Cranky, I think you’re missing the point here.
The real issue is not about “poor people having babies.” The issue is who’s responsible. According to your philosophy, I am partially responsible. And because I am partially responsible, I should be forced at gunpoint (literally) to hand over some of my property (i.e. money) to these people.
Cranky, I understand your point.
Do I have a problem with a single mom using food stamps as a way of making sure her kids have three meals and a snack a day? NO WAY
Do I have a problem with some one or even a couple who have medical problems using food stamps? NOPE
Do I have a problem with a family who has the means to get by with out them, using them? YOU BET I DO
It is a choice to work or not to work. I don’t care what area you live in. There is always work out there. If you had a well paying job and you lost it, I am sorry. You may have to work a full time lesser paying job and a part time job as well. MILLIONS of people do it. I am sorry if that sounds harsh, but no one ever said life was easy.
I don’t think I’m missing the point; I’m just separating the two issues, perhaps making the whole thing more confusing. I’m sorry; I really have given you the wrong impression. I have never believed that you or I are responsible for someone else’s babies. I’d never allege something so biologically or ethically perverse.
My arguments about the fallibility of birth control are not necessarily connected to Food Stamps or WIC. I did not mean “poor people will ger pregnant, ergo we will feed them.” I meant “Poor people would get pregnant, and I think it is unfair to frame that as an act of sheer irresponsiblity, and here is why.”
Now, to take up your other concern, that these babies are partially “your responsibility,” I truly do not believe that is what these social programs are saying or intending. I believe they decided that it is in the national interest to attempt to alleviate hunger. Just as they have decided that it is in the national interest to preserve forests, subsidize farm crops, mount a national defense, erect public art, encourage charitable giving, support public schools, give medical care to veterans, etc. You may think that any of these programs are unnecessary or serve the undeserving. However, isn’t it a bit dramatic to say a gun is being held to your head, making you responsible for those wheat crops? That veteran’s prostrate? Those goddamn bald eagles? Those patriot missiles? Yeah, we’re forking over some of our hard-earned filthy lucre to pay for that stuff, but I think it’s a stretch to say that puts us in the position of being “responsible” for these things.
But that’s more an attitude position than anything factual. I accept that we see differently about this.
Also, this year I cimply mailed my tax return and my check; the IRS didn’t beat down the door and take it at gunpoint, but hot damn that sure would make April 15th a lot more interesting. Write your senator; it’s not a bad idea. 
Please do not think that my statement of facts about conception are, in any way, putting you in the position of surrogate fatherhood. That’s not my intention. And I sincerely believe that is not the intention of WIC or the Food Stamp program, either.
misstee, there is likely no way to measure this, but I’d be curious to know how many of the people on the WIC and Foodstamp program have the loathsome attitude you describe–“do nothing, Uncle Sam will bail us out”. I hope it is a small number. Incidentally, many families take your route and eschew aid; only 60% of eligible households receive food stamps.
Not at all.
Let’s say I voluntarily withhold 7% (or whatever) of my taxes because I do not want my property (i.e. money) to be unconstitutionally given to someone else who (supposedly) deserves it more than I do.
What will happen?
So I am not exaggerating when I say that I am forced to handover my property at gunpoint so that it may be given to other individuals who “deserve it more than I do.” This is wholly unethical and unconstitutional IMO. (I don’t have a problem with my tax dollars going to roads, fire services, and national defense, all of which are constitutional and beneficial to everyone, including me. But my property should not be given directly to other individuals. That’s tyrannical.)
Okay, I gotcha. Thanks for the clarification.
I still like the “IRS-agents-collecting-taxes-door-to-door armed to the teeth” scenario you put in my mind. 
I don’t see that it matters or that it’s anyone’s business what other people eat. If you get 200 dollars a month in food stamp allocation, it’s 200 bucks worth of cookies or two hundred bucks worth of meats and veggies. I’ll admit that veggies and meats are more healthy, but is it any more or less healthy that what the non-recipient receives? And if cookies are sending people to the hospital in droves, I suppose they should be made illegal for EVERYONE.
