Pages: 1 2 3 … 12

Topic closed

2010-03-17 07:25:33
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6937|USA
read this on boortz today... I loved it



"Yup. Got another email yesterday from someone on food stamps. She didn't like the fact that I called people who use food stamps "moochers." She gave me the usual song and dance about how educated she and her husband were, how hard they have worked, how responsible they were, and how unexpected hard times suddenly came upon them. Right, and all of this was supposed to legitimize their mooching.

Look folks .. the food stamps are out there. The program grows every year. If you need them - or you think you need them - to feed your family, then go for it. But while you're at it why don't you admit that you are using the government as an instrument of plunder. You are using the government to do something for you that, if you did it for yourself, would be a criminal act. You are using the government to seize money from someone who earned it and turn it over to you for your personal use. If you're OK with that, well ... what does that say about you? So just do it, stop your whining when you're called out, and enjoy your dinner."


Kinda hard to argue aginst this as the FACT that it is, but  I trust there is some out there that will manage to do it anyway.
2010-03-17 07:41:47
King_County_Downy
shitfaced
+2,791|6883|Seattle

I think there should be more regulation on who gets them and why, but overall, I think the program is helpful to those who need it. Some people are unemployable tbh. So do they deserve to get free food? I dunno...
Sober enough to know what I'm doing, drunk enough to really enjoy doing it
2010-03-17 07:48:06
Varegg
Support fanatic :-)
+2,206|7096|Nårvei

Lack of a social safety net can easily explain why you have out of control programs like food stamps ...
Wait behind the line ..............................................................
2010-03-17 07:56:14
tuckergustav
...
+1,590|6199|...

So, food stamps can be used to buy pretty much anything but tobacco and alcohol, right?  I think you should be limited to "healthy" foods and approved products.  I think this may lessen the abuse a bit.  Also, it would promote the health of the welfare folks, thus lowering there health care needs, thus making them less of a drain on our tax dollars in the long run.

And lowing...you are kinda right...if people are accepting help, then they should stop being so defensive and a little more thankful. 

Maybe anyone on welfare should have to do some sort of community service...hmmm...then they would be "working" for what they get.
...
2010-03-17 08:00:27
Cybargs
Moderated
+2,285|7002

tuckergustav wrote:

So, food stamps can be used to buy pretty much anything but tobacco and alcohol, right?  I think you should be limited to "healthy" foods and approved products.  I think this may lessen the abuse a bit.  Also, it would promote the health of the welfare folks, thus lowering there health care needs, thus making them less of a drain on our tax dollars in the long run.

And lowing...you are kinda right...if people are accepting help, then they should stop being so defensive and a little more thankful. 

Maybe anyone on welfare should have to do some sort of community service...hmmm...then they would be "working" for what they get.
BUT BUT. YOUR TAKING OUR FREEDOMS IN ORDER TO GIVE TO CORPORATIONS BRAAAAAAAAAAAH I DONT WANT TO WORK WORK IS FOR LOOSERZ.

Yeah seriously they should fucking work.
https://cache.www.gametracker.com/server_info/203.46.105.23:21300/b_350_20_692108_381007_FFFFFF_000000.png
2010-03-17 08:04:44
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6937|USA

tuckergustav wrote:

So, food stamps can be used to buy pretty much anything but tobacco and alcohol, right?  I think you should be limited to "healthy" foods and approved products.  I think this may lessen the abuse a bit.  Also, it would promote the health of the welfare folks, thus lowering there health care needs, thus making them less of a drain on our tax dollars in the long run.

And lowing...you are kinda right...if people are accepting help, then they should stop being so defensive and a little more thankful. 

Maybe anyone on welfare should have to do some sort of community service...hmmm...then they would be "working" for what they get.
I agree, if you are working then you are EARNING. A concept alien to the entitled of our country. The same entited that put Obama in office.
2010-03-17 08:07:53
tuckergustav
...
+1,590|6199|...

lowing wrote:

tuckergustav wrote:

So, food stamps can be used to buy pretty much anything but tobacco and alcohol, right?  I think you should be limited to "healthy" foods and approved products.  I think this may lessen the abuse a bit.  Also, it would promote the health of the welfare folks, thus lowering there health care needs, thus making them less of a drain on our tax dollars in the long run.

And lowing...you are kinda right...if people are accepting help, then they should stop being so defensive and a little more thankful. 

