Food Stamps

Minimum moderation and heated debates.
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Food Stamps

Postby kiryan » Wed May 04, 2011 3:52 pm

Original thread in the general forum: viewtopic.php?f=43&t=22163&hilit=food+stamp

http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2011/05/ ... od-stamps/

1 IN 7 (SEVEN) Americans are on food stamps. ~20% in several states including Oregon and Mississippi. If you look at the map I'd say its a little more red in conservative states than liberal states... but ridiculous none the less. 1 in fricking 5 people in several states.
Ragorn
Sojourner
Posts: 4732
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2001 6:01 am

Re: Food Stamps

Postby Ragorn » Wed May 04, 2011 6:27 pm

Yeah, income disparity in a serious problem in America. It's utterly ridiculous how many people have to live below the poverty line to support the salaries of CEOs and athletes.

Also, this is why we have a minimum wage. Because if we didn't, that number would be a lot higher.
- Ragorn
Shar: Leave the moaning to the people who have real issues to moan about like rangers or newbies.
Corth: Go ask out a chick that doesn't wiggle her poon in people's faces for a living.
Teflor Lyorian
Sojourner
Posts: 1273
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2010 9:39 pm

Re: Food Stamps

Postby Teflor Lyorian » Wed May 04, 2011 7:24 pm

First of all: how is it a problem?

Second of all: how can you with any measure of seriousness say that people live below the poverty line to support high salaries. Do you have even a shred of evidence to suggest that less people would live below the poverty line if CEOs made less? Even the tiniest shred?

If you expect to be taken seriously, I'm going to need to see some reasoning.
"You see, the devil haunts a hungry man.
If you don’t wanna join him, you got to beat him."
- Kris Kristofferson (To Beat the Devil)
Ragorn
Sojourner
Posts: 4732
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2001 6:01 am

Re: Food Stamps

Postby Ragorn » Wed May 04, 2011 8:15 pm

I don't expect to be taken seriously, because this is not a serious thread. So 1 in 7 Americans are on food stamps, so what? The bottom 14% of American households have an annual income of $20,000. Shock, awe, those people are on government assistance. They are the people that government assistance is for. Pointing out that poor people are on welfare is not some huge shock.

If you think that's ridiculous, then you should work to increase the income of poor families, not complain that their basic nourishment needs are being met by the federal government. Unless you're evil, I guess.
- Ragorn
Shar: Leave the moaning to the people who have real issues to moan about like rangers or newbies.
Corth: Go ask out a chick that doesn't wiggle her poon in people's faces for a living.
Teflor Lyorian
Sojourner
Posts: 1273
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2010 9:39 pm

Re: Food Stamps

Postby Teflor Lyorian » Wed May 04, 2011 9:38 pm

And you think the ONLY method of improving the lot of those outside the first two deviations from the norm is through the force of Federal government?

Because that failure of a war on poverty has been working out so well over the last 60 years?



Before we can begin work on any actual assistance to the so-called impoverished (which would still be considered flaming rich in eighty other countries) we have to acknowledge a few things:

1) That the war on poverty has been a failure.
2) That attempts to legislate the improvement of the disposition of the poor through minimum wage, welfare, etc., has not only failed but has driven businesses to look for unskilled labor outside of the United States.
3) That attempts to establish a Federal solution on poverty have been at best moneypits that have produced no measurable improvement.
4) That poverty is a relative measure that moves any time it becomes politically expedient.
5) That the majority of current anti-poverty measures are little more than bread and circuses to trade for votes.

Finally, we must accept that people will be in poverty regardless of what billions of the people's money, stolen as tax dollars, are set to do unless directly returned to the people with a minimum of processing and thus chance for abusers to siphon off the system in terms of corruption, public payrolls, and appendage agencies.

Without those acknowledgements, we're just pouring paper dollars onto a trash fire. The percentage of people living under the poverty line has been virtually unchanged over the last 40 or so years.