I myself got pregnant at eighteen; my husband disappeared three days after Laura was born. I used welfare for about eighteen months. I took advantage of every program I could. WIC, job training (secretarial/computer skills), medicaid, AFDC and stamps. I saw a LOT of abuse, and I was shown by caseworkers ways of getting around certain things, like putting my car in my mother’s name, having her say I paid more in rent than I did. I was in a skills class with some ladies that were third generation recipients. Some people had really nice cars, clothes, etc. Others, like me, just had really bad insecurity issues, old canvas tennies, and a car that was one step away from a Flintstonesmobile. If we even had cars.
What we are eating shouldn’t be the focus here. Why so many people are falling behind and/or giving up should be addressed. Right now I still qualify for assistance, but I just can’t bring myself to sign up. I don’t know if it’s pride or stupidity, but I just won’t do it. I make eight bucks an hour though, and I’ve given up every money-wasting luxury(computer is my daughter’s and I WILL NOT sell that, the internet is my friend’s account. I’m set up as one of her locations, and I get on when she is at work). But I’m barely getting by. I have no insurance and I really need to get to the doctor. It took a week’s pay to get my daughter’s last dental cleaning/screening. It would be so easy to go sign up and get everything I need plus. I remember food stamps…getting the GOOD ice cream, trying new foods. :sigh: It’s been a long time.
Yeesh, I’m rambling. I’m not the clearest writer, and right now I feel the heat of judgement here. All I mean to say is that what recipients are eating doesn’t matter. The reason they are getting on stamps in the first place is the issue. Nitro needed them because of a new baby. Understandable… I just can’t see a baby as a mistake. Nevermind that there are many effective contraceptives. That’s beside the point now. He seems to be doing what needs to be done and isn’t letting his need get him down. That’s a much better attitude to have than the incredible shame I felt at the time. I just don’t see how cookie restrictions are going to change that.
This is an anti-fraud measure. If followed, it prevents people from selling their food stamps for cash. Have you ever had anyone try to sell you loose food stamps for cash, at a discount off face value? I have; drug addicts do it all the time.
The EBT cards minimize this issue, as well as the issue of people going through the line with a $.29 item repeatedly until they have enough loose change for a pack of cigarettes or whatever other non-food stamp item.
by Rushgeekgirl
Can I echo this sentiment?
I don’t understand why people care that much. It doesn’t make a difference monetarily whether someone fills their cart with brocolli or whether they fill it with cheetos and twinkies; a pound of feathers weighs no less than a pound of lead, right? People who get wedgies over what a perfect stranger chooses to buy really needs to be honest with themselves like jlzania (that was real classy, btw). Yes, it would be cool if grown people would eat more nutritious things and lay off the high fructose corn syrup. Yes, it would be cool if common sense was actually common. But let’s be honest: This anger is really not about people making unwise choices. If it was, everyone who loads their cart with junk would be the target of the scorn in this thread. But it is not.
To the people who actually waste emotional energy getting mad about this shit: Does your anger really stem from people being stupid, lazy or frivilous? Or are you simply appalled that not every poor person chooses to eat rice and beans every night just to make you feel better about yourself and your lifestyle choices?
Honestly.
Let’s not focus on the junk food because that’s way too obvious a target. Let’s say a food-stamper chose to buy brand names instead of the cheaper generics. Not a lot of junk food, though. Just pricier brands of the “real” foods. And here’s you, a working class schmoe who would rather shrivel up and die rather than take a penny from Uncle Sammy, unable to afford Barilla pasta or Aunt Jemima pancake mix. Being the poor humble thing that you are, you can only afford the “ShurFine” brands.
Does it suck that you can only afford to buy ShurFine bread? Yeah, okay. Some people would probably orgasm just to have a slice of any bread, let alone a whole loaf of ShurFine bread, but okay, you have a plight to be pitied. However, being mad because the food-stamper chooses not to deprive themself makes you look like a whining brat who is perfectly content with the size of his dessert until he sees someone who appears to have a bigger one. You only start caring about how little you have (or choose to have) until you see “an inferior” living a lifestyle you think is more advanced than yours.
Newsflash: you lose nothing when another person abuses the system by buying junk food. You also gain nothing when they choose to buy wholesome stuff. So why sweat something that doesn’t affect you either way?
Wanna know what I do when I wait in line at the grocery store? I daydream. I relive the most amusing moments out my day. I look at the picture of Brittany Murphy on the cover of one those mags and wonder if the child is not just a tad anorexic. I try to think of anything I forgot to get. Did I get that box of tampons? Yup I did, there it is. You’re da bomb, I think to myself, grateful that I got cash in my pocket and a working car. Then I start wondering what I’m going to make for dinner. By the time I get that decision worked out satisfactorily, the cashier has rung me up and it’s time to go home. Out the door, in the car, on the road.
I pay no attention to what other people have in their carts and I don’t pay any attention to what they use for payment. 'Cause it ain’t worth the trouble of even worrying about.
**ywtf, ** actually, it does affect taxpayers when food stamp recipents buy junk instead of healthy food. I’m not saying it’s immoral for them to do so, and I’m certainly not saying that poor people don’t deserve a nice steak here and there or a cookie just like anyone else, if they have budgeted for it. It’s a pragmatic issue, not a moral one.
It affects taxpayers in that people who eat junk instead of healthy food are more likely to have health problems. And when those people need health care, their health care is more likely to be paid for with public funds. So yes, it’s indirect, but the correlation is there.
And yes, I do mentally turn up my nose at people in the supermarket who have an entire cart full of soda and chips and prefab frozen crap, no matter how they are paying for it. I’m very consistent in that.
(BTW, WIC is a great program. I remember reading about a study that found that every dollar spent on WIC saved $3 in health care required for pregnant moms and kids covered by WIC.)
Who has the TIME to go around looking at what other people are putting in their shopping carts?
The same people who have the time to post on a message board about it.
Look, I don’t spend my life snooping into people’s eating habits, but there’s not much else to do if you’re stuck in a long grocery line. I observe people’s behavior all the time, especially when I’m stuck somewhere with nothing better to do.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by nitroglycerine *
I have no moral or ideological opposition to welfare, but I totaly agree that there are lots of lazy assed bums out there who abuse the system, especially with social security disibility programs (I know a girl who gets SSI because she has panic attacks for fucks sake)
I try to trust that if you knew how disabling Panic Disorder can be, you would not have included this comment in your post. Almost everyone has had at least one Panic Attack; suffering from this continually is impossible to describe in its horror. Perhaps you don’t know enough about it, and think it’s a joke or a small condition. I wanted to share with you that it is an extreemly harsh disability. That’s all.
The discussion on food stamps is interesting, because everyone is having a tough time making ends meet, and it’s exasperating to notice abusers of the system - who stand out more than the quiet grateful persons who do their best. Also, keep in mind that many people who are on disability have worked for years and are accessing the taxes they themselves have paid into this system.
Thankyou for reading this.
I’d like to say that I noticed what people were buying and how they were paying because I was the girl behind the counter scanning each item and taking their tender. I met all kinds of people and the ones I am unhappy with are the people who abuse government programs. I’m not trying to spite the elederly, disabled or poor…
I’m talking about the wic mothers who sell the formula for cash instead of feeding their children or the guy who goes through line 6 times with his foodstamps buying a quarter stick of gum so he can get smokes with the change or the people who outright brag to the cashier about what a great deal they have going scamming the government!
That’s lovely, caseworkers, presumably state employees, showing welfare recepients how to commit fraud. :rolleyes:
by Eva Luna
This is true. But most people who get in a snit over other people’s buying habits really aren’t basing their emotional response over this indirect correlation. The majority of people don’t think about Medicare when standing in the grocery store line. I dare say the anti-freedom of choice attitude towards food-stampers is more of a “dog with bone getting jealous at his own reflection” response, which is rooted in insecurity and the desire to feel superior to other folks. Classic human hierarchial thinking.
I fall into the trap, too. Sometimes I catch myself judging other people, thinking I know what’s best for them better than they do, wondering why they don’t conform to my expectations of Prudent Behavior. But I wouldn’t want anyone to look at me and judge me for not being more like them. (How many threads have we had dedicated to Christian zealots?) So I try not to condemn other people based on snap shot perspectives of their lives. Because the reality is, I don’t know what’s going on with them. If they abuse the system, the karma police will get them. There’s no need for me to worry my pretty little head about it.
If we want to do something for the good of public health, education starting from the home and grade-school level is far more effective than limiting food-stampers to a rigid list of Nutritiously Sound Foods. People who use food stamps are not the only people who burden the health care system, and certainly we could all do with a little bit of coaching in the right direction when it comes to eating right.
DocCathode-I hear you. I’m lucky that I’m still able to live at home, but due to OCD, I’ve found that working some retail jobs were pure hell-I was only working 20 hours a week or so at Kmart-and even then my mental health was suffering severely. I toughed it out as long as I could-to the point where my work ethic was nil-and then I said fuck it, and quit.
To those who think panic disorders are an excuse-well, then you’ve obviously never had one-and I envy you.
I still get upset when people gripe about food stamps and assistance programs-I highly doubt we spend more on this than other things. Besides, it IS in our best interest to take care of others-the whole society benefits when all are well. If people are dying, and people aren’t eating, or being educated-well, then society is going to go to hell in a handbasket.
I’m moving this to Great Debates with a warning that, even there, you are to watch the swearing and name-calling.
Frankly, when it comes to “subsidizing other people,” I think there is much more serious government waste to grumble against than welfare…
Well, when my son was first born, we were on wic and foodstamps. I lost my job the day we took him home from the hospital, and that same year, General Dynamics laid off 30,000 people or so. After trying to find a job for some time, I moved to Utah because a friend there assured me I could find work. He was wrong, I was there a week when Novell started laying off people. I remember at one point, being overjoyed upon finding out that pedialite was allowed on food stamps…my son had the runs and was dehydrated. The doctor at the clinic said we had to get it for him, but could not find any charitable organization that would give us any.
I wound up working for a computer store in provo, making 6 bucks an hour, and working 60-70 hours a week and getting payed for 40(the bosses were crooks and knew that they had me over a barrel). I never saw my family much, and what money we had barely covered rent and utilites(the cost of living in prova was very high at the time. As soon as we could afford it(thanks to the earned income credit) we moved back to texas and I got a decent job. I was on food stamps/wic for maybe a couple of years.
So, people who work hard, and try to make the right decisions sometimes find themselves in a situation where they need help. And charities/family cant/wont give it to them.
So the solution, as I understand it Crafter Man etc…is to let people like me be hung out to dry. Let my kid die, it doesnt matter because the government shouldnt be in the biz of charity?
Well, guess what? it doesnt work that way. Because when people become desperate, they do desperate things. I can assure you that before I let my kid die, or get much sicker, I would have done what I had to. If that meant breaking the law so be it. Its human nature. SO you cut off all government aid to people who cant find jobs(in case you havent noticed, there is a lot of thag going around), and they will resort to criminal activity to survive. Then we have to imprison them. it cost more in the long run than to just give them a few food stamps.
I didnt ask for the situation I was in. I had a job when my kid was born. Mrs. Bdgr couldnt work because she couldnt have gotten any job that would even have paid the daycare costs. I tried everything I could to find work, even moving half way across the country, but I just had some bad luck.
Governments job, as the constitution states, is to “Promote the General Welfare”. So if it is in the best of interest of society, it is in fact the governments job to provide food stamps for people. Since those people would either starve, or turn to crime, it certainly is in the best interest of everyone to do so.
Finally, most people on welfare are only on it for a couple of years. Most people who are on it more than a couple of years are children, elderly, or disabled. Really the percentage that abuse the system are few and far between.
Were you an hourly employee? Then you did get paid for the hours worked, plus overtime, unless your employer was indeed a crook, like you said. However, if you were on salary, quit your bitchin’. If you were salaried, you were employed to do a job for a certain amount of cash, the number of hours does not come in to play.