McDad
I can't brain today; I has the dumb.
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2011
- Messages
- 50,903
- Likes
- 100,166
Anyone care to show me where in our Constitution it covers food to citizens?
It's a jobs program. Those that receive free food can help package it up.White House wants to deliver food to the poor, Blue Apron-style - Feb. 12, 2018
Claims it can save $130 Billion. Not sure I believe that given the boxes will have to be created, packaged and delivered. I'm sure there will be specific needs with food allergies and what not, creating opportunity for liability if a mistake is made.
It's not a bad idea, but if we aren't saving any more money, it just looks like another layer to a program already rife with fraud and abuse. Also says receipients are still getting benefit vouchers. This may actually cost more in the end.
The constitution is just a general framework, more of a meta rule system for our democratic system of government. There's no reason it would cover something like this, just provide a means by which legislation could be enacted to cover it if that was the will of the people.
It could save in health care costs. Americans aren't exactly making good nutrition choices, maybe the government can help with that.
The constitution is just a general framework, more of a meta rule system for our democratic system of government. There's no reason it would cover something like this, just provide a means by which legislation could be enacted to cover it if that was the will of the people.
not sure how one could argue this hurts those that can't get out and pick it up themselves. What were they doing before? Even with the full amount on your EBT card you still had to go out and buy stuff.
for the stigma, work with Amazon so that all the boxes have the smile on it. Did you go on a spending spree or is it your handout? Who knows? if delivered.
not sure how it would save us money, but I am more for this than a straight card system.
the savings are illusory. Same money in, same money out.
It makes sense from purely the paternalistic view of saying, well, if we are going to pay for it, then we are going to make sure you eat healthy. One can debate the wisdom of that. I can see both sides. But the reality is that such is a superficial argument. More simply, it appeases the "too many black folk are scamming and abusing the system" base, and so its in there. Even if it doesn't save a dime. Heck, even if it ends up costing more, there's a segment of that base that would be okay with it.
Meh, no big deal. The whole package is doomed anyway.
He's basically saying that he's the one that believes the only people on food stamps are black.
Racist dems strike again!
Who Gets Food Stamps? White People, Mostly | HuffPost
even when it is clearly not about race, he makes it about race. despite the facts being heavily not in his favor.
The one problem I see is the food suppliers become a special interest group, and though it may be cheaper at first, it could get more expensive over time.
Resentment? Damn skippy. I completely resent that the .gov steals my hard earned money and GIVES it away to people that have the ability to go out and do SOMETHING to 'earn' those freebies. EVERYONE can sit on ass and answer a phone. Most people can help package those food packs.No, no. Not the "right."
The right that is built on resentment, yes.
The savings are illusory. Same money in, same money out.
It makes sense from purely the paternalistic view of saying, well, if we are going to pay for it, then we are going to make sure you eat healthy. One can debate the wisdom of that. I can see both sides. But the reality is that such is a superficial argument. More simply, it appeases the "Too many black folk are scamming and abusing the system" base, and so its in there. Even if it doesn't save a dime. Heck, even if it ends up costing more, there's a segment of that base that would be okay with it.
Meh, no big deal. The whole package is doomed anyway.