Food Stamps OK For Porn, Tatoos, Jewelry

[koshergrl]

Care represents Christians who are pro-babykilling the world over.

God likes dead babies!

 

[rightwinger]

Care represents Christians who are pro-babykilling the world over.

God likes dead babies!

Didn't God kill the first born sons of Egypt?
Didn't God kill millions of babies in his flood?

 

[PoliticalChic]

Does someone need to look like a refugee from Biafra for you to consider them poor?

I'm talking about ordinary families who may be down on their luck due to layoffs or other circumstances and may be near the end of their resources. They may still have a roof over their heads but may be in danger of losing that as well. They may still have a car, a refrigerator, a TV, etc. Should they have to pawn all their stuff first, before they get any assistance?

1. Why are you having difficulty answering the question?

Are you basing your understanding on the government definition of poverty?


Do you know how the government arrives at their definition?
I do.


2. "...ordinary families who may be down on their luck due to layoffs or other circumstances and may be near the end of their resources. They may still have a roof over their heads but may be in danger of losing that as well. They may still have a car, a refrigerator, a TV, etc. Should they have to pawn all their stuff first,...

Is it copacetic with you that I define 'ordinary families' in terms of folks, some of whom posted in this thread, who chose not to burden their neighbors?

Especially if they own homes, AC's, flat screens, cars, trucks, and even jacuzzi's.


3. Poverty is no home, no heat, no food. Not 'I'm not gonna go on any Ramen noodle' budget.


4. I personally know several folks, college educated professionals, who worked the midnight shift on the docks while they looked for work.

Did you?
Did you put on a sweatshirt and show up at a 'shape-up' where you might be selected or a night's employment?
No?

Collect soda cans for the nickel deposits?
Walk dogs, cut other folks' lawns, deliver newspapers?
None of 'em?

We're speaking of different 'ordinary folks,' it seems.

5. There is a dunce in this thread who manages to work into each and every thread how he owns or organizes a charity. Perhaps you could get in touch with him. I'm certain he'll pat you on the head, so he can pat himself on the back.


6. There is a difference between 'I need"

and 'I want."

Learn the difference. Then you can teach it to your children.

I would say first that someone who is without shelter, heat, and food is not going to derive much benefit from foodstamps alone.

The government defines poverty, the "absolute poverty line", as the threshold below which families or individuals are considered to be lacking the resources to meet the basic needs for healthy living; having insufficient income to provide the food, shelter and clothing needed to preserve health. The poverty line for a family of 4 in 2012 is a little over $22,000. They need to draw the line somewhere to determine whether or not someone gets help, don't they? Apparently, the "liberal" line is 22K for a family of 4, while the "compassionate conservative" line is $0.

And, yes. I did whatever I could for money. I showed up for day labor jobs at 4AM to see if I could work the day unloading trucks, moving furniture, etc. I wasn't too proud to push a broom, wash dishes, or do anything else I had to do. I've been there. I've had to pawn my stuff to pay bills. It wasn't fun. It wasn't living in the lap of luxury.

I even had to apply for charity from a food bank. Now that I have a good job, I always contribute food and clothing to my Church, local food bank, and Goodwill / Salvation Army.

I think looking after our own is a good thing, not a bad thing.

1. I am really pleased to hear of your efforts, and that you are the kind of American that made this nation great. Bravo.

2. "The government defines poverty, the "absolute poverty line", as the threshold below which families or individuals are considered to be lacking the resources to meet the basic needs for healthy living;..."
This is not the case.
Let me help:
, …the government “developed poverty thresholds. based on the "thrifty food plan," which was the cheapest of four food plans developed by the Department of Agriculture. The food plan was "designed for temporary or emergency use when funds are low," according to the USDA. Based on the 1955 Household Food Consumption Survey from the USDA (the latest available survey at the time), Orshansky knew that families of three or more persons spent about one third of their after-tax income on food, then multiplied the cost of the USDA economy food plan by three to arrive at the minimal yearly income a family would need. Using 1963 as a base year, she calculated that a family of four, two adults and two children would spend $1,033 for food per year. Using her formula based on the 1955 survey, she arrived at $3,100 a year ($1,033 x3) as the poverty threshold for a family of four in 1963….Each year, the U.S. Census Bureau updates the poverty threshold to account for inflation.” How We Measure Poverty
How We Measure Poverty - Oregon Center for Public Policy

a. Note: since the government attempts to grow constantly, they do not take into consideration that, today, the family uses less than one seventh of their after-tax income on food.

3. The Obama administration has lowered eligibility so as to increase the numbers on welfare, EBT, food stamps.

a. They don't want you to be responsible for yourself.


