Expensive meats and food stamps

[Milton Bradley]

Quote by: twoanickel DO YOU THINK IT DOES NOT ADDRESS HUMAN ISSUES THAT HAVE TO DO WITH EVERYDAY REALITY??????????????? COME ON, MAN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! You think you, as a libertarian, are a conservative? The Bible is showing you what a real conservative is. Rather than complain, you should sit up and pay attention! Compared to real Christian principles, you are a bleeding heart liberal.

Your everyday reality, and my governments everyday reality may not be the same. Perhaps the comparisons should end there, as "charity" as talked about in the bible is of free will, and not coerced through government intrusion into my financial affairs.


Why is it that the Christian God is able to let us exercise free will, but His followers are so adamant about refusing us that same courtesy?


P.S. Libertarians are considered fiscally conservative, and more liberal ( with a small L ) in the social arena.


I think Osborn's point was that if you insist on dragging your religion into every thread, you are going to be catching flak about it in every thread.

[Osborn F Enready]

Milton said: I think Osborn's point was that if you insist on dragging your religion into every thread, you are going to be catching flak about it in every thread.

I say:
Thank you. Exactly.

[twoanickel]

Quote by: RickSp LOL. There you go again. Shouting about letting people STARVE and then ranting about "umitigated GALL" in others. 1 Corinthians 13:1-4 "Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not charity, I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal. And though I have the gift of prophecy, and understand all mysteries, and all knowledge; and though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, and have not charity, I am nothing. And though I bestow all my goods to feed the poor, and though I give my body to be burned, and have not charity, it profiteth me nothing. Charity suffereth long, and is kind; charity envieth not; charity vaunteth not itself, is not puffed up." You sound like an entire brass band.

In 1 cor. 13, Paul was speaking of agape love, which is the love of one Christian for another. If you want to get real, pay attention to the way Jesus spoke to His enemies at times; especially when they were against the truth. Then read the seventh chapter of Acts and notice the choice words Stephen had for some just before they became so enraged that they killed him. Bother yourself long enough to read the choice words the Old Testament prophets had for transgressors, and contemplate the rage they had against the prophets as they killed the prophets also. Why do you think they did that? Do you suppose they killed the prophets because they pampered and spoiled them with sweet nothings in their rebel ears??????

The fact that sugar tongued preachers are willing to prostrate themselves before you, tickle your ears with lies about your condition before God, slap you on the back and plead with you to "please come back next Sunday" doesn't mean EVERY Christian is obligated to curry your favor and betray the real truth of your condition before God to meet your approval.

What do I mean? I mean pay attention to context before you use Scripture to prove anything. Hear some more from Paul: "As we said before, so say I now again, if any man preach any other gospel unto you than that you have received, let him be accursed. [do you like that?] For am I now seeking the approval of man, or of God? Or am I trying to please man? If I were still trying to please man, I would not be a servant of Christ." (Gal.1: 9,10) If you think I sound like a brass band, what do you think Stephen sounded like to those who held their hands over their ears as they rushed upon him to kill him??? And you feel so sorry for yourself. But don't expect ME to pat you on the head while you are busy trying to oppose the truth in every way possible. When people have a hatred for the truth, telling them the truth doesn't exactly please them.

[twoanickel]

Quote by: Milton Bradley Your everyday reality, and my governments everyday reality may not be the same. Perhaps the comparisons should end there, as "charity" as talked about in the bible is of free will, and not coerced through government intrusion into my financial affairs. Why is it that the Christian God is able to let us exercise free will, but His followers are so adamant about refusing us that same courtesy? P.S. Libertarians are considered fiscally conservative, and more liberal ( with a small L ) in the social arena. I think Osborn's point was that if you insist on dragging your religion into every thread, you are going to be catching flak about it in every thread.

In other words, if the Bible addresses issues that are effecting society you would rather be ignorant of what the Bible says and not know it? I find that very interesting because there is no shortage of those on this thread that take delight in attacking the Bible, and from what you just said, they would be happier if they could just attack it without knowing what it says about issues. You know what? That doesn't surprise me. That is also my own estimate of most of them. At least we agree on one thing.

And in what way has anyone on this forum deprived you of your free will? Do you mean that eating off another man's pocketbook is a matter of free will?

