyway, not the fat things have in them.

high end meats...

Ah, see, here you have stepped off the path of good sense. In order to feel healthy and energetic enough that working is actually POSSIBLE, it is necessary to put at least some high quality nutrition inside a person. Contrary to the hippies, fake doctors and fad diet advocates out there, meat and its contents are GOOD for you, not bad for you. Sugar (of which there is not very much in high quality meats), is the real killer. It causes way more trouble, and is responsible for a greater percentage of obesity and heart trouble in the developed world, than is the fat that people see in meat, and have a panic attack over (despite the fact that it is not only largely harmless, but actually quite good for you). You cannot cut good quality meat out of a diet, if you expect the person eating it to do what you expect of them...

We're actually I'm agreement.

I live a strict keto lifestyle. I keep my carbs below 30 grams pet day while taking in plenty of healthy fats. Yes, sugar is awful for anyone's overall health.

The high end meat I was referring to would be foods such as filet mignon, lobster, and crab legs. As a taxpayer you can't justify those purchases to me.

Not quoted but mentioned were incentives. I do belief that if you make a living on a welfare dependent status too convenient then the lazy will not work. I agree that jobs have to be available. I can only speak for my state but work isn't hard to find. Good people on the other hand are. The problem we run across during interviews is an unjustified sense of self-importance while being unqualified for the applied position. Some are lucky enough to be offered an entry level position and many still leave believing themselves too good for anything less than managment never knowing the position was offered because we saw potential to learn quickly and advance within the company.

It's a sad state of affairs all the way around but more so when it comes to those under under 35. They come in believing they're joining the board of directors. The worst though..and my absolute pet peeve is when a stranger walks up to me outside the building and asks this: "you're not hiring are you?" That's not the way to find a job people!

/rant

originally posted by: Aazadan

originally posted by: yuppa
Those are the few and far in between who are scamming it. And plain hamburger isnt top of the line meat. water is as exspensive as soda these days in stores. So where is the savings? In trumps mind thats where.

Water costs more than soda actually.

I know. i was shooting for lowest denominator. ^_^

originally posted by: fatkid
a reply to: KTemplar

Doubt it, I know plenty of immigrants who have gotten multiple part time jobs with in weeks of getting a work authorization card.

If the guy you know got fired from his last job for selling drugs in the parking lot, I wouldn’t higher him at my business either, I bet if you owned a business you wouldn’t hire PLENTY of people who walked through the door, because not everyone is trust worthy.

Not 100% of humanity deserves a job, if you wouldnt higher them, why should someone else.

I am talking about people I worked with, who were making slightly above minimum wage that had a Marketing Degree.

Who walks into businesses these days? Most applications are done online.

a reply to: Somethingsamiss

This is TWO things.
1) first and foremost it is a step toward getting folks who don't really need to be on the program off the program. If you are truly hungry( and I have been in the past) you'll pretty much eat whatever's in front of you. Even if it is reconstituted milk, and fruit out of a can. But, if you really aren't hungry, your going to find another way to get what you WANT to eat. This means getting a job, or if your criminally minded, well you understand. This is a simplified answer, but you get the gist of things.

2) Second is to curtail the purchase of prepared foods, and spending food stamps by trade, exchange etc.

A few years back the ONLY thing you could purchase that was premade was cereal. Everything else had to be fresh-meat, dried beans, fruit, vegetables, dairy products. A few years later they added things like boxed hamburger meals etc. By then it was all over, what had been a nutritious meal providing program became a " yeah ! we can use our EBT card at McDonalds, because Momma's too tired, or just plain lazy to cook", situation. To be honest I understand the concept of going to the fast food restaurant additions. There is a large group of children whose parents are in the program who don't have running water, or electricity for that matter. In effect can't actually cook. But, there were other ways of singling those families out, and providing them with a slightly different card that allowed them to purchase meals- on-the-go, rather than opting to let every card be usable at a fast food restaurant.

I can tell you from experience, yes, I was many years ago a food stamp recipient- My family ate better than most. I bought all fresh food- I like to cook, and had somewhere to do it. It was just myself and my child for about a year, sundays were baked Salmon, friday nights were steak night, we had roasts and veggies, and meatloaf, and always had fresh fruit, cheese, milk and veggies in the fridge. That's why I don't get why these recipients are complaining, other than just plain laziness.

As far as the UDA food packets- anyone in the system should be jumping with joy if they are anything like the ones from years past. Yes, the milk is reconstituted, but the cheese comes in a huge block of REAL cheese that tastes great. you also get pasta, dried or canned fruit and veggies. Even though its canned, it still has nutritional value. So don't knock it.

If folks in the system don't like what they are getting to eat, maybe I don't know they could find a job.

I actually don't see how this a terrible idea. Fill out a questionaire as to allergies, preferences, religious exclusions etc. . Give the option for delivery or pickup fulfillment through your local supermarket of choice. Fill the box with nutritionally balanced food tailored to your questionnaire. Done. You can supplement this with food banks and the like. Whether anyone wants to believe or not, there is rampant abuse in the EBT system as currently implemented. Leave it up the state as to how it would be executed with some broad, basic federal guidelines.

all those will work for food signs will be answered

come on down and help serve others and get food

a reply to: TrueBrit

You are right, we have become a reactive society, and are to the point where the only thing we can do is nothing.

The problem is the option you see is for a guy to quit his job. The other better option is for other people to start caring about what happens to one another and start holding the government and big business accountable, but it won’t happen, because we have been divided into groups and subsets and think that being different defines us as people.

We are caught up with instagram, Facebook, Twitter, tv, YouTube and it is only getting further and further away from us.

a reply to: airowineSailorcat


Good Lord, those people are so stupid, I couldn’t even finish watching that!

a reply to: Aazadan

Most food is cheaper than dog food.

Dog food costs money... steaks on food stamps do not. How do know this? I once watched a woman on food stamps buy steak for her dog because the stamps wouldn't pay for dog food. Of course, it wasn't 'reasonable' dog food... a 50 pound bag wasn't $2000.

Oh, and to one of your posts above... homeless people can't get food stamps. You have to have a regular address.

TheRedneck

The Trump administration is proposing a major shake-up in one of the country's most important "safety net" programs, the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, formerly known as food stamps.

Right people!

Because free GMO food is the very foundation of modern society!

originally posted by: Somethingsamiss
I hope this is the right spot for this. Sorry i don't know how to embed text.
www.npr.org...

The Trump administration is proposing a major shake-up in one of the country's most important "safety net" programs, the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, formerly known as food stamps. Under the proposal, most SNAP recipients would lose much of their ability to choose the food they buy with their SNAP benefits.

The proposal is included in the Trump administration budget request for fiscal year 2019. It would require approval from Congress.

Under the proposal, which was announced Monday, low-income Americans who receive at least $90 a month — just over 80 percent of all SNAP recipients — would get about half of their benefits in the form of a "USDA Foods package." The package was described in the budget as consisting of "shelf-stable milk, ready to eat cereals, pasta, peanut butter, beans and canned fruit and vegetables." The boxes would not include fresh fruits or vegetables.

[SNIPPED EXCESSIVE TEXT]

-----------------

Okay so i can understand where they are coming from, but... My first job when i was a kid was as a cashier for a high end grocery store. I always found it weird when people would come through buying stuff like Filet mignon or lobster tail. As i got older i started volunteering for a homeless outreach, i had to leave a few years ago due to belief differences (wasn't a fan of it becoming a cultish work camp for the so calles man of god in charge) but many of the residents received snap benefits. And honestly many of them abused it. They would trade their benefits for things like tobacco or use it to buy junk foods or soda. Then go to food banks and get the "real food".

I do think it needs to have some stipulations put on what can be bought and what can't. But this plan is crazy. They are taking the the potential nutritional value from the program. But take away the or limit the amount of junk that can be bought and make the consequences hasher for those that sell them for money or other goods. Educate people on the importance of nutrition. Also those that are capable of working help them find jobs and make it mandatory that they work so many hours per week.

Thats funny, I worked as a store manager for a Dollar Tree- pretty much the exact OPPOSITE of a "high end grocery store" lol...

Anyway, on a DAILY BASIS I had families roll through my store, loading up their shopping carts with frozen pizzas, sodas, chips, etc.. just about the worst possible food you could think of. The family members were all grossly obese, including children 5 years old and younger.

This was in Santa Rosa, California, and the majority of these families were of a particular ethnic background.

Regardless, these obese woman with 5 obese children in tow would roll up to my line, load up the check stand belt with their pizzas and sodas and chips, and then pay for $200 of junk food with food stamps. Keep in mind that the majority of the time when they opened their purses and wallets to pull out the SNAP card I could clearly see hundred dollar bills and a Mexico ID. They could have afforded the food on their own, but opted to have you and me pay for it.

Now don't get me wrong: I fully understand "more bang for your buck". The issue here is that these people are KILLING themselves and their family members with this crap. US Taxpayers are paying for their Diabetes, and THEN we are going to have to pay for their treatment, because you can bet that the US taxpayers are ALSO paying for their healthcare.

Should the food that people can buy with their food stamps be regulated? YES. If you ask for a dollar you don't have the right to complain when someone hands you four quarters.

originally posted by: burgerbuddy

OH SNAP!

lol.

lmao... genius.

originally posted by: Anathros


I agree that jobs have to be available. I can only speak for my state but work isn't hard to find.

Capitalism by its very nature speaks volumes though and says that there are more people than jobs these days though.
Supply and Demand.
Otherwise, wages would be rising and not stagnating like they have been for the past 30 years.