4. Based on the structure of the welfare system, and the government definition of 'poor,' those in the system have more spendable cash than the working families that provide the benefits.

I'd be happy to prove that.

 

[PoliticalChic]

1. I have often felt that food stamps should be reserved for purchases labeled as nutritious, but 'no-frills.'
No reason for those accepting 'Food Stamps' to eat better than those paying for the benefit.

2.Further, there should be government-sponsored church and other food kitchens available to any with a food stamp card.....no 'doggie bags.'

They are called 'Food Stamps" for a reason.


Wadda you think?

I (myself, wife, & 2 kids) recieved foodstamps briefly in the 80's when I was between jobs. I was very grateful for the assistance for the time I recieved it and got off the program as quickly as I could after getting another job. I got actual food stamps, not an EBT card, and they could only be used on food purchases. My wife and I bought no frills food and staples in order to stretch our food supply to last as long as possible. We clipped coupons and shopped sales.

Obviously times have changed since then, but there is no reason that EBT cards should not have the same restrictions as food stamps did. A food assistance program should only offer food assistance.

But this all makes me wonder if in fact, is misuse of the EBT cards as rampant as your OP suggests? Are families who are out of work and struggling to make ends meet actually using their EBT cards for porn, booze, gambling, etc? Or is this another right wing attempt to demonize the poor, and generate outrage at nonexistent problems so that the programs can be abolished to save the rich a buck or two?

You can't use the food stamp allowance on an EBT card to buy non-food items. How many times do you people need to be told that before it will sink in?

At least give me an estimate so I can figure out how many more times I'll have to post it.

I know that you are not lying....I don't suggest that you behave in that manner....

rather, the basis of your posts is that you are very, very stupid.

I doubt there is anything you can do about that....

But, enough chit-chat.
To the point: In addition to everything listed in this thread as abuses of the welfare, EBT, etc. benefits system, the said items are used to make bail or pay fines, to join health clubs, to gamble, or to buy firearms, porn, cosmetics, travel services, tattoos, jewelry, or tickets to sporting events or movies.

Why and how?

Because human beings engage in all sorts of voluntary transfers....

I understand that based on your "limitations" you are unable to imagine that criminality takes place...and is often treated with a blind eye.

Democrats regularly block reforms...

While this won't be of any help to you....others may have an "Oh, I see...." moment:


1. "A fed-up House Speaker Robert DeLeo told the Herald he is fast-tracking EBT card reforms and has proposed tougher crackdowns — including a ban on using the cards for bail money — as a major part of the House budget unveiled today at the State House.

“Having read of some of the abuses which you’ve published at various times, it just continues to anger me in terms of trying to get some control over the program to make sure these types of abuses don’t exist,” DeLeo told the Herald in a sit-down interview inside his State House office this morning.

DeLeo’s plan makes it illegal to use the taxpayer-funded cards to make bail or pay fines, to join health clubs, to gamble, or to buy firearms, porn, cosmetics, travel services, tattoos, jewelry, or tickets to sporting events or movies.

Stores breaking EBT card laws could also lose their liquor or lottery licenses. The reforms are so urgently needed that DeLeo wants to bypass the typical committee process and fast-track them to next year’s budget, he said.

“I think this shows ... how high a priority we see this,” said DeLeo. “Even if (the state) were rolling in money, any abuse of public funds is wrong, and I think we have to send a strong message that we’re going to do everything we can to stop it.”
DeLeo: EBT reform on fast track in House budget - BostonHerald.com


2. "The crux of the issue surrounding EBT and the abuse of EBT cards has to do with the fact that the cards are easily transferable to cash,”
CLT Update: May 26, 2012 - Senate Dems duck serious reform, spend more on EBT card fraud


3. Electronic Benefit Transfer (EBT) cards (the debit card equivalent of food stamps) have been at the center of a heated national discussion on welfare reform. There have been numerous reports of EBT card abuse and some states have started cracking down on card holders. Of course, whenever someone talks about welfare reform, one side of the political spectrum claims it’s “racially motivated.”
However, even those claims might be put aside for a moment in Massachusetts after a heroin allegedly posted bail with his EBT card.
Heroin Dealer Allegedly Posts Bail With EBT Card | Video | TheBlaze.com



My deepest condolences to your caretakers.

 

[Dick Tuck]

The welfare state has ended starvation.

However it generates more welfare recipients.

The goal of progressives is to kill off welfare recipients, and the wealthy, and make sure the rest of the country is static, stuck in poverty...except for a few who exist as parasites, above the fray. They also believe in killing off those who can't make it...but they propose to actually KILL them, instead of providing them with the opportunity to pull themselves out of their situation and succeed.

All progressives think they'll be a part of the parasitic group.

So how exactly do you want to reach your Communist Manifesto goal of 100% employment?

 

[theHawk]

So now it's coming out that the real conservative consensus is that they want to end ALL welfare programs...

So how come every time I've pointed that out in the past I get howls of protest from the right saying oh no we don't!?

Most conservatives probably don't want to end all of them.

I would say the only welfare/assistance programs that there should be are ones for the mentally disabled.

No grown able-bodied man or woman should ever have to receive welfare.

I know mentally retarded people that have a part-time job. What excuse does a healthy male have for not having some type of job?

 

[Luddly Neddite]

There is no true poverty in the United States of America.

What a vile, vicious, cruel thing to write, say, believe.

Tell it to the hungry children.

If there's something wrong with the system, and there most certainly is, work to change THAT. But don't work to make more hungry and homeless children and elderly - since they are largest group of FS recipients.

...I support sane restrictions on what food stamps can buy. Basically, grocery store only...

Actually, that's the way it is now. The rw's would have us believe that gangsta's are getting huge tats and buying drugs but they are lying. They KNOW they are lying but that doesn't stop them from more LIES.

If rw's had their way, they would have children, lying dead in our streets. And, they'd be expecially happy if they were black or brown or yellow children.

Disgusting excuses for human beings.

 

[gallantwarrior]

Would care to elaborate on the highlighted phrase?

Single mothers can't be expected to easily attend any kind of job training/education program if they have young children who need to be watched after. And they aren't going to be able to afford day care if they're unemployed and receiving government assistance.

Actually, single mothers/fathers could be enlisted to assist in daycare centers for others attending training. Make it a "rotating" duty for all participants. Not only would that give them some interaction with their own children, we could incorporate parenting skills classes, first aid, budgeting, and nutrition programs, an entire curriculum that would help them learn to be better parents.

A problem with "meaningful" job training is the fact that there are some pretty unreasonable expectations among the masses. Not every one is intended or inclined to become brain surgeons or rocket scientists.

What I mean when I say "meaningful" is that the training has to be effective to impart the proper job-specific skills, in jobs that are themselves meaningful. No point in providing "job training" so that people can be better burger flippers. Nor is there much good in training people to do computer work, as the IT field is highly over saturated. Same for Massage Therapy. There are plenty of areas in which people can be trained to fill areas of demand. We need to train people to be able to be CNAs, dental assistants, truck drivers, etc. [/quote]

This is a bit trickier. I would open with a suggestion that the educational system be overhauled completely. Of course, my ideas require a shift in the attitude that the only way to better earnings is by acquiring some kind of university degree. Not everyone is of the nature for academic training, many thrive when trained using more basic, hands-on type teaching. But we really must get away from the idea that everyone must have an academic degree.

Then I would restructure the educational system along the lines of what I understood Germany to have had when I was living there. Young people were required to choose whether to pursue an academic career or enlist in a trade (i.e. mechanics, plumbers, bakers, just about anything that didn't include medicine or jurisprudence). Once they were accepted into a trade guild as apprentices, they worked part time at the trade and studied that trade part time in class. By the time they were prepared to take their journeyman's test, they knew a useful job skill, very thoroughly.

Barring that, if we were to set up some kind of job training, I would agree with the caveat that the graduates of any such program be required to pay back at least some portion of the cost of their training once they had found a job in their field. The problem here is, there are lots of jobs that are less desirable. Maybe set up some kind of aptitude test to determine an individual's strengths and weaknesses, like the one they give military applicants.

But job training is not the end all solution, either. People need to be trained to a decent work ethic...get to work on time, appropriately attired, sober and clean, and render a decent day's work for the day's wage.

I don't really buy the "work ethic" argument. There are plenty of people who have good work ethics, but who just need an opportunity to actually work. At any rate, work ethic is something that is best learned on the job.[/QUOTE]

Learning "work ethic" would be integral to any job training program, whether administered in the schools or as a separate program. Regular attendance, appropriate attire, proper attitude would all be a prerequisite to continuation and eventual graduation from any training program.

 

[gallantwarrior]

I know the conservatives here don't care about this, but to the rest of you,

PoliticalChic is lying.

The EBT card does not allow non-food purchases out of one's food stamp benefit. The EBT cards cover food stamps and/or cash assistance, and the computers track your food stamp balance and you will only be able to buy non--food off your card if you have a cash assistance balance.

You know, that's really irrelevant. Even cash assistance benefits should be limited to necessities. Tats, drugs, tobacco, and such like are not necessities, despite liberal contention to the contrary.

It's irrelevant that the thread is premised on an outright LIE?

