Food Stamps

[PJ]

I obviously vote to expand. (see sig)

[dead0man]

I'm happy with the way it is, but wouldn't care too much if they expanded it or reduced it.  I'd much rather give a handout to poor people who need it (even if it's abused by 10% of people getting it) than to "big business" for any reason...especially the stupid "too big to fail" ones.

[ElectionsGuy]

Reduce. Have programs encouraging people to work so to gradually reduce the spending on food stamps. Eliminating it entirely is not a good idea, but obviously having food stamps is not a good thing and we shouldn't encourage it to be good or normal. 

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

I obviously vote to expand. (see sig)

The image in your sig is a little bit misleading, since the two sources are measuring somewhat differently - a family who pays only $36 in taxes for food stamps isn't going to be paying even $1000 in federal income tax total. Still, the point that corporate subsidies take up more money than food stamps stands.

In the current economy with unemployment the way it is, we shouldn't reduce food stamps.  I'd be open to expanding it so long as we did more to make sure its targeted to the people who really need it and minimize fraud.  Some of the reforms proposed lately by the House Republicans however are wrongheaded - a person should be able to put some money in savings to help them get back on their feet and still be eligible.

[bedstuy]

I don't understand why people want to cut foodstamps.  What kind of person wouldn't agree to pay more in taxes to avoid cuts in foodstamps?  This rich country with incredible abundance of food should let people go hungry?  Some people just have no compassion for other people I suppose.

In terms of incentives, is there a scintilla of evidence that the foodstamp program stops people from finding work?

[Goldwater]

I'm happy with the way it is, but wouldn't care too much if they expanded it or reduced it.  I'd much rather give a handout to poor people who need it (even if it's abused by 10% of people getting it) than to "big business" for any reason...especially the stupid "too big to fail" ones.

This. Corporate welfare should be eliminated, while food stamp spending is low on my list of priorities.

[Flake]

What kind of person denies food to the poor and needy?

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

I voted other, it could use expansion but I wouldn't mind some changes to the program to eliminate totally unhealthy options such as soda from the list of approved items in all jurisdictions.

[H. Ross Peron]

Expand but also this:

I voted other, but I wouldn't mind some changes to the program to eliminate totally unhealthy options such as soda from the list of approved items in all jurisdictions.

[Hatman 🍁]

Other. While well intentioned, it stigmatizes the poor. I don't know of any other country that has food stamps.

[Franzl]

Other. While well intentioned, it stigmatizes the poor. I don't know of any other country that has food stamps.

Yes. Just give poor people money. The vast majority of them will spend it wisely.

[TNF]

Other: institute a universal basic income program.

[Snowstalker Mk. II]

Other: institute a universal basic income program.

[The Dowager Mod]

What kind of person denies food to the poor and needy?

A Republican?

[Potus]

Other: institute a universal basic income program.

Paul Ryan endorsed this in a WSJ op ed.

http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304632204579337000386366182?mg=reno64-wsj&url=http%3A%2F%2Fonline.wsj.com%2Farticle%2FSB10001424052702304632204579337000386366182.html

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

What kind of person denies food to the poor and needy?

A Republican?

There was a time, I think, when TG's answer would have just been bitterly partisan.  Sadly, today it's true. 

[The Dowager Mod]

What kind of person denies food to the poor and needy?

A Republican?

There was a time, I think, when TG's answer would have just been bitterly partisan.  Sadly, today it's true. 

Damn i was going for bitterly partisan too, must try harder next time.

[Comrade Funk]

Expand, but cut unemployment benefits.

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

What kind of person denies food to the poor and needy?

A Republican?

There was a time, I think, when TG's answer would have just been bitterly partisan.  Sadly, today it's true. 

Damn i was going for bitterly partisan too, must try harder next time.

I'm getting more liberal in my mid-life.  LOL.  Scary. 

[TNF]

Expand, but cut unemployment benefits.

So let them eat, but not pay the rent. That makes sense.

[Cassius]

What kind of person denies food to the poor and needy?

It's not really a denial. It's not as if the people who want to get rid of the food stamp program are deliberately denying the poor access to food. If those who would otherwise receive food stamps were able to pay for said food, then they would be allowed to buy said food. So, though they cannot afford to buy food, they are not, legally or forcefully, being prevented from having access to or eating food.

Anyway, though I would have opposed the introduction of such a program (I would prefer to see some sort of updated workhouse for the long-term unemployed), I can't see the point of cutting it in one fell swoop. Better simply to gradually reduce the size and scope of the program. In addition, I would have it stipulate that only a 'survival diet' could be purchased through food stamps. Bread, water, a little cheap meat and a few greens.

[Indy Texas]

What kind of person denies food to the poor and needy?

It's not really a denial. It's not as if the people who want to get rid of the food stamp program are deliberately denying the poor access to food. If those who would otherwise receive food stamps were able to pay for said food, then they would be allowed to buy said food. So, though they cannot afford to buy food, they are not, legally or forcefully, being prevented from having access to or eating food.

Anyway, though I would have opposed the introduction of such a program (I would prefer to see some sort of updated workhouse for the long-term unemployed), I can't see the point of cutting it in one fell swoop. Better simply to gradually reduce the size and scope of the program. In addition, I would have it stipulate that only a 'survival diet' could be purchased through food stamps. Bread, water, a little cheap meat and a few greens.

You strike me as the sort of person who would ask a person who lost his legs in an accident why he doesn't stop being so lazy and go for a 5 mile run.

I'll let you get back to serving gruel to Dickensian orphans who work in a buggy whip factory for two cents an hour or whatever it is you do.

[I Will Not Be Wrong]

Instead of upping food stamps , up the minimum wage.

[RosettaStoned]

 Cut entirely. 

[Redalgo]

Food stamps are one of many examples of a liberal welfare regime fouling up anti-poverty efforts. And as Hatman mentioned, it gives the poor a special currency to use in a public space identifying them for all to see. To indulge in a little hyperbole, it symbolically hollers, "Look there everyone! That bloke is a failure to their family, disgrace to their country, and is probably into some pretty shady stuff. They are so dysfunctional that they cannot even get food without a handout. Hey you there, go get a job you ****ing parasite." And so on and so forth. Poor folk have enough to be stressed out about as it is without measures that shame them and treat them as totally untrustworthy being institutionalized.

I also agree with Snowstalker and TNF here. Give everyone a lump of money. Make it a universal system that is not structured in a way that drives wedges between people of different classes. Everyone pays in and then everyone receives benefits back. That way we are all interdependent with everyone contributing under an agreeable understanding that the scheme exists to help each of us equally.