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.

(Politico)   "Where are people spending their food stamps?" Obama administration: That's none of your farking business   (politico.com) divider line 245
    More: Fail, food stamps, Obama administration, Chief Judge, payment processor, secrecy, aficionados, Argus Leader, appeals courts  
•       •       •

2435 clicks; posted to Politics » on 01 Feb 2014 at 3:54 PM (30 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-02-01 12:06:35 PM
DICTATOR
 
2014-02-01 12:22:35 PM
You know grocery stores and what not probably already know, to great detail.

and watch, most of it'll be on food.
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2014-02-01 12:28:50 PM
Well, we already know that it's at the places that sell fillet minion and lobster.
 
2014-02-01 12:29:24 PM

Generation_D: You know grocery stores and what not probably already know, to great detail.

and watch, most of it'll be on food.


What's with those people? It's like they eat every day or something.
 
2014-02-01 12:30:37 PM

Generation_D: You know grocery stores and what not probably already know, to great detail.

and watch, most of it'll be on food.


this. I really don't think there's a good reason that kind of info should not be disclosed but at the same time I suspect that a lot of the people interested in getting the info just want to turn it into an excuse for further cuts to SNAP.
 
2014-02-01 12:59:43 PM
We don't care how billions are spent for the departments of war and defense, but we care how a mom of 3 spends her $80 a month?

Sounds like a conservative. They hate nickel and dime welfare, but love it in huge gobs.
 
2014-02-01 01:06:30 PM

Nadie_AZ: We don't care how billions are spent for the departments of war and defense


Yeah I remember how stories about $600 toilet seats were spiked by the White House.
 
2014-02-01 01:12:24 PM

Dancin_In_Anson: Nadie_AZ: We don't care how billions are spent for the departments of war and defense

Yeah I remember how stories about $600 toilet seats were spiked by the White House.


Ever see the West Wing episode when Christian Slater explained why a glass ashtray had to cost $400?  It actually made sense.

I'm not sure what the $600 toilet seats do, but I want one.
 
2014-02-01 01:13:59 PM

Voiceofreason01: Generation_D: You know grocery stores and what not probably already know, to great detail.

and watch, most of it'll be on food.

this. I really don't think there's a good reason that kind of info should not be disclosed but at the same time I suspect that a lot of the people interested in getting the info just want to turn it into an excuse for further cuts to SNAP.


Yeah, they want the story of the fattie who spent all their food stamp money on lobster and caviar.  It's not a sincere attempt to oversee the program at all.
 
2014-02-01 01:30:00 PM
i595.photobucket.com
 
2014-02-01 01:32:21 PM
Obama doesn't give a a damn what they spend the money on.   He just wants them to remember who sends it to them when it's time to vote.
 
2014-02-01 01:37:59 PM

BravadoGT: Obama doesn't give a a damn what they spend the money on.   He just wants them to remember who sends it to them when it's time to vote.


Lockheed Martin?
 
2014-02-01 01:42:53 PM
Congressmen are paid with tax money. I demand to know exactly where and how they're spending the money I give them. Also, no member of Congress or their dependents can pay for an abortion. That Federal tax money.
 
2014-02-01 01:45:27 PM

BravadoGT: He just wants them to remember who sends it to them when it's time to vote.

Pretty

sure SNAP existed before Obama took office.
 
2014-02-01 01:47:00 PM

propasaurus: Congressmen are paid with tax money. I demand to know exactly where and how they're spending the money I give them. Also, no member of Congress or their dependents can pay for an abortion. That Federal tax money.


Well the Congressmen are earning a pay check. I know, I find if funny too.

It's not like they are trying to find out how the postman is spending his paycheck.
 
2014-02-01 01:52:11 PM

Lsherm: Dancin_In_Anson: Nadie_AZ: We don't care how billions are spent for the departments of war and defense

Yeah I remember how stories about $600 toilet seats were spiked by the White House.

Ever see the West Wing episode when Christian Slater explained why a glass ashtray had to cost $400?  It actually made sense.

I'm not sure what the $600 toilet seats do, but I want one.


