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 should any store be allowed to collect SNAP benefits for junk food? We are helping feed their families, and food purchases should be limited to seafood less than $10/lb, hamburger, chicken, frozen bags of veggies, fruit, milk, juice, cereal, eggs, cheese, and bread.
Why do you leftists think we should be forced to pay for SNAP benefits in the first place?
Why do you leftists think we should be forced to pay for SNAP benefits in the first place?
I have no issue paying for SNAP but only for people who are physically disabled which includes the elderly. People, including myself do have a problem when able bodied people get SNAP, that is when good hearted people feel taken advantage of and it is abuse of hard working Americans who pay their tab.
Ooh, ooh, I've got the perfect solution!
Why not just brand their foreheads? That'll teach 'em ...
No kidding. I'm appalled by some of these comments. The message seems to be "let's make those among us who have the least suffer in some way for every scrap we throw their way"
If those foods are so bad, why should we allow anyone to buy them? It seems that the basis of this 'concern' has to do with the idea that we need to make decisions for the poor but everyone else is smarter and only buy nutritious foods.
That is a VERY good point, and I liked your entire post -- good info. (Could not rep you again.)
However, I think the main issue that is generally acknowledged is that poor people are not as healthy as richer people because they cannot afford to be so and/or possibly because they haven't had the education to make better nutritional choices. (When my husband and I went to an almost entirely "all natural foods" diet, our grocery bill doubled.)
I personally would be in favor of having a "junk food" tax placed on many foods and beverages, but I readily admit that this would be VERY difficult to do (as you pointed out) and would almost certainly create a firestorm of protest, not to mention all the lobbying that would take place against it.
No kidding. I'm appalled by some of these comments. The message seems to be "let's make those among us who have the least suffer in some way for every scrap we throw their way"
Lets make those among us who are able bodied but have no morals and free load off hard working people go hungry. People like this should be ashamed of themselves, they obviously have no pride in themselves and they are a load on others who work to pay to put food on their table.
Social security is not the same as SNAP benefits. Tax-paying adults paid into the SS program for decades so they would have an income in old age, and recipients of SNAP just "receive." it is reasonable to put restrictions on the latter, and in fact, we already do. They can't buy booze with it. I just think it should be restricted further, especially since we also are paying for their health care which in turn becomes more expensive when one is overweight and eating a poor diet. Diabetes is rampant.
You take out way more then you pay in w/ SS as life expectancy is growing. Many that receive SNAP also pay taxes therefore I would argue that YES it is the same concept. Social Security is a popular program but it is still paying out more to the individual than the individual paid in therefore a Handout, just one we support as a country.
I have no issue paying for SNAP but only for people who are physically disabled which includes the elderly. People, including myself do have a problem when able bodied people get SNAP, that is when good hearted people feel taken advantage of and it is abuse of hard working Americans who pay their tab.
I have no issue with people voluntarily contributing toward helping other people.
The problem ensues when the State uses its monopoly on violence to force people to contribute.
You take out way more then you pay in w/ SS as life expectancy is growing. Many that receive SNAP also pay taxes therefore I would argue that YES it is the same concept. Social Security is a popular program but it is still paying out more to the individual than the individual paid in therefore a Handout, just one we support as a country.
^^ people are able to twist their minds to justify anything, wow.
SS is a gov't mandated insurance that working people pay into. Some people die young and never collect, others pass before they collect the full amount, and others collect more than they paid in.
You take out way more then you pay in w/ SS as life expectancy is growing. Social Security is a popular program but it is still paying out more to the individual than the individual paid in.
That may be true for most people, but not for all. If someone dies before s/he collects Social Security and without leaving behind anyone who can collect his/her survivor benefits, then all the money that person had given in SS taxes would be an involuntary charitable donation -- or as Petch751 wrote, it is more like forced insurance than anything else I can think to compare it to. Also, many people die before they received everything back that they put into SS.
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.
