Why aren't food stamps regulated like WIC?

[Moxie]

You have to just accept that people who receive assistance do not want to see accountability, regulation, etc. regarding it. I am certain that no one on the board who has or has had assistance is in favor of regulation of it, nor do the abuses really bother them.

 

 

 

I don't think that is very fair. We've seen several people on this thread who have used assistance and think that there should be more regulation to prevent abuse.

[Nestof3]

I don't think that is very fair. We've seen several people on this thread who have used assistance and think that there should be more regulation to prevent abuse.

 

I must have overlooked these -- seriously -- I was looking for them. I guess I'll have to read back over the posts.

[OnTheBrink]

Based on my income, I qualify for food stamps. However, I won't get them. We're fine on my income and have no problems acquiring food. I don't believe in taking something just because I can, and I hate the idea of being "owned" by the government. This is just my personal opinion about my own life. I certainly don't begrudge anyone's need for assistance. If someone needs it, by all means, use it! Food stamps, WIC, welfare, whatever.

[lgm]

We went from healthy meals down to oatmeal, a gallon of milk for our older 6 kids per week, from 100% juices to soda to koolaid, from meat most meals to bologna and hot dogs as their only meat...

 

I do agree they need to be regulated. We buy healthy food we couldn't afford anymore, but I know we're not the norm. I buy cheese again, meat, milk and fruit, we even planted a huge garden with seeds and plants purchased with our EBT. We're really thankful.

 

We're going to switch from EBT to WIC as a transition then get off everything. **Another good inbetween offering would be a percentage off food, the higher the percentage off for the healthier the food.**

 

We need to take steps and I do not agree about paying it back. How overwhelming do you want this to be for people on assistance? How many would give up the freebies to then owe a huge debt to the govt when they could just keep the freebies?? That'll just add fuel to keeping assistance to those who would actually want to get off of them.

 

 

What about public schooling? Should that be a debt parents owe back to the state? Educa

 

 

Thank you for posting your experience. Could I ask a few questions, in the interest of understanding?

 

Why is oatmeal not considered healthy?

Are bologna and hot dogs less per pound than other protein sources in your area? (Here they are more than other meats, especially chicken)

 

Do gardens have the stigma of something only the poor do? I am very interested becasue I come from rural poverty via the situation of grandparents living self-sufficiently at the turn of the last century, but my dad got out via the military. Still, our family gardened and our relatives did. In my current area, only a few seniors garden. There are no community plots to rent. It's perceived as too much work to be of value, not as something one does to increase the family's welfare.

 

Same question for keeping goats/chickens and fishing/hunting.

 

I'd like to say: on the juice/soda/koolaid, that the pediatricians in the US a few years back strongly recommended none of these for children as they are all non-nutritious. We had a very large discussion at public school as far as what was being served for classroom parties...and the concensus was that we would be healthy and serve water or milk. During the transition, about half the kids would decline the juice box and use their own water bottle.

 

I don't agree about paying food money back either, especially in these economic times. A grant situation is fine while the family gets back on their feet after losing a job or having a medical emergency. I would like to see the education system revamped so that trade school is an option for free for those that dropped out/were kicked out at 16 and never did the last two years of public school. I'd like to see the ratio of CEO:unskilled compensation change. I'd like to see slumlords regulated and penalized too, especially if they are getting Section 8 money.

 

On public school costs - Yes, I think parents should be paying in. People value what they pay for. In this area, those in single family housing are paying in yearly school tax more than the cost of educating one unclassified child. Depending on the number of children they have, many home owners are at the tax level where they will completely pay for their own children's schooling with the school taxes they pay between birth and graduation. Those in denser housing are not paying as much b/c the tax on an apartment complex or condo is nowhere near the tax on single family homes. Employers are also paying school taxes. The kicker comes though with the medical expenses that are being billed as school expenses...the costs are just to large for the single family to handle alone.

 

Thanks for sharing your experience.

[swellmomma]

nm

Edited June 2, 2009 by swellmomma

[swellmomma]

Thank you for posting your experience. Could I ask a few questions, in the interest of understanding?

 

Why is oatmeal not considered healthy?

Are bologna and hot dogs less per pound than other protein sources in your area? (Here they are more than other meats, especially chicken)

 

Do gardens have the stigma of something only the poor do? I am very interested becasue I come from rural poverty via the situation of grandparents living self-sufficiently at the turn of the last century, but my dad got out via the military. Still, our family gardened and our relatives did. In my current area, only a few seniors garden. There are no community plots to rent. It's perceived as too much work to be of value, not as something one does to increase the family's welfare.

 

Same question for keeping goats/chickens and fishing/hunting.

 

 

I am not the person you were asking but I will answer a couple of these based on my area. In my part of the province, we have a very short growing season for gardens, so unless you have a greenhouse to get your garden started, AND have enough space to do a pretty sizeable garden you are unlikely to grow enough to store over the fall/winter/spring; instead you will have enough for the summer and that is it. Of course that is not the case province wide, those in the southern part of the province have a longer growing season. We on the other hand, had snow again 2 weeks ago, it has only really been warm enough to plant a garden for a week or so. WHere as I have read on this board of people in the states with full crops already getting ready for a second round.

 

Meat is expensive, hot dogs and bologna I find cheap. I don't buy meat at the grocery store at all unless I have no choice, I buy 1/4 cow each fall from a homeschooling farmer to get us through the year. Otherwise my food budget would totally be blown due to the cost of meat.

[Joanne]

I am certain that no one on the board who has or has had assistance is in favor of regulation of it, nor do the abuses really bother them.

 

Moreover, most people are of the mindset that if they qualify for some sort of aid, they should take it, even if they COULD live without it.

 

 

EXCUSE ME?

 

What insulting (and inaccurate) assumptions. If that is how you feel about people on "assistance" - those on this board or elsewhere - your are certainly bigoted and prejudiced.

 

If a family is going to take someone else's money, there is a string attached.

 

Families on assistance are not directly taking someone else's money. I'm willing to guess that most families who are in need of assistance have paid INTO the system as well.

 

The string a bank attaches is that the loan be repayed w/certain amount of interest.

 

Red herring to the discussion. Not a useful comparison.

 

 

The string the taxpayers are asking for in regards to welfare is that the money be used for what it was intended...healthy food for ex. It's an insult to the taxpayer, who is giving a substantial portion of their income to taxes, that the money be used for alcohol, drugs, non-nutritious wants and/or a luxurious lifestyle beyond what the taxpayer himself can afford.

 

That already IS regulated against.

 

A family shouldn't expect to keep up with the middle class or wealthy Jones' on welfare money.

 

You are making a lot of assumptions about people on "welfare" in terms of numbers and what those numbers think.

 

Given the rampant abuse and the high cost of the health consquences from the abuse,and the sheer volume of people on welfare, the taxpayer is demanding accountability. Good for the taxpayers for standing up, trying to stop the fraud and encourage that the money be used to actually improve the welfare of the recipient!

 

Are people who feel similarly working on the local level to reduce need of qualified individuals? I *am*. Even while applying for food stamps, I donate to the local food bank (food, clothes, shoes) and I directly assist a homeless gentlemen I am friends with.

[lgm]

"Families on assistance are not directly taking someone else's money. I'm willing to guess that most families who are in need of assistance have paid INTO the system as well."

 

Correct. It's indirectly, so it's easy not to think that Joe and Sally, that nice retired couple down the street bought the groceries this week instead of going to the movies with their grandkids.

 

"You are making a lot of assumptions about people on "welfare" in terms of numbers and what those numbers think."

 

I live in the metroNY area. I can see clearly and I hear very well. I know the scams and some of the scam artists in my community. I also read the public gov't info available, so I know that many that are taking aid are doing so b/c of the irrational choices they made between needs and wants and their feeling of entitlement. Others truly need help. These are the ones that I want my dollars to go to. I want to see group homes for those that can't live independently, mental health care, children growing healthily.

 

"Are people who feel similarly working on the local level to reduce need of qualified individuals? I *am*. Even while applying for food stamps, I donate to the local food bank (food, clothes, shoes) and I directly assist a homeless gentlemen I am friends with. "

 

Of course. Many are of the viewpoint that they have enough, and will go with less luxuries so that a neighbor can survive hard times. Where they sour is when the entitlement view comes in and the demand is for more than they themselves have and the recipient is unwilling to help himself by making rational decisions. When the choice is food or cable, they don't want to be paying for food so the recipient can pay for cable. Most of them grew up without it, and know it's a luxury. They are looking to help with needs, not wants. Most people here don't donate adult clothing or shoes, because they wear it out first.

 

Thanks for your opinions. I appreciate your glimpse into your world.

[Pamela H in Texas]

It's an insult to the taxpayer, who is giving a substantial portion of their income to taxes....

 

Well, I think this COULD be a decent argument (and I don't totally disagree), except that welfare is less than 1% of what we pay taxes on. Most people wouldn't consider 1% to be a "substantial portion" of their income.

Edited June 1, 2009 by 2J5M9K

[Pamela H in Texas]

I am certain that no one on the board who has or has had assistance is in favor of regulation of it, nor do the abuses really bother them.

 

Excuse you for your rudeness, assuming, and speaking for a whole group of people!

 

I had assistance at one time (a long time ago) and I may need it again next month. The abuses most certainly bother honest people regardless of whether they have had assistance. What an ugly comment to think it wouldn't. And it's just false to say that no one who has ever been on assistance is against regulation. I already posted that I think regulation is reasonable.

[Nicole M]

You have to just accept that...

 

Nest,

 

Based on what I "know" of you through these boards, I have to assume that you do not realize how condescending it is to hear someone tell them what they need to do or not do. lgm does not need to accept anything any more than Joanne needs to stop taking discussions personally.

 

I am trying to say this gently. I offer this because my overall impression of you is that you seek to be a kind and earnest person, and that you genuinely seek to understand and be understood. Using this kind of language undermines that, and alienates the very persons whom you are trying to engage. I felt you would want to know.

 

N

[LMA]

If a family is going to take someone else's money, there is a string attached. The string a bank attaches is that the loan be repayed w/certain amount of interest. The string the taxpayers are asking for in regards to welfare is that the money be used for what it was intended...healthy food for ex. It's an insult to the taxpayer, who is giving a substantial portion of their income to taxes, that the money be used for alcohol, drugs, non-nutritious wants and/or a luxurious lifestyle beyond what the taxpayer himself can afford. A family shouldn't expect to keep up with the middle class or wealthy Jones' on welfare money. Given the rampant abuse and the high cost of the health consquences from the abuse,and the sheer volume of people on welfare, the taxpayer is demanding accountability. Good for the taxpayers for standing up, trying to stop the fraud and encourage that the money be used to actually improve the welfare of the recipient!

