No Soda Bought With Food Stamps?

[Hunter]

Cut everything by a certain percentage. Everything.

 

Cuts like this are disasterous. A huge cut was suddenly made in our state's department of mental health. The department's reaction was to lay off many of it's social workers and automatically cut off social service workers for all clients who were no longer homeless no matter what their current condition was.

 

I knew one girl with Anorexia Nervosa, who was told about the cut, by her social worker, while in the hospital on full bed rest, with a feeding tube down her nose, and I think restrained so she wouldn't pull it out. So now the hospital had no outside worker to help them set up out patient care for this very sick young lady, who they had to keep longer. It ended out costing the tax payers a lot more in the long run.

 

And if we are cutting all programs at the same time, the hospital would be discharging young ladies like this to reduced food stamps too? Now there is a good plan.

 

Well it is a good plan if you believe genocide is okay and think the United Declaration of Human Rights is wrong/bad/unfair.

 

If we as a world or country believe that saving the lives of young ladies with Anorexia is important, then we cannot just cut all programs at once.

 

And if we cut WIC what do you think will happen then? WIC has been sucessful in lowering medical costs of pregnant moms and babies. So you want to cut the free medical care AND WIC at the same time. You do realize that infant mortality will climb, but maybe that is okay.

 

My exhusband and the other people from my old life before my divorce all believed genocide was acceptable and weeding out weaker families was good for the planet as a whole. I have almost no contact with anyone from my old life as many of them do not recogize my right to even be alive right now, never mind accept any services funded by tax payers. They think I am evil to steal THEIR money.

 

My MD and mental health team get so frustrated sometimes trying to convince me I have the right to be alive while disabled, never mind the right to a "good life". I'll often stop taking care of myself in an area and stop receiving a service, because I feel guilty. I've only stopped doing that mostly, because in the long run, I end out running up bigger bills. So unless I decide to commit suicide, I need to stop trying to save the tax payers a few pennies to just cost them tens of thousands of dollars.

 

And I take gifts without reporting them. Because again it ended out costing the tax payer more when I didn't do that :-0 My constant seizing scrambles my brain. I'm not very efficient with my money and time anymore and people just throw money and things at me when they see me getting disorganized, because stuff makes life easier sometimes. And watching me seize makes the people around me uncomfortable. It makes THEM feel better to buy me dinner and then take me into a book store to pick out a book to curl up in bed with, that doesn't need to be returned anywhere or special ordered beforehand. Instead of leaving me alone in my kitchen to try and assemble a meal from staples and then resort to only having access to the books available from the local library as my memory loss make it so hard for me to keep track of the interlibrary loans, and then I need help as I'm crying and trying to find the lost $150.00 book.

 

I struggle with whether I have the right to survive and especially whether I have the right to eat nice things and own nice books. I sleep on nothing but a piece of foam on the floor and my only furniture is a couple folding chairs and tables, but I have an iPad and a friend pays my for internet for me and she often buys me nice books and wants to take me out to dinner tonight. And I read things things like the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and I hear what my doctor says and sometimes I parrot what they say, but deep down, I really still believe it's a shameful thing for me to enjoy anything. The word pleasure makes me literally tremble.

 

My friend knows she cannot bring me into certain restraunts, because I won't be able to eat the food there because I will be so filled with a deep black shame. That I will leave there unsure of even my right to exist.

 

I find all of this confusing, but I do know that regulating the food stamps will not save the tax payer any money. That I do know.

[kalanamak]

It is a very nasty accusation.

 

 

I'm still befuddled. What corporate interest is pretending to have a grassroots groundswell for freebies? On this board? In Washington?

[clarkacademy]

Do none of you have senses of humor? Is the only joy you get debating on a homeschool board and trying really hard to make it known how great you are? There has been quite a few people responding on the whole gift for a child. Yes I chose to write that. Again it was comical. Take a joke :chillpill: in the end you will still feel great on your opinions and I will still feel fine with mine.

 

I would never refuse a gift for my child. Never. It is wrong. You are to be grateful for your blessings whether you wanted them or not. Any gift is a blessing. No child should lose out on stuff due to finances if someone is wanting to bless them with it, if you could read my post you would see what that was saying.

[justamouse]

I would like to think that recipients of social programs paid for out of my taxes at least appreciate the program.

 

So where should they all send the thank you notes?

 

 

I spent way to much time thinking about this thread last night.

 

Cheryl, when that man insulted you at the checkout line, I really think it was the universe trying to show you how such ignorant judgment felt. It offended us for you. But because you're so busy defending him, you couldn't see how horrible his actions were.

[Slartibartfast]

I'm still befuddled. What corporate interest is pretending to have a grassroots groundswell for freebies? On this board? In Washington?

 

Some boards have more readers than some tv shows have viewers.

[Elaine]

That's the problem I have. I have great ideas to make something better but it costs twice as much! :glare: I truly want to help people. I'm really not a bad person. :crying:

 

Cheryl,

You are not a bad person. I have agreed with nearly everything that you have posted in this rather long and cantankerous thread. The bottom line is this: personal responsibility. You clearly know what that means, and many others don't.

 

I don't care if someone buys soda with food stamps. My bigger issue is if they actually need the food stamps. You can't legislate that people purchase and consume healthy food, it is just common sense to eat nutrient rich food. But you can decide who receives the benefits. If I had my druthers all aid would stop and everyone would need to re-apply, and us tax paying citizens would get to decide who was able or not to benefit from government handouts of our tax money. But that's just me. A horrible, greedy, evil, judgmental, capitalist loving pig.

 

And, Wow! Just, wow!

 

See, I did it for you. ;)

[justamouse]

I find all of this confusing, but I do know that regulating the food stamps will not save the tax payer any money. That I do know.

:grouphug::grouphug: I am so, so sorry. And you are so brave for posting that-especially on this thread.

[Slartibartfast]

Cheryl,

You are not a bad person. I have agreed with nearly everything that you have posted in this rather long and cantankerous thread. The bottom line is this: personal responsibility. You clearly know what that means, and many others don't.

 

I don't care if someone buys soda with food stamps. My bigger issue is if they actually need the food stamps. You can't legislate that people purchase and consume healthy food, it is just common sense to eat nutrient rich food. But you can decide who receives the benefits. If I had my druthers all aid would stop and everyone would need to re-apply, and us tax paying citizens would get to decide who was able or not to benefit from government handouts of our tax money. But that's just me. A horrible, greedy, evil, judgmental, capitalist loving pig.

 

And, Wow! Just, wow!

 

See, I did it for you. ;)

 

 

Sorry, I dont find your post that shocking. I think most of us here are capitalist pigs.

 

I just think the compliations of that would cost more than it would save.

 

I know people who are poster people of the types that give welfare a bad name. They were recently forced to get jobs. I admit I was pleased. So...in reality despite the fact that we never agree I agree there are people taking advantage.

 

I do think those that are taking advantage are the minority.

[LittleIzumi]

Cuts like this are disasterous. A huge cut was suddenly made in our state's department of mental health. The department's reaction was to lay off many of it's social workers and automatically cut off social service workers for all clients who were no longer homeless no matter what their current condition was.

 

I knew one girl with Anorexia Nervosa, who was told about the cut, by her social worker, while in the hospital on full bed rest, with a feeding tube down her nose, and I think restrained so she wouldn't pull it out. So now the hospital had no outside worker to help them set up out patient care for this very sick young lady, who they had to keep longer. It ended out costing the tax payers a lot more in the long run.

 

And if we are cutting all programs at the same time, the hospital would be discharging young ladies like this to reduced food stamps too? Now there is a good plan.

 

Well it is a good plan if you believe genocide is okay and think the United Declaration of Human Rights is wrong/bad/unfair.

 

If we as a world or country believe that saving the lives of young ladies with Anorexia is important, then we cannot just cut all programs at once.

