Food stamps for KFC and tacobell ?

[96Firebird]

they let you withdraw your food benefits in cash and let you get your heroin or crack? unbelievable.

Yup...

http://otda.ny.gov/programs/food-stamps/

http://cityliving.whec.com/news/news/i-team-10-investigation-alcohol-being-bought-your-dime/51476

 

[werepossum]

FWIW, this doesn't really matter in NYS. Here, the person just needs to stop by an ATM and withdraw the money, then go to the fast food place and pay in cash.

Such a fucked up system...

I'm conflicted about that. On the one hand, I have a right wing knee-jerk reaction against it. On the other hand, as a small government advocate I don't think government should be dictating every aspect of someone's life, even someone on food stamps, or that government will do a good job of so dictating those lives. (I suspect though that this enables addicts to a considerable extent.) Bottom line, changing food stamps to a limited WIC-style plan probably has much greater benefits than it has deficits.

 

[bfdd]

I'm conflicted about that. On the one hand, I have a right wing knee-jerk reaction against it. On the other hand, as a small government advocate I don't think government should be dictating every aspect of someone's life, even someone on food stamps, or that government will do a good job of so dictating those lives. (I suspect though that this enables addicts to a considerable extent.) Bottom line, changing food stamps to a limited WIC-style plan probably has much greater benefits than it has deficits.

you can't say that werepossum. you can't have your "small gov advocate" side come out when talking about big government programs. that is illogical and i hope you can see that now. if the government is already involving themselves in your life, via feeding you, they get to choose how. if they aren't involving themselves in your life, then they have no say whatsoever.

though I agree on the WIC-style thing.

 

[Spikesoldier]

I'm conflicted about that. On the one hand, I have a right wing knee-jerk reaction against it. On the other hand, as a small government advocate I don't think government should be dictating every aspect of someone's life, even someone on food stamps, or that government will do a good job of so dictating those lives. (I suspect though that this enables addicts to a considerable extent.) Bottom line, changing food stamps to a limited WIC-style plan probably has much greater benefits than it has deficits.

small government shouldnt be throwing food at its people because nobody else would feed the degenerates.

agree with the WIC style restrictions or the nutri-loaf recommendation earlier in the thread. personally leaning towards the latter since as a kicker it would help obesity epidemic in this country, and actually give people a fucking reason to get off their ass to improve their food quality.

 

[werepossum]

you can't say that werepossum. you can't have your "small gov advocate" side come out when talking about big government programs. that is illogical and i hope you can see that now. if the government is already involving themselves in your life, via feeding you, they get to choose how. if they aren't involving themselves in your life, then they have no say whatsoever.

though I agree on the WIC-style thing.

It's more conflict than logic. I can see both sides and am not swayed one way or another by either.

small government shouldnt be throwing food at its people because nobody else would feed the degenerates.

agree with the WIC style restrictions or the nutri-loaf recommendation earlier in the thread. personally leaning towards the latter since as a kicker it would help obesity epidemic in this country, and actually give people a fucking reason to get off their ass to improve their food quality.

I should not like government so small that it did not help people who cannot help themselves, whether permanently or temporarily.

I should probably say limited government rather than small government. I believe in a powerful military, Social Security, Medicare/Medicaid, welfare for those unable to help themselves, unemployment insurance, well-guarded borders, and programs like WIC and food stamps; my ideal government couldn't actually be called small except by comparison to our current version.

I don't like the nutri-loaf idea at all. I think our welfare (and especially disability) policies are a mite too generous and a hell of a lot too arbitrary, and I like the idea of providing incentives both positive and negative to help get people off the public teat. But there's a point at which you begin to dehumanize people and make it less likely that they ever become productive members of society. I'd love a better dog-to-tick ratio, but not at the cost of making the ticks into predators.

 

[bfdd]

no werepossum, it's not more than a conflict of logic. what you're arguing makes no sense. big government created the situation in which you want to apply small government principles. that's like trying to put the square in the circle hole when playing the shapes game.

 

[Infohawk]

no werepossum, what you're arguing makes no sense.

All your posts are black and white like this. There's no reason that a government can't use free-market principles to assist its citizens.

 

[bfdd]

All your posts are black and white like this. There's no reason that a government can't use free-market principles to assist its citizens.

for the government to use free market principles to assist its citizens would require the government get the fuck out of the economy. do you see that happening at all, previously, currently or in the future? never. giving people money and telling them to buy whatever the fuck they want, isn't a free market principle. why? because that money wasn't free, it was taken from others who had no choice in the matter. no free market principles involved along this route. the only principle i can see that you're confusing with free market, is just basic freedom. i happen to believe if you need to rely on others, you're no longer a free person, if the others you have to rely on are the gov, then the gov has the right to dictate how you spend OUR(govt's) money.

i'm being black and white on this, because it makes no sense. you can't apply a certain kind of logic which doesn't have any place in this context. like i said, trying to put a square through the circle when playing the shapes game.

 

[Infohawk]

for the government to use free market principles to assist its citizens would require the government get the fuck out of the economy. do you see that happening at all, previously, currently or in the future? never. giving people money and telling them to buy whatever the fuck they want, isn't a free market principle. why? because that money wasn't free, it was taken from others who had no choice in the matter. no free market principles involved along this route. the only principle i can see that you're confusing with free market, is just basic freedom.

And how would you pay for the supermarket food? With other people's money. Again, it's not black and white there are shades of gray.

Deep down you just don't want to help these people eat. You're entitled to that position, but this debate is about whether fast food should be an option or not.

And you repeating "square into round holes" and "It doesn't make sense" are not actual arguments... It's just you saying "I'm right and you're wrong." Not very helpful.

 

[bfdd]

And how would you pay for the supermarket food? With other people's money. Again, it's not black and white there are shades of gray.

Deep down you just don't want to help these people eat. You're entitled to that position, but this debate is about whether fast food should be an option or not.

And you repeating "square into round holes" and "It doesn't make sense" are not actual arguments... It's just you saying "I'm right and you're wrong." Not very helpful.

what do you mean I'm not making an argument? I made the f'n argument. you cannot apply small government logic to a big government program. that's a logical fallacy, like trying to put a square into a circle hole. it's just not made to work together. you're better than this Infohawk, stop being so f'n dense.

Current welfare and social programs to help the "needy" and "poor" were created to keep black and brown people down. To keep the "undesirables" out of view. You(this is anyone who wants, no one in particular) want to keep pushing these programs to "help" people? When was the last time you helped someone move, by doing ALL OF IT FOR THEM. Oh that's right, you didn't because you HELPED THEM. If you want to help people, you have to start by getting them to do things for themselves. Doing things for yourself has a snowball effect on people. One day they can't cook, next day they can make a 3 course meal. Raise their hopes on life, make them feel good about themselves, they can make their own food, cook for their family. That's fantastic. Nope you want to shit on that, fuck them they should just eat junk because they're to stupid to know better.

If people want to get Government assistance, they give up their right to have free choice in the matter. You're no longer a free person when you rely on others to survive.

 

[Infohawk]

what do you mean I'm not making an argument? I made the f'n argument. you cannot apply small government logic to a big government program. that's a logical fallacy, like trying to put a square into a circle hole. it's just not made to work together. you're better than this Infohawk, stop being so f'n dense.

I'm not sure you completely understand what logical fallacies are. Speaking of being better than this, aren't you the one calling everyone dense and naive who disagrees with you?

Again, based on your post it doesn't seem like you think any food program is a good idea because it treats people like babies according to you. That's fine, but it's not really what the current discussion is about.

 

[Darwin333]

What is the total cost of this issue (the difference between allowing food stamps for fast food and restricting it to groceries)?

And how does that amount fit into the issues facing our country economically?

I look forward to your answer to see how much you are raving about nothing.

It's amazing how irrational people are about a penny wasted on the poor compared to thousands of times as much elsewhere.

This may be a corrupt program, driven by the lobbying power of Yum foods. If so, it's the least harmful corrupt program going I know of.

Get a life, get some perspective, stop taking crumbs from the poor first.

I'm actually ambivalent about the program - I can see pros and cons - but the fury about helping the poor is disgusting.

Wait a minute.....

You just posted a thread in which you proposed testing basically every American that deals with the government, including drivers licenses, twice a year because of the societal cost of drug use. Yet you can see the "pros and cons" of using tax payer dollars to help, even encourage, poor people get even unhealthier and costing society FAR more than illegal drug use. Last I checked obesity is a huge problem in the US and it costs society and the .gov (medicare, medicaid, state programs, uninsured, etc) an absurd amount of money.

How in the hell can you support both of these positions, especially considering your stated reasons, with a straight face?

 

[bfdd]

I'm not sure you completely understand what logical fallacies are. Speaking of being better than this, aren't you the one calling everyone dense and naive who disagrees with you?

Again, based on your post it doesn't seem like you think any food program is a good idea because it treats people like babies according to you. That's fine, but it's not really what the current discussion is about.

It doesn't treat people like babies, it encourages them to be babies. The system I'd support would actually treat people like babies, while encouraging them to be grown ups. That's the crucial difference. I also know what a fallacy is and applying a certain train of logic to something it doesn't pertain to is a fallacy.

I also don't call everyone dense for disagreeing with me. Just on things like this because it's rather obvious continuing the stupid shit we've been doing for around 50 years isn't fucking working. So to wish to continue the stupid policies or make more stupid policies means you're dumb.

 

[SZLiao214]

The idea that they will be able to use food stamps is sickening. They now get to eat better then i do on an average day at work.

I understand that fast food isn't amazing or anything like that but its a lot tastier then fish head soup and boiled chicken with tomatoes.

 

[Engineer]

Again for those that don't want to understand: If the government (i.e. my tax dollars) is giving away food, it should be of the WIC type in which pre-chosen foods apply to the food stamps. Nothing fancy, just basic staples (milk, cheeses, certain breads (i.e. cheap kinds), etc). I see no reason that just because we assist people with FREE food, it needs to be fancy or prepared (i.e. fast food type), period.

Take it or starve....your choice.