 

Food stamps are not a loan like a bank loan. As I posted earlier, but no one seems to want to respond to, there are plenty of other govt. programs with abuse. What about those programs? What about telling someone on Medicare how they should live and exercise? What about telling those already on SS that they have taken more than they have put in and should not get anymore? What about hospitals abusing Medicare guidelines?

[I talk to the trees]

Do gardens have the stigma of something only the poor do? I am very interested becasue I come from rural poverty via the situation of grandparents living self-sufficiently at the turn of the last century, but my dad got out via the military. Still, our family gardened and our relatives did. In my current area, only a few seniors garden. There are no community plots to rent. It's perceived as too much work to be of value, not as something one does to increase the family's welfare.

 

Same question for keeping goats/chickens and fishing/hunting.

 

 

 

If gardens are a sign of poverty, heavens! What our neighbors must think of us! We consider ourselves blessed to have a lot large enough for a nice-sized vegetable garden! I LOVE gardening! It gets me outdoors in the sunshine, and weeding can be great exercise. And the smell of tomato leaves reminds me of my grandfather (from whom I inherited my love of gardening.) And I can guarantee that my fresh-picked salads taste far better than that old bagged stuff in the stores for only the cost of a couple of packets of seeds! So PHOOEY on anybody who looks down on someone who keeps a garden!:tongue_smilie:

 

And I have been lobbying for a goat for several years now, but everyone in my family just smiles and ignores me. :lol: Someday.....

 

-Robin

[Melinda in VT]

If gardens are a sign of poverty, heavens! What our neighbors must think of us! We consider ourselves blessed to have a lot large enough for a nice-sized vegetable garden! I LOVE gardening! It gets me outdoors in the sunshine, and weeding can be great exercise. And the smell of tomato leaves reminds me of my grandfather (from whom I inherited my love of gardening.) And I can guarantee that my fresh-picked salads taste far better than that old bagged stuff in the stores for only the cost of a couple of packets of seeds! So PHOOEY on anybody who looks down on someone who keeps a garden!:tongue_smilie:

 

And I have been lobbying for a goat for several years now, but everyone in my family just smiles and ignores me. :lol: Someday.....

 

-Robin

 

From personal experience, I can tell you it can be problematic to keep both a goat and a garden. ;)

[melissel]

Well, I think this COULD be a decent argument (and I don't totally disagree), except that welfare is less than 1% of what we pay taxes on. Most people wouldn't consider 1% to be a "substantial portion" of their income.

 

And, ONCE AGAIN, this is assuming that the people on assistance have never, ever paid any form of taxes. I agree that there are many abusers out there, but I think the vast majority of recipients once did, and will again eventually, pay into the system that is providing their assistance.

 

And, ONCE AGAIN, I ask, is what we're talking about here any different than receiving unemployment benefits? Are you for regulating those too? After all, people really should be living below their means and have a nest egg for such situations. Someone else asked about Medicare/Medicaid. Are we for ensuring that people receiving those benefits are getting the appropriate amount of exercise and eating the proper foods? That they're not smoking/drinking/eating junk?

 

How will we enforce all this suggested regulation? Who will pay for the expanded staffing and resources that will be required to do all this policing and investigation? For pete's sake, the people who run these agencies can barely handle their jobs now. Will the increased resources cost less than the abuses of the system? What EXACTLY constitutes an abuse of the system? Should a homeschooling mom put her kids back in school immediately and go work at McDonalds? Should parents hand their children over to family members so they can go to work 7 days a week so they don't need assistance? Should people like Swellmomma continue working full-time outside the home, on principle, even though they're not getting paid enough to make ends meet, but they ARE getting paid enough to exclude them from receiving assistance while employed? Who gets to determine which of these instances is abuse?

 

It seems to be easier for many of you to rage against the system and cling to your biases and anecdotal evidence than to do some research on the realities of people actually in the system. There are people here on this board, in this conversation, in the system, in need of assistance, telling you things that run directly counter to your perceptions. Several people have pointed out that in spite of the popular perception of the "welfare cheats," research shows that the majority of people on assistance typify a different demographic. Why do so many of you seem not to be listening? :confused: Is it just easier to be angry and indignant than to try to understand?

[LMA]

And, ONCE AGAIN, this is assuming that the people on assistance have never, ever paid any form of taxes. I agree that there are many abusers out there, but I think the vast majority of recipients once did, and will again eventually, pay into the system that is providing their assistance.

 

And, ONCE AGAIN, I ask, is what we're talking about here any different than receiving unemployment benefits? Are you for regulating those too? After all, people really should be living below their means and have a nest egg for such situations. Someone else asked about Medicare/Medicaid. Are we for ensuring that people receiving those benefits are getting the appropriate amount of exercise and eating the proper foods? That they're not smoking/drinking/eating junk?

 

How will we enforce all this suggested regulation? Who will pay for the expanded staffing and resources that will be required to do all this policing and investigation? For pete's sake, the people who run these agencies can barely handle their jobs now. Will the increased resources cost less than the abuses of the system? What EXACTLY constitutes an abuse of the system? Should a homeschooling mom put her kids back in school immediately and go work at McDonalds? Should parents hand their children over to family members so they can go to work 7 days a week so they don't need assistance? Should people like Swellmomma continue working full-time outside the home, on principle, even though they're not getting paid enough to make ends meet, but they ARE getting paid enough to exclude them from receiving assistance while employed? Who gets to determine which of these instances is abuse?