[twoanickel]

Quote by: Osborn F Enready I say: Oh my, I had such hope for you being reasonable. That post about sums up the folly of that hope. It appears as though you are just yet another, religious zealot on a mission of God, your flavor of God of course, which is all that makes it righteous to you. Religion is a personal issue, and has no place in politics or government. As far as me being a liberal..... ROFLMAO.... that is humor. Old school liberal, on civil rights issues, maybe.(individual rights protection from government) Old school conservative, on economic issues, maybe.(balanced budget, anti-tax, anti-welfare) I would call myself a Constitutionalist, if it wasn't for their silly interjection of religion into the political arena. So I am left with Libertarianism, which is all about individual rights (as in the BOR), the Constitutional limitations upon the Republic, strong states rights(as opposed to strong Federal government), small government(only what is needed, and constitutionally legal), a strong truly free market, removing un-constitutional taxation and wealth re-distribution fronts that operate within our government, a more isolationist foreign policy stance in all areas but market access. You on the other hand, can't seem to make two posts in a row without mentioning God, the bible, or some rhetoric from "your" religion. Please, drop the religious mantra, and then we can discuss things as rational adults. Back on topic please?

2 Thess. 3:10 IS on topic. Do you believe your anti-bible phobia authorizes you to attempt to eject it from the public square? You people pride yourself in your so-called debate skills. Well, if you don't like what the Bible says about requiring people to work for their food, WHY DON'T YOU TRY TO DEBATE THAT?? You'll like to hammer the Bible, so why don't you try to hammer what it actually says?? Fat chance! When we get down to the nitty gritty of what the Bible really teaches you people tremble, quiver, shake, and melt away into the deep shadows like the mthological vampire flees the light of day.

[greeneyedgirl]

Wow, this thread has certainly..... evolved. Last night we were discussing food stamps and welfare, and I come back tonight and people are hurling quotes from the bible at each other.. :eek:

[Krazyjuice]

After the hurricanes hit south florida last summer, everybody who was in the affected area was able to receive one of these EBT (electronic benefits transfer) cards from the state with a limited ammount of 'ebt food' money on it. It didn't matter if you were rich, poor, or even hit by the storm. You just had to apply, give your address, and no questions were asked. It covered anything from fancy meat, birthday cakes, to ramen noodles. Just no prepared deli sandwiches, hot foods, or carbonated beverages. If people wanted to waste their money on meat that would go bad due to no refrigeration/lack of electricity, that was their problem.

And wtf is up with the bible quotes? Seriously.

You actually believe those myths?

(I know i'm gonna get railed from the wackos for these comments heh)

[Jack]

It's called thread hijacking, a form of spam...using bible quotes instead of participating using your own thoughts like the majority of members do. It sucks, but if you call them on it, they just take that as another form of persecution. It's very similar to the idea that it makes no sense and does no good to beat up a masochist. They enjoy it too much.

Back to the topic:
You can't stop every political process that's become corrupted or that people have abused. If you want to do that, let's start with the presidency and congress. Social programs like food stamps would be wayyyy down on my list.
Since I know the government intends to tax me until I die, they could at least put some of that money toward social programs that do some good and ensure the poorest Americans will be fed (those that don't abuse the program, anyway, like children) than pouring the majority of it into programs like ill-conceived conflicts that only seem to ensure that many Americans will never have to rely on food stamps due to the fact they'll be dead.

[rmnunez]

On the food stamp thing, I have a hunch beneficiaries' purchases are critically observed, questioning their economy. Products which one may purchase as luxuries seen paid with food stamps raise eye-brows, but there are many reasonable explanations.

[Chris]

Quote by: greeneyedgirl Wow, this thread has certainly..... evolved. Last night we were discussing food stamps and welfare, and I come back tonight and people are hurling quotes from the bible at each other.. :eek:

Well I think twoanickel was trying to be clever by starting to quote the bible. Proving how Christians can also be heartless. (guess twoa nickel was generally mad about food stamp recipients)

Quote by: twoanickel "...if anyone is not willing to work, neither let him eat." 2 Thess. 3:10

And others were just pointing out how Christians should be for charity.

One big contradiction.

[twoanickel]

Quote by: |Chris| Well I think twoanickel was trying to be clever by starting to quote the bible. Proving how Christians can also be heartless. (guess twoa nickel was generally mad about food stamp recipients) And others were just pointing out how Christians should be for charity. One big contradiction.

So you don't think requiring people to be self-responsible is charitable? You think letting, even encouraging people to have no personal integrity, initiative, and not developing their own potential is being charitable toward them?? Where are we at now? In the twilight zone?
The best thing you can do for people is require them to develop their potential. It is a part of being human, and it is NOT beng heartless. You must all be from the northeast.

But I suppose that this forum, supposedly loaded with mental giants, believe it is to the benefit of people to encourage them to be indolent and refuse to develop their potential. My, my! How SHARP the people on this forum are. They speak as if they have about as much brain power as the people inside the beltway.