 

And if we cut WIC what do you think will happen then? WIC has been sucessful in lowering medical costs of pregnant moms and babies. So you want to cut the free medical care AND WIC at the same time. You do realize that infant mortality will climb, but maybe that is okay.

 

My exhusband and the other people from my old life before my divorce all believed genocide was acceptable and weeding out weaker families was good for the planet as a whole. I have almost no contact with anyone from my old life as many of them do not recogize my right to even be alive right now, never mind accept any services funded by tax payers. They think I am evil to steal THEIR money.

 

My MD and mental health team get so frustrated sometimes trying to convince me I have the right to be alive while disabled, never mind the right to a "good life". I'll often stop taking care of myself in an area and stop receiving a service, because I feel guilty. I've only stopped doing that mostly, because in the long run, I end out running up bigger bills. So unless I decide to commit suicide, I need to stop trying to save the tax payers a few pennies to just cost them tens of thousands of dollars.

 

And I take gifts without reporting them. Because again it ended out costing the tax payer more when I didn't do that :-0 My constant seizing scrambles my brain. I'm not very efficient with my money and time anymore and people just throw money and things at me when they see me getting disorganized, because stuff makes life easier sometimes. And watching me seize makes the people around me uncomfortable. It makes THEM feel better to buy me dinner and then take me into a book store to pick out a book to curl up in bed with, that doesn't need to be returned anywhere or special ordered beforehand. Instead of leaving me alone in my kitchen to try and assemble a meal from staples and then resort to only having access to the books available from the local library as my memory loss make it so hard for me to keep track of the interlibrary loans, and then I need help as I'm crying and trying to find the lost $150.00 book.

 

I struggle with whether I have the right to survive and especially whether I have the right to eat nice things and own nice books. I sleep on nothing but a piece of foam on the floor and my only furniture is a couple folding chairs and tables, but I have an iPad and a friend pays my for internet for me and she often buys me nice books and wants to take me out to dinner tonight. And I read things things like the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and I hear what my doctor says and sometimes I parrot what they say, but deep down, I really still believe it's a shameful thing for me to enjoy anything. The word pleasure makes me literally tremble.

 

My friend knows she cannot bring me into certain restraunts, because I won't be able to eat the food there because I will be so filled with a deep black shame. That I will leave there unsure of even my right to exist.

 

I find all of this confusing, but I do know that regulating the food stamps will not save the tax payer any money. That I do know.

 

:grouphug::grouphug::grouphug:

[Slartibartfast]

Hunter, :grouphug::grouphug::grouphug:

[Guest Dulcimeramy]

Do none of you have senses of humor? Is the only joy you get debating on a homeschool board and trying really hard to make it known how great you are? There has been quite a few people responding on the whole gift for a child. Yes I chose to write that. Again it was comical. Take a joke :chillpill: in the end you will still feel great on your opinions and I will still feel fine with mine.

 

I would never refuse a gift for my child. Never. It is wrong. You are to be grateful for your blessings whether you wanted them or not. Any gift is a blessing. No child should lose out on stuff due to finances if someone is wanting to bless them with it, if you could read my post you would see what that was saying.

 

So it's "I'm right and you're wrong," and I obviously have no sense of humor and only find joy in debating on the internet?

 

Logic. Formal logic. It is a wonderful tool. I'm glad I've studied it.

 

I type 85 wpm so this isn't taking more than a few moments of my day. As the happily married mother of four great kids, I have many opportunities to experience joy. These assumptions are as bad as your other ones.

[clarkacademy]

So it's "I'm right and you're wrong," and I obviously have no sense of humor and only find joy in debating on the internet?

 

Logic. Formal logic. It is a wonderful tool. I'm glad I've studied it.

 

I type 85 wpm so this isn't taking more than a few moments of my day. As the happily married mother of four great kids, I have many opportunities to experience joy. These assumptions are as bad as your other ones.

