If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Fox 21 News)   Good News: You can use your government-issued EBT card at Colorado marijuana stores. Bad News: You have a government-issued EBT card   (fox21news.com) divider line 165
    More: Spiffy, EBT, lists of places, Colorado, welfare programs  
•       •       •

3948 clicks; posted to Main » on 16 Jan 2014 at 5:20 AM (35 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



165 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-01-16 07:28:33 AM

Uchiha_Cycliste: I have absolutely no problem with someone who is disabled by chronic (heh) crippling pain using their EBT for edibles to find relief. In fact I would look own upon anyone that would go out of their way to make sure these poor folks can't find relief, however temporary it may be. I know from experience that weed can go a long way towards relieving severe pain. I've had screws placed into my feet to put some bones back together after surgery. I've had a tib/fib that left the fib in a dozen pieces. Broken rib. wrist, etc. etc. An I sweat pot was as helpful as the oxycontin I was prescribed. People in pain should be able to help themselves however they can.


tibs fibs and ribs.... damn, some BBQ and you are set.
 
2014-01-16 07:31:00 AM

HindiDiscoMonster: Uchiha_Cycliste: I have absolutely no problem with someone who is disabled by chronic (heh) crippling pain using their EBT for edibles to find relief. In fact I would look own upon anyone that would go out of their way to make sure these poor folks can't find relief, however temporary it may be. I know from experience that weed can go a long way towards relieving severe pain. I've had screws placed into my feet to put some bones back together after surgery. I've had a tib/fib that left the fib in a dozen pieces. Broken rib. wrist, etc. etc. An I sweat pot was as helpful as the oxycontin I was prescribed. People in pain should be able to help themselves however they can.

tibs fibs and ribs.... damn, some BBQ and you are set.


yeah, but we gotta wait for Lucifer's Hammer to justify it =/
 
2014-01-16 07:31:09 AM

Uchiha_Cycliste: markfara: Uchiha_Cycliste: markfara: I guess it must vary from state to state. The only person I'm acquainted with first-hand who uses government assistance is my mother-in-law in Indiana. She gets her health and utility expenses paid directly by the government, no card necessary. Social Security checks provide her living expenses. She's pretty good at managing the money she gets, but I'm suspect that's not the norm.

To the contrary I would imagine that all the old folks on SS who lived through or were affected by the great depression probably budgets very well.  I know grandmere did.

MIL raised three kids in what was basically a shack, living on a sh*t income, so I think she got hip to budgeting pretty early in the game.

That's great (that she was privy to proper budgeting). If only we could teach kids these days to do the same, and as long as we are dreaming, the GOP too.


Hey! They're the Party of Fiscal Responsibility! Why do you hate fiscal responsibility?
 
2014-01-16 07:32:24 AM

fireclown: Is nobody other than me angry that taxpayer money can be used to buy weed? Im not an anti welfare type who wants to let folks starve or die of untreated illnesses, but I rankle at buying intoxicants for the jobless.


Not all benefit programs give money, and perhaps not all benefit programs should.  There are different reasons and different benefits.  Some do include money.

Once you give them money though, how do you expect the government to babysit what they spend it on?  It's money.  It's not monopoly money or little coupons.  If it's something legal to purchase in the state, then money tends to work for it, and nobody usually asks where the money came from or why or accepts some money and not others.

If you want to worry about what its spent on, it might be more productive to argue in favor of housing assistance, utility assistance, food stamps, etc. rather than trying to analyze some media piece about what might happen to cash.

At most, you make it really really annoying to find an 'acceptable' ATM, at which point they pretty much need to withdraw all their cash to avoid traveling that far out of the way again, and then they have their whole month's cash in their pockets at once while they go back home...   and surely no problems will ever come from that.

Seriously, if they are an addict, of any sort, making them use a different ATM won't change that.  It may not be ideal in all situations, but if you're going to give people cash, then it's probably best to realize it is cash and can be used like other cash.  We don't have programs to babysit a poor person's entire budget, and that would probably be quite costly.... and I still don't see how you'd stop them from using any other cash how they wanted, even if that were desirable... you could not have that sort of control without making them into prisoner's, basically.

At some point, if they skimp on utilities, clothes and food for alcohol or any other vice or intoxicant...  I don't think a better babysitter is going to make them more successful for long.  Either they're going to fail or they really can manage to keep the vice in control and are fine anyways, and are presumably getting buy on less than what society thinks is the appropriate benefit.

Then there's things like disability payments...  I don't particularly want to argue to some disabled guy who will never work again that he shouldn't be permitted to drink or smoke away the pain.  Not really my business, and it probably isn't the thing somehow preventing him from becoming not disabled.
 
2014-01-16 07:32:41 AM

gfid: jso2897: I can sorta see that, but the problem is that micromanaging every single dime of welfare money spent has been tried - and it's proven to be unwieldy, complicated, and cost

citation needed.

Look, some states have sales taxes which exempt most "food".  Tax exempt food is well defined.  That banana you see in the store?  It's not taxed.  That Hershey bar is taxed.   It may not be a perfect system, but it is pretty good.  If we can do that then we can prevent tax dollars from going towards booze or pot or tobacco at the very least.


