• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

USDA partnering with Mexico to boost food stamp participation

jamesrage

jamesrage

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 31, 2005
Messages
36,705
Reaction score
17,867
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
Forign nationals should not be getting foodstamps regardless if they are here legally or illegally.Apparently Bush must have been tossing Mexico's salad before he was trying to push the Bush/Kennedy/McCain amnesty plan.





USDA partnering with Mexico to boost food stamp rolls | The Daily Caller
The Mexican government has been working with the United States Department of Agriculture to increase participation in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), or food stamps.
USDA has an agreement with Mexico to promote American food assistance programs, including food stamps, among Mexican Americans, Mexican nationals and migrant communities in America.
“USDA and the government of Mexico have entered into a partnership to help educate eligible Mexican nationals living in the United States about available nutrition assistance,” the USDA explains in a brief paragraph on their “Reaching Low-Income Hispanics With Nutrition Assistance” web page. “Mexico will help disseminate this information through its embassy and network of approximately 50 consular offices.”
The partnership — which was signed by former USDA Secretary Ann M. Veneman and Mexican Secretary of Foreign Affairs Luis Ernesto Derbez Bautista in 2004 — sees to it that the Mexican Embassy and Mexican consulates in America provide USDA nutrition assistance program information to Mexican Americans, Mexican nationals working in America and migrant communities in America. The information is specifically focused on eligibility criteria and access.
 
jamesrage said:
Forign nationals should not be getting foodstamps regardless if they are here legally or illegally.Apparently Bush must have been tossing Mexico's salad before he was trying to push the Bush/Kennedy/McCain amnesty plan.





USDA partnering with Mexico to boost food stamp rolls | The Daily Caller
The Mexican government has been working with the United States Department of Agriculture to increase participation in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), or food stamps.
USDA has an agreement with Mexico to promote American food assistance programs, including food stamps, among Mexican Americans, Mexican nationals and migrant communities in America.
“USDA and the government of Mexico have entered into a partnership to help educate eligible Mexican nationals living in the United States about available nutrition assistance,” the USDA explains in a brief paragraph on their “Reaching Low-Income Hispanics With Nutrition Assistance” web page. “Mexico will help disseminate this information through its embassy and network of approximately 50 consular offices.”
The partnership — which was signed by former USDA Secretary Ann M. Veneman and Mexican Secretary of Foreign Affairs Luis Ernesto Derbez Bautista in 2004 — sees to it that the Mexican Embassy and Mexican consulates in America provide USDA nutrition assistance program information to Mexican Americans, Mexican nationals working in America and migrant communities in America. The information is specifically focused on eligibility criteria and access.
Click to expand...

I see an opportunity here....no food stamps, but a credit card type arrangement that is issued only at the U.S. Embassy in Mexico City...fingerprints and DNA taken, photo and thumb prints will be on the credit card....and it can only be renewed/refilled at the same embassy, from funds supplied by their American employers. We will let them out of the USA to go get their cards once a quarter, but they can't get back into the USA unless they have legal green cards and their DNA and fingerprints haven't been connected to any crimes.
One more requirement....their American Employers have to pay all the expenses incurred by the U.S. government related to this program.
 
Politicians must be really bored if they have nothing better to do than feed foreigners.

Why did we invade Iraq again? We would have been better off taking over Mexico.
 
Please explain to me why a legal resident and taxpayer should not be eligible for foodstamps.

Daktoria said:
Politicians must be really bored if they have nothing better to do than feed foreigners.

Why did we invade Iraq again? We would have been better off taking over Mexico.
Click to expand...

Making sure people can eat is pretty much the first thing I would expect a government to do. Because not a lot matters if you can't get that part down.
 
Deuce said:
Please explain to me why a legal resident and taxpayer should not be eligible for foodstamps.
Click to expand...

No.

Making sure people can eat is pretty much the first thing I would expect a government to do. Because not a lot matters if you can't get that part down.
Click to expand...

Making sure people can eat is the first thing you should expect your PARENTS to do.

If you can't feed'em, don't breed'em.
 
Deuce said:
Please explain to me why a legal resident and taxpayer should not be eligible for foodstamps.



Making sure people can eat is pretty much the first thing I would expect a government to do. Because not a lot matters if you can't get that part down.
Click to expand...

Pretty sure that if you make enough money to pay federal income taxes, you make too much money to get foodstamps....
 
UtahBill said:
Pretty sure that if you make enough money to pay federal income taxes, you make too much money to get foodstamps....
Click to expand...

Everyone is a taxpayer. Specifying federal income taxes leaves you in a situation where the only people collecting food stamps are the people who make enough money not to need them. I'm not sure that's what you were going for.

Daktoria said:
No.
Click to expand...

Hah. Ok. Fine, I think you shouldn't be able to drive on roads. I don't care that your taxes pay for them. No roads for you.

Making sure people can eat is the first thing you should expect your PARENTS to do.

If you can't feed'em, don't breed'em.
Click to expand...

Some of us think children should not go hungry regardless of any mistakes their parents may have made.
 
Last edited:
Deuce said:
Hah. Ok. Fine, I think you shouldn't be able to drive on roads. I don't care that your taxes pay for them. No roads for you.
Click to expand...

I think you shouldn't assume all Mexican immigrants are legal.

Some of us think children should not go hungry regardless of any mistakes their parents may have made.
Click to expand...

Some of us think parents should be held responsible for their actions, not anyone else.
 
Daktoria said:
I think you shouldn't assume all Mexican immigrants are legal.
Click to expand...

I said nothing of that nature. Read more carefully.

Some of us think parents should be held responsible for their actions, not anyone else.
Click to expand...

I don't think children should be held responsible for the actions of their parents.
 
Daktoria said:
No kidding. That's the point.



No, you.



...and?

That means other adults should have to take care of them because...?
Click to expand...

Because we're not freaking monsters that's why.
I specifically said legal, taxpaying residents. They pay into the system, they should be allowed to collect the benefits of the system like the rest of us. Illegal immigrants are different, and are not eligible. By the way, illegal immigrants very rarely go to the US government and say "Hey! Here's where I am and how much money I make!" More of a low-profile thing, ya know?
 
Deuce said:
Because we're not freaking monsters that's why.
I specifically said legal, taxpaying residents. They pay into the system, they should be allowed to collect the benefits of the system like the rest of us. Illegal immigrants are different, and are not eligible. By the way, illegal immigrants very rarely go to the US government and say "Hey! Here's where I am and how much money I make!" More of a low-profile thing, ya know?
Click to expand...
it seems that some of us ARE monsters, the far right and some libertarians would let children starve, or take them from their parents and put them into work houses where they can earn their dailly bread....
 
Deuce said:
Because we're not freaking monsters that's why.
Click to expand...

What does that have to do with anything?

You're not responsible for what you don't create. If you think people are, that's slavery, plain and simple.

I specifically said legal, taxpaying residents. They pay into the system, they should be allowed to collect the benefits of the system like the rest of us. Illegal immigrants are different, and are not eligible. By the way, illegal immigrants very rarely go to the US government and say "Hey! Here's where I am and how much money I make!" More of a low-profile thing, ya know?
Click to expand...

It doesn't matter what you say. The point is all Mexicans aren't legal, and the article explicitly mentions Mexican nationals.

You also have no right to force people to assume the risk of illegals cashing in on government programs.
 
Deuce said:
Making sure people can eat is pretty much the first thing I would expect a government to do. Because not a lot matters if you can't get that part down.
Click to expand...

Let them eat cake.
 
Daktoria said:
What does that have to do with anything?

You're not responsible for what you don't create. If you think people are, that's slavery, plain and simple.



It doesn't matter what you say. The point is all Mexicans aren't legal, and the article explicitly mentions Mexican nationals.

You also have no right to force people to assume the risk of illegals cashing in on government programs.
Click to expand...

we are ALL part of a society that depends on each other for shared risk, shared labor, shared support....
we are ALL participants in the building, and maintenance, of the infrastructure that allows us to learn, and earn, and spend.
No man is an island....
 
UtahBill said:
we are ALL part of a society that depends on each other for shared risk, shared labor, shared support....
we are ALL participants in the building, and maintenance, of the infrastructure that allows us to learn, and earn, and spend.
No man is an island....
Click to expand...

= communism.

Yes, we live in society. No we don't have collective consciousness.
 
Daktoria said:
= communism.

Yes, we live in society. No we don't have collective consciousness.
Click to expand...

No, that is nothing remotely resembling communism. You pay taxes, right? Guess what? You are participating in the maintenance of our national infrastructure by doing that.

Unless you think the US Army is a communist organization. You aren't calling our soldiers communists, are you? Because you seem to be calling our national defense forces communists.
 
Last edited:
Daktoria said:
= communism.

Yes, we live in society. No we don't have collective consciousness.
Click to expand...

how about collective conscience? collective christian charity for your fellow man?

trust me, I don't like slackers, the stupid, the lazy....but there are some among us who are disadvantaged by nature, some who aren't smart enough to hide when the rich/powerful/greedy come around to take what little they have.
You feel no obligation to them?
 
Daktoria said:
What does that have to do with anything?

You're not responsible for what you don't create. If you think people are, that's slavery, plain and simple.
Click to expand...

It is monstrous to allow a child to starve because of their parents mistakes if you are able to help, plain and simple.



It doesn't matter what you say. The point is all Mexicans aren't legal, and the article explicitly mentions Mexican nationals.
Click to expand...
It's an irrelevant point because they aren't talking about giving illegal immigrants food stamps.

You also have no right to force people to assume the risk of illegals cashing in on government programs.
Click to expand...

Illegal immigrants are "cashing in" on our national defense. Should we disband the army?
 
Deuce said:
It is monstrous to allow a child to starve because of their parents mistakes if you are able to help, plain and simple.
Click to expand...

It's monstrous to allow parents to make mistakes, passing the burden onto others.

It's an irrelevant point because they aren't talking about giving illegal immigrants food stamps.
Click to expand...

...migrant communities?

You also ignored the point on Mexican nationals.

Illegal immigrants are "cashing in" on our national defense. Should we disband the army?
Click to expand...

No. We should invade Mexico and make them pay for not monitoring their border.
 
UtahBill said:
how about collective conscience? collective christian charity for your fellow man?

trust me, I don't like slackers, the stupid, the lazy....but there are some among us who are disadvantaged by nature, some who aren't smart enough to hide when the rich/powerful/greedy come around to take what little they have.
You feel no obligation to them?
Click to expand...

I do feel a responsibility to help the very old, the very sick, and the very young. Also those who have served our country.

But I don't understand who you're talking about when you describe "disadvantaged by nature" as in "not smart enough to hide." I don't understand why I should support those who have babies to play the system/avoid work. I don't understand folks who are able-bodied who sit around all day long and refuse to work/think those who do are chumps. Or those who are here illegally being on the welfare rolls.

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/201...ollect-welfare-obama-wants-to-up-that-number/
 
nota bene said:
I do feel a responsibility to help the very old, the very sick, and the very young. Also those who have served our country.

But I don't understand who you're talking about when you describe "disadvantaged by nature" as in "not smart enough to hide." I don't understand why I should support those who have babies to play the system/avoid work. I don't understand folks who are able-bodied who sit around all day long and refuse to work/think those who do are chumps. Or those who are here illegally being on the welfare rolls.

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/201...ollect-welfare-obama-wants-to-up-that-number/
Click to expand...

disadvantaged by nature can be slow learners, like 2 of my siblings that both failed 3rd grade, both had a hard time with math, starting with fractions, both had learning issues related to reading...
and in the time and place I grew up, having dark skin meant you were disadvantaged, not by nature, but by the racist attitudes of whites. Society can be a royal bitch when it collectively decides to discriminate against another group.
 
UtahBill said:
how about collective conscience? collective christian charity for your fellow man?

trust me, I don't like slackers, the stupid, the lazy....but there are some among us who are disadvantaged by nature, some who aren't smart enough to hide when the rich/powerful/greedy come around to take what little they have.
You feel no obligation to them?
Click to expand...

That's voluntary, not mandatory. The point is to evaluate the character of people you believe in.

Don't bother with the Social Gospel guilt trip. I see right through that as an excuse to make responsible people take care of the irresponsible.
 
When you're talking about learning disabilities, society may have failed to identify learning disabilities, but did it actually discriminate? In any society are there are going to be those who naturally have more ability than others (by whatever definition that society defines--e.g. spear-throwing or weaving)? If the answer is "yes," and it is, should society "even" things out by taking away opportunity from those who "can" in favor of those who "can't"?
 
nota bene said:
When you're talking about learning disabilities, society may have failed to identify learning disabilities, but did it actually discriminate? In any society are there are going to be those who naturally have more ability than others (by whatever definition that society defines--e.g. spear-throwing or weaving)? If the answer is "yes," and it is, should society "even" things out by taking away opportunity from those who "can" in favor of those who "can't"?
Click to expand...

so if you have a child with a learning disability such that he will never make more than minimum wage, if that, then what? will you refuse help from society?
the discrimination issue is not the same as learning disabilities, it is racism that has been reduced in the last 50 years, but by no means eliminated. Do we let children starve because their parents are "colored"?
you will never read any of my posts saying "even things out"....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom