Same here. I've handed out so many applications, and when I would call to schedule an interview, they really didn't want a job - they just wanted the benefits! So glad I've got a good crew now, they've all been there for over a year and they are ALL quite happy!
MORE WINNING: Want food stamps? Work for them.
Forum rules
Keep News and Politics about News and Politics.
Do not post full articles from other websites. Always link back to the source
Discuss things respectfully and take into account that each person has a different opinion.
Remember that this is a place for everyone to enjoy. Don’t try and run people off of the site. If you are upset with someone then utilize the foe feature.
Report when things come up.
Personal attacks are against guidelines however attacks need to be directed at a member on the forum for it to be against guidelines. Lying is not against guidelines, it’s hard for us to prove someone even did lie.
Once a topic is locked we consider the issue handled and no longer respond to new reports on the topic.
Keep News and Politics about News and Politics.
Do not post full articles from other websites. Always link back to the source
Discuss things respectfully and take into account that each person has a different opinion.
Remember that this is a place for everyone to enjoy. Don’t try and run people off of the site. If you are upset with someone then utilize the foe feature.
Report when things come up.
Personal attacks are against guidelines however attacks need to be directed at a member on the forum for it to be against guidelines. Lying is not against guidelines, it’s hard for us to prove someone even did lie.
Once a topic is locked we consider the issue handled and no longer respond to new reports on the topic.
-
- Regent
- Posts: 4293
- Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2018 10:56 pm
Expand your thinking
It’s possible to disagree with an article and not respond with a personal attack you know.
Try it.
It’s possible to disagree with an article and not respond with a personal attack you know.
Try it.
-
- Regent
- Posts: 4293
- Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2018 10:56 pm
Me, too. I think sometimes they exaggerate a bit just to get the public all riled up, tbh.AZLizardLady wrote: ↑Sat Dec 07, 2019 12:26 amI hope it stays that way regardless of these SNAP changes.29again wrote: ↑Sat Dec 07, 2019 12:20 amIt's been a while since I had to deal with school lunches, but I'm pretty sure that low-income families qualify for reduced or free lunches. The schools are fairly lenient with the qualifications. At least, in my area they are.AZLizardLady wrote: ↑Thu Dec 05, 2019 8:21 pm There is already so much stereotyping here in society to begin with and after reading page 1 of this thread, I see where it continues.
I can get behind the work requirements and honestly, others are right in that many of those who are currently on food stamps actually already DO work to begin with.
However, these changes could potentially cut into the ability of many children who have been receiving reduced or free lunches at schools to no longer have that ability and THAT is where I have an honest problem.
According to the article I linked in my original reply, there's an estimated 40,000 children that will be cut-off from that lunch program as far as reduced/free, however.
I sincerely hope this has been an overreach on the part of the article writer.
I don't like to think of hungry children. I also don't like to think that parents can't parent. I also know that receiving SNAP benefits does not equal not-hungry children 100% of the time.
It just seems to me that there should be a better way to handle this, to fix this. I just do not know what that way IS, though.
Expand your thinking
It’s possible to disagree with an article and not respond with a personal attack you know.
Try it.
It’s possible to disagree with an article and not respond with a personal attack you know.
Try it.
I agree....there should be a better way to handle this but I am not so sure that what the Trump administration is planning to do is it.29again wrote: ↑Sat Dec 07, 2019 12:39 amMe, too. I think sometimes they exaggerate a bit just to get the public all riled up, tbh.AZLizardLady wrote: ↑Sat Dec 07, 2019 12:26 amI hope it stays that way regardless of these SNAP changes.
According to the article I linked in my original reply, there's an estimated 40,000 children that will be cut-off from that lunch program as far as reduced/free, however.
I sincerely hope this has been an overreach on the part of the article writer.
I don't like to think of hungry children. I also don't like to think that parents can't parent. I also know that receiving SNAP benefits does not equal not-hungry children 100% of the time.
It just seems to me that there should be a better way to handle this, to fix this. I just do not know what that way IS, though.
The epitome of the "working poor" is that yes, they're working yet still needing assistance. So making the mandate of "able-bodied" recipients working is a little short-sighted as many of those currently on SNAP are indeed working.
I do feel there's still a stigma attached to those receiving assistance like SNAP benefits and it's an unfair one though at the same time, many who HAVE abused the "system" for so long have implanted that stigma themselves.
I'm having a real struggle with this one.
-
- Regent
- Posts: 4293
- Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2018 10:56 pm
I found this --AZLizardLady wrote: ↑Sat Dec 07, 2019 1:07 amI agree....there should be a better way to handle this but I am not so sure that what the Trump administration is planning to do is it.29again wrote: ↑Sat Dec 07, 2019 12:39 amMe, too. I think sometimes they exaggerate a bit just to get the public all riled up, tbh.AZLizardLady wrote: ↑Sat Dec 07, 2019 12:26 am
I hope it stays that way regardless of these SNAP changes.
According to the article I linked in my original reply, there's an estimated 40,000 children that will be cut-off from that lunch program as far as reduced/free, however.
I sincerely hope this has been an overreach on the part of the article writer.
I don't like to think of hungry children. I also don't like to think that parents can't parent. I also know that receiving SNAP benefits does not equal not-hungry children 100% of the time.
It just seems to me that there should be a better way to handle this, to fix this. I just do not know what that way IS, though.
The epitome of the "working poor" is that yes, they're working yet still needing assistance. So making the mandate of "able-bodied" recipients working is a little short-sighted as many of those currently on SNAP are indeed working.
I do feel there's still a stigma attached to those receiving assistance like SNAP benefits and it's an unfair one though at the same time, many who HAVE abused the "system" for so long have implanted that stigma themselves.
I'm having a real struggle with this one.
Jim
@Ifitsthisname
Replying to @AOC
The new rules don't apply to families with children.
You'd think a member of congress would know that.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nat ... 608297001/ …
Expand your thinking
It’s possible to disagree with an article and not respond with a personal attack you know.
Try it.
It’s possible to disagree with an article and not respond with a personal attack you know.
Try it.