CurlTalk

House Passes Bill Cutting $40 Billion From Food Stamps

sKorpio1190sKorpio1190 Posts: 1,862Registered Users
Medium texture, normal porosity, normal elasticity :shock:
«1

Comments

  • scrillsscrills Posts: 6,700Registered Users
    oh goodness
    In addition, the legislation would allow states to require food stamp recipients to be tested for drugs and to stop lottery winners from getting benefits. The Senate farm bill also contains a restriction on lottery winners.
  • JosephineJosephine Posts: 14,175Registered Users
    I know there was a big debate here on this, but why do they think drug testing will help?
  • sKorpio1190sKorpio1190 Posts: 1,862Registered Users
    Yea seriously. We are learning in my criminal law class about how laws are not to be based on status crimes, meaning they should not punish based on our character but rather our act. Anyway, can't recall the name, but we read about a case in California where a law was overturned because it wanted to make just being a drug addict illegal. This sounds a lot like that to me. No I don't condone being a drug addict, but that does not mean that I believe they should go hungry. They are people too you know. This whole bill has really got me infuriated
    Medium texture, normal porosity, normal elasticity :shock:
  • scrillsscrills Posts: 6,700Registered Users
    Yes, and how much will the drug testing cost? will they test every member of your household?
  • sKorpio1190sKorpio1190 Posts: 1,862Registered Users
    scrills wrote: »
    Yes, and how much will the drug testing cost? will they test every member of your household?

    Exactly. The amount they are trying to save will be used up by the tests
    Medium texture, normal porosity, normal elasticity :shock:
  • multicultcurlymulticultcurly Posts: 5,132Registered Users
    Cutting food stamps won't create more jobs. Most people want to work. Age discrimination, lack of how to market oneself, lack of marketable skills, AMD lack of jobs are the problems. The number of people cheating the system is small.

    Sent from my HTCEVOV4G using CurlTalk App
    3b/c, medium-coarse, low porosity, high density
    HG: Jessicurl Too Shea and Kinky Curly Curling Custard
    Shampoo: nonsulfate shampoo and Suave Naturals sulfate shampoo when needed
  • claudine191claudine191 Posts: 8,220Registered Users Curl Neophyte
    I want to be proud of my country, but I'm not feeling the love, you know?

    We have real problems with law enforcement, racism, and making poverty inescapable.
  • spiderlashes5000spiderlashes5000 Posts: 17,495Registered Users Curl Neophyte
    I don't agree w across the board cuts. But the number of ppl cheating is NOT small. There is a huge fraud & abuse problem. In NYC there a hundred + ppl who each investigate multiple cases of welfare fraud everyday. Totally backlogged, never an end in sight. And in my current city, I see plenty of examples, as a section 8 landlord. omg

    (These are the only two cities I'm personally familiar w. But I'm sure they aren't unique in regards to having a glut of welfare abusers.)

    All of this fraud drives down the amount available to legitimate, truthful applicants.

    The need for serious reform continues.

    Not sure how I feel about the drug testing. It's punative & will hurt children. But it is a glaring abuse of the system.

    No good idea about how exactly to address that issue.
    Sent from my SCH-I605 using CurlTalk App

  • webjockeywebjockey Posts: 2,786Registered Users
    Totally not true

    Investigating cases of fraud are not the same as convictions.

    SNAP Is Effective and Efficient — Center on Budget and Policy Priorities

    Despite the recent rapid caseload growth, USDA reports that states achieved a record-low SNAP error rate in fiscal year 2011. Only 3 percent of all SNAP benefits represented overpayments, meaning they either went to ineligible households or went to eligible households but in excessive amounts, and more than 98 percent of SNAP benefits were issued to eligible households.

    In addition, the combined error rate — that is, the sum of overpayments and underpayments (see box, “Combined Error Rate Does Not Represent Excessive Federal Spending or Fraud, p. 9) reached an all-time low in 2011 of just 3.8 percent. Prior to enactment of major reforms in the 2002 Farm Bill, states with combined error rates below 6 percent qualified for a bonus payment or enhanced funding in recognition of their exemplary performance; for eight years running the national error rate has exceeded this standard.

