- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- 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
re: Alabama food stamp drops 85%....cant be posted enough
Posted on 6/6/17 at 9:39 am to Ace Midnight
Posted on 6/6/17 at 9:39 am to Ace Midnight
quote:
Anyone who thinks that the $0.75 or so taxation return on a $5 expenditure is a good return
Not sure I understand your math as it relates to the estimate. The estimate is not $0.75 return on a $5 expense, it would be $1.80 on a $1.00 expenditure and is taxpayer money that is immediately put back into the economy.
Again, I said I'm not a fan of handouts but I don't think it's the worst one out there. Social Security benefits for otherwise able bodied people and housing subsidies are far worse.
1
Posted on 6/6/17 at 9:40 am to GenesChin
quote:
Now it is time to start looking at whether crime goes up in those counties
Kind of think about it this way. If you are working and not out on the street, there is a good chance you are NOT breaking the law.
Posted on 6/6/17 at 9:55 am to GeeOH
quote:
Our freaking govment gives out contracts to have the grass cut on interstate.....instead of owning equipment and giving jobs to able men. shite like that makes blood boil. There are so many "fixes like that in every state.
why so many down votes for this?
Posted on 6/6/17 at 10:04 am to Anonymous95
quote:
The estimate is not $0.75 return on a $5 expense
From the government's perspective, what return are they going to get other than sales/consumption tax on the $9?
Posted on 6/6/17 at 10:14 am to Ace Midnight
quote:
what return are they going to get other than sales/consumption tax on the $9?
They do get sales tax from the initial spending of the benefit, but they also consider the positive impact on others such as farmers, corporations and workers when those dollars are spent (wages, profits, investments in business growth, etc.) and the taxes that all of those things generate.
Posted on 6/6/17 at 10:16 am to GeeOH
quote:Not exactly. They'd just find another scheme to feed their habit. It may make crime go up.
Yep. I see this actually help.lower drug use in those people who give up the benifits
Posted on 6/6/17 at 10:16 am to GeeOH
Sounds too rational for Louisiana
Posted on 6/6/17 at 10:25 am to TigerRob20
It was crazy. I dont know if its still in place but there was a proration scale that was just criminal and when i suggested a change i was public enemy number 1. It worked like this; if you were awared benefits at the beginning of say June but you applied and were interviewed in May you were then prorated from the application day until the 31st. So, if you came in on the 20th you got 12 days of vouchers. However if the same thing happened in say March and February you got, yep you guessed it, 12 days. I was like hold up thats 3 extra days. Alas, i was told to STFU.
Posted on 6/6/17 at 10:28 am to GeeOH
I agree in theory that there should be a work requirement, but it also seems like a blanket rule that if you're able to work you have to have a job to get food stamps isn't the way to go. There are people who work who still need assistance, and there are people who are able-bodied who can't get work for a variety of reasons. Things like welfare, food stamps, etc. are supposed to be temporary assistance to aid people in times of need. The problem is people abusing the system potentially hurt those that truly are in need.
Posted on 6/6/17 at 10:43 am to Abadeebadaba
quote:
GFY, this program took able bodied individuals off the government teet to the tune of 4.4 Mil. Is that such a small amount? How many people, that actually need the money, do you think that could help?
First - I went F myself. I do feel a lot better now. Thank you for the advice.
While $4.4mil is a lot of money to me personally, and probably most individuals, it is small potatoes to the state. I'm not arguing in favor of welfare. Generational welfare is a problem and it needs to be dealt with. I do believe in temporarily helping people who have fallen on hard times. $126 a month is barely enough to scrape by.
There are many other areas of wasteful government spending of tax payer money that could make a much larger difference. An example of that would be Louisiana's incarceration rate, which is the highest in the nation. Im too lazy to look up the actual number, but I guarantee the amount of taxpayer money being spend to house prisoners is 10x that of welfare. A population equivalent to those on welfare. The majority of these prisoners are drug possession charges. Additionally, corrupt individuals are making millions in personal profit off the privatized prisons. These same individuals are lobbying to keep marijuana illegal so they can continue the cycle of arresting and profiting. All at the expense of the taxpayer.
Why are we arguing about $126 a month?
Posted on 6/6/17 at 10:59 am to GumboDave
quote:
While $4.4mil is a lot of money to me personally, and probably most individuals, it is small potatoes to the state. I'm not arguing in favor of welfare. Generational welfare is a problem and it needs to be dealt with. I do believe in temporarily helping people who have fallen on hard times. $126 a month is barely enough to scrape by.