 

It seems to be easier for many of you to rage against the system and cling to your biases and anecdotal evidence than to do some research on the realities of people actually in the system. There are people here on this board, in this conversation, in the system, in need of assistance, telling you things that run directly counter to your perceptions. Several people have pointed out that in spite of the popular perception of the "welfare cheats," research shows that the majority of people on assistance typify a different demographic. Why do so many of you seem not to be listening? :confused: Is it just easier to be angry and indignant than to try to understand?

 

Just to clariy a misconception, unemployment is paid from a tax paid by the employer. If you are collecting unemployment, then your company is paying for it after it lays you off. There may be more kicked in from the state and I know the fed. govt. is extending the benefits, but I don't know if the employer has to pay more for the extension.

 

I agree with your post. And I am sorry that a board with people who claim they want more tolerance are very intolerant of people on food stamps. How about little charity and kindness toward those who take food stamps to help their family? How much more dignity can you take away by telling those who claim food stamps that they need to be told how to eat? Let me tell you that there are plenty of non-recipients who eat "poorly", too. (I don't always eat correctly. We eat plenty of potato chips and soda around here, but we eat our vegetables and meat also.)

 

Yes, our perceptions are shaped by those anecdotal references around us, but don't use them to shape a general picture of people on food stamps or of the poor. Don't we teach our kids classical education so that they don't generalize from a few poor examples?

 

We all pay taxes for these services. And if someone needs to apply for a government program, then they shouldn't feel ashamed. And if you don't need to apply, good for you, but please, please don't disparage someone who does. There is a "holier than thou" attitude here about food stamps. I never, never knock anyone on assistance because someday it may be me. It only takes a catastrophe or an accident or a lawsuit to be in the poorhouse, even with a nest egg.

 

And I never participate in these types of discussions here because it really serves no good purpose, but this issue is a "hot button" with me.

 

Louise

[melissel]

Just to clariy a misconception, unemployment is paid from a tax paid by the employer. If you are collecting unemployment, then your company is paying for it after it lays you off. There may be more kicked in from the state and I know the fed. govt. is extending the benefits, but I don't know if the employer has to pay more for the extension.

 

Hmm, good point. I'd heard differing things on this over time. However, I think the same argument could be made. Taxes that both employers and employees pay are pooled, and I'd wager that yes, the federal and state governments are also contributing funds. Who's to say that people who remain on unemployment for an extended period of time instead of taking any job they can are not abusing the system and draining it of funds that others may need, especially in these economic straits we're in? I've never been on unemployment in over 20 years of working, so my tax dollars have gone to pay for other people's benefits. Do I get a say in how they spend them? (For example--I don't really feel this way :D)

 

Thanks for the info, anyway! I'm off to do a little research on it now.

 

ETA: That didn't take long :lol:

 

N.J. is first to qualify for federal funds for unemployment

by The Associated Press

Friday March 27, 2009, 10:41 AM

U.S. Labor Secretary Hilda Solis

 

New Jersey is the first state to qualify for federal funds to shore up its unemployment benefits.

 

U.S. Labor Secretary Hilda Solis announced today that New Jersey will receive nearly $207 million in federal stimulus money.

 

New Jersey is one of 14 states that have had to borrow from the federal government to pay unemployment claims. New Jersey began borrowing from the feds this month when the state fund ran out of money.

 

Of course, I reside in the great state of NJ!

Edited June 1, 2009 by melissel

[phathui5]

What about public schooling? Should that be a debt parents owe back to the state?

 

Of course. If people are too lazy or poor to educate their own children (whether through homeschooling or private schools), they should be able to apply for "education assistance" from the government.

[Jami]

Well, I think this COULD be a decent argument (and I don't totally disagree), except that welfare is less than 1% of what we pay taxes on. Most people wouldn't consider 1% to be a "substantial portion" of their income.

 

I would rather keep my 1% and give it directly to those around me where I see need. Dollar for dollar I bet it would go further if dispensed by the deacons at my church or by me directly. And I'm more likely to feel compassion and connection with those whom I'm helping than I do with the welfare system at present. :)

[Nestof3]

Okay -- I admit it. I am being a jerk with a knee-jerk reaction.

 

I am honestly not upset with anyone on this board. We have issues in real life that are going on regarding these conversations which we have been having on the board which are bleeding over onto this board.

 

We are seeing much abuse, and because of that, I am hypersensitive and spewing.

 

I honestly don't want anyone on this board to be in financial ruin, to go hungry, etc. I really don't.

 

Will you please accept my apologies?

[johnandtinagilbert]

lgm,

 

You have to just accept that people who receive assistance do not want to see accountability, regulation, etc. regarding it. I am certain that no one on the board who has or has had assistance is in favor of regulation of it, nor do the abuses really bother them.

 

Moreover, most people are of the mindset that if they qualify for some sort of aid, they should take it, even if they COULD live without it. College educational aid is one example. A relative gave our son a website the other day to go to in order to sign up for college aid. When he discovered it was federal and not private aid, he did not bother going to the website.