 

[Infohawk]

Again for those that don't want to understand: If the government (i.e. my tax dollars) is giving away food, it should be of the WIC type in which pre-chosen foods apply to the food stamps. Nothing fancy, just basic staples (milk, cheeses, certain breads (i.e. cheap kinds), etc). I see no reason that just because we assist people with FREE food, it needs to be fancy or prepared (i.e. fast food type), period.

Take it or starve....your choice.

That would be fairly complicated and require a lot of government intervention in the purchasing decisions of households. Allowing people to choose what specific food they want is the fiscally conservative course of action. This is the same idea with school vouchers. Government pays, people choose. It's not very complicated.

I think a lot of conservatives are showing their true colors in this debate. They are willing to throw small government out the window if they are morally outraged about something enough.

 

[bfdd]

Infohawk, no it wouldn't. It would be basics with optional educational classes to teach people how to prepare and cook their food. I can guarantee it wouldn't cost a cent more and would save money in the long run. Unless again like I said you're against helping people and more for just doing shit for them.

 

[Engineer]

That would be fairly complicated and require a lot of government intervention in the purchasing decisions of households. Allowing people to choose what specific food they want is the fiscally conservative course of action. This is the same idea with school vouchers. Government pays, people choose. It's not very complicated.

I think a lot of conservatives are showing their true colors in this debate. They are willing to throw small government out the window if they are morally outraged about something enough.

WIC already works. Simply expand it to a few more choices and boom....you're done. Welfare That Works ((C) - 2011 - Engineer Inc.). Stores are already set up for WIC. Sorry, if you're getting free food....you can't be choosy....or simply starve (or go to public food bank).

 

[Infohawk]

WIC already works. Simply expand it to a few more choices and boom....you're done. Welfare That Works ((C) - 2011 - Engineer Inc.). Stores are already set up for WIC. Sorry, if you're getting free food....you can't be choosy....or simply starve (or go to public food bank).

So is it fair to say you're also against school vouchers? If education is being paid for by the government, you should only get the public option. Right?

 

[momeNt]

so is it fair to say you're also against school vouchers? If education is being paid for by the government, you should only get the public option. Right?

is school the same as food? Fuck!

 

[alkemyst]

they let you withdraw your food benefits in cash and let you get your heroin or crack? unbelievable.

Welfare state, the rich are too worried the poor are going to rise up and murder them in their sleep that they are willing to put this into law.

Welfare was created on the basis that if we let these POS poor starve, they will rise up and riot.

It's the passive response to a solution best answered with oil poured off of castle walls, then debated at bit until a single fiery branch dropped.

This passiveness now has people driving around in $60k+ cars with $10k of wheels and tires and an equal amount of stereo gear. Let's not forget the current custom airbrush work being done and in the name of welfare.

 

[Infohawk]

is school the same as food? Fuck!

Sounds like you're angry and you should take a break from posting...

 

[momeNt]

Sounds like you're angry and you should take a break from posting...

I'm furious and I swear I typed my statement in all caps but apparently that isn't allowed.

Can't a person's statement be pertinent to just the discussion at hand and not made into large sweeping generalizations here? Is that too much to ask!

 

[bfdd]

So is it fair to say you're also against school vouchers? If education is being paid for by the government, you should only get the public option. Right?

I am absolutely for school vouchers, but for different reasons. Our government has continually sucked educating our children and they are progressively getting worse due to asshole parents and dipshit teachers. Private schools, on average, spend less per student and get better results. Not to mention the stranglehold like monopoly the government has on education at the k-12 level.

But lets not forget just how vastly different comparing food and education are. Food is required to live, you need it, but you don't need tons of different kinds of foods to survive. There are basics that are needed and that's what should be supplied. The cheap, basics. How exactly would you draw a comparison to education?

Also, don't ever confuse me with some dipshit who labels himself. My parents gave me a label when I was born and it sure as fuck wasn't "conservative".

 

[alkemyst]

If I had it my way they could only buy cheap meats like chicken and hamburger ... no t-bones.. and certain items like fruits and Veggie's no organic... and low end breads and NO CANDY OR POP. Just like maybe 1/4 of crap that stores sell. Make it so hard that they couldn't give away their food stamps. Most people sell them for 50% face value.

Heck! Costco and Sams club accepts them now... I figure it won't be long before McD's and BK start accepting them. Doesn't subway take EBT? I think they do. Tho I could really care less what happens.

I hate to say it, but it would be nice to shop and not have to stand in line with a bunch of tweekers with rotted out teeth waiting to check out with their EBT cards. I've come to just accept it. Heck I even thought about joining them. If they are gonna give away my tax money to just ANYONE, why can I get in on it? I think they give you up to 350 a month. That could buy a lot of primo organic food and T-bones at Costco!

With Section 8 being offered now in my neighborhood and now our first murder (yeah tweeker parties) as of this past week, it's becoming more problematic with this WIC/EBT/Food Stamp shit. Poor check out lady being told "YO BITCH, YOU BETTAH NOT BE STEPPING UP HERE YO! RING THE SHIT UP AND I DON'T REMEMBER YOU!"

I swear if I ever hit my numbers to retire and have left over (I have no kids), I am burning it all off paying people to solve that issue.