Why does replacing food stamps with food so anger liberals?

  • You are viewing Orangepower as a Guest. To start new threads, reply to posts, or participate in polls or contests - you must register. Registration is free and easy. Click Here to register.
Sep 13, 2013
4,343
1,127
243
Left field
#41
Give them seeds and a hoe, those of us with the land could "hire" them as sharecroppers. Those of us who can vegetables could give them some pointers and rent them equipment. They provide the labor and God gives us the growth. I'd love to have someone keep my garden weed free, besides most of them breed like depression era farm families, let's put them to work! If they do a good job of tending our gardens we could reward them each with a chicken and they would truly learn responsibility or remain vegetarian. We could provide them with a fishing pole or a bow and charge them half of their game. The increased exercise and outdoor fresh air would no doubt make them more employable. It's a win-win situation. Could work on a farming scale as well and help replace those damned illegal aliens. What do you think?


Liberal sarcasm
 

Cimarron

It's not dying I'm talking about, it's living.
Jun 28, 2007
51,509
17,878
1,743
#42
How would they remove EBT cards and decide to give food boxes without a distribution system? They would need some way to collect the materials from the producers, pack the materials into boxes, and then get them to those who need them.

They would also need to consider diets needed for some people on SNAP that have been prescribed by their doctors..some people are deadly allergic to different food stuffs...so there would have to be a way to manage the food boxes going out to ensure someone who has a deadly peanut allergy etc doesn't die because their Govt food box had peanuts in it etc.

There are WAY to many questions to answer before saying "take away SNAP and just give them food" ..it sounds good, but in reality there are way too many variables that would need an answer and a cost to understand if this would save money or not.
Did it say the government was going to set up their own distrubtion channels? Why would they not use those distrubution systems which are already in place? This truck would simply need to make an additional stop, similar to putting another C-Store on the corner.

Capture.PNG


Now, if they said they were going to set up their own distribution center then like you I have some questions.
 

Cimarron

It's not dying I'm talking about, it's living.
Jun 28, 2007
51,509
17,878
1,743
#43
Give them seeds and a hoe, those of us with the land could "hire" them as sharecroppers. Those of us who can vegetables could give them some pointers and rent them equipment. They provide the labor and God gives us the growth. I'd love to have someone keep my garden weed free, besides most of them breed like depression era farm families, let's put them to work! If they do a good job of tending our gardens we could reward them each with a chicken and they would truly learn responsibility or remain vegetarian. We could provide them with a fishing pole or a bow and charge them half of their game. The increased exercise and outdoor fresh air would no doubt make them more employable. It's a win-win situation. Could work on a farming scale as well and help replace those damned illegal aliens. What do you think?


Liberal sarcasm
I think I wasted my time reading that.
 

Binman4OSU

Legendary Cowboy
Aug 31, 2007
27,157
15,459
1,743
Stupid about AGW!!
#45
Ok, let's try this again.

Did it say the government was going to set up their own distrubtion channels? Why would they not use those distrubution systems which are already in place? This truck would simply need to make an additional stop, similar to putting another C-Store on the corner.

View attachment 58950
You think that Truck is going to take up some space on it and make that additional stop for Free? Who is going to pay for that space on that truck and that additional stop and that truck driver salary for that stop and the diesel used to get that food to that stop......The US tax payers. Also those companies operating those trucks as a for profit business. You think they are going to give up profit making space on those trucks to haul non profit goods for them, or make non profit stops?

You can not ask a For Profit distribution system to suddenly take on the burden of a Govt not for profit business model and expect they would do it. That is very anti free market
 

Cimarron

It's not dying I'm talking about, it's living.
Jun 28, 2007
51,509
17,878
1,743
#47
You think that Truck is going to take up some space on it and make that additional stop for Free? Who is going to pay for that space on that truck and that additional stop and that truck driver salary for that stop and the diesel used to get that food to that stop......The US tax payers. Also those companies operating those trucks as a for profit business. You think they are going to give up profit making space on those trucks to haul non profit goods for them, or make non profit stops?

You can not ask a For Profit distribution system to suddenly take on the burden of a Govt not for profit business model and expect they would do it. That is very anti free market
Who said for free? Who's paying for it now?

How was it done before EBT cards?
 

Binman4OSU

Legendary Cowboy
Aug 31, 2007
27,157
15,459
1,743
Stupid about AGW!!
#48
Who said for free? Who's paying for it now?
Retailers are charged the distribution system rates, which they then pass on across all of their product lines to the US consumer now and that costs is covered by ALL consumers across ALL product lines.

