Food Stamps Are a Bargain On D.C. Streets (So This Is Why Food Stamps Are "Stimulative") 1997

Washington Post ^ | December 28, 1997 | Hamil R. Harris

[danielmryan]

It was the first Monday of the month, and a line numbering more than a hundred spilled from the doors of the District's largest food stamp office and down the sidewalk nearly a half-block to the corner of Seventh and H streets NE.

Children darted among the adults as the procession moved at a funereal pace toward the building -- a 10-minute walk from the U.S. Capitol -- where food stamps are dispensed. The hustlers who trade drugs, stolen goods and cash for food stamps waited patiently outside for people to emerge clutching books of stamps.

"For a $65 book, I am not going to give you over $30," a man wearing a leather jacket said as he and his partner did a brisk business almost within earshot of a security guard posted at the front door.

[sthguard]

Yeah, the longer transactions are a pain— I worked as a grocery cashier briefly, and WIC sales always took the longest of any type. I suppose in a perfect world we could track the WIC-eligible food by bar code and combine it with the debit card that’s replaced the physical food stamps, so you could swipe the card and the system would deduct the cost of the WIC items. Of course, that would probably be too easy.

[PapaBear3625]

Oh how ridiculous. The government doesn’t hold you at gunpoint to pay taxes.

Really? Next April 15, send the IRS a letter saying you've made taxable income, but refuse to pay any taxes on it. See what happens.

They will start by attempting to seize assets. If they are unable to grab your assets, they will send people to arrest you. If you resist arrest the guns will come out.

ALL government power comes from their ability to send men with guns to enforce compliance. If they did not have a means to enforce compliance, with the threat of death behind it all, they would just be an impotent advisory body.

[ansel12]

That doesn’t make any sense, if you want to push a left wing view then get on it.

What is it about this statement that bothers you?
“If you are a Christian, then make your point without bringing Christ into your argument for government.”

[Moonman62]

Because those who give out food would keep the best for themselves, and give their leftover , unwanted items to the poor. They don’t give the things they would eat - just the crap they wouldn’t eat. Its just the way it is. Those on here complaining know I’m talking about you.

Our current system invites abuse. I have nothing against good food for the poor. It's the system that needs to be changed.

[ansel12]

Oh how ridiculous. The government doesn’t hold you at gunpoint to pay taxes. What a stupid argument. Some on here are really whacko.

Yes they do, Lazamataz and Catsrus.

[PapaBear3625]

Some of you want to justify your selfishness. Yes, there are abuses with the system - just like there is in other things. But, to punish those who need it most because of those who abuse it - is heartless.

I have a guy who was a good friend back in my college days. Last December I found out that he had been staying in a homeless shelter because health problems had made him unable to find work, and he had slipped through the cracks of the "social services" system (I'm guessing they had no interest in helping some white male), so I invited him to stay with me.

I've taken in friends down on their luck many times over the last few decades -- guy friends, female friends who needed to leave abusive relationships and needed a couch to sleep on for a few weeks.

Now, how about you tell us of your exploits. The reason I ask is that over the years I've noticed that the ones who advocate most strongly for more government, prefer to mainly be generous with OTHER people's money.

[aruanan]

You sound like a liberal Democrat. Eat what I tell you to eat. What a bunch of hypocrites on this forum.Oh, so because someone is poor, they aren’t entitled to some ice cream once in a while?

Start exercising your mind a bit and you may work away some of that crust. A liberal Democrat tells you what you can eat with your own money. Are you familiar with the founding fathers' attitude toward using public money as a means of charity? It was not to be used this way at all. If someone who is "poor" (which most so-classified in the United States are not by almost any historical measure) is relying on the state to take money away from another citizen by threat of force to give to him, he should be limited in the choices available to him for the use of that money. That's not his money. If he doesn't like the restrictions, he doesn't have to take the money. And the restrictions will serve to make sure that folks (the majority of them who are on foodstamps) will use it as little as possible. For whose benefit? For us, the people the government is threatening with fines and imprisonment if we don't surrender our income for redistribution.

No, they're not entitled to ice cream. No one in this society is entitled to anything. They can scrape their pennies together (or give up high speed internet or multiple cell phones or some jewelry purchases or lottery purchases or alcohol or drug or designer clothes or shoes purchases or CDs or iPods or iTunes downloads or movies) and buy it for themselves.

So, what have some of you control freaks on here done to help the poor, other than run your mouths because they are getting help when needed?

Your self-righteousness is matched only by the extent to which you think you can read people's minds and know anything about their actions. How many tens of thousands of dollars of your own personal money have you spent on the needs of refugees? How many years have you spent carrying them around to government and doctor and dental appointments and enrolling them in schools and talking to counselors and taking them for job interviews and dealing with rotten landlords and making emergency runs to the hospital in the middle of the night or leaving work in the middle of the day to do it?

You really need to get an education in both political history and economics. Just because A has a perceived need doesn't give him any warrant at all to take something away from B to alleviate that need or to use C to take it from B to give it to him. A good moral case can be made for preventing the robbery of one person by another. There is no good moral case to be made justifying the robbery of one person by another. And it's funny that you should start out saying that I sound like a liberal Democrat when, in fact, I sound pretty much identical to the political philosophy espoused by the founding fathers of the United States and end up yourself sounding like the harping, bullying, end-justifies-the-means, my-exigency-justifies-my-robbing-you, haranguing of liberal Democrats.

[Just mythoughts]

Why don’t you give the cooking classes since you are so arrogant and holier than thou? I was only referring to beans and rice because most who look down their noses at those less fortunate - harp on these 2 items. There is nothing wrong with them and oh how self-righteous you are when you say you fixed them youself yesterday. Not everyone has the advantage of putting out a garden - nor the space to do so. No wonder people get the idea that Republicans don’t care about the poor - from the posts in this thread - I’d have to say they are right. Oh, so now some never learned to cook from scratch? Why don’t you also give your holier-than-thou lessons on how to do that? You people are so arrogant.

You are clueless. You brought forth Christ in as your whipping boy to guilt people who you have NO clue as to what they do or give .... is it not also Written about those that publicly give their alms for their own bragging show???? Well I will not play your highly pious game.

How do you know that I do not or have not given basic cooking classes with alllll materials supplied? I do not have the need to spend my time putting out for all to think of me as a generous giver. But I assure you that what I give is as would have been called 'first fruits'.

I think maybe you might gain a bit of 'food' IF you took the time to read the parable of the sower. The parable and then the explanation. Christ did say He foretold all things and we are right on cue as to what He said need be.

One more thing any gardener/farmer not on public assistance has the most humility of any person on this planet. AND my advantage of having a garden space came about from many years of bean and rice and living on what most people would call the less fortunate.

[Catsrus]

Your comments are so off base that they don’t make sense. You want to use Jesus’s words to justify your selfishness. People are hurting in this economy, and none of you will ever know the extent I have helped people over the years - and you shouldn’t. I don’t mind people who need food stamps getting them, even if my tax dollars pay for them. I may be in a position one day to need them. None of us can see the future. I’ve put into the system, as most of you have, and one day you may need to reap from what you’ve sown. Just saying....... If someone wants to deny a poor little child some ice cream, then you are one heartless bas****

[Safetgiver]

RE your #13. The article if from 1992.

[PapaBear3625]

I don’t mind people who need food stamps getting them, even if my tax dollars pay for them.

What people on this thread are objecting to are

1) Rampant fraud in the food stamp system (and the welfare system in general), and

2) People using the "safety net" as a hammock, sucking up tax money for generations.

We would rather be able to choose who we are generous with, rather than having our money extracted at gunpoint. You are welcome to be generous with your own money and resources. Being generous with other people's money (which is what's happening when you vote for government-funded welfare) is still being a party to robbery.

[meyer]

I agree with your sentiment. I have no problem helping the truly needy. Problem is, we’re carrying the other 80-90% of the welfare recipeints along with them. Pruning the freeloaders from all government programs would go a long way in resolving this country’s problems.

[PapaBear3625]

Pruning the freeloaders from all government programs would go a long way in resolving this country’s problems.

I don't think it's possible to prune the freeloaders from a government program, since it involves too many judgement calls from government bureaucrats who cannot be relied upon to be advocates for the taxpayers' desires. The bureaucracy bends to political pressure, and the worst freeloaders may be very active in trying to pressure politicians.

Private, charitable organizations are better at this, because they need to satisfy their contributors above all else.

[Lazamataz]

That doesn’t make any sense, if you want to push a left wing view then get on it. What is it about this statement that bothers you? “If you are a Christian, then make your point without bringing Christ into your argument for government.”

I totally disagree with Catsrus's premise, but who the hell are you to come along here and bark out a command not to use a particular argument? Are you a moderator? No? Then screw off.

I mean this is normal behavior for you, you are a dick to most of the people you post to, but it's long overdue that someone points it out.

Repeatedly.

[Lazamataz]

Oh how ridiculous. The government doesn’t hold you at gunpoint to pay taxes. What a stupid argument. Some on here are really whacko.

Wrong.

Stop paying your income taxes. Let the government know that you willfully will refuse to file returns. The government will issue you a summons for court. Refuse to go. Then, when the government comes to apprehend you, refuse to come. You will be held at gunpoint.

Stop paying your property taxes. You will be foreclosed on. Refuse to leave your (well, now THEIR) house when they come to take possession. You will be held at gunpoint.

Go purchase some clothes at WalMart. Inform the cashier that while you are willing to pay for the merchandise, you refuse to pay the sales tax. When the cashier refuses to continue the transaction, lay the money on the counter and attempt to leave. The security guard will attempt to detain you. Refuse. The cops will be called. When they arrive, refuse to cooperate and you will be held at gunpoint.

[Lazamataz]

Just saying....... If someone wants to deny a poor little child some ice cream, then you are one heartless bas****

Are you a liberal? That's a damned liberal kind of argument.

Ok. I'm heartless. I want to deny a poor, dirty little urchin an ice cream. I embrace my inner heartlessness. I really don't care what you or others think.

[Lazamataz]

Christ has said:

Luke 6:20-21 Then he looked up at his disciples and said: 'Blessed are you who are poor, for yours is the kingdom of God. Blessed are you who are hungry now, for you will be filled. Blessed are you who weep now, for you will laugh.

Therefore, Christ instructs us to be poor, hungry, and to weep, if we wish the kingdom of Heaven.

Food stamps prevent us from being hungry, therefore food stamps are against Christ's teachings.

Food stamps are a sure road to Hell. STOP SERVING SATAN AND PUSHING FOR FOOD STAMPS!

[JoeProBono]

[PapaBear3625]

2 Thessalonians 3:

6Now we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye withdraw yourselves from every brother that walketh disorderly, and not after the tradition which he received of us. 7For yourselves know how ye ought to follow us: for we behaved not ourselves disorderly among you; 8Neither did we eat any man's bread for nought; but wrought with labour and travail night and day, that we might not be chargeable to any of you: 9Not because we have not power, but to make ourselves an ensample unto you to follow us. 10For even when we were with you, this we commanded you, that if any would not work, neither should he eat. 11For we hear that there are some which walk among you disorderly, working not at all, but are busybodies. 12Now them that are such we command and exhort by our Lord Jesus Christ, that with quietness they work, and eat their own bread. 13But ye, brethren, be not weary in well doing.

The problem is not with the occasional people who, through unanticipated personal disaster, find themselves in a bad situation. But these are a small minority of welfare recipients. The issue we have is with those who WILL NOT work, who prefer to live off government money rather than do something productive to earn their own bread. The problem comes from those who crank out kid after kid in the expectation that feeding them is the responsibility of others, and can't be bothered to spend the effort to raise them to be productive adults.

I would say what I would like to do with this latter category of leeches, but it would get me banned.

[Lazamataz]

Interestingly, we see similar issues discussed by the Apostle Paul in his letter to his protégé', the young Pastor Timothy. In this Epistle, we learn that Timothy's church is establishing a program to care for its widows, which is certainly a noble effort. However, Paul gives some advice to his close friend which would seem surprising and even harsh by today's standards. He tells Timothy that those widows receiving the aid must meet rigid requirements regarding age (1 Timothy 5:9), and they must have no family or other means of support (1 Timothy 5:3-16). They must also have a proven reputation for pure lives and service to the church (1 Timothy 5:10). Paul even goes as far as to say refuse the aid to younger widows, as they would abuse the privilege (1 Timothy 5:11-12).

The Bible STRICTLY advises us to give NO CHARITY, not even on a personal level, without extremely stringent requirements -- and to GIVE NOTHING TO THE YOUNG.

Give me back that ice cream, ya immoral little leeching kid. (snatch)