    In comparison, the Internal Revenue Service estimates a tax noncompliance rate of 16.9 percent in 2006 (the most recently studied year). This represents a $450 billion loss to the federal government in one year. Underreporting of business income alone cost the federal government $122 billion in 2006, and small businesses report less than half of their income.[10]

    From National Review Online | Print (and this is a conservative viewpoint)

    I can see why conservatives would find the rise in food-stamp enrollment troubling. People who don’t need government benefits could always be tempted to take advantage of loosely structured government programs. Conservatives are rightly worried about this, and thus are eager to tighten eligibility standards and enforcement to ensure that people aren’t gaming the system. However, crop insurance provides even greater temptations to people with far less justification for government aid.

    America’s crop-insurance program is obscene. Farmers receive government subsidies averaging 70 percent of their premiums to purchase insurance that protects them against declining crop value. There’s no income limit for this subsidy: The vast majority of this taxpayer money goes to farmers who make in excess of $250,000 a year. The insurance policies are sold by private companies, and the government also pays those firms about 20 percent of the premium cost to cover their expenses. The companies get to keep the profits from the policies, so taxpayer money makes crop insurance a largely risk-free investment for insurance companies. Thus, the government uses taxpayer money to pay rich farmers to buy insurance from wealthy insurance companies, whom the government also pays to sell the policies to the farmers. Talk about a “free” market.

    If fraud was soooo rampant and people were seeing it all the time, wouldn't there be more convictions? Wouldn't there be tons of cases of whistleblowing?

    But it's always popular to blame the poor for being poor.

    EVERY program will have some cheating. But to the tune of $40 billion in cuts? I think not.
    hello.world.
  • Fifi.GFifi.G Posts: 15,490Registered Users
    I have some mixed thoughts and feelings on this issue too. Some of this has been done before. People in Work First Programs have been drug tested in the past. There were measure in place to help people get on their feet and start providing for themselves again. I had several friends go through programs like this in the 90's. A great deal of this has not been enforced over the past several years. That is part of the reason why they have case reviewers and fraud workers, and they have been finding large discrepancies.

    In a way I don't have issues with drug testing. It's illegal substances, in most states. Millions of people agree to them every day to work. They're not evil in and of themselves. I also am well aware that many children will suffer due to this law. At the same time I also know that many do already suffer because of no accountability from the parents. Many children get absolutely nothing due to their drug addicted parents. This is a fact, and always has been. There really is no right answer there. My mom, who was a lead food stamp case worker, would tell you the same. She is personally against it, but admits that you are hurting children either way.
    When I hear terms like "hipster" I think, who told cliques they could leave high school??

    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • spiderlashes5000spiderlashes5000 Posts: 17,495Registered Users Curl Neophyte
    webjockey wrote: »
    Totally not true

    Investigating cases of fraud are not the same as convictions.

    SNAP Is Effective and Efficient — Center on Budget and Policy Priorities

    Despite the recent rapid caseload growth, USDA reports that states achieved a record-low SNAP error rate in fiscal year 2011. Only 3 percent of all SNAP benefits represented overpayments, meaning they either went to ineligible households or went to eligible households but in excessive amounts, and more than 98 percent of SNAP benefits were issued to eligible households.

    In addition, the combined error rate — that is, the sum of overpayments and underpayments (see box, “Combined Error Rate Does Not Represent Excessive Federal Spending or Fraud, p. 9) reached an all-time low in 2011 of just 3.8 percent. Prior to enactment of major reforms in the 2002 Farm Bill, states with combined error rates below 6 percent qualified for a bonus payment or enhanced funding in recognition of their exemplary performance; for eight years running the national error rate has exceeded this standard.

    In comparison, the Internal Revenue Service estimates a tax noncompliance rate of 16.9 percent in 2006 (the most recently studied year). This represents a $450 billion loss to the federal government in one year. Underreporting of business income alone cost the federal government $122 billion in 2006, and small businesses report less than half of their income.[10]

    From National Review Online | Print (and this is a conservative viewpoint)

    I can see why conservatives would find the rise in food-stamp enrollment troubling. People who don’t need government benefits could always be tempted to take advantage of loosely structured government programs. Conservatives are rightly worried about this, and thus are eager to tighten eligibility standards and enforcement to ensure that people aren’t gaming the system. However, crop insurance provides even greater temptations to people with far less justification for government aid.

    America’s crop-insurance program is obscene. Farmers receive government subsidies averaging 70 percent of their premiums to purchase insurance that protects them against declining crop value. There’s no income limit for this subsidy: The vast majority of this taxpayer money goes to farmers who make in excess of $250,000 a year. The insurance policies are sold by private companies, and the government also pays those firms about 20 percent of the premium cost to cover their expenses. The companies get to keep the profits from the policies, so taxpayer money makes crop insurance a largely risk-free investment for insurance companies. Thus, the government uses taxpayer money to pay rich farmers to buy insurance from wealthy insurance companies, whom the government also pays to sell the policies to the farmers. Talk about a “free” market.

