Striper Talk Striped Bass Fishing, Surfcasting, Boating

     

Left Nav S-B Home Register FAQ Members List S-B on Facebook Arcade WEAX Tides Buoys Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Right Nav

Left Container Right Container
 

Go Back   Striper Talk Striped Bass Fishing, Surfcasting, Boating » Striper Chat - Discuss stuff other than fishing ~ The Scuppers and Political talk » Political Threads

Political Threads This section is for Political Threads - Enter at your own risk. If you say you don't want to see what someone posts - don't read it :hihi:

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
Old 12-07-2019, 10:30 AM   #1
Jim in CT
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 13,534
changes to federal food stamp program

Trump wants to make some changes to the federal food stamp program, liberals of course are claiming that Republicans want poor people to all starve to death.

The changes? People on food stamps who are able bodied, able minded, who have no children, and who are younger than 50...must do something (work, volunteer, get job training) for 20 hours a week in order to receive federal assistance. States can grant waivers to this requirement for welfare recipients who live in areas with very high unemployment.

Obviously, the change is aimed at people who could EASILY work if they wanted to, but who choose not to.

The argument against this, is what, exactly?
Jim in CT is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2019, 10:51 AM   #2
The Dad Fisherman
Super Moderator
iTrader: (0)
 
The Dad Fisherman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Georgetown MA
Posts: 17,301
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim in CT View Post
The argument against this, is what, exactly?
RACISTS!!!!

(Figured I’d beat them to it)
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

"If you're arguing with an idiot, make sure he isn't doing the same thing."
The Dad Fisherman is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2019, 11:04 AM   #3
Jim in CT
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 13,534
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman View Post
RACISTS!!!!

(Figured I’d beat them to it)
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
That about sums it up.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Jim in CT is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2019, 11:13 AM   #4
spence
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
spence's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: RI
Posts: 19,914
Do some homework Jim.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
spence is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2019, 11:35 AM   #5
Jim in CT
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 13,534
Quote:
Originally Posted by spence View Post
Do some homework Jim.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
A vague, baseless insult, from you? Get outta here.

.
Jim in CT is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2019, 12:28 PM   #6
spence
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
spence's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: RI
Posts: 19,914
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim in CT View Post
A vague, baseless insult, from you? Get outta here.

.
It’s not an insult it’s a suggestion. Trying to help.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
spence is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2019, 01:23 PM   #7
Slipknot
Super Moderator
iTrader: (0)
 
Slipknot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Middleboro MA
Posts: 16,888
Argument against is that sounds like more government not less because you’d need enforcement, red tape paperwork, privacy issues of medical records for those who can’t work. It is not as easy as Trump seems to make it sound the way you put it.

A while ago I thought there was a call for drug tests, now this
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Slipknot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2019, 01:42 PM   #8
Jim in CT
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 13,534
Quote:
Originally Posted by spence View Post
It’s not an insult it’s a suggestion. Trying to help.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
ok, tell me what i said, which is incorrect. Because to you, “doing my homework”, seems
to mean “listen to what Rachael Maddow has to say on the subject, and dont question it.”
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Jim in CT is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2019, 02:54 PM   #9
wdmso
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Somerset MA
Posts: 4,732
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim in CT View Post
Trump wants to make some changes to the federal food stamp program, liberals of course are claiming that Republicans want poor people to all starve to death.

The changes? People on food stamps who are able bodied, able minded, who have no children, and who are younger than 50...must do something (work, volunteer, get job training) for 20 hours a week in order to receive federal assistance. ( that has always been the rule many states expanded this beyond 3 months ) States can grant waivers to this requirement for welfare recipients who live in areas with very high unemployment.

Now states will only be able to issue waivers if the unemployment rate is over 6%, and waiver applications will require complex data and specificity.Obviously, the change is aimed at people who could EASILY work if they wanted to, but who choose not to.

The argument against this, is what, exactly?
funny way to be fiscally responsible off the backs of 688,000 people for roughly $160 in food purchases for three months they sure are getting over on uncle sam...
wdmso is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2019, 02:58 PM   #10
Jim in CT
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 13,534
Quote:
Originally Posted by wdmso View Post
funny way to be fiscally responsible off the backs of 688,000 people for roughly $160 in food purchases for three months they sure are getting over on uncle sam...
so you don’t think that people perfectly capable of working, should be doing something, if receiving federal assistance?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Jim in CT is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2019, 09:25 PM   #11
Pete F.
Canceled
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: vt
Posts: 7,778
WASHINGTON—Championing the decision as a way to cut costs and still meet federally mandated nutrition requirements, President Trump announced a plan Tuesday to replace food stamps with a new low-income foraging program. “We have developed a new foraging-based plan that provides qualifying Americans with a small, reusable bag they can fill with whatever they are able to scavenge from alleys, empty lots, or nearby wooded areas,” said Trump, explaining that underprivileged participants in the program would search for food scraps anywhere they can find them, including the dumpsters behind restaurants. “We will also be providing these low-income Americans with charts that explain which rotting foods are still safe to eat, which seeds and berries can be consumed without getting sick, and how to spot insects that are high in protein. Many disadvantaged citizens don’t have access to healthy meals at home, but this program will teach them the self-reliance they need to ensure their basic requirements for sustenance continue to be met.” Trump also proposed a Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program in which Americans would receive a weekly meal service kit containing pictures of food.

I know after the 9 month baby statement, this sounds believable but sorry, it’s the Onion
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Pete F. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2019, 10:55 PM   #12
Jim in CT
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 13,534
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete F. View Post
WASHINGTON—Championing the decision as a way to cut costs and still meet federally mandated nutrition requirements, President Trump announced a plan Tuesday to replace food stamps with a new low-income foraging program. “We have developed a new foraging-based plan that provides qualifying Americans with a small, reusable bag they can fill with whatever they are able to scavenge from alleys, empty lots, or nearby wooded areas,” said Trump, explaining that underprivileged participants in the program would search for food scraps anywhere they can find them, including the dumpsters behind restaurants. “We will also be providing these low-income Americans with charts that explain which rotting foods are still safe to eat, which seeds and berries can be consumed without getting sick, and how to spot insects that are high in protein. Many disadvantaged citizens don’t have access to healthy meals at home, but this program will teach them the self-reliance they need to ensure their basic requirements for sustenance continue to be met.” Trump also proposed a Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program in which Americans would receive a weekly meal service kit containing pictures of food.

I know after the 9 month baby statement, this sounds believable but sorry, it’s the Onion
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
if you’re able-bodied, able-minded, under age 50, and have no kids....why can’t you spend 20
hours a week earning the welfare that others pay for? Seriously, what’s wrong with that?

i have no problem
whatsoever, helping people
who cannot work. But people who can work, but choose. not to? That’s a very different animal.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Jim in CT is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2019, 05:44 AM   #13
Pete F.
Canceled
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: vt
Posts: 7,778
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim in CT View Post
if you’re able-bodied, able-minded, under age 50, and have no kids....why can’t you spend 20
hours a week earning the welfare that others pay for? Seriously, what’s wrong with that?

i have no problem
whatsoever, helping people
who cannot work. But people who can work, but choose. not to? That’s a very different animal.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
It’s that reading comprehension thing again
I know after the 9 month baby statement, this sounds believable but sorry, it’s the Onion
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Thousands of Americans are dying every week. The President's response?

"We're seeing indications that our strong mitigation efforts are working. Very well, actually." He adds, "The numbers are getting very good."
"It is what it is."
Pete F. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2019, 07:20 AM   #14
Jim in CT
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 13,534
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete F. View Post
It’s that reading comprehension thing again
I know after the 9 month baby statement, this sounds believable but sorry, it’s the Onion
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
i know your post was satire. but the left as a whole is attacking trump for this.

Let’s start this from the beginning. The changes to the law will
require that those who are able bodied, able minded, younger than 50, and who have no children, to work/volunteer/train for 20 hours a week to qualify for federal welfare.

Do you think this is a good idea or a bad idea?

Ocasio-cortez said her family would have starved due to this, which is a lie as it wouldn’t have impacted her family because they had children. Is it a good idea for her to distort things so badly to criticize?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Jim in CT is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2019, 08:58 AM   #15
wdmso
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Somerset MA
Posts: 4,732
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim in CT View Post
if you’re able-bodied, able-minded, under age 50, and have no kids....why can’t you spend 20
hours a week earning the welfare that others pay for? Seriously, what’s wrong with that?

i have no problem
whatsoever, helping people
who cannot work. But people who can work, but choose. not to? That’s a very different animal.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Jim under the current law this is already required.. (20hours) the change is the red tape to extend the benefits and the 6% unemployment rate. Requirements.. 1 or 2 less f 35s fighters would save more money ..

Honestly i wish they put more efforts it kicking out the live in boyfriends..
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
wdmso is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2019, 09:49 AM   #16
Pete F.
Canceled
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: vt
Posts: 7,778
Quote:
Originally Posted by wdmso View Post
..

Honestly i wish they put more efforts it kicking out the live in boyfriends..
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
👍🏻
Floridaman won’t do anything about that, he’s the guy who states building income one way for loans and another for taxes.
Sort of the same thing (fraud) but on a larger scale.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Thousands of Americans are dying every week. The President's response?

"We're seeing indications that our strong mitigation efforts are working. Very well, actually." He adds, "The numbers are getting very good."
"It is what it is."
Pete F. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2019, 10:47 AM   #17
Jim in CT
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 13,534
Quote:
Originally Posted by wdmso View Post
Jim under the current law this is already required.. (20hours) the change is the red tape to extend the benefits and the 6% unemployment rate. Requirements.. 1 or 2 less f 35s fighters would save more money ..

Honestly i wish they put more efforts it kicking out the live in boyfriends..
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Many of the live-in boyfriends, are boyfriends and not husbands, because the moms get more welfare if they're not married. Growing up I knew three couples were were married in every practical sense, but never got legally married because staying leglly single, allowed the mom to get a bigger welfare check. I knew three families that did this. It's disgusting.
Jim in CT is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2019, 11:05 AM   #18
wdmso
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Somerset MA
Posts: 4,732
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim in CT View Post
Many of the live-in boyfriends, are boyfriends and not husbands, because the moms get more welfare if they're not married. Growing up I knew three couples were were married in every practical sense, but never got legally married because staying leglly single, allowed the mom to get a bigger welfare check. I knew three families that did this. It's disgusting.
I have a good friend who had a child at 18 she was on welfare for 2 years he went in the army , then he got a State job and they attached his pay to recover the 2 years ..

Here was a guy using the system as it was designed to help in a bad spot short term , and they did this,, some incentive to leave
wdmso is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2019, 12:29 PM   #19
detbuch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 5,815
Quote:
Originally Posted by wdmso View Post
Jim under the current law this is already required.. (20hours) the change is the red tape to extend the benefits and the 6% unemployment rate. Requirements.. 1 or 2 less f 35s fighters would save more money ..

Honestly i wish they put more efforts it kicking out the live in boyfriends..
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
This is one of the financial rabbit holes that the federal government crawls into when it assumes responsibilities that it constitutionally does not have. When it takes on a host of other things that constitutionally should be left to local governments and to individuals, such as various welfare and entitlement programs, then an expectation is created in the people that it is right and necessary for it to transfer to those programs the funds necessary for its constitutional mandates such as spending on the military.

And when both obligations, constitutional and unconstitutional, need more money than the government has, it must borrow it. But the financial burden becomes permanently entrenched, so not only must the borrowing continue and the debt pile up, but it expands even more than the already exponential growth when politicians realize that this slight of bureaucratic hand can be used to pile on even more compassionate sounding vote getting giveaways.

