America: The Food Stamp Nation

[CityGirl]

Despite the general opinion that they're plenty of available jobs available I sure haven't observed them myself. Yes their are some jobs on the lower side of the pay scale available but guess what folks, many of them are taxpayer subsidized and food stamps are one of the primary subsidies.

Excerpt from Here

So what I'm stating is their is a chance (albeit a small one) that the person holding the food stamps may very well work their butt off for their employer but still qualifies for subsidies to support themselves and their family.

Edit for a bit more info. for Ohio "Wal-Mart Subsidy Report for Ohio"

Here is an article that addresses some of what you have posted
http://michaelsnyder.mensnewsdaily....s-the-tragic-downfall-of-the-american-worker/

Just a little additional info:

The article defines what used to be a "good job" as one that met these 3 criteria (at this point, only 24.6% of US jobs qualify as a "good job" by this criteria):

#1 The job must pay at least $18.50 an hour. According to the authors, that is the equivalent of the median hourly pay for American workers back in 1979 after you adjust for inflation.

#2 The job must provide access to employer-sponsored health insurance, and the employer must pay at least some portion of the cost of that insurance.

#3 The job must provide access to an employer-sponsored retirement plan.

 

[luvs]

By the way, if 'hunger' was actually a problem in America, we would find crime associated with hunger. But we don't. No one goes to jail for stealing food, and no one is murdered over a square meal. Crime in the inner cities is not about being hungry (imagine the anarchy if it was), but more so about finding drugs and alcohol ... in a perfect world paid for with black-market food stamps.

um, hunger certainly exists. & ppl shoplift food. often. u ought live in the city. there's beggars. there's poor ppl in many non-city locations, too. actual poor folks. school lunch programs 4 poverty-level kiddos. yeah, there's faux poor ppl. not as many as u seem to think, tho.
btw, food stamps arrive now on a card, & most cashiers i.d. the user.
so if mrs. doe gives mr. crack-monger her card, methinx they may notice he's not a female via name/i.d., & so on. jus' sayin'.

 

[Big Dog]

I tell you what look for facts on welfare fraud especially food stamps. I've only seen it a couple of time usually some on dope that needed a fix for his next dose. As I said only a couple of times in my life and both where found soon after dead from an over dose. Oh and that was in the 70's before welfare was corrected under the Clinton terms in office.

Your living a sheltered life to believe this! Welfare and food stamp fraud is a corporation in the cities!

Let me see the average wage in Kentucky is about $10 per hour. So if you worked 40 hours a week for 52 weeks a year that is a gross of $20800 per year which by the way a good 75% make here in their daily jobs. Now please show me where you or any one can make $30K per year from the government even as a disabled veteran. Show me the money to quote a term for a movie.

Here is some of the research I've done and this one is consistent with the others I've looked at http://www.statisticbrain.com/welfare-statistics/

My UE "salary" is $29,796 ............

I happen to know a single mother with one child and know when she is not working she fairs much better when not working than when she does. Long story short, she's driven to do better (mostly because she's able due to the daughter is older and not as large of a "child care" burden) because even with the government help she wants more for her daughter and herself!

 

[joec]

Your living a sheltered life to believe this! Welfare and food stamp fraud is a corporation in the cities!

My UE "salary" is $29,796 ............

I happen to know a single mother with one child and know when she is not working she fairs much better when not working than when she does. Long story short, she's driven to do better (mostly because she's able due to the daughter is older and not as large of a "child care" burden) because even with the government help she wants more for her daughter and herself!

She simply shows what I said most people want more than the minimum they would receive on welfare out of life and hence will work if they can find jobs that pay more. Fact is welfare does not make for a life most would want to live, basically enough to stay alive on.

 

[FrancSevin]

She simply shows what I said most people want more than the minimum they would receive on welfare out of life and hence will work if they can find jobs that pay more. Fact is welfare does not make for a life most would want to live, basically enough to stay alive on.

Then why do so many Americans do it on purpose?

 

[joec]

Then why do so many Americans do it on purpose?

I was going to answer you Franc but really you are convince 47% of the US is takers and your a maker. Keep dreaming.

 

[FrancSevin]

I was going to answer you Franc but really you are convince 47% of the US is takers and your a maker. Keep dreaming.

Why do you do that JoeC. why do you attempt to put into my head thoughts and views that do not exist there, to substantiate you opinions.

I know you have issues wit the facts and place more value on opinions but pulease, stop implying what mine are.

I never said 47% are takers.

What I have said is that the government makes taking too easy. And many have done it for generations. Not citing tables and stats, just the people with whom I work daily and have worked with most of my adult life.

But tyour typical insult was easier than answering my question. I'll give you the answer, The people who live off of the welfare dole intentionaly, not the folks in crisis but the ones who find ways to do it successfuly on purpose, do it because they want to,,,,,,, and they can.


And some do it very well.

"James Lauer, 49, and Tari Lee Lauer, 42, ... [are] accused of wrongfully receiving cash, food support, medical assistance and child-care assistance totaling almost $20,000 during various periods from October 2006 to July 2008 while failing to report about $400,000 in income and assets."
​

A St. Louis county investigator discovered the couple went on a shopping spree, including a $37,000 Chevrolet Avalanche, a $67,094 Cadillac Escalade, a $38,680.07 Nissan Titan, and a $18,283.43 2007 Ford Mustang convertible, none of which were reported to the county.

This is a rare and extreme case. But I have been witnes to many lessor crimes of fraud and abuse. Such as I have described earlier.

I work with this class of people. Soem do okay and some don't last. Many don't last because we won't participate in their attempts to "game" the system. We won't lie for them, we won't pay them in cash, we won't alter their status or their hours to meet the critical means testing needs of receiving Welfare.

So they leave. Usually after 30 days so they can colleect some unemployment.

This is their choice, not mine. They are people who consciously make such choices every day, and so are where they are because of those choices.

Not because Repulicans, business owners and guys like me don't care. Despite the record of repeated failure, I always give the next applicant a fair chance and I hope one day, one will surprise me.

Some have, and they do well under my roof.

So please swallow you bile and hate. I have no idea why you are so bitter, but lay your personal perjoratives somewhere else.

 

[joec]

Why do you do that JoeC. why do you attempt to put into my head thoughts and views that do not exist there, to substantiate you opinions.

I know you have issues wit the facts and place more value on opinions but pulease, stop implying what mine are.

I never said 47% are takers.

What I have said is that the government makes taking too easy. And many have done it for generations. Not citing tables and stats, just the people with whom I work daily and have worked with most of my adult life.

But tyour typical insult was easier than answering my question. I'll give you the answer, The people who live off of the welfare dole intentionaly, not the folks in crisis but the ones who find ways to do it successfuly on purpose, do it because they want to,,,,,,, and they can.


And some do it very well.

"James Lauer, 49, and Tari Lee Lauer, 42, ... [are] accused of wrongfully receiving cash, food support, medical assistance and child-care assistance totaling almost $20,000 during various periods from October 2006 to July 2008 while failing to report about $400,000 in income and assets."
​

A St. Louis county investigator discovered the couple went on a shopping spree, including a $37,000 Chevrolet Avalanche, a $67,094 Cadillac Escalade, a $38,680.07 Nissan Titan, and a $18,283.43 2007 Ford Mustang convertible, none of which were reported to the county.

This is a rare and extreme case. But I have been witnes to many lessor crimes of fraud and abuse. Such as I have described earlier.

I work with this class of people. Soem do okay and some don't last. Many don't last because we won't participate in their attempts to "game" the system. We won't lie for them, we won't pay them in cash, we won't alter their status or their hours to meet the critical means testing needs of receiving Welfare.

So they leave. Usually after 30 days so they can colleect some unemployment.

This is their choice, not mine. They are people who consciously make such choices every day, and so are where they are because of those choices.

Not because Repulicans, business owners and guys like me don't care. Despite the record of repeated failure, I always give the next applicant a fair chance and I hope one day, one will surprise me.

Some have, and they do well under my roof.

So please swallow you bile and hate. I have no idea why you are so bitter, but lay your personal perjoratives somewhere else.

If it has feet like a duck and quacks like a duck it is a good bet it is a duck. Now you quote me a case or two of fraud of the system however these are few and far between but come in handy to boost your claims similar to dead people voting. Now those that pull this see it as an easy scam like many that work Medicare. Now I have actually dealt with medicare fraud from both my grandmother from some trying to get money for services and doctors who had never treated her especially since she had been dead for 3 years before they submitted bills. Now do I want to do away with medicare, not a chance. It happens as I said I just don't think it is near as wide spread as most here think. Actually today I heard a report on several of the largest employers in this country pay less than the poverty level for full time workers who qualify for food stamps. Oh and they have had record profits too, just to add insult to injury. If the paid a mear $25000 per year they would get food stamps as that is just over the poverty level.

 

[FrancSevin]

If it has feet like a duck and quacks like a duck it is a good bet it is a duck. Now you quote me a case or two of fraud of the system however these are few and far between but come in handy to boost your claims similar to dead people voting. Now those that pull this see it as an easy scam like many that work Medicare. Now I have actually dealt with medicare fraud from both my grandmother from some trying to get money for services and doctors who had never treated her especially since she had been dead for 3 years before they submitted bills. Now do I want to do away with medicare, not a chance. It happens as I said I just don't think it is near as wide spread as most here think. Actually today I heard a report on several of the largest employers in this country pay less than the poverty level for full time workers who qualify for food stamps. Oh and they have had record profits too, just to add insult to injury. If the paid a mear $25000 per year they would get food stamps as that is just over the poverty level.

A naive view sir. You are obviously not immersed in the system. My wife does paperwork every week for one or two of our employees or former employees trying to game the system. We are a small company.

A case or two; Gimmie a break, Over $750 million dollars a year in food stamp fraud.


And as a recent study in Pennsyvania's own welfare dept found, in the USA it is better for a woman with two kids to go on the dole than to work and earn $57,000 a year. She will have more take home and less stress.

Sadly, we cannot let everyone do that. Somebody has to earn the cash in the first place, and pay taxes.

Food stamps are an out growth of the Grigculture Depts need to dispense all the surplus agri products from it's price support system back in the 50's.

Eggs, butter, cheese, cereal grains, all to help those in need. Now it is just a cash transaction. Most liquor/tobacco shops will take food stamps and they carry Twinkies (or used too) Bananas and cheese curls so they qualifiy.

It's cash.

It is a redistribution of wealth collected from taxpayers who work.
It's cash and it has to come from somewhere.

Madison once wrote (Federalist 10) that it is the responsibility of our government to insure an unequal access to property amoungst the population in order to preserve the health of the Republic. He concluded that such inequality was a crucial element in his genius plan we call " the Great Experiment."

If the Republic is not healthy, it's people are not safe and their future, there very freedom, is not preseved. If I'm quakin' about anything it is that.
No nation that does not expect of it's people that they produce but instead promises "free bread at the circus" will do any better than Rome, or Yugoslavia, or Greece or the USSR.

Even the Chineese have found it better to put their population to work rather than kill them by the millions to bring the books into balance. I'm not totaly familiar with their welfare system but I doubt one in six of their citizens get subsistance anything like here inthe USA.

But none of this is the point JOEC. I use the number 47 in it's proper context. Perhaps you are confused.

Some 47,000,000 Americans now depend on government assistance, food stamps, Medicaid, Housing,,,,one in six citizens. Saying nothing about fraud and abuse, saying that all is above board and neccesary for the condition of our people in this economy, saying that we seem to have to provide for so many of these poor souls in a land of plenty,,,,,that is a serious indictment of our economic situation.

If you scanback, you will see that is what I had said earlier.
Quack Quack

 

[joec]

But none of this is the point JOEC. I use the number 47 in it's proper context. Perhaps you are confused.

Some 47,000,000 Americans now depend on government assistance, food stamps, Medicaid, Housing,,,,one in six citizens. Saying nothing about fraud and abuse, saying that all is above board and neccesary for the condition of our people in this economy, saying that we seem to have to provide for so many of these poor souls in a land of plenty,,,,,that is a serious indictment of our economic situation.

If you scanback, you will see that is what I had said earlier.
Quack Quack

Yes a nation of takers 47 Million people on food stamps many of which are suddenly unemployed, under employed, working menial jobs make much below the poverty level which by the way is the 47 million at or below the poverty level in this county. It wouldn't surprise me that probably most of them are working poor, but don't know for sure.

 

[Kane]

Kane said: It seems that the 'decision point' is right around $30,000 a year.

Scrounging on the fringe, not working, subsidized by Uncle Sam and making $30K on the dole ... OR ... actually going to work, losing the benefits, possibly even paying taxes and making the same $30K.

Seems about half of folks faced with this decision stay on the dole, often leading to generational welfare specialists.

Woe is us, until the trend is reversed. Getting back to "Work for Welfare" is only a start.

Cato Policy Report, November/December 1995
Welfare Pays Better Than Work, Study Finds

$36,000 a Year in Hawaii

Welfare benefits are far more generous than commonly thought and substantially exceed the amount a recipient could earn in an entry-level job. As a result, recipients are likely to choose welfare over work, increasing long-term dependence. Those are the principal findings in "The Work vs. Welfare Trade-Off" (Policy Analysis no. 240) by Michael Tanner, director of health and welfare studies; Stephen Moore, director of fiscal policy studies; and David Hartman, CEO of Hartland Bank in Austin, Texas. The paper was released at the height of the welfare debate in Congress.

The study examines the combined value of benefits--including Aid to Families with Dependent Children, food stamps, Medicaid, and others--for a typical welfare recipient in each of the 50 states. The value of those tax-free benefits is then compared with the amount of take-home income a worker would have left after paying taxes on an equivalent pretax income. The following are among the study's findings.

* To match the value of welfare benefits, a mother with two children would have to earn as much as $36,400 in Hawaii or as little as $11,500 in Mississippi.

* In New York, Massachusetts, Connecticut, the District of Columbia, Hawaii, Alaska, and Rhode Island, welfare pays more than a $12.00-an-hour job--or more than two and a half times the minimum wage.

* In 40 states welfare pays more than an $8.00-an-hour job. In 17 states the welfare package is more generous than a $10.00-an-hour job.

* Welfare benefits are especially generous in large cities. Welfare provides the equivalent of an hourly pretax wage of $14.75 in New York City, $12.45 in Philadelphia, $11.35 in Baltimore, and $10.90 in Detroit.

* In 9 states welfare pays more than the average first-year salary for a teacher. In 29 states it pays more than the average starting salary for a secretary. In 47 states welfare pays more than a janitor earns. Indeed, in the 6 most generous states, benefits exceed the entry-level salary for a computer programmer.

The authors conclude that if Congress or state governments are serious about reducing welfare dependence and rewarding work, the most promising reform is to cut benefit levels substantially.

The study has been the subject of major news coverage. In a September 28 Wall Street Journal guest column, Tanner and Moore wrote, "The welfare reform proposals just passed by the Senate, and the earlier House version, are designed to reduce 'hard-core' welfare dependency and reward work. But we believe the most critical public policy implication of our findings is that ultimately these goals can be accomplished only by cutting benefit levels substantially. Unless and until this is done, Congress will have failed to end welfare as we know it."

Hourly Wage Equivalent of Welfare Hawaii $17.50 Alaska 15.48 Massachusetts 14.66 Connecticut 14.23 Washington, D.C. 13.99 New York 13.13 New Jersey 12.74 Rhode Island 12.55 California 11.59 Virginia 11.11 Maryland 10.96 New Hampshire 10.96 Maine 10.38 Delaware 10.34 Colorado 10.05 Vermont 10.05 Minnesota 10.00 Washington 9.95 Nevada 9.71 Utah 9.57 Michigan 9.47 Pennsylvania 9.47 Illinois 9.33 Wisconsin 9.33 Oregon 9.23 Wyoming 9.18 Indiana 9.13 Iowa 9.13 New Mexico 8.94 Florida 8.75 Idaho 8.65 Oklahoma 8.51 Kansas 8.46 North Dakota 8.46 Georgia 8.37 Ohio 8.37 South Dakata 8.32 Louisana 8.17 Kentucky 8.08 North Carolina 8.08 Montana 7.84 South Carolina 7.79 Nebraska 7.64 Texas 7.31 West Virginia 7.31 Missouri 7.16 Arizona 6.78 Tennessee 6.59 Arkansas 6.35 Alabama 6.25 Mississippi 5.53 This article originally appeared in the November/December 1995 edition of Cato Policy Report.




