Food Stamps and the $41 Cake (1 Viewer)

[bostonfred]

Im back. Glad I wasn't posting more or some really smart people might have told me how I should have spent my time instead. I bought my mom a klondike bar because I didn't think she deserved a cake. My brother got some hamburger meat. I felt bad wasting money on them like that because they're mentally ill and poor and don't deserve a moment's happiness. I told them that they should just eat gruel and wait to die but they didn't seem to like it. Or maybe they did. Like many of you, I don't spend any thought at all about actual poor people except how they're always stealing from the tax coffers. Then I rushed back to keep my post count up.

 

[Arsenal of Doom]

A couple of random thoughts after reading this thread:

1 - Kudos to the author of the OP article for making the effort to memorize what the local SNAP benefits card looks like, and for paying so close attention to what everyone is playing with in front of him, otherwise we might never know of this really newsworthy event. I mean really, you kind of have to go out of your way and make an effort to do this since they usually look just like any other debit card. Well done sir. Of course maybe he hasn't done this but just didn't like the look of the mother and kid buying the cake. Maybe they looked poor and he was afraid it was going to rub off on him or infect him like some kind of parasite. I guess his totally anecdotal account of this "incident" works about the same either way.

2 - Threads like this are a prime example of why means testing should never happen with Social Security.

 

[Nugget]

$668 is the max benefit for the SNAP program for a family of 4 per month. Why worry if over 5% of a monthly allocation for 4 people was spent on an ice cream cake. The purpose of the money was not to assist supplemental nutrition, it was for self asteem. Ice cream for everyone!

 

[Chaka]

Im back. Glad I wasn't posting more or some really smart people might have told me how I should have spent my time instead. I bought my mom a klondike bar because I didn't think she deserved a cake. My brother got some hamburger meat. I felt bad wasting money on them like that because they're mentally ill and poor and don't deserve a moment's happiness. I told them that they should just eat gruel and wait to die but they didn't seem to like it. Or maybe they did. Like many of you, I don't spend any thought at all about actual poor people except how they're always stealing from the tax coffers. Then I rushed back to keep my post count up.

Fred you are making some excellent points in this thread and I honestly think you have some people rethinking their perspective (it wouldn't be the first time you have got me to reconsider my viewpoint) but I wish you wouldn't continue with this refrain. It wasn't a choice between a $41 cake and zero happiness for eternity. Go to any major super market and you will see literally dozens of options between zero happiness for eternity and a $41 cake. If that's how she thought it was best to achieve her goal that's fine, I honestly have no problem with it, her food income is fixed and hers to do with as she likes, but let's not pretend that there weren't other options between $41 ice cream cake and zero happiness.

 

[cosjobs]

I feel really sorry for all the dooshes in this thread whose mother would never consider over-extending the monthly budget so that they might have a special birthday. Maybe if that had happened for you, you would not be such dooshes.

 

[HughHoney]

My mom always bought $41 cakes. How do you think I became the entitled doosh I am today.

 

[cosjobs]

My mom always bought $41 cakes. How do you think I became the entitled doosh I am today.

So you deserved them but no one else does? Or are you just acting like someone cared for you as a child to make another tired caricature of the left?

 

[cstu]

$668 is the max benefit for the SNAP program for a family of 4 per month. Why worry if over 5% of a monthly allocation for 4 people was spent on an ice cream cake. The purpose of the money was not to assist supplemental nutrition, it was for self asteem. Ice cream for everyone!

The amount of benefits the household gets is called an allotment. The net monthly income of the household is multiplied by .3, and the result is subtracted from the maximum allotment for the household size to find the household's allotment. This is because SNAP households are expected to spend about 30 percent of their resources on food.

If the monthy income is $1000 then $300 is supposed to go to food, leaving them with $368 from SNAP.

 

[HughHoney]

$41 Cake=happiness. Got it.

 

[cosjobs]

$41 Cake=happiness. Got it.

Having a mother who cares for you = priceless

 

[HughHoney]

So you deserved them but no one else does? Or are you just acting like someone cared for you as a child to make another tired caricature of the left?

I don't talk politics here and wasn't making a point for either side. Its pretty simple, IMO, people that get public funding don't need to buy $41 cakes. Kinda surprised some people feel that its ok hey that's their opinion.

 

[cosjobs]

So you deserved them but no one else does? Or are you just acting like someone cared for you as a child to make another tired caricature of the left?

I don't talk politics here and wasn't making a point for either side. Its pretty simple, IMO, people that get public funding don't need to buy $41 cakes. Kinda surprised some people feel that its ok hey that's their opinion.

Ok, fair enough. And frankly I think food stamps should be restricted primarily to fresh raw foods, uncooked grains and raw meat/poultry. But at the same time I think it is important to recognize the dignity and situations of those in need of assistance.

 

[djmich]

$41 Cake=happiness. Got it.

No, cake=dignity, got it?

 

[Carolina Hustler]

This guy sees someone buy a ####### cake, decides its too expensive for them, then pats himself on the back for being able to afford a costco membership, a car, the time and gas to go across town 20 extra minutes on the weekend, the space in his home to store huge boxes of bulk goods, and the money to spend on things today that he wont use until tomorrow. But he doesn't take the time to ask if this is a single mom who is trying to help her kid have a cake with his friends so he will have some self confidence and wont feel like the poor kid who can't have a birthday party for reasons that have nothing to do with him, or if this mother is dealing with some other life issues like mental illness, substance abuse, or unemployment, or if this mother has the luxury to go on longer trips to the store or if it means that shed have to bring her youger baby in a car seat she can't afford or leave them with a babysitter who can't be bothered to watch a kid for a couple hours while she gets a two gallon jar of mayonnaise. He just says, this ladys stupid, and we shouldn't give her money anymore. Maybe he can spit on some homeless people on the way home and make himself feel even better.

No one should be buying a $41 cake with public benefits. Sorry.

"Mom, all I want for my birthday is an icecream cake like Charlie had at his party" What's a mom to do? Maybe the only way she could afford to get him anything at all was to starve herself for several weeks and buy a cake with the food stamps she saved up.. You don't know all the circumstances

 

[Carolina Hustler]

Im back. Glad I wasn't posting more or some really smart people might have told me how I should have spent my time instead. I bought my mom a klondike bar because I didn't think she deserved a cake. My brother got some hamburger meat. I felt bad wasting money on them like that because they're mentally ill and poor and don't deserve a moment's happiness. I told them that they should just eat gruel and wait to die but they didn't seem to like it. Or maybe they did. Like many of you, I don't spend any thought at all about actual poor people except how they're always stealing from the tax coffers. Then I rushed back to keep my post count up.

 

[Da Guru]

I am a Little Debbie distributor and EBT fraud is rampant. I was in a store today and a woman purchased Twisted Tea with her card. The store just rang the alcoholic beverages as something else.

Party stores are a thriving business in Detroit. Anything and everything can be bought with food stamps or a bridge card.

