Missouri Republicans are trying to ban food stamp recipients from buying steak and seafood

[Moonglow]

It is called science, but common sense can tell you lots. And I am not suggesting people be told how to live. I am suggesting that when we give charity to to people we should have some control of how the charity is used. They can spend their own money however they want. If my money is being spent to feed your kids I should be able to insist you don't my donated money on soda and candy. If you don't like the rules don't take the donation.

Exactly.
I used to bristle at the thought of denying foodstamp recipients carte blanche when it came to spending their snap dollars as well, I was like "If it's legal for them, they should have the authority to spend it as they please".

Except that begs the question....what is the purpose of the program? The purpose of the program is to stave off starvation. If that's the purpose, then why are we providing empty calories that serve no purpose?

My change of mind came after having a series of involved discussions with a DHS program manager, over the course of 4 years. She said it wasn't a hardship and it wasn't micromanagement...this is CHARITY..and all the rest of us have to budget our food allotment, why should snap recipients be any different? Why should they be able to buy doritos and m&Ms and soda fountain pop..when those of us who are PAYING for their food can't afford them? That's just backwards and wrong.

The purpose of the program is to provide people the means to purchase food. At some point, we have to stop treating people like children, assume they can make decisions for themselves, and then let them live with the consequences of deciding badly.

First it wasn't enough to let people go hungry if they wouldn't provide for themselves (I'm not a supporter of letting people suffer if they're incapable of providing for themselves); we had to provide for them. Now it's not enough for them to be fat and unhealthy if they don't choose to eat properly; we must force them to eat what we think they should. At what point do we stop treating adults like retarded five-year-olds and taking over more and more of their independence?

You can when you're responsible enough to support yourself. If you expect tax payers to support you then you lose certain choices.

Is it reading comprehension or ignorant dick attitude that makes you incapable of having a conversation without making it about the personal? No wonder you're eating your liver out over what you imagine other people are doing. Get a grip.

It's my fucking money you dumbass. If you want the best of foods get a job and support yourself. If not be grateful to the tax payers that are supporting your dumbass.

My, my, put that cross on and remember what a good person you can be....

 

[jknowgood]

Exactly.
I used to bristle at the thought of denying foodstamp recipients carte blanche when it came to spending their snap dollars as well, I was like "If it's legal for them, they should have the authority to spend it as they please".

Except that begs the question....what is the purpose of the program? The purpose of the program is to stave off starvation. If that's the purpose, then why are we providing empty calories that serve no purpose?

My change of mind came after having a series of involved discussions with a DHS program manager, over the course of 4 years. She said it wasn't a hardship and it wasn't micromanagement...this is CHARITY..and all the rest of us have to budget our food allotment, why should snap recipients be any different? Why should they be able to buy doritos and m&Ms and soda fountain pop..when those of us who are PAYING for their food can't afford them? That's just backwards and wrong.

The purpose of the program is to provide people the means to purchase food. At some point, we have to stop treating people like children, assume they can make decisions for themselves, and then let them live with the consequences of deciding badly.

First it wasn't enough to let people go hungry if they wouldn't provide for themselves (I'm not a supporter of letting people suffer if they're incapable of providing for themselves); we had to provide for them. Now it's not enough for them to be fat and unhealthy if they don't choose to eat properly; we must force them to eat what we think they should. At what point do we stop treating adults like retarded five-year-olds and taking over more and more of their independence?

You can when you're responsible enough to support yourself. If you expect tax payers to support you then you lose certain choices.

Is it reading comprehension or ignorant dick attitude that makes you incapable of having a conversation without making it about the personal? No wonder you're eating your liver out over what you imagine other people are doing. Get a grip.

It's my fucking money you dumbass. If you want the best of foods get a job and support yourself. If not be grateful to the tax payers that are supporting your dumbass.

My, my, put that cross on and remember what a good person you can be....

My gosh, just tired of non working people wanting more from the tax payers. I don't have a use for them.

 

[tresbigdog]

I haven't had time to read through all 45 pages of this, but I wanted to clear up a few things.

I live in Ohio, and work for my county's Jobs & Family Services Department. Let me give you guys some numbers here. First, app. 80% of able bodied SNAP recipients work. They either work regular jobs like you and I, and just don't make enough to sustain buying groceries for their family, or they are assigned to a worksite for X number of hours per month, where they work off their SNAP assistance.

The majority of SNAP recipients are a) the elderly, b) children, and c) those on disability. None of which are expected to work, and a) and b) cannot work in most cases.

Our tax dollars contribute VERY little to welfare, very little, so worrying about what your neighbor is doing with his food stamps is a waste of your time.

As for fraud, yes, it does exist, however, fraud has been reduced dramatically in the last decade, in part because of things like the EBT card, etc.

Look, I could throw numbers at you all day, but I know the majority of you that are against people receiving assistance aren't going to change your minds. The funny thing is the majority of the people complaining about people on assistance are either on assistance themselves or applied and were turned down

 

[koshergrl]

The county doesn't issue foodstamps.

Yes, more and more people who shouldn't be eligible for snap benefits receive snap. That's what we're talking about. Exactly. It's ridiculous because they are in no danger of starving.

 

[SillyWabbit]

Food stamps are suppose to be for poor people who cannot afford basic food items. If you can waste a majority of your food stamps on steak. You don't need them. If you think it's not fair that you can't buy steaks with your food stamps. Then get a job.

So no hamburger either?

It's strictly oatmeal for you little mister.

 

[SillyWabbit]

If I got food stamps I trade them for reeses peanut butter cups!

 

[SillyWabbit]

I haven't had time to read through all 45 pages of this, but I wanted to clear up a few things.

I live in Ohio, and work for my county's Jobs & Family Services Department. Let me give you guys some numbers here. First, app. 80% of able bodied SNAP recipients work. They either work regular jobs like you and I, and just don't make enough to sustain buying groceries for their family, or they are assigned to a worksite for X number of hours per month, where they work off their SNAP assistance.

The majority of SNAP recipients are a) the elderly, b) children, and c) those on disability. None of which are expected to work, and a) and b) cannot work in most cases.

Our tax dollars contribute VERY little to welfare, very little, so worrying about what your neighbor is doing with his food stamps is a waste of your time.

As for fraud, yes, it does exist, however, fraud has been reduced dramatically in the last decade, in part because of things like the EBT card, etc.

Look, I could throw numbers at you all day, but I know the majority of you that are against people receiving assistance aren't going to change your minds. The funny thing is the majority of the people complaining about people on assistance are either on assistance themselves or applied and were turned down

Wait, does this mean if I complain I can get food stamps? I'd like some food stamps...I gotta start bitching about more stuff...

 

[koshergrl]

Food stamps are suppose to be for poor people who cannot afford basic food items. If you can waste a majority of your food stamps on steak. You don't need them. If you think it's not fair that you can't buy steaks with your food stamps. Then get a job.

So no hamburger either?

It's strictly oatmeal for you little mister.

That's right, if that's all you can afford. There's nothing wrong with oatmeal. You eat what you can afford to eat. And if you're eating nutritious food, you'll be okay.

It's not the job of the state to provide the citizenry with bakery birthday cakes and T-bones for a crowd of your close friends every month.

 

[koshergrl]

We eat oatmeal every day for about half the month in my house.

BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT I CAN AFFORD, and it's nutritious. Is it what the kids would PREFER to eat every morning before school? What do you think? But if they're hungry, they eat it. And even if they aren't, the rule is you eat 3 good sized bites because it's food and you need it, and I can't afford mcdonald's or steak and eggs for breakfast.

 

[SillyWabbit]

I eat oatmeal everday. It's awesome. Of course, my oatmeal has fruits and nuts and brown sugar and other goodies mixed in. Could I keep the goodies if I bought my oatmeal with food stamps? What if I mugged an old lady and took her food stamps--could I also buy steak?

 

[koshergrl]

I eat oatmeal everday. It's awesome. Of course, my oatmeal has fruits and nuts and brown sugar and other goodies mixed in. Could I keep the goodies if I bought my oatmeal with food stamps? What if I mugged an old lady and took her food stamps--could I also buy steak?

Absolutely.

