• 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!

Soda-buying with food stamps

Glinda said:
Purchasing "junk food like soda" with food stamps is perfectly legal. Furthermore, "the rules of receiving" food stamps preclude the purchase of alcohol and cigarettes with said funds.



You're terribly confused. If any US citizen earns enough money, the IRS requires that they pay income taxes on that income. If they don't make enough, they don't. It has nothing to do with food stamps. Beyond this, those receiving food stamps do pay sales taxes, just like people who don't receive food stamps, so they pay into the system as well. Finally, food stamps are funded by the USDA (50%) and state governments fund the rest. They're not funded by income taxes.



If you offer someone assistance, you must accept that they may not use that assistance the way you want them to. It's really not a hard concept to understand.

Tell me, when you were "so broke and strung out on drugs and alcohol" and living "under an overpass," did you spend every penny you brought home on rent? Food? Healthcare? Education? Detox programs?

Or did you buy more drugs and booze?

:roll:
Click to expand...

I always enjoy your posts! Some of these folks simply do not understand any of this and what is killing me? Are the two that should totally GET IT? Seem to be heartless:(
 
Harry Guerrilla said:
The only thing that is limited, that I know of, is TANF and SNAP.
That's it.

You can literally be on food stamps your entire life.



You don't have to work to get food stamps otherwise all those people on unemployment wouldn't get food stamps.

They check what you tell them, that's it.
I know that it can be heavily abused by moderate income people.
I work with these guys.

They have the baby momma living situation, where they aren't married and lie about their household income to receive benefits



I could scam it right now and I wouldn't be caught.
All I would have to do is not disclose assets that I have to them.
They won't verify that I'm not lying either.
Click to expand...

Maybe it depends on your area but I know here? They are very strict and as I said-days of riding the welfare gravy train is pretty much over.

Since you know how to scam the system? I am guessing you know folks that are doing it? Have you turned them in?? And I call total B.S on they will not check! That is total crap.
 
Last edited:
Kali said:
I always enjoy your posts! Some of these folks simply do not understand any of this and what is killing me? Are the two that should totally GET IT? Seem to be heartless:(
Click to expand...

Yes, I'm "heartless" because I'd prefer that two million children have access to healthy, nutritious, inexpensive food than that half that number have access to expensive, nutritionally empty junk food which will injure their health, while the other half go hungry because the allocated funds have run out.

I find your position childish, blindly adversarial, and- frankly- rather pathetic.
 
rivrrat said:
Sure, they should choose what foods to buy. Food that are necessary for survival and will keep them healthy. Pepsi and twinkies don't qualify. And if they don't like that, they can buy the pepsi and twinkies with their own ****ing money.
Click to expand...

Tell me Goddess of Bacon can we at least let them eat some Bacon? That is no more healthy than Soda or a Twinkie. Bacon is full of salt and not so good for ya either.
 
You can eat whatever you wish, but you need to buy your unhealthy treats yourself, with your own money.
Government food assistance is for providing healthy and nutritious food to needy families.
 
VanceMack said:
Right...because folks like you have done SO MUCH to 'help the crippled and dependent pets'...right? Bull****. Democrat politicians have CREATED them and limp liberals thionk thats a GOOD thing. Oh yes...Im a bad bad man because I believe people are stronger when they stand on their own two feet instead of those same people being convinced the superior position is on their knees.
Click to expand...

I am totally all for helping people and giving hands up over hand outs for LIFE. If it were up to me? I would create more social programs where everybody either gets some form of education or some type of trade school where they can at least have a real chance at a decent job.

I feel since we are the U.S.A. that everybody in this country should be able to get a college degree or some sort of trade school and that nobody should be out of work. But sadly? That is not reality.

I am not one of these keep em on Welfare and that is that type people. I support helping people get on their feet, get educated or trained in a skill and helping them find a job so they can go on to be productive citizens.

But I am also not one that wants to see people in this country starve or children never getting the pleasure of a store bought birthdaycake.

One more thing: you have NO clue what I DO in reguards to helping people and I do help at a shelter for women and kids! So never say that to me again please.
 
Last edited:
You can eat whatever you wish, but you need to buy your unhealthy treats yourself, with your own money.
Government food assistance is for providing healthy and nutritious food to needy families.

Furthermore, I find your position quite selfish.
Why should children go hungry so you can have Oreos and soda?
There is a finite amount of money allotted to food assistance for the needy each year.
There are families that need assistance, who won't qualify.
I support stretching that money as far as it will go, and that means people like you need to purchase your own junk food.
You should have plenty of money left over to do that, if welfare provides all your staple groceries.
 
1069 said:
Well.
This is one of the most distasteful exchanges I've ever read.
Were it up to me, you'd both eat nothing but gov'mint cheese for a year.
Maybe that would teach you.
Click to expand...

I would love it:) I wish they still had that gov cheese cause one of my Grands used to get it and OMG! NOM.NOM.NOM. So yummy.