And, naturally, the people now having been trained that it is the federal governments duty to provide the most basic personal needs to those who it deems are incapable of providing themselves, the populace feels that it is only right that it scrape out the money from seemingly over-luxurious things going to the less needy military and give it to those who obviously, so we are told, need it more.

Last edited by The Dad Fisherman; 12-08-2019 at 02:27 PM..
detbuch is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2019, 01:18 PM   #20
wdmso
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Somerset MA
Posts: 4,732
Quote:
Originally Posted by detbuch View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by wdmso View Post
Jim under the current law this is already required.. (20hours) the change is the red tape to extend the benefits and the 6% unemployment rate. Requirements.. 1 or 2 less f 35s fighters would save more money ..

Honestly i wish they put more efforts it kicking out the live in boyfriends..
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
This is one of the financial rabbit holes that the federal government crawls into when it assumes responsibilities that it constitutionally does not have. When it takes on a host of other things that constitutionally should be left to local governments and to individuals, such as various welfare and entitlement programs, then an expectation is created in the people that it is right and necessary for it to transfer to those programs the funds necessary for its constitutional mandates such as spending on the military.

And when both obligations, constitutional and unconstitutional, need more money than the government has, it must borrow it. But the financial burden becomes permanently entrenched, so not only must the borrowing continue and the debt pile up, but it expands even more than the already exponential growth when politicians realize that this slight of bureaucratic hand can be used to pile on even more compassionate sounding vote getting giveaways.

And, naturally, the people now having been trained that it is the federal governments duty to provide the most basic personal needs to those who it deems are incapable of providing themselves, the populace feels that it is only right that it scrape out the money from seemingly over-luxurious things going to the less needy military and give it to those who obviously, so we are told, need it more.
Again when was American acceptable to you??
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Last edited by The Dad Fisherman; 12-08-2019 at 02:29 PM..
wdmso is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2019, 01:38 PM   #21
spence
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
spence's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: RI
Posts: 19,914
Quote:
Originally Posted by wdmso View Post
Again when was American acceptable to you??
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
1776 but it’s been all downhill from there.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
spence is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2019, 03:15 PM   #22
detbuch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 5,815
Quote:
Originally Posted by wdmso View Post
Again when was American acceptable to you??
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
I answered that in another thread. But if that was not good enough, then l'll be very specific. It has always been acceptable to me. It has been more than acceptable. It has always been special and good. It has been exceptional. Still is.

Now you can answer my question. Is it necessary for our country to be divided into 50 different states with different constitutions, and all the other differences that make it more difficult to be united than exists already with our personal differences. Are states necessary?
detbuch is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12-09-2019, 07:50 AM   #23
wdmso
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Somerset MA
Posts: 4,732
Quote:
Originally Posted by detbuch View Post
I answered that in another thread. But if that was not good enough, then l'll be very specific. It has always been acceptable to me. It has been more than acceptable. It has always been special and good. It has been exceptional. Still is.

Now you can answer my question. Is it necessary for our country to be divided into 50 different states with different constitutions, and all the other differences that make it more difficult to be united than exists already with our personal differences. Are states necessary?
Why should I answers
question you want answered. To a topic I have never suggested? Like dividing the country .. to occur?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
wdmso is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-09-2019, 07:51 AM   #24
scottw
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
scottw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 9,320
Quote:
Originally Posted by wdmso View Post

Why should I answers question you want answered.

Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
I often wish re-pete wouldn't...
scottw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-09-2019, 10:52 AM   #25
detbuch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 5,815
Quote:
Originally Posted by wdmso View Post
Why should I answers
question you want answered. To a topic I have never suggested? Like dividing the country .. to occur?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Out of courtesy, perhaps. I answered your question about American being acceptable to me which is a topic I haven't suggested.

And my question is pertinent to just about any topic regarding American politics. Jim may be right. You may be afraid to answer it.
detbuch is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:04 PM.


Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Please use all necessary and proper safety precautions. STAY SAFE Striper Talk Forums
Copyright 1998-20012 Striped-Bass.com