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.
Ya think? I think it would actually save us money in the long run. We would get a better handle on what it "actually" costs to feed a family of X number of members.
Which is what I thought the whole objective was to save money in the long run...thats why i dont know why they cant be used at wholesale places - a $7 box of cereal from Sams will last me 3X as long as the $4 box from Wal-mart
Then they should do away with food stamps and utilize the same aid program that we use in foreign countries- you get a handful of rice and a cup full of water- other than that, you're on your own. There's no place in the constitution where any citizen is guaranteed three square meals a day- especially on the government's dime......
wow, harsh. in other words "f*** you, starve, and let your kids starve too". shall we spit on these people also just for good measure?
i thought we were a nation above that? or is that only if it doesn't come out of your pocket?
i find it strange we want to adopt policies from other countries that bring people down, but don't want to adopt policies that gives someone from a disadvantaged background a 1/2 decent shot of a full productive life (i.e. healthcare). but i guess that how it works when it's all about the almighty dollar.
Which is what I thought the whole objective was to save money in the long run...thats why i dont know why they cant be used at wholesale places - a $7 box of cereal from Sams will last me 3X as long as the $4 box from Wal-mart
There has to be some political reason why you can't buy from Sam's or Costco's with food stamps but I'm sure we'll never know why : ) Just like in NJ, we don't have any super walmarts... this is do to union issues and/or the mafia..oh wait, aren't they they same folks? : )
wiley hon..I just think you are a hoot.enjoy your posts...but call me slow, somtimes i don't know when you are pulling a leg or actually serious...lol
My guess is she was serious........I think she meant they tell them what they can have, kinda like dictating there weekly menu. Geez would be like Food Nazis
There has to be some political reason why you can't buy from Sam's or Costco's with food stamps but I'm sure we'll never know why : ) Just like in NJ, we don't have any super walmarts... this is do to union issues and/or the mafia..oh wait, aren't they they same folks? : )
Yeah, I wasn't aware of that and now that you guys posted not sure how that makes sense...I think it may be a Costco, sams' club policy..to much overhead in redeeming the FS???
Yeah, I wasn't aware of that and now that you guys posted not sure how that makes sense...I think it may be a Costco, sams' club policy..to much overhead in redeeming the FS???
US Code, Title 7, Chapter 51, § 2018. Approval of retail food stores and wholesale food concerns, Paragraph b:
Quote:
Effective and efficient operation of program; effect of disqualification; posting of bond
(1) No wholesale food concern may be authorized to accept and redeem coupons unless the Secretary determines that its participation is required for the effective and efficient operation of the food stamp program. No co-located wholesale-retail food concern may be authorized to accept and redeem coupons as a retail food store, unless
(A) the concern does a substantial level of retail food business, or
(B) the Secretary determines that failure to authorize such a food concern as a retail food store would cause hardship to food stamp households. In addition, no firm may be authorized to accept and redeem coupons as both a retail food store and as a wholesale food concern at the same time.
Looks to me like too much of a hassle for the wholesaler. They would have to prove retail sales and economic hardship for recipients of food stamps. ie: its a policy because of bad legislation.
wow, harsh. in other words "f*** you, starve, and let your kids starve too". shall we spit on these people also just for good measure?
i thought we were a nation above that? or is that only if it doesn't come out of your pocket?
i find it strange we want to adopt policies from other countries that bring people down, but don't want to adopt policies that gives someone from a disadvantaged background a 1/2 decent shot of a full productive life (i.e. healthcare). but i guess that how it works when it's all about the almighty dollar.
You took the post out of context- it was in response to the "it's unconstitutional to dictate what people eat" post- not meant to say "screw all of the programs if I've got to pay for them".
If the taxpayers are paying for it, there should be some regulation- no junk food, no overpriced gourmet food, etc- if people who want to cry about that, then they should get nothing (so I was being nice by offering the rice and water). The problem is that people have become "entitled" to far too much- to the point that these programs are even commonly referred to as "government entitlements". The constitution doesn't "entitle" the citizens to any of this, so they should be grateful when they get a program- not complain that they can't use their food stamps for Superbowl parties and filet mignon. It'd be like the folks in the government cheese programs of the old days complaining that they didn't like what was being given out because they wanted swiss- someone in the line would have beat them to death with a 5-lb block of cheese......
US Code, Title 7, Chapter 51, § 2018. Approval of retail food stores and wholesale food concerns, Paragraph b:
Looks to me like too much of a hassle for the wholesaler. They would have to prove retail sales and economic hardship for recipients of food stamps. ie: its a policy because of bad legislation.
I dunno- looks to me more like someone trying to protect the interests of the small retail operation. Maybe they feel that the wholesale clubs already take a share of sales away from retailers, and now they'd take a bigger share. I'm thinking there was some political lobbying that led to that ruling......
I dunno- looks to me more like someone trying to protect the interests of the small retail operation. Maybe they feel that the wholesale clubs already take a share of sales away from retailers, and now they'd take a bigger share. I'm thinking there was some political lobbying that led to that ruling......
I agree, but when it comes to lobbying resulting in legislation, I'd call that bad legislation
That's stupid! A family having to make ends meet on food stamps would get more bang for thier buck at a wholesaler
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.