 

[shake zula]

This guy sees someone buy a ####### cake, decides its too expensive for them, then pats himself on the back for being able to afford a costco membership, a car, the time and gas to go across town 20 extra minutes on the weekend, the space in his home to store huge boxes of bulk goods, and the money to spend on things today that he wont use until tomorrow. But he doesn't take the time to ask if this is a single mom who is trying to help her kid have a cake with his friends so he will have some self confidence and wont feel like the poor kid who can't have a birthday party for reasons that have nothing to do with him, or if this mother is dealing with some other life issues like mental illness, substance abuse, or unemployment, or if this mother has the luxury to go on longer trips to the store or if it means that shed have to bring her youger baby in a car seat she can't afford or leave them with a babysitter who can't be bothered to watch a kid for a couple hours while she gets a two gallon jar of mayonnaise. He just says, this ladys stupid, and we shouldn't give her money anymore. Maybe he can spit on some homeless people on the way home and make himself feel even better.

No one should be buying a $41 cake with public benefits. Sorry.

"Mom, all I want for my birthday is an icecream cake like Charlie had at his party" What's a mom to do? Maybe the only way she could afford to get him anything at all was to starve herself for several weeks and buy a cake with the food stamps she saved up.. You don't know all the circumstances

My mom told me no we can't afford it plenty of times. ####, I'm a grown man (kinda) and she still won't buy me the GI Joe with the RPG accessories.

 

[bostonfred]

My brother left a note in my car for me. He's been having a hard time interacting with me because I am constantly trying to get him to spend more wisely or save a little now that he's back from an extended stint of homelessness and imprisonment. I think he gets defensive about it because of how hard he had it the last few years. But in his situation, he doesn't get to call timeout and not be poor anymore. This is how life works every day:

"What is it like, being homeless?

No storage, no shelves. You can only carry what's on your back. No fridge or stove. No car or pantry for shopping and groceries. No heat or a/c. No washer, dryer or shower.

What can you carry? One backpack. 2 pair of pants, 1 shirt? Shirts are more important, easier to get. Wear blue jeans or black pants, but not a sweatshirt.

food and water? We love tiny treasures like instant coffee because its lightweight and small.

Paperwork in waterproof, ziploc bags

umbrella and an 8x8 plastic tarp

And a blanket (no pillow) for the cold.

Remember, the rainy season lasts four or five months, but plan for 5 just in case.

To avoid stigma and offense to businesses (and police)

never look or smell homeless/filthy

hide the backpack or they'll say, he doesn't go to college, he wants something

never be rude to anyone or you'll hear customers have complained...

My bachelors degree and 1460 sat score didn't vanish. Unfortunately, neither will my mental health or jail records

My clothes, cash, gear and other inventory is totally variable. You've only got what you've got.

One or both checks cancelled again? Everything destroyed by rain or mildew aagain? Back pack, blanket, money stolen again? Tough ####. Live, or don't.

Do you have any nostalgic possessions? I don't. I had some in storage but couldn't afford to keep the unit and they sold it at auction.

Have you ever had all your phone numbers thrown out? Until recently I couldn't get a cell phone anyway and there are no more public pay phones.

So now im back, and moving into a room of my own. And hopefully that solves a lot of these problems, but I have to buy everything from scratch because im not moving in from another apartment. I get 700/month from social security disability, and I may get as much as 150 in food stamps. Rent is 400 plus 75-100 a month for utilities, and it took me months to find this good a deal.

So now you tell me: why don't I have a lot of big and tall sized clothes for myself? How could I have "blown" my money when I was living with mom for a couple months? How do I convince you I did. Y best to search for a place?"

I don't know if this will matter to anyone, but its just another perspective from someone who did desperately need foodstamps, and another angle on why $100 of your money is not the same as $100 to someone who doesn't have a car, or a fridge, or any storage, or any of the things you guys take for granted when you say that the person in the article should have bought a cake mix. Forget cake, everything is more difficult and more expensive when you're poor.

 

[bostonfred]

Im back. Glad I wasn't posting more or some really smart people might have told me how I should have spent my time instead. I bought my mom a klondike bar because I didn't think she deserved a cake. My brother got some hamburger meat. I felt bad wasting money on them like that because they're mentally ill and poor and don't deserve a moment's happiness. I told them that they should just eat gruel and wait to die but they didn't seem to like it. Or maybe they did. Like many of you, I don't spend any thought at all about actual poor people except how they're always stealing from the tax coffers. Then I rushed back to keep my post count up.

Fred you are making some excellent points in this thread and I honestly think you have some people rethinking their perspective (it wouldn't be the first time you have got me to reconsider my viewpoint) but I wish you wouldn't continue with this refrain. It wasn't a choice between a $41 cake and zero happiness for eternity. Go to any major super market and you will see literally dozens of options between zero happiness for eternity and a $41 cake. If that's how she thought it was best to achieve her goal that's fine, I honestly have no problem with it, her food income is fixed and hers to do with as she likes, but let's not pretend that there weren't other options between $41 ice cream cake and zero happiness.

The thing is, we don't know what's going on in this story. This may be the one big splurge for the year, or ever, for a single mom who fell on hard times and an underprivileged kid is going to get his big day. Or it could be the grafter that others want to see in this story. If we are talking about someone buying a forty dollar cake because its warm out and she likes ice cream, then she's not a sympathetic figure at all. But the assumptions made in the article and by many on this board are pretty myopic. Do I think the state should be in the business of buying fancy cakes for people? Of course not. Do I think someone poor - and by poor i dont mean lazy, but unable to work for whatever reason - is within their rights to use their money on a rare frivolity? I hope so. To be fair, there's a separate function for people like that, like the ssd my brother receives, because our society doesn't want to handle its mental health problems by locking them up in perpetuity and feeding them beans and water. The foodstamps really are intended for necessary food, regardless of whether they go to people on welfare or social security or low income laborers. But then, does it matter if he uses foodstamp dollars or ssd dollars?

According to the author of the article and many on this board, it seems like we can vilify these people for ever spending a dollar we think is unwise, and we can make assumptions about their intentions, and whether they can afford to shop around for better deals, and if they have a place to store or cook their own food. And that's tremendously insulting to the people who have spent their liftimes fighting an uphill battle to stay alive in a country that wishes they'd just go away.

 

[Sweet J]

I'm going to take a controversial stance, but ice cream cake is overrated. However, I'm intrigued by the idea of a Haagen Daas cake.

Buying an ice cream cake is like buying a jar of Goober peanut butter and jelly - it sounds great but what you're really getting is a ####ty version of both.

Hold your ####ing tongue, man!! This is definitely one of those situations where 1 + 1 = fourteen thousand.

 

[Black Box]

I've said it before, and I'll say it again, it's time to cull the herd. A lot of the world's problems could be solved simply by making it legal to eat the poor.

Why would we eat the poor when we could just eat their delicious cakes?

 

[boots11234]

Im back. Glad I wasn't posting more or some really smart people might have told me how I should have spent my time instead. I bought my mom a klondike bar because I didn't think she deserved a cake. My brother got some hamburger meat. I felt bad wasting money on them like that because they're mentally ill and poor and don't deserve a moment's happiness. I told them that they should just eat gruel and wait to die but they didn't seem to like it. Or maybe they did. Like many of you, I don't spend any thought at all about actual poor people except how they're always stealing from the tax coffers. Then I rushed back to keep my post count up.