 

Your the one getting snotty over a joke. I don't care how fast you type or about your husband. I never said I was right your wrong. I gave an opinion. You are the one he!! bent on this thread to be the "right" opinion. I hope your happy opportunities last for the sake of your children. If they don't you may have to sell their pony.

[unsinkable]

Well maybe they figure if he has a pony he won't need shoes? I am sorry you walked into that one. I never said you personally you. I stated what I had read key word POSTS with an s for meaning more than one. Are you a bit defensive on that? I said nothing to you. Me thinks the lady does protest too much.

 

Amy didn't walk into anything.

 

You chose to write that.

 

Do none of you have senses of humor? Is the only joy you get debating on a homeschool board and trying really hard to make it known how great you are? There has been quite a few people responding on the whole gift for a child. Yes I chose to write that. Again it was comical. Take a joke :chillpill: in the end you will still feel great on your opinions and I will still feel fine with mine.

 

I would never refuse a gift for my child. Never. It is wrong. You are to be grateful for your blessings whether you wanted them or not. Any gift is a blessing. No child should lose out on stuff due to finances if someone is wanting to bless them with it, if you could read my post you would see what that was saying.

 

My point was/is don't "make a joke" and then say someone "walked into that one."

 

If you want to joke, own it. Part of owning it is realizing that not everyone will think it is funny.

[Slartibartfast]

My point was/is don't "make a joke" and then say someone "walked into that one."

 

If you want to joke, own it. Part of owning it is realizing that not everyone will think it is funny.

 

:iagree:

[clarkacademy]

My point was/is don't "make a joke" and then say someone "walked into that one."

 

If you want to joke, own it. Part of owning it is realizing that not everyone will think it is funny.

 

I own it I said it and it was funny. Especially when you take anothers words and give it a whole new light. That would be "walking into it". Oh and for the record quite a few others on this thread thought it was the funniest thing yet they just didn't want to respond and have you blast them. I don't care though.

[Cheryl in NM]

 

Cheryl, when that man insulted you at the checkout line, I really think it was the universe trying to show you how such ignorant judgment felt. It offended us for you. But because you're so busy defending him, you couldn't see how horrible his actions were.

 

I was waiting for this accusation. I posted this experience to show that offense does not need to be taken. Dignity has it's place.

 

Just because he acted offensively doesn't mean I have to take offense. My personal opinion regarding that episode is that he had some guilt over something and took it out on me. It didn't really have anything to do with me; I was just his toilet. I can chose to be upset about it or not let it upset me. Long story short, why in the world would I let something get to me that was said by someone who doesn't know me or my situation in life? Besides that, the man had a good point. My food choices were not healthy; it just wasn't his place to tell me since I was asking him to provide it. If I was asking him to pay for my food how could I possibly take offense at the food he wished to provide for me?

 

Cheryl,

You are not a bad person. I have agreed with nearly everything that you have posted in this rather long and cantankerous thread. The bottom line is this: personal responsibility. You clearly know what that means, and many others don't.

 

I don't care if someone buys soda with food stamps. My bigger issue is if they actually need the food stamps. You can't legislate that people purchase and consume healthy food, it is just common sense to eat nutrient rich food. But you can decide who receives the benefits. If I had my druthers all aid would stop and everyone would need to re-apply, and us tax paying citizens would get to decide who was able or not to benefit from government handouts of our tax money. But that's just me. A horrible, greedy, evil, judgmental, capitalist loving pig.

 

And, Wow! Just, wow!

 

See, I did it for you. ;)

 

Thank you! :grouphug:

Edited June 5, 2011 by Cheryl in NM

[Mrs Mungo]

I have no idea what is going on in this thread. I've been making pieces for a cake all morning. :confused:

 

Here's the problem I have with this thread:

 

I am fine with reforms. *I* would be fine with requiring a real home economics class in all schools-budgeting, basic cooking, etc. I would be fine with offering classes in frugal cooking or whatnot. I think urban gardening movements are fantastic and can be a true blessing.

 

But, I see those as long-term ideas that will require more than a change in the food stamp program.