Why don't you people openly celebrate irresponsibility, indolence, and being dependent upon others? Come on now! Quit hiding your admiration of those who engage in the high calling of being someone's house pet. When so many of the general population are as dense as the people on this forum, it is no wonder that the people inside the beltway aren't exactly bright..

[Marilyn Monroe]

Quote by: twoanickel So you don't think requiring people to be self-responsible is charitable? You think letting, even encouraging people to have no personal integrity, initiative, and not developing their own potential is being charitable toward them?? Where are we at now? In the twilight zone? The best thing you can do for people is require them to develop their potential. It is a part of being human, and it is NOT beng heartless. You must all be from the northeast. But I suppose that this forum, supposedly loaded with mental giants, believe it is to the benefit of people to encourage them to be indolent and refuse to develop their potential. My, my! How SHARP the people on this forum are. They speak as if they have about as much brain power as the people inside the beltway. Why don't you people openly celebrate irresponsibility, indolence, and being dependent upon others? Come on now! Quit hiding your admiration of those who engage in the high calling of being someone's house pet. When so many of the general population are as dense as the people on this forum, it is no wonder that the people inside the beltway aren't exactly bright..

I see your point, and it's called tough love. I agree with you that some are lazy that get food stamps and should be working, but we really can't judge people, God will have to do that.

You can't do away with the program(s) because so many children are involved in it, and nobody will let kids have nothing to prove a point.

Socialism may produce a lot more lazy types, but in MHO you have to have some Socialism to balance things out. Not too much, but some. There have to be lines drawn where "enough is enough". This is where the problems start coming in, it's never enough. Who's poor starts creeping up and up, also.

So far though for how big we are, I think it's been curtailed to some degree. I think the Earned Income Credit is too broad, but once these programs are in place that's it, "can't touch this". (M. C. Hammer)

[Osborn F Enready]

twoanickel said: 2 Thess. 3:10 IS on topic. Do you believe your anti-bible phobia authorizes you to attempt to eject it from the public square? You people pride yourself in your so-called debate skills. Well, if you don't like what the Bible says about requiring people to work for their food, WHY DON'T YOU TRY TO DEBATE THAT?? You'll like to hammer the Bible, so why don't you try to hammer what it actually says?? Fat chance! When we get down to the nitty gritty of what the Bible really teaches you people tremble, quiver, shake, and melt away into the deep shadows like the mthological vampire flees the light of day.

I say:
I responded via PM to save people the THREAD DERAILMENT you are attempting to make.

[Matt W]

Indeed.

This had better get back on-topic and fast, or it will be closed. :rolleyes:

Do not respond to me within this thread. PM myself or Sean with any questions.

[Boetie]

Those whom give the typical responses such as, "why don't these people get jobs instead of being so bored and busted," is a sign of ignorance.

Does anyone recall the Jobless Recovery? Does anyone remember how many jobs were lost?

Another little known fact is rural America. Rural American accounts for many of our poor and trust me, finding jobs in rural America is tough. Walmart is destroying mom and pop businesses in rural America. A certain number of Wal Mart employees qualify for food stamps.

The picture of poverty in America shouldn't be tossed aside with simple cliche's such as "why don't these people get jobs instead of being so bored and busted."

Poverty in America is serious and the number of children not eating properly has increased dramatically.

Recently the Legislative Branch cut food for the needy under the argument that the deficit is growing, the same Branch attempted to repeal the inheritance tax, which if they had succeeded would have skyrocketed the deficit tremendously. Fucked up priorities isn't it.

Our problem is that the people running our government is totally out of touch with Americans in poverty and are not representing Americans in poverty.

Here is a link about hunger in rural America to enlighten the ignorant

Hunger in Rural America

[RickSp]

Eleven million children are on Food Stamps. Will anyone be crasss enough to call them all shirkers and scream LET THEM STARVE, as has been done once already on this thread?

A few notes on the recipients:

Food Stamp Program

The Food Stamps Program is known in public policy circles as a “work support,” meaning it is used primarily by people looking for a job, or employed but not making enough to make ends meet. Because food stamps allow this latter group to maintain their low-wage employment, most experts believe food stamps actually keep people off the welfare rolls. Peer-reviewed research on the "dependency" effect referenced above is non-existent. The available evidence, in particular a University of Maryland study conducted in 2002, indicates that enrollment in the food stamps program keeps former welfare recipients from sliding back into poverty and re-enrolling in welfare programs. Claims of fraud and abuse of the program have likewise proved to be unfounded. In 2005, 98% of food stamp benefits went to eligible households. According to the GAO, at last count (2004) only 4.48% of food stamps benefits were found to be overpaid, down by more than a third from six years earlier. Two thirds of all improper payments were found to be the fault of the caseworker, not the individual. Finally, while the evidence is mixed as to the effect of the food stamps program on weight gain, studies conducted by the USDA on the receipts of food stamps purchases have found that program participants are more likely to spend their income on fruits, vegetables and healthy foods than low-income consumers who do not participate in the program.