Maybe anyone on welfare should have to do some sort of community service...hmmm...then they would be "working" for what they get.
I agree, if you are working then you are EARNING. A concept alien to the entitled of our country. The same entited that put Obama in office.
Well, I don't think I fit the "entitled" bill....and I helped put him in office...so...
...
2010-03-17 08:10:12
11 Bravo
Banned
+965|5523|Cleveland, Ohio

tuckergustav wrote:

and I helped put him in office...so...
fail
2010-03-17 08:10:52
Marlo Stanfield
online poker tax cheating
+122|5449

Varegg wrote:

Lack of a social safety net can easily explain why you have out of control programs like food stamps ...
So we should expand the safety net because the safety net is too big?
2010-03-17 08:12:03
tuckergustav
...
+1,590|6199|...

11 Bravo wrote:

tuckergustav wrote:

and I helped put him in office...so...
fail
We'll see.
...
2010-03-17 08:14:38
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6937|USA

tuckergustav wrote:

lowing wrote:

tuckergustav wrote:

So, food stamps can be used to buy pretty much anything but tobacco and alcohol, right?  I think you should be limited to "healthy" foods and approved products.  I think this may lessen the abuse a bit.  Also, it would promote the health of the welfare folks, thus lowering there health care needs, thus making them less of a drain on our tax dollars in the long run.

And lowing...you are kinda right...if people are accepting help, then they should stop being so defensive and a little more thankful. 

Maybe anyone on welfare should have to do some sort of community service...hmmm...then they would be "working" for what they get.
I agree, if you are working then you are EARNING. A concept alien to the entitled of our country. The same entited that put Obama in office.
Well, I don't think I fit the "entitled" bill....and I helped put him in office...so...
and how is that working out for ya? Ready for a second term?
2010-03-17 08:19:50
13urnzz
Banned
+5,830|6783

lowing wrote:

and how is that working out for ya? Ready for a second term?
honestly - Gitmo's still open, hell none of the change has happened, Bush'es policies are still in place - what is the difference? dem, repub, right , left - after being eligible to vote since the '84 election, i fail to see where a president made the impact that Congress does. we could elect a dead horse to the white house and not see the difference.
2010-03-17 08:20:24
King_County_Downy
shitfaced
+2,791|6883|Seattle

Hipsters on food stamps

"They're young, they're broke, and they pay for organic salmon with government subsidies. Got a problem with that? "
Sober enough to know what I'm doing, drunk enough to really enjoy doing it
2010-03-17 08:20:45
tuckergustav
...
+1,590|6199|...

lowing wrote:

tuckergustav wrote:

lowing wrote:


I agree, if you are working then you are EARNING. A concept alien to the entitled of our country. The same entited that put Obama in office.
Well, I don't think I fit the "entitled" bill....and I helped put him in office...so...
and how is that working out for ya? Ready for a second term?
Well, it really is a debate for another thread, but these things take time.  The mistake is that people put Obama on a pedestal and had expectations that nobody could live up to.  I like to think that if something took a long time to happen, it will take a long time to fix.  (ie...pregnancy weight, 9 months on, nine months off)
...
2010-03-17 08:21:43
Marlo Stanfield
online poker tax cheating
+122|5449

burnzz wrote:

lowing wrote:

and how is that working out for ya? Ready for a second term?
honestly - Gitmo's still open, hell none of the change has happened, Bush'es policies are still in place - what is the difference? dem, repub, right , left - after being eligible to vote since the '84 election, i fail to see where a president made the impact that Congress does. we could elect a dead horse to the white house and not see the difference.
But now everyone is getting health care \o/


Kinda funny in a cynical sort of way. You wanted Gitmo closed and troops out of the middle east but instead the President pushed forward with health care reform.
2010-03-17 08:23:56
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6937|USA

burnzz wrote:

lowing wrote:

and how is that working out for ya? Ready for a second term?
honestly - Gitmo's still open, hell none of the change has happened, Bush'es policies are still in place - what is the difference? dem, repub, right , left - after being eligible to vote since the '84 election, i fail to see where a president made the impact that Congress does. we could elect a dead horse to the white house and not see the difference.
Funny!! what is the difference? Ya forgot to mention govt. healthcare, govt owned PRIVATE companies. A debt quadrupled in one year what Bush did in 8.. we could go on. Plenty of difference.
2010-03-17 08:26:56
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6937|USA

tuckergustav wrote:

lowing wrote:

tuckergustav wrote:


