An estimated 23K active duty service members use food stamps.

Bourbon said:
View attachment 5919

President Donald Trump's proposals to cut eligibility for food stamps would hit hard on thousands of military families who receive the benefit, the Pentagon said Tuesday.
[FONT=Roboto, sans-serif]"It's a very unfortunate situation," [/FONT]Army[FONT=Roboto, sans-serif] Lt. Gen. Anthony R. Ierardi, the Pentagon's Joint Staff Director for force structure, readiness and assessment, said of the difficulties of troops who have to resort to food stamps.[/FONT]

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.mi...amp-cuts-would-hit-military-families.html/amp

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]After he pulls that rug out from under them, maybe our idiot POS can hand them their fucking boxes of "shelf stable milk" and "canned meat" when they march in his fucking multi-million dollar vanity parade. [/FONT]
Click to expand...

That equates to about 1 out of every 59.

How is this pulling the rug out from under them??
 
Burpin said:
View attachment 5919

President Donald Trump's proposals to cut eligibility for food stamps would hit hard on thousands of military families who receive the benefit, the Pentagon said Tuesday.
[FONT=Roboto, sans-serif]"It's a very unfortunate situation," [/FONT]Army[FONT=Roboto, sans-serif] Lt. Gen. Anthony R. Ierardi, the Pentagon's Joint Staff Director for force structure, readiness and assessment, said of the difficulties of troops who have to resort to food stamps.[/FONT]

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.mi...amp-cuts-would-hit-military-families.html/amp

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]After he pulls that rug out from under them, maybe our idiot POS can hand them their fucking boxes of "shelf stable milk" and "canned meat" when they march in his fucking multi-million dollar vanity parade. [/FONT]
Click to expand...

More FAKE NEWS! You repugnant lying leftists are quite FULL of it.

Ierardi did not immediately have an estimate on how many troops were on food stamps but said he had personally dealt with the problem of families struggling to meet their dietary needs in a previous post as a division commander.
 
Don't they get free meals while on duty? Maybe increase pay then, rather than increase welfare. Derp!
 
Althea said:
Maybe if we used the military instead of private contractors, we could afford to pay them better? Let's not forget...combat vets get boatloads of benefits once they leave service. That's factored into their pay already.
Click to expand...

Waste, fraud, and abuse needs to be dealt with, that's for sure. And not just the military, throughout government.
 
Althea said:
Pretty much. Why does the Navy patrol the Persian Gulf?
Click to expand...

Nothing new here. https://fas.org/man/smedley.htm Smedley Butler who was a WW 1 war hero and a general for decades figured out War is a racket. We fight for corporations. Still do . Butler was asked to overthrow the government of FDR by corporation execs. They had a secret trial. It was kept from the people. I am sure very few people are aware of the bankers plot.
yeah, but you can trust them now.https://www.npr.org/2012/02/12/145472726/when-the-bankers-plotted-to-overthrow-fdr
 
Nordberg said:
Or if we raised the min. wage we would have a lot less people on it.
Click to expand...

That is actually a bad idea! then people like me who have actually worked their entire life lose. My employer will not increase my pay accordingly, so when prices go up which is actually what this is all about we are screwed and because the prices go up it makes no difference to those getting the raise. it takes us to a two class system those who have and those who do not.
 
Wolverine said:
That is actually a bad idea! then people like me who have actually worked their entire life lose. My employer will not increase my pay accordingly, so when prices go up which is actually what this is all about we are screwed and because the prices go up it makes no difference to those getting the raise. it takes us to a two class system those who have and those who do not.
Click to expand...

Actually it is a great idea. If they made a decent wage, they would not need food stamps. the stamps are determined by your finances. Each state makes some rules. In Michigan, I believe they allow you a small bank account, very small. You can only have one car. Your wages are taken from the poverty level. if you fall short, you are allowed food stamps. It is a very small amount . If you are alone, you can get help if you make less than 15.,444 . Family of 3, 26,208 bucks.

I think we should assign a Republican to go shopping with every food stamp recipient. Poor people are unable to make proper food choices. Their waist measurements should be taken and the Republican should have power to put them on diets. They should make financial decisions for them too. If they were like them, they would be great successes.
 
Nordberg said:
Actually it is a great idea. If they made a decent wage, they would not need food stamps. the stamps are determined by your finances. Each state makes some rules. In Michigan, I believe they allow you a small bank account, very small. You can only have one car. Your wages are taken from the poverty level. if you fall short, you are allowed food stamps. It is a very small amount . If you are alone, you can get help if you make less than 15.,444 . Family of 3, 26,208 bucks.

I think we should assign a Republican to go shopping with every food stamp recipient. Poor people are unable to make proper food choices. Their waist measurements should be taken and the Republican should have power to put them on diets. They should make financial decisions for them too. If they were like them, they would be great successes.
Click to expand...

No, it is a bad idea; because if you're going to arbitrarily raise the wages of one, then you need to make it equitable for others.

Example:
Worker A is making $5.00 @ hour and it gets raised to $15.00 @ hour (300%), just because.
THEN
Worker B who has worked his ass off to get raises that now put him at $15.00 @ hour, should then be raised to $45.00 @ hour (300%)
AND
$20 to $60
$30 to $90
$40 to $120
And so on.

Or else how are you going to keep the ones who have stayed for years and worked their way up, via the raises?
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
No, it is a bad idea; because if you're going to arbitrarily raise the wages of one, then you need to make it equitable for others.

Example:
Worker A is making $5.00 @ hour and it gets raised to $15.00 @ hour (300%), just because.
THEN
Worker B who has worked his ass off to get raises that now put him at $15.00 @ hour, should then be raised to $45.00 @ hour (300%)
AND
$20 to $60
$30 to $90
$40 to $120
And so on.

Or else how are you going to keep the ones who have stayed for years and worked their way up, via the raises?
Click to expand...

I don't think you understand how wages work. Like, in any way at all.
 
Nordberg said:
Actually it is a great idea. If they made a decent wage, they would not need food stamps. the stamps are determined by your finances. Each state makes some rules. In Michigan, I believe they allow you a small bank account, very small. You can only have one car. Your wages are taken from the poverty level. if you fall short, you are allowed food stamps. It is a very small amount . If you are alone, you can get help if you make less than 15.,444 . Family of 3, 26,208 bucks.

I think we should assign a Republican to go shopping with every food stamp recipient. Poor people are unable to make proper food choices. Their waist measurements should be taken and the Republican should have power to put them on diets. They should make financial decisions for them too. If they were like them, they would be great successes.
Click to expand...

No it would not help, price of everything would go up, then when my boss doesn't adjust my pay, I am in the same boat they are, more poor, no middle class, and more rich corporations that dems always complain about! That is what it is all about.
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
No, it is a bad idea; because if you're going to arbitrarily raise the wages of one, then you need to make it equitable for others.

Example:
Worker A is making $5.00 @ hour and it gets raised to $15.00 @ hour (300%), just because.
THEN
Worker B who has worked his ass off to get raises that now put him at $15.00 @ hour, should then be raised to $45.00 @ hour (300%)
AND
$20 to $60
$30 to $90
$40 to $120
And so on.

Or else how are you going to keep the ones who have stayed for years and worked their way up, via the raises?
Click to expand...

BINGO
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top