Please tell us how, exactly, any of us should even entertain the possibility of having an intelligent conversation with people such as yourself, not to mention the OP,

for whom fact and fiction have become irrelevancies?

Is everyone else here in agreement with this poster, i.e., that the simple fact that a story is simply false is irrrelevant?

Can thus get you people to defend Mitt Romney's secret fundamentalist Mormon marriage to a 12 year old Utah girl?

Shouldn't that disqualify him from ever being president?

No, really, don't stress yourself. I certainly don't expect intelligent intercourse with you. There are reasons why I usually forgo any response to your drooling, idiotic posts.
Do carry on...

 

[Care4all]

So now it's coming out that the real conservative consensus is that they want to end ALL welfare programs...

So how come every time I've pointed that out in the past I get howls of protest from the right saying oh no we don't!?

Most conservatives probably don't want to end all of them.

I would say the only welfare/assistance programs that there should be are ones for the mentally disabled.

No grown able-bodied man or woman should ever have to receive welfare.

I know mentally retarded people that have a part-time job. What excuse does a healthy male have for not having some type of job?

right, we've always had enough jobs for everyone to be employed in a job that can support them. why do we have so many unemployed now? Are there enough jobs for all of them?

 

[koshergrl]

They're unemployed because they won't do what has to be done to be employable.

For many of them, that would mean MOVING. In the old days, people MOVED to find work. With welfare, suddenly you can just sit on your ass when the job market dries up and no moving is required...and now people think that if there are no jobs in their immediate vicinity, then they don't have to work.

 

[koshergrl]

People can still get jobs on fishing boat, and in canneries, and on the oil fields....they can even have criminal records and do that...and get paid well.

People can get jobs in Australia, and in the service industry, and in human services....if they're willing to move where the jobs are.

When I didn't like the work I was doing, I looked as far afield as I needed to to find a job I did like. Then I fucking MOVED, with my kids, my dogs, my household, and I went to where the job was.

 

[koshergrl]

And if you're on welfare, and you find a job in another locale, they will PAY YOUR MOVING EXPENSES to get you there.

 

[The T]

They're unemployed because they won't do what has to be done to be employable.

For many of them, that would mean MOVING. In the old days, people MOVED to find work. With welfare, suddenly you can just sit on your ass when the job market dries up and no moving is required...and now people think that if there are no jobs in their immediate vicinity, then they don't have to work.

Out forefathers would be horrified to see the absolute SCALE thier prodginy have turned into a nation of WIMPS.

 

[Care4all]

so all who lost their job and are unemployed are unemployed because they don't want a job? or any ole job? got it!

 

[del]

And if you're on welfare, and you find a job in another locale, they will PAY YOUR MOVING EXPENSES to get you there.

another meth dream from allie babble.

 

[koshergrl]

Are you high as we speak?

 

[koshergrl]

You can get assistance for relocation through JOBS/WORK programs that TANF clients are required to participate in.

It requires that the TANF client verify they have a job that represents a positive step towards self reliance, and then they have to gather up the expenses...a quote for a uhaul, for example, and a statement from a landlord that explains exactly how much they will have to pay to move into appropriate housing.

The case manager then authorizes payments for those things. They can also authorize payment for appropriate clothing for a new job.

 

[JoeB131]

[q

So....you never saw the thread I put up with pics of me climbing the rock wall?
I'll add this to the list of mistakes and misjudgments and fibs by Disreputable Joe, the Prevaricator.

I once tried to total 'em up.....

...but once it got up to Avagadro's Number I had to give up.

Um, no, you see, I don't care about pictures you probably downloaded off the internet and claim were you.

Had someone on another board, claimed to be a native American model and even posted pictures of herself. Until somone did a search and found out those were pictures of a woman with a totally different name.

Frankly, I don't care who you are, you're probably a guy pretending to be a chick, because about half the "women" on here are...

Also, frankly, you're kind of boring, actually. You live in your own reality, quite divorced from the one the rest of us live in.

In your reality, Roosevelt is a pejorative and McCarthy is a praise-worthy name.

Unlike the reality the rest of us live in, where the oppossite is true.

 

[JoeB131]

People can still get jobs on fishing boat, and in canneries, and on the oil fields....they can even have criminal records and do that...and get paid well.

People can get jobs in Australia, and in the service industry, and in human services....if they're willing to move where the jobs are.

When I didn't like the work I was doing, I looked as far afield as I needed to to find a job I did like. Then I fucking MOVED, with my kids, my dogs, my household, and I went to where the job was.

That's nice if you can do that, but that sounds like your roots weren't very deep to start with.

I actually looked at a job relocation in 2008... and when I realized how much of a loss I would take on my house, the cost of moving, etc. It just wouldn't have been worth it.