 

Oh boy, Nest,

I understand how you could come to this conclusion. I have thought similar things, but would encourage you to use words like "many people" or even "most people" where I added emphasis. Not b/c I'm politcally correct, either -- cuz I am certainly not. I Agree that abuse is the rule. I have personal experience that those who live the Welfare Lifestyle don't want regulation, they just want their benefits. I believe it is an inexperienced mind that says otherwise and from what I have read from this thread (every single post by the way) those on the board who have/are rec'd assistance and are in this discussion (save Joann) have witnessed the abuse and believe it to be a large part of the problem. I will say though, your blanket statement has been disproven in this very thread. Respectfully, did you read my post? We receive assistance. We waited 4 years before we applied, even though we knew we qualified b/c we didn't need it. We continue to work. We continue to pay taxes. We apply honestly, providing every single item ever requested, including every 6-months, our financial information of our business and personal finances. We have a garden. We do buy ice cream or popsicles and occasionally soda. We also have dropped cable, home phone, are down to one car, sold furniture, etc. in order to minimize our personal expenses. If we didn't buy those goodies with our food stamps, we'd use cash...either way, at the end of the month we are buying food with money anyways. We get assistance, we don't get provided for. We don't buy clothes -- ever. They are gifted -- always. Again, not saying this to be a martyr, just to let you know, and hopefully encourage you, there are some on assistance that get "it" and continue for the best, and toward independence. I am for some kind of regulation, b/c I believe the current system needs improvements, but the problem lies in the controversy about "healthy." We cannot afford organic (generally) and I Know it is the healthiest, instead, when I pray over food...I mean it...Please, Lord make this food what my body needs. Even off of aid, we have never been able to afford the best, just what is on sale :)

I respect what your husband is doing with the man you described. I understand that scenario, as we have done similar many, many times with our business. I would, however, encourage you to be a bit more cautious in your blanket statements. Simply from this thread, we see otherwise. Respectfully submitted.

 

I'd like to add, not to you personally, but just add, I would agree completely, as a Christian woman, that if the church (at large), in day to day living, not via tithe so the church building can be charitable, would do more on an individual basis (as some have mentioned here already) there would be no need for gov't assistance. That, I think is another thread...maybe?

 

 

Joann,

I recognize you are not an abuser of the system. I understand you continue to be charitable, even in your own time of need. I know what it means to work for pennies (I just stopped working at a local convenience store). I would, however, encourage you that your experience in this area appears (although maybe I'm wrong), appears to be limited and that your understanding of a Very Large population of abusers does, in fact, exist. My neighbors (Every Single One of them - 7 families) All lie about one thing or another. They have told us we're crazy cuz we tell the truth! The neighborhood we minister in (outside of our own) is filled with mom, after mom, after mom, after grandmom, after grandmom, that perpetuate the cycle of abuse. For every story like yours, I, personally, have witnessed 10 cases of abuse. Yes, we have reported, and b/c of the broken system, we have never seen any changes take place. They system, as a whole (regulation, poor staffing, etc.), is as broken as most other gov't run programs. Am I pleased I live in a country that will help us through tough times? Absolutely. Do I believe we're all properly following the program. No way. Do I take this thread, personally? Nope. Do I think there are more people like you (and me) now applying for aid b/c of the economy? Yup. But I don't think the abuse comments were intended for them, they are in reference to those who have been on the system long term or simply as abusers -- and like it or not, they certainly exist. I don't mean you are an abuser, I just mean...Yes, people, and Lots of them, abuse the system long term.

[johnandtinagilbert]

I would rather keep my 1% and give it directly to those around me where I see need. Dollar for dollar I bet it would go further if dispensed by the deacons at my church or by me directly. And I'm more likely to feel compassion and connection with those whom I'm helping than I do with the welfare system at present. :)

 

I agree completely. I think I could do a lot more with my money than the gov't ever does :) What we pay in taxes throughout the year (we have our own business) would make a huge difference in our budget. We could live with zero assitance if we had that money, And prepare for retirement on our own in a much greater way.

[Impish]

:iagree:I can also state, without hesitation that when I resided in income housing that the cheating and abuses of the system were rampant, and few, FEW families were not cheating. I can think of two, aside from my own that were not ripping off the system and openly bragging about it in my experience. That being said, I did have some sympathy for some of it, because as I explained in my other post, the system was set up as to be almost impossible to get off of, if you were doing it honestly. It was akin to climbing a greased razor blade. Making an extra $40 for babysitting so you could give your kid a birthday party, I had sympathy for. Dealing drugs out of your townhouse, really not so much.

 

I kid you not. We moved out of the province a cpl of weeks after the SWAT team stampeded through the children's play ground. :glare:

[johnandtinagilbert]

Okay -- I admit it. I am being a jerk with a knee-jerk reaction.

 

I am honestly not upset with anyone on this board. We have issues in real life that are going on regarding these conversations which we have been having on the board which are bleeding over onto this board.

 

We are seeing much abuse, and because of that, I am hypersensitive and spewing.

 

I honestly don't want anyone on this board to be in financial ruin, to go hungry, etc. I really don't.

 

Will you please accept my apologies?

 

Yes and thank you.

 

I completely understand. It is very frustrating when you are witnessing a lack of "care" to improve by people who are given every tool possible to succeed. From one Christian to another (me to you :) ) I find that in this fallen world, people without such hope need Jesus. It's often hope that matters and makes the difference. Many people who don't have Him, don't even understand there is a better way. I'll pray for your family, as I consider what your husband (and you) are doing to be a real way to help this man. I don't think the system can ever help as deeply as a relationship and a regular mentor can. Best wishes.

