Winning: Food Stamp program costs hit 7 year low

[_DoubtingThomas]

I still think fewer people on food stamps is a win for everyone.

No, we need a significant portion of the population to be poor (but obviously with all the basic needs). I believe in government programs like food stamps because some are comfortable being poor with government wealthfare. We need a good portion of the population to be poor because we unfortunately live in a capitalist country, too much competition leads to stress and heart attacks. A lot of competition is never a good thing for your health and your personal life.

[_subgenius]

I still think fewer people on food stamps is a win for everyone.

No, we need a significant portion of the population to be poor (but obviously with all the basic needs). I believe in government programs like food stamps because some are comfortable being poor with government wealthfare. We need a good portion of the population to be poor because we unfortunately live in a capitalist country, too much competition leads to stress and heart attacks. A lot of competition is never a good thing for your health and your personal life.

i honestly believe your metaphor might be applicable to biology and natural stuff

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2 ... 071925.htm

[_Always Changing]

No, we need a significant portion of the population to be poor (but obviously with all the basic needs). I believe in government programs like food stamps because some are comfortable being poor with government wealthfare. We need a good portion of the population to be poor because we unfortunately live in a capitalist country, too much competition leads to stress and heart attacks. A lot of competition is never a good thing for your health and your personal life.

Much of what is called poverty in the USA is deemed as wealth in some other countries. All relative. Therefore, poverty cannot be eradicated. However, early death because of poverty can be reduced.

[_canpakes]

Hunger can be a great motivator.

I suppose that motivation could prompt one to:

1. Look for and apply for a job,
2. Get interviewed,
3. Get hired,
4. Get first paycheck after two weeks,
5. Buy the food!

Or, some folks might just end up stealing a food item, if they were tremendously hungry, being as that they would not then be waiting two weeks to eat.

Not saying either option is more moral than the other, just that the hoped-for result may not end up being what happens when folks get hungry. Some might argue that food stamps help maintain a certain amount of stability within the social fabric, as a way of managing the inevitability of unemployment or underemployment among the population.

[_Maxine Waters]

Not saying either option is more moral than the other, just that the hoped-for result may not end up being what happens when folks get hungry.

I was always taught that the moral choice was to be patient and work for what you get rather than stealing. Stealing while easier was considered morally wrong. But I was raised conservative. What do liberals teach there children about such moral questions? That it's all morally relative to the situation or perhaps whether the person stealing was a minority or not?

I find it strange that I'm considered the immoral monster to humanity and yet I seem to be the only one who sees stealing as wrong.

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

Not saying either option is more moral than the other, just that the hoped-for result may not end up being what happens when folks get hungry.

I was always taught that the moral choice was to be patient and work for what you get rather than stealing. Stealing while easier was considered morally wrong. But I was raised conservative. What do liberals teach there children about such moral questions? That it's all morally relative to the situation or perhaps whether the person stealing was a minority or not?

I find it strange that I'm considered the immoral monster to humanity and yet I seem to be the only one who sees stealing as wrong.

Wait. I'm fairly Liberal and I taught my kids not to steal. Am I doing it wrong?

- Doc

[_EAllusion]

It's hard to "be patient" when you are starving. No one was making a moral judgment about stealing. That's said in black and white in the paragraph you quote. It's arguing that a policy consequence of removing SNAP might be more social breakdown. Admonishing people to be moral isn't going to fix that.

A similar idea might be noting that abstinence only sex ed increases the teen pregnancy rate by stigmatizing responsible sex and leading to more rash, unprepared decisions. No one is saying abstinence is a bad idea, just that a little knowledge about human behavior helps us know that undesireable consequences may follow from poor sex ed.

[_EAllusion]

Many people who have Food Share work. I hope people know that. The idea that not having Food Share might motivate people to get a job doesn't work for people who already are trying to work.

[_Xenophon]

Many people who have Food Share work. I hope people know that. The idea that not having Food Share might motivate people to get a job doesn't work for people who already are trying to work.

I'm fairly certain that Majax subscribes to the idea that if you are a part of the working poor that you are no better than the lazy grifters robbing him of his tax dollars that have no job. I haven't read much from him that leads me to believe the notion that one can work, in some locations, 60+ hours a week and still barely make ends meet really enters his mind.

[_canpakes]

Not saying either option is more moral than the other, just that the hoped-for result may not end up being what happens when folks get hungry.

I was always taught that the moral choice was to be patient and work for what you get rather than stealing. Stealing while easier was considered morally wrong. But I was raised conservative. What do liberals teach there children about such moral questions? That it's all morally relative to the situation or perhaps whether the person stealing was a minority or not?

I find it strange that I'm considered the immoral monster to humanity and yet I seem to be the only one who sees stealing as wrong.

Allow me to be more obvious, then.

To have written, "I'm not saying...", does not mean that I don't have an opinion on the morality of stealing. Only that it was not relevant to the point being made. Clearly, stealing is worse than not stealing in near any normal situation. Also, it's pretty clear to me that if folks get desperate enough, they will likely steal to feed their own family if that family is in any danger of malnutrition or starvation. They'll do that regardless of whatever label - liberal or conservative - that they claim to cling to.

The 'other' point here is that it's not sensible to operate on the standard that unemployed folks should never receive any food assistance on the premise that denying this will somehow motivate them into a waiting job. Common economic sense tells us that 0% unemployment never exists, and we no longer live in a society that allows for impoverished individuals to 'live off the land' in a functional way that simultaneously supports recovery and re-establishment into mainstream society. So there will always be some folks - and their families - that are unemployed for some period and may not be able to purchase what they need to stay in good health.

There's at least one dispassioned advantage to having food assistance available: doing so ensures a certain degree of stability within society by keeping unemployed individuals from having to resort to riot or theft to secure food for their families (and this is not to say that there are not moral reasons aside from dispassionate ones for doing so, obviously). Although, I suppose that one could claim that such an outcome isn't worrisome, since really hungry people - in their weakened state - are easy to chase down, shoot and/or jail, should they become troublesome, therefore reducing their threat. ; )

Regarding your claim of being considered "the immoral monster to humanity" - perhaps folks would not assume this so often if you were not so free in bandying about your claim that an entire group of people that you loosely describe as 'liberals' are incapable of instilling values into themselves or their children.