goverment food stamp rule #1

renovation · Post by **renovation** » Mon Oct 31, 2011 3:45 pm

should be close to what is said below !
This was written by a 21 yr old female who gets it. It's her future she’s worried about and this is how she feels about the social welfare big government state that she’s being forced to live in! These solutions are just common sense in her opinion.-- yeah, so do I!! Kathrin

This was in the Waco Tribune Herald, Waco , TX Nov 18, 2010

Put me in charge . . .

Put me in charge of food stamps. I'd get rid of Lone Star cards; no cash for Ding Dongs or Ho Ho's, just money for 50-pound bags of rice and beans, blocks of cheese and all the powdered milk you can haul away. If you want steak and frozen pizza, then get a job.

Put me in charge of Medicaid. The first thing I'd do is to get women Norplant birth control implants or tubal ligations. Then, we'll test recipients for drugs, alcohol, and nicotine and document all tattoos and piercings. If you want to reproduce or use drugs, alcohol, smoke or get tats and piercings, then get a job.

Put me in charge of government housing. Ever live in a military barracks?

You will maintain our property in a clean and good state of repair. Your "home" will be subject to inspections anytime and possessions will be inventoried. If you want a plasma TV or Xbox 360, then get a job and your own place.

In addition, you will either present a check stub from a job each week or you will report to a "government" job. It may be cleaning the roadways of trash, painting and repairing public housing, whatever we find for you. We will sell your 22 inch rims and low profile tires and your blasting stereo and speakers and put that money toward the “common good..”

Before you write that I've violated someone's rights, realize that all of the above is voluntary. If you want our money, accept our rules.. Before you say that this would be "demeaning" and ruin their "self esteem," consider that it wasn't that long ago that taking someone else's money for doing absolutely nothing was demeaning and lowered self esteem.

If we are expected to pay for other people's mistakes we should at least attempt to make them learn from their bad choices. The current system rewards them for continuing to make bad choices.

AND While you are on Gov’t subsistence, you no longer can VOTE! Yes that is correct. For you to vote would be a conflict of interest. You will voluntarily remove yourself from voting while you are receiving a Gov’t welfare check. If you want to vote, then get a job.

Now, if you have the guts - P A SS IT ON...

normalicy · Post by **normalicy** » Mon Oct 31, 2011 3:49 pm

I can appreciate much of that. Now doing it would me a miracle.

darcy · Post by **darcy** » Mon Oct 31, 2011 3:53 pm

normalicy wrote:I can appreciate much of that. Now doing it would me a miracle.

ditto to that!

good hearin' someone that age saying what she did,,

Shadow250 · Post by **Shadow250** » Mon Oct 31, 2011 5:36 pm

i agree with most of that but not all of it. not everyone chose to lose their job and if the government did any of that, it would be required and pave the way for other rights infringements. some of it is the same as prison.

Post by **FlyingPenguin** » Mon Oct 31, 2011 8:11 pm

Let's also keep in mind that some people are on assistance because they are physically disabled.

ZYFER · Post by **ZYFER** » Mon Oct 31, 2011 10:24 pm

I disagree with a lot of it due to it simply being ignorance. I do fully support control of food stamps, it isn't technically impossible to record how it is spent, or to decline things that aren't necessities. I have seen people use food stamps to buy ice cream, soda, or other unhealthy items, or proceed to buy food and spend their money on things like beer and cigarettes.

But I disagree with telling people what foods exactly to buy. Who is now deciding what a well-balanced diet is for? Last time I checked, your doctor was a better one to know what you need. How many here have been told by their doctor to consume more of one thing or another because they need more in their diet? Fiber normally comes to mind in a first glance but not limited to that ofcourse.

Besides, getting a job in this economy isn't just a matter of willpower. Then again, getting work is one thing, the job paying enough to support yourself is another. I really think that if companies weren't so greedy, we'd be better off. It would be nice to see company sponsored housing, hell it is hard enough to just get any kind of decent benefits. Meanwhile the people up top who make all the bad decision, rake in tons of money. It would also be nice to see companies taking a stand and providing job assistance on their own. Helping people back on their feet and allowing them to pull their lives together. Some families are broken apart simply because of unemployment. Where a man has to leave his family because it is easier for a woman alone with children to get help than a couple with children to get it.

Unemployment is still climbing regardless of what they are trying to say. Their statistics don't show the people who lost their job, filed for unemployment, still are looking while their unemployment runs out. These same people without a job, even after trying so hard to find one.

The idea doesn't even allow for someone to have anything either. So if someone gives you a gift, you must sell it then? Then again, proving who owns what in a residence is an issue as well. This thing is so full of holes it is saddening.

The biggest thing I do support is drug testing. So many drug users on food stamps it is sad. Even cases where people will buy $200 worth of food for someone for $50 cash to buy drugs with. Even so, programs like this are far less costly than general governmental waste. Socialism isn't really a bad thing, it is all about the implementation.

But corporations are always afraid of more push for that. It means less control for them and less profit, their greed means more to them than the happiness of their customers. Just look to some other countries in regards to healthcare, where in this one, more people go bankrupt due to medical bills than any other. Capitalism is the rot on this world.

CaterpillarAssassin · Post by **CaterpillarAssassin** » Tue Nov 01, 2011 8:08 pm

ZYFER wrote:I disagree with a lot of it due to it simply being ignorance. I do fully support control of food stamps, it isn't technically impossible to record how it is spent, or to decline things that aren't necessities. I have seen people use food stamps to buy ice cream, soda, or other unhealthy items, or proceed to buy food and spend their money on things like beer and cigarettes.

But I disagree with telling people what foods exactly to buy. Who is now deciding what a well-balanced diet is for? Last time I checked, your doctor was a better one to know what you need. How many here have been told by their doctor to consume more of one thing or another because they need more in their diet? Fiber normally comes to mind in a first glance but not limited to that ofcourse.

Besides, getting a job in this economy isn't just a matter of willpower. Then again, getting work is one thing, the job paying enough to support yourself is another. I really think that if companies weren't so greedy, we'd be better off. It would be nice to see company sponsored housing, hell it is hard enough to just get any kind of decent benefits. Meanwhile the people up top who make all the bad decision, rake in tons of money. It would also be nice to see companies taking a stand and providing job assistance on their own. Helping people back on their feet and allowing them to pull their lives together. Some families are broken apart simply because of unemployment. Where a man has to leave his family because it is easier for a woman alone with children to get help than a couple with children to get it.

Unemployment is still climbing regardless of what they are trying to say. Their statistics don't show the people who lost their job, filed for unemployment, still are looking while their unemployment runs out. These same people without a job, even after trying so hard to find one.

The idea doesn't even allow for someone to have anything either. So if someone gives you a gift, you must sell it then? Then again, proving who owns what in a residence is an issue as well. This thing is so full of holes it is saddening.

The biggest thing I do support is drug testing. So many drug users on food stamps it is sad. Even cases where people will buy $200 worth of food for someone for $50 cash to buy drugs with. Even so, programs like this are far less costly than general governmental waste. Socialism isn't really a bad thing, it is all about the implementation.

But corporations are always afraid of more push for that. It means less control for them and less profit, their greed means more to them than the happiness of their customers. Just look to some other countries in regards to healthcare, where in this one, more people go bankrupt due to medical bills than any other. Capitalism is the rot on this world.

I could not agree less on alot of this.

Being a small business owner - 7 employees, I see it from the other side. It is truly laughable how some people conduct themselves in interviews. I've had potential service tech's show up with a baseball cap and torn jeans, who hang on the chair slumped way back. Don't know how to talk, etc. It is VERY discouraging as an employer. Should these people be asking $15-20/hour and a full benefits package? Do they really deserve it? No. But that might be my greed stepping in. I suppose the person who has nothing on the line (employee) should get equal benefits and pay as someone who has EVERYTHING on the line? No again. I risk my credit, home, car, and savings on my business. It is simply risk vs. reward. Joe Schmoe can come in, do a terrible job for 6 months, cause me to lose customers and money, and then when i finally decide to let him go I'm the bad guy. He collects unemployment and moves on, I deal with the lost business and customers.

It is also extremely common for many people to be making more on unemployment than we can pay them. Do they realize or care that a lesser paying job will still put food on the table permanently? No. They would rather suck off the system until its dry, and then cry when there unemployment has run out. We were hiring for office staff a year ago. Out of 300 resumes, 250 were not qualified. 7 made more on unemployment and walked out, and we made our decision out of the best 15. 7 out of 15 made more on temporary unemployment. None of them would entertain a permanent lower paying job.

I do not disagree that high paying employment is harder to find now. But there are still jobs. Many companies are understaffed and trying to hire. The problem is that people think they are worth megabucks when they are not. Many of these people were the fat that companies needed to cut. The economy was a perfect excuse. I've seen accounts payable people making over $60k a year (in my area that is extremely high).

Touching on foodstamps. Do I think the government should tell you to buy corn flakes instead of wheaties? No. But I do think they should tell you that you can't buy candy, and you can't buy lucky charms. There poor, remember? They don't have the money to buy the most expensive food out there. The government doesn't either.

I honestly agree with most of that. Its a shame that it will never happen. We are too much of a nanny COUNTRY. Many people often forget that the government is there to serve the people, not the other way around.

ZYFER · Post by **ZYFER** » Tue Nov 01, 2011 10:15 pm

You disagree with most of it but no explanation really as to why? I am sure some people are like that, but it easy to pass over those kinds of people. Others might feel that they can do something, if perhaps given a little training, others being desperate and trying to find whatever. As for making more on unemployment? I guess that is minimum wage work, because here, it is capped and people struggle just to survive on that. I do think that people forget that you can take a job and still keep looking for something better. I just think it is overall bad practice to punish the many for the bad behavior of a few.

Some people just don't want to accept less than what they were getting. When normally that involved years at a company including pay increases. Ofcourse the worst thing one can do is to commit any kind of felony. It screws you over for life. They say a person pays their debt to society by serving their prison sentence, but in reality, they never stop paying for what is sometimes the stupid mistake of the young.

There are ways to restrict usage of food stamps, but it is a lot to track. But still, what is with allowing its use for things that are normally taxed than making those items tax-free? I think a food having sales tax is a big tip-off...

CaterpillarAssassin · Post by **CaterpillarAssassin** » Wed Nov 02, 2011 7:32 am

The sad part is that it is not minimum wage. Our minimum is around $7 hour. We were offering $12. Not going to get rich, but enough to put food on the table. I dot think there is a cap here, just 60% of your average income for the last year.

Taxing food at the grocery store is wrong. Same with clothing. Luckily MA does neither.

I hear you about not punishing the many for the mistakes of the few. But the problem is I don't think it's only a minority abusing the unemployment system. Sure, abuse levels vary, but someone staying home for 2 weeks before starting to look for a job is still abuse.

I still believe that people should be required to work or do community service while collecting government aid. Not the disabled or people who can't work of course. There was a program here that got killed in legislation that would allow an employer to take someone on while they were on unemployment for a certain period of time and not pay them. They would still collect there unemployment. This would have been great, because it would make businesses much less hesitant to hire. If you take someone on with little risk, than you can try people more easily. The fact is a bad employee can cost thousands in training, taxes, and wages with no gain. Then if you wait too long tiger rid of them, now you are stuck with there unemployment. This plan would have helped a great deal with spurring employer confidence.

ZYFER · Post by **ZYFER** » Wed Nov 02, 2011 10:10 am

That's pretty sick. It does depend on the area, but $12 an hour would actually be pretty decent around here. Most places hiring above minimum wage are around the $9 range.

The stupid part about job hunting now, is very little is local. Most are "apply online". Even some of the smaller places. Sure that is not always the case, but it does kind of put a damper on things when looking at the newspaper hardly helps. Most the ads are advertisements for schools, or some sort of scam.

To note, I've seen many jobs that require ways too much experience. To the point where only a small percentage are even eligible. There really isn't any perfect solution. A job assistance program might help, at least for the people who give a damn. I do think there should be at least mandatory participation if you are receiving unemployment. Seems some people feel it is an entitlement program.

The only food I have seen taxed are the things that are luxuries. Things like soda, candy, that sort of stuff. The kind of things people tend to buy with food stamps. Unfortunately, most places tax things like clothing. I find it somewhat messed up they tax pet food. Sure having a pet is a luxury, but feeding it is not. If you don't feed it, it is animal abuse.