There is much wrong with the system. Like all government support in a better world it would be replaced by private and community charities. That being said, anyone who calls everyone on Food Stamps lazy and undeserving is either wildly uniformed or perversely mean spirited and inhumane.

[greeneyedgirl]

Quote by: RickSp Eleven million children are on Food Stamps. Will anyone be crasss enough to call them all shirkers and scream LET THEM STARVE, as has been done once already on this thread? There is much wrong with the system. Like all government support in a better world it would be replaced by private and community charities. That being said, anyone who calls everyone on Food Stamps lazy and undeserving is either wildly uniformed or perversely mean spirited and inhumane.

I don't think anyone wants to see children starve, and I do think people realize that it is not the childrens fault that the parents are on welfare. You cannot help what you are born into.

I have no problem with welfare being used as a safety net for people who have lost their jobs. That is what welfare is supposed to be. I do however take issue with generatioinal welfare and those that use and abuse the system. For 3 years, I dealt with inner city welfare recipients and I saw the way they abused the system. Many of them were driving around in expensive cars, wearing designer clothes, etc. For the majority of the women, as soon as they cashed their check, they were off getting a new weave and their nails done. Meanwhile, they had 4 or 5 kids trailing after them and one in the oven. To me, that is irresponsible.

As far as the "maybe they can't find a job" excuse, I can understand that in a small rural area. But in a city, there is no excuse why people cannot find a job. There is ample public transportation, and tons of jobs that need to be filled.

[Chris]

I can agree with you Greeneyedgirl.

Welfair is needed, but you also have abuse - its sort of a double edged sword. I think broad sweeping generalizations about welfare recipients should try and be avoided though. I myself have seen the type of characters you describe, using Food stamps. -of whom obviously did not deserve them.

[Mia]

There is a big difference between food stamps and welfare checks, both in the amount provided and the requirements to have it.

Rick's article made a good point about food stamps helping to keep people off welfare. If they can bridge their income gap a little and allow them to afford food, they don't have to apply for the larger welfare checks.

Various states have exceptions to this (disabled, pregnant, primary caretaker of child are examples) but there is a work requirement.

You cannot receive food stamps for more than three months while not working, and you have to be signed up TO work during that time.

So it's not like there are people who can work lazing around getting food stamps long term.

Here is the calculator: http://www.health.state.nd.us/dhs/fo...calculator.asp

I put in minimum wage, one child, and 400/month child care cost, and $600 for rent (can you even get anything that cheap?) and only came up with $96 in food stamps.

Also, if you do have child support and/or welfare income, this reduces or eliminates your eligibility. You have to be really broke.

If you don't have housing costs, that is 'counted against' you. I played with the eligibility calculator and I don't see how it's possible to live on the amount required to qualify.

[greeneyedgirl]

Quote by: Mia There is a big difference between food stamps and welfare checks, both in the amount provided and the requirements to have it. Rick's article made a good point about food stamps helping to keep people off welfare. If they can bridge their income gap a little and allow them to afford food, they don't have to apply for the larger welfare checks. Various states have exceptions to this (disabled, pregnant, primary caretaker of child are examples) but there is a work requirement. You cannot receive food stamps for more than three months while not working, and you have to be signed up TO work during that time. So it's not like there are people who can work lazing around getting food stamps long term. Here is the calculator: http://www.health.state.nd.us/dhs/fo...calculator.asp I put in minimum wage, one child, and 400/month child care cost, and $600 for rent (can you even get anything that cheap?) and only came up with $96 in food stamps. Also, if you do have child support and/or welfare income, this reduces or eliminates your eligibility. You have to be really broke. If you don't have housing costs, that is 'counted against' you. I played with the eligibility calculator and I don't see how it's possible to live on the amount required to qualify.

Don't different states have different allowances though? In the state I worked in they recieved checks, food stamps, child support, etc without working for a long time (if they had kids.) I think in NY, you can recieve everything for 2 years, then you have to get a job. One thing I've noticed is that a large number of these people will work a job for a few months then go out on disability.