Citation? Dude - Im not teaching a seminar here - I'm just answering another person's musing with thoughts of my own.
I don't really know what you are on about. The fact is that some of the income that some people on "welfare" get is going to be spent at their own discretion. I happen to think that that is as it should be, but you're free to disagree. As i stated - i think your "concern" about wasting government money could be better applied elsewhere - but that's just my opinion too.
If you are looking for some big long stupid "Fark debate", you are going to need to have that with somebody else.
 
2014-01-16 07:34:30 AM

markfara: Uchiha_Cycliste: markfara: Uchiha_Cycliste: markfara: I guess it must vary from state to state. The only person I'm acquainted with first-hand who uses government assistance is my mother-in-law in Indiana. She gets her health and utility expenses paid directly by the government, no card necessary. Social Security checks provide her living expenses. She's pretty good at managing the money she gets, but I'm suspect that's not the norm.

To the contrary I would imagine that all the old folks on SS who lived through or were affected by the great depression probably budgets very well.  I know grandmere did.

MIL raised three kids in what was basically a shack, living on a sh*t income, so I think she got hip to budgeting pretty early in the game.

That's great (that she was privy to proper budgeting). If only we could teach kids these days to do the same, and as long as we are dreaming, the GOP too.

Hey! They're the Party of Fiscal Responsibility! Why do you hate fiscal responsibility?


My bad, you are right... it was totally Clinton and Obama's fault we went Trillions of dollars into debt between 2000 and 2008. How stupid of me. At least we can count on the GOP and their laser like ocus on creating new jobs.
 
2014-01-16 07:37:49 AM

Uchiha_Cycliste: markfara: Uchiha_Cycliste: markfara: Uchiha_Cycliste: markfara: I guess it must vary from state to state. The only person I'm acquainted with first-hand who uses government assistance is my mother-in-law in Indiana. She gets her health and utility expenses paid directly by the government, no card necessary. Social Security checks provide her living expenses. She's pretty good at managing the money she gets, but I'm suspect that's not the norm.

To the contrary I would imagine that all the old folks on SS who lived through or were affected by the great depression probably budgets very well.  I know grandmere did.

MIL raised three kids in what was basically a shack, living on a sh*t income, so I think she got hip to budgeting pretty early in the game.

That's great (that she was privy to proper budgeting). If only we could teach kids these days to do the same, and as long as we are dreaming, the GOP too.

Hey! They're the Party of Fiscal Responsibility! Why do you hate fiscal responsibility?

My bad, you are right... it was totally Clinton and Obama's fault we went Trillions of dollars into debt between 2000 and 2008. How stupid of me. At least we can count on the GOP and their laser like ocus on creating new jobs.


They protected us from Saddam's WMDs and brought stability to the region, too. You're obviously a Marxist ingrate! Why don't you just go get gay-married someplace and leave the rest of us alone!

;-)
 
2014-01-16 07:39:02 AM

Goimir: fireclown: Is nobody other than me angry that taxpayer money can be used to buy weed? Im not an anti welfare type who wants to let folks starve or die of untreated illnesses, but I rankle at buying intoxicants for the jobless.

Because someone on Unemployment should never drink or smoke. My god. If you want a revolution, target a bunch of working class people who have time on their hands. The movement to stop people from applying for unemployment in person was done to stop them from networking.

Also, when I was on unemployment, I often used the ATM at the corner bar. Why?

Because it was 3 miles closer to my house and the cheapest ATM in the county. They charged $2 and the next closest ATM charged $3.50.


Someone who spends that money on cigarettes or booze does so at the expense of someone who needs that money for basic necessities. That should bother you.
 
2014-01-16 07:40:18 AM
Far be it from me to screw with the snark by being the voice of reason here, but some people in Colorado with EBT cards are not actually on government assistance at all.  IF you are collecting child support via your county enforcement office, it is my understanding that you have to option of having that cash on an EBT card if you are unbanked.  It is then accessible via ATM's, or can be used at the check out counter at a store, where you can also request cash, just like for any other debit card transaction.  (I do not know this is the case for sure, but it is what I was told when Colorado was trying (unsuccessfully) to obtain for me the 9 years of back child support that my ex-husband currently owes my son.)
 
2014-01-16 07:41:01 AM

markfara: Uchiha_Cycliste: markfara: Uchiha_Cycliste: markfara: Uchiha_Cycliste: markfara: I guess it must vary from state to state. The only person I'm acquainted with first-hand who uses government assistance is my mother-in-law in Indiana. She gets her health and utility expenses paid directly by the government, no card necessary. Social Security checks provide her living expenses. She's pretty good at managing the money she gets, but I'm suspect that's not the norm.

To the contrary I would imagine that all the old folks on SS who lived through or were affected by the great depression probably budgets very well.  I know grandmere did.

MIL raised three kids in what was basically a shack, living on a sh*t income, so I think she got hip to budgeting pretty early in the game.

That's great (that she was privy to proper budgeting). If only we could teach kids these days to do the same, and as long as we are dreaming, the GOP too.