*Note: not ALL acknowledgements are necessary, just most of them.
"You see, the devil haunts a hungry man.
If you don’t wanna join him, you got to beat him."
- Kris Kristofferson (To Beat the Devil)
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Re: Food Stamps

Postby kiryan » Wed May 04, 2011 11:17 pm

Oh and you forgot obesity is an indicator of poverty in America. You should not be able to get to or maintain 300 pounds on food stamps in general.

I did like your quip about CEOs though. If it worked that way, I agree that would be a problem.
Sarvis
Sojourner
Posts: 6369
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Contact:

Re: Food Stamps

Postby Sarvis » Thu May 05, 2011 12:28 am

kiryan wrote:Oh and you forgot obesity is an indicator of poverty in America. You should not be able to get to or maintain 300 pounds on food stamps in general.

I did like your quip about CEOs though. If it worked that way, I agree that would be a problem.


Why? Pork Rinds are incredibly cheap. It can actually be expensive to eat healthy unless you're careful about it.
<a href="http://www.code-haven.com">Code Haven</a> - For all your programming needs.

I detest what you write, but I would give my life to make it possible for you to continue to write. - Some Guy Who Paraphrased Voltaire
amena wolfsnarl
Sojourner
Posts: 439
Joined: Fri Apr 04, 2008 2:14 pm
Location: grande prairie alberta canada

Re: Food Stamps

Postby amena wolfsnarl » Thu May 05, 2011 1:02 pm

[quote="Teflor Lyorian"]2) That attempts to legislate the improvement of the disposition of the poor through minimum wage, welfare, etc., has not only failed but has driven businesses to look for unskilled labor outside of the United States.
quote]

do you for one second think that the immigrant labor problem would go away if minimum wage was done away with? For one second do you think cost of living would go down if minimum wage was done away with? Fact of the matter is minimum wage is there to protect people because a certain standard is needed for a person to get by in todays society. For one month try to get by on $1800 (that includes your rent/mortgage bills and everything else), the average person cant do it. And yes i know people will say well those people should try to better thier lives and attain schooling or better jobs, fact of the matter is some people will only ever be minimum wage earners.

Businesses use immigrant labor for several reasons, and alot of the time its not because they are cheaper, its cause they are willing to do jobs that other americans dont want to and fact of the matter is they are a lot happier and have a lot less drama than americans who do do those kind of jobs.

Now i agree that there always will be a poverty line, and no matter what society you live in there will always be poor. But a program like food stamps, although it can be abused, does try to help those people. Is it so wrong that a government tries to better its peoples lives, especially those who live in poverty? Yes some of them are by choice or just plain laziness. But for those who need it, is it so horrible that the government attempts to make thier life a little better?
Dugmaren tells you 'Welcome to Canada, don't blame us if you're stupid enough to get eaten by the wild life'
Ragorn
Sojourner
Posts: 4732
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2001 6:01 am

Re: Food Stamps

Postby Ragorn » Thu May 05, 2011 1:46 pm

Only a Republican would think that removing the minimum wage would help more people get off food stamps.
- Ragorn
Shar: Leave the moaning to the people who have real issues to moan about like rangers or newbies.
Corth: Go ask out a chick that doesn't wiggle her poon in people's faces for a living.
Teflor Lyorian
Sojourner
Posts: 1273
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2010 9:39 pm

Re: Food Stamps

Postby Teflor Lyorian » Thu May 05, 2011 2:19 pm

Ragorn wrote:Only a Republican would think that removing the minimum wage would help more people get off food stamps.

Nowhere did I imply that the minimum wage should be either removed or reduced, but thanks for making some more shit up.
"You see, the devil haunts a hungry man.
If you don’t wanna join him, you got to beat him."
- Kris Kristofferson (To Beat the Devil)
Teflor Lyorian
Sojourner
Posts: 1273
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2010 9:39 pm

Re: Food Stamps

Postby Teflor Lyorian » Thu May 05, 2011 2:20 pm

amena wolfsnarl wrote:do you for one second think that the immigrant labor problem would go away if minimum wage was done away with? For one second do you think cost of living would go down if minimum wage was done away with? Fact of the matter is minimum wage is there to protect people because a certain standard is needed for a person to get by in todays society. For one month try to get by on $1800 (that includes your rent/mortgage bills and everything else), the average person cant do it. And yes i know people will say well those people should try to better thier lives and attain schooling or better jobs, fact of the matter is some people will only ever be minimum wage earners.

Businesses use immigrant labor for several reasons, and alot of the time its not because they are cheaper, its cause they are willing to do jobs that other americans dont want to and fact of the matter is they are a lot happier and have a lot less drama than americans who do do those kind of jobs.

Now i agree that there always will be a poverty line, and no matter what society you live in there will always be poor. But a program like food stamps, although it can be abused, does try to help those people. Is it so wrong that a government tries to better its peoples lives, especially those who live in poverty? Yes some of them are by choice or just plain laziness. But for those who need it, is it so horrible that the government attempts to make thier life a little better?

Some of this might matter if manufacturing and production wasn't being consistently moved overseas.
"You see, the devil haunts a hungry man.
If you don’t wanna join him, you got to beat him."
- Kris Kristofferson (To Beat the Devil)
amena wolfsnarl
Sojourner
Posts: 439
Joined: Fri Apr 04, 2008 2:14 pm
Location: grande prairie alberta canada

Re: Food Stamps

Postby amena wolfsnarl » Thu May 05, 2011 3:10 pm

Yup it's hard to comPete with countries where you only have to pay a person 0.20 a day and have no worker rights or safety laws and give tax breaks where they don't pay ANY. Do you think America should start to follow that kind of example?
Dugmaren tells you 'Welcome to Canada, don't blame us if you're stupid enough to get eaten by the wild life'
Corth
Sojourner
Posts: 6002
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2001 6:01 am
Location: NY, USA

Re: Food Stamps

Postby Corth » Thu May 05, 2011 4:29 pm

Whether America should emulate that or not is beside the point. The market will do what the market does. The manufacturing jobs will continue to move overseas where costs are lower. The implication is a lower standard of living in the developed world, and a better one in the developing world - over time.
Having said all that, the situation has been handled, so this thread is pretty much at an end. -Kossuth

Goddamned slippery mage.
Teflor Lyorian
Sojourner
Posts: 1273
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2010 9:39 pm

Re: Food Stamps

Postby Teflor Lyorian » Thu May 05, 2011 5:32 pm

amena wolfsnarl wrote:Yup it's hard to comPete with countries where you only have to pay a person 0.20 a day and have no worker rights or safety laws and give tax breaks where they don't pay ANY. Do you think America should start to follow that kind of example?

No, it's not hard.

Many companies would rather keep production domestic even if it costs more to avoid capital expenditures of establishing suitable facilities and supply chain elsewhere. Furthermore, most companies find value in keeping production domestic for other reasons, political, marketing or otherwise.

So long as government maintains a stable, balanced approach to business in regard to labor expenses and regulation, many businesses will opt to remain domestic. The problem comes in when you have a so-called very labor-friendly government that likes to create headlines in order to buy votes.

When a business can't see an end to where anti-business practices will go, it's no surprise to see them abandon facilities and let factory lines sit idle. When people find they can vote themselves better jobs, they will end up voting themselves into unemployment.
"You see, the devil haunts a hungry man.
If you don’t wanna join him, you got to beat him."
- Kris Kristofferson (To Beat the Devil)
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Re: Food Stamps

Postby kiryan » Thu May 05, 2011 5:55 pm

Ragorn wrote:Only a Republican would think that removing the minimum wage would help more people get off food stamps.


Only a liberal would think that you can help people by making it a right to have what you don't earn.
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Re: Food Stamps

Postby kiryan » Thu May 05, 2011 6:08 pm

I dunno teflor business will tend towards whatever makes them the most money, whether its increased price or lowered costs.

I'd argue that first and foremost companies have operations in America because America is their biggest most lucrative market. They'll do whatever political or publicity gyrations they have to to stay in the US market... but in general not much beyond that. For example BP giving Obama a 20 billion dollar blank check. As the business climates becomes more severe, the costs of doing businses in the US market goes up, the profits go down and the company starts shopping around.
Sarvis
Sojourner
Posts: 6369
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Contact:

Re: Food Stamps

Postby Sarvis » Thu May 05, 2011 6:16 pm

kiryan wrote:
Ragorn wrote:Only a Republican would think that removing the minimum wage would help more people get off food stamps.


