No more foodstamps for alot of people in America

[Zyster]

Someone unwilling should not get food so they can eat. There is no pity for that. However, if they will look for work and maintain the job. Absolutely. It's not a hard concept.

[Seegtease]

Of course you shouldn't be able to get food stamps if you aren't looking for work or have a good health reason to not be working. However, many people really need the help from food stamps even though they are working, which is fine too. As long as somebody is just making an effort to be productive in society, I'm absolutely fine with them getting benefits. It's the ones that think it's owed to them, refuse to contribute, and aren't grateful that irk me.

[the game]

Someone unwilling should not get food so they can eat. There is no pity for that. However, if they will look for work and maintain the job. Absolutely. It's not a hard concept.

You've never gone hungry before have you?

[Zyster]

You've never gone hungry before have you?

You've never been willing to make your life better have you?

[Zyster]

Of course you shouldn't be able to get food stamps if you aren't looking for work or have a good health reason to not be working. However, many people really need the help from food stamps even though they are working, which is fine too. As long as somebody is just making an effort to be productive in society, I'm absolutely fine with them getting benefits. It's the ones that think it's owed to them, refuse to contribute, and aren't grateful that irk me.

I also liked the rule once upon a time that existed that doesn't anymore is the requirement of working at least 20 hours a week. This helped combat some of the people in Seattle that started working less hours with a wage increase so they could keep their benefits.

[Vichan]

Honestly, the idea of "at least they're trying" isn't meaningful or helpful outside of personal feelings about "fairness" or other related topics.

But beyond that, I'd rather see a reasonable path for people to better themselves. Removing all or most of the possibilities for someone to advance or better themselves and then admonishing them for not bettering themselves is pretty silly. If that means raising the minimum wage, or subsidies for certain degree paths, or whatever (No, I don't think I have all the specific answers) then I'd like to see it.

Like I said, helping someone who's trying but needs a little extra is completely different from helping someone who refuses to even try. I'd agree with the subsidies but instead of degrees make it tech schools, there are already too many degrees floating around without enough jobs for them in their respective fields

[Svifnymr]

No they do not get more in food stamps than a working person, and no they shouldn't get it so they "don't feel bad about being poor" they should get it so they can EAT

Plenty of cases where folks on food stamps get more than someone working. And I'm not talking about "eating", when you see a cart full of junk. Candy, potato chips, dip. frozen pizzas being the closest thing to real food. Granted I don't track posters, but usually the response is that I can't judge them for wanting to eat candy occasionally or whatever because they should get to feel good about themselves and stuff, so maybe that's not you or the other poster. That doesn't change that I'm not talking about forcing them on beans and ramen, I'm wondering why Snickers and Red Bull is the order of the day.

Except for Alcohol, that they drop $100 bill on that...

I agree, but taking away food stamps without another viable option is not a solution to food stamps being a shitty system.

Yeah, I don't think they should yank stuff from everyone, but the guys in the article aren't exactly cast out into the wilderness. They probably qualify for various other programs that'll get them back on welfare soon. There are people that get a job every now and then and get fired after a week or two just to say they had something.

[Zyster]

You have to remember that a large chunk of people in the US support a party that literally cheered the idea of letting people die rather than having a modern medical insurance system. You're probably not getting through.

Now you are just trolling. Last ditch effort I guess.

I'm still waiting for you to explain how it is unfair to give support to the willing and no support to the unwilling.

Probably just receive another troll attempt however. Probably start calling us all racists, sexist etc soon.

[kail]

I bet you don't know an actual person that is really working 80 hours a week. Many MANY places people can afford to live on minimum wage with 40 hours. The people who claim otherwise are those that want extravagant things. Need another console? Yes, then I can complain I can't afford to live. I need to buy more alcohol so I can complain about not having enough to live. I need more smokes so I can complain more about not being able to live. And it goes on and on. Name one person you know that works 40 hours a week and can't live that isn't also using things outside of their needs.

Everybody here in Miami. The minimum wage vs cost of living is terrible. Many of my coworkers that are full time still work another job to make ends meet. It differs based on location and some have it bad.

[Svifnymr]

Like I said, helping someone who's trying but needs a little extra is completely different from helping someone who refuses to even try. I'd agree with the subsidies but instead of degrees make it tech schools, there are already too many degrees floating around without enough jobs for them in their respective fields

It's going to sound radical/ harsh/ whatever, but a welfare system doesn't really work without some sort of birth control. You obviously can't just let kids starve to death or grow up uneducated, but leaving them in a home where the parent is uneducated and gets extra money for more kids isn't helpful. But not like you can take folks kids away and raise them to be your army either.

[Auxora]

This report is just about a change for 3 counties in GA as others said, so the OP's title is pretty inaccurate.

Food benefits (and housing) are pretty much all state and county governed, and many states have been doing this requirement that people on foodstamps be in a work training program for 5-10 years now. Most of them that I've heard about have been pretty successful. It helps separate the people that need foodstamps to get on their feet, vs. people that just want to get on it and never work again. But since each state and even county is different in whether they follow that strategy, and different in how strict they are about applying it, there's a big variance in how much it's abused.

Knowing people who do abuse it, there's probably a lot of opportunity for improvement.

[Zyster]

It's almost like you're not reading all my posts on the issue at all and just want to start painting yourself as the victim preemptively.

Still completely ignored the question.

[Zyster]

Actually, I have already answered your question in other posts. You can keep feeling like a victim if you want, though.

No you didn't. You have called people of this names like hardass and about how we cheer for people to die. No logical statements though.

- - - Updated - - -

Like any couple with a single kid?

I worked at KFC for the first 3 years of my childs life on minimum wage no problem.

[Svifnymr]

No. There aren't. Food stamps barely pay anything in most places, to be honest.

Yes, there are. As I said, anecdotes, so what's the discussion? How many times do you spend $400+ on groceries? Subsidized rent? Furniture allowance, rent/electricity stipend?

The only way that someone on food stamps is ultimately ending up with more money than someone working is if that working person is also eligible for food stamps.

Also, WHAT they buy is largely irrelevant. The money is all going back into the economy as intended. The only difference is how it affects your feelings.

Justifying taking money from you with the benefit that you will eventually get a small portion of it back is a bit off. If you view it as you giving them free product since they need help with food, would you feel off if they took the basket of junk food versus the basket of actual food?
And that's just ignoring the outright fraud of selling benefits.

A welfare system is a safety net for society. Additionally, as stuff becomes more automated and we advance to the point the robots are taking care of us, you can be sure the robots won't be delivering Red Bull to you. I think part of the problem is viewing the welfare needs from a consumption side rather than subsidizing the supply side and just making food so cheap that even unemployed folks can buy it.

[Zyster]

Cool. Guess the min. wage is enough in your area then. That's not the case in all areas.

It doesn't matter though. These people then absolutely deserve government assistance. Not the people sitting in their parents basement with no plans to ever do anything besides consume Cheetos and Pepsi off their food card for the rest of their life.

[Mifuyne]

[Zyster]

Why would I care? Seriously, some people are way too interested in what other people are doing.

You should care. As an American citizen you should absolutely care about systems being taken advantage of and ways to improve them. I agree in some instances some people do worry too much about what others are doing. This is not one of them. If we want to strengthen our nation as a whole, trying to improve things like this are a start.

[the game]

You should care. As an American citizen you should absolutely care about systems being taken advantage of and ways to improve them. I agree in some instances some people do worry too much about what others are doing. This is not one of them. If we want to strengthen our nation as a whole, trying to improve things like this are a start.

Yeah clearly there aren't more important things in this country to fix than people buying chips and pepsi at the grocery store with food stamps. This is definitely destroying our country.

[Zyster]

Which probably make up less than 1% of active food stamp users. Look, there are always people who are going to game the system, ANY system. Creating a system that fairly helps those in need is more important in a civil democracy than creating one that overpromotes punishment for those who aren't in need.

There is no support statistic for this, and if it less than 1% it doesn't matter. You as basically saying don't fix something that is obviously broke, because although it will help, people will still try to take advantage of it. So instead of putting a band-aid over it, come back when you can absolutely secure the problem from ever happening again.

- - - Updated - - -

We're not going to "strengthen our nation" by helicoptering over some poor guy and making sure he's not buying a Snickers bar.

Seriously, you could prevent every single perceived "abuse" of food stamps and you wouldn't even make a difference of a single droplet of water in the bucket that is the national budget. Nor will you actually see any difference in your taxes. There are so many other, larger, windmills to tilt at if "strengthening the nation" is your goal.

Yet doing so won't inherently make your life worse.

- - - Updated - - -

If you're living in your parents basement with no dependents of your own, you're likely not getting food stamps then since it takes into account everyone's income in the house.

This is simply not true. After X age it does not take into account everyone's income in the house.

[Zyster]

Yeah clearly there aren't more important things in this country to fix than people buying chips and pepsi at the grocery store with food stamps. This is definitely destroying our country.

You just had a president who spent most of his term calling whites racist and further dividing our country, but mad that during the slow process of paper pushing and things getting done someone else wants to throw something else on top to fix an obvious problem in our nation?

- - - Updated - - -

So it won't help economically and really only has the potential to negatively impact people, but you're still for it because it'll just make your feelings feel better?

It's like the "test them all for drugs for reasons!" thing again. :|

How will it not help economically? More money is more money.