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.
1st, food stamps and welfare should not be forever...there should be a limit to how long someone can remain on the dole....it's fine to give someone a "hand up"...but when you do it forever, it becomes a "hand out"... When you have to take either, you need to get off your duff and look for work...do SOMETHING to improve your situation.
2nd, yes...there should be restrictions on what they can use OUR money for...if they want the freedom to buy anything, EARN your own spending money. Very simple.
This whole argument rests on the premise that people are poor because it's just so gosh darn fun.
Quote:
Originally Posted by HappyTexan
No one is being punished. SNAP is SUPPLEMENTAL. They are free to spend their own money on the junk food.
Asserting that the restrictions don't actually work isn't really a defense.
This whole argument rests on the premise that people are poor because it's just so gosh darn fun.
Nope, it rests on the premise that you should be responsible for yourself, but if you fall on hard times, society should give you a temporary helping hand.
Obviously, we are talking about adults with the capacity to work.
Quote:
Originally Posted by FrankMiller
Asserting that the restrictions don't actually work isn't really a defense.
Actually, they will work most of the time since people tend to treat their money different than other people's money.
I like the idea of limiting some of what they can put into their carts. I've watched more than a few families load up on all manner of meats, ice cream, and pizza, soda, etc. They are obese, and plagued with health problems. I don't think that tax payers should be supporting that. I don't pity anyone who can polish off 2 roasted chickens, a big tub of ice cream, 3 pizzas, soda pop, and blame their ill health on "genes."
Nope, it rests on the premise that you should be responsible for yourself, but if you fall on hard times, society should give you a temporary helping hand.
Obviously, we are talking about adults with the capacity to work.
The majority of people getting these benefits who can work are already working.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank DeForrest
There should be no taking of taxpayer money.
Eliminate unemployment and mandate a living wage, and there won't be any (except by corporations).
The majority of people getting these benefits who can work are already working.
If they are working 40 hours a week, they technically don't need such benefits for themselves.
Quote:
Originally Posted by FrankMiller
Eliminate unemployment and mandate a living wage, and there won't be any (except by corporations).
You don't seem to understand taxes and "taking" very well.
If you give me $20 and I return $5 back to you, I'm not giving you $5, you're giving me $15.
If a company is given a $10 million tax break on a $100 million tax liability, the company is paying $90 million in taxes, they aren't receiving $10 from tax payers.
Additionally, everybody who works 40 hours a week, even at minimum wage, is receiving a living wage. It might not be the life they want, but they can definitely live on it.
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.
