Millions Could Lose Food Assistance If Government Shutdown Continues

originally posted by: Propagandalf

originally posted by: Shamrock6

originally posted by: Aallanon
a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

I have witnessed first hand people having babies to increase their "income".

I do not believe all welfare people fall into this category, just like I don't think they all arise from your terrible situation.

Okay. As a "person who resorted to becoming dependent on the government" your response still comes across as a blanket indictment of those who have used services.

As I said in my first comment, of course I'm aware that there are those who abuse the system. There are plenty who "resort to becoming dependent on the government" who not only didn't want to be or choose to be, but are embarrassed to be lumped into the same broad brush category as those who abuse the system by people with the mentality exhibited in this thread by some people.

You’re either dependant on the government or not. Embarrassment is an important part of learning. If you do not want to be associated with them, don’t associate with them. But no, I’m not going to end my criticisms because you get embarrassed.

How come there is never embarrasment for those that purchase politicians like corporate and banking lobbyists?

originally posted by: TinySickTears

there are a lot of disgusting comments in the thread but your statement about having to have a job is absolutely incorrect.
unless it changed since 2016 of course.

You can get 3 months worth in a 3 year period without working. There are exceptions like students, etc... but for the common person, that's the rule. I believe it was Bill Clinton who made the policy.

We should be clear, it’s not only those in need who have become reliant on the government for help, but also those who refuse to help the members in their communities. The government and paying taxes has filled the void where charity and compassion once lived.

The sooner we start taking care of those in our communities, whether feeding, housing or funding those in need, the sooner we can release ourselves from that dependency.

originally posted by: jacobe001

originally posted by: Propagandalf

originally posted by: Shamrock6

originally posted by: Aallanon
a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

I have witnessed first hand people having babies to increase their "income".

I do not believe all welfare people fall into this category, just like I don't think they all arise from your terrible situation.

Okay. As a "person who resorted to becoming dependent on the government" your response still comes across as a blanket indictment of those who have used services.

As I said in my first comment, of course I'm aware that there are those who abuse the system. There are plenty who "resort to becoming dependent on the government" who not only didn't want to be or choose to be, but are embarrassed to be lumped into the same broad brush category as those who abuse the system by people with the mentality exhibited in this thread by some people.

You’re either dependant on the government or not. Embarrassment is an important part of learning. If you do not want to be associated with them, don’t associate with them. But no, I’m not going to end my criticisms because you get embarrassed.

How come there is never embarrasment for those that purchase politicians like corporate and banking lobbyists?

God knows.

a reply to: LordAhriman

Most are on disability also which is BS

a reply to: knoxie

Ummm, the House voted on their bill. It would have to still be put to the Senate for a vote.

Of course, I think it would be lovely for Cocaine Mitch to rear his head again and play the "reconciliation" game the Democrats used to get Obamacare through which is a budget measure. Since each House has now passed a version of a budget, the Senate can strip out the wording in the House bill and insert all the wording in the Senate bill that did pass but would not pass the House. Technically, they now have a "House" bill that the Senate can vote on and pass because it already has and the House couldn't do a thing about it because they technically already passed that House bill number.

Funding for a wall could be inserted if it wasn't there already and Trump could sign it.

a reply to: daboxfan

Excellent ideas. But what about the large banks the run the EBT cards, like JP morgan? Don't you have compassion for the large banks that run these programs and make massive profits?

sarcasm aside, I agree. If you are really hungry and not just looking for a handout or a way to stick it to the man which you are already leeching off of, you would have no problem going to a soup kitchen. If you are more concerned with the type of food they serve instead of simply receiving sustenance, we have a huge problem.

a reply to: angeldoll

Well, lets just hope they get funding by February.

originally posted by: LordAhriman

originally posted by: TinySickTears

there are a lot of disgusting comments in the thread but your statement about having to have a job is absolutely incorrect.
unless it changed since 2016 of course.

You can get 3 months worth in a 3 year period without working. There are exceptions like students, etc... but for the common person, that's the rule. I believe it was Bill Clinton who made the policy.

This is correct.
Bill Clinton ended welfare as we know it.
Back in the day you could even get cash assistance but that is no more.

en.m.wikipedia.org...


Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act

The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (PRWORA) is a United States federal law considered to be a major welfare reform. The bill was a cornerstone of the Republican Contract with America and was authored by Rep. E. Clay Shaw, Jr. (R-FL-22). President Bill Clinton signed PRWORA into law on August 22, 1996, fulfilling his 1992 campaign promise to "end welfare as we have come to know it".[1][2]



The number welfare dropped significantly after Bill Clinton passed welfare reform.
The number on welfare increased especially after 2008 because of the financial terrorists crashing the ecomony in their money making schemes.