Hey! They're the Party of Fiscal Responsibility! Why do you hate fiscal responsibility?

My bad, you are right... it was totally Clinton and Obama's fault we went Trillions of dollars into debt between 2000 and 2008. How stupid of me. At least we can count on the GOP and their laser like ocus on creating new jobs.

They protected us from Saddam's WMDs and brought stability to the region, too. You're obviously a Marxist ingrate! Why don't you just go get gay-married someplace and leave the rest of us alone!

;-)


I WAS at Berkeley during the ramp up to the Iraq war. We were pretty gung-ho about it being a stupid idea even before the war started and we made sure our voices were heard, albeit ignored. We never protested Afghanistan though, that was righteous. Anyways, I guess you hit the nail on the head =P
 
2014-01-16 07:41:30 AM

fireclown: Is nobody other than me angry that taxpayer money can be used to buy weed? Im not an anti welfare type who wants to let folks starve or die of untreated illnesses, but I rankle at buying intoxicants for the jobless.


you can treat pot as medicine or recreational, but regardless of how it is treated, it should not be covered under the food portion of WIC period. If someone gets Cash assistance as well, then without a doctor's prescription, it should not be covered there either - it should be treated the same as alcohol and cigarettes (ie; not covered)... If a doctors prescription is involved, then it should be covered under the Cash side only (if applicable). I think that would be a fair balance... This way you are not covering it for recreational purposes, but are covering it for medicinal purposes only as it is truly effective for certain conditions.
 
2014-01-16 07:42:10 AM
I would imagine there's also quite a few hookers taking EBT cards. Oh, but prostitution is illegal... my bad.
 
2014-01-16 07:42:25 AM

GoldSpider: Goimir: fireclown: Is nobody other than me angry that taxpayer money can be used to buy weed? Im not an anti welfare type who wants to let folks starve or die of untreated illnesses, but I rankle at buying intoxicants for the jobless.

Because someone on Unemployment should never drink or smoke. My god. If you want a revolution, target a bunch of working class people who have time on their hands. The movement to stop people from applying for unemployment in person was done to stop them from networking.

Also, when I was on unemployment, I often used the ATM at the corner bar. Why?

Because it was 3 miles closer to my house and the cheapest ATM in the county. They charged $2 and the next closest ATM charged $3.50.

Someone who spends that money on cigarettes or booze does so at the expense of someone who needs that money for basic necessities. That should bother you.


So are you saying that no recipient of any of the myriad  forms of "welfare" should have any discretionary income?
Or do you wish to redefine the word "discretionary?"
 
2014-01-16 07:42:50 AM

jso2897: Everybody needs to have their existence acknowledged by their fellow human beings. If the only way you can do that is butt into conversations you can't comprehend and say something pointless and stupid, that's what you do.


I think I finally understand Kanye West...
 
2014-01-16 07:45:09 AM

RobSeace: jso2897: Everybody needs to have their existence acknowledged by their fellow human beings. If the only way you can do that is butt into conversations you can't comprehend and say something pointless and stupid, that's what you do.

I think I finally understand Kanye West...


Hey, you didn't need to just trail off like that -- I was going to let you finish.
 
2014-01-16 07:46:57 AM

RobSeace: jso2897: Everybody needs to have their existence acknowledged by their fellow human beings. If the only way you can do that is butt into conversations you can't comprehend and say something pointless and stupid, that's what you do.

I think I finally understand Kanye West...


Kayne West doesn't understand Kayne West...
 
2014-01-16 07:47:17 AM

jso2897: gfid: jso2897: I can sorta see that, but the problem is that micromanaging every single dime of welfare money spent has been tried - and it's proven to be unwieldy, complicated, and cost

citation needed.

Look, some states have sales taxes which exempt most "food".  Tax exempt food is well defined.  That banana you see in the store?  It's not taxed.  That Hershey bar is taxed.   It may not be a perfect system, but it is pretty good.  If we can do that then we can prevent tax dollars from going towards booze or pot or tobacco at the very least.

Citation? Dude - Im not teaching a seminar here - I'm just answering another person's musing with thoughts of my own.
I don't really know what you are on about. The fact is that some of the income that some people on "welfare" get is going to be spent at their own discretion. I happen to think that that is as it should be, but you're free to disagree. As i stated - i think your "concern" about wasting government money could be better applied elsewhere - but that's just my opinion too.
If you are looking for some big long stupid "Fark debate", you are going to need to have that with somebody else.


lol, ok.  So you just pulled something out of your ass and don't care to back it up;  At least you're honest about it.  Good for you.
 
2014-01-16 07:47:21 AM

HindiDiscoMonster: fireclown: Is nobody other than me angry that taxpayer money can be used to buy weed? Im not an anti welfare type who wants to let folks starve or die of untreated illnesses, but I rankle at buying intoxicants for the jobless.

you can treat pot as medicine or recreational, but regardless of how it is treated, it should not be covered under the food portion of WIC period. If someone gets Cash assistance as well, then without a doctor's prescription, it should not be covered there either - it should be treated the same as alcohol and cigarettes (ie; not covered)... If a doctors prescription is involved, then it should be covered under the Cash side only (if applicable). I think that would be a fair balance... This way you are not covering it for recreational purposes, but are covering it for medicinal purposes only as it is truly effective for certain conditions.


