• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

An prime example of waste

BRG

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 20, 2005
Messages
1,962
Reaction score
0
Location
North Western SD
Now for all you big government lovers - take a look below and then tell me we can't find places to cut. Waste and abuse and all they want to do is increase taxes.

 

Mike

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
28,482
Reaction score
0
Location
Montgomery, Al
Not bad for 4 tails, 2 whole lobsters, and 2 porterhouses.

Food stamp folks get a price break?
 

andybob

Well-known member
Joined
May 24, 2006
Messages
1,190
Reaction score
5
Location
Fordingbridge England.
It is unfortunate, but the freeloaders know how to "work the system" whichever country they are in, they all seem to live the life of Riley here as well, when people lose their jobs after many years of paying into the system, they don't get anywhere near as much "assistance" as the professionally unemployed.
 

Tex

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 13, 2007
Messages
2,156
Reaction score
0
Location
Texas
andybob said:
It is unfortunate, but the freeloaders know how to "work the system" whichever country they are in, they all seem to live the life of Riley here as well, when people lose their jobs after many years of paying into the system, they don't get anywhere near as much "assistance" as the professionally unemployed.

Andybob, I have never been on govt. assistance but you do speak the truth on this one. This is the kind of waste and abuse that needs to not be paid for with the food stamp program. This should red flag an investigation into how well the program goals are being met and then the oversight committees in congress need to fix it. They need to stop fighting the other party while this kind of stuff goes on and work on why the government isn't working and fix it. This is their job and they are not making sure they are spending our tax dollars wisely. I guess you could do the same about some of the "lost" money in Iraq. It is congress that is not working and instead is on constant campaign mode.

It is too bad their policies have helped make most of the country unemployed too.

Tex
 

Larrry

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 23, 2007
Messages
8,645
Reaction score
0
Location
The good ole USA
Brother told me the thing that happened. A gal tried to buy dog food with food stamps and they wouldn't let her so she put it back and got hamburger for the dog. :mad:
 

BRG

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 20, 2005
Messages
1,962
Reaction score
0
Location
North Western SD
1st - the food stamp program should not be in the Farm Program. It should be separate.

2nd - Everyone on the foodstamp and welfare program should be required to take surprise urine tests for drugs and alcohal. If they fail, they are off the program.

3rd - Food stamps should only buy bread, milk, eggs, flour, sugar, in other words, only whats needed.
 

Tex

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 13, 2007
Messages
2,156
Reaction score
0
Location
Texas
BRG said:
1st - the food stamp program should not be in the Farm Program. It should be separate.

2nd - Everyone on the foodstamp and welfare program should be required to take surprise urine tests for drugs and alcohal. If they fail, they are off the program.

3rd - Food stamps should only buy bread, milk, eggs, flour, sugar, in other words, only whats needed.

How about adding beef to that list?

When people abuse the food stamp program like this, there should be a little button the cashier can hit to que it up for investigation. Investigations should pay for themselves in the money they save taxpayers.

Tex
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
All of the items listed are allowed under food stamps. Qualifications for food stamps are very stringent. You cannot have over $5000 in assets in Idaho. Each state administers the program.
Here are some highlights of the program.
http://www.economist.com/node/18958475
 

BRG

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 20, 2005
Messages
1,962
Reaction score
0
Location
North Western SD
Tex said:
BRG said:
1st - the food stamp program should not be in the Farm Program. It should be separate.

2nd - Everyone on the foodstamp and welfare program should be required to take surprise urine tests for drugs and alcohal. If they fail, they are off the program.

3rd - Food stamps should only buy bread, milk, eggs, flour, sugar, in other words, only whats needed.

How about adding beef to that list?

When people abuse the food stamp program like this, there should be a little button the cashier can hit to que it up for investigation. Investigations should pay for themselves in the money they save taxpayers.

Tex

As much as I like to promote and sell beef, I would say no, as their are other sources of protein that are less expensive.
 

BRG

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 20, 2005
Messages
1,962
Reaction score
0
Location
North Western SD
hurleyjd said:
All of the items listed are allowed under food stamps. Qualifications for food stamps are very stringent. You cannot have over $5000 in assets in Idaho. Each state administers the program.
Here are some highlights of the program.
http://www.economist.com/node/18958475

Just because they are allowed, doesn't make it right.
 

Tex

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 13, 2007
Messages
2,156
Reaction score
0
Location
Texas
Larrry said:
Tex said:
Investigations should pay for themselves in the money they save taxpayers.

Tex

I think you might be overestimating government investyigations :wink:


I know for a fact you have a good point there, Larry.