Fred you are making some excellent points in this thread and I honestly think you have some people rethinking their perspective (it wouldn't be the first time you have got me to reconsider my viewpoint) but I wish you wouldn't continue with this refrain. It wasn't a choice between a $41 cake and zero happiness for eternity. Go to any major super market and you will see literally dozens of options between zero happiness for eternity and a $41 cake. If that's how she thought it was best to achieve her goal that's fine, I honestly have no problem with it, her food income is fixed and hers to do with as she likes, but let's not pretend that there weren't other options between $41 ice cream cake and zero happiness.

The thing is, we don't know what's going on in this story. This may be the one big splurge for the year, or ever, for a single mom who fell on hard times and an underprivileged kid is going to get his big day. Or it could be the grafter that others want to see in this story. If we are talking about someone buying a forty dollar cake because its warm out and she likes ice cream, then she's not a sympathetic figure at all. But the assumptions made in the article and by many on this board are pretty myopic. Do I think the state should be in the business of buying fancy cakes for people? Of course not. Do I think someone poor - and by poor i dont mean lazy, but unable to work for whatever reason - is within their rights to use their money on a rare frivolity? I hope so. To be fair, there's a separate function for people like that, like the ssd my brother receives, because our society doesn't want to handle its mental health problems by locking them up in perpetuity and feeding them beans and water. The foodstamps really are intended for necessary food, regardless of whether they go to people on welfare or social security or low income laborers. But then, does it matter if he uses foodstamp dollars or ssd dollars?

According to the author of the article and many on this board, it seems like we can vilify these people for ever spending a dollar we think is unwise, and we can make assumptions about their intentions, and whether they can afford to shop around for better deals, and if they have a place to store or cook their own food. And that's tremendously insulting to the people who have spent their liftimes fighting an uphill battle to stay alive in a country that wishes they'd just go away.

I feel for you any your brothers situation but I still do not agree with you about tax payers not having a say in how their money is spent. Your brothers situation is an exception I believe not the norm and there is a dimensioning return of investment with welfare. Society cannot save everyone for various reasons and I don't believe we should try as there is only a fixed amount of dollars and many priorities. Also it is illegal to lock up people solely for mental health problems but sadly that would probably be best for those folks for reasons your own brother stated.

 

[Wrighteous Ray]

Society cannot save everyone for various reasons and I don't believe we should try as there is only a fixed amount of dollars and many priorities.

I would put helping the poor as pretty high on my list of priorities.

 

[Fennis]

lol @ "the common sense of our grandparents"

 

[Sweet J]

Im back. Glad I wasn't posting more or some really smart people might have told me how I should have spent my time instead. I bought my mom a klondike bar because I didn't think she deserved a cake. My brother got some hamburger meat. I felt bad wasting money on them like that because they're mentally ill and poor and don't deserve a moment's happiness. I told them that they should just eat gruel and wait to die but they didn't seem to like it. Or maybe they did. Like many of you, I don't spend any thought at all about actual poor people except how they're always stealing from the tax coffers. Then I rushed back to keep my post count up.

Fred you are making some excellent points in this thread and I honestly think you have some people rethinking their perspective (it wouldn't be the first time you have got me to reconsider my viewpoint) but I wish you wouldn't continue with this refrain. It wasn't a choice between a $41 cake and zero happiness for eternity. Go to any major super market and you will see literally dozens of options between zero happiness for eternity and a $41 cake. If that's how she thought it was best to achieve her goal that's fine, I honestly have no problem with it, her food income is fixed and hers to do with as she likes, but let's not pretend that there weren't other options between $41 ice cream cake and zero happiness.

The thing is, we don't know what's going on in this story. This may be the one big splurge for the year, or ever, for a single mom who fell on hard times and an underprivileged kid is going to get his big day. Or it could be the grafter that others want to see in this story. If we are talking about someone buying a forty dollar cake because its warm out and she likes ice cream, then she's not a sympathetic figure at all. But the assumptions made in the article and by many on this board are pretty myopic. Do I think the state should be in the business of buying fancy cakes for people? Of course not. Do I think someone poor - and by poor i dont mean lazy, but unable to work for whatever reason - is within their rights to use their money on a rare frivolity? I hope so. To be fair, there's a separate function for people like that, like the ssd my brother receives, because our society doesn't want to handle its mental health problems by locking them up in perpetuity and feeding them beans and water. The foodstamps really are intended for necessary food, regardless of whether they go to people on welfare or social security or low income laborers. But then, does it matter if he uses foodstamp dollars or ssd dollars?

According to the author of the article and many on this board, it seems like we can vilify these people for ever spending a dollar we think is unwise, and we can make assumptions about their intentions, and whether they can afford to shop around for better deals, and if they have a place to store or cook their own food. And that's tremendously insulting to the people who have spent their liftimes fighting an uphill battle to stay alive in a country that wishes they'd just go away.

I feel for you any your brothers situation but I still do not agree with you about tax payers not having a say in how their money is spent. Your brothers situation is an exception I believe not the norm and there is a dimensioning return of investment with welfare. Society cannot save everyone for various reasons and I don't believe we should try as there is only a fixed amount of dollars and many priorities. Also it is illegal to lock up people solely for mental health problems but sadly that would probably be best for those folks for reasons your own brother stated.

I'm not on these boards to know enough about particular people, but I am assuming you are a small-government advocate. I can't imagine the additional bureaucracy necessary to implement the bolded. If we as a country decide it is better to give poor people money for food than not (purely on an analytical basis), then we should also analyze what is the best WAY to give that money. I guess we could implement something like the WIC program, which gives money for only certain types of foods (and I am a huge fan of WIC), so maybe you are right; maybe it would work that way.But I repeat: We give poor people a *minimal* amount of food stamp money compared to some other government givaways (compare AFDC to the mortgage deduction, to Social Security). Yet we don't ask middle-income homeowners who get thousands in the form of mortgage deductions whether they are spending too much money on cake. Or SS recipients. It just seems unseemly here.

 

[Sweet J]

Society cannot save everyone for various reasons and I don't believe we should try as there is only a fixed amount of dollars and many priorities.

I would put helping the poor as pretty high on my list of priorities.

There remains an argument about what is really the best way to help the poor. And I guess there remains an argument about whether "helping the poor" is in fact best for our country. But I think those are probably better questions for another thread, and anyway, I hate to give more ammunition to folks that take a myopic view.

 

[bostonfred]

Your brothers situation is an exception I believe not the norm

I agree that you believe that. Its clear that a lot of people on your side of the issue believe that almost everyone collecting food stamps is the classic welfare queen, or somehow stealing from the system. Thats why im taking the time to talk about other cases, including my personal experiences. Because I think there's a huge disconnect between the talking points and reality on this issue (on both sides of the aisle).So what do you believe the norm is? What percent of people collecting food stamps do you believe are on "welfare" and nothing else, vs. people who are disabled, or can't find work and don't get unemployment, or have part time/low wage jobs but still get food stamps? How much of an exception are people like my mother, my brother, sweetj's family, etc in your mind?

 

[parasaurolophus]

Im back. Glad I wasn't posting more or some really smart people might have told me how I should have spent my time instead. I bought my mom a klondike bar because I didn't think she deserved a cake. My brother got some hamburger meat. I felt bad wasting money on them like that because they're mentally ill and poor and don't deserve a moment's happiness. I told them that they should just eat gruel and wait to die but they didn't seem to like it. Or maybe they did. Like many of you, I don't spend any thought at all about actual poor people except how they're always stealing from the tax coffers. Then I rushed back to keep my post count up.

Fred you are making some excellent points in this thread and I honestly think you have some people rethinking their perspective (it wouldn't be the first time you have got me to reconsider my viewpoint) but I wish you wouldn't continue with this refrain. It wasn't a choice between a $41 cake and zero happiness for eternity. Go to any major super market and you will see literally dozens of options between zero happiness for eternity and a $41 cake. If that's how she thought it was best to achieve her goal that's fine, I honestly have no problem with it, her food income is fixed and hers to do with as she likes, but let's not pretend that there weren't other options between $41 ice cream cake and zero happiness.

The thing is, we don't know what's going on in this story. This may be the one big splurge for the year, or ever, for a single mom who fell on hard times and an underprivileged kid is going to get his big day. Or it could be the grafter that others want to see in this story. If we are talking about someone buying a forty dollar cake because its warm out and she likes ice cream, then she's not a sympathetic figure at all. But the assumptions made in the article and by many on this board are pretty myopic. Do I think the state should be in the business of buying fancy cakes for people? Of course not. Do I think someone poor - and by poor i dont mean lazy, but unable to work for whatever reason - is within their rights to use their money on a rare frivolity? I hope so. To be fair, there's a separate function for people like that, like the ssd my brother receives, because our society doesn't want to handle its mental health problems by locking them up in perpetuity and feeding them beans and water. The foodstamps really are intended for necessary food, regardless of whether they go to people on welfare or social security or low income laborers. But then, does it matter if he uses foodstamp dollars or ssd dollars?

According to the author of the article and many on this board, it seems like we can vilify these people for ever spending a dollar we think is unwise, and we can make assumptions about their intentions, and whether they can afford to shop around for better deals, and if they have a place to store or cook their own food. And that's tremendously insulting to the people who have spent their liftimes fighting an uphill battle to stay alive in a country that wishes they'd just go away.

I feel for you any your brothers situation but I still do not agree with you about tax payers not having a say in how their money is spent. Your brothers situation is an exception I believe not the norm and there is a dimensioning return of investment with welfare. Society cannot save everyone for various reasons and I don't believe we should try as there is only a fixed amount of dollars and many priorities. Also it is illegal to lock up people solely for mental health problems but sadly that would probably be best for those folks for reasons your own brother stated.

I'm not on these boards to know enough about particular people, but I am assuming you are a small-government advocate. I can't imagine the additional bureaucracy necessary to implement the bolded. If we as a country decide it is better to give poor people money for food than not (purely on an analytical basis), then we should also analyze what is the best WAY to give that money. I guess we could implement something like the WIC program (giving money for only certain types of foods (and I am a huge fan of WIC), so maybe you are right; maybe it would work that way.But I repeat: We give poor people a *minimal* amount of food stamp money compared to some other government givaways (compare AFDC to the mortgage deduction, to Social Security). Yet we don't ask middle-income homeowners who get thousands in the form of mortgage deductions whether they are spending too much money on cake. Or SS recipients. It just seems unseemly here.

Apples to oranges and you know it.People that get mortgage deductions arent getting a handout. They get a tax deduction. Any "middle income" person taking a mortgage interest deduction isn't "getting thousands".

Tell you what. Take away the property taxes and the city assessment and I will happily give up my mortgage interest deduction. I will even write a check for an extra grand to any charity you want. Deal?

 

[pittstownkiller]

Your brothers situation is an exception I believe not the norm

I agree that you believe that. Its clear that a lot of people on your side of the issue believe that almost everyone collecting food stamps is the classic welfare queen, or somehow stealing from the system. Thats why im taking the time to talk about other cases, including my personal experiences. Because I think there's a huge disconnect between the talking points and reality on this issue (on both sides of the aisle).So what do you believe the norm is? What percent of people collecting food stamps do you believe are on "welfare" and nothing else, vs. people who are disabled, or can't find work and don't get unemployment, or have part time/low wage jobs but still get food stamps? How much of an exception are people like my mother, my brother, sweetj's family, etc in your mind?

BF. I think most are saying that these programs are beneficial but if the woman in question received $400/month for food and bought a $400 cake to splurge, would you have a problem then; what do you eat for the rest of the month? In reply to another poster you don't save up food stamps (at least not in NY) you have a monthly allotment; use it or lose it. I guess that the family can use their allotment as they deem fit but poor is poor and splurging on frivolous items (yes a $41 cake is frivolous in the grand scope) isn't the way to manage a household.

 

[[icon]]

This guy sees someone buy a ####### cake, decides its too expensive for them, then pats himself on the back for being able to afford a costco membership, a car, the time and gas to go across town 20 extra minutes on the weekend, the space in his home to store huge boxes of bulk goods, and the money to spend on things today that he wont use until tomorrow. But he doesn't take the time to ask if this is a single mom who is trying to help her kid have a cake with his friends so he will have some self confidence and wont feel like the poor kid who can't have a birthday party for reasons that have nothing to do with him, or if this mother is dealing with some other life issues like mental illness, substance abuse, or unemployment, or if this mother has the luxury to go on longer trips to the store or if it means that shed have to bring her youger baby in a car seat she can't afford or leave them with a babysitter who can't be bothered to watch a kid for a couple hours while she gets a two gallon jar of mayonnaise. He just says, this ladys stupid, and we shouldn't give her money anymore. Maybe he can spit on some homeless people on the way home and make himself feel even better.

No one should be buying a $41 cake with public benefits. Sorry.

Live of basic sustinance and be frugal and you might be able to afford to move out of the cycle of poverty. Buying a 41 dollar luxury good when you can bake something comparable for $3-4 is sheer ignorance and nothing short of abuse of the public assistance they have been given.

 

[Chaka]

While I still think that a $41 cake was a completely silly purchase, for anyone really but particularly in this specific instance, I think a lot of people who are looking at this mother in an extremely negative light should go back and tally their own expenses for the past year. How much #### have you purchased that you really could not (should not) afford? How much better shape would you be in financially if you made only intelligent, well considered, practical purchases?

People splurge and don't always make good decisions with their money, particularly when it comes to their children. So while I think she could have gotten the same return on a smaller investment it is kind of difficult to fault her for it too much.

 

[pittstownkiller]

While I still think that a $41 cake was a completely silly purchase, for anyone really but particularly in this specific instance, I think a lot of people who are looking at this mother in an extremely negative light should go back and tally their own expenses for the past year. How much #### have you purchased that you really could not (should not) afford? How much better shape would you be in financially if you made only intelligent, well considered, practical purchases?People splurge and don't always make good decisions with their money, particularly when it comes to their children. So while I think she could have gotten the same return on a smaller investment it is kind of difficult to fault her for it too much.

Agreed but they key component of your post is "their money"; unfortunately when you get money from someone else you invite criticism.

 

[Chaka]

This guy sees someone buy a ####### cake, decides its too expensive for them, then pats himself on the back for being able to afford a costco membership, a car, the time and gas to go across town 20 extra minutes on the weekend, the space in his home to store huge boxes of bulk goods, and the money to spend on things today that he wont use until tomorrow. But he doesn't take the time to ask if this is a single mom who is trying to help her kid have a cake with his friends so he will have some self confidence and wont feel like the poor kid who can't have a birthday party for reasons that have nothing to do with him, or if this mother is dealing with some other life issues like mental illness, substance abuse, or unemployment, or if this mother has the luxury to go on longer trips to the store or if it means that shed have to bring her youger baby in a car seat she can't afford or leave them with a babysitter who can't be bothered to watch a kid for a couple hours while she gets a two gallon jar of mayonnaise. He just says, this ladys stupid, and we shouldn't give her money anymore. Maybe he can spit on some homeless people on the way home and make himself feel even better.

No one should be buying a $41 cake with public benefits. Sorry.

Live of basic sustinance and be frugal and you might be able to afford to move out of the cycle of poverty. Buying a 41 dollar luxury good when you can bake something comparable for $3-4 is sheer ignorance and nothing short of abuse of the public assistance they have been given.

How exactly is it an abuse? I am on board for silly/unnecessary purchase but abuse? I am not so sure. It doesn't change how much she gets next month. I guess it could be child abuse if that $41 cake is the difference between eating or not for the rest of the month.What is a life of basic subsistence btw?

 

[Sweet J]

Im back. Glad I wasn't posting more or some really smart people might have told me how I should have spent my time instead. I bought my mom a klondike bar because I didn't think she deserved a cake. My brother got some hamburger meat. I felt bad wasting money on them like that because they're mentally ill and poor and don't deserve a moment's happiness. I told them that they should just eat gruel and wait to die but they didn't seem to like it. Or maybe they did. Like many of you, I don't spend any thought at all about actual poor people except how they're always stealing from the tax coffers. Then I rushed back to keep my post count up.

Fred you are making some excellent points in this thread and I honestly think you have some people rethinking their perspective (it wouldn't be the first time you have got me to reconsider my viewpoint) but I wish you wouldn't continue with this refrain. It wasn't a choice between a $41 cake and zero happiness for eternity. Go to any major super market and you will see literally dozens of options between zero happiness for eternity and a $41 cake. If that's how she thought it was best to achieve her goal that's fine, I honestly have no problem with it, her food income is fixed and hers to do with as she likes, but let's not pretend that there weren't other options between $41 ice cream cake and zero happiness.

The thing is, we don't know what's going on in this story. This may be the one big splurge for the year, or ever, for a single mom who fell on hard times and an underprivileged kid is going to get his big day. Or it could be the grafter that others want to see in this story. If we are talking about someone buying a forty dollar cake because its warm out and she likes ice cream, then she's not a sympathetic figure at all. But the assumptions made in the article and by many on this board are pretty myopic. Do I think the state should be in the business of buying fancy cakes for people? Of course not. Do I think someone poor - and by poor i dont mean lazy, but unable to work for whatever reason - is within their rights to use their money on a rare frivolity? I hope so. To be fair, there's a separate function for people like that, like the ssd my brother receives, because our society doesn't want to handle its mental health problems by locking them up in perpetuity and feeding them beans and water. The foodstamps really are intended for necessary food, regardless of whether they go to people on welfare or social security or low income laborers. But then, does it matter if he uses foodstamp dollars or ssd dollars?

According to the author of the article and many on this board, it seems like we can vilify these people for ever spending a dollar we think is unwise, and we can make assumptions about their intentions, and whether they can afford to shop around for better deals, and if they have a place to store or cook their own food. And that's tremendously insulting to the people who have spent their liftimes fighting an uphill battle to stay alive in a country that wishes they'd just go away.

I feel for you any your brothers situation but I still do not agree with you about tax payers not having a say in how their money is spent. Your brothers situation is an exception I believe not the norm and there is a dimensioning return of investment with welfare. Society cannot save everyone for various reasons and I don't believe we should try as there is only a fixed amount of dollars and many priorities. Also it is illegal to lock up people solely for mental health problems but sadly that would probably be best for those folks for reasons your own brother stated.

I'm not on these boards to know enough about particular people, but I am assuming you are a small-government advocate. I can't imagine the additional bureaucracy necessary to implement the bolded. If we as a country decide it is better to give poor people money for food than not (purely on an analytical basis), then we should also analyze what is the best WAY to give that money. I guess we could implement something like the WIC program (giving money for only certain types of foods (and I am a huge fan of WIC), so maybe you are right; maybe it would work that way.But I repeat: We give poor people a *minimal* amount of food stamp money compared to some other government givaways (compare AFDC to the mortgage deduction, to Social Security). Yet we don't ask middle-income homeowners who get thousands in the form of mortgage deductions whether they are spending too much money on cake. Or SS recipients. It just seems unseemly here.

Apples to oranges and you know it.People that get mortgage deductions arent getting a handout. They get a tax deduction. Any "middle income" person taking a mortgage interest deduction isn't "getting thousands".

Tell you what. Take away the property taxes and the city assessment and I will happily give up my mortgage interest deduction. I will even write a check for an extra grand to any charity you want. Deal?

Property taxes and city assessments go to purchase things that are beneficial to you as a landowner (i.e., a long-term resident) in the city in which you reside. Federal taxes go to pay for things that you as a person who lives in this country need (i.e., an Army to defend you). So you can't play one against the other. If you are a landowner, you should pay property taxes for the city, state or locality you live in.And I would certainly qualify the mortgage deductions as a handout, but I can be talked out of it, I guess. You are responsible to pay a certain amount of federal taxes, just like your friend who makes just as much as you, but who rents. If you have to pay less in federal taxes than the person who rents, and the only reason is that you own a house (i.e., the country wants to encourage home ownership), then yes, that is a handout.

 

[Godsbrother]

I think there needs to be a government agency set up to monitor food stamps and cakes. Dept of Food Stamps & Cakes has a good ring to it.

 

[Chaka]

While I still think that a $41 cake was a completely silly purchase, for anyone really but particularly in this specific instance, I think a lot of people who are looking at this mother in an extremely negative light should go back and tally their own expenses for the past year. How much #### have you purchased that you really could not (should not) afford? How much better shape would you be in financially if you made only intelligent, well considered, practical purchases?People splurge and don't always make good decisions with their money, particularly when it comes to their children. So while I think she could have gotten the same return on a smaller investment it is kind of difficult to fault her for it too much.

Agreed but they key component of your post is "their money"; unfortunately when you get money from someone else you invite criticism.

But isn't it her money? Does that purchase somehow change the calculus for the entire system leading to her getting more money in the future?I don't think it is necessarily logical to compare her purchase to the system that funds it because her purchase does not impact the system.

 

[bostonfred]

Your brothers situation is an exception I believe not the norm

I agree that you believe that. Its clear that a lot of people on your side of the issue believe that almost everyone collecting food stamps is the classic welfare queen, or somehow stealing from the system. Thats why im taking the time to talk about other cases, including my personal experiences. Because I think there's a huge disconnect between the talking points and reality on this issue (on both sides of the aisle).So what do you believe the norm is? What percent of people collecting food stamps do you believe are on "welfare" and nothing else, vs. people who are disabled, or can't find work and don't get unemployment, or have part time/low wage jobs but still get food stamps? How much of an exception are people like my mother, my brother, sweetj's family, etc in your mind?

BF. I think most are saying that these programs are beneficial but if the woman in question received $400/month for food and bought a $400 cake to splurge, would you have a problem then; what do you eat for the rest of the month? In reply to another poster you don't save up food stamps (at least not in NY) you have a monthly allotment; use it or lose it. I guess that the family can use their allotment as they deem fit but poor is poor and splurging on frivolous items (yes a $41 cake is frivolous in the grand scope) isn't the way to manage a household.

there are several points of debate in this thread:- are most people on food stamps "grafters"? I addressed this in the post you quoted- are food stamps for anything thats not an obvious nutritional necessity, like a cake? What about more expensive choices like fresh fruit instead of gruel, or meat instead of beans? There's a line here that we've tapdanced around but the consensus seems to be that its not an easy question, and the state is probably doing a decent, but imprecise, job.- are poor people able to shop around for a better deal in costco, etc? I contend that they are not.- your question, was this a good spending decision on her part? And the answer there is, I don't know. I know that I don't automatically begrudge her a forty dollar expense, but I get it when people say this sounds like a waste. I can totally see why someone like my mom would want to be able to get a birthday cake for her grandson when she can't drive to see him, and doesn't have nice toys or a great place or a backyard to offer when she does, and she's never going to be able to solve that. If I saw her buy a forty dollar cake for my son, id probably tell her not to spend her money on stuff like that, but id say it with a tear in my eye, because id know what it meant to her. On the other side, though, if a welfare queen were pumping out kids and living on ice cream cakes and malnourishing her kids, id be up in arms, too. I just think people jump to the worst assumption too easily with stories like this.

 

[Sweet J]

While I still think that a $41 cake was a completely silly purchase, for anyone really but particularly in this specific instance, I think a lot of people who are looking at this mother in an extremely negative light should go back and tally their own expenses for the past year. How much #### have you purchased that you really could not (should not) afford? How much better shape would you be in financially if you made only intelligent, well considered, practical purchases?People splurge and don't always make good decisions with their money, particularly when it comes to their children. So while I think she could have gotten the same return on a smaller investment it is kind of difficult to fault her for it too much.

Agreed but they key component of your post is "their money"; unfortunately when you get money from someone else you invite criticism.

If you wanted to dissect whose money is really "their money," then nobody's money is theirs. All of us have what we have, at some level, becuase of what we were given by the State. It just is. I know folks don't want to believe it. But it's there.

 

[cr8f]

30 blocks? Sounds like black neighborhoods in Milwaukee where there aren't any banks or stores without bars and people have to take buses to better stores. It's a half day trip.

 

[bostonfred]

This guy sees someone buy a ####### cake, decides its too expensive for them, then pats himself on the back for being able to afford a costco membership, a car, the time and gas to go across town 20 extra minutes on the weekend, the space in his home to store huge boxes of bulk goods, and the money to spend on things today that he wont use until tomorrow. But he doesn't take the time to ask if this is a single mom who is trying to help her kid have a cake with his friends so he will have some self confidence and wont feel like the poor kid who can't have a birthday party for reasons that have nothing to do with him, or if this mother is dealing with some other life issues like mental illness, substance abuse, or unemployment, or if this mother has the luxury to go on longer trips to the store or if it means that shed have to bring her youger baby in a car seat she can't afford or leave them with a babysitter who can't be bothered to watch a kid for a couple hours while she gets a two gallon jar of mayonnaise. He just says, this ladys stupid, and we shouldn't give her money anymore. Maybe he can spit on some homeless people on the way home and make himself feel even better.

No one should be buying a $41 cake with public benefits. Sorry.

Live of basic sustinance and be frugal and you might be able to afford to move out of the cycle of poverty. Buying a 41 dollar luxury good when you can bake something comparable for $3-4 is sheer ignorance and nothing short of abuse of the public assistance they have been given.

I challenge you to make a cake for $4 in my moms kitchen. Don't forget that you need eggs, oil, a cake pan, a mixing bowl. an oven, especially one that can fit a cake pan, a fridge with electricity, a ride to the store, and if you want to make it comparable, maybe some frosting. We don't need ice cream, it doesn't have to be a fancy cake, but you have to be in your sixties and have a mile walk to the closest store, which isn't a cheap store, and you have to carry whatever you buy in your hands or a bag, and the last time you made that walk, you got faint and fell and hit your head.

 

[Chaka]

My brother left a note in my car for me. He's been having a hard time interacting with me because I am constantly trying to get him to spend more wisely or save a little now that he's back from an extended stint of homelessness and imprisonment. I think he gets defensive about it because of how hard he had it the last few years. But in his situation, he doesn't get to call timeout and not be poor anymore. This is how life works every day:

"What is it like, being homeless?

No storage, no shelves. You can only carry what's on your back. No fridge or stove. No car or pantry for shopping and groceries. No heat or a/c. No washer, dryer or shower.

What can you carry? One backpack. 2 pair of pants, 1 shirt? Shirts are more important, easier to get. Wear blue jeans or black pants, but not a sweatshirt.

food and water? We love tiny treasures like instant coffee because its lightweight and small.

Paperwork in waterproof, ziploc bags

umbrella and an 8x8 plastic tarp

And a blanket (no pillow) for the cold.

Remember, the rainy season lasts four or five months, but plan for 5 just in case.

To avoid stigma and offense to businesses (and police)

never look or smell homeless/filthy

hide the backpack or they'll say, he doesn't go to college, he wants something

never be rude to anyone or you'll hear customers have complained...

My bachelors degree and 1460 sat score didn't vanish. Unfortunately, neither will my mental health or jail records

My clothes, cash, gear and other inventory is totally variable. You've only got what you've got.

One or both checks cancelled again? Everything destroyed by rain or mildew aagain? Back pack, blanket, money stolen again? Tough ####. Live, or don't.

Do you have any nostalgic possessions? I don't. I had some in storage but couldn't afford to keep the unit and they sold it at auction.

Have you ever had all your phone numbers thrown out? Until recently I couldn't get a cell phone anyway and there are no more public pay phones.

So now im back, and moving into a room of my own. And hopefully that solves a lot of these problems, but I have to buy everything from scratch because im not moving in from another apartment. I get 700/month from social security disability, and I may get as much as 150 in food stamps. Rent is 400 plus 75-100 a month for utilities, and it took me months to find this good a deal.

So now you tell me: why don't I have a lot of big and tall sized clothes for myself? How could I have "blown" my money when I was living with mom for a couple months? How do I convince you I did. Y best to search for a place?"

I don't know if this will matter to anyone, but its just another perspective from someone who did desperately need foodstamps, and another angle on why $100 of your money is not the same as $100 to someone who doesn't have a car, or a fridge, or any storage, or any of the things you guys take for granted when you say that the person in the article should have bought a cake mix. Forget cake, everything is more difficult and more expensive when you're poor.

I am having difficulty understanding what your brother is trying to convey in the bolded paragraph. Clearly the whole note is a powerful statement on the difficulties of being homeless and how much effort it takes to get out of that cycle. I think the bolded is the statement that ties the difficulty of being homeless with the debate we are having in this thread but I am not sure exactly how.I can even see it is an argument for why people who need food stamps shouldn't be buying $41 cakes regardless of context.

Are you able to clarify that for me?

 

[Wrighteous Ray]

Buying a 41 dollar luxury good when you can bake something comparable for $3-4 is sheer ignorance and nothing short of abuse of the public assistance they have been given.

I challenge you to make a cake for $4 in my moms kitchen. Don't forget that you need eggs, oil, a cake pan, a mixing bowl. an oven, especially one that can fit a cake pan, a fridge with electricity, a ride to the store, and if you want to make it comparable, maybe some frosting. We don't need ice cream, it doesn't have to be a fancy cake, but you have to be in your sixties and have a mile walk to the closest store, which isn't a cheap store, and you have to carry whatever you buy in your hands or a bag, and the last time you made that walk, you got faint and fell and hit your head.

I'm on fred's side here but this does not seem like a very fair challenge. How is [icon] supposed to make himself be in his 60s?

 

[Chaka]

While I still think that a $41 cake was a completely silly purchase, for anyone really but particularly in this specific instance, I think a lot of people who are looking at this mother in an extremely negative light should go back and tally their own expenses for the past year. How much #### have you purchased that you really could not (should not) afford? How much better shape would you be in financially if you made only intelligent, well considered, practical purchases?

People splurge and don't always make good decisions with their money, particularly when it comes to their children. So while I think she could have gotten the same return on a smaller investment it is kind of difficult to fault her for it too much.

Agreed but they key component of your post is "their money"; unfortunately when you get money from someone else you invite criticism.

If you wanted to dissect whose money is really "their money," then nobody's money is theirs. All of us have what we have, at some level, becuase of what we were given by the State. It just is. I know folks don't want to believe it. But it's there.

Would you expand on that a little bit?

 

[Reaper]

This guy sees someone buy a ####### cake, decides its too expensive for them, then pats himself on the back for being able to afford a costco membership, a car, the time and gas to go across town 20 extra minutes on the weekend, the space in his home to store huge boxes of bulk goods, and the money to spend on things today that he wont use until tomorrow. But he doesn't take the time to ask if this is a single mom who is trying to help her kid have a cake with his friends so he will have some self confidence and wont feel like the poor kid who can't have a birthday party for reasons that have nothing to do with him, or if this mother is dealing with some other life issues like mental illness, substance abuse, or unemployment, or if this mother has the luxury to go on longer trips to the store or if it means that shed have to bring her youger baby in a car seat she can't afford or leave them with a babysitter who can't be bothered to watch a kid for a couple hours while she gets a two gallon jar of mayonnaise. He just says, this ladys stupid, and we shouldn't give her money anymore. Maybe he can spit on some homeless people on the way home and make himself feel even better.

You and I don't buy $40.00 Cakes for our kids parties. So, this kid won't lose his self confidence and fall off a cliff with the same home-made $8.00 cake I just made my kid.I think The author was just giving one of many good examples and why the system needs to be Fine tuned - Not the extreme you go to as if the guy said she should get NOTHING.And, take the Assistance part out of it for a sec and Personally I love the person in front of me doing most of their home shopping at 7-11 when their is a discount market I go to about 1/4 mile up the road.

 

[James Daulton]

Im back. Glad I wasn't posting more or some really smart people might have told me how I should have spent my time instead. I bought my mom a klondike bar because I didn't think she deserved a cake. My brother got some hamburger meat. I felt bad wasting money on them like that because they're mentally ill and poor and don't deserve a moment's happiness. I told them that they should just eat gruel and wait to die but they didn't seem to like it. Or maybe they did. Like many of you, I don't spend any thought at all about actual poor people except how they're always stealing from the tax coffers. Then I rushed back to keep my post count up.

Fred you are making some excellent points in this thread and I honestly think you have some people rethinking their perspective (it wouldn't be the first time you have got me to reconsider my viewpoint) but I wish you wouldn't continue with this refrain. It wasn't a choice between a $41 cake and zero happiness for eternity. Go to any major super market and you will see literally dozens of options between zero happiness for eternity and a $41 cake. If that's how she thought it was best to achieve her goal that's fine, I honestly have no problem with it, her food income is fixed and hers to do with as she likes, but let's not pretend that there weren't other options between $41 ice cream cake and zero happiness.

The thing is, we don't know what's going on in this story. This may be the one big splurge for the year, or ever, for a single mom who fell on hard times and an underprivileged kid is going to get his big day. Or it could be the grafter that others want to see in this story. If we are talking about someone buying a forty dollar cake because its warm out and she likes ice cream, then she's not a sympathetic figure at all. But the assumptions made in the article and by many on this board are pretty myopic. Do I think the state should be in the business of buying fancy cakes for people? Of course not. Do I think someone poor - and by poor i dont mean lazy, but unable to work for whatever reason - is within their rights to use their money on a rare frivolity? I hope so. To be fair, there's a separate function for people like that, like the ssd my brother receives, because our society doesn't want to handle its mental health problems by locking them up in perpetuity and feeding them beans and water. The foodstamps really are intended for necessary food, regardless of whether they go to people on welfare or social security or low income laborers. But then, does it matter if he uses foodstamp dollars or ssd dollars?

According to the author of the article and many on this board, it seems like we can vilify these people for ever spending a dollar we think is unwise, and we can make assumptions about their intentions, and whether they can afford to shop around for better deals, and if they have a place to store or cook their own food. And that's tremendously insulting to the people who have spent their liftimes fighting an uphill battle to stay alive in a country that wishes they'd just go away.

I feel for you any your brothers situation but I still do not agree with you about tax payers not having a say in how their money is spent. Your brothers situation is an exception I believe not the norm and there is a dimensioning return of investment with welfare. Society cannot save everyone for various reasons and I don't believe we should try as there is only a fixed amount of dollars and many priorities. Also it is illegal to lock up people solely for mental health problems but sadly that would probably be best for those folks for reasons your own brother stated.

I'm not on these boards to know enough about particular people, but I am assuming you are a small-government advocate. I can't imagine the additional bureaucracy necessary to implement the bolded. If we as a country decide it is better to give poor people money for food than not (purely on an analytical basis), then we should also analyze what is the best WAY to give that money. I guess we could implement something like the WIC program (giving money for only certain types of foods (and I am a huge fan of WIC), so maybe you are right; maybe it would work that way.But I repeat: We give poor people a *minimal* amount of food stamp money compared to some other government givaways (compare AFDC to the mortgage deduction, to Social Security). Yet we don't ask middle-income homeowners who get thousands in the form of mortgage deductions whether they are spending too much money on cake. Or SS recipients. It just seems unseemly here.