Imagine sitting in the head, making an entry to the captain's log, when suddenly the ship is under fire.  DO YOU WANT THAT THING TO SPLINTER AND GO INTO YOUR ASS!??  I think NOT
 
2014-02-01 01:56:37 PM
FTFA:  "Between 2007 and 2011, spending 'more than doubled . . . from about $30 billion to $72 billion,'"

While I agree that *all* government spending should be subject to scrutiny....how much is $72bn compared to the rest of the yearly budget, and why are we making so much hay over it?  Oh yes.  Votes.

/the increase may have something to do with unemployment also doubling or more from 2007 up to its peak
 
2014-02-01 02:00:27 PM
When discussing food stamps, there are two ways you can go:

1. Criticize the poor for buying food that is too fancy.
2. Criticize the poor for buying food that is not fancy enough.

Solution:  The poor get no food at all!
 
2014-02-01 02:02:06 PM

Nadie_AZ: We don't care how billions are spent for the departments of war and defense, but we care how a mom of 3 spends her $80 a month?

Sounds like a conservative. They hate nickel and dime welfare, but love it in huge gobs.


Who is conservative? The newspaper that filed the FOIA request for the information? That is some insightful analysis you are brining to the issue. You should have put that post in a pleading and filed an amicus brief.
 
2014-02-01 02:05:12 PM
I really cant see why someone would need that kind of information.

Yes, I understand its statistics and no personal information, but really, what would releasing this info change? Nothing at all.
 
2014-02-01 02:08:43 PM

cman: I really cant see why someone would need that kind of information.

Yes, I understand its statistics and no personal information, but really, what would releasing this info change? Nothing at all.


Are a more informed public and transparency in government not ends in themselves? Clearly the newspaper seeking the information see some value.
 
2014-02-01 02:18:40 PM

cman: I really cant see why someone would need that kind of information.

Yes, I understand its statistics and no personal information, but really, what would releasing this info change? Nothing at all.


I think it is information that should be mined. There is a great deal of debate over things like "food deserts". Using SNAP benefits as a locus for where poor people buy food could help to win the argument for one side or the other.
 
2014-02-01 02:34:57 PM
The judge also noted that USDA has found trading of food stamps for cash to be a significant problem, with about 10% of retailers reportedly engaging in such fraud.

Important to distinguish between the % of stores trafficking and the % of total benefits trafficked.

2006-2008 (PDF)
% of stores trafficking: 8.2%
% of total benefits trafficked: 1%

2009-2011 (PDF)
% of stores trafficking: 10.5%
% of total benefits trafficked: 1.3%

Increase seems to be consistent with the increase in SNAP use during those years.

Interesting that small stores accounted for about 15% of all redemptions, but 85% of all trafficking.

Also,

Last year, USDA compliance analysts and investigators took action to:

Review over 15,000 stores;
Conduct investigations on more than 5,000 stores nationwide;
Impose sanctions, through fines or temporary disqualifications, on 692 stores found violating program rules; and
Permanently disqualify 1,387 stores for trafficking in SNAP benefits (i.e. exchanging SNAP benefits for cash) or falsifying an application.

Link

So the government does actively seek out fraudsters and take action. It follows that more funding would catch more fraud, though I doubt there's any political will for that. Also important to note that 40% of SNAP recipients live in a household with earnings. Meaning they work, but still require assistance. Historically low wages will do that.
 
2014-02-01 03:24:10 PM
So the program works, polices itself, and is not a significant part of the over all Federal budget.

And yet, the Republicans want to oversight it, so they all can have some poors to point at and make fun of for the next election.

I swear, these f-for-brains 1%'ers don't quite realize its their own white poor people using most of the food stamps. Not that bogus racist 80s "Welfare Queen" from Chicago they all love to still straw man the crap out of.
 
2014-02-01 03:54:54 PM
The food stamp program is part of the Farm Bill because in the distant past, food consumption and farmers were connected. The program was initially a farm subsidy that transferred "surplus" farm production to the hungry. The government essentially said, "Don't let it rot in the fields, we'll buy it it and give it to the poor." The impulse, I suspect, was guided more for farm support than sympathy for the needy. None the less, it benefited both at little cost to the taxpayer.
Of course, the connection between farm and table is gone and the real motive--supporting huge agribusinesses and factory farms is now openly pursued by the GOP.
After all, why waste money on the poor when we can just pay the conservative "farmers" directly through massive subsidies.

And we already know what they are spending their federal largesse on: campaign contributions  to "small government" hypocrites.
 
2014-02-01 03:55:22 PM

Nabb1: cman: I really cant see why someone would need that kind of information.

Yes, I understand its statistics and no personal information, but really, what would releasing this info change? Nothing at all.

Are a more informed public and transparency in government not ends in themselves? Clearly the newspaper seeking the information see some value.


Yet, corporations are people, my friend. Why isn't the government people?
 
2014-02-01 03:58:20 PM
Liberals worry that somewhere people are enduring suffering they don't deserve. Conservatives worry that somewhere people are enjoying comfort they didn't earn.
 
2014-02-01 03:59:16 PM

BravadoGT: Obama doesn't give a a damn what they spend the money on.   He just wants them to remember who sends it to them when it's time to vote.


And here I thought you were a free-market capitalist. Now you want to restrict people's freedom?
 
2014-02-01 03:59:52 PM
The only reason they want these numbers is so they can try and shame people, or hunt through it to find their random cases of 'GUY BOUGHT LOBSTER SYSTEM IS BROKEN BURN IT DOWN'.

Assholes.
 
2014-02-01 04:02:27 PM

vpb: places that sell fillet minion


encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com
 
2014-02-01 04:02:41 PM

BravadoGT: Obama doesn't give a a damn what they spend the money on.   He just wants them to remember who sends it to them when it's time to vote.


What is Obama running for?
 
2014-02-01 04:04:44 PM

Voiceofreason01: Generation_D: You know grocery stores and what not probably already know, to great detail.

and watch, most of it'll be on food.

this. I really don't think there's a good reason that kind of info should not be disclosed but at the same time I suspect that a lot of the people interested in getting the info just want to turn it into an excuse for further cuts to SNAP.


Really? This doesn't strike you as a costly and needless invasion of privacy?
 
2014-02-01 04:06:28 PM

BravadoGT: Obama doesn't give a a damn what they spend the money on.   He just wants them to remember who sends it to them when it's time to vote.


If it makes you feel any better, I promise not to vote for Obama during his next re-election campaign.
 
2014-02-01 04:07:40 PM
How is it that the right wingers have convinced the country at large that the principle of presumption of innocence does not apply to the poor?
Of course at the same time it is in full effect for the swindlers on Wall Street and the corporate terrorists in West Virginia.
 
2014-02-01 04:07:45 PM

ScaryBottles: Voiceofreason01: Generation_D: You know grocery stores and what not probably already know, to great detail.

and watch, most of it'll be on food.

this. I really don't think there's a good reason that kind of info should not be disclosed but at the same time I suspect that a lot of the people interested in getting the info just want to turn it into an excuse for further cuts to SNAP.

Really? This doesn't strike you as a costly and needless invasion of privacy?


Not if it makes life harder for the poors
 
2014-02-01 04:08:36 PM
Cigarettes, booze, and strip clubs.  Next question.
 
2014-02-01 04:08:39 PM

Lsherm: Dancin_In_Anson: Nadie_AZ: We don't care how billions are spent for the departments of war and defense

Yeah I remember how stories about $600 toilet seats were spiked by the White House.

Ever see the West Wing episode when Christian Slater explained why a glass ashtray had to cost $400?  It actually made sense.

I'm not sure what the $600 toilet seats do, but I want one.


It's also largely because the contractors can't make up the costs of research, design, and production through volume of sale.  There are only so many subs, ships, and airplanes to use equipment specifically designed for them meaning that that equipment tends to be fairly expensive since it tends to not easily be repurposed to civilian products or is simply not allowed to be resold to the public.  Fortunately, there's a significant movement to buy COTS when possible, or at least was, but that runs in to it's on problems as well.
 
2014-02-01 04:09:11 PM

Dusk-You-n-Me: BravadoGT: He just wants them to remember who sends it to them when it's time to vote.

Pretty sure SNAP existed before Obama took office.


It's like those Obamaphones. Barry's time machine strikes again!
 
2014-02-01 04:10:15 PM
Never understood the ashtray thing. Youre worried about an attack submarine's helmsman dealing with broken glass... but not about the open flame four inches in front of his face that is necessitating an ashtray.
 
2014-02-01 04:10:48 PM
They've all got refrigerators. Rich people have refrigerators. Ergo, the poors are rich and no longer need assistance. Checkmate.
 
2014-02-01 04:13:01 PM
Ha! An image search for 'food stamps' comes up with THIS as one of the early choices:

cdn.frontpagemag.com

Obama time machine again I guess...He created food stamps...
 
2014-02-01 04:14:46 PM

Lsherm: Dancin_In_Anson: Nadie_AZ: We don't care how billions are spent for the departments of war and defense

Yeah I remember how stories about $600 toilet seats were spiked by the White House.

Ever see the West Wing episode when Christian Slater explained why a glass ashtray had to cost $400?  It actually made sense.

I'm not sure what the $600 toilet seats do, but I want one.


Why the fark would they be smoking on a submarine!?
 
2014-02-01 04:15:48 PM
Ok, this is going to sound crazy, but why do we care what poor people spend the money on anyway? Whether they spend it on cornflakes, TP or school supplies it still goes back into the economy. Let's bring food stamps, WIC, welfare and unemployment into one benefit program and just send people the money. You could probably slash administrative costs & stimulate the economy at the same time. And you wouldn't have a bunch of busybodies trying to manipulate the free market by inspecting poor people's grocery receipts.

/deregulate welfare
 
2014-02-01 04:16:48 PM
I find myself disagreeing with the District Court argument that the doubling of the programs spending or the percentage of fraud are compelling reasons to disclose where the money is spent. Either it's public information on its face because it's public money in a public program whose data can be tracked by a provider other than the retailers to reasonably ensure reliability or fark it, no government data is accessible wrt public programs using public funds.

Now, if we could just get this done with gun data and the CDC, we'd be getting somewhere.
 
2014-02-01 04:17:00 PM

Etchy333: When discussing food stamps, there are two ways you can go:

1. Criticize the poor for buying food that is too fancy.
2. Criticize the poor for buying food that is not fancy enough.

Solution:  The poor get no food at all!


SO MUCH THIS!
 
2014-02-01 04:17:25 PM

thehobbes: Never understood the ashtray thing. Youre worried about an attack submarine's helmsman dealing with broken glass... but not about the open flame four inches in front of his face that is necessitating an ashtray.


...yeah that.
 
2014-02-01 04:18:31 PM

NateAsbestos: Lsherm: Dancin_In_Anson: Nadie_AZ: We don't care how billions are spent for the departments of war and defense

Yeah I remember how stories about $600 toilet seats were spiked by the White House.

Ever see the West Wing episode when Christian Slater explained why a glass ashtray had to cost $400?  It actually made sense.

I'm not sure what the $600 toilet seats do, but I want one.

Why the fark would they be smoking on a submarine!?


Dry ship, have to have vices or people start killing each other.
 
2014-02-01 04:18:48 PM

Sheila_McSly: Ok, this is going to sound crazy, but why do we care what poor people spend the money on anyway? Whether they spend it on cornflakes, TP or school supplies it still goes back into the economy. Let's bring food stamps, WIC, welfare and unemployment into one benefit program and just send people the money. You could probably slash administrative costs & stimulate the economy at the same time. And you wouldn't have a bunch of busybodies trying to manipulate the free market by inspecting poor people's grocery receipts.

/deregulate welfare


But if we do THAT, then government money might go to things Conservatives disapprove of!

/Please ignore that people against wars still have to pay for them,
 
2014-02-01 04:19:15 PM
images.sodahead.com

images.sodahead.com


www.conservative-daily.com
 
2014-02-01 04:19:25 PM

NateAsbestos: Lsherm: Dancin_In_Anson: Nadie_AZ: We don't care how billions are spent for the departments of war and defense

Yeah I remember how stories about $600 toilet seats were spiked by the White House.

Ever see the West Wing episode when Christian Slater explained why a glass ashtray had to cost $400?  It actually made sense.

I'm not sure what the $600 toilet seats do, but I want one.

Why the fark would they be smoking on a submarine!?


Believe it or not, smoking on subs was only banned in 2011.
 
Displayed 50 of 245 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report