Well, I don't think I fit the "entitled" bill....and I helped put him in office...so...
and how is that working out for ya? Ready for a second term?
Well, it really is a debate for another thread, but these things take time.  The mistake is that people put Obama on a pedestal and had expectations that nobody could live up to.  I like to think that if something took a long time to happen, it will take a long time to fix.  (ie...pregnancy weight, 9 months on, nine months off)
Ok well, what experience did he possess that led you to believe he was the right choice? If not for his bullshit, whatelse did you have, tangible, to put him in office. I mean besides "hope and change". Not trying to be a smart ass here, but really, what was your motivation? and are you regretting your decision?
2010-03-17 08:28:38
Marlo Stanfield
online poker tax cheating
+122|5449

lowing wrote:

tuckergustav wrote:

lowing wrote:

and how is that working out for ya? Ready for a second term?
Well, it really is a debate for another thread, but these things take time.  The mistake is that people put Obama on a pedestal and had expectations that nobody could live up to.  I like to think that if something took a long time to happen, it will take a long time to fix.  (ie...pregnancy weight, 9 months on, nine months off)
Ok well, what experience did he possess that led you to believe he was the right choice? If not for his bullshit, whatelse did you have, tangible, to put him in office. I mean besides "hope and change". Not trying to be a smart ass here, but really, what was your motivation? and are you regretting your decision?
I'm fairly "conservative" I think, I voted for Obama though. McCain was making a good case until
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/ad/SarahPalinElon.jpg
2010-03-17 08:30:18
13urnzz
Banned
+5,830|6783

lowing wrote:

Funny!! what is the difference? Ya forgot to mention govt. healthcare, govt owned PRIVATE companies. A debt quadrupled in one year what Bush did in 8.. we could go on. Plenty of difference.
did Congress do that or the white house? what i'm saying lowing is Congress holds the purse strings, and Obama hasn't changed any of the policies he proclaimed during the election that were 'wrong' under Bush - i.e., Gitmo, wiretapping, etc.

Obama wanted gov.t healthcare, who's going to give it to him? Congress.
GM and the banks wanted a bailout, who's giving it to them? Congress.

honestly, the presidency is not what it once was, the judicial system is hampered by the real obstructionists -  Congress.
2010-03-17 08:35:36
tuckergustav
...
+1,590|6199|...

lowing wrote:

tuckergustav wrote:

lowing wrote:


and how is that working out for ya? Ready for a second term?
Well, it really is a debate for another thread, but these things take time.  The mistake is that people put Obama on a pedestal and had expectations that nobody could live up to.  I like to think that if something took a long time to happen, it will take a long time to fix.  (ie...pregnancy weight, 9 months on, nine months off)
Ok well, what experience did he possess that led you to believe he was the right choice? If not for his bullshit, whatelse did you have, tangible, to put him in office. I mean besides "hope and change". Not trying to be a smart ass here, but really, what was your motivation? and are you regretting your decision?
Well, I initially voted for HC in the primaries...so he wasn't my first choice.  And I may have voted for McCain if is wasn't for a couple things...There was a time when he was "middle of the road" he worked with dems and seemed like he could be a "bridge" as pres...but during his campaigning I felt like he gave in to pressure to become more rightwing so as not to alienate the ultra conservative.  Also...and I know it has been said, but...Palin.  I just couldn't do that...

So, essentially I voted against McCain...for the candidate who had the best chance of beating him.  But, don't get me wrong...I had(and still have) hopes that he would get in there and rile things up.  And although the argument could be made that he has in all the wrong ways...I am hoping that his presidency works the same way as I spring clean my house...I have to make a mess in order to clean the mess.
...
2010-03-17 08:39:17
CameronPoe
Member
+2,925|6841
Yeah you can call them moochers and it wouldn't be inaccurate but that's what a safety net is all about. I wouldn't look down on them if they were 'mooching' while trying their utmost to obtain gainful employment. I would look down on them if they weren't. I think the safety net is a necessary part of a modern society to deal with the downturns that are an inevitable part of the free market, how effectively it is being run is what I would complain about. And his point about it being a crime if you were to commit this 'plunder' as opposed to the government is a completely moot point. This is what the civilised world has developed over centuries to deal with the relatively few disadvantages of the free market and it is legal, period. The safety net is part of what keeps society from totally unravelling in a deep and prolonged downturn. I'm on a highly taxed salary and have never collected unemployment in my entire life. If something untoward befell me I would collect unemployment to keep me from starving to death while I looked for another job. I believe the social net is a valuable necessity for any modern civlised society. Abuses and mismanagement of it should be roundly condemned however.

Last edited by CameronPoe (2010-03-17 08:40:33)

2010-03-17 08:42:31
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6937|USA

tuckergustav wrote:

lowing wrote:

tuckergustav wrote:


Well, it really is a debate for another thread, but these things take time.  The mistake is that people put Obama on a pedestal and had expectations that nobody could live up to.  I like to think that if something took a long time to happen, it will take a long time to fix.  (ie...pregnancy weight, 9 months on, nine months off)
Ok well, what experience did he possess that led you to believe he was the right choice? If not for his bullshit, whatelse did you have, tangible, to put him in office. I mean besides "hope and change". Not trying to be a smart ass here, but really, what was your motivation? and are you regretting your decision?
Well, I initially voted for HC in the primaries...so he wasn't my first choice.  And I may have voted for McCain if is wasn't for a couple things...There was a time when he was "middle of the road" he worked with dems and seemed like he could be a "bridge" as pres...but during his campaigning I felt like he gave in to pressure to become more rightwing so as not to alienate the ultra conservative.  Also...and I know it has been said, but...Palin.  I just couldn't do that...