Wages have also stagnated thanks to the globalists.
As they say, there is no free lunch because someone has to pay for it.

a reply to: Propagandalf

But how do you prevent people from abusing the services? Just look at california. They subsidize homelessness and look at what has been increasing in direct proportion to the money they are throwing at it, more homeless people?

So you are going to demonize communities that don't roll out the carpet like california does? Have you ever thought why these communities are a lot more careful in the benefits they give out, beyond labeling them as heartless?

a reply to: DBCowboy

Perhaps Congress can actually do its job?

originally posted by: ClovenSky
a reply to: Propagandalf

But how do you prevent people from abusing the services? Just look at california. They subsidize homelessness and look at what has been increasing in direct proportion to the money they are throwing at it, more homeless people?

So you are going to demonize communities that don't roll out the carpet like california does? Have you ever thought why these communities are a lot more careful in the benefits they give out, beyond labeling them as heartless?

I’m speaking of charity, helping one another, not government subsidies and programs. Some seem to believe paying more taxes and creating more programs is an adequate substitute for charity. These are the same people who express how compassionate they are while they step over the homeless in their own communities on their way to get a latte.

originally posted by: Byrd

originally posted by: daboxfan
We should only provide FOOD like Trump suggested 2 years ago. No money. We could have food centers set up where people could "shop" for the food they are provided. Maybe online and it can get shipped. It would actually BE CHEAPER than our current system.Money is a waste and its a hotbed for fraud. people should not WANT to stay on welfare. This system is a joke just like all the other handout programs INCLUDING the current ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION policies. Ending ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION would save enough to provide food for everyone....but that's not really what the liberals wants is it? wait until you see the pain and suffering you will get if the liberal idiots get their way!
SIGNED,
a very concerned US CITIZEN

The problem with "government-provided food" rather than food stamps is that you're held hostage to what they want to feed you. Ask anybody in the military or anyone else who's had to deal with these programs. They will go with the cheapest contract they can find, and that may mean types of food you don't like or can't eat.

...like spam. National food of Hawaii, but if you're Jewish, it's forbidden.

And then there's the problem of storing the food and shipping the food and inspecting the food ... and in the end you won't get fresh fruits and vegetables or even a decent grade of hamburger.

Most households with food stamps include children, elderly, and disabled people (who receive the stamps) (I picked a convenient source but other sources say the same thing) White families who are struggling to get out of poverty (areas like Kentucky) really do need this help until the jobs come back or the situation changes.

It's not a perfect system, but I don't think the "government distributes" is a good answer.

And at least food stamps supports local businesses; and in the areas where there's a lot of food stamps, the businesses need customers to stay in business.

Its called getting a job!

Beggers a can't and should not be choosers.

If you want to get good food and choose what you eat then you should get a job.

originally posted by: Aallanon
By the way Nancy could end this all tomorrow by securing our border.

Why not do that?????

She needs to be called everyday until she hears the American people loud and clear.

Here's the phone number: (202) 225-4965

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: DBCowboy

Perhaps Congress can actually do its job?

This is one of those "Mandela" things, isn't it.



Government do it's job. . . .

I am someone who receives food stamps. Not much, about $200 a month. I have 3 kids and a wife to support. I say shut it off, if it gets the wall built!

Just some back story. I started a small business about 6 years ago, after working for a fortune 500 company for 20+ years. It started as a part time thing, but became so busy that I had to decide between working for a large corporation, who over time seemed to care less and less about it's employees, or set out on my own.

For the first couple years things went well. Then things slowed down some. Last year I applied for food stamps. This IS NOT a permanent situation. I have paid into the system for years and years, so during a low time I find no problem in getting a little help when needed. That is what the system is for, to help those in need for a period of time. Instead we have bunch of lazy people that have been on it for generations, with no intention of getting a job.

If I have to do without that extra, I will find a way. I expect my business to pick up within the next year, and as soon as it does, I will take myself off the food stamp system.

I would rather have a secure border, and go without a few extra things. JMHO

a reply to: queenofswords

5 billion for border security is holding up 70 billion needed for the food stamp program

Congress needs to do their job

Congress wants open borders and hungry babies.

Way to go, leftists!

originally posted by: Unruhestifter
It's called getting a job!

Beggers a can't and should not be choosers.

If you want to get good food and choose what you eat then you should get a job.

So ignorant.

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: queenofswords

5 billion for border security is holding up 70 billion needed for the food stamp program

Congress needs to do their job

Odd, isn't it?

BTW, here's Chuckie's:

Schumer, Charles E. - (D - NY) Class III
322 Hart Senate Office Building Washington DC 20510
(202) 224-6542
Contact: www.schumer.senate.gov/contact/email-chuck