WIC and SNAP are two different things moron. WIC is a voucher for specific, nutritionally sound foods (such as milk, cheese, peanut butter, baby formula) provided to pregnant women, infants and toddlers up to 5 years of age.  People well up into the middle class range qualify.  SNAP is what used to be called food stamps, and it can not be used for anything but food (and in many states there have been new restrictions put on it, such as in my state, where they have signs up in the stores reminding SNAP users that they can't buy energy drinks with it.)
 
2014-01-16 07:48:50 AM

jso2897: gfid: jso2897: I can sorta see that, but the problem is that micromanaging every single dime of welfare money spent has been tried - and it's proven to be unwieldy, complicated, and cost

citation needed.

Look, some states have sales taxes which exempt most "food".  Tax exempt food is well defined.  That banana you see in the store?  It's not taxed.  That Hershey bar is taxed.   It may not be a perfect system, but it is pretty good.  If we can do that then we can prevent tax dollars from going towards booze or pot or tobacco at the very least.

Citation? Dude - Im not teaching a seminar here - I'm just answering another person's musing with thoughts of my own.
I don't really know what you are on about. The fact is that some of the income that some people on "welfare" get is going to be spent at their own discretion. I happen to think that that is as it should be, but you're free to disagree. As i stated - i think your "concern" about wasting government money could be better applied elsewhere - but that's just my opinion too.
If you are looking for some big long stupid "Fark debate", you are going to need to have that with somebody else.


I think it's also worth noting that by allowing one's discretionary funds to be spent at one's discretion you both: save a boat load on not trying to micro-manage the finances of tens of millions of folk AND you help these poor folks feel like their are being treated as adults I would find it insulting and discouraging to know there was some government stooge looking over my shoulder for every purchase I made. It would make it that much harder to try to get back on my feet.
 
2014-01-16 07:49:09 AM

NutWrench: The purpose of EBT cards is to buy food. You shouldn't be able to draw cash on them no matter where the ATM is located.


That's not exactly true.  The purpose is to electronically transfer money without having to send a check.  People can get benefits from the government for many things other than food stamps.
 
2014-01-16 07:49:29 AM
What is with all the people who freak out at the thought of people's benefits being used for something other than food and rent? How are people supposed to buy clothes or have emergency bus or cab fare or buy a book at a garage sale or snag a street vendor hot dog while hunting down job leads, etc...?

Yes, even poor people need cash sometimes. YOU go a couple months where the only thing you have to barter with is some bananas, a jar of peanut butter and a ten pound bag of rice.

Dickheads.
 
2014-01-16 07:51:09 AM
Pfft.
Only stupid people pay taxes.
The smart ones are on either side of the spectrum.


/discuss
 
2014-01-16 07:51:53 AM

here to help: What is with all the people who freak out at the thought of people's benefits being used for something other than food and rent? How are people supposed to buy clothes or have emergency bus or cab fare or buy a book at a garage sale or snag a street vendor hot dog while hunting down job leads, etc...?

Yes, even poor people need cash sometimes. YOU go a couple months where the only thing you have to barter with is some bananas, a jar of peanut butter and a ten pound bag of rice.

Dickheads.


I literally laughed out loud...woke my dog up, thanks a lot. :)
 
2014-01-16 07:52:57 AM

NutWrench: The purpose of EBT cards is to buy food. You shouldn't be able to draw cash on them no matter where the ATM is located.


Thanks for showing everyone how much of an idiot you are.  EBT does not mean just food stamps.  That's why everyone gets pissed off at people when they say shiat like "I saw this person buying (insert outrage item here) with his food stamp card."  Guess what maybe it wasn't food stamps and it could have been a whole host of other things that come on that universal card.
 
2014-01-16 07:54:11 AM

jso2897: GoldSpider: Goimir: fireclown: Is nobody other than me angry that taxpayer money can be used to buy weed? Im not an anti welfare type who wants to let folks starve or die of untreated illnesses, but I rankle at buying intoxicants for the jobless.

Because someone on Unemployment should never drink or smoke. My god. If you want a revolution, target a bunch of working class people who have time on their hands. The movement to stop people from applying for unemployment in person was done to stop them from networking.

Also, when I was on unemployment, I often used the ATM at the corner bar. Why?

Because it was 3 miles closer to my house and the cheapest ATM in the county. They charged $2 and the next closest ATM charged $3.50.

Someone who spends that money on cigarettes or booze does so at the expense of someone who needs that money for basic necessities. That should bother you.

So are you saying that no recipient of any of the myriad  forms of "welfare" should have any discretionary income?
Or do you wish to redefine the word "discretionary?"


"Need" is kind of the opposite of "discretionary", wouldn't you say?

We as taxpayers should ensure that everyone's basic needs are met. Our ability to do that is hindered by people who waste those funds on other things.
 
2014-01-16 07:54:48 AM

Resident Muslim: Pfft.
Only stupid people pay taxes.
The smart ones are on either side of the spectrum.


/discuss


Only assholes go far out of their way to avoid the taxes they owe. Taxes are important and are necessary to keep the government and the country running smoothly. Further, even Jesus commanded "Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and unto God the things that are God's" So not only are they selfish assholes they are bad Christians.

What do you have to say to that? =P
 
2014-01-16 07:55:22 AM

Teresaol31: People well up into the middle class range qualify


I'm not sure how true that is - define "middle class" for us first, but if what I consider middle class is receiving government assistance I see that as a problem.  That's when they have to realize that maybe they can't afford a boat or another child or that new car.  Live within your means.  That goes for Republicans too.
 
2014-01-16 07:55:25 AM
in other words, just because you can, doesn't mean you should
 
2014-01-16 07:55:44 AM
Let's assume, for the sake of argument, that you have concluded that not even one single nickel of "welfare money" (however you define that) shall be spent on recreational substances. OK.
Now - how many nickels are you willing to spend to keep how many nickels from getting spent that way?
Because money spent on administration also doesn't go to needy people, and also comes out of our pockets.
Governor Scott's litle "experiment" in Florida is one indication of where that kind of thing can end up - admittedly a worst case scenario.
http://articles.sun-sentinel.com/2014-01-13/news/fl-editorial-drug-t es ting-gs-20140113_1_drug-testing-law-welfare-applicants-drug-testing

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/01/us/florida-law-on-drug-testing-for -w elfare-is-struck-down.html

What neither article mentions is that apparently Scoot has financial connections to the company that was making bank doing the tests.

Again, a worst case scenario - but it's what lies at the end of that road.
 
2014-01-16 07:56:21 AM

Uchiha_Cycliste: markfara: Uchiha_Cycliste: markfara: Uchiha_Cycliste: markfara: Uchiha_Cycliste: markfara: I guess it must vary from state to state. The only person I'm acquainted with first-hand who uses government assistance is my mother-in-law in Indiana. She gets her health and utility expenses paid directly by the government, no card necessary. Social Security checks provide her living expenses. She's pretty good at managing the money she gets, but I'm suspect that's not the norm.

To the contrary I would imagine that all the old folks on SS who lived through or were affected by the great depression probably budgets very well.  I know grandmere did.

MIL raised three kids in what was basically a shack, living on a sh*t income, so I think she got hip to budgeting pretty early in the game.

That's great (that she was privy to proper budgeting). If only we could teach kids these days to do the same, and as long as we are dreaming, the GOP too.

Hey! They're the Party of Fiscal Responsibility! Why do you hate fiscal responsibility?

My bad, you are right... it was totally Clinton and Obama's fault we went Trillions of dollars into debt between 2000 and 2008. How stupid of me. At least we can count on the GOP and their laser like ocus on creating new jobs.

They protected us from Saddam's WMDs and brought stability to the region, too. You're obviously a Marxist ingrate! Why don't you just go get gay-married someplace and leave the rest of us alone!

;-)

I WAS at Berkeley during the ramp up to the Iraq war. We were pretty gung-ho about it being a stupid idea even before the war started and we made sure our voices were heard, albeit ignored. We never protested Afghanistan though, that was righteous. Anyways, I guess you hit the nail on the head =P


Yeah, I travel a fair amount, and I had occasion to witness, on two different occasions, TWO huge anti-Iraq war protests - one in Washington, D.C. and one in Chicago. Oddly, neither of them made even the local news. Damn that liberal media. . . .

Still, Obama's the worst president in history. So remember to vote GOP, ya hear?
 
2014-01-16 07:58:24 AM

Uchiha_Cycliste: Is this some racist, blacks and drugs thing? I don't get it.


jso2897: Everybody needs to have their existence acknowledged by their fellow human beings. If the only way you can do that is butt into conversations you can't comprehend and say something pointless and stupid, that's what you do.


Maybe I'm being too generous, but I'm pretty sure it's a reference to Grandpa Simpson's line about entitlements.

Bart Simpson: Didn't you wonder why you were getting checks for doing absolutely nothing?
Grampa: I figured 'cause the Democrats were in power again.


That, or the time he rattled off the years he was on welfare based on who was president.
 
2014-01-16 07:59:09 AM

GoldSpider: jso2897: GoldSpider: Goimir: fireclown: Is nobody other than me angry that taxpayer money can be used to buy weed? Im not an anti welfare type who wants to let folks starve or die of untreated illnesses, but I rankle at buying intoxicants for the jobless.

Because someone on Unemployment should never drink or smoke. My god. If you want a revolution, target a bunch of working class people who have time on their hands. The movement to stop people from applying for unemployment in person was done to stop them from networking.

Also, when I was on unemployment, I often used the ATM at the corner bar. Why?

Because it was 3 miles closer to my house and the cheapest ATM in the county. They charged $2 and the next closest ATM charged $3.50.

Someone who spends that money on cigarettes or booze does so at the expense of someone who needs that money for basic necessities. That should bother you.

So are you saying that no recipient of any of the myriad  forms of "welfare" should have any discretionary income?
Or do you wish to redefine the word "discretionary?"