I know tons of people who have fallen on hard times only to be turned away from benefits. Getting government aid is meant to get you off of aid, not sustain it.
quote:
There are many other areas of wasteful government spending of tax payer money that could make a much larger difference. An example of that would be Louisiana's incarceration rate, which is the highest in the nation. Im too lazy to look up the actual number, but I guarantee the amount of taxpayer money being spend to house prisoners is 10x that of welfare. A population equivalent to those on welfare. The majority of these prisoners are drug possession charges. Additionally, corrupt individuals are making millions in personal profit off the privatized prisons. These same individuals are lobbying to keep marijuana illegal so they can continue the cycle of arresting and profiting. All at the expense of the taxpayer.
Okay since you wanted to go this route with the discussion, I knew you would, tell me more about the children in the great state that are not getting proper nutrition. Shouldn't they be helped? After all they are just kids going to school and they have not broken the law. I am all for legalization, so do not think that I am not, but why are we letting children starve by the way side! These prisoners knowingly broke the law, and while I think it is stupid....it was still illegal when they possessed it, sold it etc... BUT YES we should not spend that much on prisoners and it does line the pockets of the rich.
So why are we arguing over $126 again? Oh that is right, because that money could be better used to help out citizens who are trying to do the right thing you fricking dope.
Posted on 6/6/17 at 11:01 am to GumboDave
It's not 126. It's millions.
Posted on 6/6/17 at 11:12 am to Abadeebadaba
quote:
know tons of people who have fallen on hard times only to be turned away from benefits. Getting government aid is meant to get you off of aid, not sustain it.
Im confused. Do you want to help those fallen on hard times or not?
quote:
why are we letting children starve by the way side
Many of these recipients of the $126 are children. The children you speak of helping are the same people you want to take the money away from.
This post was edited on 6/6/17 at 11:22 am
Posted on 6/6/17 at 11:14 am to RogerTheShrubber
quote:
It's not 126. It's millions.
I realize that. But the money is there and should be used to help those in need. Only temporarily.
Posted on 6/6/17 at 11:16 am to GumboDave
quote:
realize that. But the money is there and should be used to help those in need. Only temporarily.
Agreed. However we probably disagree on "in need."
Posted on 6/6/17 at 11:19 am to ilikerrands2
quote:
quote:
Our freaking govment gives out contracts to have the grass cut on interstate.....instead of owning equipment and giving jobs to able men. shite like that makes blood boil. There are so many "fixes like that in every state.
why so many down votes for this?
Because then somebody's brother in law would lose there sweetheart deal they are getting on that contract.
Posted on 6/6/17 at 11:29 am to GeeOH
quote:
Our freaking govment gives out contracts to have the grass cut on interstate.....instead of owning equipment and giving jobs to able men.
Unless the contractor somehow is doing it all by himself, he is hiring help / "giving jobs to able men"
Before someone starts to argue "Well these contracts are handed out unfairly and people rip off the government," it is just one contract to get the job done.
If the government would have to buy, maintain and replace equipment + hire workers think of the bureaucratic mess + opportunities for being ripped off
-Contract to buy/replace equipment
-Contract to repair/maintain equipment
-Hire admin to oversee program (similar to contractor)
-Hire government workers to be the labor
All the admin + government workers would get full time government job benefits too + be basically impossible to fire
Posted on 6/6/17 at 11:48 am to GumboDave
quote:
Im confused. Do you want to help those fallen on hard times or not?
Nope, either I or other family members helped them out until they could get back on their feet. I am not saying everyone has the ability to do that, but mine did not sit around a sulk because the gov would not help them when they really needed it.
quote:
Many of these recipients of the $126 are children. The children you speak of helping are the same people you want to take the money away fro
Alright well it is obvious that you did not read any of the article, so it is dumb for me to continue this.
From the article itself:
quote:
As of Jan. 1, 2017, there were 13,663 able-bodied adults without dependents receiving food stamps statewide. That number dropped to 7,483 by May 1, 2017. Among the 13 counties, there were 5,538 adults ages 18-50 without dependents receiving food stamps as of Jan. 1, 2017. That number dropped to 831 - a decline of about 85 percent - by May 1, 2017.
WITHOUT DEPENDENTS...Thanks for playing, try again.
Posted on 6/6/17 at 5:55 pm to GumboDave
Nice try
Posted on 6/7/17 at 12:02 am to SoFla Tideroller
I see it like gumbodave. People hate hate hate the non working poor, and act like they receive 99% of their taxes, when it's actually 1-2% of income. I get it, Its the principle, people can't stand that they are being taken advantage of. But it's such a distraction to larger more wasteful unproductive spending. The difference is the other issues are complicated and have no face to blame.
Look someone has to be poor, on the bottom. if not then it will be you.
This year I started a business and I will pay the poor... but the poor will pay me more.
Look someone has to be poor, on the bottom. if not then it will be you.
This year I started a business and I will pay the poor... but the poor will pay me more.
Page 5 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News