Food Stamp Use Up 1.44 million in Just One Month

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by beezzer

 

That's your wife? I am seriously sorry for you. Also, I believe she can speak for herself. Despite tradition, women are quite capable of handling themselves.

Also, too few people have too much. That's why food stamps were made necessary, because the people who had plenty kept it from the people who had too little. Capitalism and gluttony is a very bad mixture.

Dude, you have seen too many Scrooge McDuck cartoons. You honestly believe that people with more intentionally kept food away from those who had less in the US? In the last 100 years?

reply to post by beezzer

Are the people here; posting FOR more people on foodstamps?

Are you pro-entitlements?

Are you PRO bigger government?

That's an easy question. I'm glad you asked. I'm in support of the government either taking itself to task for allowing capitalists to exploit the system at the expense of others, or introduce communistic measures to ensure that at any one time, every single citizen who was born in America has all the materials needed to at least survive. Anything else is entirely up to them to procure. I'm not talking about cars or phones or computers or anything else. I'm talking about low-income housing, food, clothing, and every other basic necessity.

If you are going to project an image of prosperity and well-being, don't ignore the millions of homeless on the street. You may as well talking about your Swiss bank account while your foreclosure papers are on the table in full view. Either you are a compassionate, healthy, respectable nation that takes care of its own, or you're a cold-hearted capitalist society that kicks the sick and elderly while they're down and laughs.

You can't have it both ways. And once again! I don't understand why anyone is complaining about the food stamps. Seriously, if you care at ALL about making an informed bleeping decision, you will refer to this picture:



If you'll look closely, you'll see that those towers are composed of hundreds of little blocks like this:



If the 1.44 million reflects the steady rates of the yearly food stamp quota, then a total of approximately 17 million can be accounted for by the Bridge program. Less than half of that block right there, which is 100 million American dollars. Now look back up at the statue of liberty image.

If LESS THAN HALF of just ONE BLOCK accounts for the Bridge program, for the totality of this year, do you really think cutting the bridge program even puts a scratch on the national deficit, which is represented in that statue picture? Isolate a single tiny block in that picture, and cut it into 5 pieces. One of those pieces represents the food stamps. The rest can be blamed on everything else.

Seriously. Food stamps are not the problem. Get rid of the bridge cards completely and it will do next to NOTHING for the deficit. It's a drop of water in the bucket. You want to cut funding? Try the congressmen who sit around ho humming for two hours doing nothing but figuring out a way to look like they're doing something important while planning their next $1500-a-plate banquet where they can garner outrageous funds for private projects that got them into office to begin with.

And leave the poor people alone. They have enough problems without you lot aiming your misguided frustrations at them. A lot of them are out in the cold right now. A few dollars out of your pocket for a sandwich because they can't even purchase a coffee to keep warm isn't a whole lot to ask when you have a television, a bed, loved ones AND coffee to keep you company on a cold and blustery night. Meanwhile, alcoholics, veterans, single mothers with three kids and schizophrenic patients without Medicaid are freezing.

Find something better to argue about. Food stamps are the least of your concerns. That's not just to Beezzer, that's to everyone on this thread complaining because their extra change is going to a hungry family.

Originally posted by macman
reply to post by NarrowGate

 

That's super fantastic.
Thanks for sharing.

ya know, rather prove you can be a jerk, you could have offered assistance
NG is just trying to understand how to read/interpret the re-quotes ... some noobs do need help and that's the whole point here.

even 18-30yrs olds with a college degree don't necessary know you have to plug in a corded hand tool. how would you expect them to adapt to this new market ??

sure, they can, they should, but do they really even know how ??

reply to post by Honor93


I do appreciate the time and effort you put into that.

I already know it though, what happened what Macman thought me and afterinfinity were the same person, and decided to be deceptive or funny, idk which one, by CHANGING my name at the top of the quote to afterinfinity, at which point when I RE QUOTED his quote, AfterInfinity assumed I was the one responsible for the deception.

This is only part of the reason for my new signature

I was saying that in reference to the people that were commenting about Christianity, not pushing my beliefs though (not saying you said that, just clarifying).

Originally posted by macman
reply to post by sirhumperdink

 

When would you like to take your drug test?

Oh, the other thing is that you have to purchase a new firearm, because cops aren't cheap and you need to protect yourself.

drugs and a new firearm ???
just WHAT are you promoting here ?

reply to post by NarrowGate


Anyone who reads that will have gotten the point.

reply to post by beezzer

now hold on there Beez, your examples are disproving your theory.

When elctricity was discovered, those in the steam industry didn't curl up and die.

They adjusted.
They adapted.
They over-came.

When VCR's became obsolete, did people fight to ban the DVD player so people could still make VCR's?

People need to adjust. They need to think. But with mama-government with her ready-made teat, why bother?

steamboats do NOT transport goods any longer and haven't for quite some time.
did we adapt, sure but how many of those who were steamers, retired early ??

VCRs are only obsolete to those who are toooooo fond of the new technology.
ppl do adjust, daily ... why should they be forced to sacrifice themselves even more ?

the government teat does not provide sustenance, it provides assistance.
true, far too many ppl are in a position to NEED assistance but how is that any good reason to remove the assistance ??

Originally posted by NavyDoc

Originally posted by Honor93
Parenting is NOT "doing nothing" ... and your aggressive instance to the opposite is rather disturbing.

contrary to your opinion, i don't believe there is any service in existence that is more important, more valuable or more contributory to a stable society than good parents and for that reason alone, they should be provided food whether they perform additional labor for it or not.

anyone who thinks parenting isn't laborious has never been one.

edit on 11-12-2012 by Honor93 because: add txt

Well, coming from a guy who did not even know there were federal firefighters...

I have kids, it is hard work, and I never imagined getting a paycheck for taking care of my own kids. Taking care of your kids is not service to the country or the state--it is a service to THEM, the children, and if the community benefits from well raised kids, that is a good thing too. But then, you didn't know there were federal firefighters, so there is a lot you assume but get wrong.

Anyone who equates raising children to service to the state sounds like a creepy Orwellian Marxist to me. "Raise your children! For the glory of the mother land!"

Federal firefighters do not fight the fire down the block, nor do they fight the fires in the empty lot next to mine.
Federal firefighters ONLY respond to forest fires and government property
(now there's a conundrum - federal property)

funny thing about this is ... we never voted for or against that Federal Force, either.

raise your children for the GLORY ??? wow, that really does seem Marxist or some "ist" i wouldn't want to be part of, that's for sure.

how 'bout, raise the children for our FUTURE ?
whatever the investment.

Originally posted by beezzer

Originally posted by Honor93

Originally posted by beezzer
The progressives on this site and this thread see government as a solution to all our problems.

The rest of us see government as the cause of all these problems.

while this is true and i agree with the points, it does nothing to feed those who are hungry.
atm, that is the ONLY problem we are discussing (or are supposed to be)

The government created the problem. Then they come in with a solution (foodstamps) to the problem that they created.

i'm not disputing the fact that government created the problem, so, why aren't you advocating for eliminating government ??
government is the problem right ??

or is it just easier to demean the little guys ?
aren't they wearing enough corporate/gubment turd already ?

Originally posted by butcherguy
Well we have religion, hand grenades and invitations to mods on the last two pages.

Interesting thread, eh?

Way too many people on food stamps.

Did I ever tell you the story about the guy that owns corner grocery stores in the city?
He pays people 50 cents on the dollar to use their EBT cards. They hand him the card and give him the pin. He gives them cash.

He drives a stretch cargo van to the suburbs, and goes to a discount grocery chain.
He buys groceries there with the other people's EBT cards.
Then he drives the van full of groceries back to the city and stocks his grocery store.
He bought his stock for 50 cents on the dollar at a discount grocery.
He marks the prices up above what the discount chain actually charges by a significant amount.
Then he sells those groceries to other people, a lot of them using EBT cards to pay for them.

How do you like that? He is not a poor man, food stamps are making sure of that.

I watched it happen.

which really isn't all that different from my illegal immigrant neighbor who sells drugs for a similar deal (buyers of the drugs, trade with groceries).
it happens almost daily.
here is someone who should have no access to any entitlements or govt assistance, yet, they do AND they abuse the privilege.

the part that gets my goat is that everyone is screaming NONE for Anyone rather fix the fraud. what is that about anyway ?

one of our local discount grocers was recently busted and closed for doing what you describe above.
only difference was he'd buy merch for the shelves with the EBT credits, then sell it at equal to or greater than the retail/convenience store down the street.

someone got "discounts" but it sure wasn't the majority of his customers.

then of course, there's my x-boss who runs an adult toy shop, fudges her books and qualified to get TANF assistance where i can't even qualify for basic food stamps.
i don't understand how anyone can call this an entitlement ??? how.

reply to post by Honor93




In his defense, he said drug test not drugs.

I don't see what a police force has to do with a firearm. Police are a reactionary force. I know 2 people that have found themselves in grave need of a firearm in "civilian" life. One got a bullet in the head. The other, who had a firearm, did not get hit thank the Lord Jesus Christ. The perpetrator actually shot himself one time as well. Had he not had his weapon, he would likely be in a morgue or wheelchair.

How does this relate to welfare? I hope that is obvious, but I can explain if anyone is having problems grasping the concept due to misconceptions propagated by our schools and media.

Originally posted by Honor93

Originally posted by NavyDoc

Originally posted by Honor93
Parenting is NOT "doing nothing" ... and your aggressive instance to the opposite is rather disturbing.

contrary to your opinion, i don't believe there is any service in existence that is more important, more valuable or more contributory to a stable society than good parents and for that reason alone, they should be provided food whether they perform additional labor for it or not.

anyone who thinks parenting isn't laborious has never been one.

edit on 11-12-2012 by Honor93 because: add txt

Well, coming from a guy who did not even know there were federal firefighters...

I have kids, it is hard work, and I never imagined getting a paycheck for taking care of my own kids. Taking care of your kids is not service to the country or the state--it is a service to THEM, the children, and if the community benefits from well raised kids, that is a good thing too. But then, you didn't know there were federal firefighters, so there is a lot you assume but get wrong.

Anyone who equates raising children to service to the state sounds like a creepy Orwellian Marxist to me. "Raise your children! For the glory of the mother land!"

Federal firefighters do not fight the fire down the block, nor do they fight the fires in the empty lot next to mine.
Federal firefighters ONLY respond to forest fires and government property
(now there's a conundrum - federal property)

funny thing about this is ... we never voted for or against that Federal Force, either.

raise your children for the GLORY ??? wow, that really does seem Marxist or some "ist" i wouldn't want to be part of, that's for sure.

how 'bout, raise the children for our FUTURE ?
whatever the investment.

You didn't talk about "down the block" you said they do not exist. They do.

Raising children for the state, that is what you implied by saying that parenting was a community service. I raise my kids to be independent, educated, self-reliant, and honest adults.

reply to post by Honor93

steamboats do NOT transport goods any longer and haven't for quite some time.

Guess what drives the turbines that turn the propshaft on a nuclear submarine... or a nuclear powered aircraft carrier?

If you said steam.... you got it right.

reply to post by Honor93

the part that gets my goat is that everyone is screaming NONE for Anyone rather fix the fraud. what is that about anyway ?

I am not screaming for none, but the problem is much biggervthan a lot would like to admit.

Take the guy I gave as an example. I know that he does it and has been doing it for years. I do not live in the city. I do not shop in his stores. Yet, I know that he is doing it. Are you going to tell me that the police DON'T know that he's doing it?

The whole effing system is crooked.

reply to post by NavyDoc

you are quite welcome to your misinterpretations.
i am no longer participating in your nonsense.

you have never shown or proven how we NEED Federal firefighters.
i already clarified that WE the People didn't have a choice in the matter.
[you know, it was dictated by the dictator of the day ]
you seem to be ok with it, so why pick on the hungry ?

commodities do not exist without sales or a market in which to sell or trade them.
commodities are traded on the exchange, not food stamps.

since you don't know the difference, there really is no point in derailing the topic for your sole benefit.

my labor has become a commodity without my consent and of that, i will always disapprove.
my personal labor is not for anyone to trade but me ... the govt can kiss my Irish patuttie.
[hence, the exact reason why "paychecks" are for those not willing to pay themselves]

so, with your "unsourced" definition ... what about a food stamp subsidy is "raw material" or "a valuable thing" ??
heck, cash has no intrinsic value, why would a govt promise ?
(ie ... food stamp allotment)

the government's word isn't even good enough to support (increase the value of) the current cash/currency scheme it's running. why would you think an imaginary promise like a "food stamp allotment" has equal value to personal labor ??

so, if i'm willing to trade my unicorn for your ability to fix my car (supposedly) ... that unicorn is the equivalent value of "funds"??
nvm, i need to re-phrase that question cause imaginary is still imaginary (unicorn vs "funds")

for the last time, FS allotments can not be commodities, period.
they are not sold or demanded BY the market, ever.

then again, coming from the man who recommends everyone just take their poison and quit whining, what else should one expect ?

Originally posted by Honor93
reply to post by NavyDoc

 

you are quite welcome to your misinterpretations.
i am no longer participating in your nonsense.

you have never shown or proven how we NEED Federal firefighters.
i already clarified that WE the People didn't have a choice in the matter.
[you know, it was dictated by the dictator of the day

]
you seem to be ok with it, so why pick on the hungry ?

commodities do not exist without sales or a market in which to sell or trade them.
commodities are traded on the exchange, not food stamps.

since you don't know the difference, there really is no point in derailing the topic for your sole benefit.

my labor has become a commodity without my consent and of that, i will always disapprove.
my personal labor is not for anyone to trade but me ... the govt can kiss my Irish patuttie.
[hence, the exact reason why "paychecks" are for those not willing to pay themselves]

so, with your "unsourced" definition ... what about a food stamp subsidy is "raw material" or "a valuable thing" ??
heck, cash has no intrinsic value, why would a govt promise ?
(ie ... food stamp allotment)

the government's word isn't even good enough to support (increase the value of) the current cash/currency scheme it's running. why would you think an imaginary promise like a "food stamp allotment" has equal value to personal labor ??

so, if i'm willing to trade my unicorn for your ability to fix my car (supposedly) ... that unicorn is the equivalent value of "funds"??
nvm, i need to re-phrase that question cause imaginary is still imaginary (unicorn vs "funds")

for the last time, FS allotments can not be commodities, period.
they are not sold or demanded BY the market, ever.

then again, coming from the man who recommends everyone just take their poison and quit whining, what else should one expect ?

What can I say? THe definition of commodity was clearly defined for you and it does not say that in order to be a commodity it has to be traded, just wanted. If you want to make up your own definitions, go ahead, but that does not change the definitions. Of course one could say that foodstamps are indeed traded--for votes.

No one said that we needed federal firefighters, you just said that they did not exist. I proved you wrong yet again...it seems to be a common pattern with you. I know that you like making stuff up of what was said when you get caught saying something that was not true, but it gets old after a while.

You say that your labor cannot be taken form you without your consent, but when you demand that someone's taxes go to subsidizing someone else, that is exactly what you are endorsing.