I agree about oatmeal. It's almost a complete food..I think people can subsist almost entirely on oatmeal..with the occasional sheep's stomach and innards thrown in for color, of course..and the occasional egg and cheese meal.

I wouldn't force the kids to eat it if they hated it. But if we look at non-obese cultures (aside from cultures where they're just flat out starving and there's nothing to eat ever) you'll see they eat a pretty non-varied diet. They eat what is cheap and readily available to them, and they don't eat much else. So in Japan, it might be rice and veggies, or veggies and fish, the type depends on where you live and what you can lay your hands on and afford. In Russia it could be beets and cabbage, cabbage and potatoes. And vodka, of course. In America, the pioneers ate the same thing day in and day out according to the season. All winter they existed on dried apples, potatoes (if they had them) root vegetables (if they had them) and whatever they could make with flour or cornmeal and water (if they had any) and meat (if they had any). Indians, who in their natural state were pretty healthy, had VERY limited diets. Have you ever tried pemmican? It's nasty! But nutritious.

We've morphed into this culture where we think that if people (especially poor, stupid people) aren't granted their every desire, they're being *discriminated* against. It's ridiculous. If you're starving, you take what charity is available to keep you alive. But you don't have a RIGHT to delicious meals comprised of everything you love 3 x a day. Plus snacks.

 

[Camp]

Hamburger meat runs around $3.50 a pound. Ribeye steak runs around $12.99 a pound. What do you think?

what if its round steak?.....

All unhealthy food should be off the list. Red meat is not a healthy source of protein.

And who gets to decide and dictate to others what "healthy" is? I'm sure you're creaming your jeans in anticipation of even more opportunity to tell people how to live.

It is called science, but common sense can tell you lots. And I am not suggesting people be told how to live. I am suggesting that when we give charity to to people we should have some control of how the charity is used. They can spend their own money however they want. If my money is being spent to feed your kids I should be able to insist you don't spend my donated money on soda and candy. If you don't like the rules don't take the donation.

WHAT is "called science"? Your personal fucking opinion of what is and isn't healthy and acceptable?

You ARE suggesting that people be told how to live. You don't think restricting the welfare payments to only purchasing food - and that only of certain general types - isn't enough. We should now play nitpicking Grocery Police for "good enough" food, and presumably spark a big controversial debate over whose standard of "good enough" we're going to use, leading to ongoing adjustments of what is and isn't covered according to whoever's in power at the moment, costing everyone bunches of extra money to keep reprogramming the computers to exclude this or that or the other thing.

Able to insist? You are. Is it a good idea or particularly helpful to anything other than your condescending sense of self-righteousness? Not really.

Since so many of the recipients of our tax funded food program that feeds them are children, ya, someone has to show them an educated way to eat and since the funds involved are tax payer funds, it is appropriate to have some kinds of watch dog control. Nobody is telling people how to live by limiting how they spend donated food assistance funds. They have the ability and freedom to purchase whatever they want with their own money. It is not an attempt to control how people live by insisting that the five dollars we give them be spent on oatmeal instead of bacon. Only a very stupid person would not understand that science has proven beyond any doubt that eating cholesterol lowering oatmeal packed with vitamins is healthier than eating cholesterol causing processed bacon packed with chemicals and blood pressure increasing salt. To top it off, the five dollars worth of bacon will last a very short time and do little to prevent hunger while the five dollars worth of oatmeal will provide many days worth of hunger relief.

 

[EverCurious]

To get back to the food bundles thing, I'm guessing that's now community stuff rather than government stuff (or is it more like /some/ states do that still? I doubt it would have ever been feasible up here honestly, 3mo growth season and all)

Anyway, I've been trying to research this a bit in my spare time and I found the following for Alaska SNAP:

(Household Size, Urban, Rural I, Rural II)
1 $227 $290 $353
2 $417 $532 $648
3 $598 $762 $928
4 $759 $968 $1178
5 $902 $1150 $1399
6 $1082 $1380 $1679
7 $1196 $1525 $1856
8 $1367 $1743 $2121
Each additional $+171 $+218 $+265

So family of five in the city gets $902/m. This sounds high to me, we had a family of 5 (3 teen age boys) and it was like $600-700/m groceries for us... We're not real fancy eaters, but we do buy steaks and pepper bacon from the butcher every week...

