“How many posters on this article are actually on food stamps?”
Very few, or they would understand that it is not at all what they think it is. To begin with it is not one size fit’s all universal across the nation. The states control their own local eligibility requirements and especially the amounts disbursed. And in most red states it is actually pretty slim help already.
Both of you seem to view this issue as if there is nothing wrong with this program as it is, and it is simply hard-hearted conservatives who want to gut it or even eliminate it.
Is that your view? If I am oversimplifying your posts, just say so.
If it is your view, how do you justify the fact that people on these programs can buy luxury foodstuffs like candy, lobster and steak? Do you support that?
I have never been on food stamps or any welfare program. However, when I was raising my kids alone, my income was low enough that I could have qualified for food stamps and other types of government assistance. But I never applied for those things. The thought of food stamps never occurred to me. Instead, I just counted my pennies and found ways to make ends meet.
So, when you hear that people have never been on food stamps, it doesn't mean we live on Easy Street.
I wouldn't want anyone to go hungry. Seniors, the disabled, and truly needy people might need help. But something is seriously wrong if we have to buy food for 42 million people. We should be brainstorming to solve this problem. Our politicians won't solve it. They sound clueless.
With that said, most conservatives/Republicans today have no business complaining about food stamps. On average, it costs $17,000 to educate one child in public school for a year. (In some states, as high as $30,000.) On average, it costs only $2,000 in SNAP to feed a child for a year. But most freepers today feel entitled to your tax dollars to pay for their children's K-12 education. Given a choice, I would rather pay for a child to be fed.