 

I am *not* fine with demanding short-term fixes that don't *really* fix anything. If you want to say "here is a list of healthy foods, you may only buy these items with food stamps," that would be ignoring the *serious*, child-endangering consequences of those actions.

Edited June 5, 2011 by Mrs Mungo

[Slartibartfast]

I agree Eliana.

 

Reform is needed.

 

I think part of the problem is that there are large lobbies that stand in the way of true progress. The food industry has too much power.

Edited June 5, 2011 by Sis

[LittleIzumi]

I was waiting for this accusation. I posted this experience to show that offense does not need to be taken. Dignity has it's place.

 

Just because he acted offensively doesn't mean I have to take offense. My personal opinion regarding that episode is that he had some guilt over something and took it out on me. It didn't really have anything to do with me; I was just his toilet. I can chose to be upset about it or not let it upset me. Long story short, why in the world would I let something get to me that was said by someone who doesn't know me or my situation in life? Besides that, the man had a good point. My food choices were not healthy; it just wasn't his place to tell me since I was asking him to provide it. If I was asking him to pay for my food how could I possibly take offense at the food he wished to provide for me?

 

 

 

Thank you! :grouphug:

 

Ah, THAT phrases pretty well how this thread has felt with all the back & forth. It seems like many people have been upset by something related (like paying lots of taxes, that do support FS along with many other programs, or like government intervention/entitlements) and end up placing a lot of that frustration directly onto those of us using FS for things like buying a soda. There's been a lot of anger and most of it has little to do with the food stamps and FS users themselves (but at the system supporting it instead), so we're kind of caught in the middle.

[LittleIzumi]

I don't disagree Elaine.

 

Reform is needed.

 

I think part of the problem is that there are large lobbies that stand in the way of true progress. The food insustry has too much power.

 

:iagree::iagree::iagree::iagree::iagree::iagree::glare::glare:

[Cheryl in NM]

Many view the WIC program as successful. I have seen it defended in this thread. Why would it be bad to change the FS system to mimic WIC? That's all I'm suggesting.

[Cheryl in NM]

Ah, THAT phrases pretty well how this thread has felt with all the back & forth. It seems like many people have been upset by something related (like paying lots of taxes, that do support FS along with many other programs, or like government intervention/entitlements) and end up placing a lot of that frustration directly onto those of us using FS for things like buying a soda. There's been a lot of anger and most of it has little to do with the food stamps and FS users themselves (but at the system supporting it instead), so we're kind of caught in the middle.

 

This really goes both ways. It is unfair to state that non FS recipients are mad about taxes and taking it out personally on FS recipients but to not acknowledge that FS recipients might have some baggage that they are taking out on non FS recipients. I agree that the emotions involved in this thread have caused many people to not really read the words that were posted and respond without taking posts personally.

[LittleIzumi]

Many view the WIC program as successful. I have seen it defended in this thread. Why would it be bad to change the FS system to mimic WIC? That's all I'm suggesting.

 

My dd is allergic to dairy, so cheese/milk/formula vouchers aren't really that helpful for us. As a result (plus the many "check-ups" you need just to qualify for that handful of food) I've never used WIC and can't comment knowledgeably on its efficacy.

[texasmama]

Many view the WIC program as successful. I have seen it defended in this thread. Why would it be bad to change the FS system to mimic WIC? That's all I'm suggesting.

 

Not a terrible idea, but WIC is very complicated to follow. Yes, there are signs on foods listing what is permissible. Sometimes foods do not "pass" at the register even though the person on WIC has attempted very hard to choose an item which is on the list and "follow the rules". Also, the listing of foods is very specific and narrow, which is overly restrictive. There are some choices to be made but not as many as could be offered.

 

It is a "broken" system in that the documentation needed to qualify and the way the offices go about gathering this documentation is inefficient. It is also a "one size fits all" approach, in that participants must attend nutrition classes in order to continue to receive benefits which amount to about $40 worth of food per month. It is a high cost for a low return, both for clients and for the program. It is most likely less abused than the food stamps program, but that is just my guess, not based on any research.

