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 do you leftist liberals continue to endorse food stamps and other forms of welfare? It's not my responsibility to subsidize the food intake of other people.
Your taxes (and my taxes) subsidize the food of everyone, not only people on welfare. Who do you think pays the USDA and FDA? Who subsidizes the farmers who grow your food? If all of the many social services YOU depend on suddenly stopped, you'd be in for a world of hurt.
Why such hostility to the one who still supports some government assistance, but with more restrictions, and not to the one who doesn't think govt should give a penny to those in need? Hmmmmm?
More leftist nonsense.
There should be no government assistance. All assistance should be voluntarily funded, either through charities or donations.
You liberals always want to steal from people and give it to others without their consent.
Where did I ever say that those with disabilities, illness, or living in poverty should not have a helping hand? There's a big difference between that and defending someone on welfare who buys a $1000 TV and then complains that taxpayers aren't giving her enough to feed her family.
That's one of my biggest issues with liberals. As soon as a reasonable person suggests some guidelines suggesting funds should be provided to pay for healthy food, they resort to the "so you want people to starve" line. Always going to false extremes to try to make a point, which then loses any semblance of credulity.
Ironically one of my biggest issues with the extreme right is their hypocrisy (claim to be religious and constantly claim that libs are attacking the religion that they don't practice) and their inability to see complexities and gray areas, rather than all or nothing.
You are bringing one example you know of to paint an entire group of people as freeloaders.
Ironically one of my biggest issues with the extreme right is their hypocrisy (claim to be religious and constantly claim that libs are attacking their religion) and their inability to see complexities and gray areas, rather than all or nothing.
You are bringing one example you know of to paint an entire group of people as freeloaders.
I think it's actually an example from a satire website....
Where did I ever say that those with disabilities, illness, or living in poverty should not have a helping hand?
You liberals sure do like to spend other peoples' money.
Quote:
As soon as a reasonable person suggests some guidelines suggesting funds should be provided to pay for healthy food, they resort to the "so you want people to starve" line.
There should be no “funds†unless they were voluntarily donated. All taxation is theft.
But why are YOU entitled to spend money on ring-dings? You use public services that you could be paying for. Why should my tax dollars go to improving your roads while you spend $2 on ring-dings?
All services should be privatized and available on the free market.
Many food stamp recipients are elderly or disabled.
That is who should be getting most of the assistance but they often get minimal amounts and they don't like to complain.
Single parent families get disproportionate amounts of food assistance often getting layered programs for their kids. I can't imagine they won't expect these delivery fees, if they even exist for this population, to be subsidized by someone. If companies do it for free, they will raise prices for those of us who pay for our own food, or just raise our delivery fees.
Your taxes (and my taxes) subsidize the food of everyone, not only people on welfare. Who do you think pays the USDA and FDA? Who subsidizes the farmers who grow your food? If all of the many social services YOU depend on suddenly stopped, you'd be in for a world of hurt.
The USDA and FDA shouldn't exist in the first place.
There should be no subsidies to farmers. They should have to compete in the market like every other business.
They have a particularly high rate of obesity so they seem to be making poor food choices.
I'm assuming you are talking about welfare recipients?
Quote:
Only 20% of the obese people in the US are poor enough to receive SNAP benefits. 41% of the obese have an income of over $86,100 a year. One study done over a decade ago found that women receiving SNAP had a 2%-5% greater chance of becoming obese than did other women, but there was no increase found for men on SNAP and other studies have found no relationship between SNAP and obesity. https://theconversation.com/dont-bla...-america-80725
I haven't attacked you, not once. I have not exhibited any hostility toward you. You might want to go back and read my responses to your posts before you make such a claim.
You implied I would be just fine with people starving to death. Those aren't fighting words?
How would my ideal guideline that food stamps be applied only to inexpensive meat, seafood, chicken, dairy, eggs, veggies, fruits, and bread translate to my being fine with people starving to death?
So many of you liberals make unfair and untrue accusations (i.e., we're "racist" if we oppose illegal immigration) that it's impossible to carry on a mature debate.
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.
