No food stamps for people convicted of violent crimes

page: 1
34
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
+26 more 
posted on May, 25 2013 @ 11:51 AM
link   

On Wednesday, the 2013 Senate Farm Bill was amended by to make those convicted of certain violent crimes ineligible for SNAP (Supplementary Nutrition Assistance Program) benefits, popularly known as food stamps. The amendment was passed by unanimous consent, meaning that neither Republicans nor Democrats objected to the bill.


tv.msnbc.com...

This seems as very bad idea to me. Most criminals start because they have no money to live. This will only make things worse and is likely to make somebody who made something stupid when being young turn back to crime after getting out after the jail punishment. After jail it is not easy to find a job and the need for staying alive might send lots of people back to the negative path. I do not see any benefits in this one... Just makes restarting one´s life and crime even worse.
edit on 25-5-2013 by Cabin because: (no reason given)



+36 more 
posted on May, 25 2013 @ 11:56 AM
link   
So they are going to cut off basic food assistance, among already desperate people, to the MOST violent among the desperate. ....and who thought this was a good idea??

It's almost as if they want to see how bad they can make this summer by setting up conditions for maximum unrest and rage among the people. Bad Bad ideas from simple minded fools, IMO.



posted on May, 25 2013 @ 12:02 PM
link   
Finally, the msm begins to acknowledge that the "Farm Bill" Is all about welfare food to the masses.

As far as no FS for the violent criminals, well...

My taxes have soared 400% this year and I was told that next year they will be even higher.

I realize that no matter what becomes of this decision, it will not lower my taxes nor help the economy, food prices or the number of people on FS.

I suppose that they need to open up more allotments for all the incoming Mexican workers/dependents.

It is one thing to come here to work, it is another to begin popping out babies that will end up on the welfare rolls. For the workers who agree to minimum wage jobs, they will have to supplement their income for their families with FS.

Although I agree with this, and furthermore think that all welfare recipients should be drug tested with a no tolerance policy for life, it will probably end up not passing.

I also think that anyone is entitled to a mistake or the right decision in certain circumstances, but when a woman has an abortion she should also have her tubes tied. If in the future she wants to have a baby she can shell out the $$$$$ to have it reversed.

Perhaps all applicants to the welfare rolls should have to get a vasectomy or tubaligation first. All incoming foreign workers as well.



posted on May, 25 2013 @ 12:04 PM
link   
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 


Poor criminals. They just may have to go to work if they want to eat.


+2 more 
posted on May, 25 2013 @ 12:04 PM
link   
well, food and nutrition, water.. basic human rights.. take these away from someone and how do you expect them to turn out?

i think this is just another example of how the new society is going to squeeze all the 'undesirables' out

..never mind all those psychopaths in washington with the drone programs, etc..


Poor criminals. They just may have to go to work if they want to eat.

yeah, what was i just saying about 'washington'
edit on 25-5-2013 by UNIT76 because: hindsight is 20/20



posted on May, 25 2013 @ 12:08 PM
link   
reply to post by antar
 


I think I agree with a lot of your feelings and it's enraging to see a high % of some counties right in this area lined up at the Food Stamp/Family Services offices like it's the entertainment of the town or something. Economic depression does that though.....

There are certainly programs I would like to see reformed. They need to back off SNAP though. They REALLY REALLY do, IMO. We have high unemployment (as high as 30+% among some segments of young adults) and we have desperation with homelessness at record levels and prospects for this getting better being a distant thing in most folk's lives.

What we are missing for open warfare in our streets and a body count at the end of each day is TRUE hunger. Not the rumble of wanting more ding dongs while playing the latest Xbox....but honest to God, gut churning hunger.

I'm all for seeing the food distribution programs reformed at some future point ...but while we're in some of the worst economic times in living American history...likely isn't the best time for it. Let's also keep in mind, the Pentagon request for money came just under 700 Billion for 2013. By 2017, ALL food assistance programs combined are estimate to total around 100 Billion. It's pennies on the dollars for what any civilized nation ought to have for a baseline min, IMO.



posted on May, 25 2013 @ 12:18 PM
link   
reply to post by antar
 


I agree. I also think that single mothers who apply for SNAP or welfare should have to give the names of their babie's fathers as well as any contact information so they can be contacted and forced to provide for their children.
edit on 5-25-2013 by groingrinder because: Edited for grammar and punctuation.



posted on May, 25 2013 @ 12:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by groingrinder
reply to post by antar
 


I agree. I also think that single mothers who apply for SNAP or welfare should have to give the names of their babie's fathers as well as any contact information so they can be contacted and forced to provide for their children.
edit on 5-25-2013 by groingrinder because: Edited for grammar and punctuation.