"Need" is kind of the opposite of "discretionary", wouldn't you say?

We as taxpayers should ensure that everyone's basic needs are met. Our ability to do that is hindered by people who waste those funds on other things.


So you are saying that no recipient of any form of welfare should receive any discretionary income? Or not?
Yes or no?
 
2014-01-16 08:04:54 AM

jso2897: Let's assume, for the sake of argument, that you have concluded that not even one single nickel of "welfare money" (however you define that) shall be spent on recreational substances. OK.
Now - how many nickels are you willing to spend to keep how many nickels from getting spent that way?
Because money spent on administration also doesn't go to needy people, and also comes out of our pockets.
Governor Scott's litle "experiment" in Florida is one indication of where that kind of thing can end up - admittedly a worst case scenario.
http://articles.sun-sentinel.com/2014-01-13/news/fl-editorial-drug-t es ting-gs-20140113_1_drug-testing-law-welfare-applicants-drug-testing

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/01/us/florida-law-on-drug-testing-for -w elfare-is-struck-down.html

What neither article mentions is that apparently Scoot has financial connections to the company that was making bank doing the tests.

Again, a worst case scenario - but it's what lies at the end of that road.


Meh - I don't really have a problem with drug testing people receiving public assistance.  There does seem to be some corruption in Florida, but that doesn't mean it's a bad idea.  I'm not on government assistance, but in times of financial difficulties I sometimes go without weed.  It's just turrible, let me tell you.  Actually, it's fine.  I don't spend money that I don't have on weed that I don't need and life goes on.

And I pay taxes too so fark you if you're going to take my tax money and spend it on weed when I go without any because I'm actually managing my money and not collecting welfare.
 
2014-01-16 08:05:18 AM

markfara: Uchiha_Cycliste: markfara: Uchiha_Cycliste: markfara: Uchiha_Cycliste: markfara: Uchiha_Cycliste: markfara: I guess it must vary from state to state. The only person I'm acquainted with first-hand who uses government assistance is my mother-in-law in Indiana. She gets her health and utility expenses paid directly by the government, no card necessary. Social Security checks provide her living expenses. She's pretty good at managing the money she gets, but I'm suspect that's not the norm.

To the contrary I would imagine that all the old folks on SS who lived through or were affected by the great depression probably budgets very well.  I know grandmere did.

MIL raised three kids in what was basically a shack, living on a sh*t income, so I think she got hip to budgeting pretty early in the game.

That's great (that she was privy to proper budgeting). If only we could teach kids these days to do the same, and as long as we are dreaming, the GOP too.

Hey! They're the Party of Fiscal Responsibility! Why do you hate fiscal responsibility?

My bad, you are right... it was totally Clinton and Obama's fault we went Trillions of dollars into debt between 2000 and 2008. How stupid of me. At least we can count on the GOP and their laser like ocus on creating new jobs.

They protected us from Saddam's WMDs and brought stability to the region, too. You're obviously a Marxist ingrate! Why don't you just go get gay-married someplace and leave the rest of us alone!

;-)

I WAS at Berkeley during the ramp up to the Iraq war. We were pretty gung-ho about it being a stupid idea even before the war started and we made sure our voices were heard, albeit ignored. We never protested Afghanistan though, that was righteous. Anyways, I guess you hit the nail on the head =P

Yeah, I travel a fair amount, and I had occasion to witness, on two different occasions, TWO huge anti-Iraq war protests - one in Washington, D.C. and one in Chicago. Oddly, neither of them made even the local news. Damn liberal media. . . .

Still, Obama's the worst president in history. So remember to vote GOP, ya hear?


I know, right!?! He's so black, and he tries to be so fair, and responsible fiscally and otherwise. But he's so black and the debt he ran up for the nation in the years prior to his election are the final black nail in his black coffin. I'll never vote for Barrack Obama for president again, ever. Then again, that debt isn't half as damning a 9-11. I cant believe Obama allowed the worst terrorist attack evar to occur on hi watch What an awful, horrible black, man.
 
2014-01-16 08:06:05 AM

gfid: jso2897: gfid: jso2897: I can sorta see that, but the problem is that micromanaging every single dime of welfare money spent has been tried - and it's proven to be unwieldy, complicated, and cost

citation needed.

Look, some states have sales taxes which exempt most "food".  Tax exempt food is well defined.  That banana you see in the store?  It's not taxed.  That Hershey bar is taxed.   It may not be a perfect system, but it is pretty good.  If we can do that then we can prevent tax dollars from going towards booze or pot or tobacco at the very least.

Citation? Dude - Im not teaching a seminar here - I'm just answering another person's musing with thoughts of my own.
I don't really know what you are on about. The fact is that some of the income that some people on "welfare" get is going to be spent at their own discretion. I happen to think that that is as it should be, but you're free to disagree. As i stated - i think your "concern" about wasting government money could be better applied elsewhere - but that's just my opinion too.
If you are looking for some big long stupid "Fark debate", you are going to need to have that with somebody else.

lol, ok.  So you just pulled something out of your ass and don't care to back it up;  At least you're honest about it.  Good for you.


What do you think I pulled out of my ass? The opinion that micromanaging welfare expenditures is not cost-efficient?
For an opinion I just pulled out of my ass, it's a pretty widespread opinion.
Why would you think I just pulled it out of my ass?
You seem to be more interesting in quarreling than in learning anything, or arguing any opinion of your own.
 
2014-01-16 08:08:16 AM
ErinPac

....
The casino one is the only one that really makes sense to me, and that's because if you have any sort of addiction going on, at least you have to leave the location before you continue, which might keep it a tad less impulsive.  Though, that would probably apply about as much to people not on any assistance.

Here in MA they are going through "EBT reform". The cards were being used to buy cigarettes, alcohol, tattoos, lottery tickets,  being used in strip joints and at the casino over the boarder.  Many were being issued to dead people, Tens of thousands of the cards would be unaccounted for.  Small neighborhood stores would buy the cards from some people for pennies n the dollar,  The system is a mess.

I think to use the card you need a photo ID and the card be only used for food, clothing and shelter.
 
2014-01-16 08:09:03 AM

skozlaw: Uchiha_Cycliste: Is this some racist, blacks and drugs thing? I don't get it.

jso2897: Everybody needs to have their existence acknowledged by their fellow human beings. If the only way you can do that is butt into conversations you can't comprehend and say something pointless and stupid, that's what you do.

Maybe I'm being too generous, but I'm pretty sure it's a reference to Grandpa Simpson's line about entitlements.

Bart Simpson: Didn't you wonder why you were getting checks for doing absolutely nothing?
Grampa: I figured 'cause the Democrats were in power again.

That, or the time he rattled off the years he was on welfare based on who was president.


I would love to give him the benefit of the doubt but it felt and smelled like a lame, lazy troll to me. So I gotta treat it as such;
 
2014-01-16 08:10:38 AM
They should put photos on the EBT cards so people can use them vote.
 
2014-01-16 08:10:46 AM
Gotta try to sleep I'll dive back in, in a few hours.
 
2014-01-16 08:11:23 AM

gfid: jso2897: Let's assume, for the sake of argument, that you have concluded that not even one single nickel of "welfare money" (however you define that) shall be spent on recreational substances. OK.
Now - how many nickels are you willing to spend to keep how many nickels from getting spent that way?
Because money spent on administration also doesn't go to needy people, and also comes out of our pockets.
Governor Scott's litle "experiment" in Florida is one indication of where that kind of thing can end up - admittedly a worst case scenario.
http://articles.sun-sentinel.com/2014-01-13/news/fl-editorial-drug-t es ting-gs-20140113_1_drug-testing-law-welfare-applicants-drug-testing

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/01/us/florida-law-on-drug-testing-for -w elfare-is-struck-down.html

What neither article mentions is that apparently Scoot has financial connections to the company that was making bank doing the tests.

Again, a worst case scenario - but it's what lies at the end of that road.

Meh - I don't really have a problem with drug testing people receiving public assistance.  There does seem to be some corruption in Florida, but that doesn't mean it's a bad idea.  I'm not on government assistance, but in times of financial difficulties I sometimes go without weed.  It's just turrible, let me tell you.  Actually, it's fine.  I don't spend money that I don't have on weed that I don't need and life goes on.

And I pay taxes too so fark you if you're going to take my tax money and spend it on weed when I go without any because I'm actually managing my money and not collecting welfare.


Well, it already does pretty much boil down to a matter of opinion. The meager savings just aren't worth it to me, and I have no desire to inflict my idea of morality on somebody else just because I pay taxes or some shiat.

I won't say "f**k you"  - I have more class than that. But I respectfully disagree, and will vote accordingly - and if that angers you - too bad.
 
2014-01-16 08:13:07 AM

Onkel Buck: They should put photos on the EBT cards so people can use them vote.


Heh! :D
Good idea, but I have the sneaking suspicion there woukdn't be much GOP support for that one - not gonna make it out of the House.
 
2014-01-16 08:17:09 AM
How come so many people only get righteous about this shiat when it's some poor little asshole getting a nickel or a dime?
Aside from it's childish superfluousness, the most puzzling aspect of the "moral" argument, to me, is that.
I REALLY don't get it.
 
2014-01-16 08:17:45 AM

jso2897: What do you think I pulled out of my ass? The opinion that micromanaging welfare expenditures is not cost-efficient?


Yeah, that would be the one only I wouldn't call restricting public assistance from being spent on booze, pot or cigarettes to be "micromanaging".

For an opinion I just pulled out of my ass, it's a pretty widespread opinion.

Well then, perhaps you can cite a source for that opinion.

Why would you think I just pulled it out of my ass?

It smelled?

You seem to be more interesting in quarreling than in learning anything, or arguing any opinion of your own.

Hey, I asked for you to enlighten me and I get nothing in return.  I don't even understand why it is a controversial idea to prohibit welfare payments from buying booze (or pot or tobacco).
 
2014-01-16 08:17:50 AM
People wouldn't be spending your "hard earned" tax dollars on weed if they could grow it themselves without facing prosecution.
 
2014-01-16 08:19:45 AM

jso2897: So you are saying that no recipient of any form of welfare should receive any discretionary income? Or not?
Yes or no?


As a public benefit?  Ideally no, that's not what the programs are for.

And I get it that there's no way to ensure that all of that money is spent only on "needs".  For example I think ideas like drug testing for welfare recipients is a stupid idea, for obvious reasons.  However just once I'd like to see welfare funding advocates turn to the people they're advocating for and show them a little tough love: "We'll continue fighting for these programs, but you guys gotta stop wasting it!"  It's almost as if acknowledging that wasteful spending happens, for some people, is some kind of ideological defeat.
 
2014-01-16 08:24:42 AM

jso2897: How come so many people only get righteous about this shiat when it's some poor little asshole getting a nickel or a dime?
Aside from it's childish superfluousness, the most puzzling aspect of the "moral" argument, to me, is that.
I REALLY don't get it.


Because people need someone that they can feel superior over and blame for all of society's problems. Since it's no longer fashionable to blame the blacks (at least in most places) the poor get the spotlight all to themselves.

There are more drug addicts and thieves running around in suits in our office buildings and out glad handing to get your votes than there are on the dole. They are also more likely to do the sh*tty expensive drugs like coke.
 
2014-01-16 08:24:44 AM

jso2897: Onkel Buck: They should put photos on the EBT cards so people can use them vote.

Heh! :D
Good idea, but I have the sneaking suspicion there woukdn't be much GOP support for that one - not gonna make it out of the House.


I dont see why not, they're the ones pushing for voter ID. I know in NC that you can get an ID for free if you need one but for some reason the dems in this state are mad about that one freebie. I dont know if its because they didnt think about it first or their suddenly concerned about the cost of a freebie. Im sure the vans they use to take people to the polls will now be used to take people to the DMV because if they want to  "vote the bums out" they're going to need an ID to do it!
 
2014-01-16 08:25:11 AM

gfid: jso2897: What do you think I pulled out of my ass? The opinion that micromanaging welfare expenditures is not cost-efficient?

Yeah, that would be the one only I wouldn't call restricting public assistance from being spent on booze, pot or cigarettes to be "micromanaging".

For an opinion I just pulled out of my ass, it's a pretty widespread opinion.

Well then, perhaps you can cite a source for that opinion.

Why would you think I just pulled it out of my ass?

It smelled?

You seem to be more interesting in quarreling than in learning anything, or arguing any opinion of your own.

Hey, I asked for you to enlighten me and I get nothing in return.  I don't even understand why it is a controversial idea to prohibit welfare payments from buying booze (or pot or tobacco).


For numerous reasons - some of them Constitutionsl (see the links I posted above) and also that it rarely proves to be cost effective. For example, the Florida program charged people for drug tests - but they got a refund if they passed - courtesy of the taxpayer, and Scott's shadow company got paid. It cost the taxpayers many dolars per penny saved. And this is not atypical. Beyond broad and  general categories like food stamops or housing vouchers, it is complex and expensive to micromanage evry dime a welfare recipient spends.
Now, i"m trying to grasp the gist of this discussion - are you saying  that you find that somehow difficult to believe, based on everything you know about human nature and government efficiency? Really??
Frankly, like most people to whom it is not a moral issue, I don't think it's worth it.
Of course, if you view it as a critical moral issue - cost is no object. But as a taxpayer, I'm not fond of the phrase "cost is no object".
 
2014-01-16 08:27:02 AM

Onkel Buck: jso2897: Onkel Buck: They should put photos on the EBT cards so people can use them vote.

Heh! :D
Good idea, but I have the sneaking suspicion there woukdn't be much GOP support for that one - not gonna make it out of the House.

I dont see why not, they're the ones pushing for voter ID. I know in NC that you can get an ID for free if you need one but for some reason the dems in this state are mad about that one freebie. I dont know if its because they didnt think about it first or their suddenly concerned about the cost of a freebie. Im sure the vans they use to take people to the polls will now be used to take people to the DMV because if they want to  "vote the bums out" they're going to need an ID to do it!


Because it would amount to telling a bunch of poors to go out and vote.
 
2014-01-16 08:27:03 AM

GoldSpider: jso2897: So you are saying that no recipient of any form of welfare should receive any discretionary income? Or not?
Yes or no?

As a public benefit?  Ideally no, that's not what the programs are for.

And I get it that there's no way to ensure that all of that money is spent only on "needs".  For example I think ideas like drug testing for welfare recipients is a stupid idea, for obvious reasons.  However just once I'd like to see welfare funding advocates turn to the people they're advocating for and show them a little tough love: "We'll continue fighting for these programs, but you guys gotta stop wasting it!"  It's almost as if acknowledging that wasteful spending happens, for some people, is some kind of ideological defeat.


Those people are called "Democrats". Speaking as one, I'd love to hear, just once, an acknowledgement by my party's "leaders" that there is indeed a segment of society who, generation after generation, pops out kids for a living and freeloads off of the rest of us while b*tching nonstop about what is owed them.
 
Displayed 50 of 165 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report