The only "welfare queens" living off the government are multi billion dollar corporations. Especially with the recent tax reforms.
But sure, let's get mad that the people in the lowest rung of society get to eat and have choice in their food, and on occasion may indulge.
Capitalism, where being unable to provide for yourself is bad and you get no help, but if you're rich and fail you get bailed out and get to try again and again and never have to actually create new jobs.
That's a false dichotomy though. And for the record, I don't think they shouldn't be able to ever indulge. Just from personal experience working as a cashier many many years ago though, the funds aren't being utilized as efficiently as they could be in most cases.
A smarter system could mean less people actually go hungry. Are you more concerned over whether people have a certain level of luxury? Or an absolute number of people getting the food they require? Because SNAP that only covers cost effective foods, for say 80% of the allocated funds, with room for a few indulgent purchases would allow either broader/wider coverage of people who are eligible, or to reduce how much is paid out for the system.
She's worried about her narrative.
That said my wife and I got WIC with both our babies. Here is a program that really helps ny using guidelines as to how the dollar amount can be spent so that parents, if irresponsible, still end up using WIC to benefit their children more than themselves. This a program I think is good and EBT could take some lessons from. I don't think EBT should only provide shit food for families in need. But some guidelines would help keep people so intent to abuse the system from doing so.
It's hardly a narrative, it's a genuine concern because unlike you, many will never be able to escape being poor and dependency upon others to support them.
Oh, plus there's those who work but the wages are so low they qualify for and need EBT to survive. For instance, employees at many Walmart locations.
I actually worked at Walmart back in 2011 for a bit because it paid better than unemployment. And yeah it was a struggle. I donated plasma to supplement my wages. I'm not saying that EBT is a bad thing. Just that it needs to be refined. Like how in the 90's working in a convience store I see five kids come in with a dollar food stamp each, each buy a 10 cent candy and then go to the car for the adult to come in and use that change to buy beer or cigs. No not all people abuse the system. But every step we take to insure government aid is used in the best possible way to benefit the recipients and stop the abusers is good. Even if that means people on EBT have to buy lobster with their own cash.
Do you think EBT allotments should be determined by panels on a case by case basis? For instance, taking their employability in to account, rent costs in that area, etc.?
Is that not how it done now? If not, yes I think that's how it should work. I know that's how WIC was done when we used it and how our boys qualify for Medicaid now. ---
I think I need a drink. Almost everybody does only they don't know it. -- Charles Bukowski