"here's 50 bucks of food stamps for 30 bucks worth of drugs"

7/12/2013 12:04:03 PM

^^^well, that would be another thread. just trying to keep this on the topic of food stamps. let's fix one thing at a time here. I'm not here for ballooning arguments that eventually lead to getting us nowhere. I'd rather not make this end up becoming an immigration reform thread by making a blanket statement like "all forms of social welfare should _____". I believe each program can be looked at individually for reform or updating.

^exactly


[Edited on July 12, 2013 at 12:06 PM. Reason : ]

7/12/2013 12:05:32 PM

The same way they buy cigarettes and booze with them. Find a store that will except them as cash at some ratio or sell them for cash on the street.

It's a pretty significant problem in the food stamp system and one of the reasons they went away from using the monopoly money and switched to what basically amounts to a prepaid credt cards. Of course, when you can get issued a new card no questions asked it makes it very easy to "lose" your card and replace it at the beginning of the next month.

7/12/2013 12:06:48 PM

^or (since we don't have ID checking), just hand off the card and give the person your pin. they buy whatever they want and give the card back.

[Edited on July 12, 2013 at 12:09 PM. Reason : ]

7/12/2013 12:09:25 PM

Quote :

"^^^well, that would be another thread"

its certainly an important part of the discussion regarding feasibility and cost

7/12/2013 12:26:17 PM

Quote :

"So welfare, unemployment, medicare, medicaid, disability, farm subsidies that are not contingent on actual production, etc... should all require drug testing, right?"

Don't forget research grants! And scholarships. And DOE loan guarantees. Every single person in the ARPA-E network.

Oh, and also banks who are members of the federal reserve. They get to borrow at the overnight rate, which is about 10x lower than we get, enabled by the government. Drug test every one of them!

And bikers. They use roads without paying the gasoline tax to build them.



--------------
Oh, you want a brochure for the NC Science Museum? Not before you pee in that cup.

[Edited on July 12, 2013 at 12:30 PM. Reason : it became a song in my mind. Want to ...? Pee in a cup. In a cuuuuup]

7/12/2013 12:26:26 PM

Why do we need a new law in that case? What's the problem with charging them for the two crimes currently on the books that they are breaking: food stamp fraud, drug possession?

7/12/2013 12:35:01 PM

Because checking for ID and drug tests help enforce those laws.

[Edited on July 12, 2013 at 1:07 PM. Reason : ]

7/12/2013 1:06:50 PM

^
So you'd like to use the food stamp program to enforce other unrelated laws?

7/12/2013 1:13:08 PM

I think fraud is related.

7/12/2013 1:33:55 PM

^
drugs are unrelated

Didn't get to address this earlier:

Quote :

"^^^I actually believe both. Do you believe drugs are a sound investment?"

Yes, in some cases. We don't need to go into that, though.

Anyways, drug testing is stupid because:

a) False positives and false negatives are common: http://www.webmd.com/news/20100528/drug-tests-often-trigger-false-positives

b) Anyone can pass a drug test once. It would have to be yearly and at random to be at all effective.

c) Drug addicts need assistance as well. Having drug addicts on welfare is better than having drug addicts desperate and on the street. You keep saying "don't do drugs" as if it's that easy for everyone. Addiction is chronic.

Quote :

"^^suspending, not cutting off. pass the next go 'round and you're back on it. "

Uhh, you're still advocating cutting it off, just after one strike.

Quote :

"actually, parents using drugs are doing their children more harm than cutting off welfare."

Which drugs and how often? I'd say STARVING is a little worse than your parents lighting up a J once a week.

[Edited on July 12, 2013 at 1:48 PM. Reason : .]

7/12/2013 1:46:49 PM

the mindset of "fuck you, I got mine" is a damn troubling one

7/12/2013 1:53:16 PM

^I agree, it is. That's not what I'm saying at all though, if that is what you're implying.

Quote :

"Which drugs and how often? I'd say STARVING is a little worse than your parents lighting up a J once a week."

they wouldn't starve if that J money went towards food.

[Edited on July 12, 2013 at 2:38 PM. Reason : ]

7/12/2013 2:37:22 PM

smoking up once a week is <$10 a month. how much does food cost?

and holy shit what a lane switch you pulled there

[Edited on July 12, 2013 at 2:46 PM. Reason : .]

