(04-10-2015 09:58 AM)shiftyeagle Wrote:  

(04-10-2015 09:55 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(04-10-2015 09:52 AM)shiftyeagle Wrote:  If you live on a small fixed income and a food stamp supplement every month, yet spend that money on steak and seafood....then that already explains a lot.

I don't see any pragmatism in spending a SUPPLEMENTAL allowance on anything other than NEEDS. SNAP is in place for folks who NEED it. No one NEEDS steak and seafood. Hell, I'm not on assistance and can't even afford that ****.

Steak can be ground to make hamburgers, meatloaf, tacos, soups etc. etc.

Seafood is sometimes necessary for religious purposes during lent.

Are republicans actually going to deny Catholics on food stamps from purchasing fish during lent?

Or you could just buy more affordable ground beef.....lol.

Seafood isn't necessary during lent. Abstaining from meat altogether, including seafood, is also an option and it's only mandated on Fridays by the Catholic Church.

Desperation is a stinky cologne.....and those desperate arguments are desperate.

Really? What exactly should Catholics eat if on Friday if they can't eat fish?

Fitbud, are you familiar with the term "red herring?" Pun not intended.

(04-10-2015 09:59 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(04-10-2015 09:58 AM)shiftyeagle Wrote:  

(04-10-2015 09:55 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(04-10-2015 09:52 AM)shiftyeagle Wrote:  If you live on a small fixed income and a food stamp supplement every month, yet spend that money on steak and seafood....then that already explains a lot.

I don't see any pragmatism in spending a SUPPLEMENTAL allowance on anything other than NEEDS. SNAP is in place for folks who NEED it. No one NEEDS steak and seafood. Hell, I'm not on assistance and can't even afford that ****.

Steak can be ground to make hamburgers, meatloaf, tacos, soups etc. etc.

Seafood is sometimes necessary for religious purposes during lent.

Are republicans actually going to deny Catholics on food stamps from purchasing fish during lent?

Or you could just buy more affordable ground beef.....lol.

Seafood isn't necessary during lent. Abstaining from meat altogether, including seafood, is also an option and it's only mandated on Fridays by the Catholic Church.

Desperation is a stinky cologne.....and those desperate arguments are desperate.

Really? What exactly should Catholics eat if on Friday if they can't eat fish?

Vegetables, fruit, pasta, starches. - from a real-life Catholic.

Amazing. There are things other than seafood that can be eaten on Fridays. Are you always this dense?

This dude's argument is that Catholics will have to go without eating altogether on Fridays during Lent if this legislation is passed.

I want everyone to reflect on this.

(04-10-2015 10:05 AM)shiftyeagle Wrote:  This dude's argument is that Catholics will have to go without eating altogether on Fridays during Lent if this legislation is passed.

I want everyone to reflect on this.

That isn't my arguement. It's just an example.

My arguement is that if people qualify for food stamps, they should be able to buy food with it.

It's a pretty simply argument.

(04-10-2015 10:06 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(04-10-2015 10:05 AM)shiftyeagle Wrote:  This dude's argument is that Catholics will have to go without eating altogether on Fridays during Lent if this legislation is passed.

I want everyone to reflect on this.

My arguement is that if people qualify for food stamps, they should be able to buy food with it.

No one is saying otherwise.

This wouldn't even cut their damn benefits.

In fact, it would give them more money to spend on food they actually NEED.

(04-10-2015 09:41 AM)Machiavelli Wrote:  I got my titty in a wringer this week over something kind of like this. My Sister in law is up and she bought some snacks for the kids. She had Great Value cheese crackers and I like Cheez Its. I thought my wife bought them so when I reached into the pantry I yelled who in the heck bought the cheapo crackers. Not realizing it was just my in laws trying to help out. Felt bad. Beggars shouldn't be choosers but I can see both sides of it. Who are you to tell me what i can buy. Either we have food stamps or we don't. You let the recipients choose or priortize. I can honestly see both sides of this.

You can buy anything with your own money. If you work for it and earn it! That's the American dream.

Personally, I think all the product used on an EBT card should be produced in America or at least North America (Canada and Mexico). Food also should follow what the first lady preaches. I may not agree with the majority of what her husband does, but I understand her standardized lunch agenda and support it to a certain extent.

If the American tax payer is providing FREE services to individuals less fortunate, it should be for a healthy lifestyle that is cost effective. Providing someone with foreign products and luxury items like lobster isn't what's best for America!

If you want to cut wasteful spending, you cannot limit the initiative to only certain programs or departments.

Wasteful spending needs to be addressed ACROSS THE BOARD, from defense to SNAP to education.

(04-10-2015 10:07 AM)shiftyeagle Wrote:  

(04-10-2015 10:06 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(04-10-2015 10:05 AM)shiftyeagle Wrote:  This dude's argument is that Catholics will have to go without eating altogether on Fridays during Lent if this legislation is passed.

I want everyone to reflect on this.

My arguement is that if people qualify for food stamps, they should be able to buy food with it.

No one is saying otherwise.

This wouldn't even cut their damn benefits.

In fact, it would give them more money to spend on food they actually NEED.

Who's to say they don't need steak and seafood?

Oh yeah......Republicans.

(04-10-2015 10:09 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(04-10-2015 10:07 AM)shiftyeagle Wrote:  

(04-10-2015 10:06 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(04-10-2015 10:05 AM)shiftyeagle Wrote:  This dude's argument is that Catholics will have to go without eating altogether on Fridays during Lent if this legislation is passed.

I want everyone to reflect on this.

My arguement is that if people qualify for food stamps, they should be able to buy food with it.

No one is saying otherwise.

This wouldn't even cut their damn benefits.

In fact, it would give them more money to spend on food they actually NEED.

Who's to say they don't need steak and seafood?

Steak and seafood are basic human needs now?

My god man, listen to yourself.

(04-10-2015 09:44 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(04-10-2015 09:06 AM)firmbizzle Wrote:  So beef and seafood is now a luxury item. I thought it was just food.

"This is the way I want to live and I don’t really see anything changing," Jason Greenslate explained to Fox. “It’s free food; it’s awesome."

That story fit a longtime conservative suspicion that poor people use food stamps to purchase luxury items. Now, a Republican state lawmaker in Missouri is pushing for legislation that would stop people like Greenslate and severely limit what food stamp recipients can buy. The bill being proposed would ban the purchase with food stamps of "cookies, chips, energy drinks, soft drinks, seafood or steak."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonk...d-seafood/

If this isn't an example of how some on the right feel about poor people, I don't know what is.

And rightfully so. I'm all for helping for a limited time, but don't tell me an poorer or disadvantages person has a right to eat better than I do if I'm working and busting my ass.

It's not a question of disliking or 'trying to keep poor people down', it's common sense. When you give money to a homeless guy on the street do you give him a $5 or $10 bill or reach to the back and pull out a $100 bill? Help is one thing, but putting someone that needs assistance in a better position than working people is another.

(04-10-2015 10:11 AM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(04-10-2015 09:44 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(04-10-2015 09:06 AM)firmbizzle Wrote:  So beef and seafood is now a luxury item. I thought it was just food.

"This is the way I want to live and I don’t really see anything changing," Jason Greenslate explained to Fox. “It’s free food; it’s awesome."

That story fit a longtime conservative suspicion that poor people use food stamps to purchase luxury items. Now, a Republican state lawmaker in Missouri is pushing for legislation that would stop people like Greenslate and severely limit what food stamp recipients can buy. The bill being proposed would ban the purchase with food stamps of "cookies, chips, energy drinks, soft drinks, seafood or steak."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonk...d-seafood/

If this isn't an example of how some on the right feel about poor people, I don't know what is.

And rightfully so. I'm all for helping for a limited time, but don't tell me an poorer or disadvantages person has a right to eat better than I do if I'm working and busting my ass.

It's not a question of disliking or 'trying to keep poor people down', it's common sense. When you give money to a homeless guy on the street do you give him a $5 or $10 bill or reach to the back and pull out a $100 bill? Help is one thing, but putting someone that needs assistance in a better position than working people is another.

I have a friend who lives on food stamps. They are a family of 5 and they get roughly $400 a month. No one is living better than you are on $400 a month.

(04-10-2015 10:13 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(04-10-2015 10:11 AM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(04-10-2015 09:44 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(04-10-2015 09:06 AM)firmbizzle Wrote:  So beef and seafood is now a luxury item. I thought it was just food.

"This is the way I want to live and I don’t really see anything changing," Jason Greenslate explained to Fox. “It’s free food; it’s awesome."

That story fit a longtime conservative suspicion that poor people use food stamps to purchase luxury items. Now, a Republican state lawmaker in Missouri is pushing for legislation that would stop people like Greenslate and severely limit what food stamp recipients can buy. The bill being proposed would ban the purchase with food stamps of "cookies, chips, energy drinks, soft drinks, seafood or steak."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonk...d-seafood/

If this isn't an example of how some on the right feel about poor people, I don't know what is.

And rightfully so. I'm all for helping for a limited time, but don't tell me an poorer or disadvantages person has a right to eat better than I do if I'm working and busting my ass.

It's not a question of disliking or 'trying to keep poor people down', it's common sense. When you give money to a homeless guy on the street do you give him a $5 or $10 bill or reach to the back and pull out a $100 bill? Help is one thing, but putting someone that needs assistance in a better position than working people is another.

I have a friend who lives on food stamps. They are a family of 5 and they get roughly $400 a month. No one is living better than you are on $400 a month.

$400 just in food stamps?

(04-10-2015 10:01 AM)shiftyeagle Wrote:  

(04-10-2015 09:59 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(04-10-2015 09:58 AM)shiftyeagle Wrote:  

(04-10-2015 09:55 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(04-10-2015 09:52 AM)shiftyeagle Wrote:  If you live on a small fixed income and a food stamp supplement every month, yet spend that money on steak and seafood....then that already explains a lot.

I don't see any pragmatism in spending a SUPPLEMENTAL allowance on anything other than NEEDS. SNAP is in place for folks who NEED it. No one NEEDS steak and seafood. Hell, I'm not on assistance and can't even afford that ****.

Steak can be ground to make hamburgers, meatloaf, tacos, soups etc. etc.

Seafood is sometimes necessary for religious purposes during lent.

Are republicans actually going to deny Catholics on food stamps from purchasing fish during lent?

Or you could just buy more affordable ground beef.....lol.

Seafood isn't necessary during lent. Abstaining from meat altogether, including seafood, is also an option and it's only mandated on Fridays by the Catholic Church.

Desperation is a stinky cologne.....and those desperate arguments are desperate.

Really? What exactly should Catholics eat if on Friday if they can't eat fish?

Vegetables, fruit, pasta, starches. - from a real-life Catholic.

Amazing. There are things other than seafood that can be eaten on Fridays. Are you always this dense?

hahahah

(04-10-2015 10:13 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(04-10-2015 10:11 AM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(04-10-2015 09:44 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(04-10-2015 09:06 AM)firmbizzle Wrote:  So beef and seafood is now a luxury item. I thought it was just food.

"This is the way I want to live and I don’t really see anything changing," Jason Greenslate explained to Fox. “It’s free food; it’s awesome."

That story fit a longtime conservative suspicion that poor people use food stamps to purchase luxury items. Now, a Republican state lawmaker in Missouri is pushing for legislation that would stop people like Greenslate and severely limit what food stamp recipients can buy. The bill being proposed would ban the purchase with food stamps of "cookies, chips, energy drinks, soft drinks, seafood or steak."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonk...d-seafood/

If this isn't an example of how some on the right feel about poor people, I don't know what is.

And rightfully so. I'm all for helping for a limited time, but don't tell me an poorer or disadvantages person has a right to eat better than I do if I'm working and busting my ass.

It's not a question of disliking or 'trying to keep poor people down', it's common sense. When you give money to a homeless guy on the street do you give him a $5 or $10 bill or reach to the back and pull out a $100 bill? Help is one thing, but putting someone that needs assistance in a better position than working people is another.

I have a friend who lives on food stamps. They are a family of 5 and they get roughly $400 a month. No one is living better than you are on $400 a month.

I never said anything about living better, I said "eat better". A family of 5 "living on", as you put it, food stamps shouldn't be buying steaks either. They should be making that $400 go as far as they can. You examples has nothing to do with my position or disproves any opinion that I have.

(04-10-2015 10:09 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(04-10-2015 10:07 AM)shiftyeagle Wrote:  

(04-10-2015 10:06 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(04-10-2015 10:05 AM)shiftyeagle Wrote:  This dude's argument is that Catholics will have to go without eating altogether on Fridays during Lent if this legislation is passed.

I want everyone to reflect on this.

My arguement is that if people qualify for food stamps, they should be able to buy food with it.

No one is saying otherwise.

This wouldn't even cut their damn benefits.

In fact, it would give them more money to spend on food they actually NEED.

Who's to say they don't need steak and seafood?

Oh yeah......Republicans.

Don't forget INDEPENDENTS! Which I'm a proud member of!

$400.00 in food stamps per month can't be right. My family would be eating like royalty.

(04-10-2015 10:13 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(04-10-2015 10:11 AM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(04-10-2015 09:44 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(04-10-2015 09:06 AM)firmbizzle Wrote:  So beef and seafood is now a luxury item. I thought it was just food.

"This is the way I want to live and I don’t really see anything changing," Jason Greenslate explained to Fox. “It’s free food; it’s awesome."

That story fit a longtime conservative suspicion that poor people use food stamps to purchase luxury items. Now, a Republican state lawmaker in Missouri is pushing for legislation that would stop people like Greenslate and severely limit what food stamp recipients can buy. The bill being proposed would ban the purchase with food stamps of "cookies, chips, energy drinks, soft drinks, seafood or steak."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonk...d-seafood/

If this isn't an example of how some on the right feel about poor people, I don't know what is.

And rightfully so. I'm all for helping for a limited time, but don't tell me an poorer or disadvantages person has a right to eat better than I do if I'm working and busting my ass.

It's not a question of disliking or 'trying to keep poor people down', it's common sense. When you give money to a homeless guy on the street do you give him a $5 or $10 bill or reach to the back and pull out a $100 bill? Help is one thing, but putting someone that needs assistance in a better position than working people is another.

I have a friend who lives on food stamps. They are a family of 5 and they get roughly $400 a month. No one is living better than you are on $400 a month.

Go with me on my example. Do you give the homeless guy $5 or $10 or hand him $100?

(04-10-2015 09:59 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(04-10-2015 09:58 AM)shiftyeagle Wrote:  

(04-10-2015 09:55 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(04-10-2015 09:52 AM)shiftyeagle Wrote:  If you live on a small fixed income and a food stamp supplement every month, yet spend that money on steak and seafood....then that already explains a lot.

I don't see any pragmatism in spending a SUPPLEMENTAL allowance on anything other than NEEDS. SNAP is in place for folks who NEED it. No one NEEDS steak and seafood. Hell, I'm not on assistance and can't even afford that ****.

Steak can be ground to make hamburgers, meatloaf, tacos, soups etc. etc.

Seafood is sometimes necessary for religious purposes during lent.

Are republicans actually going to deny Catholics on food stamps from purchasing fish during lent?

Or you could just buy more affordable ground beef.....lol.

Seafood isn't necessary during lent. Abstaining from meat altogether, including seafood, is also an option and it's only mandated on Fridays by the Catholic Church.

Desperation is a stinky cologne.....and those desperate arguments are desperate.

Really? What exactly should Catholics eat if on Friday if they can't eat fish?

Good grief.
There is no requirement during Lent for Catholics to eat fish.
Catholics just can't eat meat. Grains, vegetables, fruit, etc. are all fine. Many Catholics eat meatless pasta or meatless pizza on fridays in lent.

(04-10-2015 09:47 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(04-10-2015 09:45 AM)QuestionSocratic Wrote:  I think there should be reasonable limits on the use of food stamps. Certainly no lottery tickets, cigarettes or alcohol, and I can't really think why bottled water and sports drinks should not be on an exclusion list.

That said, some sea food can be healthy and relatively inexpensive. And there is nothing wrong with round steak. It's the details that make this problematic.

If you check at any grocery store, you'll find that a half dozen apples or oranges cost less than a bag of Tostitos. Common sense doesn't come naturally to people.

The only limits on food stamps should be that they be used on food.

Who the hell are you? The King. Food stamps should not be used for expensive cuts of meat. Fresh sea food can be inexpensive. And Obama took away the work requirement to get food stamps, 48 million on it. Obama is the food stamp president.