Lady goes off on man with son at supermarket for using foodstamps (video)

[purebalance]

So she's making a fuss and blaming a low-income family for taking some very small portion of her money, instead of the rich who take the lion's share of american wealth?

The rich took her money? I'd like to see that.... oh wait they didn't you're just mad that the rich are rich and think that they're obligated to support everyone else even if they worked their ass off from being poor to get there. People like you are why there is no incentive to get rich.

[SLSAMG]

Just another miserable person. Nothing to see here.

[I Push Buttons]

People like you are why there is no incentive to get rich.

Being rich is a pretty good incentive to get rich.

[purebalance]

Being rich is a pretty good incentive to get rich.

Not really considering people expect that you pay up about 50-60% of your income(not necessarily the actual numbers but what people think and have said). Hell I've heard people say they'd be ok with the rich paying 90% of their income in taxes.

I've run into many situations like the one a doctor I work with described: In 2015 he made more gross income and actually made substantially less money than in 2014 after taxes because he made slightly more money in 2015. There's a huge problem there when doctors are pretty much looking to cut their own hours to make more money.

[SLSAMG]

So you acknowledge there will always be those at the bottom, you acknowledge the system was designed with this in mind...

Yet you still advocate those people be treated like shit and deserve nothing as punishment for their being at the bottom... You are something else.

+1

Well said, sir.

[Adam Jensen]

Better question: why is a man working 50-60 hours a week and still not making wages that put him out of poverty? You conservatives rail against welfare and then you turn around and rail against raising the minimum wage. It's ridiculous

[I Push Buttons]

Not really considering people expect that you pay up about 50-60% of your income(not necessarily the actual numbers but what people think and have said). Hell I've heard people say they'd be ok with the rich paying 90% of their income in taxes.

I've run into many situations like the one a doctor I work with described: In 2015 he made more gross income and actually made substantially less money than in 2014 after taxes because he made slightly more money in 2015. There's a huge problem there when doctors are pretty much looking to cut their own hours to make more money.

That is not how marginal taxes work, friend.

[Paranoid Android]

Not really considering people expect that you pay up about 50-60% of your income(not necessarily the actual numbers but what people think and have said). Hell I've heard people say they'd be ok with the rich paying 90% of their income in taxes.

I've run into many situations like the one a doctor I work with described: In 2015 he made more gross income and actually made substantially less money than in 2014 after taxes because he made slightly more money in 2015. There's a huge problem there when doctors are pretty much looking to cut their own hours to make more money.

You gave ONE anecdotal story of a doctor. That does not represent the WHOLE of people willing to make more money if you have to pay more in taxes.

Also I hate anecdotal stories since I'm sure you are lying (this is the internet remember) or you are leaving out key facts to fit your narrative. Plus he is a doctor. I would think the whole "SAVING LIVES" would trump how much he made. Plus it was a 1 year sample.

[Garnier Fructis]

Not really considering people expect that you pay up about 50-60% of your income(not necessarily the actual numbers but what people think and have said). Hell I've heard people say they'd be ok with the rich paying 90% of their income in taxes.

I've run into many situations like the one a doctor I work with described: In 2015 he made more gross income and actually made substantially less money than in 2014 after taxes because he made slightly more money in 2015. There's a huge problem there when doctors are pretty much looking to cut their own hours to make more money.

He's shitting you. You pay higher taxes on the portion of the income that falls into the next bracket. This is just the go to sob story for rich people that want to pay lower taxes in general.

[Berengil]

Better question: why is a man working 50-60 hours a week and still not making wages that put him out of poverty? You conservatives rail against welfare and then you turn around and rail against raising the minimum wage. It's ridiculous

Pretty much this. If this guy is working a 50+ hour work week and being a single father at the same time, he deserves a fkng medal. He is BY DEFINITION doing his part. I'm glad to pay some taxes to help him and his kid.

" Whatever you do to the least of these, you do so even unto me." ----- Jesus Christ

[Zan15]

you will always have idiots that have made bad choices so you will always have a fresh supply of idiots to work those no skill low wage jobs

damn these people and their bad choices

http://www.marketplace.org/2015/05/2...rn-food-stamps

n 2014 more than $84 million-worth of food stamp benefits were spent at military commissaries. That’s just a fraction of a percent of all the food stamps spent in the U.S. last year. But the number is sobering when you think of who is doing this spending — people who served or are currently serving our country and are still having trouble making ends meet.

The USDA estimates that in 2012, more than 1.5 million veterans used food stamps, or about 7 percent of all veterans.



How low does your income have to be to qualify for food stamps?

Pretty low — though it depends on how big your household is. A single person has to be grossing less than $15,180 a year. For a family of four, the annual income threshold is $31,008.

So what is military pay these days?

If you are a very junior member of the military on active duty, your annual base pay can be less than $19,000. Add in housing and food allowances and it can go up to the high $30,000s. But if you've got a big family, if your spouse isn't working (which, if you're moving around from base to base or if one parent is overseas can often be the case), that money may not go too far. You might very well qualify for food stamps, or at least find yourself struggling to get by.







Should the U.S. be spending so much on food stamps?

83% of all SNAP/food stamp benefits go to households with a child, senior, or disabled person. Most food stamp recipients are children and the elderly. Are these the people we want to turn our backs on?

Legislators complain that food stamp spending in recent years has reached record highs. So has defense spending, but they justify that based on our wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. Shouldn’t there be a war on hunger?

Food stamp spending is a tiny fraction of overall government spending—just 2% in 2012. We spent 19% of the U.S. budget that year on defense.
Unlike our overseas engagements, the food stamps program is highly efficient in terms of bang for the tax-payers’ bucks: it reaches the majority of people who need it and has been shown to help lift 4.7 million people out of poverty (reducing child poverty by 3%), thereby reducing those societal costs.
Each dollar spent in food stamp benefits generates nearly double that in local economic activity.

The majority of Americans have consistently supported the food stamp program and think cutting it is the wrong way to reduce government spending.
In fact, we’re not spending enough on food stamps.

The need for food assistance is greater than food stamps can fill, and the benefit amount is too low to allow a family to purchase an adequate, healthy diet.

The average monthly food stamp benefit per person is only $133.85, or less than $1.50 per person, per meal.

Between 2009-2011 the purchasing power of food stamps declined by about 7%, or $47/month for a family of four, due to inflation in the cost of food.
Only 55% of food insecure individuals are income-eligible for food stamps, and 29% are not income-eligible for any federal food assistance.

[Djuntas]

This is why I probably shouldn't work in retail as a person with Asperger.

If I saw that....Honestly, if I was in a position to get fired from my job Id maybe just ignore it, but else Id go full on CAPS MODE on her.

It reminds me of some case in Denmark where some comedian ? i think repremended a women for talking shit...anyway his point was "Just shut up when you shop in føtex" lol

[Berengil]

Well said Zan. W/e I think of my country's foreign policy, no member of the military should EVER be paid so little that they qualify for food stamps.

[Bryntrollian]

Newsflash, most of the employees at this Walmart are probably getting some form of benefits because Walmart doesn't pay them enough

[Pangean]

I'm pretty sure you are just ignorant. If you do some research you'll find that a lot of "brand name" companies simply sell their product to stores like Walmart or Kroger and allow them to rebrand it.

There is virtually no difference between a Walmart box of Mac N' Cheese and a Velvetta box of Mac N' Cheese. You just sound spoiled.

No fair neither of those are real food.

[Djuntas]

Newsflash, most of the employees at this Walmart are probably getting some form of benefits because Walmart doesn't pay them enough

Idd, its a fucking crime, but so is most thing in USA when I compare to how we have it in Denmark.

Anyway I defiantly see a few baddies working retail, but nothing big. 1 guy was stone-dead passed out. A few drunks that just buys 5 beers and leave is the useal.

[Annoying]

If a guy is working 60 hours a week and still on food stamps and isn't crippled at all, I would say "What the hell is he doing with his time and money?"

I could easily imagine 2x 25-30hr/wk minimum wage jobs. No benefits from that. That's $22,620 max before taxes, or a gross income of $1740/mo. The cutoff for a single father with 1 kid for food stamps is right around that level, and seeing as how he works 50-60, he could easily be under the cutoff.

[I Push Buttons]

Well said Zan. W/e I think of my country's foreign policy, no member of the military should EVER be paid so little that they qualify for food stamps.

It is just being fair.

An 18 year old joins up, becomes a private, lives in the barracks, eats in the chow hall, etc... That is way more than enough pay to live on since practically everything they need is provided for them.

Another 18 year old joins up, becomes a private... But this guy has two kids and a wife... That pay is not enough for his lifestyle...

How would it be fair for the second guy to be paid more than the first guy, being at the same rank, age, length of service, etc?

Its pretty much the same deal with places like Walmart... A 16 year old can live like a king working there, but a person raising several kids cannot.

I don't think people should earn more than they deserve, but I do think public assistance should be way less stigmatized and people should get what they need, if their work cannot provide it. But just raising pay is pretty silly... A person should not expect to be able to raise a family on minimum wage, but that person should also not expect their kids to starve because they don't make enough money and that should be the end of it.

[RickJamesLich]

It is just being fair.

An 18 year old joins up, becomes a private, lives in the barracks, eats in the chow hall, etc... That is way more than enough pay to live on since practically everything they need is provided for them.

Another 18 year old joins up, becomes a private... But this guy has two kids and a wife... That pay is not enough for his lifestyle...

How would it be fair for the second guy to be paid more than the first guy, being at the same rank, age, length of service, etc?

Its pretty much the same deal with places like Walmart... A 16 year old can live like a king working there, but a person raising several kids cannot.

I don't think people should earn more than they deserve, but I do think public assistance should be way less stigmatized and people should get what they need, if their work cannot provide it. But just raising pay is pretty silly... A person should not expect to be able to raise a family on minimum wage, but that person should also not expect their kids to starve because they don't make enough money and that should be the end of it.

I pretty much second this motion. I don't think there is anything wrong with using public assistance so long as it's not being abused - it's there for a purpose. That being said there are definitely instances where it's grossly abused (like people getting unemployment checks deliberately not working, so they can stay at home and keep collecting checks).

That being said it's unreasonable to expect Walmart to pay people extra money just because they have made poor life decisions. If I had 3 kids and worked at McDonalds, my life would suck lol. Essentially these people live beyond their means and are inrresponsible when they have multiple children while working low paying jobs. And that's not saying "hey never have kids" but rather, "make sure you can afford the costs of having kids, and *then* do it". This is just common sense and everyone should know it too, but those that disregard this should not be expecting Walmart to bail them out.

[Zan15]

It is just being fair.


Its pretty much the same deal with places like Walmart... A 16 year old can live like a king working there, but a person raising several kids cannot.

.

the 16 year old is receiving welfare from his parents (housing/food/clothing/ect), he is hardly living as a king in his moms house. It is also very possible the parents are receiving food stamps while the kid works.