There should be more restrictions on what poor people can buy with food stamps.

[Juicin]

A whole new team of programmers, agents, and managers, not to mention whoever the stores hire to handle their end. You're talking about millions of dollars and a hwole.new government agency.

Yea so by american budget standards....Nothing

It's an academic project you could get undergrads to do it

 

[DudleySmith]

Back in the 60's when I was a kid, soda pop was only for special occasions like visitors coming over or once in a while where Dad worked some overtime. Outside of that, beverages were things like a pitcher of Kool-Aid. A five cent package of Kool-Aid and a scoop of sugar.

Same here. Or we made butter and sugar on bread sandwiches. Even jelly was a luxury for us.

 

[Crepitus]

With the money that was provided to them by the public because they filled out paperwork that claimed that they were in need. Their decision is being funded by other people. That's an important distinction when compared to your other two examples. I'm not telling people what I think they should do with their own money.

So the other folks in your insurance pool have a say in what treatment you can get?

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

A duplicate receipt is all they need. Everything I buy at the grocery store is listed on that receipt.

Ray, the last time I worked in a grocery was 40 years ago and my information is more up to date than yours.

 

[Crepitus]

no money needed

Bullshit.

 

[postman]

Well they 100% see it like a bank transaction

So idk if they can see what you bought. But they can certainly see how much. Whether they do anything with that info is another question

I would think every halfway decent grocery store prints out an itemized bill with the description of each item next to the price. So if the food stamp office has that information, they should be enforcing the rules.

Talk about taking personal responsibility, the food stamp office should be enforcing their own rules better.

 

[Unkotare]

Right. Much of the country is classified as "food desert". And the food available is poor quality and under-priced.

Our corporate-capitalist system does a poor job of serving the people.

A greater volume and variety of goods are available to all people in the United States today than anywhere at any time in human history.

 

[Crepitus]

Why not? Government is now forcing people to take medication they don't want. What's wrong with government telling people what kind of food they can and can't eat when we're paying for it?

Ok, so we can count on your support for the vaccine mandates.

COol.

 

[Juicin]

I would think every halfway decent grocery store prints out an itemized bill with the description of each item next to the price. So if the food stamp office has that information, they should be enforcing the rules.

Talk about taking personal responsibility, the food stamp office should be enforcing their own rules better.

A) that proprietary info

B) that's also their customers personal info

C) they have no obligation to report receipts to the state, and customers might be mad

Now granted they probably sell some of this information anonymized or not. But that's not the same as handing it to the state for free. So maybe there would be pushback idk. And i doubt it would be easy to compile after you added in all the retailers and their systems.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

That's going too far, since the majority of people on food stamps are supplemental. They have somebody in the family working for a living. So what they spend their own money on isn't the governments business.

I just want the government spending to be monitored, and the food stamp office enforce the rules. Like if a person buys mostly junk food, to put limits on that persons junk food purchases.

I don't think it's going too far at all. You and I are paying to feed this family and they are using their money to feed their two dogs and four cats. I think that is something the government should know about. A carton of cigarettes here is nearly $80.00. We both know how much food you can buy for 80 bucks.

So the SNAP's receipt and their cash receipt should be reported to government. If they don't want their cash purchases reported, then let them shop twice instead of once and the second time only purchase cash items. Not much but it is an additional deterrent to being on these programs.

 

[dblack]

Apples and oranges.

We DO get to decide what is and is not taught in our schools.

And we DO get to decide how welfare is delivered.

But what the OP wants to do is use the welfare delivery as an excuse to pursue extraneous social-engineering goals - ie making people eat the way we think they ought to. The valid comparison to public schools would be if they tried using the fact that someone has kids in school as an excuse to monitor their parenting activities and ensure they're using gender neutral pronouns at home.

I see a very dangerous trend where conservatives (in both parties) are targeting the supposed beneficiaries of the welfare state, rather than the politicians who create it. It's dangerous because the "taker" argument can be made against anyone - we all receive government benefits of one form or another. If that rationale can be used to justify telling welfare recipients how to eat, it can be used to justify telling public school parents how to raise their kids.

 

[Unkotare]

In other words, let them starve. Why don't you say what you really mean instead of cloaking it in kkkonnedservative bulldooky, eh?

And do you object to govt subsidies for agribiz and other corporate sectors?

And you are hunting? Progressives? Care to try that, fascist traitor boy? You're advocating murder. You think we progressives can't use guns. I'm from West Virginia, fool. You better check yourself, punk.

Is this your 'thing,' missy? Pretending to be tough on the internet? Banal and embarrassing.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Ray, the last time I worked in a grocery was 40 years ago and my information is more up to date than yours.

You don't need any updates to look at your receipt and see the items you bought and what you paid for them.

 

[Juicin]

And we DO get to decide how welfare is delivered.

But what the OP wants to do is use the welfare delivery as an excuse to pursue extraneous social-engineering goals - ie making people eat the way we think they ought to. The valid comparison to public schools would be if they tried using the fact that someone has kids in school as an excuse to monitor their parenting activities and ensure they're using gender neutral pronouns at home.

I see a very dangerous trend where conservatives are targeting the supposed beneficiaries of the welfare state, rather than the politicians who create it. It's dangerous because the "taker" argument can be made against anyone - we all receive government benefits of one form or another. If that rationale can be used to justify telling welfare recipients how to eat, it can be used to justify telling public school parents how to raise their kids.

When republicans realize basically every senior citizen is a taker they're going to freak the fuck out, lol

 

[progressive hunter]

Bullshit.

I see you had to edit my comment to make your non-point,,

 

[postman]

A) that proprietary info

B) that's also their customers personal info

C) they have no obligation to report receipts to the state, and customers might be mad

Now granted they probably sell some of this information anonymized or not. But that's not the same as handing it to the state for free. So maybe there would be pushback idk. And i doubt it would be easy to compile after you added in all the retailers and their systems.

If they're paying for it with government money, the government should get a receipt of what they're paying for. An itemized bill. I'm sure it's perfectly legal, as it would be the only way to have any kind of oversight of what they are, or aren't allowed to buy.

Plus it would serve as a deterrent to people trying to buy things they are not allowed to purchase with food stamps.

 

[dblack]

l have to say this is one of the better topics on this forum in a very long while. With a few exceptions, it has been very civil.

I'm always most interested in the topics that don't have clearly defined partisan lines. Forces people to think a bit more. Sometimes.

 

[Crepitus]

Only when we're paying for it. And I'm not even asking for an outrageous restriction.

Crepitus should they be allowed by buy alcohol with food assistance? Why or why not?

Alcohol isn't food, it's a recreational drug.

 

[Unkotare]

The fact is, nobody cares what you think, nor do you have the right to tell other people what to do. If they minded their own business? What the hell does that mean? How about, "If decent-paying jobs were available..." How's THAT for a starting point. Until greedy employers pay a decent wage, everyone can shut the hell up about EBT.

You don't want to tell people what to eat, but you want to tell private businesses what various jobs should pay? You commie-wannabe hypocrite.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

A whole new team of programmers, agents, and managers, not to mention whoever the stores hire to handle their end. You're talking about millions of dollars and a hwole.new government agency.

But I bet you have no complaints about Dementia hiring 80,000 new IRS workers to monitor all our bank transactions over $600.00