Far many more millions in Food Aid Spent on King Crab, Lobster & Steaks than the Department of War

Jake Starkey said:
It argues for adjustment not elimination.
Click to expand...
I didn't argue for elimination. I would argue for stricter rules to get on SNAP and once on the program stricter rules for both use and monitoring of users.

For example, given AI and where computers are, I'd argue that SNAP programs only allow those on them to purchase certain foodstuffs to not include luxury items, pre-processed foods, or ones that are 'ready to eat' for the most part. That is, they have to buy basic ingredients and prepare meals. To that end, I'd also require them to attend training classes in basic food preparation. These could start online with an in-person final exam where they have to demonstrate they have actually learned to cook the stuff they were supposed to be learning to cook. If they can't, off the program for x months before they can reapply and try again.
 
FastLane said:
Plus unmarried spouse may be the breadwinner and the other spouse be on SNaP. There are lots of ways people game the system
Click to expand...
There is no such thing as an "unmarried spouse." They could be an unmarried couple, but they would need to live at different addresses, and the breadwinner would need to not be a parent to the children. The living at different addresses would cost more than the SNAP benefits, and why is the breadwinner supporting children without gaining anything from it?
 
T. A. Gardner said:
I didn't argue for elimination. I would argue for stricter rules to get on SNAP and once on the program stricter rules for both use and monitoring of users.

For example, given AI and where computers are, I'd argue that SNAP programs only allow those on them to purchase certain foodstuffs to not include luxury items, pre-processed foods, or ones that are 'ready to eat' for the most part. That is, they have to buy basic ingredients and prepare meals. To that end, I'd also require them to attend training classes in basic food preparation. These could start online with an in-person final exam where they have to demonstrate they have actually learned to cook the stuff they were supposed to be learning to cook. If they can't, off the program for x months before they can reapply and try again.
Click to expand...

You're one who would rather have your tax dollars used to buy a missile to blow up a school full of Muslim kids than allow an indigent person to have a steak now and then. Some Xtian you are.

It's funny how these mythical stories of SNAP beneficiaries buying steaks and hams and king crab always pop up at this time of year. I bet it never occurs to those sourpus snobs to realize that this is the time of year when people are receiving their tax refunds. It's quite common for low income folks to splurge when they get their refunds, buying things that otherwise are beyond their reach. A new TV, crab legs, a new pair of Nikes, etc. None of us know when we're behind someone at the grocery checkout how the person in front of us is paying. EBT cards look just like regular credit or debit cards.

The world would be so much nicer if people like you minded their own business.
 
Jake Starkey said:
Your OP is like a Ronald McDonald bouncing doll, one just has to keep hitting it every time when one walks by. It's fun.
Click to expand...
Then there's this:

607bih.gif
 
FastLane said:
Lots of people work off the books. Plus unmarried spouse may be the breadwinner and the other spouse be on SNaP. There are lots of ways people game the system
Click to expand...
Walt said:
There is no such thing as an "unmarried spouse." They could be an unmarried couple, but they would need to live at different addresses, and the breadwinner would need to not be a parent to the children. The living at different addresses would cost more than the SNAP benefits, and why is the breadwinner supporting children without gaining anything from it?
Click to expand...
Ms. Fat Lame is unhinged. I think it's the drugs.
 
volsrocks said:
From an official government research study of $6.58 billion dollars in SNAP expenditures, $1.9 million dollars were spent on king crab, $2.2 million dollars were spent on lobster and $28.4 million on select beef loins. Federal SNAP spending in 2024 was $99.8 billion. Scaled up, that means SNAP recipients spent $28.8 million dollars on king crab, $33.36 million dollars on lobster, and $430.75 million on steaks. DoW spent $2 million on Alaskan king crab, $6.9 million on lobster tail, $15.1 million on ribeye steak.

Ask any journalist pushing the "Hegseth is spending money on lobster" propaganda if they're willing to cut out those categories for SNAP recipients. They will not be.


https://twitter.com/x/status/2032085201950842932
View: https://x.com/DataRepublican/status/2032085201950842932
Click to expand...
Petey spend almost $100,000,000,000.00 in a month.

That's nearly 2 years of total SNAP spending.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top