Food Stamps at restaurants?

[Joanne]

I am sorry but they are not worth feeding. I know a relatively who is a drug addictive. For her child's sack, I wish she didn't have the welfare with the drug usage

 

Not worth feeding? :001_huh::confused: NOT WORTH FEEDING?

 

That is beyond brutal; and counter-productive in every way.

[Mergath]

well, we did, we offer to tutor her and pay for her GED, she won't accept it, It is much MUCH easier just to get welfare and taking drug

 

Welfare has a five year lifetime limit now, so things will have to change for her at some point.

[In2why]

And in a situation like that, the person would go to prison and the child would be placed somewhere else. Regardless of what a person has done, though, they have the basic right to food.

 

 

She went to jail and the child was placed with us until her family could take custody. Doesn't change history or the fact that she will carry scars forever. Perhaps if Mom had lost custody sooner she might have been spared.

I don't begrudge anyone food ever and I know that the kids we see as emergency foster parents are not the norm, but sure some parents keep their kids partly because of the check that comes with them, and also because they are too sick to know how to love them.

[mommyrooch]

And who's to determine that eligibility at the time of purchase? It's not exactly an easily enforced "rule."

 

There was a time I would have liked to have qualified for food stamps. They had even sent us an EBT card and THEN sent us a letter stating we didn't qualify. We've often been "stuck in the middle". I agree that the rules seem convoluted but really, just allow them to eat, regardless of where they purchase their food.

 

If you're going to get up in arms with "well, I pay those taxes!" I could easily turn around and say, "I'm a veteran. I spent time defending your freedom" and then make suggestions about how I think you should enjoy that freedom. But I won't. It is a FREE country, not a perfect one. Let the people eat.

 

:iagree:

[leeannpal]

:iagree::iagree::iagree:

 

This may indeed be a good option for people on food stamps who can't cook, for whatever reason. But, this is happening because it will benefit corporations and corporations were asking for it, not because it will benefit the poor (whether it will or not) or because poor people were asking for it.

 

Not only do corporations and our government officials think up these schemes to benefit themselves, but I believe they actually encourage class warfare to a certain degree.

[Lady Florida.]

I'm not sure how I feel about the drug test thing' date=' but if only 2.5% failed the drug screen then food stamp recipients must be MUCH less likely to be on drugs than the average worker! [/quote']

 

Yes, according to the article I read. It was in the local paper last week, and it did point out that the number was lower than the general population. Interesting, isn't it?

[OnTheBrink]

A requirement? That's making the assumption that people on food stamps have no knowledge of how to eat or budget well. Which falls back to the argument that the only people on food stamps are uneducated. This is untrue. I would support the availability of a program, but not the requirement.

 

Again, using my family as an example. We currently receive food stamps and if a class were a requirement it would probably require attendance during daytime working hours. This would mean my dh would have to take work time to attend, I would have to have to scrap a day of school. The class would probably take place in our county headquarters (large rural county) and would require over 90 minutes of travel time total, plus the class, plus the gas money. Gas money is at a premium around here.

 

I already know how to budget and eat well. Our previous food budget when dh was working full time was smaller than our food stamp benefit. The class would be a waste of our time, and the county's limited resources.

 

When I was on WIC, and living in a small, rural community, I was required to attend nutrition classes and I even think there were a few budgeting classes in there, too. The county provided wonderful resources for cooking with locally grown foods, showing what was in season and when. Not just for food, either. I found the classes to be very valuable. And, I was already using coupons, shopping at Aldi, and living as frugally as possible. Our family of 4 was living on $1200 a month. I was willing to learn anything I could to take some of the financial pressure off.

[Nakia]

I am sorry but they are not worth feeding. I know a relatively who is a drug addictive. For her child's sack, I wish she didn't have the welfare with the drug usage

 

Would you feel the same way if the drug addict was your child? Everyone is someone's child.

 

Talk about begrudging someone food. How awful.

[elegantlion]

When I was on WIC, and living in a small, rural community, I was required to attend nutrition classes and I even think there were a few budgeting classes in there, too. The county provided wonderful resources for cooking with locally grown foods, showing what was in season and when. Not just for food, either. I found the classes to be very valuable. And, I was already using coupons, shopping at Aldi, and living as frugally as possible. Our family of 4 was living on $1200 a month. I was willing to learn anything I could to take some of the financial pressure off.

 

Of course, it's wise to learn budgeting and nutrition. I simply don't need a required class to do that. Those are things I've done a lot of over the years, well before we qualified for assistance.

[jennynd]

Would you feel the same way if the drug addict was your child? Everyone is someone's child.

 

Talk about begrudging someone food. How awful.

 

Yes, I will, I will like my grand kids get brought up right, Not by a drug addict who think it is OK to get welfare, and getting drug and screwed up her jobs, again and again

If you think it is to cruel to the Mom, don't you think the kids deserve a parents who will think that the kids are valuable enough NOT to take drug when she was preg. When she took the drug during she was preg, that draw the line,

Edited October 25, 2011 by jennynd

[Joanne]

Yes, I will, I will like my grand kids get brought up right, Not by a drug addict who think it is OK to get welfare, and getting drug

If you think it is to cruel to the Mom, don't you think the kids deserve a parents who will think that the kids are valuable enough NOT to take drug when she was preg. When she took the drug during she was preg, that draw the line,

 

False dichotomy.

 

Denying food to a human is unrelated to child abuse and neglect.

 

I worry that your lack of knowledge about addiction gets in the way of you having a helpful perspective.

[Nakia]

Yes, I will, I will like my grand kids get brought up right, Not by a drug addict who think it is OK to get welfare, and getting drug and screwed up her jobs, again and again

If you think it is to cruel to the Mom, don't you think the kids deserve a parents who will think that the kids are valuable enough NOT to take drug when she was preg. When she took the drug during she was preg, that draw the line,

 

So if she tests positive for drugs during pregnancy, do we start starving her then? Or do we wait until the baby is born? :rolleyes:

 

Why does it have to be either/or? I see addicts in my job EVERY SINGLE DAY. I see drug addicted babies born to these addicts EVERY SINGLE DAY. Does that make me want to starve the moms? NO! It breaks my heart for them. None of us knows what causes a person to become addicted to drugs. As someone who suffers with mental illness, I believe the statistics that say mentally ill people are more likely to become addicted to drugs. I am NOT condoning drug addiction. I am suggesting we cannot always know the entire picture. And I've yet to meet someone who got clean so they could go to Taco Bell.

 

And if you honestly would be okay with seeing your very own child starve because they are addicted to drugs...well, I don't think I have anything to say to that.

[mommyrooch]

I think it says something about society when people will begrudge others food, period. How sad.

 

:iagree: Amen!!

 

To me, food should be available to all people. I put it right up there with access to air. I wouldn't begrudge another person the opportunity to breath. I also cannot begrudge them the opportunity to eat.

 

I suppose many would can and sell air if they could. Then others could weigh in on who gets to have access to it and who doesn't. I my opinion I think that would be as equally inhumane as keeping someone from having access to food.

[mommyrooch]

14) I have fed more families, voluntarily, than most of the people on this board. I've lived a very frugal life while doing so. That does not mean I am not entitled to an opinion about food stamp abuse.

 

There are hundreds upon hundreds of people on this board. I think it's awfully presumptious of you to believe that you have fed more families than most on this board. How could you possibly know that? :confused:

Edited October 25, 2011 by mommyrooch

[mommyrooch]

I would love to discuss this with you more, but I have to head out to work. Gotta pay for those $38 cakes and all those burgers. :001_rolleyes:

 

:lol: :lol:

[mommyrooch]

I apologize for saying anything about my giving even if it was true.

 

Now see, I personally don't get the feeling that this is a sincere apology. You say you're sorry you said that you gave more than others but in the same sentence you point out that it's true. :confused: I'm not sure how this came across to everyone else but to me it just feels like you really aren't sorry that you jumped to that conclusion. because in your apology you point out (again) that you do outgive most.

 

I think the general problem people are having with your statement is not the fact that you give or not. I commend you for giving. I think it's great you do! However, I think many (myself included) have a problem with your assumption that you give "more than most." It just seems really presumptious on your part and really has nothing to do with the thread. I guess I can't understand why you feel you have to keep pointing your assumption out. Even serendipidiously through an "apology." :confused:

[mommyrooch]

It's the same ol' "It's MY money and I'm GIVING it to YOU because YOU can't afford to feed your family/self without ME'' mentality. It is very us vs. them and it is sad.

 

When we first married our household income was so low that we qualified for food stamps. Heaven forbid if we had actually used them. I shudder to think about how many people would have looked down on us or judged us for what we ate/how we used them. :confused:

 

:iagree: Another poster pointed out that many view poor and poverty stricken people as "lower class." I loved in when they pointed out that they weren't lower class, just "lower income."

 

It is really sad how many people view this topic. Views ranging from "us vs. them" to judgements and criticisms. It is very sad indeed. :confused:

[ThatCyndiGirl]

Now see, I personally don't get the feeling that this is a sincere apology. You say you're sorry you said that you gave more than others but in the same sentence you point out that it's true. :confused: I'm not sure how this came across to everyone else but to me it just feels like you really aren't sorry that you jumped to that conclusion. because in your apology you point out (again) that you do outgive most.

 

I think the general problem people are having with your statement is not the fact that you give or not. I commend you for giving. I think it's great you do! However, I think many (myself included) have a problem with your assumption that you give "more than most." It just seems really presumptious on your part and really has nothing to do with the thread. I guess I can't understand why you feel you have to keep pointing your assumption out. Even serendipidiously through an "apology." :confused:

 

I thought the same thing when I read it. It's the whole, "Well, I'M SORRY that you took what I said that way!" An unapologetic apology.

 

However, later on in this thread was the whole, "good-bye, cruel board" so I think that many may have felt what I did, that it was no use to discuss it if the person who said it was really leaving.

 

But, you are right: I hate the "un-sorry Sorry". :001_huh:

[mommyrooch]

I thought the same thing when I read it. It's the whole, "Well, I'M SORRY that you took what I said that way!" An unapologetic apology.

 

However, later on in this thread was the whole, "good-bye, cruel board" so I think that many may have felt what I did, that it was no use to discuss it if the person who said it was really leaving.

 

But, you are right: I hate the "un-sorry Sorry". :001_huh:

 

Yeah, I noticed that I was late getting in on the discussion. :001_smile: I was posting replies to it as I read through all 20 some pages. Then I noticed by the time I got to the end all I was seeing was my own posts. :D That's what you get for not reading through everything first BEFORE you post. It makes you look like you just like to nag a lot and get a kick out of reading your own thoughts. :lol:

[ThatCyndiGirl]

Yeah, I noticed that I was late getting in on the discussion. :001_smile: I was posting replies to it as I read through all 20 some pages. Then I noticed by the time I got to the end all I was seeing was my own posts. :D That's what you get for not reading through everything first BEFORE you post. It makes you look like you just like to nag a lot and get a kick out of reading your own thoughts. :lol:

 

Nah, I figured you just hadn't made it all the way through, yet.

 

Besides, you were agreeing with me so we can let it slide! :lol: