Trump Administration Wants To Decide What Food SNAP Recipients Will Get

First off, you all should realize that no one on snap/stamps/we gets McDonalds or fkin kfc. If you were a recipient of the program you would know that's not possible. So, they want to limit the choices in the grocery store, then expect food prices to rise for all, and that is exactly what the agriculture corporation would love to see.

originally posted by: DanteGaland

originally posted by: Anathros
I can give you an example of SNAP and Medicaid that has stuck with me since I left state employment. So I get this call from a married man with 2 children. He explains that he has made over $127,000.00 from February to October but is laid off 3 months out of the year. His family instantly qualifies for both healthcare, SNAP, and other benefits. He was only calling to get his kids' healthcare card numbers to set an appointment. Come to find out after making small talk that he doesn't get laid off at all as he would be eligible for unemployment and it would put his family over the income threshold for these programs. The truth is that he takes off 3 months of the year to come back for bow hunting season. Think of that for a moment... $127k in 9 months. Eligibility for state programs. 3 months of vacation. Legally passes all the requirements. Plus, once you're on the state healthcare program, you receive all free dental (adults dental is limited) and healthcare which are both retroactive dating 90 days meaning he only has to pay his family's coverage 6 months out of a year. I don't blame the man, hell...I was quite impressed that he had learned the loopholes.

If you are looking at INCOME alone and not assets...you're doing it wrong.

I call BS.

POSSIBLY qualifies for Medicaid...SNAP tho? Dude making 127k annually has more than $2500 in countable resources (vehicles, property, 401ks) to disqualify.

But as a eligibility tech, you would KNOW this...right?

First of all, I was lead supervisor for AFMC in Arkansas. We were sourced by the state to take all calls related to state services. The Department of Human Services does not look into assets or personal property of those that apply for assistance here. If you're in the mood to argue, feel free but I spent 3 years training all new employees. Call BS all you want but different states can have different guidelines. Here, it all depends on the current income and number of occupants in your household. I know what the hell I'm talking about on this subject as once I was let go, I took a position at Blue Cross Blue Shield still doing similar tasks regarding medicaid but for better money.


Edit: So you're telling me that someone who has been successful enough to own their own home and car but lost their job would be forced to sell both before being eligible for assistance benefits ? No...I'm gonna call BS.

Our state guidelines are here.
www.benefits.gov...

It states:
In order to qualify for this benefit program, you must be a resident of the state of Arkansas and fall into one of two groups: (1) those with a current bank balance (savings and checking combined) under $2,001, or (2) those with a current bank balance (savings and checking combined) under $3,001 who share their household with a person or persons age 60 and over, or with a person with a disability (a child, your spouse, a parent, or yourself).

a reply to: Somethingsamiss

Can't we just deliver a box every week of foodstuffs instead? 3 squares for each member of the family.

a reply to: Anathros

There will be a trend in means testing across the board. It is dangerous as property is in effect confiscated. In order to get old age home bennies you first have to be completely liquidated, for example. That will be the new model as 20 trillion in debt forces the issue. Can't take anything from the poorest, but the middle class can be finally liquidated.

a reply to: Somethingsamiss

BTW, those people buying high end foodstuffs are making cash under the table. I have seen time and time again pulling up to the cashier with wads of cash in one hand pull out the Lonestar food card. Box their food, send it to them once a week and end the crazy.

a reply to: matafuchs

Exactly. As a family with a single mom we nearly had to go there. We toughed it out instead and worked and fought back into the middle class. I still like Spam, but the powdered milk sucked. Truly.

originally posted by: moyeti
a reply to: Somethingsamiss

Can't we just deliver a box every week of foodstuffs instead? 3 squares for each member of the family.

What happens when corporations start laying of tens of thousands of employees when sales stagnate and food corporations lose hundreds of millions in sales?

Like it or not the economy relies on consumption.

It will be a cascading effect of job loss, just so the government can save a few dollars. How much will the government lose when tens of thousands of people are no longer tax paying citizens and are forced to get those boxes of cheese that you speak of.

In the big picture of things we need job creation, not job stagnation and job killing policies and changes.

a reply to: Somethingsamiss

This is how it should be. If they can't figure out how to get a job and keep a job then their freedoms concerning the money WE give them should be limited. Run this like the WIC program and have certain items they can buy.

a reply to: joeraynor

Local stores can be contracted to make foodstuffs available. They do it already for the needy. UPS, USPS, FedEx can be contracted to deliver, only if truly warranted. Keep it simple and standard. Trade your nuts for the apple so you don't digest any. If you are offended by the charity given you then just put in a stop order. Got to keep it basic and to the point. That is the idea so that these folks move on to a more desired diet and a better life. This is so far from Spam, surplus cheese, and powdered milk that Americans were given before and manged just fine.

I feel the need to clarify my standing on the issue once more. I'm not advocating beans, rice, and bologna. I'm fine with mac and cheese, stovetop dressing, instant potatoes, a real meat. I'm advocating home style food for families in need. A dinner table bring families together. This is something many parents have forgotten. Now they throw a couple hot pockets in the microwave for 2 minutes and send their kid back to the TV. My stance is no candy, high end meats, or sodas. People need incentives to get off these programs and not allowing them to have whatever they desire is a good incentive.

I'm also for cracking down on abuse to the system. I posted a link a few pages back about several fraud cases in Louisiana. The average loss was around $20,000 each. Not one perpetrator received jail time. They received probation and owe the money back but they will never pay. At some point taxpayer money being stolen ceased to mean anything. If I walked into a bank and without any threats just grabbed a bag waiting to be picked up by Wells Fargo with 20k, I'd be doing hard time. Why is a banks money worth more than our combined taxes? That is where my grief lies. These programs are great. I stand behind them but we need to wean recipients off of them whenever possible.

a reply to: AworldTurns


My sister doesn’t have children, is a staunch Republican, and loves President Trump. She contributed over $1,000 to his campaign and even had the gold card.

She has a pension job, and is doing quite well financially.

When I told her about this plan, she literally went silent. The .25 proposed gas tax increase isn’t sitting with her well either, as she travels over 500 miles a week on average for her job.

My point is this, if she doesn’t like it; how many Democrats, who didn’t vote last time do you think will show up next election, pick your battles wisely.

There are better ways to cut fraud than by supplying already poor people with cheese blocks and rice. Start with Fraud, hire new divisions who can take the necessary time to really research reports of abuse, and make sure there is a checks and balances system so fraud is also not committed internally.

I know some feel that the poor are living a way better life than them, but what you are not taking into account is the people who hardly work will have j@ck s@@t when they reach retirement age.

The real problem is corporate greed, and coveting imo.

a reply to: Aazadan

You don’t have to pray to get fed, you could get a job.

originally posted by: Aazadan

originally posted by: howtonhawky
I wonder if they will just get walmart and other retailers to pack and send these food boxes. Different type foods for different type diets. I bet they could do it this way and still save monies.

Is that an improvement? That's corporate welfare. Under the current system the recipient can choose who they want to spend their assistance with rather than locking it in with specific large companies that can afford lobbyists.

Yes it is an improvement.
I do not think we are seeing it the same.
If they do it similar to how it was done it will be all about product fulfillment and not about name brands.
People do not need choice they need quality nourishment.

originally posted by: fatkid
a reply to: Aazadan

You don’t have to pray to get fed, you could get a job.

If somebody hires them. A lot of assumptions being made here.

a reply to: KTemplar

You are right, not everyone deserves a job

Can someone explain to me why 1% of our overall budget gets so much attention from the right? Have you guys ever heard the term point of diminishing returns? Or how about spending and investing time in areas that provide a better return. There are quite large areas of public spending we could discuss here which provide a much larger return than anything related to this program.

Ever heard the term 'Mice Nuts'? That is this. Deal with bigger problems.

i remember several months ago there were post that trump was doing away with child support and all the people i knew fell for it hook line and sinker it wasn't true of course.
is this more of the same? i am rather well versed in foodstamp knowledge in my area as all my friends are on them.
i have friend who is married to a deadbeat he applied for snap benefits and they get 300 a month for them and their 2 kids.
the husband takes the card to corner store and uses it to buy cigarettes for 12 dollars a pack and twelve packs of beer for 24 dollars off their ebt card. mean while the grand ma uses her money to keep everyone fed
i know another family with a disabled man his wife a son in school and a daughter who lives there with her 3 kids after she dumped her husband for cheating. they get 300 in ebt benefits too but were told since they had 2 vehicles they had to sell one or have their ebt cut by 100 dollars.
for the holidays they gave out food both families got a deli turkey breast and various canned goods all of which were a year out of date.
in a neighboring town they give ebt recipients free internet and all in my area are given [obama phones] free android phones.
i personally know a scummy piggly wiggly former store manager who was giving people 1/3 value of ebt as cash then taking the other 2/3 ascash from register and putting rest in his pocket.

a reply to: Anathros

My stance is no candy...

Agreed. Its the sugar that causes the real problems anyway, not the fat things have in them.

high end meats...

Ah, see, here you have stepped off the path of good sense. In order to feel healthy and energetic enough that working is actually POSSIBLE, it is necessary to put at least some high quality nutrition inside a person. Contrary to the hippies, fake doctors and fad diet advocates out there, meat and its contents are GOOD for you, not bad for you. Sugar (of which there is not very much in high quality meats), is the real killer. It causes way more trouble, and is responsible for a greater percentage of obesity and heart trouble in the developed world, than is the fat that people see in meat, and have a panic attack over (despite the fact that it is not only largely harmless, but actually quite good for you). You cannot cut good quality meat out of a diet, if you expect the person eating it to do what you expect of them...

People need incentives to get off these programs and not allowing them to have whatever they desire is a good incentive.

And heres the crux of the thing. The quoted sentence above is VERY telling.

People who can get off those programs, do not NEED incentive to get off them, because they already have incentive to do so. Its called a job worth going to. Its those for whom there is no work, who lack incentive, and I am telling you for sure, if you make sure their diets are NOT full of protein, energy, minerals, if you essentially ensure that they are engaged with low quality nutrition, then you ensure that they have no incentive to even get out of bed when they wake up, leave alone leave the house and get one of those unicorns you are thinking exist everywhere, just for the taking (those unicorns being jobs).

You clearly think that incentives are necessary, which means that you do not understand the actual causes of joblessness in the developed world at this time, leave alone in America. The unemployment rate in America is SMALL, it is a SMALL unemployment rate. Also, the US operates an economic structure which is capitalistic in nature, and some unemployment is NECESSARY in a capitalist system, because capitalist economies cannot operate at all, if EVERY person of working age and able body, actually has a job. There would be too little wiggle room, prices would stop moving upward (which would be undesirable from the perspective of big businesses, and indeed the markets, which rely on growth for their very existence), and essentially all the boring nuts and bolts of the economy, that very few people even pay attention to, will fall apart from one another and leave the whole thing a steaming, broken, unrecoverable mess.

Incentive is not the problem. What you have here is a situation where people who cannot have jobs, mostly because there are none, or are none which pay well enough to live independently from state aid, are being blamed for being under employed, or failing to gain employment, in a nation which operates a financial system in which some unemployment is necessary. There is no sense in that. None at all. And yet it is happening. Its exactly like saying "Hey, you! Why don't you get a job that no one is offering, so that you can destroy the delicate balance which makes capitalism work! I am so angry that you are not working as hard as me right now, that I am going to insist you destroy the balance which makes my own financial growth possible in the first place, and if you complain about it, you are a snowflake!"

Its witless nonsense, and its not true, AND people need to stop doing it.

Oh, and by the way, I would like to point out another thing. There is no bank in the entire world, that does not owe every human being walking the world today, at least a few, if not a great many thousands of pounds, because they screwed the entire working population, and the population of the future, during the last big financial crash. Thats money most of them never paid back, and its all taxpayer money. If the banks (representative of a very few people on the whole planet) can get away with decades of price fixing, price gouging, dodgy investments, and deliberately screwing up the worlds entire economy, then Cletus and Lou-Anne can get away with a few extra zeros here and there from their welfare, because at least the money they made from their scam, actually gets spent in local businesses in your country, rather than hidden away off shore, where no federal power can possibly reach it. Also, its worth pointing out that the chances are that fraud on the part of those receiving assistance, is likely responsible for less than a percentage point of all government money lost during a financial year. Most of the REAL fraud in the system, the stuff that REALLY costs the government, is corporate fraud.

a reply to: TrueBrit

The problem isn’t that people need state aid. It is that they need to stop working for employers who won’t pay a livable wage.

It should be illegal for a company to only higher part time employees so they don’t have to pay benifits.

People should stop working for companies that don’t pay adequate enough for a person to live, this is the reason the rich are able to consolidate all of the wealth, they aren’t paying enough out to the workers, it isn’t a welfare problem it is a mental attitude of Americans in 2018

originally posted by: fatkid
a reply to: KTemplar

You are right, not everyone deserves a job

I wasn’t referring to “deserving” a job. Some people I know have applied for months on end and don’t even get a callback.

For all you commuters, how does adding a few hundred more to your gridlock drive home sound?