    If fraud was soooo rampant and people were seeing it all the time, wouldn't there be more convictions? Wouldn't there be tons of cases of whistleblowing?

    But it's always popular to blame the poor for being poor.

    EVERY program will have some cheating. But to the tune of $40 billion in cuts? I think not.


    I wasn't saying there is a glut of SNAP fraud, but general welfare fraud.

    Recipients don't get convicted for it. Their benefits are just terminated. If they are caught. And that is a big if. But I see examples of it w/ my own eyes all the time. Most recently this past Tuesday.

    It's not blaming the poor bc a lot of these ppl really aren't all that poor.

  • webjockeywebjockey Posts: 2,786Registered Users
    webjockey wrote: »
    Totally not true

    Investigating cases of fraud are not the same as convictions.

    SNAP Is Effective and Efficient — Center on Budget and Policy Priorities

    Despite the recent rapid caseload growth, USDA reports that states achieved a record-low SNAP error rate in fiscal year 2011. Only 3 percent of all SNAP benefits represented overpayments, meaning they either went to ineligible households or went to eligible households but in excessive amounts, and more than 98 percent of SNAP benefits were issued to eligible households.

    In addition, the combined error rate — that is, the sum of overpayments and underpayments (see box, “Combined Error Rate Does Not Represent Excessive Federal Spending or Fraud, p. 9) reached an all-time low in 2011 of just 3.8 percent. Prior to enactment of major reforms in the 2002 Farm Bill, states with combined error rates below 6 percent qualified for a bonus payment or enhanced funding in recognition of their exemplary performance; for eight years running the national error rate has exceeded this standard.

    In comparison, the Internal Revenue Service estimates a tax noncompliance rate of 16.9 percent in 2006 (the most recently studied year). This represents a $450 billion loss to the federal government in one year. Underreporting of business income alone cost the federal government $122 billion in 2006, and small businesses report less than half of their income.[10]

    From National Review Online | Print (and this is a conservative viewpoint)

    I can see why conservatives would find the rise in food-stamp enrollment troubling. People who don’t need government benefits could always be tempted to take advantage of loosely structured government programs. Conservatives are rightly worried about this, and thus are eager to tighten eligibility standards and enforcement to ensure that people aren’t gaming the system. However, crop insurance provides even greater temptations to people with far less justification for government aid.

    America’s crop-insurance program is obscene. Farmers receive government subsidies averaging 70 percent of their premiums to purchase insurance that protects them against declining crop value. There’s no income limit for this subsidy: The vast majority of this taxpayer money goes to farmers who make in excess of $250,000 a year. The insurance policies are sold by private companies, and the government also pays those firms about 20 percent of the premium cost to cover their expenses. The companies get to keep the profits from the policies, so taxpayer money makes crop insurance a largely risk-free investment for insurance companies. Thus, the government uses taxpayer money to pay rich farmers to buy insurance from wealthy insurance companies, whom the government also pays to sell the policies to the farmers. Talk about a “free” market.

    If fraud was soooo rampant and people were seeing it all the time, wouldn't there be more convictions? Wouldn't there be tons of cases of whistleblowing?

    But it's always popular to blame the poor for being poor.

    EVERY program will have some cheating. But to the tune of $40 billion in cuts? I think not.


    I wasn't saying there is a glut of SNAP fraud, but general welfare fraud.

    Recipients don't get convicted for it. Their benefits are just terminated. If they are caught. And that is a big if. But I see examples of it w/ my own eyes all the time. Most recently this past Tuesday.

    It's not blaming the poor bc a lot of these ppl really aren't all that poor.

    Saying that there's general welfare fraud is like saying the sky is blue. The problem is that our legislators are claiming that there is enough fraud and problems to JUSTIFY booting 4-6 million people off of the program.

    I would think that if there was that much fraud, there would be convictions or at least investigations to support that. Your anecdotal evidence is just that.

    And you are wrong that benefits are just terminated if they get caught:

    From USDA: What is SNAP Fraud

    The federal government takes action against those who misuse the program.

    In FY 2012, over 100 analysts and investigators reviewed over 15,000 stores and conducted nearly 4,500 undercover investigations. Close to 1,400 stores were permanently disqualified for trafficking and nearly 700 stores were sanctioned for other violations such as the sale of ineligible items.

