This conservative would argue for the abolition of most, if not all aid programs but since that's not ever going to happen since that's never going to happen then make the granting of that aid as restrictive and repugnant as possible. People who are on governemnt aid can and should be held to a different standard then those who are not.

So basically your conservative view is, in an ideal world you would keep the government out. But since you know that isn't going to happen, you plan to let them be more intrusive?

Absolutely. If they're using our tax dollars for it, they have to pay the consequences. If you or I were doing it, that's completely different. We aren't living off other people's hard work.

 

Just because someone gets help from the state doesn't mean they don't work I know a lot of people that get help from the state and also work.

I don't mind the steak. What I mind is junk food....chips, sodas, candy, snack cakes, etc. I think that it should be allowed for only approved cereals, meat, cheese, bread, dairy and vegetables, 100% juices, flour, sugar, etc. I think EBT cards should be accepted at farmers markets as well. I may be jealous that they're eating T-Bones, but I'm downright mad when I see a cart piled high with sodas and chips and snack cakes, and very little healthy food, and they pay with an EBT card. BURNS ME UP!

 

RM, those foods fill people up and keep them filled up longer. So when you're short on cash you get value by foods/drinks that will stick with you for a while.

RM, those foods fill people up and keep them filled up longer. So when you're short on cash you get value by foods/drinks that will stick with you for a while.

 

Incorrect. Sodas, chips and snack cakes DO NOT keep people filled up longer. There is little to no dietary fiber in those foods. Foods like rice, beans and other whole grains are the best choice for the "stick with you" factor. Pasta as well, but must be used more prudently. Vegetables and fruits will also "stick with you". And people need to be taught what the real value of food and drink is...that it doesn't just mean cheap.

 

So, for instance, I've never had food stamps. When I was in situation where I sought help, I made .25 too much to qualify for any aid. I learned that a good, meaty soup bone could yield 2-3 days of vegetable soup, and when made with store brand canned goods or frozen veggies, I could make that 2-3 days of meals on less than $5. A decent roast of a modest price can yield even more meals, when leftovers can be used for sandwiches for lunches.

 

The myth that junk food is good value and is filling needs to be dispelled.

Just because someone gets help from the state doesn't mean they don't work I know a lot of people that get help from the state and also work.

 

I don't care if they're working or not. If you're getting money from the state, you should not be using drugs. The state wouldn't be giving you money if you could support yourself. Helping your drug habit isn't supporting yourself.

Incorrect. Sodas, chips and snack cakes DO NOT keep people filled up longer. There is little to no dietary fiber in those foods. Foods like rice, beans and other whole grains are the best choice for the "stick with you" factor. Pasta as well, but must be used more prudently. Vegetables and fruits will also "stick with you". And people need to be taught what the real value of food and drink is...that it doesn't just mean cheap.

 

So, for instance, I've never had food stamps. When I was in situation where I sought help, I made .25 too much to qualify for any aid. I learned that a good, meaty soup bone could yield 2-3 days of vegetable soup, and when made with store brand canned goods or frozen veggies, I could make that 2-3 days of meals on less than $5. A decent roast of a modest price can yield even more meals, when leftovers can be used for sandwiches for lunches.

 

The myth that junk food is good value and is filling needs to be dispelled.

Very good post.

Incorrect. Sodas, chips and snack cakes DO NOT keep people filled up longer. There is little to no dietary fiber in those foods. Foods like rice, beans and other whole grains are the best choice for the "stick with you" factor. Pasta as well, but must be used more prudently. Vegetables and fruits will also "stick with you". And people need to be taught what the real value of food and drink is...that it doesn't just mean cheap.

 

So, for instance, I've never had food stamps. When I was in situation where I sought help, I made .25 too much to qualify for any aid. I learned that a good, meaty soup bone could yield 2-3 days of vegetable soup, and when made with store brand canned goods or frozen veggies, I could make that 2-3 days of meals on less than $5. A decent roast of a modest price can yield even more meals, when leftovers can be used for sandwiches for lunches.

 

The myth that junk food is good value and is filling needs to be dispelled.

 

I didn't say or mean to imply it truly was a good value. However, if you're telling me that a plate of carrots keeps me filled up longer than a Mt Dew and a Ho Ho then I'm going to disagree.

I didn't say or mean to imply it truly was a good value. However, if you're telling me that a plate of carrots keeps me filled up longer than a Mt Dew and a Ho Ho then I'm going to disagree.

 

If you have a sandwich and some carrots and a glass of water or juice, then yes, it will keep you filled longer than a Mt. Dew and a Ho Ho. And yes, if you eat some raw carrots instead of the Ho Ho, you will stay full longer. I know that from personal experience.

We had this same discussion a couple years ago as my local representative presented a similar bill. Hearsay had some good thoughts as to why it should not be allowed. Let me see if I can dig it out from the basement.

Found it:

 

http://www.bluegrasspreps.com/showthread.php?142375-Drug-Testing-for-Welfare-Recipients&highlight=

Always my first question any time an idea that punishes a parent financially.

 

Stinks for the kids perhaps. The state may have to take custody of the kids if they parents can't provide for the kids. Such will become an additional financial burden on the state no doubt, but I'd rather have that (and would be fine with my taxes being spent for that purpose) than have the kids' drug using parents having custody of the kids. I wonder what kind of parents these folks really are anyway if they use drugs knowing it could cut off their welfare benefits and thus their ability to provide financial support for their kids. My guess is that a majority of drug using parents are pretty crappy parents. Best thing for the kids may be to get them out of that situation.

This thread may end up like the Energizer bunny; it may keep going and going.