Why aren't food stamps regulated like WIC?

[I.Dup.]

wouldn't it be really easy to fake a clean pee test, anyway? If they were really desperate and were the type to abuse the system...?

[MomtoCandJ]

I think drug tests would be great! I'm on wic and food stamps. If NOONE in the household is employed then a test should be required. If there is obvious disability or documentation that there is disability and the other adult is needed for care then no test, or if able to prove unemployment benefits. I mean this way people who are trying or have circumstances preventing them from working don't get hassled. In Georgia some people are teaching their kids how to fraudulently get ssi and get all the other assistance so they won't have to work. And yes I have witnessed these "lessons" being tought while the caregivers are at the park waiting for drugs. (Some people just don't care who hears and that the park is where kids are supposed to play). Needless to say it happened at both parks in Fitzgerald, Ga and dd only played at each once.

[The Girls' Mom]

I need to just apologize. I usually don't touch threads like this. If you knew me in real life, you would know how soft hearted I really am. I am dealing with stuff IRL that involves people I love, and the circumstances make this a hot button topic for me. I need to remember that arguing online with people I do not know changes nothing. It is what I do at home that does.

 

[elegantlion]

I need to just apologize. I usually don't touch threads like this. If you knew me in real life, you would know how soft hearted I really am. I am dealing with stuff IRL that involves people I love, and the circumstances make this a hot button topic for me. I need to remember that arguing online with people I do not know changes nothing. It is what I do at home that does.

 

Thank you for your apology. Bad apples in any group tend to stand out. Some of us are simply at our breaking point and one more thing, one more judgment could be enough to tip us over the edge.

 

I found this quote last night, from Unsinkable. I had copied it when she posted it originally. from unsinkable WTM 3/4/11

 

 

It's stories like this that i think of when someone says, "What doesn't kill you makes you stronger."

 

I disagree.

 

I think, "What doesn't kill some people hurts them so badly they live in a cardboard box under a bridge."

[nmoira]

All together now (sing whatever song you wish in your head... I just happen to know the lyrics to this one, and I like gay apparel).

 

 

'Tis the season to be jolly...

 

(Or at least merciful. Though that's harder to rhyme.)

[Elizabeth in MN]

Can we shoot this thread already? It's nasty, doing nothing for people for or against the proposed issues, and is drowning out other threads that are WAY more positive.

[Murphy101]

Soooo. I'm not a fan of drug tests for work or assistance, but let's go there for a minute...

 

Let's say someone doesn't pass it.

 

Then what? Now they don't qualify for the food for their kids? It's REALLY hard for a single person to get food stamps. And it's a pitiful amount. Something like $100 a month.

 

Most of the people on FS have kids. It seems the real goal of the pee test is to discourage people with drug problems from seeking assistance. Which hurts their kids more than them. Because they are more likely to refuse to seek help than risk failing a drug test and the subsequent fallout such as jail or losing their kids. Not all drug addicts are child abusing evil people. In fact, many are just ordinary people misusing prescribed pain meds. (which would clear a drug test btw)

 

So what is the goal of the drug test requirement? It doesn't stop drug use or abuse of the system. So it seems to be nothing more than a way of refusing assistance to undesirables.

[elegantlion]

All together now (sing whatever song you wish in your head... I just happen to know the lyrics to this one, and I like gay apparel).

 

 

'Tis the season to be jolly...

 

(Or at least merciful. Though that's harder to rhyme.)

 

 

you do not want to google gay apparel, just a warning. :w00t: :smilielol5:

[MomtoCandJ]

In my little world people who fail would still get aid for their children just not themselves. Maybe have required rehab or some kind of help for their addiction. Oh well it's not my world. Fa lalalalala just thankful there is a system to help people who need no matter how messed up it seems sometimes

[Mrs Mungo]

Or, instead of having temper tantrums every time someone on FS buys a bag of chips, we could all exert our mental energies toward demanding that large corporations pay their employees a living wage so most of these people don't need FS in the first place.

 

 

I agree. The anger is misplaced. If most people were paid a living wage, then you would cut out a large percentage of people currently receiving aid (in one form or another). One group that qualifies for aid (WIC, often food stamps and/or a military supplemental income allowance)? Junior soldiers with families. You don't think they deserve a cake? Seriously, it is beyond petty to think that.

[nmoira]

 

you do not want to google gay apparel, just a warning. :w00t: :smilielol5:

 

 

Everyone needs a hobby.

 

 

 

:tongue_smilie:

[GWOB]

 

 

I agree. The anger is misplaced. If most people were paid a living wage, then you would cut out a large percentage of people currently receiving aid (in one form or another). One group that qualifies for aid (WIC, often food stamps and/or a military supplemental income allowance)? Junior soldiers with families. You don't think they deserve a cake? Seriously, it is beyond petty to think that.

 

We were that junior enlisted family receiving WIC. We were living in the nicer part of the ghetto 35 minutes away from base. Gas and food prices were killing us, despite living well within our means. Those WIC benefits allowed us the leeway to purchase more fruits, vegetables, and better cuts of meat. Of course, even though my dh was deployed to the Middle East after 9/11 we probably did not deserve the luxury of sirloin steak twice a month. To top off our utter poor people trashiness, we conceived a second kid while in WIC! When we were finally transferred out of Southern California, we no longer needed that assistance.

 

Wendi-who used her WIC eggs to make a birthday cake for her 2yo

[thescrappyhomeschooler]

I'd much rather spend my energy worrying about my tax dollars that are being used to subsidize giant agribusiness and huge food conglomerates that are producing this crap food to begin with. I think there is a lot more fraud and waste on that end than the people who are buying a bottle of soda pop (or even a wedding cake) with their food stamps.

[lovinmomma]

We were that junior enlisted family receiving WIC. We were living in the nicer part of the ghetto 35 minutes away from base. Gas and food prices were killing us, despite living well within our means. Those WIC benefits allowed us the leeway to purchase more fruits, vegetables, and better cuts of meat. Of course, even though my dh was deployed to the Middle East after 9/11 we probably did not deserve the luxury of sirloin steak twice a month. To top off our utter poor people trashiness, we conceived a second kid while in WIC! When we were finally transferred out of Southern California, we no longer needed that assistance.

 

Wendi-who used her WIC eggs to make a birthday cake for her 2yo

 

I love this post. Not what you went through. (((HUGS))) Thank you.

[Lady Florida.]

nm

[nmoira]

nm

[Lady Florida.]

I'm pretty sure that was her user name when her post was quoted. :)

 

Yeah, I realized that and edited.

[Tutor]

My food budget would about TRIPLE if I were to go get food stamps.

 

I'm not joking. I'm not sure how'd i honestly be able to spend all that money - it's been so long since i have had "that much" to spend on groceries i'd be frozen not knowing what to do...

 

Same here.

[ChocolateReignRemix]

We have Congressman who support giving billions to oil companies making record profits, and then turn around and complain about welfare fraud? Yeah, that makes sense.

[TXMomof4]

 

I wouldn't care about peeing in a cup either, but the logistics for many people is not workable. It would make it harder for people to get ahead and it would add costs that could be better used elsewhere. People abuse systems period. Many people don't. If you round the equation to the lowest possible denominator, ie: you must prove you're not on drugs before you receive public assistance, then yes you (the government) is categorizing them as drug users, guilty until proved innocent. So, yes, if you're making the assumption that people will abuse a system and be on drugs (honestly, how many drugs users know how to fake a clean test anyway) and waste their money to get a few dollars each month in food aid, it does come across as a bit callous.

 

I'm going to have to call foul on this - dh has to take drug tests for work. In the Army now, but before that at all of his civilian jobs they had regular drug tests. He was a computer engineer for a very high profile company. Are you suggesting that the mandatory drugs tests insinuated that the management thought they were all users? I don't think anyone believes that. It's a protection for the employer and the other employees. My husband wanted to work for them and was willing to pee in a cup to verify that he was eligible for employment. Now the cost is a valid question, but getting offended because they're being asked to do something that a huge majority of employers require at this point anyway seems like a bit of a joke to me.

