- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
0
Posted on 1/16/17 at 3:10 pm to LSUJML
quote:
SNAP cost American taxpayers and eye-popping $70 billion, according to government figures.
Goddamn.. I don't want to hear another fricking thing about needing to do more for poor people. It appears handouts do not work by any stretch of the imagination.
Posted on 1/16/17 at 3:14 pm to dmjones
quote:
Isn't that how they used to do it? I thought that's where the term "government cheese" came from.
That was commodities. Completely different animal. I do think that SNAP should be modeled after the WIC program, and see no reason why it isn't.
Posted on 1/16/17 at 3:18 pm to dmjones
quote:
I thought that's where the term "government cheese" came from
We always called it commodity cheese.
When I was a kid my Grandmother got a tub of commodity peanut butter from someone.
It was in a huge tub, like the large tub that hot chocolate mix comes in.
White with black letters that basically said PEANUT BUTTER.
It was pretty good.
Posted on 1/16/17 at 3:19 pm to High C
quote:
It’s all part of the president’s longtime goal to eradicate what he and the First Lady call an epidemic of “food insecurity” among the nation’s low-income residents. Part of the problem is that this demographic has limited access to healthy food choices, the administration says, and the government must provide them with nutritional options.
FFS this is such horse shite.
80% of Americans are overweight
90% of Americans go to bed hungry
75% of inner city people can't get food
Every person that works on these studies needs to be shot in the face.
Posted on 1/16/17 at 3:19 pm to High C
quote:
That was commodities. Completely different animal.
Oh. That was before my time.
quote:
I do think that SNAP should be modeled after the WIC program, and see no reason why it isn't.
I don't disagree. IIRC, it gives nutritious foods to pregnant women and children? That's all they need. I see the labels in the grocery store. Hell, they'd probably be a lot healthier if they were restricted to those foods.
Posted on 1/16/17 at 3:41 pm to dmjones
Yes, WIC gives a certain number of vouchers per month to individuals. Each voucher spells out exactly which food items can be obtained with it. They provide healthy food necessities. Does anyone know why SNAP can't use this model?
Posted on 1/16/17 at 3:49 pm to High C
quote:
limited access to healthy food choices
They can't buy beans, chicken, or veggies?
Most low income folks are low income for a reason. They make poor choices. That poor decision making isn't limited to finances.
Posted on 1/16/17 at 3:54 pm to AUbagman
quote:
SNAP cost American taxpayers and eye-popping $70 billion, according to government figures. Goddamn.. I don't want to hear another fricking thing about needing to do more for poor people. It appears handouts do not work by any stretch of the imagination.
Do you want to hear the TRUTH?
Food Stamps are more about being a corporate subsidy than feeding the poor.
JP Morgan Chase and other banks make Millions every year off issuing EBT Cards.
Wal Mart, McDonalds, Taco Bell, Circle K etc have their labor subsidized because they can pay non-livable wages and have SNAP, Medicaid, Section 8, EBT and other programs fill in the gap.
Many have said "why don't the go back to commodities" or place limits on food types. RJR Nabisco, Frito Lay, Coca Cola, Tyson and other companies would raise h---.
Verizon, T-Mobile, Directv and other companies benefit bc snap benefits free up money for the public to buy their products.
Posted on 1/16/17 at 4:03 pm to lsusa
quote:
Food Stamps are more about being a corporate subsidy than feeding the poor.
Holy Bernie Sanders
Posted on 1/16/17 at 4:04 pm to High C
quote:
It’s all part of the president’s longtime goal to eradicate what he and the First Lady call an epidemic of “food insecurity” among the nation’s low-income residents.
They're the ones that declared Pizza a vegetable right?
Posted on 1/16/17 at 4:08 pm to High C
quote:
I do think that SNAP should be modeled after the WIC program
This.
Posted on 1/16/17 at 7:10 pm to BHM
This post was edited on 11/8/20 at 2:04 pm
Posted on 1/16/17 at 7:50 pm to MrLarson
quote:
Food Stamps are more about being a corporate subsidy than feeding the poor.
Holy Bernie Sanders
Its absolutely true. Why are CocaCola products eligible for SNAP purchase? It makes no sense whatsoever.
No one in DC gives two shits about pissing off poor people. But DC loves that CocaCola and WalMart money.
Posted on 1/16/17 at 7:55 pm to Kraut Dawg
quote:
Yep, $132 annually vs $100 annually. Nothing like paying 30%+ more just for the convenience. Typical poor person mindset. Can't be inconvenienced in the moment, no matter the cost.
Are you really this stupid? Poor people are frequently unable to come up with the $100 up-front, and they never get the volume discounts we all take for granted. This is one of the many ways in which "it is expensive to be poor." fricking moron.
Posted on 1/16/17 at 8:49 pm to Spock's Eyebrow
You do know that big Agra pushes this welfare program. It is disguised at public welfare but this is nothing but corporate welfare. Probably pushed by the healthcare industry too. They make a ton of money off of poor fat sick people. It's a vicious cycle.
Posted on 1/16/17 at 9:00 pm to BigPerm30
quote:
You do know that big Agra pushes this welfare program. It is disguised at public welfare but this is nothing but corporate welfare. Probably pushed by the healthcare industry too. They make a ton of money off of poor fat sick people. It's a vicious cycle.
That's got nothing to do with my post, and it sounds like you're trying to convince me of something I didn't opine on, or perhaps educate me on something that would change my mind on what I did post.
Posted on 1/16/17 at 10:08 pm to Spock's Eyebrow
OP where do y'all find these made up websites?
Posted on 1/16/17 at 10:13 pm to High C
quote:
and the government must provide them with nutritional options.
I'm 100% in favor of this...as in those with food stamps can no longer use them at grocery stores. They can only use food stamps to "purchase" food at govt depots stocked only with nutritious food.
Food stamp use would plummet because contrary to popular belief, recipients aren't buying shitty food because that's "all they can get." They're buying shitty food because that's all they want. I often go into an Albertsons that's serves as a "food oasis" in very diverse area. Surprisingly, I routinely see food stamp users passing up what is a great produce section in favor of Hot Fries and 2 liter orange drinks
Posted on 1/16/17 at 10:23 pm to Alt26
quote:
I'm 100% in favor of this...as in those with food stamps can no longer use them at grocery stores. They can only use food stamps to "purchase" food at govt depots stocked only with nutritious food.
So you would expand government to have multiple depots in every city, because access would have to reasonable. You'd have to man them with more government workers, keep them stocked with food, pay rent, and so forth. Great idea.
Page 2 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News