    FNS also works with State law enforcement authorities to provide them with SNAP benefits that are used in sting operations, supporting anti-trafficking actions at the local level.

    USDA’s Office of the Inspector General also conducts extensive criminal investigations – many resulting from FNS administrative oversight findings and referrals – to prosecute traffickers.

    In FY 2012, OIG SNAP investigations resulted in 342 convictions, including a number of multi-year prison terms for the most serious offenses, and approximately $57.7 million in monetary results.

    In FY 2012, OIG devoted more than 50 percent of its investigative resources to prevent SNAP fraud, waste and abuse.


    As for people not being really poor. I disagree. Folks act like people are getting rich off of food stamps.
    The qualifications are around 130% of poverty. Eligibility

    I highly doubt that the cost of living in most areas of america are around 130% of poverty. It's kinda like the whole minimum wage thing. Minimum wage is supposed to reflect what a minimum salary needs to be for people to survive - it hardly does and it hasn't kept pace with inflation/cost of living.


    The cuts and so-called reforms are out of proportion and intentionally hurt millions of Americans, many of which are children, older adults, veterans and the disabled. It's wrong and it's cruel. There are much much better and effective ways to achieve the same end.
    hello.world.
  • Fifi.GFifi.G Posts: 15,490Registered Users
    The 2010 figures, if correct, are what always confuses me. It is very frustrating to see that $69 million was blown in the state of CA, with the majority being at casinos. Ohmygoodness!! Not good. I have seen more instances of people in CA being charged within the last year. I know they hired more fraud workers after those reports.

    I can't say that I think the amount of cuts is 100% right, because I don't know what goes on in every state. I also don't assume that all people are committing fraud or on drugs. I've known many who were not, and a pretty good amount of those who have.

    I used to buy baby formula for a few people that my ex worked with. They all worked construction, got paid under the table, were on any and every program you could get, had a crank addiction, and sold food stamps or products to buy more drugs. The children were going hungry. Awful, and pretty common thing on construction sites in my town.
    When I hear terms like "hipster" I think, who told cliques they could leave high school??

    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • spiderlashes5000spiderlashes5000 Posts: 17,495Registered Users Curl Neophyte
    webjockey wrote: »

    Saying that there's general welfare fraud is like saying the sky is blue. The problem is that our legislators are claiming that there is enough fraud and problems to JUSTIFY booting 4-6 million people off of the program.

    OK, that's what they're saying. That's not what i'm saying.
    webjockey wrote: »
    I would think that if there was that much fraud, there would be convictions or at least investigations to support that.

    You would think. But that's not what i've personally seen.
    webjockey wrote: »
    Your anecdotal evidence is just that.

    Yes. But bc I personally witness it and am regularly asked to participate in it, I can confidently say it does exist.
    webjockey wrote: »
    And you are wrong that benefits are just terminated if they get caught:

    From USDA: What is SNAP Fraud

    The federal government takes action against those who misuse the program.

    In my personal experience, they are not prosecuted. I have several tenants right now who were caught committing fraud, lost their housing vouchers and are still living in my properties, paying out of pocket, with no criminal charges filed. And I have had others.
    webjockey wrote: »
    In FY 2012, over 100 analysts and investigators reviewed over 15,000 stores and conducted nearly 4,500 undercover investigations. Close to 1,400 stores were permanently disqualified for trafficking and nearly 700 stores were sanctioned for other violations such as the sale of ineligible items.

    FNS also works with State law enforcement authorities to provide them with SNAP benefits that are used in sting operations, supporting anti-trafficking actions at the local level.

    USDA’s Office of the Inspector General also conducts extensive criminal investigations – many resulting from FNS administrative oversight findings and referrals – to prosecute traffickers.

    In FY 2012, OIG SNAP investigations resulted in 342 convictions, including a number of multi-year prison terms for the most serious offenses, and approximately $57.7 million in monetary results.

    In FY 2012, OIG devoted more than 50 percent of its investigative resources to prevent SNAP fraud, waste and abuse.
    Seems like ppl are committing SNAP fraud.
    webjockey wrote: »
    As for people not being really poor. I disagree. Folks act like people are getting rich off of food stamps.
    The qualifications are around 130% of poverty. Eligibility

    I highly doubt that the cost of living in most areas of america are around 130% of poverty. It's kinda like the whole minimum wage thing. Minimum wage is supposed to reflect what a minimum salary needs to be for people to survive - it hardly does and it hasn't kept pace with inflation/cost of living.