[lovinmomma]

I'm going to have to call foul on this - dh has to take drug tests for work. In the Army now, but before that at all of his civilian jobs they had regular drug tests. He was a computer engineer for a very high profile company. Are you suggesting that the mandatory drugs tests insinuated that the management thought they were all users? I don't think anyone believes that. It's a protection for the employer and the other employees. My husband wanted to work for them and was willing to pee in a cup to verify that he was eligible for employment. Now the cost is a valid question, but getting offended because they're being asked to do something that a huge majority of employers require at this point anyway seems like a bit of a joke to me.

 

 

I'm actually a supporter of drug testing for benefits. Having said that, there are MANY issues that would arise from this. The cost most certainly IS an issue. I have a friend that has random drug testing. He pays $20 per test. In addition, he is on prescribed medication (it is a pain killer). Even though they know and have seen the prescription for his medications they still have to "run further testing" EVERY time he takes a test because his prescription shows up. They have to make sure it's what he says that it is. That's another $20. He has to take 2 per month. So, that is $80 per month just for the test.

 

Not to mention the gas and the time off of work that he has to take to go and take the tests. How is someone on food stamps or WIC supposed to plan for this? Many of them don't even have their own vehicles.

[Murphy101]

I swear I live in the wrong state some days. There is NO WAY even a moderate food budget is tripling for anyone here when they get on food stamps. It averages approx $30 a month per person in the home. There might be about $100 more than that if there is no income listed. So for a family of 12, which I have, a large estimate of food stamps would be between $390 and $425 a month. A little over two years ago when we were on FS during dh's unemployment, so NO income coming in, we never once received that much in food stamps.

 

So when I hear these tales of living of the dole of plenty in luxury, I'm just sitting here thinking one of two things:

Either there is a lot we don't know

Or

Someone is scamming someone

 

I'm going to have to call foul on this - dh has to take drug tests for work. In the Army now, but before that at all of his civilian jobs they had regular drug tests. He was a computer engineer for a very high profile company. Are you suggesting that the mandatory drugs tests insinuated that the management thought they were all users? I don't think anyone believes that. It's a protection for the employer and the other employees. My husband wanted to work for them and was willing to pee in a cup to verify that he was eligible for employment. Now the cost is a valid question, but getting offended because they're being asked to do something that a huge majority of employers require at this point anyway seems like a bit of a joke to me.

 

I think it is wrong of employers too. If they go to work and do their job, then that's the only thing an employer needs to know about them. There are a few exceptions of course, such as professions where people are armed.

 

But I don't at all think that just because a huge majority of employers require something that makes it okay, right, or justifiable for everyone else to do it.

 

Also public assistance is not a job. It's a public benefit that everyone pays into and everyone who otherwise qualifies for should receive. Maybe we should also deny them social security, medical, drivers licenses, voting, ....?

 

I'm actually a supporter of drug testing for benefits. Having said that, there are MANY issues that would arise from this. The cost most certainly IS an issue. I have a friend that has random drug testing. He pays $20 per test. In addition, he is on prescribed medication (it is a pain killer). Even though they know and have seen the prescription for his medications they still have to "run further testing" EVERY time he takes a test because his prescription shows up. They have to make sure it's what he says that it is. That's another $20. He has to take 2 per month. So, that is $80 per month just for the test.

Not to mention the gas and the time off of work that he has to take to go and take the tests. How is someone on food stamps or WIC supposed to plan for this? Many of them don't even have their own vehicles.

 

They don't. No one with any sense expects them to do that. It's a tool to deny services to a demographic without actually having to deny it. Technically they don't deny it. They just make it so difficult and miserable and unrealistic that those people can't or won't apply.