7/12/2013 2:45:49 PM

alfrpinto you forgot this:

Quote :

"1. SNAP is one of the best administered welfare programs we have, with a fraud rate of about 4% (http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-10-956T), and 5% for (Federal) administrative overhead. Both of these have improved dramatically over the past decade, the fraud rate in particular fell by almost half, despite what Newt Gingrich might try to intimate."

Surely you just glossed over it absentmindedly.

7/12/2013 2:51:12 PM

His justification has already changed multiple times in this thread. Every time someone points out that his argument doesn't work, he changes it.

7/12/2013 2:51:26 PM

Or maybe you just ignored it because your feelings are not based on actual numbers or facts but chain emails from your grandparents and anecdotes and that one time you saw someone with an iphone using an EBT card.

7/12/2013 2:52:20 PM

Quote :

"His justification has already changed multiple times in this thread. Every time someone points out that his argument doesn't work, he changes it."

Yeah, that's kinda what you have to do when your only exposure to reality occurs one rebuttal at a time :-/

7/12/2013 2:53:05 PM

where did I switch lanes?

from page 1:

Quote :

"drugs cost money, food costs money, if you don't spend on drugs, you can buy food. the equation seems pretty simple to me." "

sounds like I was pretty consistent there.

Quote :

" Surely you just glossed over it absentmindedly."

I read that. and 5% is still 5%. back to my page 1 saying that a small horror is still a horror.

Quote :

"Yeah, that's kinda what you have to do when your only exposure to reality occurs one rebuttal at a time"

also, I've had lots of personal exposure to fraud and abuse of the system. not sure how you can imply my life experiences based on my views, but you're definitely not even close.

Quote :

"smoking up once a week is <$10 a month. how much does food cost?"

is that the standard cost of drug usage nowadays? I didn't see your link to prove your point on this. I googled, but couldn't find anything specific. /s

also, the added opportunity cost of looking for employment rather than being high and employment ineligibility due to failing drug tests administered by employers comes at a lost dollar amount as well.

i'm ok with recreational drug usage, i'm just not for giving free money to people who choose to do so.

[Edited on July 12, 2013 at 3:05 PM. Reason : ]

7/12/2013 3:00:35 PM

Drug testing 1 person for every family unit on food stamps would be $50 per year. That's generous. With the average payout, that's just about 3% of the total program cost. But in reality, you would have to test more than just one person. Certainly you'd want to test spouses.

So a "fix" to the problem of 5% waste which costs 3% is acceptable? Wow man.

And there was another link here that claimed those drug tests have 10-15% false positives (although I'm not sure if I believe that). Would you test someone again if they came up positive? Or is it a better idea to arbitrarily kick off 10% who don't do drugs?

[Edited on July 12, 2013 at 3:09 PM. Reason : ]

7/12/2013 3:08:40 PM

Quote :

" also, I've had lots of personal exposure to fraud and abuse of the system. not sure how you can imply my life experiences based on my views, but you're definitely not even close."

Your personal experience is actually entirely fucking irrelevant unless you're a statistician who collects and compiles information on the system.

Quote :

"I read that. and 5% is still 5%. back to my page 1 saying that a small horror is still a horror."

Except it's not a horror. That 5% is pocket change compared to, say, the tax dollars that don't get collected due to corporate evasion, or the mortgage deduction that generations of "paycheck earners" have enjoyed year after year after year, or the subsidies that go to paycheck-earning farmers in the very same bill.

Anybody who gives a shit about government efficiency and tax dollar spending isn't going to waste time on one of the most efficient programs in existence with an extremely small fraud incidence, all from a relatively tiny portion of the budget to begin with. That 5% is literally 1/10th of a penny from each tax dollar.

For anyone who actually cares about those things, food stamps would be #2,354th on the list of priorities. Either that's not actually what you care about, or you're profoundly ignorant both about the scale and impact of food stamp abuse.

[Edited on July 12, 2013 at 3:12 PM. Reason : .]

7/12/2013 3:11:29 PM

^^why would you test spouses? test the person who applied to receive the benefit. you're implying things that I haven't even said.

Quote :

"Your personal experience is actually entirely fucking irrelevant unless you're a statistician who collects and compiles information on the system. For anyone who actually cares about those things, food stamps would be #2,354th on the list of priorities. Either that's not actually what you care about, or you're profoundly ignorant both about the scale and impact of food stamp abuse."

you're the one who implied my "exposure to reality". reality can be based on observation and experience as well as statistics.

[Edited on July 12, 2013 at 3:16 PM. Reason : ]

7/12/2013 3:12:08 PM

Quote :

"^^why would you test spouses? test the person who applied to receive the benefit. you're implying things that I haven't even said."

Why would you not test the spouse?? A family operates as a unit. If one person is doing drugs, that family's money is going to drugs.

7/12/2013 3:14:50 PM

Quote :

"is that the standard cost of drug usage nowadays? I didn't see your link to prove your point on this. I googled, but couldn't find anything specific. /s"

An 1/8th of weed is less than $80 (often by a lot). You could smoke at least 10 times on that 8th (a conservative number). That is $8/week for the weekly smoking mentioned.

7/12/2013 3:20:01 PM

^^you can't infer whether the drug money is coming from the applicant or the spouse. the only responsibility needed for compliance would be with the applicant. it's a small step towards adding responsibility, but it's still a step towards it.

i'd like to hear your thoughts on a solution to optimize the food stamp system or do you believe it is a system that is fine as it is?

^because all drug users only smoke pot. also, refer to the opportunity cost.

[Edited on July 12, 2013 at 3:21 PM. Reason : ]

7/12/2013 3:20:14 PM

Quote :

"you're the one who implied my "exposure to reality". reality can be based on observation and experience as well as statistics. "

Your observation and personal experience are of insufficient sample size. Reality is a shared experience, your personal day to day wanderings are not.

7/12/2013 3:21:20 PM

question:

you said that you weren't concerned about alcohol because it was legal. does this mean that you don't care about marijuana in places where it is legal?

7/12/2013 3:21:30 PM

^^ I can concede to that

^ if you're receiving state funding and the state doesn't ban the substance, I'm cool with it.

[Edited on July 12, 2013 at 3:24 PM. Reason : ]

7/12/2013 3:23:59 PM

but if its fraud because the drugs mean they aren't trying hard enough to pull themselves up, why would the legality of the marijuana in that state make a difference? the legality of marijuana doesn't have anything to do with the effects of marijuana.

7/12/2013 3:27:00 PM

By the way, this

Quote :

" I'd like to see people with children have their benefits increased or decreased based on their children's school performance."

Is the most psychotic thing I've ever read on this forum, and I've read a LOT of aaronburro posts.

7/12/2013 3:27:29 PM

^^^
then the argument falls back to drug testing everyone:

Quote :

"Don't forget research grants! And scholarships. And DOE loan guarantees. Every single person in the ARPA-E network. Oh, and also banks who are members of the federal reserve. They get to borrow at the overnight rate, which is about 10x lower than we get, enabled by the government. Drug test every one of them! And bikers. They use roads without paying the gasoline tax to build them."

unless you think it's only poor people that should be 100% frugal with government money

[Edited on July 12, 2013 at 3:28 PM. Reason : .]

7/12/2013 3:27:42 PM

^^^the drug testing isn't where my anti-fraud stance is. checking ID's at the register is where I'd like to lower fraud.

^I think everyone should be frugal with government money. there's a difference between receiving money because you're poor and receiving money because you're doing research. refer to my statement on infrastructure investment vs. individual no-risk no-responsibility benefit

[Edited on July 12, 2013 at 3:30 PM. Reason : ]

7/12/2013 3:28:15 PM

adultswim, don't forget almost every single farmer in the country

7/12/2013 3:29:00 PM

Quote :

"Is the most psychotic thing I've ever read on this forum, and I've read a LOT of aaronburro posts."

would you say it is Str8Foolish?

</chitchat>

7/12/2013 3:32:08 PM

Quote :

"^I think everyone should be frugal with government money. there's a difference between receiving money because you're poor and receiving money because you're doing research. refer to my statement on infrastructure investment vs. individual no-risk no-responsibility benefit"

Dude, food stamps exist so people can focus on their job and family instead of worrying about whether or not they can fucking feed themselves next week. Can you honestly not see how that benefits society?

7/12/2013 3:33:29 PM

Quote :

"^^^the drug testing isn't where my anti-fraud stance is. checking ID's at the register is where I'd like to lower fraud."

then please see my edited question:

but if its fraud bad for other-than-fraud reasons because the drugs mean they aren't trying hard enough to pull themselves up, why would the legality of the marijuana in that state make a difference? the legality of marijuana doesn't have anything to do with the effects of marijuana.

7/12/2013 3:35:20 PM

^^yes, I get that. I'm just for adding additional responsibility and accountability.