    You are misunderstanding what i'm saying. I'm not saying anyone is wealthy at 130% of the poverty level. I'm saying some recipients are lying and misrepresenting their household incomes in order to qualify for the benefits. And some are lying and misrepresenting how many dependents live in the home. And some are doing both. And some are doing other things that, if discovered, would render them ineligible for the benefits bc they would no longer qualify based on the guidelines.
    webjockey wrote: »
    The cuts and so-called reforms are out of proportion and intentionally hurt millions of Americans, many of which are children, older adults, veterans and the disabled. It's wrong and it's cruel. There are much much better and effective ways to achieve the same end.

    Yes, it's very cruel that children and honest adult recipients will have their benefits cut. Hopefully, when more cheats and freeloaders and chased away, there will be ample resources available for those who truly need them.

  • webjockeywebjockey Posts: 2,786Registered Users
    Using anecdotal as a way to paint a broad brush about the general public using this program is misleading.

    If people are misreprenting their households to qualify then they must really need food. I'm not surprised because:
    a. there is documented evidence that people who don't qualify for the benefits because they make too much money are using food pantries
    b. there is documented evidence that families turn to food pantries even though they receive benefits.
    c. food insecurity has remained high since the economic downturn.

    Instead of figuring out WHY people are finding the need to LIE in order to get food, the knee-jerk reaction is that the they must be kicked off no matter what - hunger be damned.


    This is not the way to solve the problem. Hunger advocates have been saying for years that more people need access to the program and that benefits need to be higher in order for hunger to be eradicated.

    But people are more concerned about fraud than solving the problem.

    For all who are watching this thread, I hope you keep this in mind because the consequences are the legislation that we just saw this week.

    Inequality is high, social mobility is low, recovery is hardest for the lowest rung of society. Wages have not kept up with what it takes to make it in america. These are the facts of the current economy.

    Taking food away is not the answer.

    This interview is worth a watch:
    /home/leaving?target=http%3A%2F%2Fvideo.msnbc.msn.com%2Fnow%2F53062502%2353062502" class="Popup
    hello.world.
  • scrillsscrills Posts: 6,700Registered Users
    Spidey, I get what you are saying, but I'm had section 8 tenants. These people (at least in my experience) aren't living it up. The lies they are telling are providing one or two more comforts, not making them rich. Does that make it right, no, but I hate that others that need it are going to suffer.

    And those who are just above the qualification line who cheat to get just below the line, well those people are still poor.
  • Fifi.GFifi.G Posts: 15,490Registered Users
    I don't ever feel like anyone is doing anything right anymore. I've always been a democrat (by force, I wanted to register independent), I have only voted democrat, but I have lost faith in everyone. They are too far apart.
    When I hear terms like "hipster" I think, who told cliques they could leave high school??

    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • pinkwolfpinkwolf Posts: 430Registered Users
    I live in Cali and had lost my job. I went on food stamps/cash benefit. I was single with no kids so I received $221.00 cash and $200 food stamps each month. I remember having to go to the DPSS office to see my case worker. While in the waiting area you see a little of everything: babies screaming, pimps with there prostitutes, people yelling at the other people behind the window of why they didn't get their benefits for the month, there were many who came in that were strung out on drugs (tracks in arms and legs). Not judging but it was obvious to see. :-(

    To be honest, this should only be used to help you. I got off of it when I found a job thank God.

    Oh and also, you only get cash benefits for 9 months then you have to wait 3 months. At the end of the year you have to reapply all over again. But you do keep your food stamps benefits for a year.

    Sent from my N861 using CurlTalk App
    *Natural 3C/TWA* :toothy7:
    Wash: BS/ACV, ABS, KC Come Clean
    Conditioner: Garnier WB Honey Treasures
    , Garnier WB Apple & Green Tea
    Pre-Poo: Oils & Honey Mix
    DC: Garnier WB Honey Treasures Mask, SM 10-N-1

    PT: Super Mayo Deep Conditioning Treatment
    Styler:
    KCCC, Eco Styler
    Leave-In: KCKT, Garnier WB Coconut & Cocoa Butter LI
    Moisturizer:
    Whipped Shea Butter
    Oil/Sealant:
    EVCO, Jojoba
  • spiderlashes5000spiderlashes5000 Posts: 17,495Registered Users Curl Neophyte
    scrills wrote: »
    Spidey, I get what you are saying, but I'm had section 8 tenants. These people (at least in my experience) aren't living it up. The lies they are telling are providing one or two more comforts, not making them rich. Does that make it right, no, but I hate that others that need it are going to suffer.

