Cut Free Lunch Or Cut Food Stamps

[YAX]

I don't believe in cutting free lunches or Food Stamps to the poor and those that really need it, but make the parents work for it. Give them city, county or state jobs to earn those freebies. There are a lot of jobs that the city, county and state can give to these welfare recipients without having to go out and hire people to do them. It's a win-win situation but we all know this will never happens because the Dems will not get any of their votes if this happens. Got to keep the carrot in front of the mule.

Picture of a Dem supporter 

makijg up jobs for people just means more tax dollars but I thought you were against taxes ?

[Blongforever]

School lunches also feed the next generation of robbers, drug dealers, rapists, and thieves.

Agree.  Free lunch only means supporting generations of lazy welfare dependents with no work ethic breeding like rats to get more rats on welfare.  Look at the welfare dependent communities and tell me I don't know what I'm talking about.

[can]

So, you're saying all people that got free lunches and food stamps are never going to be criminals?
 

I could tell you but I'm not sure if you have the capacity to understand the logic 

[zena]

I don't believe in cutting free lunches or Food Stamps to the poor and those that really need it, but make the parents work for it. Give them city, county or state jobs to earn those freebies. There are a lot of jobs that the city, county and state can give to these welfare recipients without having to go out and hire people to do them. It's a win-win situation but we all know this will never happens because the Dems will not get any of

Actually Bill Clinton was able to get a ton of people off welfare and working when he was president.  He also made it more difficult for people to get on it.  As soon as Bush became president, he removed that plan Bill put into place and people got back on welfare easily.  We need another Bill Clinton...oh wait, Hillary Clinton is running so there you go. 

[can]

Actually Bill Clinton was able to get a ton of people off welfare and working when he was president.  He also made it more difficult for people to get on it.  As soon as Bush became president, he removed that plan Bill put into place and people got back on welfare easily.  We need another Bill Clinton...oh wait, Hillary Clinton is running so there you go. 

8 years of progressive improvements and now we're getting 4 more years to add. looks like this country is being great! 

[zena]

8 years of progressive improvements and now we're getting 4 more years to add. looks like this country is being great! 

If you think Hillary is anything like Obama, you're wrong.  I'm not a fan of Obama and didn't vote for him in the last election, btw.

[can]

If you think Hillary is anything like Obama, you're wrong.  I'm not a fan of Obama and didn't vote for him in the last election, btw.

of course Hilary is not like obama, but America is in the right track. 

[DuMa]

So you want me to get off welfare food stamp but i am not going to until i have enough budget to last me few.  Now how do i get there?  Free food and free lunch n free housing n free this and free that with governments assistant programs.  If you take away my free food, there you go, im back into the system with no way out and you tax paying folks will forever be miserable. 

Free lunch is for kids.  Food stamps also feeds them adults.  If given a choice, i will never stop feeding the children of America.  It is this that everyone from impoverish countries will say how great America is. 

If you are in charge of making these changes and with your ideas, here's a bullet to your head.  The problems in america is so great of a number that taking away these programs now will results in catastrophic circumstances. 

Take away health care and we will still survive because we were ok not having health care to begin with.  Take away their food and this nation will go down the chit hole fast.  Vigilante robbing walmart for food will put the store out of business and you think your management career is safe?  Ha you be out of the job too. 

So then welfare is a safe haven for those who lost their jobs through circumstances.  No lie.  I'll go on the system too if that is my only out to survive.  Take that away from me n I'll be robbing you to survive. 

Politicians knows this thus why they give the poor just enough to go on by and to keep them at bay.  Consider it as a control mechanism to a problem that can't be solved.  If there is a winner (thats you) then there is also a loser ( thats them). We all cant be winners so with that in mind, let the people eat to keep you safe. 

[nightrider]

Very well said. It is a problem that the country can not solve and must do for the needy to keep them at bay. Countries that doesn't care about the poor can't be called a great country. This program needs to be there for everyone. You just never know when you might need to rely on it to scrape by.

[dogmai]

Actually Bill Clinton was able to get a ton of people off welfare and working when he was president.  He also made it more difficult for people to get on it.  As soon as Bush became president, he removed that plan Bill put into place and people got back on welfare easily.  We need another Bill Clinton...oh wait, Hillary Clinton is running so there you go. 

Hillary may share Bill's last name, but she is nothing like him.

[ok-fine-version3]

Stupid. Stupid. Stupid.

 

[ok-fine-version3]

I agree..if they cut my free lunch and food stamps, I'mma be hungry and noj mov cuav zos. I'd go to her place first, then come to you and then to another woman's.  imagine that happening to thousands of people. 

 

If you're receiving free school lunch, I hope those women are your mom and grandma because kids shouldn't be dallying around at such a young age. It's bad for your mental and physical health.


OP's argument still stands as being stupid as it clearly lacks an understanding of why these programs were created and who it's meant to benefit. SNAP = all ages and the community. Free school lunches=the children (and in essence, the community as well.)

But these are only two programs that draw funds from the USDA. There is also the WIC program and CSFP. All of these are supplemental programs. In other words, these were never meant to be someone's sole food source. People are still expected to draw income or food source from elsewhere; and yes, there are recipients who can be eligible for multiple programs based on their needs.

Needless to say, all these programs have one ultimate goal and that is to ensure that the most vulnerable people of this country still have access to nutritional food, because as some of you may be aware, studies have repeatedly shown the benefits of having a meal directly affects health care costs, the development of children, crimes, etc.

I'm not even going to bother addressing personal opinions of OP. Garbage.

[can]

OP's argument still stands as being stupid as it clearly lacks an understanding of why these programs were created and who it's meant to benefit.

trying to explain logic and facts to a republican is like trying to tell them the world is round 

[Believe_N_Me]

Actually Bill Clinton was able to get a ton of people off welfare and working when he was president.  He also made it more difficult for people to get on it.  As soon as Bush became president, he removed that plan Bill put into place and people got back on welfare easily.  We need another Bill Clinton...oh wait, Hillary Clinton is running so there you go. 

What actually happened was Bill Clinton increased the incarceration rate in low-income areas, particularly in black areas. Cutting off welfare drove up the incarceration rate. Here's the real kicker though.

How many of you are aware that jailbirds work for measly wages? Some of America's biggest manufacturing companies have found a new way to employ cheap labor in correctional facilities. So not all of them are going overseas. They are going under the radar via jailhouses where prisoners perform those jobs for pennies.

Bill Clinton was actually not a very good president. He was lucky that the dotcom industry came when it did. That inflated the job market. He sent a lot of middle class manufacturing jobs overseas or into correctional facilities. His policy "Don't Ask-Don't Tell" actually made it worse for gays, "Three Strikes" decimated the black male presence in black communities, etc.

Some of us were still too young to understand what was really going on. We relied too much on the mainstream media.

[Believe_N_Me]

My main point is that many of these children can bring their own lunch to school. Food stamp covers such costs. It's been configured into the total amount. However, it's the parents who choose not to pack the lunches. Some of these people get much more than what the average working family spends on their own monthly grocery bill.

Here is a chart for Kaiser Family Foundation:

http://kff.org/other/state-indicator/avg-monthly-food-stamp-benefits/?currentTimefra me=0&sortModel=%7B%22colId%22:%22Location%22,%22sort%22:%22asc%22%7D

This means that in California a family of 6 would receive approx. $851/month! That is much more than I spend in my own household!

Why should children from this household also receive FREE lunch when food stamp can clearly provide them a lunch?

If the issue is that parents are behaving negligently, then funds must be deducted and used towards school lunch.