What Happened When a State Made Food Stamps Harder to Get

[Endus]

Nobody is saying it's not abused. We're saying that abuse is negligible, has been decreasing, and isn't worth the outsized attention it receives - https://time.com/4711668/history-food-stamp-fraud/

It's like if you're doing the books for your store, and you're consistently short $50 a week. Someone's grifting off the cash. That's bad.

Hiring a staff security officer for $40k/year and installing cameras to record every till to eliminate that grift, however, is a waste of your time and money. The grift is costing you about $2500/year. You'd like to stop that, but spending $40,000 plus the thousands more for the cameras, that's spending way more than you were losing. Just letting it slide and waiting for the culprit to slip up is the more fiscally responsible choice.

The existence of fraud isn't a demonstration that a system is failing or needs to be overhauled. What matters is how much fraud exists, and whether it's feasible to work to uncover it, or if that effort won't be cost-effective.

[Elegiac]

What is it with these idiots not seeming to grasp the entire point of a country being called “developed” is that people do not need to work as hard for a higher standard of living.

[Orlong]

He's talking about charity outside of the government as a solution, so no government involvement.

And it's paid for out of the kindness of the hearts of wealthy people who have concentrated wealth. You know, the people benefiting from the increasing wealth and income inequality to begin with.

Yeah, so the happiness of the poor outweighs the happiness of the people who have the money (in your case you think anyone who has $100,000 or more is rich). Take away the money they earned and make them less happy so someone who doesnt work and refuses to work can be happy too

- - - Updated - - -

Not at all, as someone who grew up poor and needed help I am all for a hand UP, just not a hand OUT which is why I'm less sympathetic to people who blame society for their own problems. I grew up around people like they, you know what became of them? They're still poor. Everything I have, everything I have worked for is because I put in hard work physically and in school because I didn't want my kids living like I did.

Thats right. Youre a shining example of how to do it. Instead of working 2 or 3 jobs to build a little savings which they could use to invest, the majority of poor people bitch and moan constantly about having to work even one job if it doesnt pay enough to live like they want to even though its a job a monkey could do. No skill jobs dont deserve the kind of pay they think it should pay. The also routinely make unwise financial decisions with the money they DO have such as buying lottery tickets, gambling, get rich quick schemes, having kids that they cant support, buying a new car instead of a junker to get them by etc...that they go further into the hole. Its not my responsibility to dig them out of the hole and let them live a movie star life

- - - Updated - - -

Mostly. What grounds do you have to claim otherwise, other than a desire to foster suffering among people you wish to marginalize?



Sure.

Whether it's worth investigating and prosecuting that depends on the scale of the fraud, however. If fraud is minimal and difficult, it's likely not even worth pursuing; you'll spend more chasing it down than you were losing through it in the first place. Fiscal responsibility does not entail eliminating fraud. It entails reducing fraud to the point where further surveillance and investigation is no longer worth the effort.



This is just the Boomer Trolley Problem.

"We can't ever make anything better for anyone, because it's unfair to all the people who had it worse off before!"

The argument is nonsense.

Im about tired of hearing about your boomer trolley problem. Its a far left bullshit propaganda. Life is about fairness for all. yes its true. If everyone else suffered to get where they are now comfortable, then yes, absolutely, as a principal everyone else should suffer likewise to get to where they want to be. Its the only fair solution

[Elegiac]

Yeah, so the happiness of the poor outweighs the happiness of the people who have the money (in your case you think anyone who has $100,000 or more is rich). Take away the money they earned and make them less happy so someone who doesnt work and refuses to work can be happy too

Yep.

So what?

- - - Updated - - -

Im about tired of hearing about your boomer trolley problem. Its a far left bullshit propaganda. Life is about fairness for all. yes its true. If everyone else suffered to get where they are now comfortable, then yes, absolutely, as a principal everyone else should suffer likewise to get to where they want to be. Its the only fair solution

So we should stop all forms of technological development then because it might make people’s lives easier?

Lol. Ok boomer.

[Orlong]

The abuse in the Food Stamp system is negligible. It's a myth that it's some rampant problem.