    And those who are just above the qualification line who cheat to get just below the line, well those people are still poor.

    Some of them are not poor. IDK what qualifies as "living it up" but some do have rather high levels of discretionary income. Just one example (of many): I have a house in a nice neighborhood that rents for $1600. (In Columbus, the average rent is $650...so this is high.) i've never rented it on section 8 before. But everytime it comes available, I have 20 calls from section 8 recipients who have been approved for $400-$900/month rent vouchers or total rents of that amount. And I ask them what about the $1200-700 deficiency??? And they tell me they will pay it under the table.

    I'm sorry, if you are listed as an unemployed single mother of four children w/ no income, how the in the hell do you have an extra $1200/month to slip to me under the table?! w/o even batting an eye?

    I'm telling you the truth!!! One of my tenants drives an Escalade. Another drives a Lexus. All have nice cars. All get the Dish put in when they move in. How do you have no or low income and you can pay $120/month for cable. They all have huge flat screen tvs in almost every room. Some get brand new furniture. I have seen it being delivered from the store where I bought mine. One has these huge parties/cookouts almost every wknd and invites me. I don't go but once I had to be there while a party was going on and I have never seen tha much food and beer and booze in my life. Another had two sons in prison she was still collecting cash and rent benefits for...until she got caught. Another had two adults living there w/ good full time jobs, claimining zero household income...until she got caught. Hair done. Nails done. All the latest gear. If I have extra washers or dryers, I will ask a new tenant moving in if they want them. Half the time, they are like, "girl, no. I'm going down to Sears tomorrow and getting something new; my last set was about 5 yrs old so I just left it."

    I even dated a guy who was fraudulently collecting welfare.

    I'm not mad at them! But I'm not pretending that they are struggling eating PB&J sandwiches either.

    Ppl like Webbie don't like when I tell it like it is bc it doesn't quite fit into their agenda. I'm certainly not saying everyone on public assistance is running these kinda hustles. Or even most. But YES, A LOT ARE. But I'm neither Democrat nor Republican, so I have no reason to lie. I'm just calling it like I see it.

    Yes, I also hate that others who need it are going to suffer.

    I'm just saying all this in response to multiculti and webbie's statements that there are very few ppl on PA cheating the system. Wrong! Or, at least in ~my~ experience, there are more than a few.

    Tho I have had some great, honest, hardworking tenants who were a pleasure to do business with.

  • spiderlashes5000spiderlashes5000 Posts: 17,495Registered Users Curl Neophyte
    webjockey wrote: »

    If people are misreprenting their households to qualify then they must really need food.

    Yes, possibly. Or they are crooks.

  • webjockeywebjockey Posts: 2,786Registered Users
    More reading

    Bad Decisions Don’t Make You Poor. Being Poor Makes for Bad Decisions.
    New research shows that worrying about money causes cognitive impairments.

    Poverty and cognitive impairment: Study shows money troubles make decision-making difficult. - Slate Magazine

    Another great film to watch. Two american families
    Pay close attention to the mother who always looks nice, has her nails done, looks professional in spite of struggle
    /home/leaving?target=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.pbs.org%2Fwgbh%2Fpages%2Ffrontline%2Ftwo-american-families%2F" class="Popup


    Here's a thought - if our economic system was more just, provided more opportunity to move out of poverty, allowed for a fair shake at the american dream, maybe, people wouldn't have to go through shady measures to get theirs.

    OF course it's easier to see the bad behavior of the poor. Bad behavior at the top. That's ok. Or at least our leglslators reward/reprimand in a way that says its ok.

    And damn straight I have an agenda. Too many damn people are struggling for reasons beyond their personal control.

    For every welfare queen I can counteract with a story of real struggle and need as a food bank employee and someone who lives in a low-income community.

    But that's not the point. The point is that the House vote about the farm bill is unprecedented.

    the nutrition bill has NEVER been separated from the farm side
    the cuts are crazy high
    the legislation has always been bi-partisan. It's not even close.

    I repeat. This is unprecedented and we should all ask ourselves why this came to be.


    I won't even bother to respond to the claim of how much fraud there is. Feelings and anecdotes are not facts.
    hello.world.
  • spiderlashes5000spiderlashes5000 Posts: 17,495Registered Users Curl Neophyte
    webjockey wrote: »
    More reading

    Bad Decisions Don’t Make You Poor. Being Poor Makes for Bad Decisions.
    New research shows that worrying about money causes cognitive impairments.

