Half of US kids will get food stamps, study says

[redmaxx]

Quote from smegalicious : All work and no play? How about he can buy a new fun geeky tech thing at Target using GCs paid for by SCJohnson?

That works. But if he gets in the habit spending all his savings on tech, he won't have any savings!

[Elmer]

Quote from redmaxx : The government isn't providing Internet access (outside of public libraries, where it is arguably necessary) to anyone. Period.

I don't believe he claimed they did, he was just responding to your opinion that they should......

Quote from redmaxx : OK, so if the poor person follows your advice and cuts the internet, are you going to give them more money because their food bill went up?

If they're saving that much by using the internet, then you'd think they'd redirect their funds to it, or find a way to obtain it for free.

Quote from smegalicious : My biggest concern w/your previous statements was only that it seemed, IMHO, that you were falling into the typical trap of just merely *assuming* that the Internet was an "expense" w/o contemplating the various ways it can help in such a financial crisis.

As opposed to the "typical trap" that because some are making wise choices, most are, and funds should be given out to all based on that..

Quote from trancepire : Off topic, but on topic at the same time...I've been on a frugality kick for quite some time now so I just skim the front page of SD knowing I shouldn't and hoping nothing jumps out at me. Then, when it does, I convince myself I don't need whatever it is I spotted. I should really delete those deal alerts too.

Me too. I've got too much stuff, and so do most of my friends and family. These days, I've been using my "need" to find and buy deals to pick up cheap stuff for donating to charity, (clothes, toys, etc). Got that idea from another poster. I order large quantities of the really cheap deals, and take a truck load down at a time. They've also been good for the care packages my employees put together and send to troops overseas.

Quote from redmaxx : Generally the only real additional savings you can get at Costco is when they come out with their coupon books. However, if you do enough research, you'll find many overpriced things at Costco. For example, I rarely buy electronics there any more, it's so much more expensive than anywhere else.

[smegalicious]

Quote from Elmer : If they're saving that much by using the internet, then you'd think they'd redirect their funds to it, or find a way to obtain it for free.

Perhaps they redirect those funds to rent, electricity or some of the other necessities that FS don't cover.

Quote : As opposed to the "typical trap" that because some are making wise choices, most are, and funds should be given out to all based on that..

Where has anyone suggested that "most are" because some are?

BTW, I think Elmer may just have inferred that I was actually "making wise choices"....

[Elmer]

Quote from smegalicious : Perhaps they redirect those funds to rent, electricity or some of the other necessities that FS don't cover.

Even if the savings provided would more than cover the cost?

Quote from smegalicious : Where has anyone suggested that "most are" because some are?

The government providing everyone with something because some might use it wisely, doesn't seem to be justification to extract from others at gunpoint, the funds necessary to pay for it, but I realize we have a fundamental disagreement on that.

Quote from smegalicious : BTW, I think Elmer may just have inferred that I was actually "making wise choices"....

If after all this time you haven't gathered that I'm a fan of those who make good choices with their money, you haven't been paying attention......

[SigX]

Quote from redmaxx : It's rather hard to get yourself out of poverty if you're a single parent with less than a high school education.

no doubt. that is why I generally support education and training programs.

Quote : It's also rather disingenuous to try to pin it on one factor alone.

pin what on what factor? I am simply pointing out that more kids equals more money. where did I suggest that it is the only factor for anything????????

Quote from cdog90260 : the way I see it is that if the state is willing to give it out, only a fool wouldnt take it. It's about using the resources you have.

Wasn't trying to argue that point. i am suggesting that maybe we should NOT have a system that PROMOTES poor people having mroe kids.

[nobama]

Quote from redmaxx : Can you elaborate? I think I understand what you're saying, but I don't know why.

Quote from smegalicious : And that's an assumption you can't prove.... i.e. a preconceived notion about what "most people" will or will not do.

It is very difficult to communicate my position and feelings on this issue with a just a few words on an Internet forum without writing volumes, and even then I fear greatly that I will be entirely misunderstood.

First, I care deeply about the actual poor - those who truly are in need - and I have stated before that I have done and continue to do much for them as I believe that is the right thing to do. I am concerned that my comments here sound as if I do not care or that I am perceived to be the Grinch. That is far from the actual truth. As the saying goes, "there but by the grace of God go I".

My comments and thoughts in this thread have been spoken viewing through the lens of my personal experience and observations and those include actually knowing many persons who are most definitely *poor* and actually knowing many persons who are manipulating the system to their own advantage and ultimately to the disadvantage of the true poor persons.