Now if I limit the US consumer to only Food Stamp recipients and I make the retail purchaser the US Govt and I use a For Profit distribution method and I remove the ability to recover those cost through for profit mark ups to the US Food Stamp holder...I have put 100% of the entire distribution system costs and profits on the tax payer back while subsidizing the for profit distribution system.

now right now US tax payers are already paying for profit distribution and retail profits on SNAP purchases and would continue to have to pay distribution profits for Food Boxes if this was to become a reality UNLESS they set up their own not for profit distribution system. Thus creating more Govt jobs, govt benefit payouts etc etc etc

Would it save money? we don't know. Could it...Maybe. We just don't have enough details to say it would or not. How many new distribution routes would need to be added to provide this service to all Food Stamp recipients, How would locations such as Alaska or Hawaii be handled, would it be cheaper to subsidize for profit distribution than setting up a not for profit distribution. How would things like diesel prices effect this program? how would special dietary needs be handled on the packing and distribution sides?
 
Last edited:

Cimarron

It's not dying I'm talking about, it's living.
Jun 28, 2007
51,509
17,878
1,743
#49
Retailers are charged the distribution system rates, which they then pass on across all of their product lines to the US consumer now and that costs is covered by ALL consumers across ALL product lines.

Now if I limit the US consumer to only Food Stamp recipients and I make the retail purchaser the US Govt and I use a For Profit distribution method and I remove the ability to recover those cost through for profit mark ups to the US Food Stamp holder...I have put 100% of the entire distribution system costs and profits on the tax payer back while subsidizing the for profit distribution system.

now right now US tax payers are already paying for profit distribution and retail profits on SNAP purchases and would continue to have to pay distribution profits for Food Boxes if this was to become a reality UNLESS they set up their own not for profit distribution system. Thus creating more Govt jobs, govt benefit payouts etc etc etc

Would it save money? we don't know. Could it...Maybe. We just don't have enough details to say it would or not. How many new distribution routes would need to be added to provide this service to all Food Stamp recipients, How would locations such as Alaska or Hawaii be handled, would it be cheaper to subsidize for profit distribution than setting up a not for profit distribution. How would things like diesel prices effect this program? how would special dietary needs be handled on the packing and distribution sides?
We already know it costs money to distrubute food. It's all being distributed now and no one suggested that cost would magically disappear, did they?

I'm making an assumption here because I have not read the plan. But my best guess is that the savings were not reported to come from distribution,etc., but rather from dissallowing certain non-essential food products.

Additionally, distribution centers for those on food stamps are already in place and being used. They aren't new, this would likely increase there use though.
 

RxCowboy

Has no Rx for his orange obsession.
A/V Subscriber
Nov 8, 2004
63,453
46,710
1,743
Wishing I was in Stillwater
#50
Why is it with social programs that we can't ask if it is working well or if it could be made better without people going all "OMG! The world is ending! We're throwing Grandma off the cliff!"?
 

wrenhal

Territorial Marshal
Aug 11, 2011
6,321
3,297
743
48
#51
Because they don't want vegetables.

This has to be one of the very many abuses of this program. I know I have seen it standing in line. Someone has their items separated on the belt. Pays for their snap items and then pulls out a roll of Benjamin's to pay for the cigs , beer and others.
Don't know where you live but I don't see that much here in Oklahoma. I see a few, but most I see just are buying whatever is cheaper (and yes, name brands are cheaper in more cases than you think). On top of that, if someone buys lobster on snap, that just means they run out faster and have to use their own money until the end of the month. It's not unlimited, they get a set amount of benefits for the month and then when that runs out, it's out. Zero balance. I bet you see the most abuses in big cities where it's easy to turn around and sell what you bought to someone for cash and even if it's half the cost, it's cash money in their pocket.

Sent from my Moto G Play using Tapatalk
 

wrenhal

Territorial Marshal
Aug 11, 2011
6,321
3,297
743
48
#52
Seems like it would be easier to program the SNAP/Food Stamp cards to only be able to buy certain things.

I mean, my FSA card will only work to buy specific items...how hard can it be to do that with food too?
I would like to go the other way. Get rid of nearly all of the bureaucracy of proving poverty to get money/benefits/food from the government. Even the liberals are now claiming that the "free market" approach fo consumer choice and decisionmaking is better for those in poverty. Set the poverty baseline, and give everyone that amount in cash. If they screw that up, they are at the whim of private charity. No more proving that you are poor to get cash. Nobody in poverty unless their own choices cause it.
Sounds similar to the prebate idea of the Fairtax.