I wonder what the numbers are now, in 2013.

 

[mak2]

What year is this?

 

[mak2]

I know an E3 or below in the military with a family can get food stamps. Damn takers.

Yes a nation of takers 47 Million people on food stamps many of which are suddenly unemployed, under employed, working menial jobs make much below the poverty level which by the way is the 47 million at or below the poverty level in this county. It wouldn't surprise me that probably most of them are working poor, but don't know for sure.

 

[Kane]

I know an E3 or below in the military with a family can get food stamps. Damn takers.

Why do you and joec refuse to acknowledge the statistics?

 

[luvs]

franc. now. be real. i've yet, in my years of purchasing alcohol from a state store/etc., to see food stamps used to buy booze. sheesh. nor have i seen snacks 4 sale.

btw, my Mom got her 1st job @ 15. she then went to a hospital fer employment. they sent her to a university, as she rocked. she got promotion after promotion. got recuited by a headhunter fer a few. was 'nudged' into her previous job via co-workers suggestions.
that's pennsyvainia fer 'ya. tho they took her many states away weekly, w/ my dad, fer that job.

 

[mak2]

This is a right wing meme used by the conservatives to justify their resistance to any sort of social program. Them people all drive cadillacs and vacation in Monaco too.

franc. now. be real. i've yet, in my years of purchasing alcohol from a state store/etc., to see food stamps used to buy booze. sheesh. nor have i seen snacks 4 sale.

 

[FrancSevin]

franc. now. be real. i've yet, in my years of purchasing alcohol from a state store/etc., to see food stamps used to buy booze. sheesh. nor have i seen snacks 4 sale.

btw, my Mom got her 1st job @ 15. she then went to a hospital fer employment. they sent her to a university, as she rocked. she got promotion after promotion. got recuited by a headhunter fer a few. was 'nudged' into her previous job via co-workers suggestions.
that's pennsyvainia fer 'ya. tho they took her many states away weekly, w/ my dad, fer that job.

I am being real.

I do not have a problem with food stamps. It is a good program which helps both the farmer and the citizens in financial crisis.

I am upset with the fact that one in six Americans has now become chronicaly and generationaly dependent on what was supposed to be a stop gap provision. However, the program now basicaly entraps participants in a no win dependency on the government largess.

 

[luvs]

maybe 4 slim-jims & chips. a few distributors way far away sell foods. bar foods-, salt-laden. to keep u thirsty. fer thier beverages.

 

[FrancSevin]

maybe 4 slim-jims & chips. a few distributors way far away sell foods. bar foods-, salt-laden. to keep u thirsty. fer thier beverages.

You are completely missing the point.

The abuse of tthe food stmp program, by users and by merchants is appallingly systematic. It has become an esential part of the underground economy.

It hs grown from one in 15 people to one in six, not counting the dubious shop keepers who trade in the stamps.

Taxpayers foot the bill.

 

[luvs]

um, franc, maybe ur missing myyyy point, eh.....

um. half the post u typed is missing, btw. would u be slightly angry, there, franc~

btw, u sure know 'bout welfare 4 one that is obviously above the mere notion of welfare.......

so, is healthcare an issue, too..... when ur pension/savings run dry, u gonna gulp that pride .......

 

[muleman]

"The authors conclude that if Congress or state governments are serious about reducing welfare dependence and rewarding work, the most promising reform is to cut benefit levels substantially."

This appears to be the main problem and leads to the generational dependance that has occurred.

 

[Kane]

You can google story after story just like this.


Pol gets tough on welfare abuse


By Hillary Chabot
Tuesday, February 15, 2011 - Updated 2 years ago

A frustrated House Speaker Robert A. DeLeo is cracking down on welfare card abuse after a Herald review found that Bay State recipients blew nearly $200,000 in taxpayer dough last year on a broad array of luxuries — including booze, lingerie, tanning parlors, jewelry, movie theaters and even pets.

“It angers me, it just really does because that money could be put to other uses,” DeLeo (D-Winthrop) told the Herald yesterday. “It’s just got to stop. We can’t allow this to happen.”

DeLeo said he’s targeting the spending and investigating several different ways to halt the abuse, including a Republican-backed bill that would outlaw store owners from knowingly accepting welfare funds for liquor or smokes.

Welfare families used their Electronic Benefit Transfer (EBT) debit cards to squander $191,000 on a host of non-essentials, according to records obtained by the Herald, including:

• $175,000 on liquor stores, including a $102 tab at a Dracut bar;
• $827 at Victoria’s Secret stores across the state, including $208 at a Hyannis outlet;
• $644 at beauty supply stores, salons, and even a tanning booth in Fall River.
• $664 at PETCOs and other pet supply stores; $127 on jewelry stores; $3,427 at AT&T mobile phone stores; and about $100 at Chuck E. Cheese.

“This is a system that’s leaking like a sieve. I expect to see grocery stores. I expect to see pharmacies. When you see spending on something like Chuck E. Cheese it gets ridiculous,” said House Minority Leader Bradley H. Jones (R-North Reading).

The state Department of Transitional Assistance program has handed out EBT cards to the 70,000 households it services.

This latest review comes after a Herald report in October detailing the state’s lax oversight of EBT spending — an issue that boiled over into Gov. Deval Patrick’s re-election campaign last year.

State officials argued that most of the $46.4 million that welfare recipients spent using the debit cards in fiscal year 2010 went to supermarkets and pharmacies, such as $736,000 spent at a Wal-Mart Super Center in Chicopee.

“By and large, the families who rely on these important benefits use them during difficult financial times on a path to self-sufficiency,” said Jennifer Kritz, spokeswoman for the state welfare department.
Kritz also pointed out that the department has a unit charged with busting welfare abuse that recouped $4 million last year.

However, she said Patrick supports GOP legislation making it illegal for business owners to knowingly take welfare money for alcohol or tobacco.
GOP lawmakers said they welcome DeLeo’s and Patrick’s support but hope their efforts aren’t watered down.


Page: 1 2 Continue »

 

[luvs]

wanna see how i eat-- costs, wow! i thank God on days i'm alloted actual food & not hafta drink my dinners thru a tube in my stomach.~ feeding tube formula isn't cheap. co-pays, specialists. insurance co.'s- they cover u. fer a minute. then-

 

[loboloco]

Food stamps alone are not the problem. It is the entire ball of wax.

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs...s-168-day-every-household-poverty_665160.html



'Welfare Spending Equates to $168 Per Day for Every Household in Poverty'

11:13 AM, Dec 7, 2012 • By DANIEL HALPER



Single Page Print Larger Text Smaller Text Alerts


The amount of money spent on welfare programs equals, when converted to cash payments, about "$168 per day for every household in poverty," the minority side of the Senate Budget Committee finds. Here's a chart detailing the committee's findings:

According to the Republican side of the Senate Budget Committee, welfare spending per day per household in poverty is $168, which is higher than the $137 median income per day. When broken down per hour, welfare spending per hour per household in poverty is $30.60, which is higher than the $25.03 median income per hour.
"Based on data from the Congressional Research Service, cumulative spending on means-tested federal welfare programs, if converted into cash, would equal $167.65 per day per household living below the poverty level," writes the minority side of the Senate Budget Committee. "By comparison, the median household income in 2011 of $50,054 equals $137.13 per day. Additionally, spending on federal welfare benefits, if converted into cash payments, equals enough to provide $30.60 per hour, 40 hours per week, to each household living below poverty. The median household hourly wage is $25.03. After accounting for federal taxes, the median hourly wage drops to between $21.50 and $23.45, depending on a household’s deductions and filing status. State and local taxes further reduce the median household’s hourly earnings. By contrast, welfare benefits are not taxed."

