Is The Grocery Checkout A Big Driver Of Republican Voters? - Page 6 - Politics and Economics

Really uncertain as to why maulaga58 unfounded assertions and strawman arguments are permitted.

No one in this thread has suggested a 50K/yr UBI as a replacement for the current SNAP/food stamp regime, so that BS shouldn't fly here.

09-22-2017 , 12:17 PM

#127

maulaga58

veteran

Join Date: Apr 2011 Posts: 2,048

Quote:

Originally Posted by Victor

extreme liberalism is defending a program that provides food for poor people and has been documented to have a fraud rate of less than 1.5%. http://time.com/4711668/history-food-stamp-fraud/

extreme liberalism is attempting to deny poor ppl access to freakin coffee.

seriously dude, you need to think a lot better.

You do realize a major portion of people getting food stamps are poor people with children. Last time I checked children are not supposed to have coffee.

09-22-2017 , 12:18 PM

#128

stinkubus

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Jan 2012 Posts: 4,422

So the parents can't spend anything on themselves?

09-22-2017 , 12:19 PM

#129

maulaga58

veteran

Join Date: Apr 2011 Posts: 2,048

Quote:

Originally Posted by stinkubus

It was mentioned as a solution to the problem to just give people cash instead. Oh well i'm done with this. You guys are seriously about to turn me republican.

09-22-2017 , 12:20 PM

#130

OneEyedPoker

grinder

Join Date: Feb 2017 Posts: 569

Quote:

Originally Posted by Victor

extreme liberalism is defending a program that provides food for poor people and has been documented to have a fraud rate of less than 1.5%. http://time.com/4711668/history-food-stamp-fraud/

But that can't be right, Maulaga knows 40 people who take advantage of it so it has to be in the millions nationwide...

09-22-2017 , 12:21 PM

#131

stinkubus

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Jan 2012 Posts: 4,422

Quote:

Originally Posted by maulaga58

It was mentioned as a solution to the problem to just give people cash instead. Oh well i'm done with this. You guys are seriously about to turn me republican.

Which you then, in a very dishonest manner, exaggerated to giving everyone $50k/yr.

09-22-2017 , 12:22 PM

#132

eyebooger

Join Date: May 2010 Posts: 58,700

Quote:

Originally Posted by maulaga58

You guys are seriously about to turn me republican.

LOL

09-22-2017 , 12:23 PM

#133

maulaga58

veteran

Join Date: Apr 2011 Posts: 2,048

Quote:

Originally Posted by stinkubus

Which you then, in a very dishonest manner, exaggerated to giving everyone $50k/yr.

Oh but other people are allowed to take the extreme liberal viewpoint. That I'm advocating everyone starving to death.

09-22-2017 , 12:23 PM

#134

stinkubus

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Jan 2012 Posts: 4,422

No one has stated that either?

09-22-2017 , 12:25 PM

#135

FlyWf

It's the other way

Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 58,097

Quote:

Originally Posted by maulaga58

Oh but other people are allowed to take the extreme liberal viewpoint. That I'm advocating everyone starving to death.

Not everyone, silly, we know that

09-22-2017 , 12:27 PM

#136

Victor

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jul 2003 Posts: 72,261

Quote:

Originally Posted by maulaga58

You do realize a major portion of people getting food stamps are poor people with children. Last time I checked children are not supposed to have coffee.

dude wtf.

why on earth would you think the children are drinking the coffee? why on earth would you want to keep the parents from drinking coffee?

cmon man. seriously dude, you need to think a lot better.

seriously, this is a legit head asplode mindbottling response. just totally bazaar.

09-22-2017 , 12:28 PM

#137

SuperUberBob

Not interesting enough

Join Date: Feb 2006 Posts: 48,217

Quote:

Originally Posted by maulaga58

My solution would be require identification for use of the card. To make sure the person using the card is the 1 receiving benefits. Also take away non essential items off what you can buy with the card no pop candy bars coffee etc... for starters. At least then if fraud is occurring. A their not going to get much cash back from transaction. B The person committing the fraud has to have other person shopping with them.

Not everybody has photo ID

09-22-2017 , 12:29 PM

#138

Trolly McTrollson

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Oct 2010 Posts: 36,772

Maxwell House is like $5 for a barrel of coffee.

09-22-2017 , 12:30 PM

#139

Huehuecoyotl

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Sep 2009 Posts: 29,257

Quote:

Pundits who oppose generous cash transfer incomes often appeal to the need for paternalism. You can't just provide people cash incomes because they could spend it wrongly or badly. Michael Strain had a version of this argument recently over at the Washington Post:

At the risk of sounding unfashionable, one reason that I can’t support UBI — despite its many attractive and seductive features — is that we need a little paternalism. It is right and just that we have a social safety net — in a nation as wealthy as ours, no one should be able to fall too far. But UBI money doesn’t come from the Money Tree, and that reality needs to be respected. If we take money from John to give to Matthew, who would starve without it, then we owe it to John to make sure that his money is appropriately spent on Matthew’s food and shelter, not on Matthew’s alcohol and gambling. And surely there are a lot of Matthews out there who, if given the chance, would spend John’s money on alcohol and gambling. In addition, we can be confident that under UBI, at least some people will be taken advantage of, losing their benefit money. The children of recipients who spend their UBI unwisely also stand to lose quite a bit, and society needs to keep those children at the forefront of mind when evaluating safety-net programs.

I like Strain's formulation because, unlike most others, it explicitly turns upon a baffling distinction between transfer income (i.e. welfare income) and factor income (i.e. income paid out to owners of capital or laborers). I call this distinction baffling, not for the usual reason that there is no meaningful difference between transfer and factor income, but rather because for the purposes of paternalism, it doesn't seem like it should matter what the source of the income is.

If blowing your money on alcohol and gambling is bad (e.g. because it hurts children, the alcoholic/gambler, or society more generally), surely it's bad regardless of whether your money comes from transfer income or factor income. Does a kid hunger less because the money dad lost at the track was from a paycheck instead of a disability check? Obviously not.

http://www.demos.org/blog/5/5/16/why...-factor-income

09-22-2017 , 12:42 PM

#140

iamnotawerewolf

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jul 2011 Posts: 31,482

Quote:

Originally Posted by OmgGlutten!

They care more about EBT because the other stuff doesn't effect them but if they had EBT they'd be saving $500/month or whatever. It's jealousy.

does it really effect them though? how much?

it's already been pointed out, the ratio of SNAP:military spending

both are "effecting" them; one much much less so - but that's the one driving their vote?

09-22-2017 , 12:42 PM

#141

batair

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Sep 2005 Posts: 16,802

Quote:

Originally Posted by Inso0

If you want to spend your own money on nonsense, that's fine. But if I give you money for lunch, I'd like to see better choices being made.

Yeah but trump and the small gov people seem to really really want that wall.

09-22-2017 , 12:44 PM

#142

iamnotawerewolf

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jul 2011 Posts: 31,482

Quote:

Originally Posted by maulaga58

You guys are seriously about to turn me republican.

heresy.

09-22-2017 , 12:47 PM

#143

DodgerIrish

Fraudulent Zodiac

Join Date: Dec 2007 Posts: 28,191

Quote:

Originally Posted by maulaga58

I know around 200 people on a semi personal level Around 40 of those people are either buying food stamps from other people or selling food stamps to other people. It really annoys me to be honest.

Telling the truth does seem to create issues for you, yes.

If you just came out and said there should be no public assistance it would save a lot of time.

Quote:

Originally Posted by iamnotawerewolf

One is in the abstract, the other is literally right in front of their face.

They also feel personal pride in the US military, it affirms their worldview.

09-22-2017 , 12:51 PM

#144

markksman

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 20,921

If we are going to require people eat truly health with SNAP and give them high quality proteins with fruit and vegetables then we need to at least quadruple the financial outlay if not more.

So for those of you nitpicking the menus of the poor a high quality menu will be substantially more expensive. So if we agree to a 400% to 500% increase we can start laying out parameters for what kind of restrictions and limitations make sense otherwise lol when you are trying to feed someone for a month for under $200. (Hint that’s 3 calories per penny so map it out 300 calories per dollar. Cross match that with high quality food)

09-22-2017 , 12:53 PM

#145

maulaga58

veteran

Join Date: Apr 2011 Posts: 2,048

why is it so wrong to want more protections and restrictions in place to prevent fraud? Does it comfort you posters knowing your tax dollars are providing a percentage of the middle class 200 dollars worth of food for 100 dollars cash. That a percentage are not using the food card money their given for their intended purpose?

09-22-2017 , 12:54 PM

#146

iamnotawerewolf

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jul 2011 Posts: 31,482

dude how many times do you need to be shown statistics showing how incredibly low fraud is?

09-22-2017 , 12:56 PM

#147

Victor

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jul 2003 Posts: 72,261

Quote:

Originally Posted by maulaga58

bc the levels of fraud are negligible. like, there is hardley any fraud. the rate is around 1.5%. further, approximately 99 cents out of every dollar go towards food.

to reduce this tiny percentage even more would cost a ton of money and resources.

09-22-2017 , 12:57 PM

#148

maulaga58

veteran

Join Date: Apr 2011 Posts: 2,048

Quote:

Originally Posted by iamnotawerewolf

dude how many times do you need to be shown statistics showing how incredibly low fraud is?

Because the people committing fraud is always getting reported? All articles I read just shows the money is being spent? Ya don't say

09-22-2017 , 12:58 PM

#149

markksman

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 20,921

Quote:

Originally Posted by maulaga58

I didn't vote for either. I voted for Obama twice. I disliked Hillary as much as Trump if not more.

Lol

09-22-2017 , 01:00 PM

#150

markksman

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 20,921

Quote:

Originally Posted by maulaga58

Because the people committing fraud is always getting reported? All articles I read just shows the money is being spent? Ya don't say

Is that how you think fraud is determined? By voluntary polling ?

CITE?

Page 6 of 15

First

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

Last

...

Page 6 of 15

First

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

Last