Anybody see this piece of crap? Okay, here’s a sample:
I have a solution: Dharma-style food stamp reform. Fans of “Lost” will recognize the reference, but for those who did not watch the show, the Dharma Initiative packaged its own food to supply members of the project on the island. Each item came in a package with a simple black-and-white label and a basic description. Beer cans were marked with the word “Beer.” It probably tasted as bad as it looked. In any case, here is a picture:
Dharma-style food stamp reform would have four basic components. First, the federal government would create a government “brand” of essential food items such as milk, cheese, meat, cereal, vegetables, bread, peanut butter, beans, juice, soup, baby formula, diapers, etc., and would package the items with simple black-and-white labels and basic descriptions. The word “Government” would be stamped across the top in bold letters so everyone would know it was a welfare item. These items could be manufactured by major companies through government contracts, thus not creating a net loss to private industry. Because competition is not an issue, taste and quality, with the exception of the baby formula and baby food, would not be a top priority. Snacks, soda, cigarettes and beer would not be available through the program.
You can imagine where it goes from there. Once you decide to give poor people low-quality food, you’ve pretty much put yourself permanently in the world’s biggest a-hole and Jesus-hates-you category. The interesting thing is what inspired this thought experiment. A woman in front of him in line at Wal-Mart was using food stamps to buy staple items like bread and cereal and milk. So, what was the problem? Well, she was also talking on an expensive cell phone and had a nice purse. Oh, and she was buying beer, cigarettes, and snacks with her own money.
We see these arguments a lot. You shouldn’t be able to get government assistance to feed your children until you’ve canceled your phone, cable, internet, car, gym, etc. Or, you can’t buy some diapers for your kid unless you quit smoking and drinking. Hey!! Why don’t we drug test these people? Can we get a vaginal probe?
I have trouble even responding to this line of thinking because it’s so miserly and judgmental. But, you know, you aren’t going to help mommy find a job by taking away her cell phone and internet connection. Banning television might work though.
Daddy needs to give the bad people a spanking.
And if you bet a billion dollars that the author was a white male? YOU WIN!
http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=212289175454949&set=pu.187291327954734&type=1&the
ater
The average person on food assistance, SNAP, gets $130 a month to eat. You can not buy beer & smokes with that money. Most of those on it are children, single moms, elderly and people with disability. People are just aholes.
He even looks like a stupid prick. Just saying.
How does he know she was on an expensive cellphone? Was she talking on an iPhone 3? Since the link is to Tucker’s student newspaper(Thanks Tbogg!!), I’m going to guess he made most, if not all, of this up.
I’m sick and tired of these nanny state conservatives. The poor are no more, and in fact far less, likely to “waste” money. They’re not aliens, freaks, losers, or some other abnormal kind of human who needs to be monitored 24/7. The reason people stay poor is because of rules like this: they make it much more difficult and stressful to be poor, and much more difficult to save and maintain money and maintain “wealth”, and the result of that is that people stay poor longer.
If you’re worried about waste, why are you whining about $20 worth of beer, rather than: several millions worth of pork for factories producing useless crap for the military; the money wasted on wealthfare, such as tax-subsidies for companies that are making record profits during a recession; the amount of money we pay politicians (who also buy beer with it! and coke! and hookers! and cigarettes! and boats! and second homes! what a waste); any number of other things that actually cost more money, probably including the very implementation of this bill.
It’s singling out one public expenditure over others. The rest of us realize there’s no difference between that and the others, aside from being an easier target for idiots who imagine they’ll never sink so low as to need “public assistance”, despite the fact that they do, every day.
Sick and tired of this crap. Also, this isn’t just nanny state conservatives. We have plenty of “Even The Liberals!” on our side who want to monitor what the poor buy with THEIR MONEY — yes, it’s THEIR MONEY — and give them a cup to piss in.
If we can bring ONE reform to food stamps and welfare, it’s this: get rid of every assistance program, and give the poor CASH. Cold, hard, cash.
Google and their 3% corporate tax rate probably steal more money from the government every year then welfare fraud has ever cost the government. This is the same racist siren song since Reagan.
It’s like when you have to spend your last $20,000 on tests/biopsies and declare bankruptcy before you can have a $100,000 life-saving operation.
But then you’re bankrupt.
This is all well and good, but I want to know when do we get to the concentration camp stage? Or at least some of those sweet, sweet forced labor camps they have in North Korea and China? Let’s go out there and attack the problem head on. Too many poor people on gubmint welfare? Lock ’em in an industrial warehouse and make ’em sew soccer balls for 16 hours a day. Once inside, the free market will decide who is and isn’t a skilled, hardworking, and valuable worker and who is and isn’t allowed to return to the private sector. It’s just the empowering, humane way.
Also, too, I love the unwitting communist undertones of being able to buy Government-provided Bread and Yogurt at the grocery store. Terrific.
how about this?
Limbaugh doesn’t count and you know it. Find someone with a little more Hayekian (Burkean? Buckleyan?) modesty, n00b.
Also, too, fry the little sluts with their abortion pills.
…Where were they when I was in high school?
Sorry bazooka, Amazon appears to have beaten you to the punch:
The link to that article is actually here
http://www.mcall.com/news/local/amazon/mc-allentown-amazon-complaints-20110917,0,6503103.story
I did a serch in its archives as I wanted to read it 🙂
There was a program that indeed operated like that. I think the Reagan Administration ended it. It was called USDA surplus food and it showed up at schools for lunches, at welfare programs, and on Indian reservations.
It was all in large quantities. Five-pound processed cheese (like Velveeta) loafs. Large cans of green beans and corn. Generic labeled pork and beans, white lima beans, pinto beans, corned beef, canned spahetti…
And it was all labeled “USDA Government Surplus..Not for resale”
And contrary to the nitwit’s imagination, Food Stamps are not good for buying beer. Directly, that is.
And these guys are always yammering on about regulations that go with bailouts of businesses.
Sadly, I see this type of thinking all too often. A member of the local judiciary has the tendency to remark about how recipients of various government services are spending her money. And she is quite well off.
Most likely, the cell phone was free. The Feds have a program for people to have a cell phone and limited service. This has been around for a few years.
This jerk needs to mind his own business.
This isn’t only hateful; it’s LAZY.
We poor folks are the world’s easiest targets.
(Silly me: I first read ‘Dharma’ as in Buddhism. In that case, I’d be behind ‘a Dharma style’ program 100%, since compassion would be a guiding principle. But no.. )
It probably doesn’t need spelling out, but the calculation behind this is that being poor is a moral failure; therefore, the poor must be punished. (And being rich like the author, naturally, is evidence of moral superiority.)
Insert epithet here.
Which is especially grotesque in light of the study suggesting that the rich in fact have the morals of a polecat:
This makes sense. On average, they are less likely to be held accountable for misbehavior, either socially or legally.
The fact that these are the people who ‘succeed’ in this society really says something about the society, no?
All of the responses so far skirt the issue, which is why I believe the left unnecessarily cedes the ground of moral judgment and common sense to the right. What happens if we admit that food stamps weren’t intended to free up discretionary spending on cigarettes:
Our attempts to help other people are sometimes taken advantage of, and some of the people we help act on poor priorities and a lack of self-discipline. We don’t accept this because we condone it, but because the alternatives — vindictive social policies, a totalitarian state, or a country without a safety net for anyone — are much worse.
Jeez, that story about the way Amazon treats its workers is really bad. They don’t need a union, though (snark). Is this unassailable evidence that labor law is horrible for the working person, or what?
What’s not horrible, in fact what’s really great, is the comments thread connected to this opinion piece. Even the readers of Tucker’s coloring book are horrified; either that, or the regular Daily Caller readers don’t have the stomach to defend this jackass, and the zone is flooded by Booman readers and those from other progressive blogs who clicked the link. Whatever the cause, the writer is thrown to the ground very roughly.
The grand champion, one I choose to believe is from a Booman reader (he begins by quoting from the column):
Paul_D
“stamped across the top in bold letters so everyone would know it was a welfare item”
Kinda like books that have “Regnery Publishing” on the spine.
Ooh, good one.