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

[Cecilie1200]

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.

Most of the people who receive food stamps have jobs - minimum wage jobs. Others are military families, and retired people. Of those who don't work, most are retired or disabled. It's a Republican lie that people who receive food stamps are lazy.

You clearly have not visited your local welfare office recently.

If he did he's see just who his tax dollar is supporting. Its not a pretty picture.

You pretty much have to respect most of those people on the basis that they're living organisms, because I'll be damned if they offer you a single other reason for doing so.

 

[Zander]

They should be allowed to buy whatever they want, but they should be wickedly shamed and mocked at the checkout stand.

I suggest an announcement that "We have a social parasite on checkout aisle 1" Then every item they are purchasing announced on the PA ....followed by flashing red lights and a loud klaxon style alarm. They should also have their photographs placed on a board at the store entrance for all to see. Nobody should be proud of being on food stamps.

 

[Cecilie1200]

steak and sea food is good for you

what they should ban is soda pop candy and pre done foods

Why? What's it to you whether people want to be healthy or not?

it is my business i am paying for it

I'm not arguing that taxpayers have the ability to make any micromanaging, meddling laws they like regarding spending. I'm asking why the hell you care what other people eat or don't eat, beyond the simple fact of them getting food at all. What's it to you?

 

[jon_berzerk]

steak and sea food is good for you

what they should ban is soda pop candy and pre done foods

Why? What's it to you whether people want to be healthy or not?

it is my business i am paying for it

I'm not arguing that taxpayers have the ability to make any micromanaging, meddling laws they like regarding spending. I'm asking why the hell you care what other people eat or don't eat, beyond the simple fact of them getting food at all. What's it to you?

it is not meddling if the tax payers are paying for it

meddling is the whole premise behind obamacare

either we are all in or all out

 

[Moonglow]

They should be allowed to buy whatever they want, but they should be wickedly shamed and mocked at the checkout stand.

I suggest an announcement that "We have a social parasite on checkout aisle 1" Then every item they are purchasing announced on the PA ....followed by flashing red lights and a loud klaxon style alarm. They should also have their photographs placed on a board at the store entrance for all to see. Nobody should be proud of being on food stamps.

I'll let you know when my Mom in law is getting food, she's 85 and won't hear them anywhey...since she lost he retirement to the crash in 2008...

 

[September]

Maybe if we gave free food and water to everybody... you know... basic fruits and vegetables, and some lean meats. Maybe milk too, and things like eggs, beans, etc. Free juice and water. Healthy stuff. Completely reorganize the system.

Oh and go full Tesla and make electricity completely wireless and free. Then just about everyone could survive and be happy on the bare minimum, and if they want a more extravagant life, they can work for it.​

 

[Moonglow]

Maybe if we gave free food and water to everybody... you know... basic fruits and vegetables, and some lean meats. Maybe milk too, and things like eggs, beans, etc. Free juice and water. Healthy stuff. Completely reorganize the system.

Oh and go full Tesla and make electricity completely wireless and free. Then just about everyone could survive and be happy on the bare minimum, and if they want a more extravagant life, they can work for it.​

How in the hell would the farmers have a steady income with that plan?

 

[September]

Maybe if we gave free food and water to everybody... you know... basic fruits and vegetables, and some lean meats. Maybe milk too, and things like eggs, beans, etc. Free juice and water. Healthy stuff. Completely reorganize the system.

Oh and go full Tesla and make electricity completely wireless and free. Then just about everyone could survive and be happy on the bare minimum, and if they want a more extravagant life, they can work for it.​

How in the hell would the farmers have a steady income with that plan?

I'm sure a great and mighty nation like America could figure it out.​

 

[Cecilie1200]

steak and sea food is good for you

what they should ban is soda pop candy and pre done foods

Why? What's it to you whether people want to be healthy or not?

it is my business i am paying for it

I'm not arguing that taxpayers have the ability to make any micromanaging, meddling laws they like regarding spending. I'm asking why the hell you care what other people eat or don't eat, beyond the simple fact of them getting food at all. What's it to you?

it is not meddling if the tax payers are paying for it

meddling is the whole premise behind obamacare

either we are all in or all out

Look up the definition of "meddling".

And anytime you're ready to stop diverting off onto "I have the RIGHT to butt in!" - which no one is disputing - and address the question of why the hell you WANT to butt in, let me know. I realize how hard it can be to sack up, so I won't hold my breath.

By the way, I love the argument of "We already interfere in people's lives, so we should just run EVERYTHING!" What exquisite jackassery.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Maybe if we gave free food and water to everybody... you know... basic fruits and vegetables, and some lean meats. Maybe milk too, and things like eggs, beans, etc. Free juice and water. Healthy stuff. Completely reorganize the system.

Oh and go full Tesla and make electricity completely wireless and free. Then just about everyone could survive and be happy on the bare minimum, and if they want a more extravagant life, they can work for it.​

Missed the point where it was anyone's job to provide "the bare minimum" for free to anyone else, or to have them "survive and be happy". They can work for all of it, not just "more extravagant".

I cannot imagine why anyone would think that enabling an entire class of worthless, non-producing consumers who provide nothing of value whatsoever to themselves, let alone to anyone else, would be a good thing.

 

[September]

Maybe if we gave free food and water to everybody... you know... basic fruits and vegetables, and some lean meats. Maybe milk too, and things like eggs, beans, etc. Free juice and water. Healthy stuff. Completely reorganize the system.

Oh and go full Tesla and make electricity completely wireless and free. Then just about everyone could survive and be happy on the bare minimum, and if they want a more extravagant life, they can work for it.​

Missed the point where it was anyone's job to provide "the bare minimum" for free to anyone else, or to have them "survive and be happy". They can work for all of it, not just "more extravagant".

I cannot imagine why anyone would think that enabling an entire class of worthless, non-producing consumers who provide nothing of value whatsoever to themselves, let alone to anyone else, would be a good thing.

"Good"? Acts of kindness and unconditional love, helping others, showing mercy, and being selfless are all very often subjectively perceived to be "good". Many, many people, including "Christians", would even declare these things to be "objectively good".

But... I do not believe in objective morality. I do not even believe in "good" or "evil".​

 

[Dragonlady]

Maybe if we gave free food and water to everybody... you know... basic fruits and vegetables, and some lean meats. Maybe milk too, and things like eggs, beans, etc. Free juice and water. Healthy stuff. Completely reorganize the system.

Oh and go full Tesla and make electricity completely wireless and free. Then just about everyone could survive and be happy on the bare minimum, and if they want a more extravagant life, they can work for it.​

Missed the point where it was anyone's job to provide "the bare minimum" for free to anyone else, or to have them "survive and be happy". They can work for all of it, not just "more extravagant".

I cannot imagine why anyone would think that enabling an entire class of worthless, non-producing consumers who provide nothing of value whatsoever to themselves, let alone to anyone else, would be a good thing.

How noble, decent and Christian of you. Even the ancient Romans had the good sense to realize that if the privileged few didn't provide food and distraction for the rabble, the rabble would turn on them and destroy them.

As a result, every Roman was entitled to a measure of wheat from the city stores, and the Senators paid for performances and gladiator competitions at the Coliseum. Hence the phrase "bread and circuses".

There are far more poor people than rich. People with nothing - no hope, no future, no stake in their communities, will turn on those who have oppressed them.

It's simply in your best interest to provide for the needs of the poor.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Maybe if we gave free food and water to everybody... you know... basic fruits and vegetables, and some lean meats. Maybe milk too, and things like eggs, beans, etc. Free juice and water. Healthy stuff. Completely reorganize the system.

Oh and go full Tesla and make electricity completely wireless and free. Then just about everyone could survive and be happy on the bare minimum, and if they want a more extravagant life, they can work for it.​

Missed the point where it was anyone's job to provide "the bare minimum" for free to anyone else, or to have them "survive and be happy". They can work for all of it, not just "more extravagant".

I cannot imagine why anyone would think that enabling an entire class of worthless, non-producing consumers who provide nothing of value whatsoever to themselves, let alone to anyone else, would be a good thing.

"Good"? Acts of kindness and unconditional love, helping others, showing mercy, and being selfless are all very often subjectively perceived to be "good". Many, many people, including "Christians", would even declare these things to be "objectively good".

But... I do not believe in objective morality. I do not even believe in "good" or "evil".​

1) How is it "kind" to turn people into useless, non-productive slugs? I wouldn't be that "kind" to my children, for their own good, and I actually know and love them personally. I have no interest in showing that sort of "love" to total strangers, and certainly not with money forcibly removed from other people. You want to live out "Wall-E" or "Idiocracy" in real life? Go adopt a homeless person and have him laze around on YOUR couch.

2) There is nothing kind or loving about taxpayer-funded, government-mandated "charity". Not now. Not ever.

3) It's only selfless if you do it with YOUR money. If you do it with mine, you're a douche nugget.

4) "Subjective" is the only descriptive word you've used correctly in that whole post.

5) I DO believe in good and evil, and nothing in more evil than the sort of "good" you're proposing.

6) Don't even get me started on the disdain and condescension for your fellow man implicit in your blathering bullshit. You try to be "kind" and "loving" to ME by saying, "Here, it's too hard for you to provide the basics for yourself, let me just do that for you", and I will slap the taste out of your mouth.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Maybe if we gave free food and water to everybody... you know... basic fruits and vegetables, and some lean meats. Maybe milk too, and things like eggs, beans, etc. Free juice and water. Healthy stuff. Completely reorganize the system.

Oh and go full Tesla and make electricity completely wireless and free. Then just about everyone could survive and be happy on the bare minimum, and if they want a more extravagant life, they can work for it.​

Missed the point where it was anyone's job to provide "the bare minimum" for free to anyone else, or to have them "survive and be happy". They can work for all of it, not just "more extravagant".

I cannot imagine why anyone would think that enabling an entire class of worthless, non-producing consumers who provide nothing of value whatsoever to themselves, let alone to anyone else, would be a good thing.

How noble, decent and Christian of you. Even the ancient Romans had the good sense to realize that if the privileged few didn't provide food and distraction for the rabble, the rabble would turn on them and destroy them.

As a result, every Roman was entitled to a measure of wheat from the city stores, and the Senators paid for performances and gladiator competitions at the Coliseum. Hence the phrase "bread and circuses".

There are far more poor people than rich. People with nothing - no hope, no future, no stake in their communities, will turn on those who have oppressed them.

It's simply in your best interest to provide for the needs of the poor.

Unless you are a) my pastor, and b) able to show me the passage of the Bible that says, "And thou shalt tax the productive to support the poor like helpless infants", you can fuck off with your snotty little (failed) attempt at making me feel guilty for not living up to your standards projected onto my religion. As if.

 

[BlueGin]

Maybe if we gave free food and water to everybody... you know... basic fruits and vegetables, and some lean meats. Maybe milk too, and things like eggs, beans, etc. Free juice and water. Healthy stuff. Completely reorganize the system.

Oh and go full Tesla and make electricity completely wireless and free. Then just about everyone could survive and be happy on the bare minimum, and if they want a more extravagant life, they can work for it.​

Missed the point where it was anyone's job to provide "the bare minimum" for free to anyone else, or to have them "survive and be happy". They can work for all of it, not just "more extravagant".

I cannot imagine why anyone would think that enabling an entire class of worthless, non-producing consumers who provide nothing of value whatsoever to themselves, let alone to anyone else, would be a good thing.

