I keep hearing this story that there is supposedly a certain – and a quite significant – number of people in this country who cheat the government to get the food stamps they are not entitled to. Now, you need to remember that I’m not American and I only discovered the concept of food stamps fairly recently. I’m trying to understand the idea logically but I simply can’t get the concept of food stamp cheaters to make any sense to me.
If a person goes to the trouble of jumping through the bureaucratic hoops on the way to food stamps, resigns him or herself to living in fear of being found out, faces the humiliation of presenting these food stamps at the check-out counter, and agrees to have one’s food choices policed by the unwelcoming cashiers and other customers who hate seeing food stamps being used on food they don’t approve, then that has got to be a pretty desperate person. I can’t imagine anybody with a good income and a comfortable life going to all that trouble. Why would they? I mean, really? If there is, indeed, a significant group of people who cheat to get these food stamps, doesn’t it mean that there are categories of people in dire financial need who, for whatever reason, are not covered by the food-stamp provisions? In this situation, wouldn’t it make a lot more sense to expand the category of people who need this assistance rather than suspect that somebody is trying to become a multi-millionaire by getting “undeserved” food stamps?
It makes me feel somewhat ashamed even to discuss food stamps in a country that has given out billions of taxpayers’ money to Goldman Sachs and Co in very recent history. Food stamps sound like such a miserable drop in the bucket compared to the enormous sums those corporate cheaters have been able to get out of us.
I pay my taxes honestly and I know I’d be much richer if I didn’t have to pay them. But I can’t bring myself to experience any outrage over somebody getting an extra loaf of pre-sliced bread out of that money. I do, however, mind it hugely that Mr. Blankfein will get yet another Porsche out of it.
Clarissa's Blog 
I agree with you that corporate welfare is a bigger problem than food stamps. Part of the problem with food stamps, though, and with our welfare system in general is that they were consciously designed in order to eliminate the shame factor. For example cities like New York buy ads to inform people about food stamps and make a point of telling them that they should not feel ashamed of using them and that this is so that they can buy healthier meals for their families.
LikeLike
I once told a colleague that the day before a cashier at the supermarket asked me whether I was going to pay with food stamps.
“Oh God, what were you wearing??” the colleague immediately asked. I have to confess that the first thing I did after being asked that question was examine my clothes.
LikeLike
“Part of the problem with food stamps, though, and with our welfare system in general is that they were consciously designed in order to eliminate the shame factor.”
I’m going to go out on a limb here and guess that if you believe this, that you have never actually been poor.
LikeLike
Yeah, I was just… welcome to America, where if you’re poor you are the Enemy. Really, we hate poor people here, we do. The America I grew up in, where you could be “poor but proud” because we had the strange idea that people were more than just the sum of their possessions, and it was better to be an honest poor person than someone who had sold their soul to the company store and lived a deceitful, empty, wealth-gathering life, died sometime while I was still in high school. The idea that poor people shouldn’t go around in a constant shame-crouch because they’d fallen on hard times for whatever reason, is the last vestige of that generous, humane outlook we had in the past, and it’s being strangled to death by people like you who think that telling food stamp recipients that there was no shame in getting government assistance so they and their kids wouldn’t starve to death is “a problem.”
In short, fuck off, you spoiled, pampered, coddled baby.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Part of my concern with putting out ads for food stamps is that I am operating on the assumption that anyone who really needed them would be able to find out about them through other means. Just like the point of Pepsi ads are not that you should know that there is such a thing as Pepsi, but to sell an image of Pepsi that it is something cool to drink, these ads serve to create an image in which using food stamps is a “life-style option” and not just simply something to fall back on when there is no other choice.
LikeLike
I am a graduate student so I guess it depends on how you define poverty. I have never viewed myself as poor. That being said I am classified by our government as living in poverty for the purposes of medical care. (So as not to tempt myself, I have not investigated the full extent of what I might be able to receive from the government.) I do not believe that someone like myself should count as poor so one of my ground rules for even beginning to discuss government welfare, besides for the need for there to be a strong shame factor, is that it should only be given to people who are significantly worse off than me.
LikeLike
“I am operating on the assumption that anyone who really needed them would be able to find out about them through other means.”
You… assumption… gah!
“…it should only be given to people who are significantly worse off than me.”
Has anyone told you that you aren’t the center of the universe and you’re arbitrary standards mean nothing outside of the concept of your own life?
You can’t be real.
LikeLike
I may have made an assumption, but it is one based on a valid understanding of the purpose of ads. Can you make a case that these ads are different from what Pepsi does? I am turning down any claim to your tax dollars in the form of government welfare. That seems to be the opposite of being selfish or seeing myself as the center of the universe. Do you believe that I should be on welfare? If so feel free to send me a check.
LikeLike
Where else would people poor enougth to get food stamps find out? Using their broadband connection tot he internet? Maybe using their unlimited mobile data plan and smart phone? They should place ads so that people like you do feel ashamed about their lack of understanding of how poverty pervades every aspect of a persons life.
LikeLike
Being poor is humiliating and horrible enough without having to feel even more shamed for using assistance in order to survive. On top of your belly croaking with hunger, malnourishment, fear that you’ll get sick and won’t be able to afford medical care, and wondering how you’ll be able to function at work/looking for jobs on an empty stomach, what sick soul would think that shame is an appropriate cherry on that shit cake?
LikeLike
Agree that anyone whose “belly is not croaking from hunger” should not count for government welfare and I will concede to having government welfare exist in the first place.
LikeLike
Strawman on aisle five.
LikeLike
You of your own free will decided to draw the line of defining poverty in those terms. Do you wish to draw a different line. As a medieval scholar I am inclined to define poverty in terms of who people in the middle ages would have called poor.
LikeLike
Wow, you really are completely unaware of what an idiot you sound like.
LikeLike
That is ok. I was wondering the same thing about you. But notice how I am open minded enough to give you the benefit of the doubt and attempted to negotiate with you. Despite having Asperger syndrome, I possess a theory of mind and recognize that other people honestly disagree with me. I therefore try to avoid, no matter how tempting it might be, to simply dismiss others as idiots. Are you willing to grant me the same?
LikeLike
”You of your own free will decided to draw the line of defining poverty in those terms.”
What terms? I haven’t defined poverty in any terms. The argument was whether poor people are humiliated enough. Rather than address any actual arguments on this point, you again brought up this pathetic bogeyman of food stamp cheaters. Cough up some statistics or STFU.