I'll zero in closer to home for an example. I have a relative with a 20 year old daughter who gave birth out of wedlock to a child. The daughter is on (to the best of my knowledge) every form of assistance available. The daughter has no job, lives with her grandmother rent free, grandma feeds her and the daughter does little more all day than take care of the baby, sleep, watch TV, text her friends and talk on her cell phone and surf the Internet. She has no interest in getting a job because she knows she has it pretty cushy where she's at.

I have seen many, many similar situations in my "travels".

It is these individuals who I have a problem with and I believe that they are taking advantage of the system and are not truly *poor*. They only choose to be poor out of laziness or because they believe there's no reason to choose otherwise.

Viewing through that perspective, I have a great difficulty with the fact that the money that the gov't forcibly takes from you and I goes to many freeloaders who are able to provide for themselves but choose not to. If those freeloaders receive a benefit from any contributions that I have freely made to charity xyz, then that's one thing because I freely gave. It doesn't make it right, but at least no one held a gun to my head and gave me no choice to give them the money.

I have great empathy for low income persons who are at that position due to various circumstances beyond their control and I have the greatest respect for those who
honestly try their hardest to raise their families and survive by trying to make the wisest choices as possible with their money and in doing so they are forced to do without some of what others would consider luxuries.

No links or proof, just my opinion.

[smegalicious]

Quote from nobama : First, I care deeply about the actual poor - those who truly are in need - and I have stated before that I have done and continue to do much for them as I believe that is the right thing to do. I am concerned that my comments here sound as if I do not care or that I am perceived to be the Grinch. That is far from the actual truth. As the saying goes, "there but by the grace of God go I".

I meant to post this earlier when discussing Oregon's program w/trancepire, but I'll use it as a part of this reply. And it isn't meant solely towards you, nobama, but more as general information.

This is from the state of Oregon's SNAP [oregon.gov](the new name for food stamps, since there's no more stamps ) website.

The intent of the Program is to help improve the health and well being of low-income households and individuals by providing them a means to meet their nutritional needs. Contrary to popular belief, SNAP benefits are not meant to meet all of the food needs of a household or an individual, but to supplement their nutritional needs. People do not need to be destitute to qualify for SNAP benefits.

In other words, the level of "poor" that the govt has chosen to assist w/this particular program is not reserved solely for the lowest of the low.

Quote : My comments and thoughts in this thread have been spoken viewing through the lens of my personal experience and observations and those include actually knowing many persons who are most definitely *poor* and actually knowing many persons who are manipulating the system to their own advantage and ultimately to the disadvantage of the true poor persons.

How many have you known who have simply used it?

Quote : I'll zero in closer to home for an example. I have a relative with a 20 year old daughter who gave birth out of wedlock to a child. The daughter is on (to the best of my knowledge) every form of assistance available. The daughter has no job, lives with her grandmother rent free, grandma feeds her and the daughter does little more all day than take care of the baby, sleep, watch TV, text her friends and talk on her cell phone and surf the Internet. She has no interest in getting a job because she knows she has it pretty cushy where she's at.

I hope it's documented on her FS forms that she and Grandma share meals. And that she has no shelter expenses.

Quote : It is these individuals who I have a problem with and I believe that they are taking advantage of the system and are not truly *poor*. They only choose to be poor out of laziness or because they believe there's no reason to choose otherwise.

Or because Grandma lets them live rent free.

Perhaps if that were no longer an option and she were forced to care for herself, she'd be better deserving of such assistance.

Quote : Viewing through that perspective, I have a great difficulty with the fact that the money that the gov't forcibly takes from you and I goes to many freeloaders who are able to provide for themselves but choose not to. If those freeloaders receive a benefit from any contributions that I have freely made to charity xyz, then that's one thing because I freely gave. It doesn't make it right, but at least no one held a gun to my head and gave me no choice to give them the money.

Abuse is never "right." But perfection is an unobtainable goal.

Do you have any specific reforms/suggestions for curbing these "many freeloaders"?

Quote : I have great empathy for low income persons who are at that position due to various circumstances beyond their control and I have the greatest respect for those who honestly try their hardest to raise their families and survive by trying to make the wisest choices as possible with their money and in doing so they are forced to do without some of what others would consider luxuries.

I know you do, and I would never think or suggest otherwise. At most, I just wish you thought there were more of them.

