Current Events > Why does the goverment not want poors to buy hot food with snap money

(+) Yeah! (+)

Balrog0 posted...

My biggest allies when the legislature wants to limit snap benefits are the grocers association and walmart lol

Why do you suppose that is?
To shut out McDonalds?

They get money.

---

Philosopher_X posted...

What are you even trying to say?

We live in a country where it's citizens talk tough but won't do anything. We have enough guns and White men in America to stand up to the government and make them listen to war concerns. But that's not going to happen. It's too much of a hassle and a threat to the comfort provided.

Americans in general aren't willing to risk losing something just so somebody else can live a little better, even if they aren't actually even losing anything personally.

ITT you have people who can't live on their own trying to explain why other people struggling shouldn't be allowed a damned steak.

What does race have to do with this?


---

Philosopher_X posted...

Americans in general aren't willing to risk losing something just so somebody else can live a little better, even if they aren't actually even losing anything personally.

That's even worse.
Altruism-by-proxy is not altruism at all.

Villain posted...

They get money.

Well yeah

I guess I'm only bringing it because I think there's just a genuine disdain for the poor and other marginalized groups, like it's a ground up phenomenon not something rich people are some how forcing on others imo

---

Surprised Dump doesn't let people buy McDonald's so they can eat like him

As a SNAP recipient this has never bothered me

---

Questionmarktarius posted...

Philosopher_X posted...

Americans in general aren't willing to risk losing something just so somebody else can live a little better, even if they aren't actually even losing anything personally.

That's even worse.
Altruism-by-proxy is not altruism at all.

Most people love to believe they're good people, even if flawed. But some are objectively bad. Maybe not evil, but bad and not even aware of it.

But if we start listing toxic behaviors and these behaviors happen to run parallel with people's worldview/ideology, they feel personally attacked and get defensive. Every time it hits close to home, the goal changes from discussing the idea to protecting one's narrative or self/group image instead.

But the latter might just be people getting offended at being exposed and not knowing what to do about it because they don't want to change, lol.
---

Its not cruelty.
Its because getting groceries from scratch then cooking it is a lot cheaper than splurging on hot food.
Welfare exists to help those in need help themselves by being more efficient with funds and eventually become self sufficient.

---

metallica846 posted...

Philosopher_X posted...

But the latter might just be people getting offended at being exposed and not knowing what to do about it because they don't want to change, lol.

Id say thats a huge part of it. Its rare for someone to realize a thought is wrong and actively change it. My dad just doubles down when I say something he is fundamentally all about seems f***ed up. Like lets talk about it, stop bringing up emails and blowjobs.

Ah, yes. Can never finish a conversation because of the reoccurring deflection! That's how it goes with my dad and grandpa. And they'll create counter arguments to non arguments instead of engage the actual argument, lmao.

And don't you dare try to reel them back in after they tried to get away from it! They may blow up and Thanksgiving dinner gets awkward.
---

ledbowman posted...

I know but this example seems straight up mean

It is. Have you had one of those? Brutal.

I mean you can buy it cold, as opposed to on the hot racks, which is the way better way to have it, as they are somehow even nastier on the racks than microwaved.

But yeah, that being on snap IS mean.

---

At Little Ceaser's you can pay for the pizza cold with snap, and give them 50 real cents to cook it for you.

---

DemonBuffet posted...

Its not cruelty.
Its because getting groceries from scratch then cooking it is a lot cheaper than splurging on hot food.
Welfare exists to help those in need help themselves by being more efficient with funds and eventually become self sufficient.

Implying all poor people have adequately stocked kitchens and cooking equipment.

---

MutantJohn posted...

Implying all poor people have adequately stocked kitchens and cooking equipment.

Know of any decent 'pots and pans' charities?

SomeLikeItHoth posted...

Because they dont need it. They also dont need soda and candy. Snap should just be for basic things like rice, milk, vegetables and water. Not $50 steaks.

A crappy 7/11 breakfast sandwich is the equivalent of a $50 steak in your mind?

---

FursonaNonGrata posted...

Your ideology is all over the place but it all pretty much boils down to an ignorance of history (especially that of working class people) and a worship of corporate propaganda. The only consistency in your politics is a hatred of poor people.