Maybe misused is a more correct term. SNAP stands for Supplemental NUTRITION Assistance Program. SNAP funds should only be able to be used for nutritious items. Soda, cookies, chips, sugary cereal, candy, frozen pizza, etc... is not NUTRITIOUS foods. This is why I always advocate that they should be given vouchers like the WIC program gives that specify the brand and food that they are allowed to get and ONLY those food and brands. They print them right on the voucher. Then SNAP recipients would actually be getting what the program was designed for and that's NUTRITION. Vegetables, meats, milk, fruits, etc...

[Zan15]

You're whole mantra is that everyone is a victim, do you think everyone on food stamps needs to be on it and are not able to help themselves? Do you believe people don't take advantage of systems when they don't need it?

Where did I say that?

I actually said the opposite

Right. They can't buy anything they want. There are quite a few limitations. People do abuse the system, but its a tiny percentage where the whole population should not be punished. They should spend the money on enforcement and enhancements.

Find me a single system that is not abused, Don't worry I'll wait.
You don't make millions suffer because of thousands, you fix the problem.

Also even if criminals have trouble finding jobs, well they should have thought of that before committing a crime. Avoid committing felonies is a pretty easy thing to do.

Mid to high level Misdemeanors will also prevent you from being gainfully employed at a lot of corporations as will Bankruptcy and major credit issues.

I agree, but they served their time and should not continue to be punished for life.
Their employment should be limited based on their crime such as a person whom robbed a bank should not be able to be denied to work at a bank but it should not be a broad scope brush on every job


These are also taxpayers we are talking about who spent years paying into the same system that helped other people. Why should they not benefit from it?

[Elegiac]

Maybe misused is a more correct term. SNAP stands for Supplemental NUTRITION Assistance Program. SNAP funds should only be able to be used for nutritious items. Soda, cookies, chips, sugary cereal, candy, frozen pizza, etc... is not NUTRITIOUS foods. This is why I always advocate that they should be given vouchers like the WIC program gives that specify the brand and food that they are allowed to get and ONLY those food and brands. They print them right on the voucher. Then SNAP recipients would actually be getting what the program was designed for and that's NUTRITION. Vegetables, meats, milk, fruits, etc...

Why?

Nutritious food costs a lot more money. You said you don’t want to spend so much money on assistance.

What’s the issue with them buying cheaper products?

[Endus]

Im about tired of hearing about your boomer trolley problem. Its a far left bullshit propaganda. Life is about fairness for all. yes its true. If everyone else suffered to get where they are now comfortable, then yes, absolutely, as a principal everyone else should suffer likewise to get to where they want to be. Its the only fair solution

Tough. It's an accurate assessment of the irrational basis behind much of your position. It is not "propaganda" to expose bad reasoning, especially if it is predicated on furthering abuse and harm for the sake of it.

Your position on this encourages and applauds abuse and victimization, on the grounds that you faced similar issues, and want others to suffer too.

It's the same reason a man raised by an abusive father who'd hit them with a belt will often grow up to beat their own kids. And, when challenged, say "I turned out fine." When the fact that he's beating his kids shows he did not, in fact, turn out fucking fine.

Stop encouraging harm because you feel a need to victimize others. It's abusive horse shit.

[Zan15]

Maybe misused is a more correct term. SNAP stands for Supplemental NUTRITION Assistance Program. SNAP funds should only be able to be used for nutritious items. Soda, cookies, chips, sugary cereal, candy, frozen pizza, etc... is not NUTRITIOUS foods. This is why I always advocate that they should be given vouchers like the WIC program gives that specify the brand and food that they are allowed to get and ONLY those food and brands. They print them right on the voucher. Then SNAP recipients would actually be getting what the program was designed for and that's NUTRITION. Vegetables, meats, milk, fruits, etc...

They are nutritious foods, just not efficiently nutritious. Even Lucky Charms has a bunch of required nutrition's in it that are part of the recommended healthy diet.

If you want them buying more healthy alternatives you better be ready to beef up the allowance to cover the additional cost

I do agree the money should be managed better and the allowances should have tighter controls but all that cost money. Most likely about the same amount of money to enforce and manage as is spent on wasteful items.