Sent from my Moto G Play using Tapatalk
 

wrenhal

Territorial Marshal
Aug 11, 2011
6,321
3,297
743
48
#53
How would they remove EBT cards and decide to give food boxes without a distribution system? They would need some way to collect the materials from the producers, pack the materials into boxes, and then get them to those who need them.

They would also need to consider diets needed for some people on SNAP that have been prescribed by their doctors..some people are deadly allergic to different food stuffs...so there would have to be a way to manage the food boxes going out to ensure someone who has a deadly peanut allergy etc doesn't die because their Govt food box had peanuts in it etc.

There are WAY to many questions to answer before saying "take away SNAP and just give them food" ..it sounds good, but in reality there are way too many variables that would need an answer and a cost to understand if this would save money or not.
Did it say the government was going to set up their own distrubtion channels? Why would they not use those distrubution systems which are already in place? This truck would simply need to make an additional stop, similar to putting another C-Store on the corner.

View attachment 58950

Now, if they said they were going to set up their own distribution center then like you I have some questions.
Having had siblings in the air Force and Navy, I can guarantee that if it's not specified how they'll do it, the government will create their own bloated, expensive way to do it and give the contracts to cronies.

Sent from my Moto G Play using Tapatalk
 

wrenhal

Territorial Marshal
Aug 11, 2011
6,321
3,297
743
48
#54
Retailers are charged the distribution system rates, which they then pass on across all of their product lines to the US consumer now and that costs is covered by ALL consumers across ALL product lines.

Now if I limit the US consumer to only Food Stamp recipients and I make the retail purchaser the US Govt and I use a For Profit distribution method and I remove the ability to recover those cost through for profit mark ups to the US Food Stamp holder...I have put 100% of the entire distribution system costs and profits on the tax payer back while subsidizing the for profit distribution system.

now right now US tax payers are already paying for profit distribution and retail profits on SNAP purchases and would continue to have to pay distribution profits for Food Boxes if this was to become a reality UNLESS they set up their own not for profit distribution system. Thus creating more Govt jobs, govt benefit payouts etc etc etc

Would it save money? we don't know. Could it...Maybe. We just don't have enough details to say it would or not. How many new distribution routes would need to be added to provide this service to all Food Stamp recipients, How would locations such as Alaska or Hawaii be handled, would it be cheaper to subsidize for profit distribution than setting up a not for profit distribution. How would things like diesel prices effect this program? how would special dietary needs be handled on the packing and distribution sides?
We already know it costs money to distrubute food. It's all being distributed now and no one suggested that cost would magically disappear, did they?

I'm making an assumption here because I have not read the plan. But my best guess is that the savings were not reported to come from distribution,etc., but rather from dissallowing certain non-essential food products.

Additionally, distribution centers for those on food stamps are already in place and being used. They aren't new, this would likely increase there use though.
You said this already what distribution centers for people on food stamps are you talking about cuz if you're talking about the local DHS office or whatever you're talking the very small building usually with a bunch of bureaucrats that has no storage for that kind of stuff.

Sent from my Moto G Play using Tapatalk
 

RxCowboy

Has no Rx for his orange obsession.
A/V Subscriber
Nov 8, 2004
63,453
46,710
1,743
Wishing I was in Stillwater
#55
Retailers are charged the distribution system rates, which they then pass on across all of their product lines to the US consumer now and that costs is covered by ALL consumers across ALL product lines.

Now if I limit the US consumer to only Food Stamp recipients and I make the retail purchaser the US Govt and I use a For Profit distribution method and I remove the ability to recover those cost through for profit mark ups to the US Food Stamp holder...I have put 100% of the entire distribution system costs and profits on the tax payer back while subsidizing the for profit distribution system.

now right now US tax payers are already paying for profit distribution and retail profits on SNAP purchases and would continue to have to pay distribution profits for Food Boxes if this was to become a reality UNLESS they set up their own not for profit distribution system. Thus creating more Govt jobs, govt benefit payouts etc etc etc

Would it save money? we don't know. Could it...Maybe. We just don't have enough details to say it would or not. How many new distribution routes would need to be added to provide this service to all Food Stamp recipients, How would locations such as Alaska or Hawaii be handled, would it be cheaper to subsidize for profit distribution than setting up a not for profit distribution. How would things like diesel prices effect this program? how would special dietary needs be handled on the packing and distribution sides?
Amazon says "hi".