Thats the same user who blocked me for calling out his homophobia lmao

---

There's nothing like the sweet scent of privilege in the air on a crisp Winter night.

Edited!
---

Deadpool_18 posted...

Because capitalism is built on making the poor and middle class eat each other while the uppers live lives without conflict.

Capitalism funds programs like SNAP to make sure people in need have access to our huge surplus of food.

If I could swap every one of you clowns with a person from North Korea, I would.

cmiller4642 posted...

Surprised Dump doesn't let people buy McDonald's so they can eat like him

i dislike mcdonald's. plus i get more full off something like pasta sauce and noodles instead of a cheeseburger meal.
---

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RIo0-sQop1Q

---

Broseph_Stalin posted...

Capitalism funds programs like SNAP to make sure people in need have access to our huge surplus of food.

If I could swap every one of you clowns with a person from North Korea, I would.

lmao

---

I miss the old food coupons. Crackheads used to trade them 2 for a dollar and you could eat cheap. Even more so back in the early 90s when bread at aldi's was 30 cents

---

Wouldn't want the poor to have access to any sort of luxury

And as we all know, ever since early man discovered fire, hot food has been a luxury
---

MarqueeSeries posted...

Wouldn't want the poor to have access to any sort of luxury

And as we all know, ever since early man discovered fire, hot food has been a luxury

it's like some people don't even understand what a luxury is
who honestly thinks they are entitled to luxury
what the hell is this

---

SomeLikeItHoth posted...

Because they dont need it. They also dont need soda and candy. Snap should just be for basic things like rice, milk, vegetables and water. Not $50 steaks.

SomeLikeItHoth posted...

Okay bye

No one will miss you.

---

Balrog0 posted...

The only time waivers to this rule are granted are for areas that have suffered from natural disasters to my knowledge. I don't know of any state that allows it in perpetuity

California.

---

The Trent posted...

MarqueeSeries posted...

Wouldn't want the poor to have access to any sort of luxury

And as we all know, ever since early man discovered fire, hot food has been a luxury

it's like some people don't even understand what a luxury is
who honestly thinks they are entitled to luxury
what the hell is this

You're fighting a losing battle friend

The poor are going to be entitled to more and more of the things you hold above their head and there's nothing you can do about it
---

MarqueeSeries posted...

You're fighting a losing battle friend

The poor are going to be entitled to more and more of the things you hold above their head and there's nothing you can do about it

it's not a battle
i'm asking
define a luxury and define entitlement
how do these ideas even jive

---

JustMyOpinion posted...

What if they just take the cold food and heat it up at home?

OMG now you want the government to pay for their microwaves too?!

---

JustMyOpinion posted...

The Trent posted...

OMG now you want the government to pay for their microwaves too?!

90% of households already have a microwave. I assume most have a stove, oven, or hot plate too.

You know what they say about assuming
..
---

Also, shocking to see opinions around people being formed off of baseless assumptions and bias.

Spoiled armchair governors, smh
---

JustMyOpinion posted...

MutantJohn posted...

You know what they say about assuming
..

It's a very reasonable assumption. Take your platitudes elsewhere.

Doubling down, I see
---

shockthemonkey posted...

You guys are using the word luxury to mean food heated up in a 711 microwave

lmfao, THIS!

I can't tell a troll from a douchebag anymore. not since the trolls put a ring on their gimmicks and never revert back.
---

JustMyOpinion posted...

https://www.census.gov/history/www/homepage_archive/2015/october_2015.html

Since 1978, 98 percent of households own at least one television. Data from the Survey of Income and Program Participation shows that along with televisions, most households also own a refrigerator (99.2 percent), gas or electric stove (98.6 percent), and microwave oven (96.8 percent).

There ya go. Now, either show me a study showing that of the 99% of the population that owns a stove/oven, the remaining 1% is all poor people and less than 2% of the population is poor which would then make my assertion that most have a stove/oven false. Or, you can shut the fuck up and quit while you're behind.

And he was never seen again....

---

I get food benefits, but I only spend them on actual groceries. I don't think people should get luxury food from food benefits. You should be motivated to find a side hustle if you want the better stuff. They're there so you don't starve to death, not so you can eat convenient overpriced shit. Know what else is inconvenient? People getting money took from them to support you.