    Poverty and cognitive impairment: Study shows money troubles make decision-making difficult. - Slate Magazine

    Another great film to watch. Two american families
    Pay close attention to the mother who always looks nice, has her nails done, looks professional in spite of struggle
    Two American Families | FRONTLINE | PBS


    Here's a thought - if our economic system was more just, provided more opportunity to move out of poverty, allowed for a fair shake at the american dream, maybe, people wouldn't have to go through shady measures to get theirs.

    OF course it's easier to see the bad behavior of the poor. Bad behavior at the top. That's ok. Or at least our leglslators reward/reprimand in a way that says its ok.

    And damn straight I have an agenda. Too many damn people are struggling for reasons beyond their personal control.

    For every welfare queen I can counteract with a story of real struggle and need as a food bank employee and someone who lives in a low-income community.

    But that's not the point. The point is that the House vote about the farm bill is unprecedented.

    the nutrition bill has NEVER been separated from the farm side
    the cuts are crazy high
    the legislation has always been bi-partisan. It's not even close.

    I repeat. This is unprecedented and we should all ask ourselves why this came to be.


    I won't even bother to respond to the claim of how much fraud there is. Feelings and anecdotes are not facts.

    Yes, anecdotes can be facts! Who told you they weren't!? :protest: They just weren't obtained using the scientific method.

    But now ezine articles and statistics pulled from the internet...they are never, ever misleading! ;)

  • webjockeywebjockey Posts: 2,786Registered Users
    Good luck with that. :hello2:

    I hope what I have presented creates a dialogue beyond this message board and a desire for folks to learn more about this important issue facing our nation and its future.
    hello.world.
  • curlyarcacurlyarca Posts: 8,449Registered Users
    Come on Spidey, this is about food stamps, so I don't think it's reasonable to say "welfare". I mean, unless we're going to talk about all the other entitlements out there: tax breaks for homeowners, subsidized flood insurance for those homeowners, etc. Why accept section 8 if the people are so fraudulently receiving assistance from the government? Why not seek tenants who can pay with cash they have earned/borrowed from somewhere else instead of passively supporting their cheating? Would/did you accept a tenant that offered to pay you under the table?

    The poor are easy targets. To be poor is to be weak and an eff up. People who receive SNAP are easy targets because they're poor who dare to admit it and seek assistance. The House has been threatening to do this for over a year now, I'm not surprised they finally did it. Bad timing for them though, because if the government shuts down 9/30, who is or is not getting food stamps will be the least of their problems.

    People seem to have forgotten the 80s and 90s.

    Food stamps are not the problem. Wages are the problem.

    How Class Works - Richard Wolff Examines Class - YouTube

    "In the depth of winter, I finally learned that within me there lay an invincible summer."

    4a, mbl, low porosity, normal thickness, fine hair.
  • OBBOBB Posts: 4,174Registered Users
    growing up in the Viet community during the 2nd wave of Viet immigrants in the 80s-90s there were numerous stories of newcommers taking advantage of the system. with the 2nd generation not so much but theres still some cheating. is there cheating in the welfare system? definitely. does the welfare system need reforming? absolutely. but lets call this bill for what it is a move by the republicans to keep the focus/blame on the poor and the weak(minorities) - because they know it wont pass the Senate or the POTUS. some the attempts by conservative states in the last few years: anti-immigrant bills, no Obamacare, voter ID, closing low cost clinics, no same-sex marriage, anti-unions, etc.
  • CGNYCCGNYC Posts: 4,937Registered Users
    I think the reason people are bitter about welfare and assistance is because so many of us know at least a few people/families who are milking the system. Mom and/or Dad won't work, never intend to work, have as many kids as they want, always drive new cars, have huge tvs in every room, buy every new iThing that comes out, run their kids to specialists every time they get a cough, and eat just fine and don't even have sense enough to lie or keep quiet about it. They gloat.

    They have more kids than we can afford, see doctors for free when our (expensive) insurance won't pay. We keep the old phone, skip the new game systems for our kids, budget for groceries and drive our old cars into the ground because we have to LIVE WITHIN OUR MEANS.

    Them most of us have a friend or sister or cousin whose husband died or left, she works full time and then some raising three kids and making it work somehow because she makes $12 too much for assistance and we see that neighbor who brags about another new massive tv and we think - there is something very wrong with this system.