[SigX]

Quote from nobama : It is very difficult to communicate my position and feelings on this issue with a just a few words on an Internet forum without writing volumes, and even then I fear greatly that I will be entirely misunderstood. First, I care deeply about the actual poor - those who truly are in need - and I have stated before that I have done and continue to do much for them as I believe that is the right thing to do. I am concerned that my comments here sound as if I do not care or that I am perceived to be the Grinch. That is far from the actual truth. As the saying goes, "there but by the grace of God go I". My comments and thoughts in this thread have been spoken viewing through the lens of my personal experience and observations and those include actually knowing many persons who are most definitely *poor* and actually knowing many persons who are manipulating the system to their own advantage and ultimately to the disadvantage of the true poor persons. I'll zero in closer to home for an example. I have a relative with a 20 year old daughter who gave birth out of wedlock to a child. The daughter is on (to the best of my knowledge) every form of assistance available. The daughter has no job, lives with her grandmother rent free, grandma feeds her and the daughter does little more all day than take care of the baby, sleep, watch TV, text her friends and talk on her cell phone and surf the Internet. She has no interest in getting a job because she knows she has it pretty cushy where she's at. I have seen many, many similar situations in my "travels". It is these individuals who I have a problem with and I believe that they are taking advantage of the system and are not truly *poor*. They only choose to be poor out of laziness or because they believe there's no reason to choose otherwise. Viewing through that perspective, I have a great difficulty with the fact that the money that the gov't forcibly takes from you and I goes to many freeloaders who are able to provide for themselves but choose not to. If those freeloaders receive a benefit from any contributions that I have freely made to charity xyz, then that's one thing because I freely gave. It doesn't make it right, but at least no one held a gun to my head and gave me no choice to give them the money. I have great empathy for low income persons who are at that position due to various circumstances beyond their control and I have the greatest respect for those who honestly try their hardest to raise their families and survive by trying to make the wisest choices as possible with their money and in doing so they are forced to do without some of what others would consider luxuries. No links or proof, just my opinion.

i hear ya.

I have said this before on here and I will say it again... I see many disabled people in my line of work. Many of them really more of a "temporary" disability... they have a serious illness that may take time to resolve before they can be productive again. Once they are stable and back to normal many of then just can NOT transition back to work. its both sad and pathetic at the same time. I have even seen people that make themselves sick again on purpose to avoid going back to work. its amazing how addicted some become to the system.

[Rebound]

Quote from nobama : . I'll zero in closer to home for an example. I have a relative with a 20 year old daughter who gave birth out of wedlock to a child. The daughter is on (to the best of my knowledge) every form of assistance available. The daughter has no job, lives with her grandmother rent free, grandma feeds her and the daughter does little more all day than take care of the baby, sleep, watch TV, text her friends and talk on her cell phone and surf the Internet. She has no interest in getting a job because she knows she has it pretty cushy where she's at. I No links or proof, just my opinion.

Well, you go and shut down 2/3 of the abortion clinics and water down all the sex ed classes, what do you expect?

[TheWoman]

Quote from Rebound : Well, you go and shut down 2/3 of the abortion clinics and water down all the sex ed classes, what do you expect?

That makes sense. Back in the days before abortion clinics and sex ed classes nearly all children were born to single mothers.........

[Rebound]

Quote from TheWoman : That makes sense. Back in the days before abortion clinics and sex ed classes nearly all children were born to single mothers.

The 1950's ended 60 years ago, too. We've had a sexual revolution. Sex is plastered on billboards, in prime time TV, in all the music... culturally, a lot has changed, and not for the best, but that's the reality.

[nobama]

Quote from Rebound : Well, you go and shut down 2/3 of the abortion clinics and water down all the sex ed classes, what do you expect?

So you're suggesting that she should have had the baby killed?

[Elmer]

Quote from SigX : its amazing how addicted some become to the system.

Indeed......many for generations......

[SigX]

Quote from Rebound : The 1950's ended 60 years ago, too. We've had a sexual revolution. Sex is plastered on billboards, in prime time TV, in all the music... culturally, a lot has changed, and not for the best, but that's the reality.

I dont really get what you are saying here. Nobody is asking for people to stop having sex. we are simply asking for people to be responsible for themselves and thier kids. these entitlement programs essentially remove all responsibility. that is the problem. why not have 10 kids out of wedlock? whats the big deal? after all the gov will give you more money for each "investment".