If she knows who is. If he is in the country.



posted on May, 25 2013 @ 12:34 PM
link   
In India it is generations of beggars in the streets, parents are known to mutilate a child to help make them more pathetic to the would be donator.

A hard choice to pass up the needy, but in all reality giving to them only stands to create more cruelty and poverty based crime.

Children forced to go out and beg or suffer the consequences.

It is an endless cycle seemingly, but is it really?

Is poverty and hunger in any country avoidable with close to 8 billion people on the planet and resources through inflation less attainable?

How many generations of welfare parasites have we seen in the US? How many more will there be if the welfare rolls end? Would we see a return to a simpler time once it does happen? Will family farms once again become the back bone of America? Will food and survival trump unnecessary electronics and entertainment?

Will the jaded generation of entitlement change their course and learn to reflect a less cynical view of others with more tolerance and compassion or will they simply vanish because if there is noone to hand out, or to accept handouts, then who will survive?

Charity is sometimes not what it has become known to be, sometimes it means being given the chance to learn to survive even in the midst of great challenge.


edit on 25-5-2013 by antar because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 25 2013 @ 12:38 PM
link   
reply to post by groingrinder
 


I had to get welfare for a month after my ex left the home, I said that I did not want to give my sons fathers name because it was unsafe to do so. They did not question it.



posted on May, 25 2013 @ 12:50 PM
link   
I would rather see mandatory drug testing for recipients. I have personally seen people go to the supermarket and trade their snap benifits for cash. The benefits are traded for .50 on the dollar. Someone who doesn't need the help is getting groceries at half price and the other person is geting cash for their habit while their kids are going hungry. That just doesn't sit right with me. SNAP is supposed to help families afford healthy food in a time of financial hardship, not for a crackhead to get high.



posted on May, 25 2013 @ 12:56 PM
link   
reply to post by groingrinder
 


And if the father refuses? He may already be paying child support which may not be enough to help with groceries for a whole month. Why should children go hungry if their parents have hit hard times, and daddy can't pay up. There is a sound reason for the SNAP program. If you aren't worried about where your next meal is coming from, you can focus on getting yourself into a better financial situation,and a child should be able to focus at school, not be distracted all day by an empty tummy. The program just needs to address situations where the benefits are not being used for their intended purpose.
edit on 5/25/2013 by blivey because: foggy morning brain



posted on May, 25 2013 @ 12:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
reply to post by antar
 


I think I agree with a lot of your feelings and it's enraging to see a high % of some counties right in this area lined up at the Food Stamp/Family Services offices like it's the entertainment of the town or something. Economic depression does that though.....

There are certainly programs I would like to see reformed. They need to back off SNAP though. They REALLY REALLY do, IMO. We have high unemployment (as high as 30+% among some segments of young adults) and we have desperation with homelessness at record levels and prospects for this getting better being a distant thing in most folk's lives.

What we are missing for open warfare in our streets and a body count at the end of each day is TRUE hunger. Not the rumble of wanting more ding dongs while playing the latest Xbox....but honest to God, gut churning hunger.

I'm all for seeing the food distribution programs reformed at some future point ...but while we're in some of the worst economic times in living American history...likely isn't the best time for it. Let's also keep in mind, the Pentagon request for money came just under 700 Billion for 2013. By 2017, ALL food assistance programs combined are estimate to total around 100 Billion. It's pennies on the dollars for what any civilized nation ought to have for a baseline min, IMO.


This video (30000 fight over Section 8 Housing) completely freaks me out:

www.youtube.com...


+7 more 
posted on May, 25 2013 @ 01:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by antar
but when a woman has an abortion she should also have her tubes tied. If in the future she wants to have a baby she can shell out the $$$$$ to have it reversed.

What a disgusting thing to say. Sorry but I disagree!! I have had an abortion and I am not ashamed by any means. I was on meds that interacted with my BC and was not told it would. I was young and not prepared to have a child let alone not know if the child would even make it full term due to the meds I was on. I signed multiple papers stating "you can't get pregnant while on accutane," yet it happened because they failed to mention it affected the BC. So according to YOU I should have been basically castrated?
I have zero problems with abortion it is hard choice to make and unless you have ever been in that situation imo you really have no say in it. I don't think people should use it as a form of BC but you can't control what people do with their body. I would never tell someone else what to do with THEIR body. Abortion is a very personal and emotional choice.


Perhaps all applicants to the welfare rolls should have to get a vasectomy or tubaligation first. All incoming foreign workers as well.