How noble, decent and Christian of you. Even the ancient Romans had the good sense to realize that if the privileged few didn't provide food and distraction for the rabble, the rabble would turn on them and destroy them.

As a result, every Roman was entitled to a measure of wheat from the city stores, and the Senators paid for performances and gladiator competitions at the Coliseum. Hence the phrase "bread and circuses".

There are far more poor people than rich. People with nothing - no hope, no future, no stake in their communities, will turn on those who have oppressed them.

It's simply in your best interest to provide for the needs of the poor.

Remind me again why the SNAP recipients are too good to eat hamburger and must be pampered with high cost food that even the middle class can't afford every week?

 

[Cecilie1200]

Maybe if we gave free food and water to everybody... you know... basic fruits and vegetables, and some lean meats. Maybe milk too, and things like eggs, beans, etc. Free juice and water. Healthy stuff. Completely reorganize the system.

Oh and go full Tesla and make electricity completely wireless and free. Then just about everyone could survive and be happy on the bare minimum, and if they want a more extravagant life, they can work for it.​

Missed the point where it was anyone's job to provide "the bare minimum" for free to anyone else, or to have them "survive and be happy". They can work for all of it, not just "more extravagant".

I cannot imagine why anyone would think that enabling an entire class of worthless, non-producing consumers who provide nothing of value whatsoever to themselves, let alone to anyone else, would be a good thing.

How noble, decent and Christian of you. Even the ancient Romans had the good sense to realize that if the privileged few didn't provide food and distraction for the rabble, the rabble would turn on them and destroy them.

As a result, every Roman was entitled to a measure of wheat from the city stores, and the Senators paid for performances and gladiator competitions at the Coliseum. Hence the phrase "bread and circuses".

There are far more poor people than rich. People with nothing - no hope, no future, no stake in their communities, will turn on those who have oppressed them.

It's simply in your best interest to provide for the needs of the poor.

Remind me again why the SNAP recipients are too good to eat hamburger and must be pampered with high cost food that even the middle class can't afford every week?

Remind me again why I have to pay to feed other people's families when I'm clipping coupons and poring over sale papers to feed my own.

 

[BlueGin]

Maybe if we gave free food and water to everybody... you know... basic fruits and vegetables, and some lean meats. Maybe milk too, and things like eggs, beans, etc. Free juice and water. Healthy stuff. Completely reorganize the system.

Oh and go full Tesla and make electricity completely wireless and free. Then just about everyone could survive and be happy on the bare minimum, and if they want a more extravagant life, they can work for it.​

Missed the point where it was anyone's job to provide "the bare minimum" for free to anyone else, or to have them "survive and be happy". They can work for all of it, not just "more extravagant".

I cannot imagine why anyone would think that enabling an entire class of worthless, non-producing consumers who provide nothing of value whatsoever to themselves, let alone to anyone else, would be a good thing.

How noble, decent and Christian of you. Even the ancient Romans had the good sense to realize that if the privileged few didn't provide food and distraction for the rabble, the rabble would turn on them and destroy them.

As a result, every Roman was entitled to a measure of wheat from the city stores, and the Senators paid for performances and gladiator competitions at the Coliseum. Hence the phrase "bread and circuses".

There are far more poor people than rich. People with nothing - no hope, no future, no stake in their communities, will turn on those who have oppressed them.

It's simply in your best interest to provide for the needs of the poor.

Remind me again why the SNAP recipients are too good to eat hamburger and must be pampered with high cost food that even the middle class can't afford every week?

Remind me again why I have to pay to feed other people's families when I'm clipping coupons and poring over sale papers to feed my own.

Exactly. Granted if I find good sales on canned food ( tuna, ham, chicken) or flats of bottled water, sports drinks or cereal that I know they don't get everyday I will pick it up and donate some to the food bank. But... Ungrateful moochers whining about not getting prime cuts of steak everyday or organic canned goods can kiss my butt.

 

[Boss]

Again... just to put this out on the table again....

Our nation produces a shit-ton of agricultural surplus every year. It's absolutely impossible for a farmer to know precisely how much corn or wheat he will be able to sell when it's ready to sell. Since it's far worse to run out and not have anything to sell, they often over-produce... this creates a surplus. The surplus is totally useless if it's not used.

We could establish a food distribution service using surplus agriculture and feed millions. It would not be a "burden" to the taxpayer because the surplus already exists and is of no use unless it gets used. Yes, there would be a cost to administering the program but that cost would be considerably less and the program would be considerably more efficient.

The hardest part would be implementing the program and transitioning away from food stamps or EBT cards. People have gotten used to they system they have.. they are used to being able to buy the premium ice cream and their Hot Pockets... They'd have to get used to more raw veggies and food that requires preparation, but they wouldn't starve.

 

[Dragonlady]

Maybe if we gave free food and water to everybody... you know... basic fruits and vegetables, and some lean meats. Maybe milk too, and things like eggs, beans, etc. Free juice and water. Healthy stuff. Completely reorganize the system.

Oh and go full Tesla and make electricity completely wireless and free. Then just about everyone could survive and be happy on the bare minimum, and if they want a more extravagant life, they can work for it.​

Missed the point where it was anyone's job to provide "the bare minimum" for free to anyone else, or to have them "survive and be happy". They can work for all of it, not just "more extravagant".

I cannot imagine why anyone would think that enabling an entire class of worthless, non-producing consumers who provide nothing of value whatsoever to themselves, let alone to anyone else, would be a good thing.

How noble, decent and Christian of you. Even the ancient Romans had the good sense to realize that if the privileged few didn't provide food and distraction for the rabble, the rabble would turn on them and destroy them.

As a result, every Roman was entitled to a measure of wheat from the city stores, and the Senators paid for performances and gladiator competitions at the Coliseum. Hence the phrase "bread and circuses".

There are far more poor people than rich. People with nothing - no hope, no future, no stake in their communities, will turn on those who have oppressed them.

It's simply in your best interest to provide for the needs of the poor.

Remind me again why the SNAP recipients are too good to eat hamburger and must be pampered with high cost food that even the middle class can't afford every week?

If you think that SNAP recipients are dining on steak and lobster on the money they're getting, you are delusional.

They're also banned from getting massages and manicures and going on cruises.

This is yet another example of Republicans passing useless laws designed to punish poor people for being poor. Like the drug testing laws for welfare recipients. Thousands and thousands tested, very few positives. What a waste of time and money!

 

[Moonglow]

Maybe if we gave free food and water to everybody... you know... basic fruits and vegetables, and some lean meats. Maybe milk too, and things like eggs, beans, etc. Free juice and water. Healthy stuff. Completely reorganize the system.

Oh and go full Tesla and make electricity completely wireless and free. Then just about everyone could survive and be happy on the bare minimum, and if they want a more extravagant life, they can work for it.​

Missed the point where it was anyone's job to provide "the bare minimum" for free to anyone else, or to have them "survive and be happy". They can work for all of it, not just "more extravagant".

I cannot imagine why anyone would think that enabling an entire class of worthless, non-producing consumers who provide nothing of value whatsoever to themselves, let alone to anyone else, would be a good thing.

How noble, decent and Christian of you. Even the ancient Romans had the good sense to realize that if the privileged few didn't provide food and distraction for the rabble, the rabble would turn on them and destroy them.

As a result, every Roman was entitled to a measure of wheat from the city stores, and the Senators paid for performances and gladiator competitions at the Coliseum. Hence the phrase "bread and circuses".

There are far more poor people than rich. People with nothing - no hope, no future, no stake in their communities, will turn on those who have oppressed them.

It's simply in your best interest to provide for the needs of the poor.

Remind me again why the SNAP recipients are too good to eat hamburger and must be pampered with high cost food that even the middle class can't afford every week?

hamburger is ground steak..Why do people not understand that?