Only a liberal would think that you can help people by making it a right to have what you don't earn.


Only a conservative thinks that 1 in 7 people starving to death would be good for the country.
<a href="http://www.code-haven.com">Code Haven</a> - For all your programming needs.

I detest what you write, but I would give my life to make it possible for you to continue to write. - Some Guy Who Paraphrased Voltaire
amena wolfsnarl
Sojourner
Posts: 439
Joined: Fri Apr 04, 2008 2:14 pm
Location: grande prairie alberta canada

Re: Food Stamps

Postby amena wolfsnarl » Thu May 05, 2011 7:02 pm

Actually alot of times countries like china will pay for the construction for plants and even employee housing so that cuts a huge cost to moving production to other nations. Alot of companies do only have token operations in the US and import most of the other products and just finish the product so they can claim it's manufactured in America. PR work at it's finest
Dugmaren tells you 'Welcome to Canada, don't blame us if you're stupid enough to get eaten by the wild life'
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Re: Food Stamps

Postby kiryan » Thu May 05, 2011 7:10 pm

Sarvis wrote:
kiryan wrote:
Ragorn wrote:Only a Republican would think that removing the minimum wage would help more people get off food stamps.


Only a liberal would think that you can help people by making it a right to have what you don't earn.


Only a conservative thinks that 1 in 7 people starving to death would be good for the country.


Only a liberal would think that everyone on food stamps would starve to death. Most would figure out a way to survive on their own personal efforts (get a job) or at least via their own personal social safety net. Your lack of faith in an American's ability to take care of themself is depressing.
Ragorn
Sojourner
Posts: 4732
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2001 6:01 am

Re: Food Stamps

Postby Ragorn » Thu May 05, 2011 7:23 pm

Only a Republican thinks that people on food stamps should just get a damn job already :)
- Ragorn
Shar: Leave the moaning to the people who have real issues to moan about like rangers or newbies.
Corth: Go ask out a chick that doesn't wiggle her poon in people's faces for a living.
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Re: Food Stamps

Postby kiryan » Thu May 05, 2011 7:30 pm

Get a job, share an apartment, ride the bus bike or walk, cancel their cable, stop smoking drinking and playing the lottery, stop shopping at 7-11 or quickie mart.

I fully endorse 95% of people on food stamps doing exactly the above, and for the record I am aware that lots of people on food stamps do have a job.
Sarvis
Sojourner
Posts: 6369
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Contact:

Re: Food Stamps

Postby Sarvis » Thu May 05, 2011 7:31 pm

Remember that thread where thousands upon thousands of people applied for jobs at McDonalds?

Just Get a Job: Still not as easy as Republicans like to think!

(Hint: We can't all get hired as CEOs after bankrupting several companies already.)
<a href="http://www.code-haven.com">Code Haven</a> - For all your programming needs.

I detest what you write, but I would give my life to make it possible for you to continue to write. - Some Guy Who Paraphrased Voltaire
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Re: Food Stamps

Postby kiryan » Thu May 05, 2011 7:54 pm

Sarvis, do you think that 1 in 7 people in America would starve to death if we cut food stamps off? Some definitely would, but most would not.

How many people do you know on food stamps and welfare? I've known more than a couple dozen over the years and less than half in my opinion were deserving... you know the single mom with 3 kids and not getting child support or the single mom going to school full time...

and even in these "deserving" situations you'll find that they aren't doing all that they could be... for example they still eating out, shopping retail instead of good will, live in their own apartment instead of sharing or living at home, they go to a college instead of a CC or a college in a different state instead of the cc where they grew up.

and if you want to talk people I am only acquainted with through a retail experience... dozens who pay cash for alcohol tobacco and lottery tickets and buy candybars with foodstamps. Or a good friend of mine who owns a LA nail shop talks about hundreds of women who get $15-$25 nails every week or 2 on their way back from cashing their welfare check complaining how they don't get enough foodstamps.

I'd be fine with foodstamps if it was the LAST resort for people. Instead most people use it to subsidize their preferred lifestyle. Its not right for people to starve to death, but its not right for you to be paying $65 a month for cable and expecting me to give you $130 a month in food stamps... and bitching about how its not enough money.
amena wolfsnarl
Sojourner
Posts: 439
Joined: Fri Apr 04, 2008 2:14 pm
Location: grande prairie alberta canada

Re: Food Stamps

Postby amena wolfsnarl » Thu May 05, 2011 8:05 pm

Agree 100% people in todays society hqve a bad habit of living beyond thier means. Personally I'd like to see to food stamps go away and have the government subsidize food banks more. If you qualify for food stamps go down to the food bank pick up your food for the week. Have it meet all the nutritional needs. If they want chocolate bars go use thier own money.

We do need stronger minimum requirements for all of our social welfare programs. It is A great program that too many people abuse. It's not the program that is evil but the people who abuse it.
Dugmaren tells you 'Welcome to Canada, don't blame us if you're stupid enough to get eaten by the wild life'
Corth
Sojourner
Posts: 6002
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2001 6:01 am
Location: NY, USA

Re: Food Stamps

Postby Corth » Thu May 05, 2011 8:52 pm

Only an idiot would generalize about republicans and democrats to the extent that we are seeing in this thread.
Having said all that, the situation has been handled, so this thread is pretty much at an end. -Kossuth



Goddamned slippery mage.
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Re: Food Stamps

Postby kiryan » Thu May 05, 2011 10:43 pm

I 100% agree Amena.

In human services field over the past 15-20 years they have been adopting two attitudes
A) maintain and preserve the dignity of the people served
B) get everyone who qualifies enrolled

On the surface, both those sound like good and noble goals.

Point B flies in the face of what many perceive as the problem with social programs. People who qualify don't necessarily need or deserve the subsidy.

Point A, coupled with the arguments about difficulties getting to food banks, cultural and religious sensitivity (tortillas for hispanics, rice for asians and bread for white people) and "special diets" (vegetarians, veegans, hindus) is what lead us away from food banks and food stamps (they get food stamp credit cards now instead).

I think cultural / religious respect is good, but when it comes down to me needing to feed you, you should get and eat whatever I give you which should maximize price vs nutrition. If you're vegan and would rather die than eat an egg, die. Conversely if a vegan diet is is cheaper than meat and gives you the same proteins, you'll be eating mushrooms at my food bank. If your pride keeps you from going to the food bank then starve, if that causes injury to your kids then DHS will need to take them.
Sarvis
Sojourner
Posts: 6369
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Contact:

Re: Food Stamps

Postby Sarvis » Fri May 06, 2011 12:37 pm

kiryan wrote:I 100% agree Amena.

In human services field over the past 15-20 years they have been adopting two attitudes
A) maintain and preserve the dignity of the people served
B) get everyone who qualifies enrolled

On the surface, both those sound like good and noble goals.

Point B flies in the face of what many perceive as the problem with social programs. People who qualify don't necessarily need or deserve the subsidy.

Point A, coupled with the arguments about difficulties getting to food banks, cultural and religious sensitivity (tortillas for hispanics, rice for asians and bread for white people) and "special diets" (vegetarians, veegans, hindus) is what lead us away from food banks and food stamps (they get food stamp credit cards now instead).

I think cultural / religious respect is good, but when it comes down to me needing to feed you, you should get and eat whatever I give you which should maximize price vs nutrition. If you're vegan and would rather die than eat an egg, die. Conversely if a vegan diet is is cheaper than meat and gives you the same proteins, you'll be eating mushrooms at my food bank. If your pride keeps you from going to the food bank then starve,


I actually pretty much agree with you.

if that causes injury to your kids then DHS will need to take them.


Of course, you would throw a shit-fit if DHS actually took away kids. After all they shouldn't even be allowed to investigate when there are signs of abuse, right?
<a href="http://www.code-haven.com">Code Haven</a> - For all your programming needs.