[Mergath]

I'm going to have to call foul on this - dh has to take drug tests for work. In the Army now, but before that at all of his civilian jobs they had regular drug tests. He was a computer engineer for a very high profile company. Are you suggesting that the mandatory drugs tests insinuated that the management thought they were all users? I don't think anyone believes that. It's a protection for the employer and the other employees. My husband wanted to work for them and was willing to pee in a cup to verify that he was eligible for employment. Now the cost is a valid question, but getting offended because they're being asked to do something that a huge majority of employers require at this point anyway seems like a bit of a joke to me.

 

But... so what if they do use drugs? Like others have said, the children of users have to eat, too. People who get hooked on drugs have a much higher prevalence of mental illness and previous abuse. Does that mean they deserve to starve? As long as they aren't actually selling the FS to buy drugs, I just don't see why it matters, unless the point of the test is to direct them to places that can help them get clean. Which I doubt.

 

It's my belief that food is a basic human right. Making some bad choices doesn't negate that right.

[elegantlion]

I'm going to have to call foul on this - dh has to take drug tests for work. In the Army now, but before that at all of his civilian jobs they had regular drug tests. He was a computer engineer for a very high profile company. Are you suggesting that the mandatory drugs tests insinuated that the management thought they were all users? I don't think anyone believes that. It's a protection for the employer and the other employees. My husband wanted to work for them and was willing to pee in a cup to verify that he was eligible for employment. Now the cost is a valid question, but getting offended because they're being asked to do something that a huge majority of employers require at this point anyway seems like a bit of a joke to me.

 

There is a difference between being an employee of a company and a citizen of a country that has processes in place to help those less fortunate. I'm not offended, but I believe when you offer something to your community and then put more roadblocks in place and call it "help", it's not help.

 

I too have held jobs, dh as well, where drug testing, background checks, even lie detectors tests were required. I have no issue with that. The company itself is hiring employees that will match their criteria. They choose who they want to be a part of their team. There is a different burden of proof. A country and a community under the guise of helping all of its citizens should not screen citizens in the same manner. Again, I would have no objection to peeing in a cup, but the logistics for some people already under stress and hardship would be hard. That's not counting the added expense to the program itself.

[Scarlett]

http://www.ouhsc.edu/onie/canIGetFS.asp

Check this out Martha.

[Scarlett]

I swear I live in the wrong state some days. There is NO WAY even a moderate food budget is tripling for anyone here when they get on food stamps. It averages approx $30 a month per person in the home. There might be about $100 more than that if there is no income listed. So for a family of 12, which I have, a large estimate of food stamps would be between $390 and $425 a month. A little over two years ago when we were on FS during dh's unemployment, so NO income coming in, we never once received that much in food stamps.

 

So when I hear these tales of living of the dole of plenty in luxury, I'm just sitting here thinking one of two things:

Either there is a lot we don't know

Or

Someone is scamming

 

I think the high living claims are exaggerated too...but I do know my friend with 3 kids was getting $600 per month when she had no income about a year ago. That was AR though.

[Scarlett]

I know when dh was off work for 3 months I looked up the guidelines. If we could have taken my cs out of the equation we would have qualified that one month when short term disability wasn't coming through. But my cs for one goes back out the door for dh's cs for 2....so it wasn't income we could actually use for food. I didn't get far enough to figure out if they would have considered dh's cs expense...but I can see how overwhelming it all is when people are struggling.

[Scarlett]

.

[Murphy101]

http://www.ouhsc.edu/onie/canIGetFS.asp

Check this out Martha.

 

 

Holy cow?! I see that went into effect this past October. If I did the calculator thingy right, we would qualify for $800ish a month?! Wow. I KNOW that is new because our income hasn't changed since dh first got his job and we didn't qualify by iirc $200 too much income then. So when he got the job, we lost the food stamps. Which on the one hand I guess is okay. We aren't starving by any stretch. I spend right at about $100 a person a month on groceries and we eat fairly well. Not lavish, but well, iykwim.

 

Good heavens. That is no where near tripling our grocery budget, but that would be a HUGE relief to it.

 

Tho we have high hopes that dh's career change will mean he doesn't qualify! :)

 

I think the high living claims are exaggerated too...but I do know my friend with 3 kids was getting $600 per month when she had no income about a year ago. That was AR though.

 

 

Ugh. Who the heck are these people and what kind of shenanigans are they pulling or confusing or I don't know what? I have an ex sil the same way. Between all the various stuff, SSI, disability, food stamps and so forth - she has more money than we do with just herself and a teen at home. (rent and mortgage free too btw). And yet my dad in another state is living off SS that doesn't cover his electric bill or property taxes. Wth?!

[Scarlett]

 

 

Holy cow?! I see that went into effect this past October. If I did the calculator thingy right, we would qualify for $800ish a month?! Wow. I KNOW that is new because our income hasn't changed since dh first got his job and we didn't qualify by iirc $200 too much income then. So when he got the job, we lost the food stamps. Which on the one hand I guess is okay. We aren't starving by any stretch. I spend right at about $100 a person a month on groceries and we eat fairly well. Not lavish, but well, iykwim.

 

Good heavens. That is no where near tripling our grocery budget, but that would be a HUGE relief to it.

 

Tho we have high hopes that dh's career change will mean he doesn't qualify! :)

 

 

 

Ugh. Who the heck are these people and what kind of shenanigans are they pulling or confusing or I don't know what? I have an ex sil the same way. Between all the various stuff, SSI, disability, food stamps and so forth - she has more money than we do with just herself and a teen at home. (rent and mortgage free too btw). And yet my dad in another state is living off SS that doesn't cover his electric bill or property taxes. Wth?!

 

It is just what they gave her because she has 3 kids. They were less than a year,4 and 6. She isn't an abuser though. She is my friend who had the husband turned rabid atheist who told her she had to give up her faith and religion or he would divorce her. When she wouldn't give into that demand he cut off her access to the family money and when she moved out he refused to pay cs for a time until a judge got hold of him. My parents let her move into their small guest house until she could get on her feet. It was a horrible time for that woman and to think anyone would begrudge her that money makes me sad. And mad.

[laundrycrisis]

As a cashier, I loved WIC. I saw people taking home nutritious food that they didn't tend to buy otherwise. Often the WIC food was the only worthwhile food they took home.

 

And, they were NOT buying garbage food instead of healthy food because it was cheaper.....how do I know ? Because they were buying the most expensive brands of garbage food ! Not the cheaper store brand sweet cereal or fried-corn-batter-cheese-powder-coated snacks, but name-brand Froot Loops and Cheetos. The brands were a big deal. On the WIC purchases, we had to put back expensive name brand items and switch them out with the budget brands....and the recipients were often very irritated by this. They wanted the name brand milk, cheese, whole grain cereal, orange juice and beans.

 

I have also been poor and barely able to afford food, and without a proper kitchen. I was able to find nutritious food on a very tight budget, and that could be prepared in a hot pot. It helped a lot that I worked in the store and knew what the food bargains were. Not having a good working freezer was another complication, just a small fridge. It can still be done. I ate more canned stuff that I was happy about, but it was cheap canned stuff, and it was still way better than chips and froot loops and the other garbage foods I scanned for people who paid for the junky food with stamps.

 

Every once in a while someone would come through with stamps and they were stocking up on low priced nutritious foods and meal-stretchers to use them with. For the same purchase amount, they got an impressive amount of healthy food to take home. It was rare to see this, and I learned from those people.

 

I am very much in favor of food welfare. I do not resent contributing to it, at all. And I would not be in favor of creating more hoops for people to jump through to get it. But I do think that it would be more helpful to the recipients to have the use of the benefit restricted to foods that are not empty-calorie snack or dessert foods, or high sugar content cereals, or breakfast foods that are really just morning desserts.

[Parrothead]

In my little world people who fail would still get aid for their children just not themselves. Maybe have required rehab or some kind of help for their addiction. Oh well it's not my world. Fa lalalalala just thankful there is a system to help people who need no matter how messed up it seems sometimes

Unfortunately it doesn't work like that. The criminal element looking for assistance for their kids will, 9 times out of 10, pi$$ away that assistance. Their kids only eat what the school gives them or what they can steal.

[Parrothead]

I'm actually a supporter of drug testing for benefits. Having said that, there are MANY issues that would arise from this. The cost most certainly IS an issue. I have a friend that has random drug testing. He pays $20 per test. In addition, he is on prescribed medication (it is a pain killer). Even though they know and have seen the prescription for his medications they still have to "run further testing" EVERY time he takes a test because his prescription shows up. They have to make sure it's what he says that it is. That's another $20. He has to take 2 per month. So, that is $80 per month just for the test.

 

Not to mention the gas and the time off of work that he has to take to go and take the tests. How is someone on food stamps or WIC supposed to plan for this? Many of them don't even have their own vehicles.

Who is demanding that your friend test? They should be paying for the testing not your friend.

[MomtoCandJ]

With no income our family of 3 got 500. My brother's babies momma gets over 800 a month, child support from DB, cash assistance, no rent, subsidized lights and heat and Wic. She is pregnant with number 4 (thank goodness it isn't my brother's). She told my mom that she got pregnant so that she could keep getting cash assistance without going to MIWORKS. I'd you have children under age 4 then you don't need to go. MIWORKS helps with resume skills, job training and getting things you need to go back to work.

[Joanne]

I think drug tests would be great! I'm on wic and food stamps. If NOONE in the household is employed then a test should be required. If there is obvious disability or documentation that there is disability and the other adult is needed for care then no test, or if able to prove unemployment benefits. I mean this way people who are trying or have circumstances preventing them from working don't get hassled. In Georgia some people are teaching their kids how to fraudulently get ssi and get all the other assistance so they won't have to work. And yes I have witnessed these "lessons" being tought while the caregivers are at the park waiting for drugs. (Some people just don't care who hears and that the park is where kids are supposed to play). Needless to say it happened at both parks in Fitzgerald, Ga and dd only played at each once.

 

 

Drug testing costs more money than it saves; poor economics.

 

Not to mention the fact that those on food stamps are not automatically on probation or in the criminal justice system; they have no legal reason to account for their lifestyle.

 

Being poor is not a crime.

[Murphy101]

It is just what they gave her because she has 3 kids. They were less than a year,4 and 6. She isn't an abuser though. She is my friend who had the husband turned rabid atheist who told her she had to give up her faith and religion or he would divorce her. When she wouldn't give into that demand he cut off her access to the family money and when she moved out he refused to pay cs for a time until a judge got hold of him. My parents let her move into their small guest house until she could get on her feet. It was a horrible time for that woman and to think anyone would begrudge her that money makes me sad. And mad.

 

My humble apologies for misreading your post. (where's the eating poo pie smiley? )That certainly doesn't sound like my sil. Though it does sound like she was married to my brother. :/

 

I don't begrudge any of them. Even my sil. My post was more about how frustrating it is that the system is so stereotyped and often seems so oddly distributed.

 

Where are all these people everyone is claiming are screwing the system for some great free ride? In all my years as an adult I've met exactly TWO. My sil and one other. And for the life of me, I can't figure how they are doing it. Lie all they want, the government loves, loves it's paperwork in triplicate. So it's not like people can just say, "I'm broke." and get money. *confused*

[lovinmomma]

Who is demanding that your friend test? They should be paying for the testing not your friend.

 

It's a friend that is in the middle of a custody battle. The mother falsely accused him of doing drugs (I think smoking pot) and the judge ordered the random drug testing to appease the mother. He has yet to show positive for anything in his drug tests.

 

And, obviously, this isn't for government aid, but I just wanted to point out the hardship that drug testing could impose on someone that is already struggling enough to be on food stamps.

[Parrothead]

It's a friend that is in the middle of a custody battle. The mother falsely accused him of doing drugs (I think smoking pot) and the judge ordered the random drug testing to appease the mother. He has yet to show positive for anything in his drug tests.

 

And, obviously, this isn't for government aid, but I just wanted to point out the hardship that drug testing could impose on someone that is already struggling enough to be on food stamps.

 

Dude needs a better lawyer. I could see one test. Maybe two. But continued random testing is a bit crazy. Especially if he is paying for it.

 

If the gov't were to require testing for aid recipients, the gov't would be responsible for payment of such tests. The only hardship on the aid recipients would be the extra time it takes and the hassle. And perhaps humiliation depending on how well one takes these kinds of things.

[goldberry]

Reading a thread from 2 years back! I got mad all over again! Lol

 

 

 

 

I know! I hate it when that happens! I should just stay off the food stamp threads altogether. What a useless thread to revive.....

[Slartibartfast]

I realize that we cannot be the morality police. Nor do I think we should. But there are steps that could be taken to reduce the blatant abuse of a system that was only meant to be a temporary help to those that are truly in need. If they made food stamps for things like meat, veggies, bread and milk it would still accomplish what it set out to do: feed people. Cut out all the junk you can buy. Make it extremely hard to sell them. Drug test (yeah, I know that is controversial...but if I have to go through drug testing to work, then I have no problem with drug testing for assistance)

 

 

 

http://blogs.denverp...ey-saves/68104/

 

Apparently drug testing welfare recipients wastes more money than it saves. As it turns out, most people on food stamps are not drug users.

 

I would rather buy a poor person a huge bag of flaming hot cheetos, a wedding cake and a case of bud light than support a drug testing company for no dang reason.

 

http://www.nytimes.c...tests.html?_r=1

 

MIAMI — Ushered in amid promises that it would save taxpayers money and deter drug users, a Florida law requiring drug tests for people who seek welfare benefits resulted in no direct savings, snared few drug users and had no effect on the number of applications, according to recently released state data.

[Joanne]

With no income our family of 3 got 500. My brother's babies momma gets over 800 a month, child support from DB, cash assistance, no rent, subsidized lights and heat and Wic. She is pregnant with number 4 (thank goodness it isn't my brother's). She told my mom that she got pregnant so that she could keep getting cash assistance without going to MIWORKS. I'd you have children under age 4 then you don't need to go. MIWORKS helps with resume skills, job training and getting things you need to go back to work.

 

 

 

The bold - child support and cash assistance (TANF) are mutually exclusive.

[Joker]

Dude needs a better lawyer. I could see one test. Maybe two. But continued random testing is a bit crazy. Especially if he is paying for it.

 

If the gov't were to require testing for aid recipients, the gov't would be responsible for payment of such tests. The only hardship on the aid recipients would be the extra time it takes and the hassle. And perhaps humiliation depending on how well one takes these kinds of things.

 

 

In Florida, they make recipients pay for the test up front and reimburse if they pass. That's one of the biggest problems I have with the whole thing. These people qualify for, and need, aid but they are supposed to come up with the money for a drug test. :confused: I haven't looked into but I wonder how long it takes for the reimbursement when they pass, as the majority do.

[lovinmomma]

In Florida, they make recipients pay for the test up front and reimburse if they pass. That's one of the biggest problems I have with the whole thing. These people qualify for, and need, aid but they are supposed to come up with the money for a drug test. :confused: I haven't looked into but I wonder how long it takes for the reimbursement when they pass, as the majority do.

 

 

Exactly. It makes NO sense to expect a person that qualifies for food stamps to pay for a drug test...reimbursed or not.

[Parrothead]

In Florida, they make recipients pay for the test up front and reimburse if they pass. That's one of the biggest problems I have with the whole thing. These people qualify for, and need, aid but they are supposed to come up with the money for a drug test. :confused: I haven't looked into but I wonder how long it takes for the reimbursement when they pass, as the majority do.

 

What? That is crazy!

 

That reminds me of the asinine rule that the homeless have to have a permanent address before they can get help. Hello! What part of homeless aren't these rule makers getting?

[MomtoCandJ]

Not sure how it works but my brother pays for the kids things even though I thought that is what child support was supposed to be for. I mean like clothes and some toys. If my brother didn't buy them, they wouldn't have any clothes. In fact I sent up a bag of shoes my dd outgrew to help him out. I understand if it was to pay rent or other utilities but she's not doing that either. I seen a. Receipt where DB payed her light bill and bought minutes for her phone so some one could call her if there was a problem. He does this and child support. Right now he's on unemployment but he had them take child support out of that.

[Scarlett]

 

 

My humble apologies for misreading your post. (where's the eating poo pie smiley? )That certainly doesn't sound like my sil. Though it does sound like she was married to my brother. :/

 

I don't begrudge any of them. Even my sil. My post was more about how frustrating it is that the system is so stereotyped and often seems so oddly distributed.

 

Where are all these people everyone is claiming are screwing the system for some great free ride? In all my years as an adult I've met exactly TWO. My sil and one other. And for the life of me, I can't figure how they are doing it. Lie all they want, the government loves, loves it's paperwork in triplicate. So it's not like people can just say, "I'm broke." and get money. *confused*

 

No apology needed Martha . I knew I had not been clear about my friend which is why I explained further.

 

I too have rarely in my life seen abuses and fraud like I hear about on theses boards. The one I have seen....or rather assumed is when a woman is living with a man and not reporting his income. But I think there is even a legal way to get around that...something like if they declare they are two separate households or some such. As you said the government loves its paperwork.

[Scarlett]

Not sure how it works but my brother pays for the kids things even though I thought that is what child support was supposed to be for. I mean like clothes and some toys. If my brother didn't buy them, they wouldn't have any clothes. In fact I sent up a bag of shoes my dd outgrew to help him out. I understand if it was to pay rent or other utilities but she's not doing that either. I seen a. Receipt where DB payed her light bill and bought minutes for her phone so some one could call her if there was a problem. He does this and child support. Right now he's on unemployment but he had them take child support out of that.

 

He is doing what he thinks is best for his kids.....I doubt any of that beyond cs is a legal requirement. I hope he is keeping good records of all he does in case he decides it fight for custody.

[Joanne]

Not sure how it works but my brother pays for the kids things even though I thought that is what child support was supposed to be for. I mean like clothes and some toys. If my brother didn't buy them, they wouldn't have any clothes. In fact I sent up a bag of shoes my dd outgrew to help him out. I understand if it was to pay rent or other utilities but she's not doing that either. I seen a. Receipt where DB payed her light bill and bought minutes for her phone so some one could call her if there was a problem. He does this and child support. Right now he's on unemployment but he had them take child support out of that.

 

*shrug*

 

My caring for my kids costs far more than what child support would cover (if I were getting it).

 

When my oldest lived with his Dad, I still purchased clothes, toiletries, school supplies, and other stuff for him.

[Elizabeth in MN]

You can buy urine on eBay, inject it into your bladder with a needle, and test clean.

 

Some states have done trial runs of the testing to get benefits thing. It cost more to run than it saved in welfare fraud.

[Joanne]

No apology needed Martha . I knew I had not been clear about my friend which is why I explained further.

 

I too have rarely in my life seen abuses and fraud like I hear about on theses boards. The one I have seen....or rather assumed is when a woman is living with a man and not reporting his income. But I think there is even a legal way to get around that...something like if they declare they are two separate households or some such. As you said the government loves its paperwork.

 

I've seen one.

 

A daycare client was getting WIC, and didn't marry her baby daddy (they lived together) so that she didn't lose benefits. She offered me boxes of cereal. :laugh:

 

They had a new house in my old subdivision, new cars, etc. They were both working, but I have to assume she did not include his income in the household.

 

Other than that, I've *heard* of many abuses, and in a different life, believed them to exist at much higher levels than I do now.

 

You'd think I'd see it with my clients (many of whom are in the criminal justice population), but I don't see abuse at high numbers there, either.