No, I’m not.
People should not be able to use welfare for anything and everything. They should be able to use it on food. That is a fairly clear distinction.
I just don’t think we need bureaucrats monitoring what anybody is eating. I don’t think the government needs to be that empowered.
Honestly, I don’t think it’d be long before the government decides we all need monitoring, for our own good and because they need to control healthcare costs. Michelle’s gestapo. They’d already have the bureaucrats for it ... since they’ve been monitoring the “vulnerable” welfare brats.
And, all the stupid welfare brats would vote for it because, “why not monitor the rich like you’re monitoring us?”
More over-empowered buraucrats digging deeper in more people’s lives is just a bad idea. Monitor for fraud or misuse ... not bad diet.
SnakeDoc
I'm not suggesting anything that micro, and I'm one of the last people around here who would empower the government to do anything.
What I'm saying is that EBT would work a whole lot better if the ONLY things you could purchase with an EBT were clearly denoted as food items like produce, meat, dairy, grains . . . the basics. Surely we have the technology these days to do this electronically via bar scanner at the checkout counter.
Also, don't forget that when someone accepts government charity, they de facto subscribe to abide by the government rules surrounding acceptance of that charity. Therefore, government rightfully can, and should, define the rules very clearly about how that charity can be used. I think your fear of government creep is unfounded; rather, it feels like you're imagining the scenario in order to make your argument.