Though, I will say, they don't give me enough to buy healthy food and not go over. I have a sensitive stomach, so it's impossible for me to not go almost 100$ over my benefits each month. I can't just eat ramen and hot pockets, Id be in pain 24/7.

---

Lost_All_Senses posted...

I can't just eat ramen and hot pockets, Id be in pain 24/7.

Sorry. Thems the brakes. Ramen and hot pockets will keep you from dying. Be glad we don't force you to only drink room temperature Ensure

---

ledbowman posted...

Sorry. Thems the brakes. Ramen and hot pockets will keep you from dying. Be glad we don't force you to only drink room temperature Ensure

I actually get Ensures through insurance to help me gain weight lol. But Im not 100% sure hot pockets and ramen would keep me from dying. Plus the pain being non stop would be a worse fate than death. It's weird you decided to come at me like this when I was literally on the anti-luxury side btw. You literally cherry picked the only sentence you could spin to make me look like I wasn't. You got some shady tactics, I imagine it doesn't help you have a very good social life outside of CE. Unless you just like getting out all your bad personality traits here.

---

imagine somebody trying to justify telling a parent to feed their children unhealthy snack foods because they think any old steak is a "luxury" and too good for them.
---

RickyTheBAWSE posted...

imagine somebody trying to justify telling a parent to feed their children unhealthy snack foods because they think any old steak is a "luxury" and too good for them.

I mean there's a lot of stuff between snack food and steak tho. Like chicken and hamburgers. But yeah, fuck this dude anyway. He showed his cards

---

Lost_All_Senses posted...

I get food benefits, but I only spend them on actual groceries. I don't think people should get luxury food from food benefits. You should be motivated to find a side hustle if you want the better stuff. They're there so you don't starve to death, not so you can eat convenient overpriced shit. Know what else is inconvenient? People getting money took from them to support you.

Indeed. Food benefits should have to be spent in an actual grocery store buying food that will last at least a week versus grabbing a burrito from 7/11.

How does the government know that the food being bought at a grocery store is actually being used by those getting the benefits and not just being sold to somebody else? The ONLY way to be sure they're at least getting food to prepare and eat would be to straight up give them actual food versus cash benefits to go buy it. Even then though they might sell it.

---

HellRatUFO posted...

Within the past few years in the United States, countless businesses have been started by prominently Latino/Hispanic entrepreneurs creating jobs. According to yall, many of these people that grew up in lower income neighborhoods that have made something of themselves should have their income and businesses killed off with insane increased corporate tax rates, mandated wage hikes, and mandated benefits as so long as it sticks it to richer white business owners to pump into bloated welfare programs with no oversight to cut any spending what so ever.

https://cnbc.com/2018/09/25/latinos-are-a-powerful-force-fueling-small-business-growth-in-the-us.html

small businesses don't pay corporate taxes

---

It's really nobody's fucking business how people spend their stamps. None of these people are even interested in the opinions of those that don't even know their situation, lol. And no, being a tax payer doesn't make it your business. It it were, you'd get a receipt/statement from the government every month about how and where they allocate funds generated by taxes.

FoH with this weird ass circlejerk
---

DrunkieBrewster posted...

It's really nobody's fucking business how people spend their stamps. None of these people are even interested in the opinions of those that don't even know their situation, lol. And no, being a tax payer doesn't make it your business. It it were, you'd get a receipt/statement from the government every month about how and where they allocate funds generated by taxes.

FoH with this weird ass circlejerk

What entitles them to this right if the stamps are handouts to begin with? They didnt earn welfare by working for it. They earned it by being lucky enough to be born as an American. Most countries people need to work to put food on their table.

---

MutantJohn posted...

Also, shocking to see opinions around people being formed off of baseless assumptions and bias.

Spoiled armchair governors, smh

Have you ever worked in a welfare office?
Your opinions would drastically change if you could see selfish and entitled half of the clients that walk through the door are.
They simply need to fill out a report every 6 months regarding changes to income and household size and they cant even take on that responsibility. They throw fits at the office because they dont want to fill out forms.

---