SNAP (food stamps) should be restricted to rice, flour, rolled oats, and sugar

[Ray From Cleveland]

Don't gimme any crap about how poor people need a balanced diet. As it is these snappers spend all this money on junk food. A diet of staples will be better for them. And MUCH cheaper for the taxpayers. Eating just those 4 staples, a person can live on a dollar a day.

They should still be allowed to buy vegetables and protiens. all those carbs are not good alone. But maybe something more innovative besides taxpayer funded food stamps needs to be considered. Maybe the government can work with private industries to make some sort of relief donations to offset some of the cost.

I think I can summarize the problem here: I've seen those food stamp people buying all kinds of prepared foods. Spaghetti in a can, ready made cakes, Stoffers TV dinners, Precooked shrimp and so on. I mean, if you want a cake for the kids, fine. Get a box of cake powder, some eggs (which you will use anyway) some oil and some frosting and make the Fn cake yourself. Spaghetti isn't that hard to make. Boil some water, throw the noodles in there, and add sauce when it's done. When we had drinks as a kid, we never had prepared drinks. Mom got some Kool-Aid packages, mixed it with water and sugar, and put it in a pitcher. It lasted us three days.

Part of the problem is people dont know how to cook anymore, or are too lazy to cook. Its true

Cooking is one thing I despise. I hate it. But I have to cook in order to eat. I piss and moan if I have to cook a hotdog.

I would love to be able to eat like these food stamp people I see in line. For me, a TV dinner is a treat, not a daily staple. If I lived on those instead of making my own food, I can't imagine what I would spend at the grocery store every week. But I would have enough fuel perks to get a free tank of gasoline every month.

 

[OldLady]

Don't gimme any crap about how poor people need a balanced diet. As it is these snappers spend all this money on junk food. A diet of staples will be better for them. And MUCH cheaper for the taxpayers. Eating just those 4 staples, a person can live on a dollar a day.

They should still be allowed to buy vegetables and protiens. all those carbs are not good alone. But maybe something more innovative besides taxpayer funded food stamps needs to be considered. Maybe the government can work with private industries to make some sort of relief donations to offset some of the cost.

During the sixties and early seventies, in rural areas anyway, the government surplus truck would come around once a month or so and people would just get in line to get whatever the government had extra of. Big bags of instant mashed potatoes (they were the best ones I ever had), big cans of peanut butter, 5 pound blocks of cheese, etc. etc. I didn't live here then but relatives of mine did that would sometimes send me "care packages" of government surplus (we were really broke but no, we didn't do the welfare thing--we just skipped meals). I never see that any more, or any of that stuff at our food pantry. Is the USDA sending all that surplus to foreign countries or what? That would be a huge, practical help to keep SNAP benefits from being abused.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Don't gimme any crap about how poor people need a balanced diet. As it is these snappers spend all this money on junk food. A diet of staples will be better for them. And MUCH cheaper for the taxpayers. Eating just those 4 staples, a person can live on a dollar a day.

They should still be allowed to buy vegetables and protiens. all those carbs are not good alone. But maybe something more innovative besides taxpayer funded food stamps needs to be considered. Maybe the government can work with private industries to make some sort of relief donations to offset some of the cost.

During the sixties and early seventies, in rural areas anyway, the government surplus truck would come around once a month or so and people would just get in line to get whatever the government had extra of. Big bags of instant mashed potatoes (they were the best ones I ever had), big cans of peanut butter, 5 pound blocks of cheese, etc. etc. I didn't live here then but relatives of mine did that would sometimes send me "care packages" of government surplus (we were really broke but no, we didn't do the welfare thing--we just skipped meals). I never see that any more, or any of that stuff at our food pantry. Is the USDA sending all that surplus to foreign countries or what? That would be a huge, practical help to keep SNAP benefits from being abused.

Believe it or not, they got rid of it because the people (at least over here) complained about it. They didn't want to stand in line for anything. The media compared it to the former USSR and called it disgraceful.

 

[OldLady]

Don't gimme any crap about how poor people need a balanced diet. As it is these snappers spend all this money on junk food. A diet of staples will be better for them. And MUCH cheaper for the taxpayers. Eating just those 4 staples, a person can live on a dollar a day.

They should still be allowed to buy vegetables and protiens. all those carbs are not good alone. But maybe something more innovative besides taxpayer funded food stamps needs to be considered. Maybe the government can work with private industries to make some sort of relief donations to offset some of the cost.

During the sixties and early seventies, in rural areas anyway, the government surplus truck would come around once a month or so and people would just get in line to get whatever the government had extra of. Big bags of instant mashed potatoes (they were the best ones I ever had), big cans of peanut butter, 5 pound blocks of cheese, etc. etc. I didn't live here then but relatives of mine did that would sometimes send me "care packages" of government surplus (we were really broke but no, we didn't do the welfare thing--we just skipped meals). I never see that any more, or any of that stuff at our food pantry. Is the USDA sending all that surplus to foreign countries or what? That would be a huge, practical help to keep SNAP benefits from being abused.

Believe it or not, they got rid of it because the people (at least over here) complained about it. They didn't want to stand in line for anything. The media compared it to the former USSR and called it disgraceful.

It's really depressing the depths of our stupidity, isn't it?

 

[easyt65]

I still find it funny how libs changed the name 'FOOD STAMPS' to 'SNAP' so it would sound 'cooler' and less 'Welfare-ish'.

 

[Flash]

Why not leave the poor the fuck alone?

.

Why not leave the taxpayers alone?

 

[Camp]

You are conflating constitutional rights with mandates. Certain religions demand procreation and do not allow birth control. That means procreating is covered in the 1rst Amendment allowing for freedom of religion..

That's BS. Any child molester can say "it's my religious belief that child molesting is ok". Do we sanction that? THINK.

Procreation is in the Holy Book of the Christians and an established part of that religion that has already been approved by the SCOTUS as being a valid part of that religion that does not conflict with government laws and standards. People procreating does not require breaking state or federal laws. Child molesting does. Is this concept beyond your ability to understand? Probably is.

 

[guno]

i guess they like shitting on their own

The Food Stamp Capital of the U.S. is WHITE and REPUBLICAN


This might rank among the greatest of ironies in history: the Food Stamp Capital of the U.S. is almost entirely white and Republican.

yes bible thumping cracka land

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Why not leave the poor the fuck alone?

.

Why not leave the taxpayers alone?

 

[Claudette]

Why not leave the poor the fuck alone?

.

Why not leave the taxpayers alone?

Don't be silly. They need those that work and produce, the tax payer, to pay for the freeloaders.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

i guess they like shitting on their own

The Food Stamp Capital of the U.S. is WHITE

i guess they like shitting on their own

[URL='http://politicalblindspot.com/the-food-stamp-capital-of-the-u-s-is-white-and-republican/']The Food Stamp Capital of the U.S. is WHITE and REPUBLICAN

This might rank among the greatest of ironies in history: the Food Stamp Capital of the U.S. is almost entirely white and Republican.

yes bible thumping cracka land

and REPUBLICAN[/URL]


This might rank among the greatest of ironies in history: the Food Stamp Capital of the U.S. is almost entirely white and Republican.

yes bible thumping cracka land

Yeah, you really have to watch those crakas. But as reliable as Political Blog Spot is, try a better source:

DC Has Highest Percentage of Food Stamp Recipients

 

[Camp]

Don't gimme any crap about how poor people need a balanced diet. As it is these snappers spend all this money on junk food. A diet of staples will be better for them. And MUCH cheaper for the taxpayers. Eating just those 4 staples, a person can live on a dollar a day.

They should still be allowed to buy vegetables and protiens. all those carbs are not good alone. But maybe something more innovative besides taxpayer funded food stamps needs to be considered. Maybe the government can work with private industries to make some sort of relief donations to offset some of the cost.

During the sixties and early seventies, in rural areas anyway, the government surplus truck would come around once a month or so and people would just get in line to get whatever the government had extra of. Big bags of instant mashed potatoes (they were the best ones I ever had), big cans of peanut butter, 5 pound blocks of cheese, etc. etc. I didn't live here then but relatives of mine did that would sometimes send me "care packages" of government surplus (we were really broke but no, we didn't do the welfare thing--we just skipped meals). I never see that any more, or any of that stuff at our food pantry. Is the USDA sending all that surplus to foreign countries or what? That would be a huge, practical help to keep SNAP benefits from being abused.

Believe it or not, they got rid of it because the people (at least over here) complained about it. They didn't want to stand in line for anything. The media compared it to the former USSR and called it disgraceful.

It's really depressing the depths of our stupidity, isn't it?

It is really sad how misinformation is spread around. Farn support programs instigated during the New Deal-Great Depression days of the 30's and ended during the Reagan years of the 80's. In order to keep farms and farmers from going broke, the government guaranteed farmers a profit and would buy up surplus foods at a set price. It kept food prices down and filled government warehouses full of surplus food.while at the same time kept family farms healthy, vibrant and profitable. That is where all that surplus food came from. Now the money goes to middlemen, packing plants, industrial farms and instead of surplus food we have EBT and family farms have become rarer every year. The warehouses full of surplus food disappeared and the family farmers began their decline under Reagan. Most of the family farms of today are enslaved to the big industrial farm corporations by contractual agreements.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

I still find it funny how libs changed the name 'FOOD STAMPS' to 'SNAP' so it would sound 'cooler' and less 'Welfare-ish'.

The left is always trying to change terms when one doesn't work properly: global warming to climate change, liberals to progressive, lies to misspoke. Your point of food stamps is a perfect example of that.

 

[danielpalos]

why care what the poor do or don't do for their money; you don't want the poor to care about how much the rich make or work for their money.

Well because it's really not "their money" it's our money because our government takes it from us to give to them.

it is your poor lifestyle choice that are not rich or poor, so you don't have to pay personal income taxes.

Yes, I do pay income taxes. Sorry to burst that bubble.

it is your choice to make that much and pay that much in taxes; sorry to burst your personal responsibility bubble.

No, it's not a choice. You need money to put a roof over your head, you need money for utilities. You need money to support your transportation to and from work. Our society is built on the exchange of money.

yes, it is a choice; you could go on welfare and not work, instead of whining about taxes.

 

[danielpalos]

No, my point is you can make a meal cheap and they do not deserve steak and lobster. People believe that the taxpayer is their personal bank account and I say forget that!

These lazy people need to get a damn job and learn to cook and stop expecting the working society to pay for their lazy ass.

I am more agree with shooting the lazy drug addicted pieces of shit than supporting their worthless asses anymore!

Also that goes for every race!

The only segment of society I will pay for willingly is the Native American Population and I know you will disagree that but as for any other segment of society fuck'em!

I also think that one of the requirements should be you are not allowed to own pets. It makes no sense that taxpayers are feeding people and those people are feeding their animals. The government should be allowed to send agents to various homes to see if these people have huge dogs or ten cats.

Yes, that's what we need, is to spend even more taxpayer money on home invasions to make sure people are living the way we want them to.

Or we could behave like REAL conservatives, mind our own damned business about what priorities people do or don't have for their cash, and address the REAL problem of our bloated welfare state.

Their cash? What about MY cash?

REAL conservatives are those that want to help the people who truly need help by weeding out those that can take care of themselves and are just using our tax dollars so that they can free up more of their own cash to use on non-necessities.

Your cash is going to pay for our wars on crime, drugs, and terror, not our war on poverty, so you can "look tough".

Yes it does because the money I spend to fight drugs, terror and crime protects me and our country. We all benefit from that. Nobody benefits by supporting children that are not their own. The only one that benefits are the mothers and in some rare cases, the father as well.

you can't care under our form of capitalism. the poor should not how much the rich make or how they make it, and the rich should not care how much the poor make or how they make it.

 

[danielpalos]

Why not leave the poor the fuck alone?

.

Why not leave the taxpayers alone?

you can always quit and be poor to not pay taxes. stop complaining about paying taxes.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

I also think that one of the requirements should be you are not allowed to own pets. It makes no sense that taxpayers are feeding people and those people are feeding their animals. The government should be allowed to send agents to various homes to see if these people have huge dogs or ten cats.

Yes, that's what we need, is to spend even more taxpayer money on home invasions to make sure people are living the way we want them to.

Or we could behave like REAL conservatives, mind our own damned business about what priorities people do or don't have for their cash, and address the REAL problem of our bloated welfare state.

Their cash? What about MY cash?

REAL conservatives are those that want to help the people who truly need help by weeding out those that can take care of themselves and are just using our tax dollars so that they can free up more of their own cash to use on non-necessities.

Your cash is going to pay for our wars on crime, drugs, and terror, not our war on poverty, so you can "look tough".

Yes it does because the money I spend to fight drugs, terror and crime protects me and our country. We all benefit from that. Nobody benefits by supporting children that are not their own. The only one that benefits are the mothers and in some rare cases, the father as well.

you can't care under our form of capitalism. the poor should not how much the rich make or how they make it, and the rich should not care how much the poor make or how they make it.

The poor don't make anything, that's the point. You need to learn the difference between making money and getting money.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Well because it's really not "their money" it's our money because our government takes it from us to give to them.

it is your poor lifestyle choice that are not rich or poor, so you don't have to pay personal income taxes.

Yes, I do pay income taxes. Sorry to burst that bubble.

it is your choice to make that much and pay that much in taxes; sorry to burst your personal responsibility bubble.

No, it's not a choice. You need money to put a roof over your head, you need money for utilities. You need money to support your transportation to and from work. Our society is built on the exchange of money.

yes, it is a choice; you could go on welfare and not work, instead of whining about taxes.

And what if we all did that?

The idea of representation is to hire people that will take care of our money. If they don't, you boot them out next election and hire somebody else.

I have less of a problem paying taxes than what those taxes go for. You don't quit working for that reason.

 

[Manonthestreet]

Poor people rarely have the kitchen supplies and utensils and counter space needed to cook from scratch.

Sorta like minorities cant get an ID lie

 

[Manonthestreet]

Food stamp fraud is at an all-time high, with cases this year including a state lawmaker and even a millionaire.

According to the USDA, $70 million of taxpayer money was wasted in 2016 due to food stamp fraud. Food Stamp Fraud at All-Time High: Is It Time to End the Program?