    It FEELS like there's a direct coloration between the people we know who NEED HELP and can't get it and the people who DO NOT but are sucking the system dry. We hear there have been cuts and part of us thinks fine, start with those lazy people we know who won't work and maybe there will be more for the mom of three working two jobs. Of course, it does not work like that. The people who are going to game the system will always get theirs, and the people who won't lie to get help will always suffer.

    These cuts are bad news, the system is broken. The cuts are not going to fix it at all, there will just be more hungry kids.
  • scrillsscrills Posts: 6,700Registered Users
    A couple of people living "hood rich" should not effect millions. And please believe, one missed check and these people are in BIG trouble. Those TV's will be back to Rent-a-Center and the cars will be repo'd.

    In general this mentality is very frustrating to me. This song says it all
    Gator Boots, with the pimped out Gucci suit
    Ain't got no job, but I stay sharp
    Can't pay my rent, cause all my money's spent
    but thats OK, cause I'm still fly
    got a quarter tank gas in my new E-class
    But that's alright cause I'm gon' ride
    got everything in my moma's name
    but I'm hood rich da dada dada da

    Just because they are flossing, it doesn't mean they have money. These are the same ones coming to me and my responsible friends and family the day after the big cookout because they don't have enough food for the week.
  • spiderlashes5000spiderlashes5000 Posts: 17,495Registered Users Curl Neophyte
    curlyarca wrote: »
    Come on Spidey, this is about food stamps, so I don't think it's reasonable to say "welfare". I mean, unless we're going to talk about all the other entitlements out there: tax breaks for homeowners, subsidized flood insurance for those homeowners, etc.

    I'm talking about the MEANS TESTED PUBLIC ASSISTANCE programs that relate to the population who receive food stamps. Flood insurance, etc., isn't germane to this particular topic.
    curlyarca wrote: »
    Why accept section 8 if the people are so fraudulently receiving assistance from the government?

    I know there is a huge need among ppl/families who honestly and legitmately qualify for these services and I want to help them. I want children to grow up in the nicest, safest homes they can.
    curlyarca wrote: »
    Why not seek tenants who can pay with cash they have earned/borrowed from somewhere else instead of passively supporting their cheating?

    When I see a glaring, unmistakable offense, I report it. I won't knowingly support cheating. But I contract w/ the housing agency, not the tenant. I'm not their babysitter. I just own and maintain the properties.

    But yes, I have private pay tenants, too.
    curlyarca wrote: »
    Would/did you accept a tenant that offered to pay you under the table?
    Never. (And have lost a lot of money by refusing to accept it.)
    curlyarca wrote: »
    The poor are easy targets. To be poor is to be weak and an eff up.

    I don't think the majority of Americans feel this way. Most of us agree that there is a need for these programs...but utilized the right way. (Most of us are but a paycheck or two away from the same situation so who are we to judge?)
    curlyarca wrote: »
    Food stamps are not the problem. Wages are the problem.
    True. But a separate problem is the fraud and abuse that plague the welfare system...which admittedly probably won't be improved w/ this legislation.

  • spiderlashes5000spiderlashes5000 Posts: 17,495Registered Users Curl Neophyte
    scrills wrote: »
    A couple of people living "hood rich" should not effect millions. And please believe, one missed check and these people are in BIG trouble. Those TV's will be back to Rent-a-Center and the cars will be repo'd.

    In general this mentality is very frustrating to me. This song says it all
    Gator Boots, with the pimped out Gucci suit
    Ain't got no job, but I stay sharp
    Can't pay my rent, cause all my money's spent
    but thats OK, cause I'm still fly
    got a quarter tank gas in my new E-class
    But that's alright cause I'm gon' ride
    got everything in my moma's name
    but I'm hood rich da dada dada da

    Just because they are flossing, it doesn't mean they have money. These are the same ones coming to me and my responsible friends and family the day after the big cookout because they don't have enough food for the week.

    That's even worse!

    But I know some of them have it bc when their vouchers get cancelled (due to fraud or whatever), they can seemlessly go from paying less than $100/month to paying $900/month out of pocket. I see what they have.

    Obviously, this isn't all ppl receiving benefits. I think most begin w/ documented, unquestionable need. But somewhere along the line, their circumstances change. But some get too comfortable and won't voluntarily opt of out of the system or report the changes, as they are supposed to.

    And it's not just the cash that they do it for. There is huge peace of mind that comes from knowing that if you get laid off or fired or decide to quit your job, you can make a call, and everything is taken care of.

  • JosephineJosephine Posts: 14,175Registered Users
«1