I don’t doubt it. If you’re walking through one in the near future why don’t you report here what a bottle of Coke is going for?
Well, OK, if I happen to find myself in one I’ll check out the prices for you but really I try to avoid such places as much as possible.
Probably maximum that she is qualified for, based on working two jobs?
My mother collected a lot more than that per week back in the 1980’s.
I once bought a half-price chocolate strawberry shortcake for my birthday with my EBT card. The person behind me commented “I wish I could get Food Stamps to buy junk food.” REALLY!
I now work as a cashier at a discount store, and have to check out people buying over $200 worth of paper and plastic goods to put on the table (plates, glasses, cups, tablecloths, and silverware). It really bothers me that all that stuff is going to end up in the garbage, while some people are struggling to put food on their table.
As someone who has been on food stamps in the past, and is also a back-up cashier in a store that sells grocery, I think people should STFU and stop worry about what folks have in their cart. Provided all purchases are legal it’s nobody’s business who’s buying what.
There are many examples of using the word ‘job,’ to refer to illegal activity. But as a general rule, that’s not the case when referring to ‘job creation.’ When that phrase is used, the word ‘job’ almost invariably means legal activity.
Yes.
No. It’s their decision to flout the spirit and the text of the rules of the food stamp program that does that. As I pointed out above, a wealthy stadium owner that used city subsidies to buy seat covers for his stadium and then sold them at a profit instead of using them would also be denigrated, showing that the effect exists when the actor is not poor.
I have never heard of this. MAYBE because I have never lived in a state that offered money for bottles, certainly not plastic water bottles.
And considering I can find bottled water in 24-30 pack cases for as low as $2.49, and people re-sell the same exact water for $1/bottle or more, it would be nuts to pour out water (at least drink it and/or pour it into empty jugs or something) and sell empty bottles instead of using it.
It seems like something that would be so rare if it happens, and no real incentive for people to do it on mass scale, that it would be a waste of time worrying about it.
And the quotes from various enforcement authorities, cited above? What about the YouTube videos showing people pouring out water for profit?
Your response makes me think of Pauline Kael, the New York Times film critic who supposedly expressed surprise after President Nixon was re-elected, saying, “None of my friends voted for him!”
Perhaps, Horatio, your dreamt philosophies are incomplete,
I get what you’re saying, but I just can’t bring myself to be critical of people who are struggling to survive for manipulating, in a very small way, the system to provide a bit of extra benefit for themselves. That’s what happens when people are struggling to survive – they do what’s necessary. Maybe they could get by without doing so, but this way their families can eat healthier, or occasionally get medicine, or (god forbid!) even occasionally eat something delicious or have some enjoyment and joy in their lives.
I’d rather fashion a better support system then go after such minor violations.
Oh no, poor people might be making a couple of extra bucks on the side! They might even be using it for DRUGS! As if their lives aren’t shit enough, let’s take all their joys away from them.
God, we are such fucking hypocrites in this country.
I guess I just can’t find it in my heart to give a shit. I would be way more critical of a rich guy doing it, he doesn’t need it to eat.
Is anyone (who doesn’t already hate poor people) criticizing them for manipulating the system to get extra benefit? It seems the criticism is more against using a stupid, inefficient way to get a couple of extra dollars instead of actually doing a little work to make a lot more additional funds (selling on the street, to other markets, or whatever). If they have time to sit around dumping water out, they have time to actually sell the stuff to other people.
To be honest, some of the people on food stamps aren’t the most functional. A lot of them are normal folks down on their luck, of course, but some have, shall we say, “issues” that make it difficult or impossible for them to hold down a job.
My guess is that the ones doing the water-dumping are not as functional as the ones attempting re-selling for profit.
I generally agree.
I’m arguing against the, “Nonsense! That never happens!” view and not advancing any desire to see some harsh punishment applied. Ideally, the solution is to remove the incentive to create this kind of waste.
It seems to me that the easiest solution would be to close the Shaws in Bangor. Problem solved.
And then close Eugene, Oregon?
Will you then travel back to the east cost to close the Save-a-Lot store in Newark?
Well, actually I would do neither since I don’t consider this a real issue to be concerned with so why not? Close them all. One perfectly good overreaction deserves another. Keep closing down everything until the poor are extinct. Then there will never ever be any scamming and we can all slap each other on the backs and say mission accomplished.
Now, if water becomes so scarce that normal evaporation like pouring out water that you legally bought and owned or I don’t know rain becomes a huge issue then I might be more inclined to take this seriously. Barring that, it’s just a way for the bored to create windmills then have a jolly good tilt with them.
Reading your posts I don’t think we disagree though because I agree with what you posted earlier but this thread doesn’t really cover treating the issue instead of treating the symptoms.
I did notice every reference to this issue in the thread up until that point mentioned one store and I pointed that out.