Posted on 06/23/2004 9:04:01 AM PDT by presidio9
No, there are buttons on the terminal labeled "credit" and "debit". EBT is your electronic "food stamp".
It sucks having princples, doesn't it?
Do Not Run For Public Office!!
I think a better idea is to start distributing t-shirts that say "I have a job and pay taxes-I'm a sucker,idiot, moron, for doing it when I could be on govt. assistance"
My opinion is that there should be and end to welfare and a start of innovative insurance. If you don't pay insurance, you don't get benefits. It used to be if the breadwinner died, there was insurance for that. Now, maybe there should be dead beat husband insurance, divorce insurance, etc.
Your sister paid taxes and should get some back. There are a lot of people who never pay taxes and those should get nothing back. Perhaps on your 1040 there should be lines where you can pay into all kinds of bizarre insurance funds at varying rates for varying benefits.
The fraud problem is endemic in means tested entitlement programs -- food stamps are hardly the only culprit. People underreport their income. That's the bulk of it; the welfare mom with ten fake IDs may exist, but I imagine you would have to look fairly hard to find one. But with 10% or more (probably much more) of the economy off the books, people can cheat. Some do. I am open to any silver bullet solutions anyone has to offer.
That said, I think the reason food stamps are so resented by the non-welfare population is simply that they are visible. We all see what happens at the checkout counter. Other forms of public assistance aren't under our eyes. That difference, however, is not especially relevant to the design of a rational welfare system.
The basic welfare problem that we developed from the 1960's forward was that welfare paid better -- often much better -- than an entry level job. When you are done huffing and puffing about welfare bums, you are still faced with the reality of a single mom with two kids who, prior to welfare reform, faced the prospect of losing perhaps two thirds of her effective income (cash and non-cash benefits) if she took a minimum wage job. That's not counting the cost of daycare and the commute. These are serious disincentives; the phrase "the welfare trap" was perfectly descriptive. Of course such a person usually didn't take the job. Neither would you under like circumstances.
Now let's all huff and puff again and agree she shouldn't have had the kids to begin with. Ok, we've settled that. Now whatcha gonna do? Single mothers and their kids are the bulk of the welfare caseload. Most of them are probably pretty shaky in the educational department and have weak to nonexistent resumes. Minimum wage or a bit more is usually going to be the best they can get, at least initially.
We need a structure in which it always pays to take the job. That means things like food stamps, medicaid, and housing assistance need to phase out gradually as income rises. Since 1995 we've been moving towards such a system but no one said it would be easy. In the meantime, we work with what we've got. One other poster expressed a preference for bulk commodity distributions in place of food stamps. That would be cumbersome but not impossible. What other option would you prefer?
Have to agree with that. People on welfare want only the best. They want to look down on the little people who work. Work is something that is beneath them.
Indigent dependency stamps?
The principles thing does get in the way sometimes. It even costs me money!
But,,,,I'm not changin'......
Running for public office means checking your integrity at the door, and becoming a liar, prostitute, and shill. Not to worry, it ain't happenin'!!........
It's not. It stands for Electronic "Benefit" Transfer. That key is for one thing, and one thing only - your and my tax dollars feeding these no-loads.
They don't think it's too much to ask. Hell, they've "got" to have real money for beer, smokes, and lottery.
C'mon, where's the love???
See, You got me started!!!!!......
"Freedom" Stamps. Because it's a lie, and that's what we pay governments to do.
Food banks run by churches. Eliminate this direct food stamp voucher program which is abused by recipients and vendors alike. And I agree with your comment about people under reporting their incomes. It's b.s. - how many people on the dole are working o-t-b, and getting the EITC, etc??... Too bad they can't weed out the dishonest ones and ban them.
yup, youre right, i guess thats me....the only good thing is i have more disposable income, and its income that i actually EARNED LOL
The Capt.
How about "meritorious service" stamps ? Or "honorable employment" stamps ?
Next week's NYT headline will read "Republicans Eliminate Food Stamp Program"
I like your idea in #87. But here is my idea to improve on it. Have food stamps be able to buy only food that was farmed or made by salieried govt. employees. EEEwww.
Can you imagine the stuff that would be produced ?
There would be no concern for market forces, no concern for the people who use the stuff, no concern for quality, no concern for value, etc.
Then the poor could really see what the rest of us have to put up with in other govt. services like the post office, IRS, epa, etc.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.