So, essentially I voted against McCain...for the candidate who had the best chance of beating him.  But, don't get me wrong...I had(and still have) hopes that he would get in there and rile things up.  And although the argument could be made that he has in all the wrong ways...I am hoping that his presidency works the same way as I spring clean my house...I have to make a mess in order to clean the mess.
Hate to break the news to you but Obama is going to go down as the worst president in US history. Right behind Jimmy Carter. ( never thought that possible)

It is a real shame to. The struggle of the black community has endured over the centuries, when finally their dream is a reality. They get Obama. I would have loved our first "black" president to be something great. It just isn't to be.
2010-03-17 08:45:05
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6937|USA

burnzz wrote:

lowing wrote:

Funny!! what is the difference? Ya forgot to mention govt. healthcare, govt owned PRIVATE companies. A debt quadrupled in one year what Bush did in 8.. we could go on. Plenty of difference.
did Congress do that or the white house? what i'm saying lowing is Congress holds the purse strings, and Obama hasn't changed any of the policies he proclaimed during the election that were 'wrong' under Bush - i.e., Gitmo, wiretapping, etc.

Obama wanted gov.t healthcare, who's going to give it to him? Congress.
GM and the banks wanted a bailout, who's giving it to them? Congress.

honestly, the presidency is not what it once was, the judicial system is hampered by the real obstructionists -  Congress.
I see, so when Bush was in office everything was HIS fault. Now we have Obama and everything is congress' fault. Neh can't find anything wrong with that logic.
2010-03-17 08:47:04
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6937|USA

CameronPoe wrote:

Yeah you can call them moochers and it wouldn't be inaccurate but that's what a safety net is all about. I wouldn't look down on them if they were 'mooching' while trying their utmost to obtain gainful employment. I would look down on them if they weren't. I think the safety net is a necessary part of a modern society to deal with the downturns that are an inevitable part of the free market, how effectively it is being run is what I would complain about. And his point about it being a crime if you were to commit this 'plunder' as opposed to the government is a completely moot point. This is what the civilised world has developed over centuries to deal with the relatively few disadvantages of the free market and it is legal, period. The safety net is part of what keeps society from totally unravelling in a deep and prolonged downturn. I'm on a highly taxed salary and have never collected unemployment in my entire life. If something untoward befell me I would collect unemployment to keep me from starving to death while I looked for another job. I believe the social net is a valuable necessity for any modern civlised society. Abuses and mismanagement of it should be roundly condemned however.
Unemployment is not mooching. It is insurance that is paid BY YOU.

Mooching is something for nothing.
2010-03-17 08:52:03
CameronPoe
Member
+2,925|6841

lowing wrote:

CameronPoe wrote:

Yeah you can call them moochers and it wouldn't be inaccurate but that's what a safety net is all about. I wouldn't look down on them if they were 'mooching' while trying their utmost to obtain gainful employment. I would look down on them if they weren't. I think the safety net is a necessary part of a modern society to deal with the downturns that are an inevitable part of the free market, how effectively it is being run is what I would complain about. And his point about it being a crime if you were to commit this 'plunder' as opposed to the government is a completely moot point. This is what the civilised world has developed over centuries to deal with the relatively few disadvantages of the free market and it is legal, period. The safety net is part of what keeps society from totally unravelling in a deep and prolonged downturn. I'm on a highly taxed salary and have never collected unemployment in my entire life. If something untoward befell me I would collect unemployment to keep me from starving to death while I looked for another job. I believe the social net is a valuable necessity for any modern civlised society. Abuses and mismanagement of it should be roundly condemned however.
Unemployment is not mooching. It is insurance that is paid BY YOU.

Mooching is something for nothing.
Well I suppose to rephrase: if you still haven't found a job by the time unemployment benefits run out I don't agree with casting you to the dogs. I agree with me being taxed to support those people who are still verifiably making a concerted effort to acquire employment in a tough environment if their benefits have run out rather than letting them die. I expect it to be heavily policed to stamp out abuse and believe that community work in return should be a necessity for receipt. I believe in the nation pulling together during tough times.

Last edited by CameronPoe (2010-03-17 08:53:50)

Topic closed

Pages: 1 2 3 … 12

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2025 Jeff Minard