“As a medieval scholar I am inclined to define poverty in terms of who people in the middle ages would have called poor.”
How the fuck is your major even remotely relevant to this discussion? I suppose you expect us to bow to your superior knowledge, because oh you study a time period when a lot of people were very poor. La-di-da. Clearly that outranks any actual lived experience of hunger.
But guess what? It’s an inane argument, because poverty is not defined by an absolute standard. Poverty is defined by the standards of the society in which it exists. Here’s a novel idea: why don’t you try going to an inner city, or a northern First Nation–the kind where the people are living in mouldy, dilapidated houses without running water–and you can show up and explain to them that, oh they’re not really suffering all that badly, because they’re not living in thatched-roof huts, burning charcoal for a living.
Oh and for the record? I *also* have a degree in mediaeval history; and frankly–if given the choice, I would rather have a welfare state than have people living like peasant.
LikeLike
You took it as a given that poor people are by definition those who are starving. Feel free to accept a wider definition, but that kind of takes the steam of your argument. My point was never about people trying to cheat the system, it was that our government is choosing a rather wide definition of poverty. This creates a system in which welfare can become a life-style option. This is where the shame factor comes in. Obviously truly poor people do not need to be shamed, they have enough as it is. If there is no shame to being poor than there is reason to suspect that the line of poverty has been drawn so wide that it is nolonger useful.
Notice that I never claimed to be smarter than other people. If you decide that I am I can live with that along with a personal “welfare” check. I assume you have read George Orwell and understand the dangers of simply changing words around. Would you say that a medieval person who could not afford to eat meat on a regular basis was poor? If no then why should a modern person who cannot afford meat be deemed poor? Why is an understanding of poverty based on an understanding of the Middle Ages less than an understanding of poverty based on living in an inner city, which I did for five years?
LikeLike
“You took it as a given that poor people are by definition those who are starving.”
No, I take it as a given that poor people can’t afford to buy food and pay for their other living expenses. That’s pretty much the definition of poverty.
“This creates a system in which welfare can become a life-style option. ”
Again, people keep saying this, but then they don’t cite any statistics about what percentage of people actually do this.
“This is where the shame factor comes in. Obviously truly poor people do not need to be shamed, they have enough as it is. ”
Oh yes, because “truly” poor people will magically be shielded from the shame which you are arguing should be associated with being associated with foodstamps. Precisely how’s that going to work?
“If there is no shame to being poor than there is reason to suspect that the line of poverty has been drawn so wide that it is nolonger useful.”
See, this is why your argument is so full of shit. You just said that there *shouldn’t* be any shame associated with being “truly poor,” but now you’re saying that there *should* be shame associated with poverty. You can’t have it both ways.
But of course, all of this *still* just overlooks the fact that, in fact, there actually *is* a lot of shame associated with poverty in our culture.
“Notice that I never claimed to be smarter than other people.”
Believe me, I don’t think you are.
“I assume you have read George Orwell and understand the dangers of simply changing words around.”
The only person doing that is you; you are redefining ‘poverty’ from one line to the next to mean whatever the fuck is most convenient for you.
“Would you say that a medieval person who could not afford to eat meat on a regular basis was poor? If no then why should a modern person who cannot afford meat be deemed poor? ”
You seem to have my argument backwards. You would say that a modern person who doesn’t have electricity is poor. Would you say the same about a mediaeval person?
“Why is an understanding of poverty based on an understanding of the Middle Ages less than an understanding of poverty based on living in an inner city, which I did for five years?”
Seriously? It’s because actually living through something gives you a better understanding than reading about it in a book.
LikeLike
““Would you say that a medieval person who could not afford to eat meat on a regular basis was poor? If no then why should a modern person who cannot afford meat be deemed poor? ””
– This starts getting way too close to the “But children in Uganda are starving, so how dare you engage in any analysis of anything whatsoever” line of argument. Why should we suddenly adopt the criteria of the Medieval people when we have our own society and can create criteria of our own?
LikeLike
It is very important to bring up the starving children in Uganda. Since there is no moral difference between human beings and countries are an artificial constructions, it should be my right to have any of my tax dollars the government took to provide health care for poor children here and use it to buy bread for children in Uganda. Are you suggesting that poor black children in Uganda are less human than poor white children in Georgia. (Of course it should be my right to have those same tax dollars back and spend it on Starbucks, but that is a side point.)
LikeLike
I really dislike it when people say “are you suggesting…” and then proceed to ascribe some barbarity to me. I always say exactly what I mean to say without suggesting, implying or hinting at anything.
As far as I’m aware, nobody has suggested that the food stamps be cut and that money in its entirety be sent to Uganda. When such a bill is introduced in Congress or such a budget is proposed by a potential Veep, I will gladly discuss them. For now, however, I see a budget proposal that wants to cut food stamps in order to give the money to billionaires. And I don’t support either Uganda or the Middle Ages being used as rhetorical devices to make the point that people on food stamps in the US are over-entitled or spoiled. If that is, indeed, tje point you are making.
LikeLike
The issue here is whether, even if we ignore the fact that taxes for welfare are form of coercion, we can justify welfare even moral grounds. Since you do not know whether I was going to send that money to feed Ugandian children, you have no choice but to give me back my money so I can make that choice.
LikeLike
“Since you do not know whether I was going to send that money to feed Ugandian children, you have no choice but to give me back my money so I can make that choice.”
– I’m ready to give you back every single cent you gave me. 🙂 But you do know that I personally do not collect taxes or decide where they go, right? 🙂 We will all make the choice whether the tax money will go to food stamps or to the billionaires in November. I mean, YOU will decide. I don’t decide because I don’t vote in this country. 🙂
LikeLike
How do you define living expenses? For that matter how do you define food? Does meat count? Keep in mind you are up against a trap the moment you try give clear definitions of poverty. The wider your definition the less empathy you will be able to generate. If you narrow your definition then you face the possibility that there are people on welfare who do not fit your definition and should therefore be cut. The point of shame is not to use against the truly poor, but against anyone who would attempt to take advantage of the system. I have no idea how many “life-style” people there are and neither do you, particularly as we have no agreed upon standard. The best we can do here is to construct a plausible system that can reduce the level of poverty. The reason why I would not call someone without electricity today poor is that I would not call a medieval person without electricity poor. I am very consistent. We could have a different discussion about people who are less fortunate than us and our moral responsibility for such people. Part of the advantage of book knowledge is that it allows one context to be able to build a larger theory than simple personal experience, which can so easily turn into a trap. For example, who would you say understands the Holocaust better, a lay survivor or a professional scholar in the field? This is not to say that personal experience has no value.
LikeLike
On the Holocaust question: I’m surprised this is even a question. Of course, the survivor.
Does anybody disagree??
LikeLike
“How do you define living expenses? For that matter how do you define food? Does meat count? Keep in mind you are up against a trap the moment you try give clear definitions of poverty. The wider your definition the less empathy you will be able to generate. If you narrow your definition then you face the possibility that there are people on welfare who do not fit your definition and should therefore be cut.”
Blah, blah, blah, basically you have no legitimate argument and are simplyu whining about poor people collecting welfare now.
“The point of shame is not to use against the truly poor, but against anyone who would attempt to take advantage of the system.”
Once again, you can’t have the one without the other.
“I have no idea how many “life-style” people there are and neither do you, particularly as we have no agreed upon standard. The best we can do here is to construct a plausible system that can reduce the level of poverty. ”
Well, it’s so nice that, even though you apparently have no clear definition of poverty, you can still magically argue that people aren’t really poor.
“The reason why I would not call someone without electricity today poor is that I would not call a medieval person without electricity poor. I am very consistent. ”
Seriously? Someone who can’t afford electricity isn’t poor in your opinion? How well do you suppose you’d fare in the world economy without access to electricity?
Also, as Clarissa points out, why are you arbitrarily defining the Middle Ages as the baseline for OUR society?
“For example, who would you say understands the Holocaust better, a lay survivor or a professional scholar in the field?”
Who do I suppose understands the Holocaust better? In what way? From an overarching materialistic perspective, obviously the scholar.
If, on the other hand, you mean to ask who better understands what it was like to LIVE through the holocaust, then I would say without a second’s hesitation that the SURVIVOR KNOWS BETTER THAN SOME CHUMP WHO JUST READ ABOUR IT IN A BOOK.
Likewise: you made an assertion about what it was like to be on welfare, how there’s not enough shame associated with it. In order to support this claim, you cite the fact that you study a bunch of poor people who lived 700 years ago. On the other hand, I have the testimony of every single person I have ever met who has used fooodstamps to the effect that to do so is humiliating and degrading in the extreme. Sorry honeybunch, THEIR OPINION OUTRANKS YOURS!
Now, if we were talking about poverty on an overreaching, societal scale, then…well, frankly, I *still* wouldn’t believe that your perspective was necessarily better, because I’m afraid I’ve been rather unimpressed by your logical reasoning ability thus far.
LikeLike
We keep going in circles around this idea that there are people who want to “take advantage of the system”, yet my original question remains unanswered: why would somebody go to all the trouble of jumping through bureaucratic hoops and shouldering the shame and the vituperation for something so minimal as a few loaves of pre-sliced bread and a few cans of peas? Doesn’t that, in itself, signal a profound desperation? It isn’t like anybody is likely to buy a mansion as a result of these “savings”, right?
Why take advantage when the advantage in question is so minimal?
LikeLike
Unlike you I have a very clear definition of poverty. Amongst other things, it means not being able to afford meat or electricity. Another definition I might consider is someone whose state of being is so dire that we would have to question the morality of any person who would consciously turn their backs on them. I do not understand why you object to my discussion of shame as a test of poverty. We both agree that there is a moral responsibility to help those less fortunate than ourselves and certainly those living in a state we define as poverty. (I support private charity you seem to support government welfare.) Now we both agree that it is possible for people to take advantage of the system. Do you doubt that I could acquire food stamps for myself if I so wished? Remember that as far as the government is concerned, I am poor. I am simply suggesting that one safeguard against abuse could be the use of social shame. From an anthropological perspective this is a common tactic traditionally used to keep people in line. By the Middle-Ages I was simply choosing a pre-modern time that people usually associate with poverty. If you want to talk about life in Rome, I think my basic point will still stand. My interest is not this society per se, but to take an ethical position that could be applied to any time and place. Scholarship is much more than just reading about something in a book. It involves using a consistent methodology in the service of crafting a larger picture. You seem to lack a methodology for considering poverty. Saying that welfare is humiliating means nothing without some standard to compare it to. For example, I compared having ads to not having ads.
LikeLike
“Unlike you I have a very clear definition of poverty.”
So what? No one cares what your definition of anything is. You aren’t the arbiter of reality. You don’t get to make the rules for other peoples’ lives.
LikeLike
“Food stamps sound like such a miserable drop in the bucket compared to the enormous sums those corporate cheaters have been able to get out of us. I pay my taxes honestly and I know I’d be much richer if I didn’t have to pay them. But I can’t bring myself to experience any outrage over somebody getting an extra loaf of pre-sliced bread out of that money. I do, however, mind it hugely that Mr. Blankfein will get yet another Porsche out of it.”
I couldn’t agree anymore. I can’t think of anything I am LESS concerned about than “food stamp fraud.” And from what I understand food stamps are very cheap for the government. Just think of how much food grocery stores and restaurants throw away daily. I would rather that people have that food.
LikeLike
“Just think of how much food grocery stores and restaurants throw away daily.”
A bit OT, but I wonder if any cities have programmes whereby surplus food from grocery stores and restaurants are distributed to homeless shelters.
LikeLike
A good portion of it ends up at Food Banks, which is why so much of the food I got from there had mould spots/was past expiration. However, since the demand is so high and the supply so low with the recession, a lot of food banks have to either depend heavily on private donations, or shut down.
When I got a job after months of unemployment, the first payday, I wrote a donation cheque to my food bank as a gesture of gratitude.
LikeLike
It depends on local rules from Board of Health, whether they will let an official place like a homeless shelter or a food bank distribute food that is rotting or rotten, or that is partly eaten and so could carry a communicable disease.
LikeLike
I like what you say, Clarissa. I’m also glad that you shop in a market where some customers use food stamps,as so I.
I must say that the idea of shaming people who need food assistance is repugnant to me.
LikeLike
We live in an economically blighted area and many people have really tough lives. I see these people and how they live and find any discussion of how they don’t work because they don’t want to work to be completely unconscionable.
