Almost 10% of Americans on food stamps.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Wezil


Driving by a poor looking house and seeing a nice car in the driveway doesn't mean ****.

Show me the stats that show food stamp users are driving SUV's and wearing designer clothes. Otherwise the lot of you are just talking out your ass.

Well Oerdin did say that people with food stamps can't afford food. I'm suprised so many people jumping to his side in this.

[Wezil]

Quit being a dick. You said

Originally posted by Patroklos

I could go on how a good portion of the food stamp members are no doubt driving SUVs and wearing designer clothes, but I don't want Oerdin's head to explode

I'm calling you on it. Make Oedin's head explode. Prove it.

[Patroklos]

You want proof that the poor people have screed up financial priorities. Yeah, let me find some statistics of FUBU ownership percentages for the poor.

http://www.heartland.org/Article.cfm?artId=945

The most common form of fraud by far, however, was an unreported income, which accounted for over half of the 201 cases.

Dated, but valid, and more than what your ridiculous request warrents.

I note that Che's personal experiances passed as proof

[Wezil]

Alright. A right-wing site that looks at one county in California a dozen years ago and doesn't source their research. Pretty shabby evidence but it is at least something. You are improving.

As to Che - I never commented on his claims one way or the other. Personal experiences will rarely "pass as proof".

edit - and it is not a "ridiculous request" for someone to back up their BS claims.

[Arrian]

Originally posted by Ming

Oh FFS. Are you blind?

...

As for the topic, I wouldn't brag about such a large portion of the population being on food stamps, but I don't see how having a safety net is shameful. I thought letting your poor starve was shameful. How is helping them shameful? Or is it just that having a recession is shameful? Oy, the agony! Oy, the shame! to make my privates public for a game?

Abuse of said safety net is shameful, but I've no idea how common abuse is. I've no experience with food stamps. I have observed the "shack with 3 expensive cars in the driveway" phenomenon, but rarely.

-Arrian

[UnOrthOdOx]

No one here is arguing that everyone on food stamps is abusing the system. But, there are those cases, and it's human nature for those cases to be the ones that stick in your head, specifically because they are what stick out, not the norm.

http://www.frac.org/html/federal_food_programs/programs/fsp_faq.html

90% of food stamps go to those at or below the poverty line.

That means 10% go to those that are above the poverty line.

It is this latter 10% that tends to stick out, especially to someone like myself, who was living below the poverty line WITHOUT govt assistance, until the age of 12 when we moved above that poverty line.

I'm forgetting the % in the link above and don't care to look again, but a vast majority of food stamps also go to households with disabled persons. As I was saying earlier, there is an abuse there that people adopt these kids just to get this benefit. And, the benefit is for the child, not the adult, so when the child hits a certain age and the 'parents' no longer get the benefit, the child is cut loose, often unprepared to be on their own. This is not the majority, but it does happen, and yes, it stands out in my mind.

The problem, however, goes beyond just food stamps. If you are on food stamps, you can often qualify for other aid as well. It is the cumulative effect of these aids that make it to where there are cases where people are better off NOT working to stay on these programs. And, they can site needing to care for these disabled children as a reason they cannot work, even if they don't actually GIVE that care.

I've seen it happen more than once. That does not, by any means, make it neccessarily common, or the norm. But I think it's more prevalent than people would really like to know.

[Patroklos]

edit - and it is not a "ridiculous request" for someone to back up their BS claims.

It is not a BS claim, it was one backed up my the experiance of several people in this thread. If you want to ***** about Toronto traffic, I am not going to ask you for proof

Though now you have proof, enjoy.

[LordShiva]

"Heartland Institute"

[Wezil]

Originally posted by Patroklos


It is not a BS claim, it was one backed up my the experiance of several people in this thread.

Okay, if you want to argue semantics - It was an anecdotal claim. Feel better?

If you want to ***** about Toronto traffic, I am not going to ask you for proof

Why not? It is provable. I could pull traffic studies.

Though now you have proof, enjoy.

Actually no, but since you want to continue....

The "proof" you offered showed welfare abuse in one county in CA over a dozen years ago. If I accept your source as credible (I have trouble as this right-wing site doesn't make reference to any of their research) then all you have "proven" is welfare abuse. You still haven't proven your claim of SUV's and designer clothes. Even if people are abusing a system you haven't shown they are living the high life in any way or form. You can be a "welfare cheat" and still be poor.

[Patroklos]

You still haven't proven your claim of SUV's and designer clothes.

Jesus, talk about quibbling

Obviously that was simply a discriptive example to illustrate improper financial priorities. Are you going to actually argue that the poor don't sqander their resources? Wow.

Even if people are abusing a system you haven't shown they are living the high life in any way or form.

Amazing you fall into the same pit of retardedness after watching Oeridin do the same. How is saying the poor spend their money irresponsibly constitute them living the "high life?" Just to illustrate your supidity, I said SUV because of the costs of fueling it, NOT because it was a fly ass 22" wielding ghetto crawler. I find it interesting you think a 1992 rusted out Bronco is a luxury car. I could have just as easily said cigaretts and booze and the point is the same.

[Wezil]

Originally posted by Patroklos


Jesus, talk about quibbling

Obviously that was simply a discriptive example to illustrate improper financial priorities. Are you going to actually argue that the poor don't sqander their resources? Wow.

So now you finally admit you pulled it out of your ass.

Thank you.

[Patroklos]

So now you finally admit you pulled it out of your ass.

And now you finally admit you must retreat into semantics to avoid your looking stupid, at which you have failed horribly.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by UnOrthOdOx
The problem, however, goes beyond just food stamps. If you are on food stamps, you can often qualify for other aid as well. It is the cumulative effect of these aids that make it to where there are cases where people are better off NOT working to stay on these programs. And, they can site needing to care for these disabled children as a reason they cannot work, even if they don't actually GIVE that care.

I've seen it happen more than once. That does not, by any means, make it neccessarily common, or the norm. But I think it's more prevalent than people would really like to know.

People are never better off not working, but then people are stupid. I think though that a lot of people benefit from programs when they do in fact work. Buying peoples food stamps for 50 cents on the dollar for example.

[Wezil]

Originally posted by Patroklos


And now you finally admit you must retreat into semantics

Where?

to avoid your looking stupid, at which you have failed horribly.

I didn't claim SUV's and designer clothes. You made the stupid claim (and admitted it).

[Tuberski]

Originally posted by Kidicious


People are never better off not working, but then people are stupid. I think though that a lot of people benefit from programs when they do in fact work. Buying peoples food stamps for 50 cents on the dollar for example.

Believe this or not, with a Texas "Lone Star" food stamp card, there is the option to simply withdraw money.

ACK!