I think one issue with the program you mentioned, would probably be employer abuse. They would treat those employees badly because they can, making them do the worst tasks solely because of their hiring status. Sure not always the case, but it only takes a few bad companies to make it a real problem. Somehow I doubt that is the reasoning it was killed though.

To note, I have known people who were unemployment for over two years. This is hardly by choice either. They looked long and hard for jobs. Ones they are well-qualified for nonetheless. Another problem is the equal opportunity BS. Where companies need to make a quota hiring "minorities". Ofcourse this leads to hiring less qualified people, many who end up being lazy. This later leads to another problem when you have to fire them, as they play the "race" card.

CaterpillarAssassin · Post by **CaterpillarAssassin** » Wed Nov 02, 2011 5:47 pm

I will certainly agree that there is no simple solution. There are those who truly want to work and cant find work, and then there are those that work the system. How do you differentiate on a large scale?

I honestly think a huge part of the problem is manufacturing is leaving this country faster than ever. These people that may not have college degrees and made a living at the local factory are finding themselves laid off, and with nothing to fall back on. The economy in the US has changed drastically, and the population just hasn't caught up. We are becoming a country that designs the products for the other countries to produce. This leads to a higher demand of engineers, graphics design, etc. All college degrees, and I think the vast majority on unemployment are "unskilled" labor. Put in the position, I honestly would not know what to do either aside from government funded education programs, and educating the public ABOUT the education programs.

ZYFER · Post by **ZYFER** » Thu Nov 03, 2011 1:39 am

I'd agree with that, and its painful. If all the countries of the world laid an embargo on the U.S., it'd be screwed. If a major disaster occurred which wiped out the country's power infrastructure, the country doesn't have the manufacturing capacity to get it back online on its own. Relying too heavily on other countries is just a bad plan overall. I mean it works in a world where all countries are united. This isn't such a world.

Education is a great thing, but people can't afford it. Tuition costs are on the rise, and the public school system is so bad that many people can't get into the schools they may need to get employment. I find it pretty surprising on how little interest is taken in educating the next generation. The problem is that it is only a matter of time before the country loses the edge of design, as more and more countries become technologically advanced.

Kaworu · Post by **Kaworu** » Thu Nov 03, 2011 3:03 pm

I sat on unemployment for a while looking for work, and I'm one of those people who said no thanks to a couple of those $7/hour jobs because in some instances, $7 doesn't pay for the fuel to commute. (Closest work to me for a while was about a 2 hour drive each way, I live in a former steel mill town).

I'm somewhat fortunate that I did have a good paying job several years ago and purchased a new Civic that's really easy on the gas, but I have co-workers that drive older 'clunker' vehicles that get terrible mileage and they simply can't put together the funds to buy a more efficient vehicle.

From the 'unskilled' worker viewpoint, we have plenty of companies sending jobs over seas when there are plenty of people here at home that could use the work. Small and large businesses alike.

CaterpillarAssassin · Post by **CaterpillarAssassin** » Thu Nov 03, 2011 4:21 pm

Kaworu wrote:I sat on unemployment for a while looking for work, and I'm one of those people who said no thanks to a couple of those $7/hour jobs because in some instances, $7 doesn't pay for the fuel to commute. (Closest work to me for a while was about a 2 hour drive each way, I live in a former steel mill town).

I'm somewhat fortunate that I did have a good paying job several years ago and purchased a new Civic that's really easy on the gas, but I have co-workers that drive older 'clunker' vehicles that get terrible mileage and they simply can't put together the funds to buy a more efficient vehicle.

From the 'unskilled' worker viewpoint, we have plenty of companies sending jobs over seas when there are plenty of people here at home that could use the work. Small and large businesses alike.

I hear you on that and it needs to pay the gas to get there. I don't know where you live or your situation, but if there is no work close by, it might be time to relocate.

See it is easy to say that try shouldn't move manufacturing overseas, but when your competition sent there manufacturing to china and can offer its products at 50% of the cost of yours, it leaves little choice. I think about the only remedy for that is substantial dutys on imported goods.

Kaworu · Post by **Kaworu** » Thu Nov 03, 2011 4:41 pm

I was fortunate and found work about 7 months ago. The pay isn't to terrible, and it's local (half hour drive)