Coming from someone who cannot tell the difference between medicine and poison, and cannot tell the difference between "I disagree with your premise of it being harmful" and "take your poison and quit whining" as well as other illogical and unfounded accusations, what does one expect? Since you make # up on the fly, we get no real conssitency or logic. Unlike you, I believe the government should not force anyone to do anything, be it take a vaccine or support someone else financially. You want government to force people to behave in ways you approve of, but not in others. My stance is more consistent. You like government force, just in areas you approve of.

reply to post by beezzer

then i would suspect that we don't view those two words quite the same when they appear next to one another.

you interpret it as responsibility TO self.
and for the younger generation, this is acceptable.

here is why i see it differently.
once you get to be an older fart (like some of us) and, you have years of BEING responsible to yourself, then and only then do you discover that acting "personally responsible" is being responsible for your environment (all of it)

for 3 very simple reasons
(we've already established that i'm not religious, so please avoid the temptation)

1. treat others as you wish to be treated.
2. Earthly stewardship (includes all creatures) / honor thy mother (and her inhabitants)
3. until you learn personal responsibility, you cannot be personally responsible for anyone, including yourself.

hopefully, you do not require examples.

until a person experiences personal responsibility, they can not be personally responsible.
there is no logical extension that would make is so, there is no majic wand or secret age ... and ... there isn't any govt legislation that could possibly succeed.

that is why i chuckle when i hear those two words from those who have yet to learn it.

Originally posted by NavyDoc
reply to post by Honor93

 

Again, you are being stupid. I used "firefighters" as an example of an individual employed by the government. You said that there were no federal firefighters. I showed you that, in fact, there were. You are trying to weasel out of your stupid, ignorant, comments.

well, it seems your inability to be civil is a character flaw ... sooooo ... sticks and stones friend ... name-calling is for losers

Ugh...I am at my wits end....

I have spent a few hours arguing with my former classmates on facebook...yeah i know...the evilseed. I could not get them to understand....I could not get them to realize this is just more control...just more pain...

They think it is wonderful that the Gov is feeding people...and on the outside..i see their point...but I am not there...I have went beyond that and studied it deeper. I tried to teach them there is more at stake here

I got them to watch a few videos....or...they said they did...here...





I'm cool...I wanted to try and show my wayward hillbilly friends that the state is not their friend....

I am a child of the Appalachian Mountains....I am a mountaineer. I grew up under the mantra of the West Virginia Creed...."Montani Semper Liberi"....Mountaineers are always free....and that by god is how I live and I made a point to poke them in the nose with that....we are not Floridians...we are not Nebraskans....we are damn Mountaineers...and we should be f'ing proud of that and live accordingly.....

Originally posted by NavyDoc

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by beezzer

 

That's your wife? I am seriously sorry for you. Also, I believe she can speak for herself. Despite tradition, women are quite capable of handling themselves.

Also, too few people have too much. That's why food stamps were made necessary, because the people who had plenty kept it from the people who had too little. Capitalism and gluttony is a very bad mixture.

Dude, you have seen too many Scrooge McDuck cartoons. You honestly believe that people with more intentionally kept food away from those who had less in the US? In the last 100 years?

ummm, ABSOLUTELY and as recently as 1974.

here, i'll post it again in case you or others missed it ...

want some truth ?? read this
[if you dis the souce, fine, find another, the truth is reported by those who know, on both sides]

www.downsizinggovernment.org...
The USDA’s food subsidy programs developed out of the need to dispose of farm production deemed surplus under commodity price support programs.
- snip -
Farm and food subsidy programs provide both rural and urban legislators reasons to vote for increased USDA funding.
- snip -
[color=amber]The solution is to repeal both farm and food subsidies, and allow open market competition to cut food prices for all families.

now, when ppl are hungry, there is no such thing as a surplus of food, period.

and, in case you missed the 70s, some of us endured food rations, severe gas shortages and a persistent recession with tax rates over 70% ... seriously.