BTW, I have several grands as my parents divorced several times.
 
dimitri said:
Well... At my local grocery store, you can buy bottled Cola cheaper than the bottled water (at least the water that doesn't taste like dirty).

What can we do when can't sodas are cheaper than water?
Click to expand...

I have never understood the paying for water craze. I mean it is just water and should be free:)
 
Kali said:
Maybe it depends on your area but I know here? They are very strict and as I said-days of riding the welfare gravy train is pretty much over.
Click to expand...

Not really, during Reagans term they played switch around with the welfare system.
Instead of getting direct cash benefits by applying for funds, you now get refundable tax credits.
I'm talking in the upwards range of $7000 to $8000 a year.

All of the people I work with have access to very affordable and comprehensive health insurance.
I'm talking about the company pays 80% of the insurance premiums and they still put their children on Medicaid.
That is milking the system.

Kali said:
Since you know how to scam the system? I am guessing you know folks that are doing it? Have you turned them in?? And I call total B.S on they will not check! That is total crap.
Click to expand...

In my county, DFACS is so backed up that they have to get outside counties to help them process the claims.
Not only that but I'm not inviting drama in my life, by ratting out people I have to work with everyday.
 
Last edited:
Kali said:
I am totally all for helping people and giving hands up over hand outs for LIFE. If it were up to me? I would create more social programs where everybody either gets some form of education or some type of trade school where they can at least have a real chance at a decent job.

I feel since we are the U.S.A. that everybody in this country should be able to get a college degree or some sort of trade school and that nobody should be out of work. But sadly? That is not reality.

I am not one of these keep em on Welfare and that is that type people. I support helping people get on their feet, get educated or trained in a skill and helping them find a job so they can go on to be productive citizens.

But I am also not one that wants to see people in this country starve or children never getting the pleasure of a store bought birthdaycake.

One more thing: you have NO clue what I DO in reguards to helping people and I do help at a shelter for women and kids! So never say that to me again please.
Click to expand...

It may shock you but you have NO IDEA what I do...how much time I dedicate weekly not only in a paid but also a pro-bono capacity working with these the least of my brethren. i am regularly humbled by thepower and ability of those that succeed when given the opportunity. And that ULTIMETLY is what we are talking about in this program. Effective HAND UP programs vs bull**** handout programs. You dont like how harsh some of my words are? Tough ****. I am DAILY repulsed by the people that ENABLE those that have bought into the poor pathetic me message and more so by those that endorse the message. And whenEVER I see whiny little bitches not only not grateful for the support of others (and its OK...really...I dont EXPECT gratitude) but also pissy in their expectation and demands of others...yeah...it turns my stomach a little bit. They want to buy sodas, smokes, candy bars? Fine...get a ****ing job pal. But when it comes to assistance meant for food and nurturing...either demonstrate you will utilize those resources adequately to provide nutritous meals for you and yours, or dont get surprised when some of us say...fine...we want to see it changed or we should pull the plug altogether.

I'll take you at your word when you say you are for hand-ups, not hand-outs. Fine...then you MIGHT want to consider the ineffective nature of your unequivocated support of a government handout system.
 
Her attitude makes me not want to give charitably, since there's no culpability.

It's the same reason why you don't give a dollar to the disheveled old man with the brown paper bag in front of the liquor store. It's a safe bet that he won't use any dropped change to get a hot meal, clothes, or a place to stay. He'll just drown himself in another bottle.

Subsidize that? Not in this lifetime.
 
rivrrat said:
And we're arguing that it should NOT be.
Click to expand...

Very good. You understand the concept behind debate. Sadly for you, you're sitting in the FAIL seat. Despite assertions to the contrary, our country hasn't turned into a mad socialist regime quite yet, and our government will not be issuing absurd directives as to what types/brands/amounts of food those receiving assistance must/may consume.

rivrrat said:
If you're making so little that you qualify for food stamps, then you are making so little that you qualify not to pay income taxes.
Click to expand...

You are absolutely and unequivocally wrong on this point. :2no4:

rivrrat said:
I really don't care which specific taxes fund it. I was addressing the fact that they don't pay income taxes if they're using food stamps.
Click to expand...

Still wrong. :shrug:

rivrrat said:
If you want money from me, you accept my rules for using it, or you don't get any more. Same for anyone receiving charity. The person offering the charity makes the rules.
Click to expand...

Happily for all of us, that "person" isn't you. :2wave:
 
Last edited:
Kali said:
I always enjoy your posts! Some of these folks simply do not understand any of this and what is killing me? Are the two that should totally GET IT? Seem to be heartless:(
Click to expand...
Yeah, it's so ****ing heartless of us to forbid the buying of oreos and doritoes with public funds. :roll: Oh the horror. Whatever will they eat??!

Kali said:
Tell me Goddess of Bacon can we at least let them eat some Bacon? That is no more healthy than Soda or a Twinkie. Bacon is full of salt and not so good for ya either.
Click to expand...
Bacon has nutritional value. Pepsi and Oreos do not.

Glinda said:
Very good. You understand the concept behind debate. Sadly for you, you're sitting in the FAIL seat. Despite assertions to the contrary, our country hasn't turned into a mad socialist regime quite yet, and our government will not be issuing absurd directives as to what types/brands/amounts of food those receiving assistance must/may consume.
Click to expand...
ROFL You ****ing serious? They most certainly DO restrict what you can and can't buy with public assistance. As well they should. But, they should restrict it even more.

You are absolutely and unequivocally wrong on this point. :2no4:
Click to expand...
Empty words :roll:

Still wrong. :shrug:
Click to expand...
I'm wrong in what I don't care about? LMFAO Yeah. Okay.


Happily for all of us, that "person" isn't you.
Click to expand...
I know! Whatever would people eat if they couldn't have twinkies, hoho's and pepsi? Like, OMG, I'd make them meat, fruit, and veges. I'd make sure the finite amount of available funds go further and provide the most nutritional value to each person who needs it so that even more people could be fed adequately with the same amount of money. Horrible, terrible, heartless person that I am wanting to make sure that more people can get help and eat healthy. The horror of it all.

And, sorry to tell you, but that charitable person IS me. I donate to several charities. I just donate to ones that don't waste the ****ing money on stupid **** like Dr. Pepper.
 
I know! Whatever would people eat if they couldn't have twinkies, hoho's and pepsi?
Click to expand...

And then, to top it off, they want to whine (see Kali's posts in this thread) that generic Oreos taste like crap, and they deserve name-brand ones. And that cake mixes are not good enough, because they don't want to be 'slaves to their stoves"; they deserve bakery cakes.

:roll:

Entitlement run amok.
 
1069 said:
And then, to top it off, they want to whine (see Kali's posts in this thread) that generic Oreos taste like crap, and they deserve name-brand ones. And that cake mixes are not good enough, because they don't want to be 'slaves to their stoves"; they deserve bakery cakes.

:roll:

Entitlement run amok.
Click to expand...

Holy ****. I totally missed that. What complete and utter horsehit.

There's some truth to the old adage, "Beggers can't be choosers."
 
Has it occurred to anyone that while we're arguing about whether people on gov assistance can buy soda or twinkies, we're going in debt to the tune of another TRILLION-plus next year?


A trillion. That's

1,000,000,000,000.

That's one million million. You could make 1 person out of every 300 in America a millionaire with that.

That's over three thousand dollars for EACH man, woman and child in America. More like ten thousand dollars per household.

EACH YEAR!!!

We've got to get spending under control, and most particularly social spending. It is going to bankrupt us.
 
Last edited:
That's over three thousand dollars for EACH man, woman and child in America. More like ten thousand dollars per household.
Click to expand...

Is that all?
That isn't very much, really.

We've got to get spending under control, and most particularly social spending. It is going to bankrupt us.
Click to expand...


Why "particularly" social spending?
It accounts for an insignificant percentage of our annual spending.
I think we need to put more money toward social programs, actually. A lot more.
I think we should get the money to do so by cutting elsewhere. Military spending, for example.
I just think the social programs need to be run more efficiently, so that the largest possible number of recipients can benefit.
"More efficiently" would include recipients not being permitted to purchase expensive and nutritionally empty junk treats with food assistance money.
 
Here is a novel idea; merge the Army with the marines, the navy with the airforce, get rid of Homeland Security (merge that in with the CIA), have stricter guidelines on who can get foodstamps so that fraud cannot be committed, and if someone does have to get foodstamps, instantly make sure that unless unable, they have first been put into that state's unemployment system and are actively searching for a job.

Think of all that money we will save?
 
JohnWOlin said:
Here is a novel idea; merge the Army with the marines, the navy with the airforce, get rid of Homeland Security (merge that in with the CIA), have stricter guidelines on who can get foodstamps so that fraud cannot be committed, and if someone does have to get foodstamps, instantly make sure that unless unable, they have first been put into that state's unemployment system and are actively searching for a job.

Think of all that money we will save?
Click to expand...

Or just print up a big pile of stickers that say "SNAP-approved" (just like the ones that say "WIC-approved") and slap them onto all of the nutritious, generic or store-brand items in the grocery store.
 
JohnWOlin said:
When has milk ever said WIC approved?
Click to expand...

Store-brand milk always has a WIC-approved sticker.
It always has, at least in my neighborhood grocery store.
Eggs, too. Cheese.
All WIC-approved foods have stickers.
 
1069 said:
Store-brand milk always has a WIC-approved sticker.
It always has, at least in my neighborhood grocery store.
Eggs, too. Cheese.
All WIC-approved foods have stickers.
Click to expand...

(Looks at Kroger's milk) Nope don't have it. Maybe it is something specific to your state or store?
 
Google the term "WIC approved sticker" (in quotation marks).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom