Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Why would anyone view this as hating the poor? People feel better about themselves when they have a purpose - a reason to get up in the morning - and they go to bed at night knowing they've contributed to someone or something.
I think it's a great idea, as long as they are somehow providing free child care. Otherwise what is the purpose of forcing someone to work for minimum wage if they have kids not in school that will cost far more than min wage to put in daycare?
Whilst I can understand that there are a few scroungers around who simply don't want to work, what concerns me are these points taken from that link:
Quote:
At the close of 2014 approximately 12,000 individuals were enrolled in the state assistance program.
Quote:
If individuals can’t get and hold a part-time job of twenty hours per week, they can qualify by enrolling in training program. If that doesn’t get them a job, they can still qualify by volunteering.
So assuming that the unemployed still can't get a job, are there really 12,000 volunteer positions just lying around open for them to fill?
I think it's a great idea, as long as they are somehow providing free child care. Otherwise what is the purpose of forcing someone to work for minimum wage if they have kids not in school that will cost far more than min wage to put in daycare?
Obviously you didn't read the article or you would have noted that the work/volunteer law only applied for people with no children.
Funny how that hate doesn't seem to apply to big business, which is in bed with the government, and effectively steals far more from Americans than people on food stamps do.
I don't disagree with what you said at all -- but people who vocalize this idea tend to look the other way when it comes to big business doing effectively the same thing.
Ok, but this thread is about food stamp recipients in the state of Maine. Perhaps you'd like to start a new topic talking about big businesses and it can be discussed there.
Why would anyone view this as hating the poor? People feel better about themselves when they have a purpose - a reason to get up in the morning - and they go to bed at night knowing they've contributed to someone or something.
You're talking about people who are so down on their luck or who just don't have it together enough to manage basic things - like have a reliable running car, readily available child care, be able to stick to a schedule. I would think that the majority of the drop in eligible recipients is because these people just can't jump through the hoops required to stay on welfare.
You're talking about people who are so down on their luck or who just don't have it together enough to manage basic things - like have a reliable running car, readily available child care, be able to stick to a schedule. I would think that the majority of the drop in eligible recipients is because these people just can't jump through the hoops required to stay on welfare.
So just keep throwing money at them and they can stay unable to manage basic life functions, or stick to a schedule? Is that an excuse to live on the taxpayers? NO, it's not.
So 24 hours/month of job training/volunteering is "jumping through hoops"? Interesting way to look at it, especially since so many Americans have to actually work much more than 24 hours/month just to feed themselves.
You're talking about people who are so down on their luck or who just don't have it together enough to manage basic things - like have a reliable running car, readily available child care, be able to stick to a schedule. I would think that the majority of the drop in eligible recipients is because these people just can't jump through the hoops required to stay on welfare.
I disagree. Many Americans were down on their luck when Roosevelt's New Deal came about. Many of them were depressed, drinking, leaving their families etc. I think the New Deal contributed to the emotional as well as financial health of many people and families. I think this is a good idea if done in the right way.
You're talking about people who are so down on their luck or who just don't have it together enough to manage basic things - like have a reliable running car, readily available child care, be able to stick to a schedule. I would think that the majority of the drop in eligible recipients is because these people just can't jump through the hoops required to stay on welfare.
This is SNAP for single, able bodied people.
Not families and not disabled and not aged.
Before 2008 single able bodied people could only get SNAP for 3 months.
The FedGov extended that 3 month period and it will be expiring next year.
So a 3 month program for single, able bodied adults turned into an 8 year program.
Maine decided not to renew this year. But Maine did say if they worked 20 hours, took training or volunteered for 24 hours a month they could keep their SNAP.
10,000 decided not to pursue it and dropped off the rolls.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