I detest what you write, but I would give my life to make it possible for you to continue to write. - Some Guy Who Paraphrased Voltaire
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Re: Food Stamps

Postby kiryan » Fri May 06, 2011 3:53 pm

if the kid could star in an ethiopian food bank commercial, then no you're not going to hear any complaints from me although I might still wonder philosophically if government should be able to get involved.

if its the government's opinion that your kid is "failing to thrive" and orders you to feed them chocolate instead of steak to increase their weight gain, then yes I'll have a damn fit. I was classified as "failing to thrive" and a couple of our kids as well... but we come from skinny families. In the wrong state, seeing the wrong doctor and maybe making the wrong comment, I could easily be facing a DHS investigation... and that is unequivocably wrong when I put steak and potatos and vegetables and milk on the table every single day and the kids are just of a slight build compared to the standard fatty today.
Sarvis
Sojourner
Posts: 6369
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Contact:

Re: Food Stamps

Postby Sarvis » Fri May 06, 2011 4:49 pm

kiryan wrote:if the kid could star in an ethiopian food bank commercial, then no you're not going to hear any complaints from me although I might still wonder philosophically if government should be able to get involved.

if its the government's opinion that your kid is "failing to thrive" and orders you to feed them chocolate instead of steak to increase their weight gain, then yes I'll have a damn fit. I was classified as "failing to thrive" and a couple of our kids as well... but we come from skinny families. In the wrong state, seeing the wrong doctor and maybe making the wrong comment, I could easily be facing a DHS investigation... and that is unequivocably wrong when I put steak and potatos and vegetables and milk on the table every single day and the kids are just of a slight build compared to the standard fatty today.


But you do know they need more than one meal a day, right? :P
<a href="http://www.code-haven.com">Code Haven</a> - For all your programming needs.

I detest what you write, but I would give my life to make it possible for you to continue to write. - Some Guy Who Paraphrased Voltaire
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Re: Food Stamps

Postby kiryan » Fri May 06, 2011 6:49 pm

no, the fact that they "need" more than 1 meal a day is not clear to me at all since for 10+ years I ate only 1 meal a day.

and I had steak for dinner, fruit constnatly shoved in my face, boxes of kit kat, m&ms in the closet and as much cash as I wanted to go out and eat, a 2 liter of dew in my dew bucket 24x7. i was just a damn skinny kid period. 5'10, 115-125 lbs until I was 20ish and started doing weight gain protein shakes.
Sarvis
Sojourner
Posts: 6369
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Contact:

Re: Food Stamps

Postby Sarvis » Fri May 06, 2011 7:16 pm

I was just being snarky... but:

I was classified as "failing to thrive" and a couple of our kids as well... but we come from skinny families.


kiryan wrote:for 10+ years I ate only 1 meal a day.


Just sayin...

5'10, 115-125 lbs until I was 20ish and started doing weight gain protein shakes.


Or you probably could have just started eating.

Out of curiosity was your father the same way? Some people say obesity is genetic, others say it's just laziness... but I've always suspected it's more of a learned behavior. If your parents overeat (or in your case undereat) then you'll grow up thinking that's normal behavior and your body will adapt to it.
<a href="http://www.code-haven.com">Code Haven</a> - For all your programming needs.

I detest what you write, but I would give my life to make it possible for you to continue to write. - Some Guy Who Paraphrased Voltaire
Ragorn
Sojourner
Posts: 4732
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2001 6:01 am

Re: Food Stamps

Postby Ragorn » Fri May 06, 2011 7:27 pm

It's both. Metabolism is adaptive but partly genetic. Eating habits are learned.
- Ragorn
Shar: Leave the moaning to the people who have real issues to moan about like rangers or newbies.
Corth: Go ask out a chick that doesn't wiggle her poon in people's faces for a living.
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Re: Food Stamps

Postby kiryan » Fri May 06, 2011 8:27 pm

parents are not obese. My dad eats a lot, my mom hardly ever eats (and gains weight when she does). My dad eats candy 3 or 4 times a week (which is why we had the boxes of snickers) I ate maybe 1 candy bar every 2 weeks.

