"When plunder becomes a way of life for a group of men living together in society, they create for themselves in the course of time a legal system that authorizes it and a moral code that justifies it."
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://boortz.com/blogging/mt-tb.cgi/51633
Jamie Dupree's Blog
If you enjoy Neal's daily chat with Jamie Dupree, you'll love Jamie's Blog! Check it out for analysis of the campaigns and goings on in Washington D.C.
Cristina Gonzalez and Laura Nunemaker assist in the daily preparation of Nealz Nuze!
I think if people like you could learn to mold your message so that it's not so "anti govt" and is more geared towards recognizing that social safety nets arent going anywhere but we need to be fiscally responsible - WITHOUT yelling for BIG cuts so fast and so hard after a REALLY bad recession, you might get somewhere.
But tea party agenda rhetoric... it will make your party smaller, your ideas weaker, and you wont get anything done.
but hey, maybe I'm wrong. I'm willing to bet I'm not - and encourage you to keep right on raging. :-)
Snark
You are not thinking clearly. If we had spending cuts, the states wouldn't need so much from the Fed! If we had state based programs to help those that need it, our money would go to the state instead of the Fed.
Don't go throwing darts about platitudes and slogans around when you are the queen of such btw!
You just deliberately ignore stuff? I have said there are ways to PHASE OUT - do you know what that means? And you know very well if we weren't spending billions and billions on stupid wars, we would have a lot more money for REAL projects here at home, including closing the border, that was just dumb asking HOW to close it.
We keep putting out the ideas, you progressives keep knocking them down all the while complaining cause no one else comes up with ideas. You're just as bad as Congress.
Quit being snarky. You may think you are dealing with teenagers, but arguing with you is like arguing with a 5 year old constantly asking the same question over and over again. And NEVER hearing the answer.
It CAN be done, didn't say it would be easy but we sure can't keep going the way we are. It's certainly better than anything Washington or you have come up with.
WE ARE AMERICANS
And also what is with the divide such as "we" "us" "you". We are all Americans and should demand our gov't be fiscally responsible. Our gov't needs to stop continuous spending on able body individuals. Gov’t job is to provide a just (notice I did not say fair) play ground; it is not to run the play ground.
We are becoming a country of takers instead of a country of producers--This should be alarming to all. It does not matter whether the takers are individual or corporations because it needs to stop if we want to remain the most profitable and innovative country in the world.
I don't know about you but I do not want to be a follower nation, I want our nation to be the leader. So we need to stop with the bickering, personal insults and attacks and come together as American for the betterment of our nation. The first step is to demand personal responsibility from individuals, businesses, politicians, and civil servants (local or national).
rejoyce
regarding your list, this is exactly what I'm talking about.
You offer plattitudes and slogans without substance.
cut spending? for everything? OK - and then what, just deal with states going bankrupt? who cares? the wars end and we cant pay to get them home? people who need SS just - tough shit?
close our borders? how?? and how do you CUT spending but then initiate a project of that magnitude?
I understand you're pushing the libertarian agenda, that's great! But, what I never see from libertarians is the ground work needed to accommodate for the radical change they want.
It's like dealing with teenagers. They want to change the world and they know JUST how to do it! But they never are willing to do the real work to make those changes effective and positive for the country and they FOR SURE never EVER think about the consequences.
All you care about is change according to your agenda, all else be damned.
@snarkybird
I think we all are in agreement that spending is out of control and needs to be addressed. Personally, I don’t have a problem with a society having entitlements (e.g. Student aids, temporary welfare benefits (2years with lifetime limits), Health Insurance for those under 20 yrs etc…) approved by the People; the gov’t should not be the major entitlement donor—most entitlements should be set up in the private sector (e.g. charitable non for profit organization, churches, mosques, temples, etc…). However, I have a problem when the entitlements do not help the individual achieve a better life circumstance. I want the gov’t in conjunction with private sector non-for- profit organizations to be there for people in circumstances such as the one in your example of the now successful widow due to SS have an opportunity to rise above their poor circumstances. Unfortunately that is not what most with gov't assistances do. They abuse the system instead of using it to get out of their poor or unfortunate circumstances.
At the core we most agree on the problem but disagree on how to solve the problem. Most agree health insurance needs reform but we disagree on how to do that reform. People such as myself believe the reform should be done using the private sector and others believe it should be a combination of private sector and gov't or just gov’t. I disagree with the combination of private sector and gov't or just gov’t because I know when gov't is involve, competition is nonexistent--The gov't will eventually squeeze out the private sector and we will end up with something like single payer. I don't think the gov't is equipped to run such task because it comprise of individuals whose interests varies and because we will end up with a two tier system and corruption.
I want to help our less fortunate in our society to make something of themselves; I don't want our “help” to create a sector of population that get by on gov't hand out and who lack or possess very little personal and societal responsibility. Basically I don't think people should be punished for their success and rewarded for their failures. Continuous support of an individual with entitlements does little for society and the individual. A society is doom if the takers outweigh the producers.
Snark
That is your opinion that it "does great harm" and "want to burn the house down"? You can't step back and see how your system of spend spend spend with huge entitlement programs isn't harmful?
You really that blind or do you completely align yourself with the progressive method of destroy to replace?
I said "local and state", that is where the private charity/groups come in, so Tre and I are on the same page. And the limits are not near what leaving it up to the Fed would be. So you are confusing yourself, your approach would NOT work with Tre and I because you would insist on Federal Government involvement, and would not be concerned with people getting help that dont deserve it.
Good try, spin again. You want us to keep fighting but want to direct that fight away from what is important. Federal Government interference is hurting America. Period. And the idea that others are happy with this is a farce, you are ignoring the polls completely.
rejoyce
You said "Poor little snark, you see your demise coming and keep hoping you can derail us from the real fight."
I think I've said pretty consistently that I want you to keep fighting. I think it does you great harm but I also think A)it's your right and B)it's how this country is setup.
what I think is funny is this view that you've lost control.
I think you cant face the idea that others are happy with this, that there are ways to manage it effectively, and it's all constitutional.
I am very open to the idea that these things need to be managed better and I think you could make the case, as tre did, that much could be provided via private charity/groups. I think that has it's limits but, you see the difference there yes? - tre and I agree on a basic premise and could work to a meaningful conclusion and we probably are very far away politically.
But you - you just want to burn the house down.
that is where I part ways with your views.
Trusted Steward
Funny coming from a progressive!
There have already been proposals on phasing these entitlements out. And yes it would have to be a phase-out, not just a flat out cut since we have enabled people to become dependent on them.
phase out
cut Federal spending all across the board
quit getting involved in every incident in the world and bring our guys home
close our borders
enable businesses to increase their business and grow jobs
let the states determine how to handle those who need help
no more bailouts
no more interference from the Federal Government which leads to bigger bubbles than free market would normally allow
any monies from TARP, etc., that have not been spent void
There are many other issues and I'm sure everyone here has something they would add to that list but it's a great place to start. And you are still ignoring that debt clock.
Snarkybird
Okay, thank you. That was an intelligent and thoughtfull response.
No, we cannot cut all of the spending from one day to the next. However, I suggest we begin unraveling this out of control spending. First, let's lock it down, no more increases, period. Second, let's begin to give back the money (i.e. privatize social security, unregulate and allow health insurance accross state lines). Let's also significantly cut from one year to the next the amount of government mandated charity. Let charities that opperate efficently receive income from private individuals. We will get more done with less. Look at FeedtheChildren.org. They can feed a family of 4 for 7 days for $25. That includes administration costs. Significantly less than the Food Stamps programs.
Let's go private. They opperate efficently. Will there be corruption? Yes. Will there be some waste? Yes. Will it be less than the governments beauracratic hands? YES!
Again, thanks for your thoughtfullness and willingness to listen approach.
@snarkybutt
Were you born a moron or have you been working it your whole life? People ignore this george soros, acorn, obamy maxist plant. He/she it obviously has allot of time to post here, so either (it's) being paid or(it's)one of the parasitical moochers. Because we all know the rules for liberals is "good enough for thee but not enough for me." Don't waste another second (it's) most definantly not worth it; stop giving it any attention; poor deprived thing.
Sometimes people laugh to hide embarrassment
"rejoyce LMFAO!
of course! Obama's election is the signal that the "moocher class" has finally risen to power!
Our first black president. and this is your take.
oh gee, and you wonder why some think it's racist."
Race hadn't even occurred to me till you said that. So the race baiters are you! And I guess you automatically assume all moochers are black?
Poor little snark, you see your demise coming and keep hoping you can derail us from the real fight. You? No, you are not the real fight, you are just sideshow. The real fight is going on right now in tea parties, calls, emails and visits to politicians, all the while noting the ones who don't pay attention. And boy is that list long. They will go. We will attempt to do it this way. But like good soldiers there is always a Plan B.
"Natural" disasters. According to the CBO this recession would already be ending. As far as the man made disasters, those came about by your people pandering to the moochers, giving them loans for homes they couldn't afford. Giving them ever increasing entitlements that we couldn't afford. So thanks for making my point.
If government had stuck to handling natural disasters, we wouldn't have had the housing bubble and following collapse bringing everything else down with it.
Keep up your work of trying to destroy America. Show us what you are really made of.
retrejoycejeffW
ok, I'll just cave here - you're right.
defense, given your numbers, is at least double to 3 times that of entitlements.
I was wrong. You are right.
the irony here is, all three of those programs have zero to do with food stamps or welfare which fall under HHS. And each of those entitlements has a separate tax to pay for them, whereas defense comes out of income tax.
but - again, you're right.
So, I'm assuming you're approach here is to show that the govt is upside down, right? that defense (which is needed) is now less than entitlements (not needed), right?
and since, they are programs providing for people who vote - the only way to end them is to circumvent the congress who wont take them away for fear of losing votes, and get rid of them via a state initiated constitutional convention to use amendments to end them?
Is that right?
I do appreciate you correcting me on the spending item. My data: http://www.wallstats.com/deathandtaxes/ I think is better but, it's pointless to quibble over that. and, frankly, I agree that entitlements do need to be cut. I think we just disagree with the amounts. You want them gone. I think that's ridiculous. I'd prefer we cut them responsibly.
but, my way requires you to recognize them as legitimate and you cant do that. I understand.
So, and this is where you just loose me, how do you get rid of the "mooching". By that I mean, personal experience with SS - mother has two babies, father dies of cancer unexpectedly, SS helped her make it, she became successful business owner. SS tax paid for that. All the elderly that rely on SS and medicare.
I know you think this would all right itself through other means were all these programs to end. My question would be - if we're spending all this on these things now, heck let's VERY generously cut it in half to take out waste, fraud, and abuse - that's at a min the size of the DoD budget. It's money going out to pay for things that would go back to the people who earned it.
How would you manage that change for those who rely on that income? And how would you manage the change in private sector providers that rely on that income? I know several HC companies that will now take nothing BUT medicare - because they reliably pay (unlike insurance companies).
I understand your concerns around the spending, I really do.
But, you have to be a trusted steward to be enabled with the power to change these things simply because of the impact they currently have.
Do you really think your approach accomplishes that?
Yep snark is picking what she "absorbs"
And totally ignoring the debt clock I posted. Those unfunded liabilities, did ya see, $107 TRILLION. That's the future bill for your lovely little entitlement programs we are passing on to our children, grandchildren, etc.
rejoyce
LMFAO!
of course! Obama's election is the signal that the "moocher class" has finally risen to power!
Our first black president. and this is your take.
oh gee, and you wonder why some think it's racist.
LOL!
All those "other" elections were nothing... ignore those! This loss was the "big sign"!
Awesome. please, keep fighting this fight just as you are! It is fantastic entertainment. Perhaps if you could move it along a little more though? I'm not sure the GOP has fully been derailed. If you hurry you can trash it completely and have something new and viable by 2012.
here's to you getting that done!
on disasters - yeah, so you're saying the role of the fed govt is to step in when there is an unexpected event and people need help?
@Dan Isaacs
"Cash benefits are Not Food Stamps! You may get a welfare check. with that, you could buy beer. Or deodorant. Or McDonalds. Or Lottery tickets. This has always been the case.
Food Stamps (food benefit account) cannot be used for those things. Furthermore, you cannot get cashback or make cash withdrawals from your food account.
I'll be happy to be mistaken about this. But I don't think I am. By all means, show me how you can use Food benefits to buy beer. I'll follow your links. ;)"
Re: Dan Isaacs
I think you are misunderstanding people's outrage. People are outrage because some (not all-because many do use it as it was intended to be used) on EBT can buy anything and everything if their EBT contains cash benefit. Also people are outrage because the food stamp portion (whether paper or electronic) are being sold for cash to buy what the EBT (food stamp) was not intended to buy. People are outrage because EBT is not being used to propel individuals to a better lifestyle; it is being used as a way of life etc... Now between you and me, please read the sign again. It is blatantly stating you can use the cash benefit portion of the EBT card to buy cigarette and beer (two very unhealthy items for people who are likely without insurance or have Medicaid which is another abused entitlement that is being paid by the taxpayers). I mean there is so much wrong with this that I don't know I can stop if I begin to list them.
I want the best for my fellow man so I want to teach them how to fish and not feed them for just one day.
“Okay, so you're saying they can do pretty much whatever they want?”
Were you not just arguing that very point, sb?
Sb: “Those are the words of a sad, little man.”
Okay, so your pretty much out of any mature arguments and are resorting to petty insults, thank you for confirming your intellectual contradiction(besides being wrong on several levels, but I'll leave that alone)
sb: “I said it before Ace and I'll say it again - THEY are US.”
You forgot to mention our magical one vote, the 3 branches government and the Constitu...
ohhh,, never mind.
Sb: “We get the govt we deserve.”
No, We've got a government that is bought and paid for by money looted from the Archivers and producers.
We've got a government out of control that is spending like a drunken Statists (I don't want to piss-off any of my navy brethren)
We've got a government that doesn't recognize the limits place on it by the Constitution.
practice what you preach snark
"rejoyceand ace Joyce, you said "Sometimes, drastic measures have to be taken.""
This is what I find so utterly pathetic.
You think "drastic measures" need to be taken because you can't sell your ideas at the polls.
it's like watching ben or liberalhater on this board. they try to say something but, after their ideas are shot down, they resort to name calling.
same thing."
Sounds like you are getting a tad upset and resorting to name calling yourself!!!
As for selling ideas at the polls, are you being deliberately obtuse? (I get it, you just don't like having to go to the dictionary) Have you not heard us complain multiple times that the candidates out there now and for the past several DECADES are saying whatever it takes to get our vote, but then do what the progressives want when they get to Washington? That is what we are tired of. And the damage you people are inflicting is not the kind that can easily (if at all) be undone by the next round of politicians, even if we can find some honest ones.
Conservatives are getting more organized and more educated on the political process, so it's easier to catch your crap these days and that is why we are working so hard to stop it now before bad legislation gets in place. You call it the party of no, we call it the party of damage control.
See we want lower taxes for everyone, job growth, employers free to provide really nice benefits for his/her employees if they choose to. And if there are still some that don't have the ability to improve their lot in life and need help, well we can take care of them at the state and local level. Why do you care whether it's local or Federal as long as they are taken care of? Because it's not about taking care of people, is it?
snarkybird @ 11/20/09 08:30:20 AMreport abuse
"If that's the contortion you have to do to be right"
I did that on purpose to see if you would actually inform yourself. You see... On page 117 (or page 5 of the PDF) Total DOD spending (including the wars) for 2010 is $728 Billion. Whereas 3 entitlement programs are 1438 Billion.
Can you do that math? The entitlement programs are double what DOD spends including the wars.
Next time, get educated before you open your math. Better yet, please memorize this quote: Better to be thought a fool, than open your mouth and remove all doubt. - Ben Franklin
Snark's foolishness
There is no contortion for it to be right. Welfare spending is almost 3x DOD budget, excluding wars. Wars don't happen every day or every year. The welfare state does....
Thank you Bob
This is for you snarky: The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not.
Jefferson
Flawed Logic of snark
"So, as I said, you believe with all your little heart that the US is a land made up of moochers who can, by their own majorities, vote in representatives that will continue the mooching until all the achievers are gone or broke."
My little heart, your little brain, don't be ridiculous, even Jefferson warned us against moochers voting to do exactly what you deny. Many political writers and philosophers have stated what to every one else but you is obvious.
Moochers did not elect GWB, they elected Obama. Millions turned out that had never voted before, that is fact. And what does Clinton and Perot have to do with this discussion? Nothing. Once again you are trying to obfuscate the subject.
The answer to your other questions should also be obvious. Because the moocher class is not only growing but are being given a larger voice through groups such as ACORN and SEIU and frankly, progressives like you.
You and your group are helping to break down the American way of government and life, see Cloward & Piven. See "Rules for Radicals". It's in writing. This is the goal.
The "disaster" scenario you are using with mattisben is assinine even for you. THAT is one of the few reasons for Federal Government. That is what they need to focus on instead of all this other crap that is NOT part of their constitutional mandate.
You truly are worthless.
rejoyce
You said "And you and your buddies would NOT like it, so stop pretending"
and then this "Elections by themselves can't undo entitlement programs."
So, as I said, you believe with all your little heart that the US is a land made up of moochers who can, by their own majorities, vote in representatives that will continue the mooching until all the achievers are gone or broke.
So, by that flawed logic, lacking a majority in any state, you want a minority to come together and change the law of the land instead.
So, I have to ask - why did the moochers elect GWB, twice? Or elect Ronald Reagan, twice? Or elect GHWB once?
Let's face it, the only reason Clinton beat Bush I was because of Perot.
Why did our congress enjoy a conservative majority for a decade most recently? Or vote in those same conservatives who ran on an agenda of smaller govt?
mattisben asked "what is this country was divided into two sections" regarding moochers and achievers. Well, I can tell you, it mostly is, with the exception of texas - the south, which harbors most of these "antimoocher" sentiment, relies heavily on the federal govt for funding.
But, mattisben, why not just start with disasters? Next time there is a hurricane or a flood, and the federal govt wants to offer aid - refuse. Surely a guy like Bobby Jindal or Haley Barbour are conservative enough to recognize the value in that kind of statemet/action. Right?
reTre
LOL
I love it. "DoD spending (excluding wars)"
If that's the contortion you have to do to be right - done. I'll leave you to twist.
Just the facts
This is for the uninformed. Food Stamps no longer exist and have not been used in most states for close to 15 years. Today's program is called the Supplimental Nutrition Assistance Program(SNAP). SNAP benefits are not the same as cash benefits however cash benefits do appear on some EBT cards and while on the same physical EBT card, they are derived from a completely different funding source than SNAP benefits. They are most likely TANF (Temporary Assistance to Needy Families)benefits and can be used exactly as cash. TANF benefits used to be distributed in the form of a check that was later cashed at a bank. The benefits were added to the EBT card because the electronic transfer was cheaper than printing checks. I am not defending the misuse of benefits provided by tax dollars. It's a crime and is regularly prosecuted.
Dead Founders part 2
If the present Congress errs in too much talking, how can it be otherwise in a body to which the people send one hundred and fifty lawyers, whose trade it is to question everything, yield nothing, and talk by the hour? My reading of history convinces me that most bad government results from too much government. Our country is now taking so steady a course as to show by what road it will pass to destruction, to wit: by consolidation of power first, and then corruption, its necessary consequence. Rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others. I do not add 'within the limits of the law' because law is often but the tyrant's will, and always so when it violates the rights of the individual. That government is best which governs the least, because its people discipline themselves. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.
Quoting Dead Founders
Since you all are in a historical mood, here are a few quotes from Thomas Jefferson. Please enlighten yourselves!
The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not. To compel a man to furnish funds for the propagation of ideas he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical. When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty. Whenever a man has cast a longing eye on offices, a rottenness begins in his conduct. A wise and frugal government, which shall leave men free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned - this is the sum of good government. Educate and inform the whole mass of the people... They are the only sure reliance for the preservation of our liberty. Every government degenerates when trusted to the rulers of the people alone. The people themselves are its only safe depositories. Experience hath shewn, that even under the best forms of government those entrusted with power have, in time, and by slow operations, perverted it into tyranny. For a people who are free, and who mean to remain so, a well-organized and armed militia is their best security. History, in general, only informs us of what bad government is. I know of no safe depository of the ultimate powers of the society but the people themselves; and if we think them not enlightened enough to exercise their control with a wholesome discretion, the remedy is not to take it from them but to inform their discretion. I own that I am not a friend to a very energetic government. It is always oppressive. I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than those attending too small a degree of it.
@snarkybird @ 11/19/09 12:34:19 PM
You said you're usually wrong... well you are right about that...
Just some figures from the President's own website mind you (http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/assets/fy2010_new_era/Summary_Tables2.pdf)
I want to draw your attention to Table S-7, page 130. DOD 2010 spending (excluding the Wars) is 533.7 Billion. Social Security alone for 2010 - 695 Billion. Add in Medicare and Medicaid for 2010 which are 453 Billion and 290 Billion you get DOD Spending at 553.7 Bil and 3 entitlement programs at 1438 Billion.
I'm sure you can do basic math can't you? Well kids, it is 553.7 goes into 1438 2.597 times. So when someone says it is 3 times and you say DOD is more than the others... the other guy is right. In this case, you should just sit down and be quiet, you're embarassing yourself.
Free Beer!
I drink A LOT of beer, but I make $115,000 a year, so I don't think I would qualify for the EBT thing. Does anybody have any ideas about how to help me out? By the way, Neil Russell has got to be old school; ZIPPY MART! I thought I was the only one that remembered when they were called that.
Hey everybody, pop another Zoloft and let it slide.
Stop pretending snark
"You just dont get it do you. this is about "of the people, by the people". You talk about doing this like it would be some threat. C'mon. these things are in place for a reason."
Yeah we get it better than you do. And you and your buddies would NOT like it, so stop pretending.
It's a shame it comes to this. The convention would be necessary to UNDO the crap you and your boys are doing. Elections by themselves can't undo entitlement programs. Or heaven forbid if this crap & tax thing passes, elections can't undo that.
I thought you understood the process better than that.
re Welfare Queen.
This is so NOT an urban legend. I have known many in our old neighborhood. As for Snarky - if the US were divided into two separate nations; one which operated on personal liberty AND responsibility (as the founders of the US intended) and the other operated on wealth redistribution (as the US currently operates); which one would you choose? Socialism has never worked long term. The achievers will either stop producing or move somewhere more favorable. Anyone for the Constitutional Federation of Texas?
rejoyceand ace
Joyce, you said "Sometimes, drastic measures have to be taken.""
This is what I find so utterly pathetic.
You think "drastic measures" need to be taken because you can't sell your ideas at the polls.
it's like watching ben or liberalhater on this board. they try to say something but, after their ideas are shot down, they resort to name calling.
same thing.
you cant win elections with this junk so you think brute force and circumventing the will of the people is the better way to go.
I say go for it. I would LOVE LOVE LOVE to watch you folks try. Truly. This stuff needs to see real scrutiny.
the best disinfectant is sunshine.
buy you folks cant even muster enough to refute me.
Benefit of Doubt
Well to be fair I went by and read the website "http://www.apa.org/pi/wpo/myths.html" and just so you know that little report has been around the block a couple of times, little chnage here and there, but never the less the same one.
Ya most of those people want off the system, thats why a few years ago when they tried to get folks to at least work 20 hours a week and learn a skill they rioted and the ACLU and Civil rights leaders were down here egging it on!
You know SB, you shouldn't believe everything you readon the internet! LMAO
rejoyce
LOL!
Quoting Madison??
DUHHH! hello?? what have we been talking about??
Sheesh! Try "Hamilton".
We'll let you catch up.
reDD
well, you've had personal experience in a specific area, gosh - you must be right!
BY that logic, if I live in a place that has hurricanes all the time, everyone must have hurricane insurance, just like me, right?
nevermind. no need to delve any further. you're better off ignoring the data and sticking with you tiny slice. you're hangin on pretty tight there.
You know you cannot answer the question: Where did you get the absurd idea that even though the Statists aren't restrained by the Constitution, they are restrained by the Constitution?
Because you jump back a forth on both sides of it every day.
Bird Brain
You said; "suffice it to say I make quite a bit more than that and pay plenty of taxes as a result."
"According to JAMES MADISON, the clause authorized Congress to spend money, but only to carry out the powers and duties specifically enumerated in the subsequent clauses of Article I, Section 8, and elsewhere in the Constitution, not to meet the seemingly infinite needs of the general welfare. ALEXANDER HAMILTON maintained that the clause granted Congress the power to spend without limitation for the general welfare of the nation. The winner of this debate was not declared for 150 years."
The link above makes it very clear that Congress has the right to spend money, but NOT to legislate for the general welfare, that is a power relagated to the states in the 10th amendment.
Example: "In United States v. Butler, 56 S. Ct. 312, 297 U.S. 1, 80 L. Ed. 477 (1936), the U.S. Supreme Court invalidated a federal agricultural spending program because a specific congressional power over agricultural production appeared nowhere in the Constitution. According to the Court in Butler, the spending program invaded a right reserved to the states by the Tenth Amendment."
Infact, it seems that it's more a matter of the SC becoming disinterested in following the true meaning of the general welfare clause than that it's set in stone. Gee, I wonder why?
rejoyce
You said "You are pissing off America and it's gonna get ugly."
regarding a constitutional convention without congress - I think that would be super-awesome!!
You just dont get it do you. this is about "of the people, by the people". You talk about doing this like it would be some threat. C'mon. these things are in place for a reason.
but, so are elections.
Keep on fighting!!! I'll go make the popcorn.
Really Snark?
"DD - see previous link on these myths of welfare you blather on about."
Really now! Gee, lets see if I understand this, I should believe you and not my lying eyes? Is that what your saying? MMMMMMM!
Well as a fireman/paramedic I have been in these places, ALOT! I guess I shouldn't believe what I have seen. Maybe I can't believe all of those people that live there? The investigations & news reports? Gee I didn't realize that if I didn't get my information from the same place you did, why it just never happened? Is that what you are saying SB?
Gee guess the folks at the welfare department are just lying to me!
Damn SB, I am so glad you set me stright! You the smartest one in the room. Twenty-eight years in the streets and I never knew everyone was lying to me.
AND IT KEEPS GETTING FUNNIER
Probably not
I'm betting there are several in the 14th district of Texas who disagree. By snarkybird
I imagine Ron Paul and his followers would agree that congress is out of control. Your state of THEY are US is just silly. At some point in EVERY nations history, "THEY" get out of control and no longer represent their people the way the people want to be represented. Those times are called revolutions.
Up to a point you are right about getting the government we deserve until that point when the candidates lie to get votes. Then suddenly things are happening you did NOT vote for.
Sometimes, drastic measures have to be taken.
And we're getting closer.
Food Stamps
When I was young (and poor) I knew of pot dealers that would take food stamps for 50 cents on the dollar, maybe they paid for their munchies with em.
Precedent can be overturned
Especially since FDR padded the SC up to the number that would approve all his actions. That needs to be looked at again.
These programs are not constitutional, but liberal progressives can twist words to mean whatever they want. This all needs to be challenged. Again.
General Welfare was never intended to be "welfare", Regulate means to make regular not "rules and regulations". They are to enable commerce to flow evenly between the states not control it to an inch of death.
98% of what the Federal Government has taken on was originally intended to be left to the individual, local and state governments AND YOU KNOW THAT! So why to morons keep trying to defend this intrusion.
Keep it up. There is more and more talk about forcing a constitutional convention WITHOUT Washington (Article 5) and whether you think it's a good idea or not, we could see it happening if you people don't BACK OFF. And don't threaten all kinds of amendments that we wouldn't want because they still have to be approved by 3/4 of the states so that would preclude any partisan efforts.
You are pissing off America and it's gonna get ugly.
reace
""Okay, so you're saying they can do pretty much whatever they want?""
Those are the words of a sad, little man.
I said it before Ace and I'll say it again - THEY are US.
We get the govt we deserve.
But I get it - congress wants power, it controls the purse, it buys votes, congress keeps power. I get that this is the cycle you see.
I'm betting there are several in the 14th district of Texas who disagree.
That's nothing
He shoulda got a pic of the crack dealer in the parking lot with the EBT scanner hooked to his PDM.
snarkybird: “There is now substantial precedent that confers the power to congress to act on what it deems to be the "general welfare".
Okay, so you're saying they can do pretty much whatever they want?
my goodness, so many interested parties today
ace - again with the "answer the question" crap? (sigh) You seem to be very good at not listening, coming up with your own argument, and then applying it to what wasn't said. It's rather amazing. If you're asking if congress is constrained by the constitution? that's absurd - of course! that document calls out its power. What chaps you is Hamilton saw it differently than madison and the SCOTUS long ago sided with Hamilton. Sorry... if you dont like it, take it up with them. I agree.
DD - see previous link on these myths of welfare you blather on about. it's getting old folks, could you at least read previous posts. which leads me to
ben - I'm sorry, did you have some data that refutes that rather long list of data points about what you "think" welfare is and what is ACTUALLY is and does? The old "it's the source" argument is kinda lame without at least something else to point to. If you bothered to read the link you'd see exactly what I said is true. most use it and move on.
walt - you do realize that this isn't 1876, right? people survived, sure. But a whole lot of them didnt. talk to your grandparents about the depression sometime. read a book. it'll do ya good. here's a funny one - we wouldnt even have become mighty nation without the generosity of one nation in particular during our birth - who might that be?
libhater - yes, you do (no idea what you're referring to but, I just like disagreeing with you! :-P)
what you've deemed "anathema" was greatly debated by the SCOTUS, Madison, Hamilton, and Jefferson. There is now substantial precedent that confers the power to congress to act on what it deems to be the "general welfare".
I like this one better
It takes a moment or two to load.
http://usdebtclock.org/
Unfunded liabilities including Medicare & SS = 106,187,225,000,000 which has changed drastically just since I posted this.
It's not theirs to give
Thought this link might help make the point for some folks like Snarky who think these programs just need some sort of adjustments to make the world right. http://fee.org/library/books/not-yours-to-give-2/
Isn't it odd how on a micro scale none of us would be OK with a neighbor seizing our property b/c they lost their job. But most folks are just accustomed to the fact that on a macro scale the gov't seizes our private property (i.e. our income) in order to provide that income to those who haven't earned it.
This isn't to say that none of us would give to a neighbor in need. Just that none of us would be pleased to find that the president of the homeowners association had seized our property and designated it to now be the property of a neighbor who was out of work.
For Snarky
"... What's your alternative to all these programs? Before they existed there was none...."
And somehow, people survived. Even managed to build a mighty nation without them Weird, huh?
E.B.T., cigs & Beer
I work at a grocery store and I remember the day a "man" came in and bought cigs with E.B.T. cash. I had to control myself from throttling him for buying cigs with tax dollars! I was latter told that this was perfectly legal!
@ snarkybird
No we don't. You just haven't taken your meds yet.
Food stamps for beer
Food stamp recipients have been doing this for years anyway. I worked as grocery store cashier in college and on several occasions I saw people come in and buy a small packet of crackers, give me $1 or $2 in food stamps and get the change in coins; then go back around and do it again. They would repeat this until they had enough cash in change to buy a 6 pack of beer, bottle of wine, cigarettes what ever. Used to aggravate the crap out of me but there was nothing I could do, it was perfectly legal.
Bird Brain
Really?
A link to the American Psychological Association saying welfare is a good thing? That it does no harm? Please!
How about the fact that welfare has created an entire segment of our society that is nothing more than a slave to the system. It robs people of their self esteem. It encourages more of the same bad behavior. It has eliminated the traditional idea of a family in this segment of society. A father in the home of most welfare recipients is rare to say the least.
And just go to any ACORN office to find all the latest ways of scamming the system.
Nice post ThatGuy!
Yes, SCOUTS can be (and in this case, was) wrong.
I am looking for a lawyer who can help me file suit disputing this ruling and get it overturned.
Then I'd like to go after the Department of Education.
Constitutional authority
James Madison, one of the prime authors of the Constitution, repeatedly stated that the document does not provide for the provision of charity. The "general welfare" does not mean "individual welfare" as even a cursory examination of the Founders intent reveals. Taking by the power of force from one and giving to another is theft. There is no other defintion.
Big Joe
Was actually going to state that it is basically liquid bread, and was long used by the armies and navies of the world as a troop ration as it often kept better than water, so the "it's not food" argument could technically be thrown out.
well you ax'd fo' it.................
BIG JOE...............yep it'll work....jist look at me........no bad side effects.....'cept I gotta pee a lot.......and kidneys are a lil'run down.....an' the liver is rock hard......an'
Cigarettes and beer
As a taxpayer, I for one am happy to know that food stamps pay for cigarettes and beer. I think they should pay for crack, too. Move the parasites and Obama voters faster from this world to the next. To use the slogan from Pournelle and Niven's OTATH OF FEALTY: "Think of it as evolution in action."
See the other side
SB - "These programs keep millions alive and offer a way to get their basic needs met when they are unable to do so themselves. the war on poverty isnt just about ending it (which I'm assuming you're now advocating?? ) it's about helping those in need during difficult times. Age, change in family structure, unforseen disaster or circumstance. THis is why these programs exist and they work."
Well I agree to a point, they WERE started to help people. However, today we find that more and more people on these programs are not unable, but rather unwilling to work. There are several welfare areas where I live. Many of the people that live there have been there since they got out of high school. They refer to them as "communities". Welfare has gotten way out of hand and has created simply another class of people in this country. UPPER, MIDDLE, LOWER & WELFARE. I have met people who also tell me that once on these programs, it is difficult to get off. (You can quickly earn too much to be on the program, and not earn enough to survive in the real world) Are they working, I think not!
snarkybird (again) Where did you get the absurd idea that even though the Statists aren't restrained by the Constitution, they are restrained by the Constitution?
Did you Not understand that question?
In some instances you will claim that the bedrock of the Republic – the Constitution is perfectly fine and that no one is seizing the wealth of some to buy the votes of others.
And in other instances – like today – you will claim the Statist Democrats have no constraints place on them by the Constitution.
That all these wealth redistribution programs – including the new Ocrapcare healthcare bill – have no Constitutional restraints placed on them.
It can't be both, either we have a government that is limited by the restraints placed on it by the Constitution or we don't.
Pick one and answer the question.
Beer as Food
Yes Big Joe, it works. You can also freeze it and its solid.I'm workin on a micro wave dish,I'll let you know!!
Section 8, Clause 1
I suppose Article 1, Section 8, Clause 1 could be interpreted to mean anything, but let's take a look at it: "Clause 1: The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States; "
The general Welfare of the United States... Is the United States an entity, or the people therein?
The decision by the SCOTUS was anathema to the founding principles of the USA, where they effectively negated the limitations of Section 8 and the 10th amendment by making general Welfare carte blanche for doing whatever the powers that are in charge deem right. (R or D)
People can help people. That is what heppened before the social programs.
rejamesj
weird
http://www.wallstats.com/deathandtaxes/
that's 2010 budget numbers.
I get 2.7 trillion for defense (900B x 3) but 1.9 trillion for all entitlements (I added SS, medicare, medicaid, income security)
I left out spending for national security since it's not strictly "DoD" budget and you still come up short of your 3x number.
what am I missing? please show me...happy to be wrong. I often am, just ask anyone here :-)
Fair Tax re Joyce M/Blythe
"When the USDA turned us down, we turned to the Pinellas County Sheriff's office. We watched as undercover detectives sent an informant into the store to make a buy while they listened across the street. The informant used a food stamp card and bought BEER, lottery tickets and cigarettes. Detectives say the clerk even took money from the EBT card to pay off an old debt."
Joyce,These same retailers will be the ones collecting the 25% on everything they sell and safeguarding same until given to the Feds. Help me please,I'm tiring to get next to it!!!!
Dooh!
mmmmmm Beer
I wonder?
I truly wonder if beer could be used as food to keep a man alive. Beer is full of hops, wheat, sugar, malts and other food-like additives. But, it's just in liquid form. Could a man survive for 2-3 months on beer alone? I'm not talking about staying piss-drunk. But, if a man drank a few beers every few hours every day? I think it could work. What do ya'll think? C'mon, give me some feedback.
wow! you like me! you really, really like me!
LOL!
Cheryl - I didn't say I dont care AT ALL. Just that this type of strawman, aka "the welfare queen" is not only trivial but a myth ( again: http://www.apa.org/pi/wpo/myths.html)
mattisben - OK. Please show us where it's immoral and unconstitutional to use tax dollars to provide for the general welfare. Or where welfare has destroyed the things you claim. (see below for some useful tips)
rockhound - section 8 of the constitution. first sentence. and the SCOTUS has already ruled in favor of SS in that regard. http://www.ssa.gov/history/court.html
which is a great precedent for social welfare generally.
Ace - have they worked? Yes. These programs keep millions alive and offer a way to get their basic needs met when they are unable to do so themselves. the war on poverty isnt just about ending it (which I'm assuming you're now advocating?? ) it's about helping those in need during difficult times. Age, change in family structure, unforseen disaster or circumstance. THis is why these programs exist and they work.
Constitutionality
For those that say it is authorized under the US Consitution, could you please point out where it is authorized? Article and Section, please.
If your argument is "General Welfare Clause", since that is highly subjective, why did the authors and ratifiers of the document go any further? The General Welfare pare of the preamble is not a blank check to do anything you like. A good place to start on what the Federal Government is allowed to do is Article 1, Section 8.
President Obama is is entirely correct when he calls it a negative liberty document. It negates the liberties that governments have taken since governments were created.
sumbuddy is gonna get............
T BROWN.......damn it sumbuddy is gonna get hurt......where the hell are you....I was out there an' got heat stroke.......you say BEER ain't food.....you eat food to live right....no food no life....no beer no life......so it must be food......
Joyce M/B....if mo' bizniss' lose the EBT.....then we got to relearn RANDY where to go fo' the beer(is food) run.....
Being ruled constitutional......
.....in liberal courts argued with liberal emotions over constitutional logic is not the same thing as being the original intent. Unfortunately SCOTUS justices can be wrong without being held accountable, like the jacka$$ whose name currently escapes me but uses international law as a litmus test against which to measure our own. If you'd told John Adams the general welfare section meant you were able to use a ballot box to steal money from one individual and hand it to another you'd likely find yourself on the losing end of a dueling pistol. This is perhaps one of the most fundamental differences between liberalism and conservatism, when a conservative has a question regarding the intention of the Constitution they refer to the supplemental writings and intentions of the authors, when a liberal questions the intentions they refer to their feelings and what makes them feel good at the moment.
What is just is not always kind, and what seems fair on the surface is usually a great transgression at the core.
On the dole
This is good news for Stan and his #1 fan. and tshirt doc....entitlements are MORE than 3X the defense budget. Look it up, IDIOT!
snarkybird: Where did you get the absurd idea that even though the Statists aren't restrained by the Constitution, they are restrained by the Constitution?
SB: “All these programs are constitutional. Been taken to SCOTUS and they agreed. “
SB:”Immoral? please explain? I dont understand. Is this a "rob from the rich to pay for the poor" immorality?”
You went ahead and answered your own question didn't ya, SB.
SB: “Are you suggesting we just go back that? Please then explain why they were created to begin with? “
Some of them were created in the 'War on poverty', have they actually worked?
You said they need changes, so I guess you answered your own question again.
They wouldn't need changes if THEY WORKED OKAY, right SB?
Again, Where did you get the absurd idea that even though the Statists aren't restrained by the Constitution, they are restrained by the Constitution?
snarkybird is GOD
by snarkybird: "I agree that these programs all need changes"
snarkybird is right again!!! It's time that we change the Constitution to better suit our hatred of this capitalist society. I can't believe that we bowed to the likes of those useless old cogers that wrote that horrible document.
Constitutional, Huh?
Snarky says, "All these programs are constitutional..."
OK, I'm holding in my formerly nicotine stained fingers a copy of the U.S. Constitution. Please point out the section where it says that it is the function of government to seize from someone who earns to give to those who did not earn. I'll wait.
Who cares?
Obviously anybody who is on food stamps has been pissing away money on beer and cigs anyways.
Dan I already did!
The link I posted earlier showed undercover going in:
"When the USDA turned us down, we turned to the Pinellas County Sheriff's office. We watched as undercover detectives sent an informant into the store to make a buy while they listened across the street. The informant used a food stamp card and bought BEER, lottery tickets and cigarettes. Detectives say the clerk even took money from the EBT card to pay off an old debt."
Yes, all entitlements are unconstitutional and immoral. Their purpose is not to assist, but to control. The recipient is always under the thumb of the one providing the largesse. Without these wonderful programs, people would have to make wiser decisions and be more charitable with their neighbors. I don't speak from some ivory tower. I have worked in these areas and I know the mentality that is pervasive and, actually promoted....often by the clergy.
Welfare has caused the demise of the black nuclear family. Medicare and medicaid have been major contributors to the rise in medical costs. He governs best who governs least.
mattisben
i hate to tell you this, but nothing is 3 times the defense budget. do some research first, it will keep you from looking like an idiot that "doesn't know the exact figures".
Snarky
I do not believe a word you say. There is no way that anyone who works and pays taxes does not care where it goes. I call you on your bull......
I SAID IT and I'LL SAY IT AGAIN, "BEER ain't food!!!
Now if you still want to start sumpin.....meet me outside.....and just in case I'm not there.....go ahead and start without me!!!
P.S. Sorry butt, I didn't realize you were a kegger.
Save a little outrage here.
Taxpayer money spent for American made cigarettes and beer puts the money, minus administrative costs, back into the US economy. The Food Stam program is expected to spend 36 billion dollars this year which is just twice what they spent to bribe the AARP into supporting Obamacare.
Cash benefits are Not Food Stamps!
You may get a welfare check. with that, you could buy beer. Or deodorant. Or McDonalds. Or Lottery tickets. This has always been the case.
Food Stamps (food benefit account) cannot be used for those things. Furthermore, you cannot get cashback or make cash withdrawals from your food account.
I'll be happy to be mistaken about this. But I don't think I am. By all means, show me how you can use Food benefits to buy beer. I'll follow your links. ;)
remattisben
You said --------- "Abuse is not the issue. We are talking about a program that is about (I don't know the exact figures) 3 times our defense budget. Government welfare, of any kind, is immoral and wasteful...not to mention unconstitutional. And the abuses are not the exception, but the rule." ---------
Wow, that's quite a statement.
First, you're lumping in all entitlements (Medicare, Medicaid, SS, and Income Security) to substantiate the claim on size of expenditures.
http://www.wallstats.com/deathandtaxes/
above is a good resource for seeing where your money goes and at what size.
All these programs are constitutional. Been taken to SCOTUS and they agreed.
Immoral? please explain? I dont understand. Is this a "rob from the rich to pay for the poor" immorality? OK. What's your alternative to all these programs? Before they existed there was none. Are you suggesting we just go back that? Please then explain why they were created to begin with?
I agree that these programs all need changes.
But it is absurd and foolish to think they are 1)unconstitutional 2)going to be abolished or 3)not doing good.
how about we all put our grown up hats on and just try to figure out how we're going to change them in ways that make sense for everyone?
...yeah...didn't think so. LOL!
oh well...
Psst...Dan Isaacs
I see "Cash Benefits" on the sign. So keep your condenscension to youself thanks very much.
re liar liar
Butt, cigarettes must be food too. I didn't get fat until I stopped smoking. They must have been supplying some nutritional value.
Dan Isaacs
May I suggest you either clean your glasses(if you wear them), get an eye exam, learn to read, or stop seeing things through liberal colored glasses because, since you're the one who wants to play reading police, the sign clearly says:
WE ACCEPT (E.B.T.) FOOD STAMPS. YOU CAN BUY CIGARETTES AND BEER WITH YOUR CASH BENEFITS.
Seems pretty clear to me that they are encouraging people to buy beer and smokes with E.B.T. cash benefits. Now, you were saying?
liar liar....................
I don't kno' who the sumbitch is that said........BEER ain't food.....butt if I meet 'em they're DRT.......not food what a dumbass.......
re Dan, Fran, and others
Dan, you forgot to continue reading the word "benefits". That's always code for a handout. Fran, great post. What is almost as mystifying is to see stores selling individual cigarettes for $.25-$.50, and these idiots buy them. They are poor because they make poor choices.
What is it with you "find something else" people today?
Dan, wake up buddy, finish reading the sign. "...with your cash benefits."
Now, where are you going to get those cash benefits?
Cash Benefits
It says Cash Benefits. And that is food stamps. There is somthing to see here.
rerockhound
suffice it to say I make quite a bit more than that and pay plenty of taxes as a result.
and yes, given the actual usage of the program - I dont care about this stuff. it's trivial in the scheme of overall concerns about where my tax dollars go.
reben
http://www.apa.org/pi/wpo/myths.html
your turn.
Joyce did it!!!
Re: Joyce, "I took a picture of it which they did NOT like and the next day the sign was gone".
Before I read the posting about this action that Joyce took, I was wondering about the mentality of the person(s) in charge at these businesses that engage in this sort of accomodation. Methinks that they're fully endorsed in the "bottom line" and enablement be damned!
Re: POed Tax Payer; if the rest of us will follow your lead maybe the errant retailers will eventually get the message regardless of whether they agree with it or not.
You guys are missing something
There is a period at the end of "We Accept (E.B.T.) Food Stamps."
When you see a period (.) that means the sentence has ended.
What follows is a new sentence. It says you can buy beer and cigarettes with cash. It does not say you can buy them with Food Stamps.
Nothing to see here, move along. Find something else to be outraged about.
The premise
of having the Federal Government of the US handing out welfare is wrong, and a reading of the US Constitution (there is no general welfare CLAUSE, it is a preamble to section 1, "promote the general Welfare." It is a reason to have the Constitution, not a directive therein. It is why, not what to do.)
You may disagree with me, but you are wrong. It's ok, freedom allows you to be wrong.
Snarkybird
So you think this is ok then? You don't care? It's the people who don't care that allow this type of behavior to propagate. When my wife and I who both work and who have to budget ourselves when we grocery shop and only buy alcohol when we have the extra money(neither one of us drink all that much and neither of us smoke), seeing crap like this makes my blood boil. When I open my paycheck and see that so far I've paid in over $10K in federal income tax withheld, then see this, I don't simply shrug it off. And it isn't like I make $100K either. Combined we've paid in nearly $16K in income tax withheld from our paychecks. And let's not forget that those who abuse alcohol and smoke cigarettes are more likely to need medical services but I'm guessing you're ok with that too. There is a line between need and want. I suggest not having EBT only lines but EBT only stores.
Sad truth about Food Stamps...
Many recipients of Food Stamps sell them or the food they purchase with them for pennies on the dollar to get the cash for beer and cigarettes.
Keep in mind, the tax on cigarettes is so high that "we" are getting most of our money back when they purchase cigarettes. Maybe we should tax alcohol as high as cigarettes.
Better yet, maybe we should pass the Fair Tax. The money we would collect on black market activity that we aren't currently collecting will pay for a lot of social programs. Of course, that would be a sensible solution to a complex problem, so that really isn't an option.
"Everyone agrees, small markets are a big part of the problem. In fact, a government investigation found that out of every food stamp dollar spent in smaller grocery stores, 23 cents is misused."
Seems the biggest problem is a confusion over whose responsibility it is to enforce, state or Federal.
Report these cases where you find them, the stores can lose their EBT machines.
snarkybird
snarkybird is right!! ACORN should be running this country. Welfare abuse is just hurting all of us and we really should bend over and let the poor run this country. Afterall, they obviously have figured out how to manipulate this pathetic system of government we have. God bless you snarkybird for saying it how it really is!! I hope that when we get the communist government you are shooting for, that you will run for dicatator. I want to put on a blue dress and work for you!!!
Bird Brain
Go put your ostrich head back in the sand.
I don't have to substantiate that welfare buys votes. That's a fact and if you can't see it you're as blind as a bat.
How about if YOU substantiate that "most" people use welfare as intended. Why are there generations and generations who aspire to nothing more?
When they tried to close the George Lagree public housing in Charleston 20 years ago you should have heard the outrage. It was their heritage. That was where they grew up and it was where they wanted their children to grow up too. It was their right. See Fransisco's item number 3.
Bird Brain, please go back to utopia.
making assumptions snark
but, by all means, demonize food assistance when more people than ever are having trouble making ends meet. By snarkybird
It's the abuse, not the intent that is being critized.
And the abuse is much more wide spread than you are trying to claim.