Again disgusting thing to say. I AM on SNAP and Medicaid. I am very thankful for both programs. I was employed when I became pregnant so I didn't need any assistance but i had a jack hole for a boss who thought i should ignore all my doctors orders and then let me go. My pregnancy did not in any way affect my job! I paid into both programs my entire working life so I have no problem taking any kind of assistance right now. I have never had assistance in my life and once i have my child I will no longer need it but let me tell you what the $169 I get a month in food assistance really helps with only one income right now. My income was the one that paid for food and it was a hell of a lot more than what i get but I'm grateful to the system for the help I do get.

I get really sick of people grouping everyone in the category of "lazy" just because they get assistance. You don't know someone's situation. I hope you never lose your job and need help. I know many people who lost their jobs and homes due to economic times and that doesnt' make them lazy! Sometimes you need a little help to get on your feet, sad thing is many abuse this help and those of us who don't abuse it get categorized and labeled because of those who do. I would never be on assistance for life. I don't even like it now to be honest but it is very helpful and I am appreciative.



posted on May, 25 2013 @ 01:18 PM
link   
Yea well there goes the increase in the crime rate. Violent offenders have mouths to feed.



posted on May, 25 2013 @ 01:19 PM
link   
reply to post by Cabin
 


Not everyone who has been convicted of a violent crime...is at their core a violent person...yes they made a big mistake; buy many are still good people; they serve their time and really work hard to turn their lives around.

Denying ex-criminals a way to get food is not going to help in their quest for a better life.

When people are hungry...they get grouchy and can get desperate; if they are assured of a food source where they know they will get some help and nourishment along the way...many may calm down...and really try hard to be a better person.



posted on May, 25 2013 @ 01:28 PM
link   
reply to post by mblahnikluver
 


I couldn't have said it better myself. Continue on, amazing woman.



posted on May, 25 2013 @ 01:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by Cabin

This seems as very bad idea to me. Most criminals start because they have no money to live. This will only make things worse and is likely to make somebody who made something stupid when being young turn back to crime after getting out after the jail punishment. After jail it is not easy to find a job and the need for staying alive might send lots of people back to the negative path. I do not see any benefits in this one... Just makes restarting one´s life and crime even worse.


Couldn't agree more. On top of that, I'd like to know if the time spent on this Bill was a waste of time. How many people convicted of such crimes sought food stamps? Here we have a national deficit of $16,741,876,472,844.22, and it is growing by $2.85 billion per day. So getting violent offenders off food stamps cuts government spending by what? $2,000 a day? Woohoo.

How about they devote some time to working out how to get our military out of the Middle East. Now THAT would cut serious spending.



posted on May, 25 2013 @ 01:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by sylent6
Yea well there goes the increase in the crime rate. Violent offenders have mouths to feed.



i have to agree. a "felon", already has a hard time getting any job, let alone one that pays enough. that's probably one of the big reasons that criminals tend to re offend in the first place. so lets make things even worse by cutting out something like food stamps. all this will achieve is to make sure that violent offenders have almost no choice but to commit crimes, things like muggings, home invasions and violent robberies will likely end up on the rise once this goes through. add onto that these "violent felons" have likely learned at least one important lesson since their incarceration, that is that DEAD MEN tell no tales.
not to mention you will end up hurting THEIR kids by this, which yet again will leave them with with a higher probability of becoming criminals themselves.

this is almost as dumb as cutting food stamps to drug users. yet another group who has a very hard time finding any job let alone one that pays half decent, thanks to hiring policies like "if you use drugs don't even bother to apply", and drug testing as part of the hiring process. nothing like adding more incentive to commit criminal acts. can't get a job or one that pays enough? add on can't even get food stamps? what does that leave? oh wait they added a study in with the news story.


Researchers at Yale University have found that making drug offenders ineligible for food stamps puts them “at greater risk of engaging in dangerous, sexual risk behaviors in order to obtain food,” according to the Yale News. Many former drug offenders in states where they are ineligible for food stamps “are turning to prostitution and other behaviors that put them at risk for HIV and other negative outcomes in order to obtain food.”

tv.msnbc.com...

wonder if they did another study on how much it affects this same group of people committing other crimes? say those for whom prostitution really will not work for. so yeah you can see how well this will work for VIOLENT offenders, they aren't gonna pimp themselves out, they will just do what they have to commit MORE violent crimes. nothing like setting people up to become even worse problems. and hey remember in JAIL they at least will get fed, not to mention it would probably help out their families by entitling them to more food stamps and welfare. i suspect prison fees are higher than what they would have gotten with food stamps. so this is a good idea WHY?



posted on May, 25 2013 @ 02:00 PM
link   
Wow, I don't like this. Punishment for crimes is dealt out in Court, not after the fact.

I don't see how this can even be Constitutional in fact. It's like a Double Jeopardy. It literally adds further punishment to what ever price they already paid.

Lord knows I'm opposed to violence completely, but this is utter nonsense.



  exclusive video


new topics
top topics
 
34
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join