So the government is just supposed to hand food stamps over with no questions asked?

Let me tell you about a situation I was aware of. A co-workers daughter got divorced and got custody of her 2 children. While struggling to make ends meet, she applied for aide and it was awarded to her. Shortly after that, my co-worker suggested her daughter move in with her to help her save and get caught up on bills. She even remodeled her home to accommodate her grandchildren. However, the daughter DID NOT give up her food stamps. One day my co-worker came into work bragging how her daughter had hundreds of dollars in food stamps building up and they choose to spend it on a lavish Christmas Dinner including all the supplies needed to make several different confections, cookies and cakes, not only for the immediate family, but also for her other child and grandchildren. My problem with all of this, my co-worker makes nearly $100,000 with salary and benefits and had no problem spending the governments money issued to her daughter. Did I ignore this - no I didn't. I wrote a letter to the proper agency suggesting that her case be reviewed so the money could be given to someone who actually had a need . Now I know that this is not a common situation, but there is alot of fraud going on.

If this bill were in place, they would not have been allowed to do this.

Also, this money should be used for healthier diets because alot of the time, the only descent meal these children get are the ones provided at school. Without the proper nutrients, children have a harder time focusing and lack energy. And I don't buy that the recipients do not have the ability to cook a healthy meal - I think we are just too accustomed to the fast food world.

Posted by: Rascal01

February 2, 2012 at 1:14 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Wow Oldarkei - you make such a great argument. Glad your only intelligent remark was to correct my grammar!

Posted by: Rascal01

February 2, 2012 at 2:43 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

LA Times: "To many liberals, the thing that distinguishes them from conservatives is that those on the right lack empathy. It’s not a particularly fair criticism...">>

Oh yes it is. For instance:

***
Empathy, Open-mindedness, and Political Ideology: Conservative and Liberal Trends

Excerpts:

"...several studies have shown that significant differences do exist between those who display higher levels of empathic characterization, and those who display lower levels. These characteristics include greater moral reasoning, understanding of others' emotional states, and recognition of others' thoughts and feelings (Eisenberg, Miller, Shell, McNalley, & Shea, 1991; Detert, Treviño, & Sweitzer, 2008). McAdams et al. (2008) looked at political ideology and its correlates, and found that political liberalism is often associated with empathic feeling and greater openness, both of which are characteristics connected with greater understanding of others. People identifying themselves as liberal have also been found to believe a good society is modeled after leaders who represent care, empathy and inclusiveness (McAdams et al., 2008)..."

"Several studies have shown that conservative ideology correlates with classic authoritarian beliefs, greater intolerance and less empathy. Individuals who show greater empathy seem to be less prejudicial, have greater concern for outsider groups, and sustain ideas for greater inclusion (Pratto, Sidanius, Stallworth, & Malle, 1994). Similar findings have been seen in the differing narratives of conservative and liberal individuals. When asked to describe how and what they learned as children, conservative individuals tended to describe learning as primarily from authority figures and from enforcement of strict rules, while liberal individuals described that they learned empathic characteristics and to respect diversity. For liberal individuals there is also a strong connection to opening oneself up to differing perspectives (McAdams et al, 2008).

There is also evidence that supports the notion that political ideology is connected with different levels of flexibility, receptiveness, and tolerance. Tetlock (1983) suggested that conservative individuals may be more intolerant and less receptive to differing ideas. McAdams and colleagues (2008) have also suggested that conservative individuals maintain ideas which often support discriminatory action, exclusivity, and lack of tolerance. Conversely, liberal individuals were found to be more tolerant and to maintain an understanding of inclusion and acceptance of diversity." http://tinyurl.com/6qkn3zc

Other factors to consider:

"Intelligence Study Links Low I.Q. To Prejudice, Racism, Conservatism"

"The study, published in Psychological Science, showed that people who score low on I.Q. tests in childhood are more likely to develop prejudiced beliefs and socially conservative politics in adulthood." http://tinyurl.com/823w54m

Posted by: fayfreethinker

February 2, 2012 at 7:23 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Hydro - my point was that I am not aware of many people living at home with a 6 figure income collecting food stamps, but that doesn't mean that other people collecting this benefit are not committing fraud in some other way.

Another situation I am aware of is someone getting food stamps and giving the food away because they have soo much in their pantry it expires before they use it. Do I consider this fraud - YES I do. Just because you qualify for a benefit doesn't mean you have to use it. In this situation, a person is accepting the benefit but clearly doesn't need it. Or maybe the amount they are given is just too high.

There are soo many people who need financial help - don't take a benefit just because you can. Think of the others it could be helping if you were that much less selfish!

I think that you can state your opinion without insulting people Hydro! Maybe you would like to throw in a few expletives next time as well.

Posted by: Rascal01

February 3, 2012 at 8:59 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

I am absolutely NOT opposed to food stamps for those who need them. As for feed them for a year and then let them either get a job or not eat, some of the people on food stamps HAVE jobs, jobs that pay very little, or a part time job that is all they can find. This country is millions of jobs short of the number necessary to employ everyone. What rock do conservatives live under?

That said, I don't see anything wrong with wanting our money to go for good nutrition. (I just don't know how you draw the line without being unfair. Who would want to deny soda or kool-aid for a child's special occasion? We might just have to hope that people use good sense, and if they don't, they reap the consequences.)

I don't think it is elitist to think a person should stretch their food dollars by making a birthday cake from pantry goods--flour, sugar, oil, eggs, vanilla, cocoa, etc., each in turn stocked up on when they were on sale. My parents worked long hours, raised a garden, and helped our older relatives; they were short on time. Yet every birthday cake I remember was homemade, as well as all our other desserts. I NEVER had a cake ordered from a bakery and didn't miss it. Even a single mom who can barely cook should be able to see the savings in buying a cake mix and can of frosting on sale, plus some candles, compared to a bakery cake.

Posted by: inquire

February 3, 2012 at 3:32 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Here is another story for the readers. I know a single mom who had two young children and was pregnant with a third when she was divorced. After the third child was born, her case-worker increased her food stamps by over $100 per month. She argued that the newborn was breastfeeding and did not cost her that extra money. The case worker awarded it to her anyway. For a family of 4, this individual was getting over $550 per month in food stamps. Keep in mind this was one adult, two young children, and an infant. She told me she could not possibly spend all the money each month and the excess rolled over each month into her account.

Now go into any grocery store and look at the prepared foods that are eligible for 'EBT' aka Food Stamps. Deviled eggs, sub sandwiches, salads, etc. Virtually anything that is not a 'hot' food is Food Stamp eligible. So we have 1/3 of the working public purchasing prepared foods with food stamps and we consider this ok? If these families are in need of food assistance, is it too much to ask that they buy the ingredients and prepare their own food? I assure you i have fed a family of 5 with $200 per month in food costs. Why are we providing over twice that at taxpayer expense?

As for Coralie's comments on the 'dump on poor people'. I knew of a man in the 80's who had a liquor store and was taking food stamps in return for liquor. He was amassing so many food stamps that he could not launder that he actually build a grocery store next to his liquor store in order to launder the food stamps. Have you not seen the law passed in California that limited the ability of FS recipients to withdraw cash from their cards at liquor stores, strip clubs, and casinos in order to curb the missuse of FS's?

Posted by: fightingthelibs

February 3, 2012 at 10:40 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

A Benton County Republican promoting abortion. Now I've seen everything. A society that deserves to exist has a plan for helping those who need help through no fault of their own.

We are nearly six million jobs short of enough. People who did all the right things, have multiple degrees, and have always taken care of themselves now find themselves in need of help, similar to those they may have criticized in the past when their lives were still normal. It can happen to anyone. Don't ever be fool enough to think it can't.

Your core philosophy of resenting any tax that doesn't benefit you personally is pretty un Christian. Are you one of the atheists here? Actually I believe most of them have more compassion than you have.

Posted by: inquire

February 4, 2012 at 1:55 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )