Should you be able to use food stamps for pets???

It's hard not to stereotype people. In the old days, we forced people who had a hard time in society into "poor houses," which were basically prisons. That way we could keep them out of the public eye and also keep an eye on them since we know that they're a bunch of crazy, lazy drunks. You got a roof over your head and maybe enough food to keep you alive.

No phone, no food, no pets. Ain't got no cigarettes.

I suppose the bottom line is that if you give money to someone, you can't tell them what to do with it, so if that bothers you, you have the option of not directly giving them money, but rather giving it to a charity you trust. Give your money to pet charities if you want.

*Buys a package of ham with food stamps

*slides ham to dog under the table

Bam. Food stamps to pet food.

originally posted by: Bluntone22
a reply to: LightSpeedDriver

Pretty obvious you can't dictate how cash is spent but food stamps are for food.

So what is dog food then?

originally posted by: JAGStorm
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

If you give a homeless person money, they can spend it on drugs, or something to eat, or feed their dog, sure. You know that when you give them that money out of your own free will.

What we are talking about is different, food stamps. We are forced to pay for this through taxes. That's where I have the problem. There are many absolute animal lovers that don't have a pet (or a child for that matter) because they are being responsible, how ironic is it for them to have to pay for someone else's pet???

Consider this: if it wasn't taxed from you, you would donate at least part of it. Maybe acts of good will, whatever. Of course, if you wouldn't that would undercut much of the argument against social taxation. Nonetheless...its an expense you will give regardless.

Or maybe just consider that once it leaves your hands it is no longer yours, and you exert no control over it.

Either of the above works for me to give me my viewpoint, although I do recognize what you are saying.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: Bluntone22
a reply to: LightSpeedDriver

Pretty obvious you can't dictate how cash is spent but food stamps are for food.

So what is dog food then?

Alpo.....
Usually the can has a dog on the side.
If people feed dogs their food we obviously can't stop them but we don't have to give them money for food made for dogs.

originally posted by: Bluntone22
If people feed dogs their food we obviously can't stop them but we don't have to give them money for food made for dogs.

Pet food used to be cheaper than human food, but I don't think that's true anymore. But I wouldn't begrudge somebody buying pet food and eating it themselves if it was cheaper. Could make a good casserole.

a reply to: JAGStorm


I worry about my cat like she is my child.

I constantly see people move out and just leave the poor babies, and it gets very cold.

I see too many people get pets without giving enough consideration as to what the pets need.

I feel if you have a pet, you need to take care of it, not food stamps.

Should you be able to use food stamps for pets???

No.

If they are that hungry then they should eat their dog or what the hell ever.

a reply to: JAGStorm

My youngest son helped set up a program at his school where students could donate pet food that was then donated to the local food bank. People could get food for their pets there. He did this as part of an exam in his government class. The program became permanent at least it was still operating when he graduated but that was 2014.

No. If you can't afford food, you can't afford pets. My average food and vet bill for a single dog and single cat is about $1000/yr.

Something about how if you feed animals who can do for themselves, they become dependent upon handouts...

In fact, scrap the whole program and go back to handing out government cheese. Deliver it to their door so as not to have the excuse of "I can't come get it." EBT is abused too easily.

The whole "You can't decide how the money is spent" argument falls apart when the money isn't freely given, but instead is taken under threat of force. Don't believe that taxes are coercion? Try not paying them.

But yes, if I gave a homeless person $10 voluntarily, I couldn't ( and wouldn't ) complain if he went and bought some booze, crack, etc... instead of food.

They can do what they want with the money, but I think pets should be made to do some kind of work to earn their keep rather than just sit around watching game shows all day and getting high. The infrastructure in this country is rotting away, and we have plenty of pets just sitting around when they could be working.

a reply to: Blue Shift

No they can't buy whatever with the money, there are rules:
www.fns.usda.gov...


Households CAN use SNAP benefits to buy:

Foods for the household to eat, such as:
breads and cereals;
fruits and vegetables;
meats, fish and poultry; and
dairy products.
Seeds and plants which produce food for the household to eat.
In some areas, restaurants can be authorized to accept SNAP benefits from qualified homeless, elderly, or disabled people in exchange for low-cost meals.
Soft drinks, candy, cookies, snack crackers, and ice cream are food items and are therefore eligible items
Seafood, steak, and bakery cakes are also food items and are therefore eligible items
Energy drinks that have a nutrition facts label are eligible foods
Live seafood such as lobsters, fish and shellfish may be purchased with SNAP benefits.

Households CANNOT use SNAP benefits to buy:

Beer, wine, liquor, cigarettes or tobacco
Any nonfood items, such as:
pet foods
soaps, paper products
household supplies
Vitamins and medicines
Food that will be eaten in the store
Hot foods

originally posted by: cynicalheathen
No. If you can't afford food, you can't afford pets. My average food and vet bill for a single dog and single cat is about $1000/yr.

Easily! And wait until they get old and sick and that $1K won't last very long. That's what is really sad about the "homeless guy with dog" issue. Fact is, they get more donations if they have a dog, but that dog is at serious risk--not IF it gets sick, but WHEN it gets sick. That dog's 'end-of-life' is not going to be pretty.

Either you give or you don't. But giving doesn't give you a right to dictate use after the fact. Unless, obviously, it was agreed upon to begin with.

The problem I have with your attitude on this is that when we are talking about social welfare programs like food stamps, we *don't* get to decide what we are giving or how much. The government simply takes and does.

If I see the homeless man with his dog out begging, then I can decide to go buy dog food, and I have. Or I can decide to simply give actual food, and I have. At that point, *I* am making my choice on how and what I give. I can even give some cash if I want, and I have done that one also.

But with government social assistance, then take and they decide how much they will take and no one asks me crap about any of it, and when it's not enough ... they come back and make it even more next time.

So when someone decides that I'm not just paying for all the poor, but their pets if they want 'em, and I know that *still* won't be enough and government will tend to reach deeper next time ... YOU BET I PROTEST.

No one asked and no one cares. They all just take.

a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

You spoke my exact words. My rescues are many times more loving and affectionate than many humans I know and can provide that much needed companionship we humans need.

We all know the food stamps issue needs adjustment and do not now provide for the feeding of pets but perhaps in the future their true value to humans will be acknowledged as well as "what humans" truly are in need; not just the human grifters.

a reply to: ketsuko

Exactly! It was just recently that they stopped allowing welfare withdrawals at casinos, strip clubs and smoke shops.
articles.latimes.com...

I have no doubt that are good people that truly need the benefits, but there is a lot of abuse too. Either you are poor enough to be hungry or you aren't. It's not rocket science.

You know the #1 food purchased with food stamps???? SODA!
Zero nutritional value, and the sad part is all us taxpayers will pay twice, once for the Soda, and then again for the diabetes!
www.huffingtonpost.com...

a reply to: schuyler

I guess I'm not used to how things work there. In the Netherlands, if you are on welfare you get a single monthly payment. All bills must be paid from that single deposit. I guess people could abuse the system to buy alcohol, drugs and/or hire pink-haired strippers but in 2 months you will be homeless.

I used to volunteer at a foodbank and there our clients were people on welfare who still didn't have enough. People from all walks of life, young and old, and grateful for a little extra help. An animal shelter lady used to come and donate cat and dog food so that we could give it to our clients. It wasn't enough for the week but every little helps.

Yes. why?

What if your company closed and you got laid off and your wife is going through chemotherapy for cancer. You already had the Dogs at your house. Do you just give them away even though you can't afford to take care of them? Nope. Anyone with pets will understand that.

a reply to: schuyler

Wow! You spend alot. I have seven rescues and make a lot of their food myself as well as buy quality cat and dog food. They are seen by caring well-trained vets when ill. I have never had to spend your amounts per year for their care. I am a member of several animal welfare groups and highly respect all animals.

If you know how and who to see, animal care does not need to bankrupt you-I am far from wealthy and old and single and do it.

NO animal's end of life is ever pretty-it hurts us humans deeply as well and every senior animal I have ever had was well cared for and loved to the end including medicine etc.

a reply to: JAGStorm

Why even ask,why would you have pets if you can't afford to feed yourself,much less bring an animal into the fray,a pet is a luxury so pay for it's food or hunt it,taxpayers shouldn't fund your frivilitys