Trump. Replace food stamps with food boxes. Very smart.

[Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!)]

Since we're already paying an assload on their medicaid, it probably makes sense to try and force these morons to eat healthy.  God forbid they learn something in the process.

Of course reducing what the govt spends on medicaid would hurt gdp, so the resident fucktards prefer helicopters of cash.

It would take "big grocery" about 11 seconds to adjust their inventory and supply chain to accommodate, so yhe idea it's "too confusing" is very lol.

If we cared about the children these kids would have been taken away from these people at birth. Lol

[star seed 7]

Some people people like fsd just prefer fascism.

[Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!)]

Then again, remember when the govt tried to make a webpage for poors to by shitty high deductible insurance policies through????

[Whisker Biscuit]

The very pillar of capitalism is for hard working taxpayers to subsidize the piss poor decisions of others.  Want to eat anything and everything and never get your ass off the couch?  No problem, taxpayers that eat healthy and exercise will pay for your health care.  Want to eff dudes without a rubber?  No problem, taxpayers will pay for your hospital bills and subsidize your living expenses....hell taxpayers will even pay you more money for your subsequent kids.  Want to do drugs?  No problem, taxpayers will pay for the emergency care costs of your overdoses and subsidize your living expenses because you can't pass a drug test to get a job.   Ain't life great!

[Phil Titola]

"unprotected sex out of wedlock"

Lol.

[K-S-U-Wildcats!]

It is definitely awesome that kids go hungry so we prove a point about responsibility to their insufficiently grateful parents.

IMO not enough people seem to care at all about the children in these discussions.  I've said it before I don't mind losing some efficiency in the process if it results in more balanced meals for families.

That’s the problem so many people are overlooking that Trump is trying to address. Posters like Sys are good for popping in occasionally to espouse economic truisms about the superior efficiency of cash that completely misses the point: welfare is about providing assistance to the truly needy - and sometimes that isn’t so “efficient.”

People are spending their food stamps on unhealthy crap, and at much more expensive locations (convenience stores). Some of that can be fixed by tightening restrictions on the use of food stamps. But it doesn’t address people selling/bartering their food stamps for pennies on the dollar to buy booze, cigs, sex, drugs, etc. In all these cases, the kids suffer.

This is why there are noble charities that I support that send home backpacks full of nutritious food with children. The government scaling back food stamps and instead increasing their partnership with these charities is a wonderful idea.

[Whisker Biscuit]

"unprotected sex out of wedlock"

Lol.

Damn...i knew i screwed this up.  So that you can understand it:  "want to eff dudes without a rubber?"

[DQ12]

@MakeItRain  come get your boy

[michigancat]

It is definitely awesome that kids go hungry so we prove a point about responsibility to their insufficiently grateful parents.

IMO not enough people seem to care at all about the children in these discussions.  I've said it before I don't mind losing some efficiency in the process if it results in more balanced meals for families.

That’s the problem so many people are overlooking that Trump is trying to address. Posters like Sys are good for popping in occasionally to espouse economic truisms about the superior efficiency of cash that completely misses the point: welfare is about providing assistance to the truly needy - and sometimes that isn’t so “efficient.”

People are spending their food stamps on unhealthy crap, and at much more expensive locations (convenience stores). Some of that can be fixed by tightening restrictions on the use of food stamps. But it doesn’t address people selling/bartering their food stamps for pennies on the dollar to buy booze, cigs, sex, drugs, etc. In all these cases, the kids suffer.

This is why there are noble charities that I support that send home backpacks full of nutritious food with children. The government scaling back food stamps and instead increasing their partnership with these charities is a wonderful idea.

Was this program designed to make food more nutritious for recipients or to reduce fraud associated with SNAP?

Also, lol that you started that post implying that you care about truly assisting the needy.

[Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!)]

Point - KSUW

Michicat, try harder

[Whisker Biscuit]

It is definitely awesome that kids go hungry so we prove a point about responsibility to their insufficiently grateful parents.

IMO not enough people seem to care at all about the children in these discussions.  I've said it before I don't mind losing some efficiency in the process if it results in more balanced meals for families.

That’s the problem so many people are overlooking that Trump is trying to address. Posters like Sys are good for popping in occasionally to espouse economic truisms about the superior efficiency of cash that completely misses the point: welfare is about providing assistance to the truly needy - and sometimes that isn’t so “efficient.”

People are spending their food stamps on unhealthy crap, and at much more expensive locations (convenience stores). Some of that can be fixed by tightening restrictions on the use of food stamps. But it doesn’t address people selling/bartering their food stamps for pennies on the dollar to buy booze, cigs, sex, drugs, etc. In all these cases, the kids suffer.

This is why there are noble charities that I support that send home backpacks full of nutritious food with children. The government scaling back food stamps and instead increasing their partnership with these charities is a wonderful idea.

Was this program designed to make food more nutritious for recipients or to reduce fraud associated with SNAP?

Also, lol that you started that post implying that you care about truly assisting the needy.

I will freely admit i don't give two shits about the needy outside of those that truly can't work (kids, elderly, disabled...and not because you're too fat)....get a rough ridin' job and if that's not enough to pay the bills get a second job.  But that absolutely doesn't preclude me from wanting to get the best bang for the buck from the money the government is going spend (or in most instances, waste) on "welfare" programs.  Anything that can be done to improve results, whether it's improve nutrition or reduce fraud, should be attempted and i'm not sure how you could even argue with that....outside of just bitching that someone doesn't care as much as you think they should.

[star seed 7]

I told you guys wb would be great in the pit 

[treysolid]

"unprotected sex out of wedlock"

Lol.

Damn...i knew i screwed this up.  So that you can understand it:  "want to eff dudes without a rubber?"

what you're implying here is that a pregnancy is the woman's fault. got it.

[Phil Titola]

Can someone point me to details of all this fraud and waste occuring that necessitates dropping poor people food boxes like they are refugees Ina 3rd world country instead of American citizens?

[michigancat]

It is definitely awesome that kids go hungry so we prove a point about responsibility to their insufficiently grateful parents.

IMO not enough people seem to care at all about the children in these discussions.  I've said it before I don't mind losing some efficiency in the process if it results in more balanced meals for families.

That’s the problem so many people are overlooking that Trump is trying to address. Posters like Sys are good for popping in occasionally to espouse economic truisms about the superior efficiency of cash that completely misses the point: welfare is about providing assistance to the truly needy - and sometimes that isn’t so “efficient.”

People are spending their food stamps on unhealthy crap, and at much more expensive locations (convenience stores). Some of that can be fixed by tightening restrictions on the use of food stamps. But it doesn’t address people selling/bartering their food stamps for pennies on the dollar to buy booze, cigs, sex, drugs, etc. In all these cases, the kids suffer.

This is why there are noble charities that I support that send home backpacks full of nutritious food with children. The government scaling back food stamps and instead increasing their partnership with these charities is a wonderful idea.

Was this program designed to make food more nutritious for recipients or to reduce fraud associated with SNAP?

Also, lol that you started that post implying that you care about truly assisting the needy.

I will freely admit i don't give two shits about the needy outside of those that truly can't work (kids, elderly, disabled...and not because you're too fat)....get a rough ridin' job and if that's not enough to pay the bills get a second job.  But that absolutely doesn't preclude me from wanting to get the best bang for the buck from the money the government is going spend (or in most instances, waste) on "welfare" programs.  Anything that can be done to improve results, whether it's improve nutrition or reduce fraud, should be attempted and i'm not sure how you could even argue with that....outside of just bitching that someone doesn't care as much as you think they should.

Yeah there's no evidence that this would reduce fraud or improve nutrition. Fraud through SNAP is already extremely low and the purchasing behaviors of families on SNAP aren't significantly different than non-SNAP families. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/13/well/eat/food-stamp-snap-soda.html

Even then, there's no evidence this program would reduce the amount spent on soda.

[Whisker Biscuit]

"unprotected sex out of wedlock"

Lol.

Damn...i knew i screwed this up.  So that you can understand it:  "want to eff dudes without a rubber?"

what you're implying here is that a pregnancy is the woman's fault. got it.

I love this argument.  So a woman is not responsible for her pregnancy...got it.  You're the guy that gets mad at your wife's coworker for rough ridin' your wife.  Pro tip...it's not the co-workers fault your wife spread her legs for him.  He couldn't have mumped her without her consent and participation.  So yeah, it's her fault. 

[Whisker Biscuit]

It is definitely awesome that kids go hungry so we prove a point about responsibility to their insufficiently grateful parents.

IMO not enough people seem to care at all about the children in these discussions.  I've said it before I don't mind losing some efficiency in the process if it results in more balanced meals for families.

That’s the problem so many people are overlooking that Trump is trying to address. Posters like Sys are good for popping in occasionally to espouse economic truisms about the superior efficiency of cash that completely misses the point: welfare is about providing assistance to the truly needy - and sometimes that isn’t so “efficient.”

People are spending their food stamps on unhealthy crap, and at much more expensive locations (convenience stores). Some of that can be fixed by tightening restrictions on the use of food stamps. But it doesn’t address people selling/bartering their food stamps for pennies on the dollar to buy booze, cigs, sex, drugs, etc. In all these cases, the kids suffer.

This is why there are noble charities that I support that send home backpacks full of nutritious food with children. The government scaling back food stamps and instead increasing their partnership with these charities is a wonderful idea.

Was this program designed to make food more nutritious for recipients or to reduce fraud associated with SNAP?

Also, lol that you started that post implying that you care about truly assisting the needy.

I will freely admit i don't give two shits about the needy outside of those that truly can't work (kids, elderly, disabled...and not because you're too fat)....get a rough ridin' job and if that's not enough to pay the bills get a second job.  But that absolutely doesn't preclude me from wanting to get the best bang for the buck from the money the government is going spend (or in most instances, waste) on "welfare" programs.  Anything that can be done to improve results, whether it's improve nutrition or reduce fraud, should be attempted and i'm not sure how you could even argue with that....outside of just bitching that someone doesn't care as much as you think they should.

Yeah there's no evidence that this would reduce fraud or improve nutrition. Fraud through SNAP is already extremely low and the purchasing behaviors of families on SNAP aren't significantly different than non-SNAP families. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/13/well/eat/food-stamp-snap-soda.html

Even then, there's no evidence this program would reduce the amount spent on soda.

Now there's a cogent argument i can respect.  Good work mc.  I disagree, but i appreciate the on-topic response.

[star seed 7]

You disagree with what part?

[ChiComCat]

I love this argument.  So a woman is not responsible for her pregnancy...got it.  You're the guy that gets mad at your wife's coworker for rough ridin' your wife.  Pro tip...it's not the co-workers fault your wife spread her legs for him.  He couldn't have mumped her without her consent and participation.  So yeah, it's her fault. 

A woman isn't anymore responsible for her pregnancy than a man is but they have to deal with the consequences a lot more.  Also, the most bang for you buck is proper education and available contraception.

Also, your philosophy of women being responsible for sex because a man's job is to eff anything that moves speaks quite highly of you.

[catastrophe]

To be clear, I believe most Americans (rich and poor) make really poor food choices.  I also think we have reached a pretty bad place where some of the least healthy food available is also the cheapest.  It wasn't until I took a college level nutrition class that I had any appreciation for making better meal decisions, so I don't expect others to know better automatically.  I just think it would be great if we could incorporate some of this into our food stamps program.  If the federal government is basically taking responsibility for feeding people, it should do it right.

[Whisker Biscuit]

You disagree with what part?

I disagree with MC's conclusions.  Did you read the article?  It does a pretty good job of stating the case that the SNAP program needs to be improved.  If meals were provided instead of SNAP cards, people wouldn't have the opportunity to purchase sugary drinks or other crap food that will eventually give them diabetes and make them even more dependent and costly to taxpayers.

[renocat]

 A lot of small towns in KS have lost their grocery stores, and have a lot of old people.  Such boxes could be a godsend for them.

[Whisker Biscuit]

I love this argument.  So a woman is not responsible for her pregnancy...got it.  You're the guy that gets mad at your wife's coworker for rough ridin' your wife.  Pro tip...it's not the co-workers fault your wife spread her legs for him.  He couldn't have mumped her without her consent and participation.  So yeah, it's her fault. 

A woman isn't anymore responsible for her pregnancy than a man is but they have to deal with the consequences a lot more.  Also, the most bang for you buck is proper education and available contraception.

Also, your philosophy of women being responsible for sex because a man's job is to eff anything that moves speaks quite highly of you.

Damnit, i did it again.  I'm sorry.  I don't really understand what you are saying but i'm truly sorry if i've offended you.  women aren't responsible for the sex they engage in?  men don't want to eff women?  I'm confused.... i really don't get your argument, but again i apologize.

[Phil Titola]

This topic has nothing to do with fraud obviously, as there is way bigger fraud in other government programs and paying the IRS...it's about punishing the "lazy" people and they should just appreciate what they get for free.

[treysolid]

"unprotected sex out of wedlock"

Lol.

Damn...i knew i screwed this up.  So that you can understand it:  "want to eff dudes without a rubber?"

what you're implying here is that a pregnancy is the woman's fault. got it.

I love this argument.  So a woman is not responsible for her pregnancy...got it.  You're the guy that gets mad at your wife's coworker for rough ridin' your wife.  Pro tip...it's not the co-workers fault your wife spread her legs for him.  He couldn't have mumped her without her consent and participation.  So yeah, it's her fault.

You're the guy who slut-shames women you have what you perceive to have what you perceive to be too many sexual partners but turns around and high-fives your buddy while begging to hear more details about all the "sluts" he's been banging lately. And that colors your world-view for literally everything you said in your post.