Oh please, you don't think that "voters" in this group are not going to vote for the candidate that will give them more??!!!! That's being very naive. So yes, it does buy votes. That's the way it's always been. Wake up!
Beer isn't food and neither are cigarettes!!!
Snarkybird re: your comment~11/19/09 09:23:29 AM "but, by all means, demonize food assistance when more people than ever are having trouble making ends meet".
You're so dead set against reasonable, cognitive thought process that you're willing to catagorize "BEER" and "CIGARETTES" as food. You know better than that.....and yet????????
Re Snarky
Abuse is not the issue. We are talking about a program that is about (I don't know the exact figures) 3 times our defense budget. Government welfare, of any kind, is immoral and wasteful...not to mention unconstitutional. And the abuses are not the exception, but the rule.
rebenandmattisben
ben - fair enough. I disagree. And you cant substantiate that this "buys votes". Also, most people use welfare for what they need and then move on. which leads us to ...
mattisben - right, I didnt say there wasn't abuse. There is. abuse exists in public and private sectors in all shapes and sizes. But, when the majority of people use the system as intended, why should they be punished by not having this option just because some people abuse it.
Recall the legislation created to stop federal funding for ACORN? It had to be rewritten because in its original form, it stopped funding for hundreds of defense contractors for the same reason.
why isnt more done to stop abuse in welfare? $$ - in the span of govt expenditures, it's small and hard to manage. so people put up with a certain level of abuse because the benefits outweigh the costs of abuse or creating more enforcement to prevent it.
I pay taxes. And I dont care about this. On balance, these programs help more people than hurt and the abuse is small compared with those who use the system as intended.
Food Stamps
i just glad when i see a white person using food stamps. unfortunately this ain't happened in the last few years or so....
/sarc
snarkybird
Helpful link thanks, I get upset standing in line at the supermarket and watch the person in front of me have their cart overflowing and use the swipe card [we all pitch in to pay for] to live better than most of the people who pay their own way. There are some that need a helping hand at times but so many think its a way of life. I like to help unfortunate people at times, But it irks me to see the healthy riding for free. Semper Fi
food stamps
What can and can’t I purchase with Food Stamps? With your Food Stamp benefits you can buy milk and other dairy products; meat, fish, poultry, eggs and beans; cereals, rice, pasta and other grain products; any ingredient used for baking or cooking; fruits and vegetables; cold deli foods for home consumption; ice and water for human consumption; infant formula, some special dietetic or diabetic food and "natural" or "organic" food items; and garden seeds and plants for growing food at home.
With your Food Stamp benefits you can not buy any kind of beer, alcohol or wine; any type of tobacco products; nonfood items like cleaning products, soap and paper products; drugstore medicines such as aspirin, cough syrup and vitamins; items to preserve food such as jars and freezer containers; any "hot" prepared foods that are ready to eat; and foods not for people such as pet foods.
Not ever buying anything at Texaco again
Can't stop the looters and moochers but I sure can put my money with responsible retailers. I work in this industry and can't tell you how funny the look is when you say... sorry not allowed with food stamps, WIC etc.
snarky
You mean demonize the theft of private property by means of government force to provide for those who will not provide for themselves? Yes, I will demonize it. I have worked in these areas, trying to help people get off the teat. 100% are satisfied with taking other people's hard earned dollars and sitting on their butts. Not a one really wanted to be productive. It is not assistance, it is enablement.
Bird Brain
Government does NOT belong in the business of charity. It breeds fraud, corruption, promotes a nonproductive lifestyle, and gives the politicians a way to buy votes.
When the church, YMCA,the salvation army, and individuals were the primary sources of charity there was little to no fraud. If someone was abusing the system they would be cut off.
Today it's a way of life.
Depends on where this is
I don't know about other states, but in TN there are two types of EBT's: the regular and EBT Cash. The regular has the usual restrictions about not buying tobacco, alcohol, and such.
EBT Cash is different. You can buy anything with it and you can get cash back from a purchase with an EBT Cash card. Why? No idea.
I agree 100% with Neal's idea of having a specific lane at the supermarket strictly for EBT customers with a sign reading 'Your Tax Dollars at Work.' I worked in a grocery store for three years and can tell all kinds of stories about EBT customers.
Food Stamps
Nothing new. Moochers find a way. When they were still issuing paper food stamps, there was a place near the homeless shelter in Phoenix that would cash them in for 50 cents on the dollar. What was next door? The crack man.
Before you criticize
This is what you get when you don't earn money you have.
1. The first generation that gets benefits appreciates them, and wants to get out of the stigma that is associated with it. 2. The second generation accepts the benefits, but the stigma is less, as they see their friends and others in the same situation. 3. The third and subsequent generations demand the benefits and disdain both the benefit and those that are supplying them with it.
Just remember, you are cruel if you want to get rid of this.
Joe!
So what's new How has this changed? This has been going on since the food stamp program started, either people would work around it and buy cheap items for the change or trade the stamps for money directly.
Please, save the outrage for something new. By Joe
That makes it ok? No it doesn't. One of our local stores had this in the window, I took a picture of it which they did NOT like and the next day the sign was gone. They may still be doing it, but now there is a stigma attached.
Keep pointing out the "outrageous" stuff folks, it does have an impact.
but, by all means, demonize food assistance when more people than ever are having trouble making ends meet.
Buying Stock
Time to invest in the parent companines of Kool and King Cobra
So what's new
How has this changed? This has been going on since the food stamp program started, either people would work around it and buy cheap items for the change or trade the stamps for money directly.
Please, save the outrage for something new.
Food Stamps
Makes me want to get back to work so I can make more money to pay for the losers beer & cigarettes. Every day I think more & more about needing to leave & move to a no tax country like the Cayman Islands. It's very sad. I'm not sure our country can recover from this. The entitlement crowd is now too large. How do you take it away from them once you've given it to them?
Recession Proof
Everyone that knows me has just laughed and laughed when I say I want to open a place called the "Puff and Brew". Cigarettes, beer, and of course lottery tickets and none of that other stuff that spoils at a zippy mart. And now accepting EBT, talk about the road to an easy retirement. Oh yeah, and an animated sign that looks like a fat Las Vegas Vic waving a beer and a cigarette.
say what???
As a current user of EBT having been laid off from my job recently, I thought that was illegal.....WTF!!!!!!!!!!
Beer and cigs....
If you work and pay taxes, even the bare minimum of taxes, you should copy this and send it to your Congressperson and Senator and be Mad As Hell and Not Going To Take It Anymore!
Change
you can believe in!
NO SCRATCH-OFFS???
I would hope that, in this new 'Obamerica', people could also purchase lottery tickets with Food Stamps. I mean...how the hell are they supposed to ever be able to retire, for god's sake?
Tax dollars at work
How about EBT cards to pay for hair weaves and teeth grills? Tattoos? Where does it end?
GREAT!
Now the Coneheads can be on food stamps, too!
Welcome to Remulak! Hey, Butt -- stop tryin' to light the eats!
food stamps.
We used to see this all the time. The folks would come in and buy something cheap and get 75 cents change from a 1 dollar food stamp. Then repeat, 2 or three times, then buy their Kools.
Search Boortz.com
