# Maine now requires childless adults to work for food stamps



## poppy (Feb 21, 2008)

Here's what happened. 80% of the lazy dolts dropped off food stamps rather than choose training, working, or doing 6 hours of community service per month. These are society's deadbeats. It's about time states clamped down on the abuse of taxpayer money. Drug test them and shave off several more percent. Helping the truly needy is fine. Giving money to slugs isn't.

"One trillion dollars&#8212;that&#8217;s how much the government spent last year on means-tested welfare aid, providing cash, food, housing, medical care, and social services to poor and low-income individuals. The food stamp program is the nation&#8217;s second largest welfare program.

The number of food stamp recipients has risen dramatically, from 17.2 million in 2000 to 45.8 million in 2015.

The number of food stamp recipients has risen dramatically, from 17.2 million in 2000 to 45.8 million in 2015. 

Costs have soared over the same period, from $20.7 billion in 2000 to $83.1 billion in 2014.

http://dailysignal.com/2016/02/08/ma...what-happened/


----------



## Cornhusker (Mar 20, 2003)

Work for their benefits????
Racist!! :hysterical:
Some of then actually refused to work, train or do 6 hours of community service.
I hate to sound mean, but it wouldn't be that big a deal if they did starve


----------



## greg273 (Aug 5, 2003)

I am all in favor of requiring community service for benefits... but then the devil is in the details, gotta pay someone to manage the people, make sure the work gets done, etc. By the time you get done with all that, it probably costs more than to simply just hand out money. Sad but true. 
THen there is the question of what about all the other people that get 'something for nothing' from the government. I know some farmers and ranchers around here who take as much state and federal money as they can get their hands on. Should we have them picking up litter by the side of the road also? If you can find a way to run that program in a cost effective manor, I'd be all for it.


----------



## Cornhusker (Mar 20, 2003)

greg273 said:


> I am all in favor of requiring community service for benefits... but then the devil is in the details, gotta pay someone to manage the people, make sure the work gets done, etc. By the time you get done with all that, it probably costs more than to simply just hand out money. Sad but true.
> THen there is the question of what about all the other people that get 'something for nothing' from the government. I know some farmers and ranchers around here who take as much state and federal money as they can get their hands on. Should we have them picking up litter by the side of the road also? If you can find a way to run that program in a cost effective manor, I'd be all for it.


Are these farmers illegal aliens?
That's what we are talking about here.
Sounds to me like the democrats are buying illegal votes again


----------



## City Bound (Jan 24, 2009)

This is a good idea. It weeds out many people. One of our mayors started something like this in our city and it really helped break down welfare abuse.


----------



## Declan (Jan 18, 2015)

Cornhusker said:


> Work for their benefits????
> Racist!! :hysterical:
> Some of then actually refused to work, train or do 6 hours of community service.
> I hate to sound mean, but it wouldn't be that big a deal if they did starve


Are there black people in Maine?


----------



## poppy (Feb 21, 2008)

greg273 said:


> I am all in favor of requiring community service for benefits... but then the devil is in the details, gotta pay someone to manage the people, make sure the work gets done, etc. By the time you get done with all that, it probably costs more than to simply just hand out money. Sad but true.
> THen there is the question of what about all the other people that get 'something for nothing' from the government. I know some farmers and ranchers around here who take as much state and federal money as they can get their hands on. Should we have them picking up litter by the side of the road also? If you can find a way to run that program in a cost effective manor, I'd be all for it.


No one needs to be hired to manage them. The managers are already there anyway for the jobs they assign community service people. I'll admit they probably have to spend more of their time looking for them hiding someplace. They really aren't required to do much. Just show up and they're okay.


----------



## greg273 (Aug 5, 2003)

Cornhusker said:


> Are these farmers illegal aliens?
> That's what we are talking about here.
> Sounds to me like the democrats are buying illegal votes again


 The original article was about welfare and food stamps, not 'illegal aliens'.


----------



## greg273 (Aug 5, 2003)

poppy said:


> No one needs to be hired to manage them. The managers are already there anyway for the jobs they assign community service people. I'll admit they probably have to spend more of their time looking for them hiding someplace. They really aren't required to do much. Just show up and they're okay.


 You're dreaming poppy if you think people doing 'community service' don't need some sort of supervision. Ever see convicts out painting curbs? Got 4 convicts painting, and two cops standing there watching them. You think those cops work for free? Of course not. 
What about the ranchers? Gonna make them do some community service too? Or do they get their fences built for free? Gonna make them pee in a cup to get that EQUIP money? Lets have REAL 'welfare reform' ACROSS THE BOARD and not just 'punish the poor people' because you think they're moochers.


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

City Bound said:


> This is a good idea. It weeds out many people. One of our mayors started something like this in our city and it really helped break down welfare abuse.


 And WI 
If youâre an able-bodied adult without children living at home, you must work at least 80 hours a month or look for work to stay in the program.

That rule went into effect in April, and between July and September, about 25 percent of the 60,000 recipients eligible to work were dropped from the program when the penalty took effect, according to DHS data.


----------



## tamarackreg (Mar 13, 2006)

Why on earth would you clamp down on the ones that haven't bred???


----------



## Forcast (Apr 15, 2014)

WV as well all ready stated

If you are in a drug treatment program that counts, you get food stamps


----------



## City Bound (Jan 24, 2009)

A guy I worked with told me about his niece who dropped out of high school and was on welfare. She was on it for years and then when she was going to be made to go out and rake laves and pick up garbage for her welfare she was so mortified that she took a computer course and got herself a job. She ended up making over a 100 grand a year on the job.

Goes to show what kind of talent could be being wasted in America.


----------



## MO_cows (Aug 14, 2010)

greg273 said:


> You're dreaming poppy if you think people doing 'community service' don't need some sort of supervision. Ever see convicts out painting curbs? Got 4 convicts painting, and two cops standing there watching them. You think those cops work for free? Of course not.
> What about the ranchers? Gonna make them do some community service too? Or do they get their fences built for free? Gonna make them pee in a cup to get that EQUIP money? Lets have REAL 'welfare reform' ACROSS THE BOARD and not just 'punish the poor people' because you think they're moochers.


What subsidies do you think ranchers get?


----------



## ||Downhome|| (Jan 12, 2009)

The ones I would really love to see required to work for federal funds would be the government and its employees. 

Then the next time Military interventions needed, the countries we provide aid to can step up and in rather then send our Sons and Daughters...

Crazy concepts but I get tired of the welfare harp.

You all do know that the food stamp program benefits everyone right?

Everyone's keeps on harping on the Flint thing, they not only have a screwed up water system but they also do not have any real grocery stores in the city.

Many in the area are dependent on FS.

Ask yourself, what happens when they go bye bye?

They are a subsidy, like so many others that are handed out.

When they go you will just pay directly to make up the difference the food industry no longer collects.

Food benefits was originally a Farm subsidy program,I.E people could buy food.

Really anyone who knows how to file correctly and makes under 50k needs to check themselves when it comes to government spending.

Why?

You don't pay in enough to cover the actual services rendered to you!

Ever heard of this thing called the deficit? 

I call sour grapes on so many levels.

I'm willing too bet though, those who dropped where elderly and rural.

And willing to also bet at some point paid in to the system.

just some fat for ya to chew on.


----------



## Wolf mom (Mar 8, 2005)

||Downhome|| said:


> ....just some fat for ya to chew on.


If you are going to drop a rant on us to stir the stew pot, at least do it with facts.


----------



## ||Downhome|| (Jan 12, 2009)

Wolf mom said:


> If you are going to drop a rant on us to stir the stew pot, at least do it with facts.


There are facts if you want to look ?


----------



## ||Downhome|| (Jan 12, 2009)

Of coarse if there's no weight to that post I suppose someone could post facts to discredit it ?


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

||Downhome|| said:


> Of coarse if there's no weight to that post I suppose someone could post facts to discredit it ?


Wouldn't that be redundant?


----------



## Fishindude (May 19, 2015)

I looked it up and read about what they have done in Maine. Sounds like a great idea and has really reduced costs. Wish my state would do the same.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

Cornhusker said:


> Are these farmers illegal aliens?
> That's what we are talking about here.
> Sounds to me like the democrats are buying illegal votes again


Where in the OP does it say anything about illegal aliens? Can you point it out please?


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

greg273 said:


> You're dreaming poppy if you think people doing 'community service' don't need some sort of supervision. Ever see convicts out painting curbs? Got 4 convicts painting, and two cops standing there watching them. You think those cops work for free? Of course not.
> What about the ranchers? Gonna make them do some community service too? Or do they get their fences built for free? Gonna make them pee in a cup to get that EQUIP money? Lets have REAL 'welfare reform' ACROSS THE BOARD and not just 'punish the poor people' because you think they're moochers.


So convicts painting curbs are like welfare folks doing community service? Really? 
I've done a lot of volunteering. There's been several teens at these 'events', usually. Some are there b/c of traffic tickets or other minor offenses so really not convicts OR welfare. NO SUPERVISION to speak of. Show up & do the work.


----------



## Cornhusker (Mar 20, 2003)

Irish Pixie said:


> Where in the OP does it say anything about illegal aliens? Can you point it out please?


Sorry, I was on another thread and confused myself.
Back to this thread.......
One of the requirements are that the recipients work, and many refuse.
I know a lot of farmers, and they all work harder than most people.
I don't think you can equate farm subsidies to welfare, that's a stretch


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

Tricky Grama said:


> So convicts painting curbs are like welfare folks doing community service? Really?
> I've done a lot of volunteering. There's been several teens at these 'events', usually. Some are there b/c of *traffic tickets or other minor offenses *so *really not convicts* OR welfare. NO SUPERVISION to speak of. Show up & do the work.


If they were doing community service by order of the court due to a *conviction* of a crime, they are in fact "convicts"

Someone has to supervise them at least to the point of recording how long they actually work so they will know when the sentence is completed.


----------



## Cabin Fever (May 10, 2002)

I predict the birth rate is about to explode in Maine....


----------



## TripleD (Feb 12, 2011)

I say make it 10 hours and see how many more refuse to accept it....


----------



## no really (Aug 7, 2013)

I am trying to understand the opposition to this.

It is important to do something in the way of work, someone who has not worked for long periods are not considered in most job interviews. Community service does count to most perspective employers, it shows drive and will to work.

Why not give long term recipients a bit of a push to become more responsible? There are jobs out there, even if it isn't a dream job, something most of us have had to do in our working careers. You gotta start somewhere or even start over at times. 

It is not good to get into the head space of settling for no real future, IMHO that is what a lot of the younger ones are doing.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

no really said:


> I am trying to understand the opposition to this.
> 
> It is important to do something in the way of work, someone who has not worked for long periods are not considered in most job interviews. Community service does count to most perspective employers, it shows drive and will to work.
> 
> ...


I suspect a good percentage of them already have jobs where they get paid in cash, and pay no taxes. 

I've worked construction jobs with people who were drawing "disability" but still putting in 40 hours a week


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

The only problem I see is what the real savings will be after the program is administrated. There has to be oversight, and it's going to cost money.


----------



## Cornhusker (Mar 20, 2003)

Bearfootfarm said:


> I've worked construction jobs with people who were drawing "disability" but still putting in 40 hours a week


I've always wondered about that.
I've known people who actually have disabilities that can't get any help, then I see people who appear able bodied who make more on disability than some people do working.


----------



## no really (Aug 7, 2013)

Bearfootfarm said:


> I suspect a good percentage of them already have jobs where they get paid in cash, and pay no taxes.
> 
> I've worked construction jobs with people who were drawing "disability" but still putting in 40 hours a week


Well I guess maybe if they want to stay off the radar they should make a choice. There are folks that need help desperately, if those that are capable of providing for themselves were off the roles maybe the limited amount of funds would go further.

There is alot of waste in the process. Problem is those that are most vulnerable are the ones that suffer.


----------



## Cornhusker (Mar 20, 2003)

Irish Pixie said:


> The only problem I see is what the real savings will be after the program is administrated. There has to be oversight, and it's going to cost money.


I think the training aspect of it should help get people off welfare.
Also, forcing them to work for it may encourage them to get up off the couch and support themselves.
Maybe they need that boost to get some self respect


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

Cornhusker said:


> I don't think you can equate farm subsidies to welfare, that's a stretch



What's the difference ?
I know some that get both.


----------



## no really (Aug 7, 2013)

AmericanStand said:


> What's the difference ?
> I know some that get both.


I missed where farm subsidies were discussed in the article.


----------



## TripleD (Feb 12, 2011)

Cornhusker said:


> I've always wondered about that.
> I've known people who actually have disabilities that can't get any help, then I see people who appear able bodied who make more on disability than some people do working.


My neighbor across the road is a perfect example of this.

Disability check over a $1000
Girlfriends welfare check $600
Sells his pain pills or trades them for food stamps over $1000
Gets $500 in food stamps for his family of 4.
Lives rent free and no utilities on three acres his brother owns.
Does maintenance on the trailer park beside him for his brother $500 a week.
He used to be a plumber and charges $30 an hour for his work on weekends.
He never runs out of beer or cigarettes ! Talk about a good life.....


----------



## Cornhusker (Mar 20, 2003)

no really said:


> I missed where farm subsidies were discussed in the article.


They always trot that out to justify welfare fraud


----------



## MattB4 (Jan 3, 2016)

Encouraging folks to breed? Not sure that is a good idea. Almost like saying that women that are married with children can not qualify for assistance but those unmarried can. 

Perhaps a work requirement should be applied equally to all.


----------



## MO_cows (Aug 14, 2010)

Even if it doesn't save a ton of money, I like the message it sends. The concept, the values it represents. It says, don't just sit there and feel sorry for yourself. You are capable of contributing to society.


----------



## Nimrod (Jun 8, 2010)

Irish Pixie said:


> The only problem I see is what the real savings will be after the program is administrated. There has to be oversight, and it's going to cost money.


Eighty % dropped food stamps rather than do a minimum amount of work. Not all of the remaining 20% are working, some are doing training and don't need supervision. 

The savings are what food stamps would have cost for the 80%. The cost of supervising the fewer than 20% remaining is way less than the savings, even if you employ notoriously inefficient gooberment workers. The remaining food stamp recipients only have to be supervised 6 hours a week. I bet you could find one or two responsible recipients to supervise the rest and it wouldn't cost you anything.


----------



## Cornhusker (Mar 20, 2003)

MO_cows said:


> Even if it doesn't save a ton of money, I like the message it sends. The concept, the values it represents. It says, don't just sit there and feel sorry for yourself. You are capable of contributing to society.


I don't know how any adult capable of work can just sit and collect welfare.
Don't people have any pride anymore?
I realize some people have been taught since birth that they are oppressed and shouldn't even try, but it's time to wake up, grow up and earn their way.


----------



## MO_cows (Aug 14, 2010)

Cornhusker said:


> I don't know how any adult capable of work can just sit and collect welfare.
> Don't people have any pride anymore?
> I realize some people have been taught since birth that they are oppressed and shouldn't even try, but it's time to wake up, grow up and earn their way.


No, some people don't seem to have any pride or maybe it's more a sense of self worth. That's why I like a "work for benefits" concept, it gives them a chance to learn self worth. 

There are some people who are just lazy, greedy, think it's just fine for the rest of the world to see to their needs. But not everyone is like that, and our assistance programs shouldn't train them to be that way, either.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

Nimrod said:


> Eighty % dropped food stamps rather than do a minimum amount of work. Not all of the remaining 20% are working, some are doing training and don't need supervision.
> 
> The savings are what food stamps would have cost for the 80%. The cost of supervising the fewer than 20% remaining is way less than the savings, even if you employ notoriously inefficient gooberment workers. The remaining food stamp recipients only have to be supervised 6 hours a week. I bet you could find one or two responsible recipients to supervise the rest and it wouldn't cost you anything.


Color me skeptical. If it's anything like the "drug test welfare recipient program" that some states have enacted it will actually lose money.


----------



## doozie (May 21, 2005)

I believe the number of reported of recipients dropping from the program could possibly be the ones getting the minimum amount of aid, I don't know the facts, but the minimum of aid is about 16.00 a month. While it may help a person afford say, milk, beans, or burger for the month, the time spent in training, etc would not be worth the gas to get to said training, or the time spent "earning" that 16.00 in benefits.

I'm not saying training or working while getting benefits is a bad thing, just that the numbers dropped may not be saving all that much overall.


----------



## City Bound (Jan 24, 2009)

TripleD said:


> My neighbor across the road is a perfect example of this.
> 
> Disability check over a $1000
> Girlfriends welfare check $600
> ...


 
This is exactly how most people are going to have to live the more the socialistic the gov gets. The black market in soviet Russia meant survival for most people. 

How does he trade food stamps, aren't they on a debit card?


----------



## City Bound (Jan 24, 2009)

anyone who would go and have a kid for food stamps is cracked. If the same amount of hours required for the community service were used in a real job then the person could get more money then they would get from food stamps. They may be able to still get some food stamps if they work depending on their income.


----------



## Tiempo (May 22, 2008)

Poppy, could you edit the op to keep within HT c&p rules please?


----------



## Farmerga (May 6, 2010)

greg273 said:


> You're dreaming poppy if you think people doing 'community service' don't need some sort of supervision. Ever see convicts out painting curbs? Got 4 convicts painting, and two cops standing there watching them. You think those cops work for free? Of course not.
> What about the ranchers? Gonna make them do some community service too? Or do they get their fences built for free? Gonna make them pee in a cup to get that EQUIP money? Lets have REAL 'welfare reform' ACROSS THE BOARD and not just 'punish the poor people' because you think they're moochers.


I am all for ending all forms of government money transfer payments to all people. No food stamps, no subsidies, no nothing. Sounds good, sounds good.


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

Tiempo said:


> Poppy, could you edit the op to keep within HT c&p rules please?


It may be past the allowable period of time so I'll abbreviate the paragraph for him.


----------



## City Bound (Jan 24, 2009)

doozie said:


> I believe the number of reported of recipients dropping from the program could possibly be the ones getting the minimum amount of aid, I don't know the facts, but the minimum of aid is about 16.00 a month. While it may help a person afford say, milk, beans, or burger for the month, the time spent in training, etc would not be worth the gas to get to said training, or the time spent "earning" that 16.00 in benefits.
> 
> I'm not saying training or working while getting benefits is a bad thing, just that the numbers dropped may not be saving all that much overall.


training never really works and I doubt it was intended to work. offering people training is just a way for the gov to cover any moral or ethical liability that comes with kicking people off food stamps. It is like...."hey, we tried. We even made training available. We did all we could. " It is just a front.


----------



## Tiempo (May 22, 2008)

wr said:


> It may be past the allowable period of time so I'll abbreviate the paragraph for him.


Thanks, I was on my phone without specs and in the middle of something


----------



## doozie (May 21, 2005)

I used to think everyone should be working, they should only buy certain things, etc. 
I was assuming everyone was like me, do what ever it takes, walk miles to work, take a bus, no job beneath me, everyone lives where jobs are plentiful, right?
Fast forward to now, I am pretty sure at this stage in my life, a employer will pick the younger job applicant over me. Glad I don't have to find out...hope I am employed until retirement.

Labeling those that qualify for something lazy or slugs won't change a thing that they are eligible for, however it is determined.

The numbers on aid are surging because there are less jobs to go to. Or perhaps they are low paying jobs and it's the only way to get by.
News reports note plant closings and layoffs. In a small town it is devastating.

I have no idea why recipients without children are being singled out of a program meant to provide food to the hungry. Maybe it's really only a way to make those unemployment figures look good for a while, but what happens when the rest dropped off are unable to find a job.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

Tiempo said:


> Thanks, I was on my phone without specs and *in the middle of something *



:hammer: :shocked: :shocked:

How DARE you have a *real life*!!!!!
Explain yourself , young lady!!


----------



## Dutchie (Mar 14, 2003)

Declan said:


> Are there black people in Maine?


Not very many


----------



## ||Downhome|| (Jan 12, 2009)

Dutchie said:


> Not very many


 Its the French and French Canadians that are the Black by most peoples standards...


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

||Downhome|| said:


> Its the French and French Canadians that are the Black by most peoples standards...



I've never heard that before. Could you please explain.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

> How does he trade food stamps, aren't they on a debit card?


Anyone can swipe the cards
I've never seen a store ask for an ID before accepting a card


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

Bearfootfarm said:


> If they were doing community service by order of the court due to a *conviction* of a crime, they are in fact "convicts"
> 
> Someone has to supervise them at least to the point of recording how long they actually work so they will know when the sentence is completed.


I think the other post talked about TWO cops watching convicts paint curbs...there was NO ONE watching these teens. There's a couple people at the 'community garden' or whatever place & when the kids were done w/their hour, they checked 'em off.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

Tricky Grama said:


> I think the other post talked about TWO cops watching convicts paint curbs...there was NO ONE watching these teens. There's a couple people at the 'community garden' or whatever place & *when the kids were done w/their hour, they checked 'em off*.


That's still "supervision" in that someone is paid to be there the whole time, whether they "watch" every minute or not, and someone has to keep track of the records


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

Bearfootfarm said:


> Anyone can swipe the cards
> I've never seen a store ask for an ID before accepting a card


ID? You have to have a PIN Number entered into the machine Before any transactions take place. That PIN number IS the persons ID, just like a person uses the ATM card to get cash out of one of those machines. Now guess you could give or sell that card to someone else BUT they then have access to your PIN number to use it.


----------



## TripleD (Feb 12, 2011)

arabian knight said:


> ID? You have to have a PIN Number entered into the machine Before any transactions take place. That PIN number IS the persons ID, just like a person uses the ATM card to get cash out of one of those machines. Now guess you could give or sell that card to someone else BUT they then have access to your PIN number to use it.


This is how it works . You go to the store with the card and pin# ,spend a hundred on food and give the owner $50.


----------



## DEKE01 (Jul 17, 2013)

Bearfootfarm said:


> If they were doing community service by order of the court due to a *conviction* of a crime, they are in fact "convicts"
> 
> Someone has to supervise them at least to the point of recording how long they actually work so they will know when the sentence is completed.


I volunteer at a wild animal rescue, using my backhoe, chipper, tractor, labor etc. to help him clear land and build pens. I frequently train community service folks on use of the chipper and put them to work. The guy that owns the rescue records their hours and supervises their work. With rare exception, I've found the community service workers to be very friendly, do a good job, and want to make a positive impact. 

In the nearby city park, the park staff supervises their work. While there is someone at the court house receiving work hours and performance reports, there are not additional managers overseeing the actual work they same way road gangs work. 

One office worker could record the hours for hundreds of workers, so there is not a significant added expense to make these people work.


----------



## DEKE01 (Jul 17, 2013)

Irish Pixie said:


> Color me skeptical. If it's anything like the "drug test welfare recipient program" that some states have enacted it will actually lose money.


It is nice to see that you are finally acknowledging the fact that gov't doesn't do much of anything both effectively and efficiently. I look forward to the time when you come to the understanding that that is why we need to greatly reduce the role of gov't in our lives.


----------



## mreynolds (Jan 1, 2015)

||Downhome|| said:


> The ones I would really love to see required to work for federal funds would be the government and its employees.
> 
> Then the next time Military interventions needed, the countries we provide aid to can step up and in rather then send our Sons and Daughters...
> 
> ...




Not saying your wrong but I am on a phone and searching is hard. What comes to mind to me is that lets say we have only a hundred people in America. They all have to eat. How does good stamps or lack thereof change that fact?

Of course I haven't seen the other pages do if this has been answered I apologize.


----------



## DEKE01 (Jul 17, 2013)

doozie said:


> I believe the number of reported of recipients dropping from the program could possibly be the ones getting the minimum amount of aid, I don't know the facts, but the minimum of aid is about 16.00 a month. While it may help a person afford say, milk, beans, or burger for the month, the time spent in training, etc would not be worth the gas to get to said training, or the time spent "earning" that 16.00 in benefits.
> 
> I'm not saying training or working while getting benefits is a bad thing, just that the numbers dropped may not be saving all that much overall.


Maybe true, But also consider that it probably costs a few hundred dollars a month to process that check and keep someone on the roles. Last time I checked a few years ago, IIRC, the DoEd had a budget of $40B and half of that was actually spent on programs to help educate via grants to states and localities. The rest was overhead and rule making.


----------



## mreynolds (Jan 1, 2015)

Bearfootfarm said:


> I suspect a good percentage of them already have jobs where they get paid in cash, and pay no taxes.
> 
> I've worked construction jobs with people who were drawing "disability" but still putting in 40 hours a week


Same here bff. But that is a weak excuse to not implement this program.


----------



## mreynolds (Jan 1, 2015)

MO_cows said:


> Even if it doesn't save a ton of money, I like the message it sends. The concept, the values it represents. It says, don't just sit there and feel sorry for yourself. You are capable of contributing to society.


EXACTLY....if we can only get just 5 or 10 percent to start believing in themselves again it would be a good thing. Yes we may need to spend extra at first. But think of all those new taxpayers on the books too as well as the quantity of life those people would now have. 

Don't understand why some take the offensive when it comes to welfare reform. It's like they believe we hate them or something. When the truth is something other than their minds can dream up.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

mreynolds said:


> Same here bff. But that is a weak excuse to not implement this program.


I didn't say it was an excuse not to do it
I'm saying that is probably why some are against it.
They can't do community service if they have jobs already and don't want to lose the funds


----------



## MO_cows (Aug 14, 2010)

Bearfootfarm said:


> I didn't say it was an excuse not to do it
> I'm saying that is probably why some are against it.
> They can't do community service if they have jobs already and don't want to lose the funds


If they have "under that table" jobs already, they are cheating the SNAP program so cutting their benefits because they won't work for them is still a win.


----------



## mreynolds (Jan 1, 2015)

Bearfootfarm said:


> I didn't say it was an excuse not to do it
> I'm saying that is probably why some are against it.
> They can't do community service if they have jobs already and don't want to lose the funds


Yes, I understood that. Probably didn't convey that well. But there are also some on disability longer my bil that can't find anything on they books because they don't want the hassle of paperwork. You are allowed to make a certain amount on disability part time. some of those that you mentioned would just have to make a choice.


----------



## City Bound (Jan 24, 2009)

Food stamps in general has a sort of economic ripple effect. Sure, you can say there are a few bum milking it but in whole the people on food stamps help to stimulate the economy. A portion of the food stamps used goes to pay workers at the store, the utility company and its workers, the truckers, the insurance companies, the construction companies, to pay taxes, and on and on. The money ripples out into the community in legitimate ways. How much of that money falls through the cracks of misuse and corruption is worthy of investigation. How much of that wealth is shipped out of the country instead of being recirculated in the us is another aspect worth investigation. over all though, the money generates flow in the economy.

Someone posted a while back that Walmart (if I recall the numbers right) takes in 11 billion in food stamps. Not sure if that is true but if it is then that is not chicken scratch. BJ's and Costco did not take food stamps when they first opened up here in my city. There was a big stink about it and eventually they started taking them. The difference in foot traffic in costcos exploded and the place is an absolute mad house on the weekends. You can barely walk in the stores sometimes and people are leaving with massive amounts of food and goods. When I started going to Costco, before they accepted food stamps, and the way it is now are worlds apart. 

Costco pays a decent wage and offers health benefits. So, some how or other food stamps help the economy. Crime is cut down by food stamps so that saves money. 
I do not like the gov getting too involved in our lives also, but if there were no food stamps there would be more crime and more beggars on the streets.....and yes, of course, more people desperate for, and willing to take, a job.


----------



## mreynolds (Jan 1, 2015)

City Bound said:


> Food stamps in general has a sort of economic ripple effect. Sure, you can say there are a few bum milking it but in whole the people on food stamps help to stimulate the economy. A portion of the food stamps used goes to pay workers at the store, the utility company and its workers, the truckers, the insurance companies, the construction companies, to pay taxes, and on and on. The money ripples out into the community in legitimate ways. How much of that money falls through the cracks of misuse and corruption is worthy of investigation. How much of that wealth is shipped out of the country instead of being recirculated in the us is another aspect worth investigation. over all though, the money generates flow in the economy.
> 
> Someone posted a while back that Walmart (if I recall the numbers right) takes in 11 billion in food stamps. Not sure if that is true but if it is then that is not chicken scratch. BJ's and Costco did not take food stamps when they first opened up here in my city. There was a big stink about it and eventually they started taking them. The difference in foot traffic in costcos exploded and the place is an absolute mad house on the weekends. You can barely walk in the stores sometimes and people are leaving with massive amounts of food and goods. When I started going to Costco, before they accepted food stamps, and the way it is now are worlds apart.
> 
> ...


Yes but regardless of food stamps or not people still have to buy food. now think of your scenario and then think of this one.

How much did it cost the system when people are predominantly over weight?

how has helping the grocers with good stamps helped the farmers? Why do they still have to be subsidized?


----------



## mreynolds (Jan 1, 2015)

City Bound said:


> Food stamps in general has a sort of economic ripple effect. Sure, you can say there are a few bum milking it but in whole the people on food stamps help to stimulate the economy. A portion of the food stamps used goes to pay workers at the store, the utility company and its workers, the truckers, the insurance companies, the construction companies, to pay taxes, and on and on. The money ripples out into the community in legitimate ways. How much of that mmoneyoney falls through the cracks of misuse and corruption is worthy of investigation. How much of that wealth is shipped out of the country instead of being recirculated in the us is another aspect worth investigation. over all though, the money generates flow in the economy.
> 
> Someone posted a while back that Walmart (if I recall the numbers right) takes in 11 billion in food stamps. Not sure if that is true but if it is then that is not chicken scratch. BJ's and Costco did not take food stamps when they first opened up here in my city. There was a big stink about it and eventually they started taking them. The difference in foot traffic in costcos exploded and the place is an absolute mad house on the weekends. You can barely walk in the stores sometimes and people are leaving with massive amounts of food and goods. When I started going to Costco, before they accepted food stamps, and the way it is now are worlds apart.
> 
> ...


And since you brought up Wal-Mart. Why do you think they pay food stamp wages for? Do next year they will make 12 billion is why.


----------



## DEKE01 (Jul 17, 2013)

City Bound said:


> Food stamps in general has a sort of economic ripple effect. Sure, you can say there are a few bum milking it but in whole the people on food stamps help to stimulate the economy. A portion of the food stamps used goes to pay workers at the store, the utility company and its workers, the truckers, the insurance companies, the construction companies, to pay taxes, and on and on. The money ripples out into the community in legitimate ways. How much of that money falls through the cracks of misuse and corruption is worthy of investigation. How much of that wealth is shipped out of the country instead of being recirculated in the us is another aspect worth investigation. over all though, the money generates flow in the economy.


That is utter nonsense. It is a liberal lie designed to justify Democrat vote buying. 

If I am not taxed to give you food stamps, I invest my extra cash into creating jobs that create wealth for business owners, workers, and all those folks down the line that sell food, haircuts, and everything else. My investment stimulates the economy at least as much as your food stamps and also creates wealth for the economy and for the gov't to tax. The gov't can ONLY tax wealth. Food stamps are not wealth. The gov't can't tax your food stamps, at least not for long because the process of taxing and spending consumes wealth until it no longer exists. 

With your food stamp tax on me, I invest less and less wealth is created for all. The gov't takes my money and wastes bunches of it, then gives it to those who will not invest it. Gov't taxing and spending destroys wealth except for the favored few. 

Think about it. If all it took to stimulate the economy was to tax at great rates and give it back to the peasants, then why wasn't the USSR a financial success? Why did it take instituting some wealth building capitalism into China to make it a financial success? 

To really stimulate the economy, why not just give people a big salary and pay them to dig useless holes? In a world where there are only 3 parties, the gov't, a hole digger, and a retailer. The gov't taxes the digger and the retailer, gives the money to the digger to dig a hole that serves no good purpose. The digger spends his money and stimulates the economy just like with food stamps. But no wealth is created in the process so next year there are fewer taxes to collect and fewer holes are dug. In year 3, with fewer holes being dug, the retailer sells less and is taxed less. So in year 4, even fewer holes are dug, less is spent at the retailer. Eventually, the gov't will have destroyed all wealth and everyone is equally poor in spite of all the gov't "stimulus" you claim comes from a gov't give away.


----------



## City Bound (Jan 24, 2009)

mreynolds said:


> Yes but regardless of food stamps or not people still have to buy food. now think of your scenario and then think of this one.
> 
> How much did it cost the system when people are predominantly over weight?
> 
> how has helping the grocers with good stamps helped the farmers? Why do they still have to be subsidized?


 I was just trying to find some positive aspect to the situation. people like to attack and demonize people using food stamps as the root of the problem. I was trying to show that it is not just the people who use food stamps who benefit from the stamps but their is a whole web of beneficiaries who benefit as the ripples expand out across the water. 

I am not sure why farmers need to be subsidized but from a business perspective they are on the bottom of the supply chain and make the least for their goods. Once those foods hit retail the retailer will make four to five times more for those same goods then they paid for them with less labor input then the farmer had to invest. I also heard that they are subsidized to create stability in the market. prices for food can go up or down a few cents without causing too much disturbance in the market. If the price sky rockets in a bad season or bottoms out in a glut then it would cause trouble. So, the subsidies help balance the highs and lows to some manageable extent. Is that true, I don't know. 

Some of the money used to pay farmers for their crops comes from the money companies get from costumers using food stamps. it makes no difference to a super market if a customer uses cash, credit, or food stamps because it is all money in the end. Money from the food stamp card ( a dollar is still a dollar even if it comes from a food stamp card) gets transferred to the supermarket, the supermarket then uses the money how ever they see fit.......like to pay for some California strawberries, florida orange juice, frozen shrimp from the gulf, whatever. Somewhere in the process a farmer is paid. Truckers are paid to ship the food. So, those food stamp dollars are circulating in productive ways.


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

There is NO positive side to food stamps other then helping the POOR. Not those that Can work and provide for themselves. 2 Thessalonians 3:10 "if any would not work, neither should they eat."


----------



## MO_cows (Aug 14, 2010)

City Bound said:


> Food stamps in general has a sort of economic ripple effect. Sure, you can say there are a few bum milking it but in whole the people on food stamps help to stimulate the economy. A portion of the food stamps used goes to pay workers at the store, the utility company and its workers, the truckers, the insurance companies, the construction companies, to pay taxes, and on and on. The money ripples out into the community in legitimate ways. How much of that money falls through the cracks of misuse and corruption is worthy of investigation. How much of that wealth is shipped out of the country instead of being recirculated in the us is another aspect worth investigation. over all though, the money generates flow in the economy.
> 
> Someone posted a while back that Walmart (if I recall the numbers right) takes in 11 billion in food stamps. Not sure if that is true but if it is then that is not chicken scratch. BJ's and Costco did not take food stamps when they first opened up here in my city. There was a big stink about it and eventually they started taking them. The difference in foot traffic in costcos exploded and the place is an absolute mad house on the weekends. You can barely walk in the stores sometimes and people are leaving with massive amounts of food and goods. When I started going to Costco, before they accepted food stamps, and the way it is now are worlds apart.
> 
> ...


You forgot something. The amount that food stamps create their ripple in the economy is less because for every dollar collected in taxes that goes to food stamps, there is govt bureaucracy and waste taken out of it. So the food stamp recipient gets to put probably 50 cents of every dollar into the economy. The bureaucracy machine ate the rest of it. The net effect is less money in the economy than there would have been otherwise.


----------



## City Bound (Jan 24, 2009)

DEKE01 said:


> That is utter nonsense. It is a liberal lie designed to justify Democrat vote buying.
> 
> If I am not taxed to give you food stamps, I invest my extra cash into creating jobs that create wealth for business owners, workers, and all those folks down the line that sell food, haircuts, and everything else. My investment stimulates the economy at least as much as your food stamps and also creates wealth for the economy and for the gov't to tax. The gov't can ONLY tax wealth. Food stamps are not wealth. The gov't can't tax your food stamps, at least not for long because the process of taxing and spending consumes wealth until it no longer exists.
> 
> ...


 *I think the system you mentioned is the best system and the one that makes the most money. Food stamps is a sub system that feeds into the main system. There are cracks in every system. Food stamps was set up to be a way to address people who were falling into the cracks in the main system. As is the case with all systems, the food stamp system has its own cracks that create problems. The op was addressing one way of patching up some cracks in the food stamp system. *


----------



## City Bound (Jan 24, 2009)

MO_cows said:


> You forgot something. The amount that food stamps create their ripple in the economy is less because for every dollar collected in taxes that goes to food stamps, there is govt bureaucracy and waste taken out of it. So the food stamp recipient gets to put probably 50 cents of every dollar into the economy. The bureaucracy machine ate the rest of it. The net effect is less money in the economy than there would have been otherwise.


True. Regardless of where the money comes from the gov are crooks and will skim off their undeserved cut of the money. For every dollar of debt they take on (for whatever goal) the gov takes their cut before it even hit the street. Whether tax money or loaned money, they skim it. 

Big gov is the real problem. 

That 50 cents has more mutual benefit in the hand of the everyday people then the 50 cents in the hand of the gov mafia in the capital. That 50 cents in the hand of everyday americans ripples out and does more good then the suits in DC could do in a million years. 

I am not saying I agree with the system.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

MO_cows said:


> If they have "under that table" jobs already, they are cheating the SNAP program so cutting their benefits because they won't work for them is still a win.


I never said it wasn't


----------



## mreynolds (Jan 1, 2015)

City Bound said:


> I was just trying to find some positive aspect to the situation. people like to attack and demonize people using food stamps as the root of the problem. I was trying to show that it is not just the people who use food stamps who benefit from the stamps but their is a whole web of beneficiaries who benefit as the ripples expand out across the water.
> 
> I am not sure why farmers need to be subsidized but from a business perspective they are on the bottom of the supply chain and make the least for their goods. Once those foods hit retail the retailer will make four to five times more for those same goods then they paid for them with less labor input then the farmer had to invest. I also heard that they are subsidized to create stability in the market. prices for food can go up or down a few cents without causing too much disturbance in the market. If the price sky rockets in a bad season or bottoms out in a glut then it would cause trouble. So, the subsidies help balance the highs and lows to some manageable extent. Is that true, I don't know.
> 
> Some of the money used to pay farmers for their crops comes from the money companies get from costumers using food stamps. it makes no difference to a super market if a customer uses cash, credit, or food stamps because it is all money in the end. Money from the food stamp card ( a dollar is still a dollar even if it comes from a food stamp card) gets transferred to the supermarket, the supermarket then uses the money how ever they see fit.......like to pay for some California strawberries, florida orange juice, frozen shrimp from the gulf, whatever. Somewhere in the process a farmer is paid. Truckers are paid to ship the food. So, those food stamp dollars are circulating in productive ways.


Well first, I don't think anyone is demonizing people who are in need. I do see demonizing the corruption though. 

Second, you missed my point entirely. Wal-Mart and Costco are some of the biggest recipients of those food stamps. They have a vested interest on keeping people on food stamps. And in keeping you convinced they are great no matter the cost or corruption on smaller levels.


----------



## City Bound (Jan 24, 2009)

mreynolds said:


> Well first, I don't think anyone is demonizing people who are in need. I do see demonizing the corruption though.
> 
> Second, you missed my point entirely. Wal-Mart and Costco are some of the biggest recipients of those food stamps. They have a vested interest on keeping people on food stamps. And in keeping you convinced they are great no matter the cost or corruption on smaller levels.



In general, I rarely ever hear people distinguish the legitimate people on welfare and food stamps from the moochers, usually they just lump them all together and consider them all moochers. It is nice that some people here make the distinction.

Well, the second part sounds like a conspiracy and you might be right. greed makes people do all kinds of dark and hidden things.


----------



## coolrunnin (Aug 28, 2010)

mreynolds said:


> Well first, I don't think anyone is demonizing people who are in need. I do see demonizing the corruption though.
> 
> Second, you missed my point entirely. Wal-Mart and Costco are some of the biggest recipients of those food stamps. They have a vested interest on keeping people on food stamps. And in keeping you convinced they are great no matter the cost or corruption on smaller levels.


Your wrong walmart and cosco aren't the biggest recipients of food stamps the processed/packaged food manufacturers are, they are also the ones who pushed for food stamps over commodities.


----------



## ET1 SS (Oct 22, 2005)

As I understand the program. About 20% of Food Stamp recipients volunteer 20-hours/week for community programs, which qualifies them for the EBT.

Those who refuse to volunteer, have a stiffer guidelines to meet before they are eligible for EBT.

I glean wastefood and distribute it among food pantries, teen center and unwed mothers home. They each have volunteers working in their programs for this benefit.


----------



## mreynolds (Jan 1, 2015)

coolrunnin said:


> Your wrong walmart and cosco aren't the biggest recipients of food stamps the processed/packaged food manufacturers are, they are also the ones who pushed for food stamps over commodities.


Well in my defense,I did say "some of the biggest recipients". But you are right we need to look at the whole picture before we can solve this problem. 

every step we can take to lessen the big boys hold is a step in the right direction. As long as it doesn't hurt the ones really in need.


----------



## mreynolds (Jan 1, 2015)

City Bound said:


> In general, I rarely ever hear people distinguish the legitimate people on welfare and food stamps from the moochers, usually they just lump them all together and consider them all moochers. It is nice that some people here make the distinction.
> 
> Well, the second part sounds like a conspiracy and you might be right. greed makes people do all kinds of dark and hidden things.


Not saying this is the case with you, but sometimes if you are looking for a certain response you get it more often than when you are not looking for it.


----------



## City Bound (Jan 24, 2009)

ET1 SS said:


> As I understand the program. About 20% of Food Stamp recipients volunteer 20-hours/week for community programs, which qualifies them for the EBT.
> 
> Those who refuse to volunteer, have a stiffer guidelines to meet before they are eligible for EBT.
> 
> I glean wastefood and distribute it among food pantries, teen center and unwed mothers home. They each have volunteers working in their programs for this benefit.


if they worked 20 hours they would get a pay check that is about the same as the food stamps


----------



## romysbaskets (Aug 29, 2009)

Hubby says....NUMBERS NEVER LIE.  Ok so on Maine and food stamp recipients dropping off 80% with the other 20% needing supervised community service...I have some simple costs and rewards listed, then affects....

$116.23 is the average per person food stamp benefits for Maine. 

If a couple made this figure....

They would get $232.46 per month and I don't think anyone would call that living large. Now for whatever reasons they dropped out, 80% did. 

About the savings.... How much supervision do 20 people need for instance? Their amount of food stamps would be around $2789.52 per month based on the above numbers but the other 80 people who dropped off the program just saved $111,580.80!!! Now again, how many people need to supervise 20? I figure maybe they get placed at agencies already available...like soup kitchens, food banks, and yes able bodied folks could help with park clean ups. So again, how many people really need to be hired? If they are placed properly...NONE. Those that have prior management or supervisory skills could be designated to supervise. I don't imagine they need to any complicated jobs requiring skilled people or police to supervise them. So what happens to the $111,580.80? It isn't spent, it is saved. Now look at the real number of people that fell off Maine's food stamp program and run these numbers for the state...WOW. But this is not all good, trust me. 

The affects of the 80% drop off aren't without costs.... 

The elderly, rural residents, disabled and mentally disabled depend on these food stamps. 

The elderly who are disabled need to be screened carefully to avoid them being included in the work requirement, also those that are rural, retired and unable to get to where the work is needed to be excluded. Now how about the mentally ill? There needs to be very careful screening to catch those that should be allowed to stay on the program and not to exclude them.....

Here is one law I just saw in Maine!

http://www.pressherald.com/2015/09/16/maine-will-subject-food-stamp-recipients-to-new-asset-test/

Now you will have to fill out an asset column to prove you don't have $5,000 in assets, this includes snow mobiles which may be needed for where folks live, campers or all terrain vehicles, bank balances which are already standard in WA for instance. They expect 8,600 more folks to fall off the program due to assets. 

If an older couple has worked all their lives and have a camper, an all terrain vehicle they need for where they live...gosh, they are going to get penalized? They don't deserve to keep any assets as they get older or they don't get the food stamps they paid into their entire lives???? I kind of wonder at some of these laws. They don't just affect those who may not want to work. My concern is about those that have retired who worked all their lives or are disabled to boot!!!


----------



## doozie (May 21, 2005)

Regarding the link above,
These asset tests have been eliminated in other states. I don't know from looking if my neighbors atv, snowmobile, or car even runs...heck, I don't even know if they are on food stamps, how do they even make such generalizations? Also, the story looks like it is affecting only those without children for some unknown or explained reason.


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

Bearfootfarm said:


> That's still "supervision" in that someone is paid to be there the whole time, whether they "watch" every minute or not, and someone has to keep track of the records


There IS someone there all the time that the community garden, f.i., is open. There are NO extra volunteers there for the teens who were doing service. I don't know if I drew a picture it would be clearer? NO paid workers. NO extra people watching anyone. Just the usual volunteer & sign in sheet.


----------



## oneraddad (Jul 20, 2010)

As a State employee I used to go collect people for community service and put them to work. I was already getting paid and I got a lot of work accomplished for little effort.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

Tricky Grama said:


> There IS someone there all the time that the community garden, f.i., is open. There are NO extra volunteers there for the teens who were doing service. I don't know if I drew a picture it would be clearer? NO paid workers. NO extra people watching anyone. Just the usual volunteer & sign in sheet.


You're talking about one specific place and a small number of people.

Not everywhere lets them work with "volunteers".

Many of them here are supervised by paid employees, and if there are suddenly hundreds more in the system, they will have to create new tasks to handle them all.


----------



## mreynolds (Jan 1, 2015)

oneraddad said:


> As a State employee I used to go collect people for community service and put them to work. I was already getting paid and I got a lot of work accomplished for little effort.


When we build or add on to a fire station I usually get volunteered to man the job with people on protol. never had to have a deputy either.


----------



## romysbaskets (Aug 29, 2009)

oneraddad said:


> As a State employee I used to go collect people for community service and put them to work. I was already getting paid and I got a lot of work accomplished for little effort.


Thank you for posting this. It is always better for a thread to have someone who really knows from experience to contribute.  We can't know for sure unless someone else does.


----------



## romysbaskets (Aug 29, 2009)

Bearfootfarm said:


> You're talking about one specific place and a small number of people.
> 
> Not everywhere lets them work with "volunteers".
> 
> Many of them here are supervised by paid employees, and if there are suddenly hundreds more in the system, they will have to create new tasks to handle them all.


For any other employees that might possibly need to be hired, the huge amount of money included in the 80% drop off would easily cover the fraction costs. You are right about them needing help if there is not enough existing places for them to be assigned. Without living there, I don't have first hand knowledge of the facilities they could go work at. I imagine the case workers in place for Welfare could schedule them to where they need to be. In Washington for instance, I knew of some older folks on food stamps and welfare, the welfare office scheduled them for a work program based on their abilities..they were just told where to go. There were no extra folks hired. We are now talking about 20% instead of the 100% number of folks on food stamps there so that is a lot less people needing to work for their food stamps.


----------



## romysbaskets (Aug 29, 2009)

Tricky Grama said:


> There IS someone there all the time that the community garden, f.i., is open. There are NO extra volunteers there for the teens who were doing service. I don't know if I drew a picture it would be clearer? NO paid workers. NO extra people watching anyone. Just the usual volunteer & sign in sheet.


I think community gardens are a great place for volunteers too.  I know that the food banks always need help and the work is not hard. I agree that must be a lot of needs to fill. However, even if some people had to be hired to supervise at other facilities, it would be minimal I would think. Most places they could work would be as you say, volunteer and sign in sheets. Folks already there over seeing.


----------



## Farmerga (May 6, 2010)

I don't see much supervision being needed. Give them a task, tell them to do it, check back when they are done. If the task is not done to standard, pull the food stamps.


----------



## romysbaskets (Aug 29, 2009)

doozie said:


> Regarding the link above,
> These asset tests have been eliminated in other states. I don't know from looking if my neighbors atv, snowmobile, or car even runs...heck, I don't even know if they are on food stamps, how do they even make such generalizations? Also, the story looks like it is affecting only those without children for some unknown or explained reason.


They are going after folks that have $5,000 or more in assets which include those. They are trying to weed out anyone they can that can help themselves. Until they eliminate this form, it's there. They just added a simple asset form as they feel folks should not get help if they have assets they can liquidate. Sure there are young people that are abusing the system.. But it goes back to the older folks working all their lives to have a paid off home and possibly an rv, atv etc... Yes there are people out there working under the table and not reporting accurate income to get help. My concern is with the elderly, mentally impaired, disabled and those located where they can't get work. You are so right, how does anyone know about the generalizations...they expect people to be honest when they fill out those forms. In most states you have to register all those items...including boats, rvs, and extra cars etc. You would think the state already knows. Eventually this will all get tied together so no forms should be necessary.


----------



## City Bound (Jan 24, 2009)

The sick and elderly are in a different category, thy are protected by different programs.


----------



## City Bound (Jan 24, 2009)

romysbaskets said:


> I think community gardens are a great place for volunteers too.  I know that the food banks always need help and the work is not hard. I agree that must be a lot of needs to fill. However, even if some people had to be hired to supervise at other facilities, it would be minimal I would think. Most places they could work would be as you say, volunteer and sign in sheets. Folks already there over seeing.


We have a mandatory 8 hours of community service to our community garden as members. It forces people to get involved and we take care of the place ourselves. Part of the reason for this is that we are trying to foster the community part of a community garden. People give classes, build gazebos, mow the lawns, to clerical work. Even the regular work days of weeding foster community because we work with our fellow gardeners and talk. I got to know a lot of people just by weeding with them. 

If we had outsiders coming in to do our work it would disrupt the goal.


----------



## Texaspredatorhu (Sep 15, 2015)

greg273 said:


> You're dreaming poppy if you think people doing 'community service' don't need some sort of supervision. Ever see convicts out painting curbs? Got 4 convicts painting, and two cops standing there watching them. You think those cops work for free? Of course not.
> What about the ranchers? Gonna make them do some community service too? Or do they get their fences built for free? Gonna make them pee in a cup to get that EQUIP money? Lets have REAL 'welfare reform' ACROSS THE BOARD and not just 'punish the poor people' because you think they're moochers.


If it wasn't for the subsidies you would pay a whole lot more for your steak and burgers and also your milk! Farmers and ranchers actually WORK!


----------



## no really (Aug 7, 2013)

City Bound said:


> We have a mandatory 8 hours of community service to our community garden as members. It forces people to get involved and we take care of the place ourselves. Part of the reason for this is that we are trying to foster the community part of a community garden. People give classes, build gazebos, mow the lawns, to clerical work. Even the regular work days of weeding foster community because we work with our fellow gardeners and talk. I got to know a lot of people just by weeding with them.
> 
> If we had outsiders coming in to do our work it would disrupt the goal.


That is sad, you don't have room for people that might really benefit from the time spent working and learning with your group? They might find a goal there also.


----------



## ET1 SS (Oct 22, 2005)

romysbaskets said:


> ...
> If an older couple has worked all their lives and have a camper, an all terrain vehicle they need for where they live...gosh, they are going to get penalized? They don't deserve to keep any assets as they get older or they don't get the food stamps they paid into their entire lives???? I kind of wonder at some of these laws. They don't just affect those who may not want to work. My concern is about those that have retired who worked all their lives or are disabled to boot!!!


Vehicles needed for access are not included in the $5,000


----------



## ET1 SS (Oct 22, 2005)

Texaspredatorhu said:


> If it wasn't for the subsidies you would pay a whole lot more for your steak and burgers and also your milk! Farmers and ranchers actually WORK!


Some farmers do get subsidies and some do not.


----------



## City Bound (Jan 24, 2009)

no really said:


> That is sad, you don't have room for people that might really benefit from the time spent working and learning with your group? They might find a goal there also.


 Well, if we had to. It would create less incentive for the members to actually volunteer. We are self run so we need to encourage people to get involved. 

There is a difference between working beside fellow garden members and working beside people who are forced to be there by the gov and who do not care for the community or gardening. 

Anyway our garden is on federal land and there are strict rules. You are not even allowed to be in the garden area without a permit. 

maybe it sounds sad, but we have our ways and they work for us......and that is perfectly fine, just like I accept that other people have their ways.


----------



## no really (Aug 7, 2013)

City Bound said:


> Well, if we had to. It would create less incentive for the members to actually volunteer. We are self run so we need to encourage people to get involved.
> 
> There is a difference between working beside fellow garden members and working beside people who are forced to be there by the gov and who do not care for the community or gardening.
> 
> ...


Must be a really exclusive group, not much room for others? You never know those people doing community service might just want to become involved in your groups garden. 

But you have your ways, glad for you.


----------



## City Bound (Jan 24, 2009)

no really said:


> Must be a really exclusive group, not much room for others? You never know those people doing community service might just want to become involved in your groups garden.
> 
> But you have your ways, glad for you.


 I think you have made the situation seem worse in your mind. It is not as bad as you make it out. The garden is not exclusive.


----------



## romysbaskets (Aug 29, 2009)

City Bound is in New York so his community garden with it's members may run that way there. However since the OP posted about Maine..I did a little looking up on the subject to see what they have there. 

In Portland, Maine they have 9 Community Garden Sites that have folks pay for plots, $50 or for low income $15 yearly. The department of city works oversees it. Now what if they set aside some of those plots there for time to be spent by these folks for the community service hours? That food could in turn feed low income and the homeless. 

Then I found this:

In Yarmouth, Not only do they have an existing large community garden, they already donated 4143.6 lbs of vegetables to the food pantries and those in need last growing season plus...*They take volunteers because it is fully overseen and supervised already!*

http://www.yarmouthcommunitygarden.org/ 

There are a lot more community gardens available there in Maine. So a community garden may run differently in different areas....


----------



## Texaspredatorhu (Sep 15, 2015)

ET1 SS said:


> Some farmers do get subsidies and some do not.


It's all public knowledge whic ones do and don't and how much it amounts to. And even the ones that do still work harder than 99.99999% of the low life's in this country getting handouts on a daily basis, so what's the big deal if someone deserving gets a little extra from Uncle Sam?


----------



## mmoetc (Oct 9, 2012)

Texaspredatorhu said:


> It's all public knowledge whic ones do and don't and how much it amounts to. And even the ones that do still work harder than 99.99999% of the low life's in this country getting handouts on a daily basis, so what's the big deal if someone deserving gets a little extra from Uncle Sam?


Maybe one of you "conservatives" could tackle this?


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

no really said:


> That is sad, you don't have room for people that might really benefit from the time spent working and learning with your group? They might find a goal there also.


One of the times I volunteered at our Com. Garden there were dozens of volunteers...there was mulch to be shoveled, boarders to put up, lots of heavy stuff. Those that had their 'plots' were working them but lots of other things to do.
Other places I've volunteered have been full of folks & no extra help, at least no extra PAID help. Our city has a small building w/tossed away yard products, paint, automotive stuff that people can take-free. Just have to show proof of residency. We had 2 vols writing down the am'ts of stuff w/#s of people who came in.


----------



## mreynolds (Jan 1, 2015)

mmoetc said:


> Maybe one of you "conservatives" could tackle this?


not a conservative or a liberal but I'll try. 

Let's say that as a carpenter I drive 6000 nails a day. now I do this every day for a year. This causes many houses to be built. Housing prices drop causing many others to lose money in real estate. So the government comes to me and says I have been a bad boy fort doing my job so well. They only want me to drive 3000 nails and they will pay me the rest in a subsidy.

Now I understand that subsidies only cover insurance since 2014, but doesn't that make it easier to just not spend as much money on measures to make sure your crop doesn't fall? The way I understand it, they are trying to wean farmers of them now and every idea they have has been exploited by many.


----------



## mmoetc (Oct 9, 2012)

mreynolds said:


> not a conservative or a liberal but I'll try.
> 
> Let's say that as a carpenter I drive 6000 nails a day. now I do this every day for a year. This causes many houses to be built. Housing prices drop causing many others to lose money in real estate. So the government comes to me and says I have been a bad boy fort doing my job so well. They only want me to drive 3000 nails and they will pay me the rest in a subsidy.
> 
> Now I understand that subsidies only cover insurance since 2014, but doesn't that make it easier to just not spend as much money on measures to make sure your crop doesn't fall? The way I understand it, they are trying to wean farmers of them now and every idea they have has been exploited by many.


Try again. Think of it in the context of "deserving" and who gets to decide that.


----------



## mreynolds (Jan 1, 2015)

mmoetc said:


> Try again. Think of it in the context of "deserving" and who gets to decide that.


Well there's the problem. Subsidies started because many farmers were going to go out of business. The dust bowl and all that. It was special circumstances. It was also supposed to be temporary. I can see subsidies happening certain years or certain circumstances but not every year as a given. Same thing with food stamps some people play the system some are really truly in need. 
So who is deserving in farm subsidies? Only those who have those special circumstance. If they need that every year then someone who is a better farmer needs to buy that farm.fIf someone is destined to fail at the farm every year they don't need to be farmers imo.

But that's not the way it is. It is corrupt all the way from the paid lobbyist in D.C. down to the bottom.


----------



## mmoetc (Oct 9, 2012)

mreynolds said:


> Well there's the problem. Subsidies started because many farmers were going to go out of business. The dust bowl and all that. It was special circumstances. It was also supposed to be temporary. I can see subsidies happening certain years or certain circumstances but not every year as a given. Same thing with food stamps some people play the system some are really truly in need.
> So who is deserving in farm subsidies? Only those who have those special circumstance. If they need that every year then someone who is a better farmer needs to buy that farm.fIf someone is destined to fail at the farm every year they don't need to be farmers imo.
> 
> But that's not the way it is. It is corrupt all the way from the paid lobbyist in D.C. down to the bottom.


I fully understand the history and reasoning behind farm subsidies. I was asking those who most often rail against government giveaways to explain how one group can be "deserving" of such largesse.


----------



## MattB4 (Jan 3, 2016)

mmoetc said:


> I fully understand the history and reasoning behind farm subsidies. I was asking those who most often rail against government giveaways to explain how one group can be "deserving" of such largesse.


Good question. I have often wondered why married couples get special tax breaks. Why rich people can take advantage of give backs like the incentives for buying alternative energy or expensive toys like Tesla cars. Why minorities get special rights. Why good looking people get all the breaks. 

Best I can figure is that the world is one messed up place.


----------



## mreynolds (Jan 1, 2015)

mmoetc said:


> I fully understand the history and reasoning behind farm subsidies. I was asking those who most often rail against government giveaways to explain how one group can be "deserving" of such largesse.


Well no one is really deserving. no one "deserves" to be down and out. That's the basic truth. no one deserves it. But bad things happen to everyone. That is why we have programs. I can't say why others think that some are more deserving except maybe not realizing the whole picture.

But those paid D.C. lobbyist sure think they deserve their money when they lobby for that.


----------



## arabian knight (Dec 19, 2005)

No it isn't messed up Life has never been fair. Never will be and never should be even as the left seems to want it to be these days.


----------



## City Bound (Jan 24, 2009)

there are always winners and losers. There is an old English saying: like it or lump it. 

I have always fallen more into the loser side of the spectrum. The more accept my lot in life the more at peace I am. 

Life for most people is suffering. We may find moments and periods of happiness now and then in life but life promises us no mercy. many can find peace in the promise of eventual death, whether it be because it leads to a better afterlife or if it simply just leads to the end of life in this word.


----------



## ET1 SS (Oct 22, 2005)

City Bound said:


> there are always winners and losers. There is an old English saying: like it or lump it.
> 
> I have always fallen more into the loser side of the spectrum. The more accept my lot in life the more at peace I am.
> 
> Life for most people is suffering. We may find moments and periods of happiness now and then in life but life promises us no mercy. many can find peace in the promise of eventual death, whether it be because it leads to a better afterlife or if it simply just leads to the end of life in this word.


That theme is oft repeated throughout the book of Ecclesiastes.

All is vanity.

Ecclesiastes 9:7 Go thy way, eat thy bread with joy, and drink thy wine with a merry heart; for God now accepteth thy works. 
:8 Let thy garments be always white; and let thy head lack no ointment. 
:9 Live joyfully with the wife whom thou lovest all the days of the life of thy vanity, which he hath given thee under the sun, all the days of thy vanity: for that is thy portion in this life, and in thy labour which thou takest under the sun. 
:10 Whatsoever thy hand findeth to do, do it with thy might; for there is no work, nor device, nor knowledge, nor wisdom, in the grave, whither thou goest.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

arabian knight said:


> No it isn't messed up Life has never been fair. Never will be and never should be even as *the left seems to want it to be* these days.


I thought you were the one always saying things here are now "unfair" *because of* "the left".

It's hard to keep up


----------



## Farmerga (May 6, 2010)

mmoetc said:


> Maybe one of you "conservatives" could tackle this?


 This Conservative is totally against any and all transfer payments made to farmers, or, anyone else. It is just another area where the Federal government has engaged in activities in which it has no legitimate business.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

Farmerga said:


> This Conservative is totally against any and all transfer payments made to farmers, or, anyone else. It is just another area where the Federal government has engaged in activities in which it has no legitimate business.


Maybe as a way of protesting you could refuse to buy any products that may have come from someone who got any sort of Govt funds.

It will also have the fringe benefit of cutting your grocery bills a LOT


----------



## coolrunnin (Aug 28, 2010)

Bearfootfarm said:


> Maybe as a way of protesting you could refuse to buy any products that may have come from someone who got any sort of Govt funds.
> 
> It will also have the fringe benefit of cutting your grocery bills a LOT


I see that route raising your grocery bill a lot, the food people who use no subsidy is expensive.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

coolrunnin said:


> I see that route raising your grocery bill a lot, the food people who use no subsidy is expensive.


I'd be surprised of you could even find any outside a Farmer's Market, and they don't do much in Winter


----------



## ET1 SS (Oct 22, 2005)

We have more and more Farmer's Markets that continue operating all winter long, every year. All Farmer's Markets here accept EBT / Food stamps.

My Farmer's Market runs year-round.

We also have a cash matching program, every EBT dollar is matched so you can buy $2 worth of fresh food with that EBT dollar.


----------



## Farmerga (May 6, 2010)

Bearfootfarm said:


> Maybe as a way of protesting you could refuse to buy any products that may have come from someone who got any sort of Govt funds.
> 
> It will also have the fringe benefit of cutting your grocery bills a LOT


I grow the vast majority of my food. None of it is subsidized.


----------