I saw an ad for part-time jobs as maids and kitchen help at a St. Louis hotel. Under the ad there was an announcement telling people that there were so many applications that they wouldn’t even be answered. 😦 These are not “spoiled” people who apply for these jobs. And even they are scarce. 😦
LikeLike
“Has anyone told you that you aren’t the center of the universe and you’re arbitrary standards mean nothing outside of the concept of your own life?”
– Like me, Izgad is autistic, so it’s very difficult to accept this idea. Im for one, keep struggling with it.
LikeLike
He doesn’t seem to be struggling with it.
LikeLike
“The idea that poor people shouldn’t go around in a constant shame-crouch because they’d fallen on hard times for whatever reason, is the last vestige of that generous, humane outlook we had in the past, and it’s being strangled to death by people like you who think that telling food stamp recipients that there was no shame in getting government assistance so they and their kids wouldn’t starve to death is “a problem.””
I’m gonna go out on a limb and make a wild guess that this guy is a libertarian.
LikeLike
That I am and proud of it.
LikeLike
Ah. Well that would explain just about everything, wouldn’t it.
LikeLike
“On top of your belly croaking with hunger, malnourishment, fear that you’ll get sick and won’t be able to afford medical care, and wondering how you’ll be able to function at work/looking for jobs on an empty stomach, what sick soul would think that shame is an appropriate cherry on that shit cake?”
– This is the double tragedy of poverty: fear and shame. I see a very rich country – because this is a very rich and productive country – that is bogged down in conversations about these non-existent food stamp cheaters instead of figuring out why so many people are out of work and struggling.
An especially evil outgrowing of this debate is the legend of “welfare mothers.” I see red whenever I hear blabberings about these (again, non-existent) single mothers who give birth to live the high life on welfare checks. It is especially endearing that the same people militate against reproductive rights and want to cut assistance to children whose parents are on welfare.
LikeLike
I will avoid saying anything as to what goes on among inner city minority groups, particularly as there are people here who probably know much more about it than I do. But I will tell you that the Ultra-Orthodox Haredim have development elaborate means to cheat the welfare system and they sure do use food stamps.
LikeLike
“But I will tell you that the Ultra-Orthodox Haredim have development elaborate means to cheat the welfare system and they sure do use food stamps.”
– At the risk of sounding stupid, these are people who can’t work because they need to dedicate their lives to studying the Torah and praying, right?
Maybe we could have a discussion here on the blog of how people feel about offering governmental assistance to the Haredim. That would be an interesting topic.
LikeLike
I would love that. Of course it is a trap for all you modern liberals, because you are not going to be able to craft a principled position that just cuts out Haredim. What ever cuts you suggest will have to be applied on a wider basis.
LikeLike
OK, I have no idea why I got placed with these anti-Haredim Liberals who want to cut out the Haredim Jews. 🙂 I don’t want them to live in poverty or to starve and I never militated against them getting food stamps. My position is that anybody who is in a situation where they need food stamps should get them, no matter how they got into that situation. I can’t imagine anybody doing it for the fun of it.
LikeLike
Let us be very clear about the Haredim. Fact: we are dealing with a society that uses the welfare system so that the man can sit and study and the women can produce ten kids. These people are willing to live on very little in order to do so. That being said they are taking from the government when they could work and they are doing so in order to advance an ideology that is hostile to everyone here, including me.
LikeLike
Sounds just like Blankfein and Co with the slight difference that these folks aren’t content to I’ve on very little. Even very much is too little for them. 🙂
LikeLike
How many of these Haredim are there, really, and are they getting more food stamps with “my money” than my congressman is getting free dinners in nice restaurants with it, for crying out loud?
LikeLike
“How many of these Haredim are there, really, and are they getting more food stamps with “my money” than my congressman is getting free dinners in nice restaurants with it, for crying out loud?”
– Exactly.
P.S. I changed your sign-in information to obscure the email address.
LikeLike
Tens of thousands of them and they are producing lots of kids who are going to be taught that all of us have an obligation to support them.
LikeLike
“Of course it is a trap for all you modern liberals, because you are not going to be able to craft a principled position that just cuts out Haredim. What ever cuts you suggest will have to be applied on a wider basis.”
Not really. The question just becomes, “Is it better to have a system that allows unsympathetic people to take advantage without reprimand, or one that leaves some of the truly needy out in the cold?”
LikeLike
“The question just becomes, “Is it better to have a system that allows unsympathetic people to take advantage without reprimand, or one that leaves some of the truly needy out in the cold?””
– That’s really a crucial question for the subject at hand. I personally unequivocally vote for the former. I can’t deal with the idea of anybody going hungry by my side.
LikeLike
This is not about sitting back and letting people starve. It is whether or not we can craft a better system than government welfare, which can cut out people trying to take advantage of the system.
LikeLike
“It is whether or not we can craft a better system than government welfare, which can cut out people trying to take advantage of the system.”
– And what could that system be like?
LikeLike
I am inclined to let people make their own moral choices with their money. If people choose to be stingy than that is their moral failing.
LikeLike
You were the one who proposed an idea of an alternative system. Now it turns out you don’t have one. If such a system doesn’t exist even in your imagination, then what are we arguing about?
LikeLike
My alternative system is to replace governemnt welfare with private charity. For those who insist in keeping the government involved I would be willing to go with a negative income tax (NIT). This would give everyone a certain level of income. This was the position of Milton Friedman.
LikeLike
“My alternative system is to replace governemnt welfare with private charity.”
– If the humiliation factor is not important to you, then that would make sense. Or enriching the millionaire ladies who use these charities to stay rich at the expense of fools who donate. (I’m very closely acquainted with heads of 2 charities, and don;t start me on the “work” they do.) I, on the other hand, don’t mind hiring governmental officials who will figure out who needs help and when. Their accountability is a lot higher than that of those charity drones.
LikeLike
Feel free to “donate” to the government as long as I do not have to at the point of a gun.
LikeLike
Again, this is not an answer but an attempt at avoiding an answer. The charity system is not-so-rich people feeding the very rich to avoid dealing with their feelings of guilt. Actual poverty is in no way alleviated as a result. Your solution is not a solution at all.
Let’s wait and see if anybody has any valid alternatives to food stamps that would actually help feed the hungry.
LikeLike
The Mormon Church does a very good job at keeping their people off of welfare and out of poverty. If you are a Mormon you are not allowed to take welfare unless you have first gone to the Church and asked them for help. So why don’t we see Mormons dying in the streets? It seems like they may be doing something right that we can all imitate.
LikeLike
Both of those charity ladies I know make over $250,000 a year. I can’t imagine any poor schmuck at the governmental office that processes those food stamp claims making even a portion of that. I’m not too thrifty but even I am too thrifty to waste my money on these thieves.
LikeLike
“And what could that system be like?”
We should not forget “hidden welfare”, like handouts, tax breaks, giveaways, and subsidies to those interests that have lobbyists etc. Perhaps if such topheavyness was eliminated. In other words, take big business, religion, and the rich off welfare.
LikeLike
“In other words, take big business, religion, and the rich off welfare.”
– Hear, hear!
LikeLike
Izgad, if you look at surveys of economists, you’ll see that 75-85% of believe (possibly with provisos) that “redistribution of income is a legitimate role for government”. Going by the scientific consensus, the real debate ought to be over how much redistribution should be done, and in what manner, not whether redistribution should be done or not. It’s not asking four economists and getting five opinions, but rather asking four economists and getting two opinions. Therefore, anyone who disagrees with government redistribution ought to have damn good reasons for why they think such a strong majority of economists are wrong and why their own position (rely on private charity) is better.
Basically, what redistribution does is keep a country capitalist. A not insignificant number of historians believe that the New Deal prevented a socialist or communist revolution in the US. It improved people lives enough (as compared to the private charity before it!) and gave them enough of a stake in the system that they weren’t tempted to overthrow it. If it helps, think of redistribution as capitalism’s insurance against revolution.
LikeLike
I also really love this comment from Rob F.
LikeLike
How about the fact regardless of whether it works, government action means point a gun at someone’s head and threatening to kill them if they do not comply? Put the gun away I am all ears for collective action to help people in need. Also, just about all economists believe that free trade is a good thing and that we should end tariffs and allow full immigration. You give me those things and we can talk about welfare. Of course once you open the borders you will have to limit the welfare system in order to stop people from coming here to take advantage of it.
LikeLike
“How about the fact regardless of whether it works, government action means point a gun at someone’s head and threatening to kill them if they do not comply”
– I’m noticing that, irrespective of what we discuss, you always come back to this imaginary gun. 🙂 Seriously, man, a few more times, and I will not be able to control my psychoanalytic persona. 🙂 🙂
LikeLike
Do you deny that there are several million people in this country who are armed and who believe that they possess the moral right to rob me, put me in prison or even to kill me for not “following the law?”
LikeLike
“Do you deny that there are several million people in this country who are armed and who believe that they possess the moral right to rob me, put me in prison or even to kill me for not “following the law?””
– You mean the police? Are we back to the idea that people in the US get killed for tax evasion? 🙂
LikeLike
“My alternative system is to replace governemnt welfare with private charity.”
That’s not a system at all. Charity is up to the individual and can be doled out at will. Private charity is about those who bestow; government systems is about the recepient. You bring up the Mormoen chursch: that requires it’s beneficiaries to be Mormen. Other charities require that people remain sober, straight. childless, married, etc etc etc. A government run system is blind and (should) dole to everyone equally. Private charity lets those who are “unlike” or those who are somehow unappealing fall through the cracks.
LikeLike
” This creates a system in which welfare can become a life-style option.”
– In the US? That would be a pretty shitty lifestyle, to be honest. Unless we are talking about Goldman Sachs and Co, of course.
LikeLike
Food stamps: a passeist scam to humiliate victims of the warmongering State.
LikeLike
I like David Gendron for his strong, pithy definitions. 🙂
LikeLike
Thank you! 😉
LikeLike
Thank you! 🙂
LikeLike
Food stamps were created for rationing in a war context.
LikeLike
I’m going to leave this here …
LikeLike
I think that the main point is there are no honest discussions about the economy and all people get is sound bites and false analysis based on cherry picked stats. A good example is last Sunday’s “Your Money” on CNN where they had a graph plus discussion on Ohio’s low rate of employment (6.3%) as an example of an improvement in the economy. I checked Ohio’s rate of labor force participation and discovered it was falling so the reason for a decrease in unemployment was due to people falling off the labor force rather than an improvement in the economy. Food stamps i.e. SNAP represents an extremely small expenditure compared to the overall federal budget but is a “hot button” like fake voters who represent an extremely small group. Most folks in the states believe that foreign aid is over ten percent of the budget when it is actually much less than one percent. This is part of the confirmatory bias where people are interested in confirming their belief system instead of seeking the truth. Expect much more of this in the election run up where Freud’s narcissism of minor differences is in full play.
LikeLike
“Food stamps i.e. SNAP represents an extremely small expenditure compared to the overall federal budget but is a “hot button” like fake voters who represent an extremely small group. Most folks in the states believe that foreign aid is over ten percent of the budget when it is actually much less than one percent. This is part of the confirmatory bias where people are interested in confirming their belief system instead of seeking the truth.”
– This is EXACTLY what I’m trying to say here.
LikeLike
Adopting a negative income tax would make food stamps unnecessary.
So would, for that matter, slapping a VAT on everything and giving everyone a refund (so long as the numbers are appropriately selected).
LikeLike
Agree
LikeLike
Re the original post, there was some comment recently on this blog by the commenter Matt, who really felt, he said, that the perception that there could be food stamp and welfare cheaters was insightful, and that where “liberals” “mess up” (to whom, according to whom) is by not acknowledging that fraud is at least technically a possibility.
I don’t know, food stamps are hard to get nowadays, but perhaps some libertarian or conservative could go down and try to commit fraud, see how well they do.
LikeLike
” there was some comment recently on this blog by the commenter Matt, who really felt, he said, that the perception that there could be food stamp and welfare cheaters was insightful, and that where “liberals” “mess up” (to whom, according to whom) is by not acknowledging that fraud is at least technically a possibility.”
– I wrote this entire post in response to that comment. I can’t just believe things when they don’t make sense to me logically. As of now, nobody has been able to explain to me who would try to get these food stamps unless they really needed them.
LikeLike
My limited understanding of the situation as it exists today is that it is not necessarily that difficult to get that some people might prefer going for them instead of working. Haredim are a good example of this. I would be happy to hear that I am wrong as it would mean that we are much closer to a libertarian state than I thought.
LikeLike
Well, I guess so they can study Torah and not use birth control … maybe … but I only just found out about these Haredim.
LikeLike
But government welfare means that we are all going to be paying for it. Furthermore, because they are concentrated in specific geographic areas, they cannot be touched through electoral politics. They wield enough power that no one on a local or even New York state level can afford to openly come out and pull a Wisconsin on them.
LikeLike
“They wield enough power that no one on a local or even New York state level can afford to openly come out and pull a Wisconsin on them.”
– What does “pull a Wisconsin” mean? 🙂
LikeLike
You remember what the governor of Wisconsin did to government unions.
LikeLike
There are UNEQUIVOCABLY some people who take advantage of food stamps. One of my good friends has multiple colleagues (inner city teachers) who buy food stamps off of others so that those originally with food stamps can buy drugs, alcohol etc.
This is not an opinion… this is an absolute fact. Now, let me be EXTREMELY uprfront in saying that I def. think this is the minority of people. However, there are certainly some who do things like this. Additionally, there was a story 6 months ago going through the whole media about a lottery winner (~$500k i think) who still got food stamps because she didn’t earn any income (but assets weren’t mean tested for food stamps apparently… not sure if that is federal or state policy). There are limited number of people like her… but that is my point! You don’t see news stories about the millions who use the food stamps as temporary stop gaps.. but these aggregious abuses I mention get a ton of attention.
I think it should be clear that some do abuse the system… I have already clearly said what happens with bailing out banks is a major issue.. but it doesn’t change the point about SOME abusing food stamps.
BTW.. foodstamps are at an all time high… (some due to rule changes made by both Bush and Obama)… so its not unreasonable to question how many people get it.
LikeLike
“One of my good friends has multiple colleagues (inner city teachers) who buy food stamps off of others so that those originally with food stamps can buy drugs, alcohol etc.”
– So why do these colleagues do that? These are people you know, so maybe you have an answer.
“BTW.. foodstamps are at an all time high… (some due to rule changes made by both Bush and Obama)… so its not unreasonable to question how many people get it.”
– Probably also because we are going through a major economic crisis and the unemployment has soared.
LikeLike
The reason her colleagues do taht is they can buy food for “half off” (they buy 100 dolalrs of food stamps for $50, and can buy food, and the $50 is likely used for drugs, alcohol etc.)
I do not know here colleagues.. and it is frustrating that they do these abuses (my friend doesn’t tell me all of the stories because she doesn’t want to hear me rant about how bad it is… guess you’re not the only one who has to listen to me lol)
And I want to tread extremely carefully not to be racial or classist.. but the few teachers who I know do this grew up in poverty. One is specific is an african american who in one stance is remarkably admirable story. She was something like 1 of 7 kids who grew up in abject povery in the northeast… and got a college teaching degree (and recently a masters!) I would like nothing more than to applaud her, and I do for that part. HOwever, the cultural part is huge. Despite how she has risen to a different “social and class stauts” (and has a good job).. she still enables others through buying food stamps when she makes good money.
It really is a sad testament how much culture (how you grew up etc.) influences things. I know this is just one example.. but don’t you think these behaviors are detrimental to creating self-sufficiency.?
LikeLike
“The reason her colleagues do taht is they can buy food for “half off” ”
– And why is it important for them to buy food at half-price as opposed to, say, you and me? Might it be because they are poor and that money makes a real difference to them?
“I know this is just one example.. but don’t you think these behaviors are detrimental to creating self-sufficiency.?”
– I don’t think this country faces the issue of developing a huge lack of self-sufficiency in people. As opposed to the country where I come from, for example.
LikeLike
“As a medieval scholar I am inclined to define poverty in terms of who people in the middle ages would have called poor.”
– But why?? Just because this happens to be your area of study? Or because, as a Conservative, you tend to look back for the “golden standard” of everything?
This just seems such an unusual – not to say arbitrary and bizarre – way of creating definitions that would serve us today.
LikeLike
“Tens of thousands of them and they are producing lots of kids who are going to be taught that all of us have an obligation to support them.”
OK then, separate topic although I am still so much less concerned about this than about the wars, corporate welfare, the Romney tax plan, etc.
Thx for changing my info Clarissa but it doesn’t really matter, this is the public e-mail address announced on the blog (and that I keep forgetting to read).
LikeLike
“My limited understanding of the situation as it exists today is that it is not necessarily that difficult to get that some people might prefer going for them instead of working.”
Are you actually in US or familiar with it? They are very hard to get and do not buy much. They don’t substitute work by a long shot, and you can’t get them for long.
LikeLike
And yet somehow we have all these Haredim who have managed to make a life-style out of it.
LikeLike
I must say, I deeply enjoyed this comment by The Twisted Spinster, in response to someone who thinks the downtrodden do not feel sufficient shame:
“[F]uck off, you spoiled, pampered, coddled baby.”
LikeLike
“I keep hearing this story that there is supposedly a certain – and a quite significant – number of people in this country who cheat the government to get the food stamps they are not entitled to.”
Part of the problem with this article is that the notion anyone is “entitled” to food stamps… is probably the largest part that people object to.
Maybe some people should be GIVEN the benefit of food stamps.. and I am ok with that. But ENTITLED… that is loaded.
Also, I think the biggest issue is not that people are qualify who don’t “meet the rules”… but moreso that the rules/program encourage dependency and game playing to keep maintaining benefits.
Here is one example. (http://www.fns.usda.gov/snap/applicant_recipients/eligibility.htm)
Family of four:
Maximum Annual Income for Foodstamps: ~$25,000 – $30,000
Maximum Food Stamp Benefit: $~8,000 (this is maximum.. I have heard from some sources it may be less)
If that person earns a penny over the cutoff… they lose ALL 8,000
Say the family has a single mother.. who currently works 35 hours a week and makes ~25k. If she were to either take a second job… or go back to school and get a higher paying job… she might make $40k (a substantial net jump)
However, over 50% (the $8,000 food stamp benefit) of the salary increase would be lost from food stamps.
That is a MASSIVE disincentive to improve your earning capability. Does anyone disagree? I am not even necessarily blaming the person in this situation… but the idea that this doesn’t lead to a “dependency” society is questionable.
I just provided a “logical/reasoned” example of why someone might decide not to improve their economical circumstance. The other issue the whole idea that regardless of logic… when people turn for handouts that is a culture that is not in unison with self-sufficiency. I grew up middle-class (not upper-middle) and I can almost guarantee that in my hometown less people would think of turning t ofood stamps than people from certain rural or inner city areas. I am being honest that I can’t relate to others difficulty growing up… but the fact that foodstamps is an option I believe can cahnge someone’s perspective on self-sufficiency.
Lastly, I agree corporate and bank handouts suck. Blankfein is a douche (really.. doing gods work? go choke on it). With that said, I hope the comments can be on the content I provided about food stamps.
LikeLike
“That is a MASSIVE disincentive to improve your earning capability. Does anyone disagree? ”
– I do. 🙂 Having a stable income of $40K, a good job that provides this income, not having to face the stigma of being on governmental assistance, not having this thrown in your face constantly, the social mobility, the possibility to improve your situation – one has to be a very weird person to renounce all that for $8k in food stamps.
“I just provided a “logical/reasoned” example of why someone might decide not to improve their economical circumstance. ”
– Have you actually met a person who refused the $40K job in favor of keeping their food stamps?
“when people turn for handouts that is a culture that is not in unison with self-sufficiency”
– In this particular country, I don’t see that culture. If we were talking about my part of the world, however, I would totally agree with you. We do experience it as a very serious issue where people choose to live on miserable handouts instead of working. But we have an entire long history leading up to this state of afairs, while in the US, we have a history that pulls in the opposite direction.
“Blankfein is a douche (really.. doing gods work? go choke on it)”
– Yay!!! 🙂 🙂
LikeLike
“In this particular country, I don’t see that culture. If we were talking about my part of the world, however, I would totally agree with you. We do experience it as a very serious issue where people choose to live on miserable handouts instead of working. But we have an entire long history leading up to this state of afairs, while in the US, we have a history that pulls in the opposite direction.”
I think this is the crux of the matter. As a nation, we don’t have that culture. In inner city and rural areas I do believe there is this culture. I have a few indirect experiences with this, and many that I ahve heard first hand. My step-dad sells innsurance.. and has sold to both wealthy individuals and people on medicare. HHe has multiple examples of people trying to game work requirements. None directly on food stamps that he has mentioned, but a handful who have avoided work so that they keep getting medicaid and subsidized rent (some adults are paying $75 a month.. unreal).. Now, I don’t know that every example is true.. but frankly the core of the matter is that the values of the middle class are often not the values of many in inner city areas or rural areas. I sincerely feel that this is one of the largest things holding back people born into the cycle of poverty. Idk.. hope that might provide some insight where I am coming from
LikeLike
“In inner city and rural areas I do believe there is this culture. ”
– OK, I have a stupid question. 🙂 Other than the cities and the rural areas, what is there? 🙂 Is there some sort of another geographic formation that is neither the city nor the country-side that I’m not aware of? Seriously, though.
“but frankly the core of the matter is that the values of the middle class are often not the values of many in inner city areas or rural areas. I sincerely feel that this is one of the largest things holding back people born into the cycle of poverty”
– All I can say about the values of the American middle class right now is that they molly-coddle their children to the point of making them nearly disabled. Of course, I recognize that there might be other values I’m not yet aware of. Given that it’s mostly the middle-classes who have generations after generations of completely useless housewifely woman who infantilize themselves to the point of being incapable of any self-sufficiency, I’ve got to wonder.
LikeLike
OK, I have a stupid question. 🙂 Other than the cities and the rural areas, what is there? 🙂 Is there some sort of another geographic formation that is neither the city nor the country-side that I’m not aware of? Seriously, though.
Good question 🙂 I would generally say there are inner cities (aka ghetto.. or the poor area.. again.. not racial.. just the area where the poor people live.. nearly every city has a few distinct areas like this), moderate to wealthy areas of cities, suburbs (where vast majority are middle class) and rural.
LikeLike
Also, just to be clear… after re-examining my point the maximum benefits for someone earning $20k might be less than $8k a year… but the disincentive exists in a similar fashion
LikeLike
Matt, if you read a comment of mine that explains one possible solution to the “welfare trap” problem you discuss.
LikeLike
“Of course it is a trap for all you modern liberals, because you are not going to be able to craft a principled position that just cuts out Haredim. What ever cuts you suggest will have to be applied on a wider basis.”
This isn’t a trap. Let the Haredim get them. As far as I’m concerned, any body who wants food stamps should get them. Most people would never get them because they ARE so loaded with shame. And food stamps limit choice. It’s not how Americans like to shop. The risk of abuse is small. The veryfact that an ad campaign exists to destigmatize food stamps suggests that they are stigmatized. I remember reading a study that some parents will actually deal with having LESS food for their children if it means that they can avoid the shame of food stamps. We are a rich country. We spend money in insane, crazy ways. We throw out food by the bucketload. I really and truly don’t care who uses food stamps. I would rather have someone “undeserving” get them then risk a system in which people go hungry (which does happen daily in this very rich country and that’s a much more grave crime than “food stamp fraud.”)
LikeLike
I subscribe to everything Evelina Anville says in this comment.
LikeLike
Do that and you are giving up the moral high ground. This stops being about helping poor people, but ignoring minor crooks in favor of worse ones. No more poor suffering people with aching bellies full of shame.
LikeLike
The last thing I need – and I think Evelina will agree – is a “moral high ground” in dealing with the poor people. This even sounds kind of nasty. And where would the poor people with their shame go all of a sudden?
LikeLike
“Do that and you are giving up the moral high ground”
How? I think that an important role of government is to ensure that people have access to food. If people are going to go through so much trouble to “game the system,” then they probably have a mental disorder that would prevent them from getting food anyway. No system is perfect and all systems will be abused at some point. But the “moral high ground” is that we help people eat– no matter what the risk. It’s simple.
LikeLike
God forbid we give up the “moral high ground.” It’s so much better to stand there smug and perfect while someone who isn’t nice and clean and white goes hungry. They should go hungry, those imperfect creatures!
That was sarcasm. Here’s the real lesson: being smug about your own moral superiority is BAD. People WILL NOT LIKE YOU if you are that way. They will smile patiently while you jabber at them, and get away from you at the nearest opportunity. No one likes a smug asshole, even if he is right about everything, and you aren’t.
LikeLike
Izgad, Izgad, Izgad…You’re not a brilliant chessmaster who’s been cleverly coralling us into ‘giving up the moral high ground.’ You are an idiot and a troll who’s too stupid to realize when he’s already had his arguments beaten to jelly.
LikeLike
” I’m noticing that, irrespective of what we discuss, you always come back to this imaginary gun. ”
This is actually the case with every Libertarian I’ve ever met, to be honest.
LikeLike
“This is actually the case with every Libertarian I’ve ever met, to be honest.”
– I know! Eventually, one gets tired of discussing anything because what is there to say to this bizarre argument while still sounding polite?
LikeLike
“And where would the poor people with their shame go all of a sudden?”
If you shame people, they go into various modes of self-destruction. They might want to take a few of you with them, that’s their choice. It’s a free world.
LikeLike
Well Matt, if it is so attractive to do this … why don’t you try it and send back a report? I assign one year of fieldwork!!! Izgad, too!!!
LikeLike
I don’t mind when people disagree… but it frustrates me when they make silly, pedantic comments like this. I’m not sure exactly which comment this applies to, but I never said it was “so easy”… but rather that people abuse the system.
I make well over the legal limit for food stamps… so why would I try to get them? I never claimed people with middle-upper middle incomes are using food stamps. Many people who use them (and particularly those who use them for more than an odd month or two) are becoming somewhat dependent on them… or at least that is mine and many conservatives objections to them.
So again… I’m not dependent on them…largely because I have a different cultural mindset around this (and natural intelligence, family circumstances, some luck too i suppose… trying to be self-aware here) so why would I try to use them?
And I could be like some people who buy foodstamps for cash so that the original food stamp recipient could buy drugs, alcohol, or cigs…. but I have a conscious so I don’t do this crap.
LikeLike
Last point I want to make is there is no doubt food stamps represent a small part of the budget (although it has risen to over $70 billion annually.. not a completely insignificant sum), but there are 2 large objections to them:
1. Some people feel that some (or many in some people opinion- not mine) recipients are taking advantage of the system and its unfair, immoral etc… this is where this post and most focus on.
2. The less talked about one is how food stamps, medicaid, section 8 housing, TANF etc. create a culture of dependency that is truly inhumane. I am ready to be mocked on this, but from my few experiences with people who have received these benefits and from many first-hand accounts of others who have interacted with people on these programs, they don’t view them as a “last resort” to help out with a temporary “rough patch”… but rather as a “system” and a “way of life”. Again, I never had to grow up in poverty and I know that not everyone uses these programs this way, but I think a decent percentage of people on these programs feel this way.
THis is both bad for this country… but even more so my heart truly breaks for people who don’t realize the power/potential of what they can achieve. I may get some comments like “why don’t you give them money or a job etc.” if you care so much for them… the point is that they need to care for themselves and by dooing that they will be more talented AND have the self-respect that you can only get from self-sufficiency.
LikeLike
Everyone I know who has used these safety net programs has regarded them as a last resort. I am skeptical that there are very many people who try to game the system.
LikeLike
Oh, those nasty, conniving, poor and their essentially immoral nature! Tsk, tsk, take away that porridge! Anyway, related, this, from Debt: the first 5000 years, on how markets are neither natural nor free:
“This in turn leads to that great embarrassing fact that haunts all attempts to represent the market as the highest form of human freedom: that historically, impersonal, commercial markets originate in theft. More than anything else, the endless recitation of the myth of barter, employed much like an incantation, is the economists’ way of fending off any possibility of having to confront it. But even a moment’s reflection makes it obvious. Who was the first man to look at a house full of objects and to immediately assess them only in terms of what he could trade them in for in the market likely to have been? Surely, he can only have been a thief. Burglars, marauding soldiers, then perhaps debt collectors, were the first to see the world this way. It was only in the hands of soldiers, fresh from looting towns and cities, that chunks of gold or silver-melted down, in most cases, from some heirloom treasure, that like the Kashmiri gods, or Aztec breastplates, or Babylonian women’s ankle bracelets, was both a work of art and a little compendium of history-could become simple, uniform bits of currency, with no history, valuable precisely for their lack of history, because they could be accepted anywhere, no questions asked. And it continues to be true. Any system that reduces the world to numbers can only be held in place by weapons, whether these are swords and clubs, or nowadays, “smart bombs” from unmanned drones.”
LikeLike
I might also point out, concerning this matter of ‘barter-based economies’ that no anthropologist has ever actually found such a system, in any society with a non-monetary economy. This in spite of the fact that much of economics simply assumes that money arose naturally from such a system.
LikeLike
‘I might also point out, concerning this matter of ‘barter-based economies’ that no anthropologist has ever actually found such a system, in any society with a non-monetary economy. This in spite of the fact that much of economics simply assumes that money arose naturally from such a system.”
– True! I read a very detailed account of why this is a myth in Graeber’s book and the evidence is overwhelming.
LikeLike
Also – I think food stamps are supposed to be one of the very most successful programs the government has, gets huge marks for improving lives and for using almost all of its money on actual food for actual poor, and from what I understand it saves money because of the problems that do not occur since people have eaten.
LikeLike
I agree! Fussing about a few people here and there who get the food stamps without being completely 100% broke is mean and petty. It denigrates a wonderful program for no reason. This is the same as people who want to abolish tenure because one tenured professor somewhere is a jerk.
LikeLike
hey clarissa explains it all, i have food stamps and i don’t feel a bit ashamed at all because theres a card im given that looks like a debit card, and the only person that might mite know its food stamps is a cashier, but most of the time i use self checkout so i dont need a cashier. i could see however one can feel ashamed if they had no money to pay for housing and looked like a bum purchasing a large amount of food when everyone knows hes probably using food stamps; which hope doesn’t happen to me sometime soon. i have bin trying to get my GED and i,m 22 years old. i dont have a job and dont have any income. i live in my homes house and have applying online for jobs on my computer. w/b
LikeLike
I don’t think you need to feel ashamed and I wish you the best of luck with your job search.
LikeLike
thanks clarissa, i just wanted you to know how the food stamp process actually worked, and i think that these millionaires that cheat the system are wrong for doing so, and they’ll eventually get what they deserve when there caught which is a $250,000.00 fine and some time in prison.
LikeLike
I’m afraid most of them will never get their well-deserved prison sentences. 😦
LikeLike
yeah, thats true most millionaires wont get their prison time, because thats the kind of country we live in where senators and representatives get more benefits the the people that live in this country. i think the more that people who actually need food stamps take advantage of food stamps the more we beat these millionaire cheaters.
LikeLike