[johnandtinagilbert]

:iagree:I can also state, without hesitation that when I resided in income housing that the cheating and abuses of the system were rampant, and few, FEW families were not cheating. I can think of two, aside from my own that were not ripping off the system and openly bragging about it in my experience. That being said, I did have some sympathy for some of it, because as I explained in my other post, the system was set up as to be almost impossible to get off of, if you were doing it honestly. It was akin to climbing a greased razor blade. Making an extra $40 for babysitting so you could give your kid a birthday party, I had sympathy for. Dealing drugs out of your townhouse, really not so much.

 

I kid you not. We moved out of the province a cpl of weeks after the SWAT team stampeded through the children's play ground. :glare:

Being snarky....Incredible isn't it? I have thought....you live in free housing, you get free food, free childcare, free gifts at Christmas time, free adult education, even job seeking assistance, free bus cards, etc and you still need to have your drug dealing baby daddy sleep in your house.....oh yea! That's how they get all the bling!

 

Seriously, indeed, the cycle is tough. You earn too much, you lose what is supposed to be helping you get through tough times. You don't earn enough, you stay on the system. That's again, why I find it all fundamentally flawed...and always hope that people will help people more and more, and then the gov't won't feel it necessary to fill the void.

[Impish]

Being snarky....Incredible isn't it? I have thought....you live in free housing, you get free food, free childcare, free gifts at Christmas time, free adult education, even job seeking assistance, free bus cards, etc and you still need to have your drug dealing baby daddy sleep in your house.....oh yea! That's how they get all the bling!

 

Seriously, indeed, the cycle is tough. You earn too much, you lose what is supposed to be helping you get through tough times. You don't earn enough, you stay on the system. That's again, why I find it all fundamentally flawed...and always hope that people will help people more and more, and then the gov't won't feel it necessary to fill the void.

I'm in Canada. If you look for my other post, you'll find that my housing wasn't free, it was 30% of my gross, which = 50% of my net. I paid my own childcare, because I worked shifts. I had student loans, which I was told would be forgiven because I was a single mom, but very much were not. Food stamps don't exist in Canada. I don't know anything about free gifts at Christmas, nor free bus cards, don't happen here either.

[johnandtinagilbert]

I'm in Canada. If you look for my other post, you'll find that my housing wasn't free, it was 30% of my gross, which = 50% of my net. I paid my own childcare, because I worked shifts. I had student loans, which I was told would be forgiven because I was a single mom, but very much were not. Food stamps don't exist in Canada. I don't know anything about free gifts at Christmas, nor free bus cards, don't happen here either.

 

Oh, I understood that, Impish:) I meant in America there are Section 8/Projects/Low Cost housing areas where you either pay a small percentage or get totally free housing. Most of these communities have "sponsors," like a major airline for example, that provide gifts at Christmas, new clothes and supplies at the beginning of the year and work in conjunction with other organizations (PAL, Boys Clubs, YMCA, churches, etc.) that have on site, or local areas that offer programs (before/after school care, day care, accept gov't vouchers, food banks) to further help those with financial need. Many organizations open up in areas where the need is high, thus providing not only gov't, but a huge network of assistance. A few of our friends have AMAZING holidays (amount of gifts, I mean) b/c they get freebies from several organizations, while many I know who are not on aid, have much smaller ones, filled with socks and underwear...lol, I remember 2 years ago, dh and I wrapped underwear individually just to lengthen the gift opening part of our holiday, while a friend (single mom, baby daddy drama) had so many gifts (all from sources) that they were opening gifts for 2 hours!

[Renee in NC]

I must have overlooked these -- seriously -- I was looking for them. I guess I'll have to read back over the posts.

 

Actually, I didn't say either way. I have no problems with restrictions on what I could buy with food stamps, as long as it is decided by our duly elected representatives, not by the people who think we shouldn't have food stamps anyway. No baked goods? Fine - I don't really buy them anyway. No chips or soda? No problem. No white bread? Okay.

 

I also specifically said that the abuses infuriate me.

[TravelingChris]

Firs of all, Medicare and Medicaid are two very different programs. If you are employed, you start paying into Medicare when you first become employed be it 16 or 18 or 22, whatever. Then you pay into it all your working life until 65, right now but I am not sure if it is changing along with Social Security. THe rate paid is based on income with a maximum cap. If we are US citizens (I am not sure how residents qualify) and we or our spouse paid the tax for 40 quarters, we will not pay any premiums and get it when we retire.

 

Now Medicaid is an aid program, just like food stamps and WIC. It is based on income and the maximum you can earn varies by state. While there is abuse of the Medicaid system, that is mostly done by the practitioners and medical supply companies and not by the users. Of course, some may use an inappropriate level of care but that really is less of a problem than with some of the other aid programs.

 

 

In terms of statistics, the fact that 50% are on it less than 8 months means that 50% are on it longer. While the current economic downturn is longer than usual, many are on these programs longterm. I think the food stamp budget is overly generous for its family size. I looked at our family size and noticed that it was somewhat less than we were spending on food supplies only in FL and maybe about equal to what we spend here. I am not poor and we are not economizing on our food purchases. We buy steaks, roasts, ice cream, bakery bread, fresh fruits out of season, etc. This is not how I would be spending money if my husband lost his job and I don't think that this is how the FS budget should be set either. I am sure that I could plan healthy meals for a lot less money.

[Renee in NC]

Okay -- I admit it. I am being a jerk with a knee-jerk reaction.

 

I am honestly not upset with anyone on this board. We have issues in real life that are going on regarding these conversations which we have been having on the board which are bleeding over onto this board.

 

We are seeing much abuse, and because of that, I am hypersensitive and spewing.

 

I honestly don't want anyone on this board to be in financial ruin, to go hungry, etc. I really don't.

 

Will you please accept my apologies?

 

I can understand your frustration with what you have posted about the helpers that your dh has had.

 

I don't really know anyone else on assistance and the 2 other families that I know well that were on assistance in the past were not abusers of the system at all. I know that abuse exists because the workers at DSS always act as if the assumption is that you are cheating the system and they just have to find it.

 

There are already regulations, but they are hard to enforce. I would be willing to have workers visit my home to verify what we have told them. I believe they can, but they don't (we had to give directions to our house when we applied.)

[Renee in NC]

In terms of statistics, the fact that 50% are on it less than 8 months means that 50% are on it longer. While the current economic downturn is longer than usual, many are on these programs longterm. I think the food stamp budget is overly generous for its family size. I looked at our family size and noticed that it was somewhat less than we were spending on food supplies only in FL and maybe about equal to what we spend here. I am not poor and we are not economizing on our food purchases. We buy steaks, roasts, ice cream, bakery bread, fresh fruits out of season, etc. This is not how I would be spending money if my husband lost his job and I don't think that this is how the FS budget should be set either. I am sure that I could plan healthy meals for a lot less money.

 

The budgets went up 24% as part of the economic stimulus bill a couple of months ago. It *is* too much I think, and we get much less than the maximum. We don't spend it all either, because I still economize. Not as much as I would have to if we didn't have them, of course.

 

I think the idea was to increase the benefits because more people are reaceiving them and it helps to boost the economy. Not much different than giving billions to the banks.

[Impish]

Oh, I understood that, Impish:) I meant in America there are Section 8/Projects/Low Cost housing areas where you either pay a small percentage or get totally free housing. Most of these communities have "sponsors," like a major airline for example, that provide gifts at Christmas, new clothes and supplies at the beginning of the year and work in conjunction with other organizations (PAL, Boys Clubs, YMCA, churches, etc.) that have on site, or local areas that offer programs (before/after school care, day care, accept gov't vouchers, food banks) to further help those with financial need. Many organizations open up in areas where the need is high, thus providing not only gov't, but a huge network of assistance. A few of our friends have AMAZING holidays (amount of gifts, I mean) b/c they get freebies from several organizations, while many I know who are not on aid, have much smaller ones, filled with socks and underwear...lol, I remember 2 years ago, dh and I wrapped underwear individually just to lengthen the gift opening part of our holiday, while a friend (single mom, baby daddy drama) had so many gifts (all from sources) that they were opening gifts for 2 hours!

I just don't know what to say :svengo:

[pqr]

Well, I think this COULD be a decent argument (and I don't totally disagree), except that welfare is less than 1% of what we pay taxes on. Most people wouldn't consider 1% to be a "substantial portion" of their income.

 

 

Except that it is not "less than 1%" it is actually closer to 2% and that does not include some of the operational costs and other smaller programs or medicade. Think of it this way 1 in every 53 dollars, now to me that seems like a great deal of money.

[johnandtinagilbert]

Except that it is not "less than 1%" it is actually closer to 2% and that does not include some of the operational costs and other smaller programs or medicade. Think of it this way 1 in every 53 dollars, now to me that seems like a great deal of money.

 

You make a good point. I wonder if those numbers include the gov't operational expenses that surround the program, and the classes offered, etc...

[TravelingChris]

It is hard to find how much is spent on welfare since there are so many forms- Food stamps, section 8, medicaid, tanf, etc, etc. But in the United States, in 2000, the amount spent was approximately $430,000,000,000. That amount is higher today but no one has figured out exactly how much higher. THe figure above does not include entitlement programs where you paid in like Social Security, pensions, or Medicare. Another figure I saw was that welfare constitutes 3.2% of the Gross Domestic Product.

[caitlinsmom]

lgm,

 

You have to just accept that people who receive assistance do not want to see accountability, regulation, etc. regarding it. I am certain that no one on the board who has or has had assistance is in favor of regulation of it, nor do the abuses really bother them.

 

Moreover, most people are of the mindset that if they qualify for some sort of aid, they should take it, even if they COULD live without it. College educational aid is one example. A relative gave our son a website the other day to go to in order to sign up for college aid. When he discovered it was federal and not private aid, he did not bother going to the website.

 

Wow! there is really nothing else to say to something like this. Once again a huge assumption.

[5kidsforME]

:iagree:I can also state, without hesitation that when I resided in income housing that the cheating and abuses of the system were rampant, and few, FEW families were not cheating. I can think of two, aside from my own that were not ripping off the system and openly bragging about it in my experience. That being said, I did have some sympathy for some of it, because as I explained in my other post, the system was set up as to be almost impossible to get off of, if you were doing it honestly. It was akin to climbing a greased razor blade. Making an extra $40 for babysitting so you could give your kid a birthday party, I had sympathy for. Dealing drugs out of your townhouse, really not so much.

 

I kid you not. We moved out of the province a cpl of weeks after the SWAT team stampeded through the children's play ground. :glare:

 

 

Making an extra $40 babysitting?? Why not do this all the time and try to get off of assistance? I don't get that.

[Impish]

Because it wasn't something that was a steady thing in that situation.

[5kidsforME]

Because it wasn't something that was a steady thing in that situation.

 

But it was there when she/he wanted to give a birthday party for their child. I am sure more opportunities where available had they looked.

[Penelope]

nm, I'm going to focus on the positive in my world today.

Edited June 2, 2009 by Penelope

[Annabel Lee]

nm

[Murphy101]

Okay -- I admit it. I am being a jerk with a knee-jerk reaction.

 

I am honestly not upset with anyone on this board. We have issues in real life that are going on regarding these conversations which we have been having on the board which are bleeding over onto this board.

 

We are seeing much abuse, and because of that, I am hypersensitive and spewing.

 

I honestly don't want anyone on this board to be in financial ruin, to go hungry, etc. I really don't.

 

Will you please accept my apologies?

 

Gladly accepted!:grouphug:

 

This is the REAL problem.

Becoming jaded.

I admit it's my problem too.

People get so mired in the negatives and abuses they see, that it begins to cloud judgement on the bigger picture - that a lot more good and decent folks do NOT do that.

 

It's kind of like if you live in a bad side of town full of theft and drugs long enough, you can forget that there's areas/folks that don't do those things. Much less that there's areas where people can sleep with window open and doors unlocked at night.

 

Good and honest people also tend to live mostly silent lives. Unfortunately that makes it very easy to forget they exisit.

[Renee in NC]

It is hard to find how much is spent on welfare since there are so many forms- Food stamps, section 8, medicaid, tanf, etc, etc. But in the United States, in 2000, the amount spent was approximately $430,000,000,000. That amount is higher today but no one has figured out exactly how much higher. THe figure above does not include entitlement programs where you paid in like Social Security, pensions, or Medicare. Another figure I saw was that welfare constitutes 3.2% of the Gross Domestic Product.

 

$430 billion? That's less than half of what has been given to corporations for bailouts.

Edited June 2, 2009 by Renee in FL

[pqr]

$430 billion? That's less than half of what has been given to corporations for bailouts.

 

 

That may be true but has no bearing on the issue. Further, many who oppose welfare abuse also opposed bail outs.

[Impish]

But it was there when she/he wanted to give a birthday party for their child. I am sure more opportunities where available had they looked.

Sorry, but you're asking about a situation that spans back over 7 yrs ago, and in another province to boot. All I remember is that she was filling in for the regular sitter, and wasn't *reporting* the money because otherwise it would have gone to her rent instead of to the birthday party. It was the 'cheating' aspect I was referring to, the non reporting. I honestly don't recall if she babysat regularily and reported it or not, just remember her telling me that she wasn't reporting that because of the birthday party...that's the only reason it sticks out in my mind, because of her shame and fear...that she was having to 'hide' $40 so her kid could have a birthday, and was so ashamed of that, and frightened that housing would find out. She could have been evicted for it.

 

Ack! I remember. She was a student, during the day. I had asked her why she was home from school, if her son was sick. That's what it was.

[5kidsforME]

Sorry, but you're asking about a situation that spans back over 7 yrs ago, and in another province to boot. All I remember is that she was filling in for the regular sitter, and wasn't *reporting* the money because otherwise it would have gone to her rent instead of to the birthday party. It was the 'cheating' aspect I was referring to, the non reporting. I honestly don't recall if she babysat regularily and reported it or not, just remember her telling me that she wasn't reporting that because of the birthday party...that's the only reason it sticks out in my mind, because of her shame and fear...that she was having to 'hide' $40 so her kid could have a birthday, and was so ashamed of that, and frightened that housing would find out. She could have been evicted for it.

 

Ack! I remember. She was a student, during the day. I had asked her why she was home from school, if her son was sick. That's what it was.

 

 

Seriously, it is neither here nor there. The system IMO opinion is totally messed up. IMO she shouldn't have to lie about the $40 but then again I think it was wrong of her to lie period.

[astrid]

I read a long excerpt from this book and think it should be required reading for everyone. It clearly showed how the author, despite her education, intelligence, and the security of her health insurance and retirement funds, couldn't make it as a service sector worker on the money she was paid. As I recall she cut her experiment short because she was getting ill.

 

I haven't read all of this thread, so maybe it's been mentioned, but did anyone see the "30 Days" episode where the couple tried to live in (Cleveland? Cincinnati? Some city in Ohio, I recall....) on minimum wage? It was incredibly eye-opening for me. Here's a link to the episode:

http://vod.fxnetworks.com/fod/play.php?sh=thirtydays&ep=45

 

Astrid

[OH_Homeschooler]

Of course. If people are too lazy or poor to educate their own children (whether through homeschooling or private schools), they should be able to apply for "education assistance" from the government.

 

 

Um, you might want to remember that there are some people who are "lazy" enough to send their kids to public school on these boards.

 

I can see why threads like this are usually closed down quickly. They really bring out the ugly side in some people (not even referring to the quoted post).

[Impish]

Seriously, it is neither here nor there. The system IMO opinion is totally messed up. IMO she shouldn't have to lie about the $40 but then again I think it was wrong of her to lie period.

No, she shouldn't have had to lie. Was it wrong of her to lie? Yes. But, I understood her wanting to get her son clothes and a toy for his birthday, something she could not have done if she'd reported the income.

[mom2agang]

My family gets food stamps and I am not ashamed. My husband works 70hrs a week and I see it this way: They my husband has to make $250,000 a year for us not to be low income. Trust me he don't even make a 1/4 of that. I would rather spend my tax dollars instead of some scammer. I have no problem people who need it getting help.