Now I presume these kids are also getting free school lunch too, I don't suppose that cost comes out of their SNAP benefits? I paid out another $300/ish a month for my boys to get school lunch (which I guess argumentatively would put our bill at about $900/m.) Though the free food at school program up here offers kids both breakfast and lunch for free though... Anyway, even if the kids are getting free breakfast/lunch we'd be roughly talking about like $2/meal (ish). ~shrug~ /That/ doesn't sound unreasonable to me.

 

[jknowgood]

We eat oatmeal every day for about half the month in my house.

BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT I CAN AFFORD, and it's nutritious. Is it what the kids would PREFER to eat every morning before school? What do you think? But if they're hungry, they eat it. And even if they aren't, the rule is you eat 3 good sized bites because it's food and you need it, and I can't afford mcdonald's or steak and eggs for breakfast.

Steak and egg for breakfast? The only way I get that is, if I didn't eat all of my steak from the nite before. I need welfare!

 

[koshergrl]

To get back to the food bundles thing, I'm guessing that's now community stuff rather than government stuff (or is it more like /some/ states do that still? I doubt it would have ever been feasible up here honestly, 3mo growth season and all)

Anyway, I've been trying to research this a bit in my spare time and I found the following for Alaska SNAP:

(Household Size, Urban, Rural I, Rural II)
1 $227 $290 $353
2 $417 $532 $648
3 $598 $762 $928
4 $759 $968 $1178
5 $902 $1150 $1399
6 $1082 $1380 $1679
7 $1196 $1525 $1856
8 $1367 $1743 $2121
Each additional $+171 $+218 $+265

So family of five in the city gets $902/m. This sounds high to me, we had a family of 5 (3 teen age boys) and it was like $600-700/m groceries for us... We're not real fancy eaters, but we do buy steaks and pepper bacon from the butcher every week...

Now I presume these kids are also getting free school lunch too, I don't suppose that cost comes out of their SNAP benefits? I paid out another $300/ish a month for my boys to get school lunch (which I guess argumentatively would put our bill at about $900/m.) Though the free food at school program up here offers kids both breakfast and lunch for free though... Anyway, even if the kids are getting free breakfast/lunch we'd be roughly talking about like $2/meal (ish). ~shrug~ /That/ doesn't sound unreasonable to me.

I could (and have) fed a family of 8 on about 450 a month.

If you want to learn how to feed a lot of people on a shoestring, take lessons from the primary chef in a large Mexican family, or better yet, a large Laotian or Cantonese family.

Bag of rice, some bags of veggies, and weird cuts of meat that are applied VERY sparingly..and beans. The Mexicans make tortillas. And they all eat quite well, with enough foodstamps left over to barter for whatever they want.

Of course..they do supplement with dogs and cats and the occasional goat.

 

[koshergrl]

Next to oatmeal, eggs are probably the most economical complete food that there is.

 

[jknowgood]

To get back to the food bundles thing, I'm guessing that's now community stuff rather than government stuff (or is it more like /some/ states do that still? I doubt it would have ever been feasible up here honestly, 3mo growth season and all)

Anyway, I've been trying to research this a bit in my spare time and I found the following for Alaska SNAP:

(Household Size, Urban, Rural I, Rural II)
1 $227 $290 $353
2 $417 $532 $648
3 $598 $762 $928
4 $759 $968 $1178
5 $902 $1150 $1399
6 $1082 $1380 $1679
7 $1196 $1525 $1856
8 $1367 $1743 $2121
Each additional $+171 $+218 $+265

So family of five in the city gets $902/m. This sounds high to me, we had a family of 5 (3 teen age boys) and it was like $600-700/m groceries for us... We're not real fancy eaters, but we do buy steaks and pepper bacon from the butcher every week...

Now I presume these kids are also getting free school lunch too, I don't suppose that cost comes out of their SNAP benefits? I paid out another $300/ish a month for my boys to get school lunch (which I guess argumentatively would put our bill at about $900/m.) Though the free food at school program up here offers kids both breakfast and lunch for free though... Anyway, even if the kids are getting free breakfast/lunch we'd be roughly talking about like $2/meal (ish). ~shrug~ /That/ doesn't sound unreasonable to me.