Wonderful study on cost to get all stores up and running on systems that can track purchases
https://fns-prod.azureedge.net/sites...es-Summary.pdf

about 400 million to upgrade and 600 million a year to maintain


SNAP Study

https://fns-prod.azureedge.net/sites...ed-Summary.pdf

Compares what SNAP users buy vs Non Snap as well

The first 75% of the total spend only 9.3% and 2.1% were spent on real junk food (soda and candy).

Some are half and half 6.9% frozen desert and 3.4% salty snacks. (can include things like healthy deserts, frozen fruit, salted nuts, etc etc)



As far as abuse goes, there is way more money and priority on other systems that should come first, second - 50th.....could save way more money than the entire SNAP budget and not take food away from people that need it

Hell if we just managed the military spending better we could double our SNAP funding easily. Nah lets just keep increasing that Military spending

- - - Updated - - -

Thats right. Youre a shining example of how to do it. Instead of working 2 or 3 jobs to build a little savings which they could use to invest, the majority of poor people bitch and moan constantly about having to work even one job if it doesnt pay enough to live like they want to even though its a job a monkey could do. No skill jobs dont deserve the kind of pay they think it should pay. The also routinely make unwise financial decisions with the money they DO have such as buying lottery tickets, gambling, get rich quick schemes, having kids that they cant support, buying a new car instead of a junker to get them by etc...that they go further into the hole. Its not my responsibility to dig them out of the hole and let them live a movie star life

What a bunch of unsubstantiated crap that has been disproven over and over again. You are so stuck in your welfare queen mode you can't see what is really happening

the majority does nothing of which you say

[Elegiac]

What a bunch of unsubstantiated crap that has been disproven over and over again. You are so stuck in your welfare queen mode you can't see what is really happening

the majority does nothing of which you say

Things he says while he is receiving union benefits, mind you.

He's not wrong in that there is actually a class of people who are leeching on society and giving nothing in return, however.

They're called Baby Boomers.

[Breccia]

there are people on foodstamps who needs them, and there are people who are abusing the system.

I tell you what, you find a reliable source that says what % of SNAP benefits go to fraud, and then we can discuss the next step.

I'll give you a hint: it's about one percent.

[Orlong]

Why?

Nutritious food costs a lot more money. You said you don’t want to spend so much money on assistance.

What’s the issue with them buying cheaper products?

Because its not what the program was designed for

- - - Updated - - -

They are nutritious foods, just not efficiently nutritious. Even Lucky Charms has a bunch of required nutrition's in it that are part of the recommended healthy diet.

If you want them buying more healthy alternatives you better be ready to beef up the allowance to cover the additional cost

I do agree the money should be managed better and the allowances should have tighter controls but all that cost money. Most likely about the same amount of money to enforce and manage as is spent on wasteful items.

It shouldnt cost any more money to at the very least just add more items to the banned list. They already have a system running that prohibits the purchase of non food items and prepared foods. All they have to do is add additional items to the list such and chips, cookies, soda, candy, etc. I do agree it would cost more to switch to a voucher system and but they could at least expand the banned list

[Elegiac]

Because its not what the program was designed for

But clearly the original design was immoral, by your previous arguments, since it doesn't automatically adopt the cheapest possible option.

How do you know that giving people healthy food on SNAP isn't going to just encourage them to stay on it?

[Zan15]

Because its not what the program was designed for


It shouldnt cost any more money to at the very least just add more items to the banned list. They already have a system running that prohibits the purchase of non food items and prepared foods. All they have to do is add additional items to the list such and chips, cookies, soda, candy, etc. I do agree it would cost more to switch to a voucher system and but they could at least expand the banned list

I already listed how much it would cost in a study....and its a lot.
The vast majority of places that accept SNAP are just regular old register based stores.

They do not have the ability to process a voucher type system and the hundreds of millions to billions a year it would take to do so is just not worth it.


I do agree they should add a bunch more items to the list, but with that they should also increase the amount given to afford healthier options. Also that thing this administration hates to do, educate...educate people how to eat healthier and teach them how to use their stamps efficiently.

[eschatological]

Because its not what the program was designed for

- - - Updated - - -



It shouldnt cost any more money to at the very least just add more items to the banned list. They already have a system running that prohibits the purchase of non food items and prepared foods. All they have to do is add additional items to the list such and chips, cookies, soda, candy, etc. I do agree it would cost more to switch to a voucher system and but they could at least expand the banned list

If you make them buy more expensive, nutritious food, without increasing the allowance, you're effectively cutting their benefit - because they physically get less food.

That's simple math.

[PosPosPos]

That's simple math.

Yes, which is exactly why it will never fly with American conservative ideology, an existence that finds anything rooted in or quantifiable in reality anathema.

[Beefhammer]

Nobody is saying it's not abused. We're saying that abuse is negligible, has been decreasing, and isn't worth the outsized attention it receives - https://time.com/4711668/history-food-stamp-fraud/

As always, the right(he's no "woke" independent by his posting history), loves manufacturing issues. Just like welfare fraud and in person voter fraud, while a few have done it, it is statistically insignificant and not really a problem nor an indication of a bad or corrupt system.

- - - Updated - - -

If you make them buy more expensive, nutritious food, without increasing the allowance, you're effectively cutting their benefit - because they physically get less food.

That's simple math.

Yup, again another "conservative" that fails to understand the issues facing the poor. As someone who was on food stamps at one point, if I spent it on fresh fruits and vegetables, healthy whole grain breads over white bread and such, I would use up my monthly allowance for about a weeks or less of food stuffs. It's not like people are getting $1000s of dollars to spend a month and most of the time it's just enough to supplement a grocery bill.

- - - Updated - - -

I already listed how much it would cost in a study....and its a lot.
The vast majority of places that accept SNAP are just regular old register based stores.

They do not have the ability to process a voucher type system and the hundreds of millions to billions a year it would take to do so is just not worth it.


I do agree they should add a bunch more items to the list, but with that they should also increase the amount given to afford healthier options. Also that thing this administration hates to do, educate...educate people how to eat healthier and teach them how to use their stamps efficiently.

Again yup, the Trump admin just ended the regulation making schools provide healthy foods for students and early on he closed down government site that Michelle Obama created to help educate people on healthy eating and track their food intake to help them.

[zenkai]

The abuse in the Food Stamp system is negligible. It's a myth that it's some rampant problem.

It isn't a myth, one would have to be obtuse to think it wasn't a problem

- - - Updated - - -

I tell you what, you find a reliable source that says what % of SNAP benefits go to fraud, and then we can discuss the next step.

I'll give you a hint: it's about one percent.

Learn the difference between fraud and people who areon the system who don't need it.

[Trunksee]

Maybe misused is a more correct term. SNAP stands for Supplemental NUTRITION Assistance Program. SNAP funds should only be able to be used for nutritious items. Soda, cookies, chips, sugary cereal, candy, frozen pizza, etc... is not NUTRITIOUS foods. This is why I always advocate that they should be given vouchers like the WIC program gives that specify the brand and food that they are allowed to get and ONLY those food and brands. They print them right on the voucher. Then SNAP recipients would actually be getting what the program was designed for and that's NUTRITION. Vegetables, meats, milk, fruits, etc...

Great thought but wont work. People already sell their SNAP funding for pennies on the dollar for cash to buy things not available to them. Yes there are plenty of people who qualify but growing up in a community like this the sale of SNAP funds is rampant. Believe it or not people do sell their ebt funds all the time. When you grew up in this environment I think it hits home more when you pull yourself out of it and look back at how abused it really is. But we cant require IDs because.... its discriminatory.

[zenkai]

If you make them buy more expensive, nutritious food, without increasing the allowance, you're effectively cutting their benefit - because they physically get less food.

That's simple math.

Nutritious food isn't expensive, maybe processed nutritious food which really isn't good for you. There is not a scenario where eating hamburgers at mcdonalds is cheaper than eating a healthy salad you made yourself.