Current Events > Trump administration wants to dictate what kind of food poor people eat

(+) Yeah! (+)

Even if this system is more costly, people will gladly spend extra to fuck with people they see as beneath them.

CarlGrimes posted...

mustachedmystic posted...

Cause this won't change either, in fact, It'll cost more money.

How is that again?

very simple:

those supporting the proposal are lying about what it will cost.

i linked to a WaPo article in which most experts in food distribution indicated this.

AssultTank posted...

iPhone_7 posted...

I never said anything about following. Its a wide partial glass entrance so its easy to see the parking lot below and the times weve watched them go is usually when theyve thrown such a fit it got close to having to call 911. And lol at maybe a few times, believe what you want if it upsets you so much.

The thing is that abuse like this tends too be extremely rare outside specific areas. In areas where it happens, it is somewhat common, but overall it is still pretty rare.

the thing is that iphone_7 is just making shit up
---

You guys are acting like I said all or most food stamp users. God forbid you sheltered folks ever work retail in between a high traffic area and a poor as fuck neighborhood.
---

iPhone_7 posted...

You guys are acting like I said all or most food stamp users. God forbid you sheltered folks ever work retail in between a high traffic area and a poor as fuck neighborhood.

no, we're acting like you're blatantly trolling and making shit up

because you are blatantly trolling and making shit up
---

#triggered
---

Why do people feed Pinchekria
---

Darkman124 posted...

iPhone_7 posted...

You guys are acting like I said all or most food stamp users. God forbid you sheltered folks ever work retail in between a high traffic area and a poor as fuck neighborhood.

no, we're acting like you're blatantly trolling and making shit up

because you are blatantly trolling and making shit up

Dark, I've got a lot of respect for you so maybe you can explain something to me. Is there any good reason why

Mountain Dew
Cheetos
Little Debbie's
Ben & Jerry's
Bottled water (unless you live in Flynn, MI lol)
Filet Mignon
Live lobsters
Snickers bars

and other, similar obvious luxuries should be purchasable with SNAP benefits? Note that I'm not suggesting no non-essential foodstuffs at all, just eliminating prepackaged foods and luxury items.
---

fire_bolt posted...

Darkman124 posted...

iPhone_7 posted...

You guys are acting like I said all or most food stamp users. God forbid you sheltered folks ever work retail in between a high traffic area and a poor as fuck neighborhood.

no, we're acting like you're blatantly trolling and making shit up

because you are blatantly trolling and making shit up

Dark, I've got a lot of respect for you so maybe you can explain something to me. Is there any good reason why

Mountain Dew
Cheetos
Little Debbie's
Ben & Jerry's
Bottled water (unless you live in Flynn, MI lol)
Filet Mignon
Live lobsters
Snickers bars

and other, similar obvious luxuries should be purchasable with SNAP benefits? Note that I'm not suggesting no non-essential foodstuffs at all, just eliminating prepackaged foods and luxury items.

I can understand invoking a restriction on everything except:

Bottled water
Filet Mignon
Live lobsters

Largely that they aren't junk food despite their cost. I don't expect people on SNAP will go around buying live lobster all the time, because it's a big cost for limited funds. I don't see a good reason to restrict it if some people chose to buy one.
---

^agreed

i don't have any issue with congress passing bans on SNAP covering junk food

i just think anyone who claims to see constant abuse of SNAP is a liar

esp someone who tells really obviously fake stories about how they go back to their fancy cars afterwards
---

Certain groups, despite using SNAP and similar programs in huge numbers, will nevertheless support this because they've been easily conned into thinking people who don't look like them abuse the system

And que the race card. Funnily enough white trash comes to mind more than ghetto when I think of Welfare abuse.
---

que is not a word in english

@chill02

que
---

Darkman124 posted...

^agreed

i don't have any issue with congress passing bans on SNAP covering junk food

i just think anyone who claims to see constant abuse of SNAP is a liar

esp someone who tells really obviously fake stories about how they go back to their fancy cars afterwards

Aight, we on the same page then. Felt really fucking weird to be on the same side of an argument as someone like DiffEQ, let me tell you.

I grew up poor white trash who lived in trailer parks constantly so I've kinda got the view from the inside. We'd eat really good the first two weeks of the month. The second two weeks would be a beans/potatoes diet. If my mom hadn't been able to waste a big portion of her stamps on junk food (her personal favorite being cheese whiz, I shit you not) maybe we'd have had more consistent meals. Same was true for pretty much everyone else I knew lol
---

my older sister was on ebt for years after her divorce since her husband got a really light alimony/child support settlement with her and she hadn't finished college.

she did the best she could for her 3 kids to buy them healthy food and generally was able to keep it going most of the time

she's not able to help herself though; she loves giving things to people and when i want to treat her to a really nice meal at my place she is insistent on bringing something even if it stresses her budget

i advise against judging SNAP by what you observe. so many people use it that our own experiences are misleading. we also only remember extreme cases

the majority of recipients of SNAP benefits are children. always remember that. sometimes the parents buying for them suck and waste some of the benefit on garbage food. sometimes they don't. limiting access to more healthy foods is probably a good idea; trying to ship them only those foods is a tremendous waste of resources in the digital era.
---

So with more stringent welfare reform obviously on the horizon, my question is this:

Why should the people who work be obligated to feed the people who don't want to?
---

my friend used to live with me and she gave me her snap card every month as part of her rent

I was better at buying food than her anyway
---

AssultTank posted...

I mean, if you live in an area where abuse of SNAP actually occurs, it isn't unreasonable for them to see it happen a lot.

Benefit abuse happens most often in higher crime areas, and is most often drug related, people selling their benefits for drugs. Those nice cars he is seeing are likely owned by the dealers while the people buying are the addicts...

i think we have to remember why we're even talking about observing abuse--the sitting president wants to strip half the benefit away and replace it with shipped goods, essentially a super-brutal solution to abuse that SNAP calculates as 1% of total outlays

people who work retail certainly do see it but i think most people can tell when someone is bullshitting

when one of those 'in the know retail observers' shows up in a topic about slashing benefits to the bone to combat abuse that isn't actually happening, and tells a ridiculously over the top story i feel the appropriate thing to do is call bullshit
---

r4X0r posted...

So with more stringent welfare reform obviously on the horizon, my question is this:

Why should the people who work be obligated to feed the people who don't want to?

so they don't eat you
---

thelovefist posted...

Don't a significant number of a food stamp recipients sell their food stamps for drugs like crack? This should help that right?

Finally, somebody gets it. You should have to show your ID when you use them so that people dont trade them.

I mean, our tax dollars go to this feckless system that allows the money to be traded.

People sell them fifty cent on the dollar and thats how its been since the 1970s.
---

I mean, if you live in an area where abuse of SNAP actually occurs, it isn't unreasonable for them to see it happen a lot.

Benefit abuse happens most often in higher crime areas, and is most often drug related, people selling their benefits for drugs. Those nice cars he is seeing are likely owned by the dealers while the people buying are the addicts...

Actually it's usually people committing fraud to get the benefits and then making money that they don't file with the government. They don't actually own the cars, they just get one with a payment they can't possibly make and then somehow manage to find a dealer who will finance them once the previous one is repo'd.
---

Darkman124 posted...

AssultTank posted...

I mean, if you live in an area where abuse of SNAP actually occurs, it isn't unreasonable for them to see it happen a lot.

Benefit abuse happens most often in higher crime areas, and is most often drug related, people selling their benefits for drugs. Those nice cars he is seeing are likely owned by the dealers while the people buying are the addicts...

i think we have to remember why we're even talking about observing abuse--the sitting president wants to strip half the benefit away and replace it with shipped goods, essentially a super-brutal solution to abuse that SNAP calculates as 1% of total outlays

people who work retail certainly do see it but i think most people can tell when someone is bullshitting

when one of those 'in the know retail observers' shows up in a topic about slashing benefits to the bone to combat abuse that isn't actually happening, and tells a ridiculously over the top story i feel the appropriate thing to do is call bullshit

Agree. There's definitely some abuse taking place out there but the move to EBT cards throttled it a bit compared to the old paper stamp system. Also eliminated buying things with stamps and getting change back in cash.

I'm less concerned about direct fraud and more concerned that the money be used as intended: getting nutritious food onto the plates of people who need an income supplement. As it stands now SNAP basically subsidizes the junk food industry, which is why their lobbiest fight so hard against imposing regulations on SNAP
---

fire_bolt posted...

I'm less concerned about direct fraud and more concerned that the money be used as intended: getting nutritious food onto the plates of people who need an income supplement. As it stands now SNAP basically subsidizes the junk food industry, which is why their lobbiest fight so hard against imposing regulations on SNAP

yep, that battle is one worth fighting.
---

So with more stringent welfare reform obviously on the horizon, my question is this:

Why should the people who work be obligated to feed the people who don't want to?

I honestly don't have a problem with a percentage of taxes going to welfare for people who really need it. Sometimes you run into hard times and can't pull your own weight. The primary issues that I have with the system are:

1. People with lower income who obtain government assistance get more benefits out of the program than what a person who has barely enough money to pay their utilities each month but makes too much to qualify for services would have, thus making the people who obtain said assistance better off in many respects

2. The program, while in theory is supposed to be temporary support to help people back on their feet, is designed in such a way that it is very difficult to make a transition out of it because if you make anything over the threshold you are cut off, even if the threshold isn't enough for you to live independently off of
---

One issue is that the current program allows people to become very comfortable. Luxury should not be part of welfare because it should be a revolving door for people who need help. Part of welfare should be them finding you a job and you actually taking it. Some people just kick their feet back and take advantage of the unlimited welfare, by having kids.
---

thats fine, Obama and his wife decided was school kids ate. Fair, next
---

Darkman124 posted...

fire_bolt posted...

I'm less concerned about direct fraud and more concerned that the money be used as intended: getting nutritious food onto the plates of people who need an income supplement. As it stands now SNAP basically subsidizes the junk food industry, which is why their lobbiest fight so hard against imposing regulations on SNAP

yep, that battle is one worth fighting.

This plan from Trump isn't the way to do it, unfortunately. I feel like they have the perfect model concept in WIC if they'd just expand it to cover more SNAP stuff
---

I don't have a problem with this, you're taking a free handout.

Welfare is there to be a short term safety net not for long term leeching tool to be lazy and get fat.

way too many new posts in this topic

did anyone see the light or is it still just people being tickled by the few cents they spend each year on Jimmy's chocolate bar
---

SageHarpuia posted...

Certain groups, despite using SNAP and similar programs in huge numbers, will nevertheless support this because they've been easily conned into thinking people who don't look like them abuse the system

And que the race card. Funnily enough white trash comes to mind more than ghetto when I think of Welfare abuse.

This. I live in NH, which is like 95% white, and I saw shit like this all the time when I worked as a cashier.
---

CarlGrimes posted...

This. I live in NH, which is like 95% white, and I saw shit like this all the time when I worked as a cashier.

Why does race matter? Why can't reforming welfare abuse be a non partisan issue?
---

r4X0r posted...

Why does race matter?

Because those of us that want reform are being called racist.
---

fire_bolt posted...

Dark, I've got a lot of respect for you so maybe you can explain something to me. Is there any good reason why

Mountain Dew
Cheetos
Little Debbie's
Ben & Jerry's
Bottled water (unless you live in Flynn, MI lol)
Filet Mignon
Live lobsters
Snickers bars

and other, similar obvious luxuries should be purchasable with SNAP benefits? Note that I'm not suggesting no non-essential foodstuffs at all, just eliminating prepackaged foods and luxury items.

Sorry I am stepping on question you are asking someone else, but why does it matter. These people life suck, if they want to get a snicker bar. I won't feel put out.

I use to work at a place the processed benefits . I saw people game the system . But most people were hard working people just in need. This one time this old woman ate a smelly ass hot dog in my office while I was working with her. So yeah I had some people who just didn't care. But most were not like here.
---

Lady came in wanting to return several big Valentines Day chocolate boxes. The option for tender back to account popped up on the computer screen, picked yes. She threw a fit at my superviser because the $68 went back on her EBT instead of giving her the cash.

But this totally made up interaction totally didnt just happen. Anyways gonna go back from break.
---

cjsdowg posted...

fire_bolt posted...

Dark, I've got a lot of respect for you so maybe you can explain something to me. Is there any good reason why

Mountain Dew
Cheetos
Little Debbie's
Ben & Jerry's
Bottled water (unless you live in Flynn, MI lol)
Filet Mignon
Live lobsters
Snickers bars

and other, similar obvious luxuries should be purchasable with SNAP benefits? Note that I'm not suggesting no non-essential foodstuffs at all, just eliminating prepackaged foods and luxury items.

Sorry I am stepping on question you are asking someone else, but why does it matter. These people life suck, if they want to get a snicker bar. I won't feel put out.

I use to work at a place the processed benefits . I saw people game the system . But most people were hard working people just in need. This one time this old woman ate a smelly ass hot dog in my office while I was working with her. So yeah I had some people who just didn't care. But most were not like here.

Hard working people in need don't need luxuries, they need groceries. I'm not saying it all needs to be beans and rice. For the price of a 12 pack of soda you can get enough sugar and tea bags or Kool aid to last a month. For the price of two candy bars you can get a box of cake or brownie mix. A single steak costs as much as three pounds of ground beef. If SNAP cut out prepackaged foods then the money people get would stretch a lot further and would in general be healthier.
---

fire_bolt posted...

A single steak costs as much as three pounds of ground beef.

ratio is more like 2:1 there unless you're talking ribeyes/short loin cuts. beef in general is not cost-efficient; chicken is vastly less expensive (and healthier)
---

iPhone_7 posted...

Lady came in wanting to return several big Valentines Day chocolate boxes. The option for tender back to account popped up on the computer screen, picked yes. She threw a fit at my superviser because the $68 went back on her EBT instead of giving her the cash.

But this totally made up interaction totally didnt just happen. Anyways gonna go back from break.

How convenient. This just happened!

Darkman124 posted...

fire_bolt posted...

A single steak costs as much as three pounds of ground beef.

ratio is more like 2:1 there unless you're talking ribeyes/short loin cuts. beef in general is not cost-efficient; chicken is vastly less expensive (and healthier)

Was in fact thinking ribeye or NY strip. As a chef by trade, sirloin isn't a fucking steak, it's a roast with illusions of grandeur xD
---

And yeah, I'd cut beef out of the American diet entirely if I could somehow. Chicken is better in every way that is measurable (and taste isn't measurable, it's subjective)
---

Im in the supermarket business (lol)

We have a big hispanic base throughout the entire company so im sure this will affect us. The company for a while has been trying to get more "cash paying" customers. Sales might suffer but in the long run we should be fine. Im hoping this actually kills our competition >_>

There is some fuckery with snap. People would buy tons of shit.. pull out there wallet.. have a massive amount of cash on them but they pay with their ebt card.

People sell and buy ebt cards all the time. Someone even tried selling them outside the store till we called the cops on em.

Anyways this idea is stupid as shit
---

fire_bolt posted...

Was in fact thinking ribeye or NY strip. As a chef by trade, sirloin isn't a f***ing steak, it's a roast with illusions of grandeur xD

imo it does just fine if you cook it blue rare, just like tenderloin except more flavorful
---

Darkman124 posted...

fire_bolt posted...

Was in fact thinking ribeye or NY strip. As a chef by trade, sirloin isn't a f***ing steak, it's a roast with illusions of grandeur xD

imo it does just fine if you cook it blue rare, just like tenderloin except more flavorful

Eh, if you're gonna go that route I personally just buy a chuck roast and hand trim it into steaks. Catch roast on sale and I've gotten steaks as cheap as $2/lb before, plus I cut them to the thickness I want.

If your local grocery has an actual butcher they can do this for you, usually for free too. Just grab whatever you're wanting cut up and take it to them.
---

i definitely prefer sirloin to chuck

the fat deposits in chuck are huge and don't seem to liquefy well at any level of cooking

what i like to do with chuck roast is sear it, then make my own ground beef for burgers in a sterile grinder

it's the only way i'll have a "medium" burger.

since youre a chef i have to ask

wtf do restaurants do to allow the offering of a "medium" burger? it seems like a huge risk to buy preground beef and allow idiot customers to order it undercooked
---

fire_bolt posted...

cjsdowg posted...

fire_bolt posted...

Dark, I've got a lot of respect for you so maybe you can explain something to me. Is there any good reason why

Mountain Dew
Cheetos
Little Debbie's
Ben & Jerry's
Bottled water (unless you live in Flynn, MI lol)
Filet Mignon
Live lobsters
Snickers bars

and other, similar obvious luxuries should be purchasable with SNAP benefits? Note that I'm not suggesting no non-essential foodstuffs at all, just eliminating prepackaged foods and luxury items.

Sorry I am stepping on question you are asking someone else, but why does it matter. These people life suck, if they want to get a snicker bar. I won't feel put out.

I use to work at a place the processed benefits . I saw people game the system . But most people were hard working people just in need. This one time this old woman ate a smelly ass hot dog in my office while I was working with her. So yeah I had some people who just didn't care. But most were not like here.

Hard working people in need don't need luxuries, they need groceries. I'm not saying it all needs to be beans and rice. For the price of a 12 pack of soda you can get enough sugar and tea bags or Kool aid to last a month. For the price of two candy bars you can get a box of cake or brownie mix. A single steak costs as much as three pounds of ground beef. If SNAP cut out prepackaged foods then the money people get would stretch a lot further and would in general be healthier.

Wouldnt sugar and cake/brownie mix also count as luxuries?
---

A_Good_Boy posted...

I remember when red hats got pissed at an Obama for dictating what their kids can eat at school. Now they'll cheer when Trump dictates what that kid's family can eat at home.

kind of a difference between telling parents what they can BUY for their kids at school and telling people what they can FREELY get on taxpayer dime.
---

BillyKidd posted...

A_Good_Boy posted...

I remember when red hats got pissed at an Obama for dictating what their kids can eat at school. Now they'll cheer when Trump dictates what that kid's family can eat at home.

kind of a difference between telling parents what they can BUY for their kids at school and telling people what they can FREELY get on taxpayer dime.

People on food stamps have paid into it. It'd be like telling people what food they're allowed to buy for their family with the money that they've contributed.

Darkman124 posted...

i definitely prefer sirloin to chuck

the fat deposits in chuck are huge and don't seem to liquefy well at any level of cooking

what i like to do with chuck roast is sear it, then make my own ground beef for burgers in a sterile grinder

it's the only way i'll have a "medium" burger.

since youre a chef i have to ask

wtf do restaurants do to allow the offering of a "medium" burger? it seems like a huge risk to buy preground beef and allow idiot customers to order it undercooked

Some restaurants I've worked at hand ground their own beef so it's the same as what you were describing. For the rest, they don't want to tell a customer "no" for any reason. So they slap a warning label on the menu, make the serve staff verbally warn the customer that undercooked meat is dangerous, and then shrug it off. Hell, I almost got fired because I refused to serve a woman who wanted RARE CHICKEN BREAST grilled. My manager finally decided to just cook it himself rather than write me up. People are stupid sometimes and in the device industry the customer is always right, even if they're factually wrong XD
---

byrone posted...

BillyKidd posted...

A_Good_Boy posted...

I remember when red hats got pissed at an Obama for dictating what their kids can eat at school. Now they'll cheer when Trump dictates what that kid's family can eat at home.

kind of a difference between telling parents what they can BUY for their kids at school and telling people what they can FREELY get on taxpayer dime.

People on food stamps have paid into it. It'd be like telling people what food they're allowed to buy for their family with the money that they've contributed.

No?
---

MysticMismagius posted...

fire_bolt posted...

cjsdowg posted...

fire_bolt posted...

Dark, I've got a lot of respect for you so maybe you can explain something to me. Is there any good reason why

Mountain Dew
Cheetos
Little Debbie's
Ben & Jerry's
Bottled water (unless you live in Flynn, MI lol)
Filet Mignon
Live lobsters
Snickers bars

and other, similar obvious luxuries should be purchasable with SNAP benefits? Note that I'm not suggesting no non-essential foodstuffs at all, just eliminating prepackaged foods and luxury items.

Sorry I am stepping on question you are asking someone else, but why does it matter. These people life suck, if they want to get a snicker bar. I won't feel put out.

I use to work at a place the processed benefits . I saw people game the system . But most people were hard working people just in need. This one time this old woman ate a smelly ass hot dog in my office while I was working with her. So yeah I had some people who just didn't care. But most were not like here.

Hard working people in need don't need luxuries, they need groceries. I'm not saying it all needs to be beans and rice. For the price of a 12 pack of soda you can get enough sugar and tea bags or Kool aid to last a month. For the price of two candy bars you can get a box of cake or brownie mix. A single steak costs as much as three pounds of ground beef. If SNAP cut out prepackaged foods then the money people get would stretch a lot further and would in general be healthier.

Wouldnt sugar and cake/brownie mix also count as luxuries?

If you wanna get that pedantic then technically everything is a luxury except potatoes with a small amount of salt and butter in them. As long as you eat them peels and all, a couple pounds of potatoes per day is all you need to meet the bare nutrition requirements for survival
---

fire_bolt posted...

Some restaurants I've worked at hand ground their own beef so it's the same as what you were describing. For the rest, they don't want to tell a customer "no" for any reason. So they slap a warning label on the menu, make the serve staff verbally warn the customer that undercooked meat is dangerous, and then shrug it off. Hell, I almost got fired because I refused to serve a woman who wanted RARE CHICKEN BREAST grilled. My manager finally decided to just cook it himself rather than write me up. People are stupid sometimes and in the device industry the customer is always right, even if they're factually wrong XD

Your boss served rear chicken breast.. damn he really wanted that sale.
---