I could (and have) fed a family of 8 on about 450 a month.

That was probably before the Obama economy.

 

[koshergrl]

To get back to the food bundles thing, I'm guessing that's now community stuff rather than government stuff (or is it more like /some/ states do that still? I doubt it would have ever been feasible up here honestly, 3mo growth season and all)

Anyway, I've been trying to research this a bit in my spare time and I found the following for Alaska SNAP:

(Household Size, Urban, Rural I, Rural II)
1 $227 $290 $353
2 $417 $532 $648
3 $598 $762 $928
4 $759 $968 $1178
5 $902 $1150 $1399
6 $1082 $1380 $1679
7 $1196 $1525 $1856
8 $1367 $1743 $2121
Each additional $+171 $+218 $+265

So family of five in the city gets $902/m. This sounds high to me, we had a family of 5 (3 teen age boys) and it was like $600-700/m groceries for us... We're not real fancy eaters, but we do buy steaks and pepper bacon from the butcher every week...

Now I presume these kids are also getting free school lunch too, I don't suppose that cost comes out of their SNAP benefits? I paid out another $300/ish a month for my boys to get school lunch (which I guess argumentatively would put our bill at about $900/m.) Though the free food at school program up here offers kids both breakfast and lunch for free though... Anyway, even if the kids are getting free breakfast/lunch we'd be roughly talking about like $2/meal (ish). ~shrug~ /That/ doesn't sound unreasonable to me.

I could (and have) fed a family of 8 on about 450 a month.

That was probably before the Obama economy.

I could still do it I think. They wouldn't get a lot, but they'd get enough. I feed my family of 3 on about 200 a month right now. Some months less, some months more....

 

[Boss]

Well, if you waste it, then you don't have any more for the rest of the month, and you get to find another way to pay for your food. So what? This is really just about resenting poor people for getting welfare, which I can understand, but I have no interest in reacting by trying to micromanage people's lives even further.

The thing is, how many EBT cards get filled per month for the same money as goes to a single vacation for Michelle and her vast entourage? I have better things to resent than feeding the poor...

Excellent observation! Why do Conservative allow Liberals to control the dialogue? THAT should be what is debated here! This Liberal pops in to USMB to post a smarmy thread about mean old Republicans wanting to deny the starving their steak and lobsters, and Conservatives immediately fall all over themselves explaining and clarifying... WHY? We should just all say Republicans don't want people having to rely on food stamps, period!

The Liberals knock us off message all the time and we respond like a bunch of trained seals. They know what they are doing, they understand that we don't really want people to starve or do without, but all the time they can get us to spend defending our positions and explaining our policies, that's time we aren't focusing on Benghazi or the IRS shenanigans. All the load of crap and corruption happening daily with this administration, and we're stuck here arguing with morons about steaks and lobster!

 

[koshergrl]

Well, if you waste it, then you don't have any more for the rest of the month, and you get to find another way to pay for your food. So what? This is really just about resenting poor people for getting welfare, which I can understand, but I have no interest in reacting by trying to micromanage people's lives even further.

The thing is, how many EBT cards get filled per month for the same money as goes to a single vacation for Michelle and her vast entourage? I have better things to resent than feeding the poor...

Excellent observation! Why do Conservative allow Liberals to control the dialogue? THAT should be what is debated here! This Liberal pops in to USMB to post a smarmy thread about mean old Republicans wanting to deny the starving their steak and lobsters, and Conservatives immediately fall all over themselves explaining and clarifying... WHY? We should just all say Republicans don't want people having to rely on food stamps, period!

The Liberals knock us off message all the time and we respond like a bunch of trained seals. They know what they are doing, they understand that we don't really want people to starve or do without, but all the time they can get us to spend defending our positions and explaining our policies, that's time we aren't focusing on Benghazi or the IRS shenanigans. All the load of crap and corruption happening daily with this administration, and we're stuck here arguing with morons about steaks and lobster!

That's what makes the ignore button such a valuable tool.