The universe of means-tested welfare spending refers to programs that provide low-income assistance in the form of direct or indirect financial support—such as food stamps, free housing, child care, etc.—and which the recipient does not pay into (in contrast to Medicare or Social Security). For fiscal year 2011, CRS identified roughly 80 overlapping federal means-tested welfare programs that together represented the single largest budget item in 2011—more than the nation spends on Social Security, Medicare, or national defense. The total amount spent on these federal programs, when taken together with approximately $280 billion in state contributions, amounted to roughly $1 trillion. Nearly 95 percent of these costs come from four categories of spending: medical assistance, cash assistance, food assistance, and social / housing assistance. Under the President’s FY13 budget proposal, means-tested spending would increase an additional 30 percent over the next four years.

The diffuse and overlapping nature of federal welfare spending has led to some confusion regarding the scope and nature of benefits. For instance, Newark Mayor Cory Booker has recently received a great deal of attention for adopting the “food stamp diet” in which he spends only $4 a day on food (the median individual benefit) to apparently illustrate the insufficiency of food stamp spending ($80 billion a year) or the impossibility of reductions. The situation Booker presents, however, is not accurate: a low-income individual on food stamps may qualify for $25,000 in various forms of welfare support from the federal government on top of his or her existing income and resources—including access to 15 different food assistance programs. Further, even if one unrealistically assumes that no other welfare benefits are available, the size of the food stamp benefit increases as one’s income decreases, as the benefit is designed as a supplement to existing resources; it is explicitly not intended to be the sole source of funds for purchasing food.
​

 

[luvs]

stats can be manipulated.
reality cannot.
try living on $95/month.
try.

 

[FrancSevin]

um, franc, maybe ur missing myyyy point, eh.....

um. half the post u typed is missing, btw. would u be slightly angry, there, franc~

btw, u sure know 'bout welfare 4 one that is obviously above the mere notion of welfare.......

so, is healthcare an issue, too..... when ur pension/savings run dry, u gonna gulp that pride .......

I know a lot about welfare because I am involved in it with many friends and relatives. My sister-in-law is a social worker. We have several "special" employees who's social workers must help step them and us through the process. Many will not work more hours because it upsets their benes. Some will not accept a promotion or raise becaause it upsets their status for "etitlements."

But more personaly;
My company is an affirmative action employer. We hire from the poor and unskilled. With training programs, loan programs, social support programs, and have received state awards for our employment practices.

Nope. My personal savings are already gone, I never had a pension. The company my wife andI built has gone under, we are far in the red. Worth over a million four years ago, we have kept it alive for the sake of our employees.
Now we got nothin but our work skills; I'm 66 years old ready to be a greeter at Wally world.

That said;
I do not expect anyone else to pay for my medical care. As for pride, what is wrong with having some?

BTW Fer sum one whu text typs as u do, thts an odd accusatun. And plez stp insinuatin sum evil purpose on my part.

 

[luvs]

i would have said that i'm humbled & apologize. especially since u cannot properly type, much as myself. i type in that manner due to a disability.

then, u insulted my Picksburghese. take 'at to a Stiller. methinx u may not win that one.

as fer 'typing-pride'- oh, my. if u base the scale of on typing, wow. i have friends, pets, books, laughs, hobbies, a career-to-be,.....

 

[FrancSevin]

i would have said that i'm humbled & apologize. especially since u cannot properly type, much as myself.

then, u insulted my Picksburghese. take 'at to a Stiller. methinx u may not win that one.

I am going blind, Sometimes I cannot see what I type verywell.

I meant no insult when I parroted your style

My apologies.

 

[loboloco]

stats can be manipulated.
reality cannot.
try living on $95/month.
try.

Rent?
Utilities?
Food?

Sorry, but no one in the US has to survive on 95.00 a month. If they are doing so without any form of support it is a choice, not something they have been forced into. One of the reasons these programs were created. However, the point you seem to miss is that it has now become more lucrative to stay on these programs than find a job. Most people can survive quite easily on 168.00 per week. In fact, many survive on less. However, those who do, choose to do so.

 

[luvs]

has sarcasm passed ur mind~
u really think i live on that--i'd luv to!