^because it is a state vs. federal funding issue

[Edited on July 12, 2013 at 3:36 PM. Reason : ]

7/12/2013 3:35:36 PM

Btw: My personal experience: I was on food stamps for two years after getting my Bachelor's and completing a non-paying internship while I also worked a minimum wage service job in the evenings to pay rent and utilities, all totaling about 60-65 hours a week. That internship was pretty much the headliner of my grad school application, and now I'm finishing up my Masters degree at the best school in the nation for my field (STEM, btw) and already being headhunted by multiple international engineering firms.

I smoked marijuana that entire time, both to reduce stress and enhance my focus while studying, at a cost of about $30 a month.

You don't know what's best for someone just because they're poorer than you. Nor can you class a person's dedication or usefulness because they use X arbitrary drug with Y arbitrary legal status. You're trying to micromange the lives of millions of people, almost half of which earn paychecks, whom you know nothing about, because you think your currently stable lifestyle entitles you to moral authority over them. Ascetic misery and living on the edge of crisis does not promote ambition, it just turns people into short-term-minded drones who can't plan or budget beyond their next meal.

[Edited on July 12, 2013 at 3:42 PM. Reason : .]

7/12/2013 3:39:25 PM

Quote :

"^^yes, I get that. I'm just for adding additional responsibility and accountability."

Then I'm very curious as to why you think this relatively efficient program needs more oversight, and not other programs.

You're giving Big Brother a huge boner right now.

[Edited on July 12, 2013 at 3:40 PM. Reason : .]

7/12/2013 3:40:27 PM

^^kudos to you. you obviously are for drug usage while using food stamps because of your personal experience.

p.s. "stress relief" can be managed by things other than drugs.



[Edited on July 12, 2013 at 3:44 PM. Reason : ]

7/12/2013 3:42:05 PM

Quote :

"^^your non-paid internship was your choice. you could have worked a paying job. choices"

lol here we go

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poe's_law

[Edited on July 12, 2013 at 3:42 PM. Reason : .]

7/12/2013 3:42:27 PM

You actually know exactly nothing about what opportunities were available to me.

7/12/2013 3:42:43 PM

Quote :

"^because it is a state vs. federal funding issue"

ok, so what if the federal government legalizes it. are you claiming that the effects of marijuana will change if the federal government legalizes it?

If drugs are bad because they mean people are being lazy and not applying themselves and pulling themselves up by the bootstraps, what magically changes if those drugs are legal? If its not about the legality, why shouldn't your same standard apply to alcohol and many other things?

[Edited on July 12, 2013 at 3:44 PM. Reason : .]

7/12/2013 3:43:49 PM

^^so you find it idiotic for people to imply things about your personal life too?

^if they legalize marijuana federally, sure. i'm cool with not testing for it. move on to testing for other drugs.

[Edited on July 12, 2013 at 3:48 PM. Reason : ]

7/12/2013 3:46:24 PM

why then is it bad? you just said it had nothing to do with fraud, so why are drugs bad? why should people who do drugs not receive SNAP if its not about fraud?

7/12/2013 3:48:41 PM

Quote :

"you obviously are for drug usage while using food stamps because of your personal experience."

Nope. I'm for people doing their best to make their own lives bearable and while using food stamps, since nobody knows the conditions of their lives and what makes them happy better than themselves.

7/12/2013 3:49:24 PM

^^because they are currently purchasing goods currently considered to be illegal.

^it's definitely easier to be happy when other people are buying your happiness

[Edited on July 12, 2013 at 3:55 PM. Reason : ]

7/12/2013 3:50:03 PM

Quote :

"^^because they are currently purchasing goods currently considered to be illegal."

what does that have to do with SNAP?

[Edited on July 12, 2013 at 3:59 PM. Reason : .]

7/12/2013 3:59:25 PM

Quote :

"it's definitely easier to be happy when other people are buying your happiness"

And bingo, here it is: you think public assistance should only be available to people who endure misery and hardship the entire time they're on it. If they are enjoying themselves in any way that costs money, at all, then they're not being punished enough for being poor.

Best part is that your proposed policies wouldn't have affected me one bit if my drug of choice was liquor.

[Edited on July 12, 2013 at 4:08 PM. Reason : .]

7/12/2013 4:07:18 PM

i bought weed, coffee, AND beer while receiving unemployment benefits. i am scum.

7/12/2013 4:10:04 PM