 

WIC is meant to be supplementary nutrition only, and it serves a narrow population, pregnant women and children five and under. The income guidelines for qualification are higher than food stamps, as well.

[Mrs Mungo]

Many view the WIC program as successful. I have seen it defended in this thread. Why would it be bad to change the FS system to mimic WIC? That's all I'm suggesting.

 

Here is a list of foods you can/can not get under WIC

 

1. A lot of families with allergies/food intolerances have trouble with this list.

 

2. Some of it doesn't even make sense! You can buy junk cereal, but not white potatoes? Why can't you buy dried fruit? It can be a great source of iron.

 

3. It doesn't take into account ease of cooking. A lot of people on food stamps don't have access to a real kitchen.

 

4. It doesn't cover fresh meat.

 

5. Again, these are not all items that can be easily found at small inner city grocery stores. Go to a 7-11 and see how many of the items on this list you can find. *No* substituting, you can't get white or wheat bread instead of whole grain, for example.

[texasmama]

My dd is allergic to dairy, so cheese/milk/formula vouchers aren't really that helpful for us. As a result (plus the many "check-ups" you need just to qualify for that handful of food) I've never used WIC and can't comment knowledgeably on its efficacy.

 

WIC offers soy options now, but a doctor must sign a note for a child to receive this option rather than dairy.

[Slartibartfast]

WIC offers soy options now, but a doctor must sign a note for a child to receive this option rather than dairy.

 

But soy is not really a great alternative. It is also high allergen. There should be more options.

[cdrumm4448]

That doesn't seem arbitrary?

 

No. It seems responsible.

[texasmama]

But soy is not really a great alternative. It is also high allergen. There should be more options.

 

I agree. What about rice or almond milk? Those are not covered.

[Slartibartfast]

No. It seems responsible.

 

It sees pretty irresponsible to me to make blind cuts without any consideration of logistics.

 

 

All we need is a bunch of mental/elderly patients on the streets because people just make cuts without any consideration of consequences.

Edited June 5, 2011 by Sis

[cdrumm4448]

Cuts like this are disasterous. A huge cut was suddenly made in our state's department of mental health. The department's reaction was to lay off many of it's social workers and automatically cut off social service workers for all clients who were no longer homeless no matter what their current condition was.

 

I knew one girl with Anorexia Nervosa, who was told about the cut, by her social worker, while in the hospital on full bed rest, with a feeding tube down her nose, and I think restrained so she wouldn't pull it out. So now the hospital had no outside worker to help them set up out patient care for this very sick young lady, who they had to keep longer. It ended out costing the tax payers a lot more in the long run.

 

And if we are cutting all programs at the same time, the hospital would be discharging young ladies like this to reduced food stamps too? Now there is a good plan.

 

Well it is a good plan if you believe genocide is okay and think the United Declaration of Human Rights is wrong/bad/unfair.

 

If we as a world or country believe that saving the lives of young ladies with Anorexia is important, then we cannot just cut all programs at once.

 

And if we cut WIC what do you think will happen then? WIC has been sucessful in lowering medical costs of pregnant moms and babies. So you want to cut the free medical care AND WIC at the same time. You do realize that infant mortality will climb, but maybe that is okay.

 

My exhusband and the other people from my old life before my divorce all believed genocide was acceptable and weeding out weaker families was good for the planet as a whole. I have almost no contact with anyone from my old life as many of them do not recogize my right to even be alive right now, never mind accept any services funded by tax payers. They think I am evil to steal THEIR money.

 

My MD and mental health team get so frustrated sometimes trying to convince me I have the right to be alive while disabled, never mind the right to a "good life". I'll often stop taking care of myself in an area and stop receiving a service, because I feel guilty. I've only stopped doing that mostly, because in the long run, I end out running up bigger bills. So unless I decide to commit suicide, I need to stop trying to save the tax payers a few pennies to just cost them tens of thousands of dollars.

 

And I take gifts without reporting them. Because again it ended out costing the tax payer more when I didn't do that :-0 My constant seizing scrambles my brain. I'm not very efficient with my money and time anymore and people just throw money and things at me when they see me getting disorganized, because stuff makes life easier sometimes. And watching me seize makes the people around me uncomfortable. It makes THEM feel better to buy me dinner and then take me into a book store to pick out a book to curl up in bed with, that doesn't need to be returned anywhere or special ordered beforehand. Instead of leaving me alone in my kitchen to try and assemble a meal from staples and then resort to only having access to the books available from the local library as my memory loss make it so hard for me to keep track of the interlibrary loans, and then I need help as I'm crying and trying to find the lost $150.00 book.

 

I struggle with whether I have the right to survive and especially whether I have the right to eat nice things and own nice books. I sleep on nothing but a piece of foam on the floor and my only furniture is a couple folding chairs and tables, but I have an iPad and a friend pays my for internet for me and she often buys me nice books and wants to take me out to dinner tonight. And I read things things like the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and I hear what my doctor says and sometimes I parrot what they say, but deep down, I really still believe it's a shameful thing for me to enjoy anything. The word pleasure makes me literally tremble.

 

My friend knows she cannot bring me into certain restraunts, because I won't be able to eat the food there because I will be so filled with a deep black shame. That I will leave there unsure of even my right to exist.

 

I find all of this confusing, but I do know that regulating the food stamps will not save the tax payer any money. That I do know.

 

That's quite a leap: cuts across the board to genocide. We as a country don't have the money to fix every problem, every time. Now go ahead and tell me how we should increase taxes on the rich. Even if we took 100% of the assets of people making over $250,000 per year, we still wouldn't have enough money for this country's spending for one year. And what should we do about next year? The rich will have been tapped out.

 

Where do you want all the money to come from?

[cdrumm4448]

So where should they all send the thank you notes?

 

 

I spent way to much time thinking about this thread last night.

 

Cheryl, when that man insulted you at the checkout line, I really think it was the universe trying to show you how such ignorant judgment felt. It offended us for you. But because you're so busy defending him, you couldn't see how horrible his actions were.

 

If the government wasn't in the way, and people could give directly to other people, the thank you notes would go directly to the giver.

[cdrumm4448]

Cheryl,

You are not a bad person. I have agreed with nearly everything that you have posted in this rather long and cantankerous thread. The bottom line is this: personal responsibility. You clearly know what that means, and many others don't.

 

I don't care if someone buys soda with food stamps. My bigger issue is if they actually need the food stamps. You can't legislate that people purchase and consume healthy food, it is just common sense to eat nutrient rich food. But you can decide who receives the benefits. If I had my druthers all aid would stop and everyone would need to re-apply, and us tax paying citizens would get to decide who was able or not to benefit from government handouts of our tax money. But that's just me. A horrible, greedy, evil, judgmental, capitalist loving pig.

 

And, Wow! Just, wow!

 

See, I did it for you. ;)

 

I am right there with you.

[cdrumm4448]

Logic. Formal logic. It is a wonderful tool. I'm glad I've studied it. QUOTE]

 

Directness is a better tactic for argument than sarcasm.

[Scarlett]

This has been addressed over and over ad nauseum in this thread - it is NOT an abuse if it is legal. Right now it is legal and therefore, not an abuse.

 

My nostrils would flare if someone were paying that close of attention to what I was buying and how I paid for it!

 

Yes and think about this. Maybe that boy with the FS card had eaten dinner at each of his friends house every night that week because his mom works the third shift. So she didn't have to buy as much groceries for her family and so who cares if the boy treats his friends to a candy bar and soda? I mean really WHO CARES?

 

I don't begrudge a treat for those who have next to nothing.

[cdrumm4448]

Let's see, right now someone who can't write an intelligible sentence is trying to defend a non-opinion with a bad joke. Other than that, I have no idea either. ;)

 

That was really helpful.

[Cheryl in NM]

Ya'll are jumping to a bunch of conclusions. I said "mimic" WIC, not expand the program to include the rest of the population. When I originally presented my idea I said it would be based on a WIC-like structure. I mean a WIC structure. Where only certain foods would be allowed but a large variety that would allow for allergies, disabled and elderly.

[Mrs Mungo]

Ya'll are jumping to a bunch of conclusions. I said "mimic" WIC, not expand the program to include the rest of the population. When I originally presented my idea I said it would be based on a WIC-like structure. I mean a WIC structure. Where only certain foods would be allowed but a large variety that would allow for allergies, disabled and elderly.

 

We disagree with it because it would cost twice as much to fund it that way. People who are in favor of cuts to these programs *are also* the ones saying we should spend twice as much on administration as we do now.

[cdrumm4448]

It sees pretty irresponsible to me to make blind cuts without any consideration of logistics.

 

 

All we need is a bunch of mental/elderly patients on the streets because people just make cuts without any consideration of consequences.

 

And what do you think the consequences are of spending money we do not have?

[cdrumm4448]

To choose a certain number and cut everything by that, regardless of need or consequence?

 

I think we see responsibility very differently.

 

Could you explain your reasoning a little more, please? Perhaps I am misunderstanding.

 

Quite simply, every group says,"Cut-JUST NOT US (or my program!") The only fair way to do it is cut a consistent amount across the board. We have a habit in the country of making things harder than they need to be.

[Mrs Mungo]

And what do you think the consequences are of spending money we do not have?

 

Has anyone here said they were not in favor of any kind of cuts in government programs? No. What people have said is, this is a stupid place to start because it is a tiny amount of the federal budget.

[Slartibartfast]

And what do you think the consequences are of spending money we do not have?

 

So you are ok with elderly and mental patients being thrown out on the streets?

[cdrumm4448]

We disagree with it because it would cost twice as much to fund it that way. People who are in favor of cuts to these programs *are also* the ones saying we should spend twice as much on administration as we do now.

 

Not everyone is saying that. I would like to see administration reduced also.

[Mrs Mungo]

Not everyone is saying that. I would like to see administration reduced also.

 

But, you have offered no ideas on how to make that happen without serious consequences.

[cdrumm4448]

Has anyone here said they were not in favor of any kind of cuts in government programs? No. What people have said is, this is a stupid place to start because it is a tiny amount of the federal budget.

 

Every group says cut-just go after someone else. That's how we got into this mess.

[cdrumm4448]

So you are ok with elderly and mental patients being thrown out on the streets?

 

Private charity.

[Lady Florida.]

Recipients ARE using my money, as well as many other people's money. We SHOULD have a say in what they buy.

 

But we don't live in a direct democracy. You can work to elect representatives whose values are in line with yours. You can write to your elected officials and give them your opinion. You can even run for office yourself if you meet the requirements. You can run on a food stamp reform platform. But you and I as private citizens don't get to make the decisions. We only get to vote for those who do make them. That's the way this great country is set up.

[cdrumm4448]

But, you have offered no ideas on how to make that happen without serious consequences.

 

No one here has offered ideas on how to reduce spending to within what we take in.

[*Lulu*]

Every group says cut-just go after someone else. That's how we got into this mess.

 

 

I don't see anyone treating FS as a sacred cow, or identifying it as their cause. What I do see is that posters are repeatedly calling for us to start with the programs where a cut would make a noticeable difference to the nation's bottom line.

[cdrumm4448]

But we don't live in a direct democracy. You can work to elect representatives whose values are in line with yours. You can write to your elected officials and give them your opinion. You can even run for office yourself if you meet the requirements. You can run on a food stamp reform platform. But you and I as private citizens don't get to make the decisions. We only get to vote for those who do make them. That's the way this great country is set up.

 

There aren't too many people who contact their reps as often as I do. And I am quite active in getting new people elected who do agree with me.