We have listened to some anecdotes but here are some better figures on it than the anecdotal abuses:

http://www.economist.com/node/18958475

Food stamps
The struggle to eat
As Congress wrangles over spending cuts, surging numbers of Americans are relying on the government just to put food on the table

Jul 14th 2011 | WASHINGTON, DC | from the print edition

WHEN the dismal news came on July 8th that the unemployment rate had risen fractionally to 9.2%, both Republicans and Democrats declared the data proof of the folly of the other party’s policies. How, Republicans asked, could Democrats even consider raising taxes when the economy is so weak? How, Democrats retorted, could Republicans advocate big cuts in the safety net when so many Americans are in desperate need? As the haggling over raising the legal limit on the federal government’s debt reaches a climax (see Lexington), the feeble state of the economy is making the budgetary trade-offs involved ever less appealing.

Take food stamps, a programme designed to ensure that poor Americans have enough to eat, which is seen by many Republicans as unsustainable and by many Democrats as untouchable. Participation has soared since the recession began (see chart). By April it had reached almost 45m, or one in seven Americans. The cost, naturally, has soared too, from $35 billion in 2008 to $65 billion last year. And the Department of Agriculture, which administers the scheme, reckons only two-thirds of those who are eligible have signed up.

Republican leaders in the House of Representatives want to rein in the programme’s runaway growth. In their budget outline for next year they proposed cutting the amount of money to be spent on food stamps by roughly a fifth from 2015. Moreover, instead of being a federal entitlement, available to all Americans who meet the eligibility criteria irrespective of the cost, the programme would become a “block grant” to the states, which would receive a fixed amount to spend each year, irrespective of demand. The House has also voted to cut a separate health-and-nutrition scheme for poor pregnant women, infants and children, known as WIC, by 11%. (The Senate, controlled by the Democrats, is unlikely to approve either measure.)

Low marks all round
»The struggle to eat
Dicing with debt and the future
Rocky road
So bad, it could get better
Competition or chaos?
Hizzoner's other cities
Clarification: Dave Camp

Reprints
Related items

Lexington: Dicing with debt and the futureJul 14th 2011

Related topics

United States federal budget
Government spending
Public finance
Social services funding
Democratic Party (United States)

Advocates for the poor consider such cuts unconscionable. Food stamps, they argue, are far from lavish. Only those with incomes of 130% of the poverty level or less are eligible for them. The amount each person receives depends on their income, assets and family size, but the average benefit is $133 a month and the maximum, for an individual with no income at all, is $200. Those sums are due to fall soon, when a temporary boost expires. Even the current package is meagre. Melissa Nieves, a recipient in New York, says she compares costs at five different supermarkets, assiduously collects coupons, eats mainly cheap, starchy foods, and still runs out of money a week or ten days before the end of the month.

It is also hard to argue that food-stamp recipients are undeserving. About half of them are children, and another 8% are elderly. Only 14% of food-stamp households have incomes above the poverty line; 41% have incomes of half that level or less, and 18% have no income at all. The average participating family has only $101 in savings or valuables. Less than a tenth of recipients also receive cash payments from the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families programme (TANF), the reformed version of welfare; roughly a third get at least some income from wages.

Spending on food stamps has risen so quickly because, unusually, almost all the needy are automatically and indefinitely eligible for them. Unemployment benefits last for a maximum of 99 weeks at the moment, and that is due to fall to six months from next year. No one knows exactly how many people have exhausted their allotment, as the government does not attempt to count them. But almost half of the 14m unemployed have been out of a job for six months or more, and so would no longer qualify for benefits under the rules that will apply from January 1st.

Medicaid, America’s main health-care scheme for the poor, does not cover childless adults in most states, no matter how destitute they are. Housing assistance is not an entitlement, and only a small fraction of those who qualify for it actually receive it. The food-stamp programme has a rule limiting able-bodied, childless adults to three months on food stamps every three years—but it is suspended at times of high unemployment, leaving only recent immigrants and those convicted of drug offences to go hungry.

Stacy Dean of the Centre for Budget and Policy Priorities (CBPP), a think-tank, argues that the rapid growth of food stamps in recent years is a sign that they are working as intended, responding promptly to hard economic times. In contrast, she points out, block-grant programmes grow much more slowly when times are tough, since funding for them does not increase in line with demand. Food-stamp participation rose by 45% between December 2007 and December 2009, CBPP calculates, while the number of families receiving cash grants under TANF, a block-grant scheme, rose by just 13%.

Food stamps also help stimulate the economy more than other forms of government spending, points out Jim Weill of Food Research and Action Centre, a charity, since their recipients are so poor that they tend to spend them immediately. When Moody’s Analytics assessed different forms of stimulus, it found that food stamps were the most effective, increasing economic activity by $1.73 for every dollar spent. Unemployment insurance came in second, at $1.62, whereas most tax cuts yielded a dollar or less. All the talk in Washington these days, however, is of cutbacks—even for the hungry.

Of course there are a few crooked politicians I would like to see starve than some of the people who are in the Food Stamps program.

Tex
 

Latest posts

Top