I stopped eating lunch in elementary school because I refused to eat cafeteria food. The quality of food was beneath my standards. I tried bagged lunches, but i don't eat pb&j and a ham sandwich requires pickles and tomatos to be edible which makes the bread soggy. Ultimately, it was just too much trouble to bother with and I got to play longer at recess as well.

I stopped eating breakfast because I'd rather sleep in. When I did eat breakfast in elementarly/parts of middle school, it was steak and eggs.

as far as gaining weight at 21, its probable that it was natural changes in my metabolism... that may have been caused by the protein shakes I was drinking. it certainly wasnt from over eating (I only ate 2 whoppers a day which was around 2700 calories plus 32 oz of mountain dew or less). Compare that to highschool where I was eating a piece of steak as big as your hand (not palm) an equal amount of rice + a whole large baked potato with several gobs of sour cream on it, a glass of milk and anywhere from 64 to 128 oz of mountain dew a day... or 3 cheese burgers with a large fry and 44 oz coke (when i ate out instead of at home).
Teflor Lyorian
Sojourner
Posts: 1273
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2010 9:39 pm

Re: Food Stamps

Postby Teflor Lyorian » Sat May 07, 2011 5:41 am

The role of Federal government in our Republic is not to provide for the people, because in order for a government to provide, it must take away. Governance must make maximum effectiveness with minimum resource expenditure under clearly constructed goals set in a manner that enjoys the support of a vast majority of the people that should reflect as a majority with a wide margin no matter what geographical area (and their unique concerns) are polled. Federal government should be held accountable by the people to resist undue over-influence of industry, the popular opinion, science, religion, and others in order to properly serve the people what the people believe should be served.

1) A full-time position with benefits, steady pay, and relative job security is a privilege (which usually must be earned), not a right.

Unless consumers demonstrate brand-loyalty, geopolitical-loyalty, and have a constant need to consume the same goods at a regular interval, the OTHER end of this equation simply doesn't work out to everyone having a 'good job.' Furthermore, if everyone has a 'good job,' then it's not a fucking good job anymore.

2) Success is a relative measure that cannot be guaranteed.

Those impoverished today are ten fold more significantly materially wealthy than their peers from forty years ago: their old 'crappy' cars are twice as fuel efficient but twice as powerful, in addition to being roughly 5 times more reliable. They have communication devices that can be activated from nearly anywhere (unless you are on AT&T or T-Mobile, but then it's just 'slightly less than nearly anywhere'), at rates that even a majority of the impoverished seem to be able to afford, where their 1970's counterparts had to make do with pay phones and lacked home phone service. Today's impoverished people are obese rather than hungry. Success is a term that is defined by most Americans as doing better than average/median (median is closer to the truth here). By definition, only half of people can do better than median (if even that many).

3) The system is built by those who have flourished and succeeded most under it.

Those successful enough to be seen as leaders have done very well under the current system - whereas those who have failed under the current system have probably not been very well served by it. So the perception about what must be done to 'fix' or 'improve' the system that usually floats to the top from those who weren't failed by it. If you didn't come up with ideas of how to improve the system, but rather, you allowed yourself to be informed by media pundits, advocates, or partisans, you're misinformed. Period.

4) The dirty secret is that half of the American economy is highly mobile, yet inexorably linked with the other half that is highly immobile.

We go very far in government (local, state, and federal) to encourage people to lay down roots, build communities, and to foster a sense of personal ownership and pride for American homeowners. However, the fact of the matter is that jobs move in the United States. Steel mills close in Ohio while automotive plants are built in Georgia. Public policy is at odds, especially when it comes to the bottom quartile of the nation's households by income, about how to direct public assistance (other than the near-universal agreement to hand out dollars for votes, of course).




- So, the Solution? -

Yeah, it's that easy :P

But here's a few ideas that need to accompany any serious attempt to right our nation:

1) The Federal government's focus should be on informing and guiding efforts by more local forms of government, private charity and industry, to resolve the interstate issues that arise from poverty - NOT on handing out dollars for votes. For example: encouraging the impoverished underemployed to say.. move where bodies are needed.

2) We really must accept, or agree to accept a threshold where a percentage of people won't be able to find good work, because face it, not all people are good workers. The people, in order to secure the welfare of a nation, need to provide a workforce that optimally meets the needs of industry where the number of good workers and the number of good jobs are pretty close.

3) (not critical, but an idea nonetheless) Chronically bad or incapable workers must be identified so that assistance provided isn't a giant waste of resources. EXAMPLE: if someone is just an awful worker, don't push them into another job skills class where he'll learn how to be a lazy bum with a shit attitude but with another set of useless skills.

4) Incentivize people to help themselves.

5) Commit to integration and tighter relationships with private charity.

6) Lock that shit down: don't allow welfare to become a political tool. If you make changes, make them permanent, create laws that can't be abused and then lock that shit down so the next set of ass-grabbing politicians can't leverage it to their advantage at the polls.
"You see, the devil haunts a hungry man.
If you don’t wanna join him, you got to beat him."
- Kris Kristofferson (To Beat the Devil)
Ashiwi
Sojourner
Posts: 4161
Joined: Thu Jun 14, 2001 5:01 am

Re: Food Stamps

Postby Ashiwi » Sun May 08, 2011 3:20 pm

I think the WIC program is much closer to what the food programs in the US need to be. Participants can only get certain foods pre-approved by the program. There is no candy, no junkfood, no soda. There is milk, healthier cereals, peanut butter, cheese, beans, 100% juice, etc. If you want the other stuff, you have to pony up your own money for it.

I see nothing "de-humanizing" about not giving welfare recipients lobster, 12-packs of Mountain Dew, or cartloads of Little Debbies.
Gormal tells you 'im a dwarven onion'
Gormal tells you 'always another beer-soaked layer'

Inama ASSOC:: 'though it may suit your fantasies to think so, i don't need oil for anything.'

Haley: Filthy lucre? I wash that lucre every day until it SHINES!
Teflor Lyorian
Sojourner
Posts: 1273
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2010 9:39 pm

Re: Food Stamps

Postby Teflor Lyorian » Sun May 08, 2011 5:28 pm

WIC is a program that is a good example of the principles I laid out: well coordinated by Federal government, administered by the states, with well formed, well stated goals and accountability measures.
"You see, the devil haunts a hungry man.
If you don’t wanna join him, you got to beat him."
- Kris Kristofferson (To Beat the Devil)
Ragorn
Sojourner
Posts: 4732
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2001 6:01 am

Re: Food Stamps

Postby Ragorn » Mon May 09, 2011 1:45 pm

Neither WIC nor food stamps allow people to buy soda, candy, or cigarettes. What happens is, when you use food stamps, change under a dollar is refunded in cash. So you will regularly see people come to the register with five small cans of baby formula, each of which costs 99 cents plus tax. They'll request five separate transactions, and clear each transaction with $2 in food stamps. So they buy the formula and get 94 cents in change. Then they take the $4.70 cash they just amassed and buy a six pack with it.

Most grocery stores don't allow such blatant abuse. When I was in high school, the store I worked at didn't give a shit, and we were expressly told not to fuck with people who were trying to abuse the system.

WIC is a better system, because it specifies exactly what the person is allowed to purchase.
- Ragorn
Shar: Leave the moaning to the people who have real issues to moan about like rangers or newbies.
Corth: Go ask out a chick that doesn't wiggle her poon in people's faces for a living.
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Re: Food Stamps

Postby kiryan » Mon May 09, 2011 5:59 pm

Hmm... as of 3 years ago, you could buy soda and candy bars on foodstamps in Oregon.

Maybe your state was smart about it. I might be more open to social services if they were run effiicently and without abuse.

WIC is a much better program than foodstamps, but there are a lot of people who would criticize it as well as specifically subsidizing politically favored industries like dariy over healthier choices like soy.

Return to “Current Events & Politics”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests