Befor we cut food stamps

Befor we cut food stamps

Posted in the Somerset Forum

First Prev
of 4
Next Last
Somerset girl

Somerset, KY

#2 Sep 24, 2013
It would be more cost efficient to cut food stamps, or even better lets drug test everyone who gets them then we can pay foreign aid and the people who truly use food stamps to buy food will still get them. It's a win win
Old man

Greensburg, KY

#3 Sep 24, 2013
Who will pay the cost of all those drug tests?
Troll Alert

Somerset, KY

#4 Sep 24, 2013
Another thread brought to you by the Tennessee troll.
Just a Legend

Somerset, KY

#5 Sep 24, 2013
Overall food stamps are a positive. Of course, there is room to clean up the system. Billions of dollars goes to foreign aid, student loans, non-profits, etc. Student loan and post-secondary school growth are hand in glove and have little to do with educating the students. If I had to prepare another thesis I would start with student loan and education outcomes. I remember one class that I had, the teacher didn't bother to show up over half of the classes.
Paul Revere

Krypton, KY

#7 Sep 25, 2013
How 'bout we start by eliminating every food stamp recipient who has been added to the rolls in the last decade?
Since 2000, the number of Americans on food stamps has risen from 17 million to the current number of 48 million. There is absolutely no way 31 million people should have been added in only 13 years. The system is rotten, corrupt and should be dismantled.
sawdust

Stearns, KY

#8 Sep 25, 2013
Paul Revere wrote:
How 'bout we start by eliminating every food stamp recipient who has been added to the rolls in the last decade?
Since 2000, the number of Americans on food stamps has risen from 17 million to the current number of 48 million. There is absolutely no way 31 million people should have been added in only 13 years. The system is rotten, corrupt and should be dismantled.
You're right, it needs changing. I once had a friend that worked in the food stamp office and he was always trying to get me to come sign up on food stamps because I was a self employed logger. He said he could fix it so no one would ever know. That was back in the 80's.

I remember the days when the needy got monthly govt. commodities, cheese, peanut butter, powdered milk, powdered eggs, flour, cornmeal, etc. It worked pretty good and the idea came from the Mormon church who still has the most efficient welfare system in the world.

I would actually rather volunteer at a soup kitchen than to see my tax dollars go for so much fraud.
JustCuts

Somerset, KY

#9 Sep 25, 2013
Cut all food stamps out and make people earn their living, isn't that the way its suppose to be ? Dont see any animals in the wild running around giving out free food to the ones that wont look for their own do you ? Just Cut them out and let the hammer fall where it may.
old dawg

Lexington, KY

#10 Sep 25, 2013
i know there are folks out there that really do need these, but there is so much abuse. i know people are buying goods and reselling them. i know people are reselling commodities.

recently, i heard there was a bill in the works to limit snacks and soft drinks to improve health and hopefully improve the obesity situation.

i really believe the ones opposed to drug testing have their reasons. otherwise, why would they oppose it? myself? i have nothing to hide, if they want a sample, not a problem.

that would actually help the job market, because they would have to hire a bunch of people to watch the other people pee, because the honor system wouldn't work, i don't think.
Highly

London, KY

#11 Sep 26, 2013
But they'd pay the peewatchers $6 an hour and they'd have to get food stamps to survive. Oh, you took your model from Walmart. I get it now.
Mr Jaxass

Somerset, KY

#12 Sep 29, 2013
Somerset girl wrote:
It would be more cost efficient to cut food stamps, or even better lets drug test everyone who gets them then we can pay foreign aid and the people who truly use food stamps to buy food will still get them. It's a win win
It's not about people buy drugs with their food stamps (which is nigh impossible) it's about people who spend money on drugs and get assistance with food, when they could be buying their own food with the drug money.

Also, the drug test practice itself is flawed. Just because somebody would show positive doesn't mean they spent money on drugs (or even did drugs at all. False positives are more common than you think.) when they could have been supporting themselves. Hell, it could have been somebody that kicked an addiction dropping dirty because of the shit built up in their system (sometimes your body can retain a substance for months).

Do I think it is right to pay for drugs and use my tax money to buy you food? Hell No. But drug testing does more harm than good.
tired of it

Lexington, KY

#13 Sep 29, 2013
Mr Jaxass wrote:
<quoted text>
It's not about people buy drugs with their food stamps (which is nigh impossible) it's about people who spend money on drugs and get assistance with food, when they could be buying their own food with the drug money.
Also, the drug test practice itself is flawed. Just because somebody would show positive doesn't mean they spent money on drugs (or even did drugs at all. False positives are more common than you think.) when they could have been supporting themselves. Hell, it could have been somebody that kicked an addiction dropping dirty because of the shit built up in their system (sometimes your body can retain a substance for months).
Do I think it is right to pay for drugs and use my tax money to buy you food? Hell No. But drug testing does more harm than good.
in my job i am subjected to surprise urine tests all the time. and yes, there's a guy watching me pee because people have tried to cheat.

i've never had a false positive in 10 years. the only times i get a read is when i take painkillers (prescription) for my shoulder and i have to show them the prescription to prove it.

the excuse of false positive reads are 90% just that, excuses to cover up.

if you don't do the drugs, they won't show up.
heh heh

Bolivar, MO

#14 Sep 29, 2013
How about just eliminating the damn card and doing buisness ala the 1920s.Any of your great grandparents leech and mooch off the system?We all know the answer to that one.
whattt

London, KY

#15 Sep 29, 2013
Snake man wrote:
Lets cut foreign aid.
and drug test welfair recipents
true american

London, KY

#16 Sep 29, 2013
Old man wrote:
Who will pay the cost of all those drug tests?
the same people that pay for food stamps,,, the working men and women of the U.S.A.
Carla

Manchester, KY

#17 Sep 29, 2013
Most are too Fat to work now.

“Welcome to the Winds of Change”

Level 5

Since: Apr 10

Location hidden

#18 Sep 29, 2013
I think some of you are missing part of the problem. There is a vast income inequality in this country. You would be horribly surprised at how many working people are on food stamps because the people they work for are too cheap to pay a living wage. A few years back Wal-mart was explaining to their employees how to sign up for government help simply because they knew they were not going to pay them a living wage. I use Wal-mart as an example, but it happens all over.

Next to the drug testing while I think that would be great in theory, the practice would be much different. It would cost the tax payers more money to test all those that receive welfare just to remove less than 1% of those that are one it. IN other words the cost to test would far outweigh the benefit.

The real way to fix the system is education and paying people a living wage. That is the only way to solve this issue....everything else is smoke and mirrors.
CTT

Brodhead, KY

#19 Sep 29, 2013
Allanon80 wrote:
I think some of you are missing part of the problem. There is a vast income inequality in this country. You would be horribly surprised at how many working people are on food stamps because the people they work for are too cheap to pay a living wage. A few years back Wal-mart was explaining to their employees how to sign up for government help simply because they knew they were not going to pay them a living wage. I use Wal-mart as an example, but it happens all over.
Next to the drug testing while I think that would be great in theory, the practice would be much different. It would cost the tax payers more money to test all those that receive welfare just to remove less than 1% of those that are one it. IN other words the cost to test would far outweigh the benefit.
The real way to fix the system is education and paying people a living wage. That is the only way to solve this issue....everything else is smoke and mirrors.
1%? Seriously?

I was talking to a peace officer recently, asked him about what percentage of people they come in contact with were on drugs. His response was drug use is so prevalent they have to assume they all are, especially the younger generation, but that at least half were were actually on something.

Education is a key factor, but even that won't fix the problem without more jobs. Jobs left this country partly due to Unions forcing companies to pay high wages to uneducated drones to screw in a widget all day, and partly due to government polices like NAFTA that allowed companies to ship jobs to Mexico etc where employees are paid $3 a day versus $30 an hour here.

All the stuff that we need and buy here should be made here. I believe that alone would make a huge difference in our economy

“Welcome to the Winds of Change”

Level 5

Since: Apr 10

Location hidden

#20 Sep 29, 2013
CTT wrote:
<quoted text>
1%? Seriously?
I was talking to a peace officer recently, asked him about what percentage of people they come in contact with were on drugs. His response was drug use is so prevalent they have to assume they all are, especially the younger generation, but that at least half were were actually on something.
Education is a key factor, but even that won't fix the problem without more jobs. Jobs left this country partly due to Unions forcing companies to pay high wages to uneducated drones to screw in a widget all day, and partly due to government polices like NAFTA that allowed companies to ship jobs to Mexico etc where employees are paid $3 a day versus $30 an hour here.
All the stuff that we need and buy here should be made here. I believe that alone would make a huge difference in our economy
You're right my figures were wrong. Since starting the testing in Fl only 2% have tested positive for drugs. I stand corrected....either way it is not the most cost effective way of removing the problem and only adds to the debt for states. Education and an actual living wage is the only way to really fix the problem. Are you one of those people who think companies should pay what they want and don't think there should be a minimum wage? You are deluding yourself if you don't think there is a socio-economical divide in this country.

I find it odd that a certain party wants to make sure that everyone has a gun, but then wants to make sure those same people can't eat by voting down SNAP benefits. Sounds like the makings of a riot to me. Think French Revolution!
Bansky

London, KY

#21 Sep 29, 2013
true american wrote:
<quoted text>the same people that pay for food stamps,,, the working men and women of the U.S.A.
If you're lucky enough to pull in $50,000 a year, your contribution to the snap fund would be a whopping $36. This info is freely available on the net....there are a lot of myths about snap. If you miss $36 a year and can't live on $50,000 a year then clearly you're doing something wrong. If it's the principle, then MOVE. I enjoy living in a civilized society and not a third world country. Seems like we always have money for everything but to help our own people. Sickening IMO.
walt

Stearns, KY

#22 Sep 29, 2013
Woops!

IRS loses $67 million out of billion-dollar ObamaCare slush fund

"The IRS is unable to account for $67 million spent from a slush fund established for Obamacare implementation, according to a Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration (TIGTA) report released today.

The “Health Insurance Reform Implementation Fund”(HIRIF) was tucked into Obamacare in order to give the IRS money to enforce the tax provisions of the healthcare law. The fund, totaling some $1 billion of taxpayer money, was used to roll out enforcement mechanisms for the approximately 50 tax provisions of Obamacare.

According to the report:“Specifically, the IRS did not account for or attempt to quantify approximately $67 million [from the slush fund] of indirect ACA costs incurred for Fiscal Years 2010 through 2012.”

It’s not as if anyone in the IRS, or any other agency, has to worry about suffering for incompetence. Lois Lerner of the Tax Exempt Organizations Division was officially classified as incompetent by internal review, to protect her from charges of abusing her authority, and she’s riding off into the sunset with a $113,000 pension after years of earning over $170,000, having enjoyed several months of paid vacation to cap off her career."

http://www.humanevents.com/2013/09/26/irs-los...

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 4
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Somerset Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Bible study rules for public schools proposed (Feb '10) 18 min Searching for him 166,390
eclipse glasses 2 hr Solar one 4
Grace Marie Martin has Warts 3 hr That_crazy 5
Big boobs are gross, who agrees? (Apr '09) 3 hr heckyea 261
Question about UGN. (Nov '11) 3 hr left 7
Virgin Wanted 7 hr kitty kat slap 3
Sick of you John whang! 10 hr Timothy 5

Somerset Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Somerset Mortgages