Apples to oranges and you know it.People that get mortgage deductions arent getting a handout. They get a tax deduction. Any "middle income" person taking a mortgage interest deduction isn't "getting thousands".

Tell you what. Take away the property taxes and the city assessment and I will happily give up my mortgage interest deduction. I will even write a check for an extra grand to any charity you want. Deal?

The mortgage deduction can absolutely be considered a hand out. What services are you providing for this reduction of taxes? And to say it's not worth 000's is bs too. The annual interest on my $280k 30 year mortgage at 5.25% lowered my total tax liability by several thoughsand dollars.

 

[bostonfred]

My brother left a note in my car for me. He's been having a hard time interacting with me because I am constantly trying to get him to spend more wisely or save a little now that he's back from an extended stint of homelessness and imprisonment. I think he gets defensive about it because of how hard he had it the last few years. But in his situation, he doesn't get to call timeout and not be poor anymore. This is how life works every day:

So now you tell me: why don't I have a lot of big and tall sized clothes for myself? How could I have "blown" my money when I was living with mom for a couple months? How do I convince you I did. Y best to search for a place?"

I am having difficulty understanding what your brother is trying to convey in the bolded paragraph. Clearly the whole note is a powerful statement on the difficulties of being homeless and how much effort it takes to get out of that cycle. I think the bolded is the statement that ties the difficulty of being homeless with the debate we are having in this thread but I am not sure exactly how.I can even see it is an argument for why people who need food stamps shouldn't be buying $41 cakes regardless of context.

Are you able to clarify that for me?

Sure. I've been telling him the same things others have said in this thread. You need to try to save. You need to spend wisely. You need to get clothes and other necessities.He was homeless in california just a few short months ago, and after I got him back here, he really wasn't ready to jump back in to the day to day routine of living in an apartment and having a fridge. He was used to walking everywhere and being chased around the city by cops who repeatedly tazered him and hurt him. He was badly broken when he got back here, as many homeless mentally ill people are.

His letter to me, unrelated to this thread, was basically telling me that he didn't want me to judge him because he didn't save enough, or buy the right things, or find an apartment fast enough, because he had been living so insanely hand to mouth the last few years that he had very little concept of what to do when he got back.

is that an argument that he shouldn't buy 41 dollar cakes? Sure. I said as much myself. But its also some interesting perspective on why he might not have been able to afford a 1 dollar cake back when he was homeless, because he was robbed repeatedly, and had a lot of expenses that you and I don't think about. And more to the point, he's explaining why he didn't do a great job saving once he got back, because he's still in "take what you can get when you can get it" mode, in a very fight or flight, post traumatic stress mentality. Its a tough adjustment for him.

Its also hard for me. My initial reaction is that he should save, and he shouldnt ever get a pizza or eat takeout, especially if he's going to come back later and ask for money when he can't afford first month, last month and security. He had enough to cover it, in theory, if he had lived on bologna sandwiches and ramen noodles. So now I wonder if I should help him with those things or if im enabling him. Its not an easy question. Hence his letter to me.

 

[Usual21]

Ice cream cake is delicious.

Let's keep this thread about cake and not politics.

Exactly. Those chocolate crunchies in the middle are fn AWESOME.

 

[[icon]]

While I still think that a $41 cake was a completely silly purchase, for anyone really but particularly in this specific instance, I think a lot of people who are looking at this mother in an extremely negative light should go back and tally their own expenses for the past year. How much #### have you purchased that you really could not (should not) afford? How much better shape would you be in financially if you made only intelligent, well considered, practical purchases?

Me making poor financial decisions with my money is my problemMe making poor financial decisions with your money is a much bigger problem. And the problem isn't this one isolated instance... but rather that this instance is most likely indicative of a trend of abuse of federal assistance.

 

[parasaurolophus]

Im back. Glad I wasn't posting more or some really smart people might have told me how I should have spent my time instead. I bought my mom a klondike bar because I didn't think she deserved a cake. My brother got some hamburger meat. I felt bad wasting money on them like that because they're mentally ill and poor and don't deserve a moment's happiness. I told them that they should just eat gruel and wait to die but they didn't seem to like it. Or maybe they did. Like many of you, I don't spend any thought at all about actual poor people except how they're always stealing from the tax coffers. Then I rushed back to keep my post count up.

Fred you are making some excellent points in this thread and I honestly think you have some people rethinking their perspective (it wouldn't be the first time you have got me to reconsider my viewpoint) but I wish you wouldn't continue with this refrain. It wasn't a choice between a $41 cake and zero happiness for eternity. Go to any major super market and you will see literally dozens of options between zero happiness for eternity and a $41 cake. If that's how she thought it was best to achieve her goal that's fine, I honestly have no problem with it, her food income is fixed and hers to do with as she likes, but let's not pretend that there weren't other options between $41 ice cream cake and zero happiness.

The thing is, we don't know what's going on in this story. This may be the one big splurge for the year, or ever, for a single mom who fell on hard times and an underprivileged kid is going to get his big day. Or it could be the grafter that others want to see in this story. If we are talking about someone buying a forty dollar cake because its warm out and she likes ice cream, then she's not a sympathetic figure at all. But the assumptions made in the article and by many on this board are pretty myopic. Do I think the state should be in the business of buying fancy cakes for people? Of course not. Do I think someone poor - and by poor i dont mean lazy, but unable to work for whatever reason - is within their rights to use their money on a rare frivolity? I hope so. To be fair, there's a separate function for people like that, like the ssd my brother receives, because our society doesn't want to handle its mental health problems by locking them up in perpetuity and feeding them beans and water. The foodstamps really are intended for necessary food, regardless of whether they go to people on welfare or social security or low income laborers. But then, does it matter if he uses foodstamp dollars or ssd dollars?

According to the author of the article and many on this board, it seems like we can vilify these people for ever spending a dollar we think is unwise, and we can make assumptions about their intentions, and whether they can afford to shop around for better deals, and if they have a place to store or cook their own food. And that's tremendously insulting to the people who have spent their liftimes fighting an uphill battle to stay alive in a country that wishes they'd just go away.

I feel for you any your brothers situation but I still do not agree with you about tax payers not having a say in how their money is spent. Your brothers situation is an exception I believe not the norm and there is a dimensioning return of investment with welfare. Society cannot save everyone for various reasons and I don't believe we should try as there is only a fixed amount of dollars and many priorities. Also it is illegal to lock up people solely for mental health problems but sadly that would probably be best for those folks for reasons your own brother stated.

I'm not on these boards to know enough about particular people, but I am assuming you are a small-government advocate. I can't imagine the additional bureaucracy necessary to implement the bolded. If we as a country decide it is better to give poor people money for food than not (purely on an analytical basis), then we should also analyze what is the best WAY to give that money. I guess we could implement something like the WIC program (giving money for only certain types of foods (and I am a huge fan of WIC), so maybe you are right; maybe it would work that way.But I repeat: We give poor people a *minimal* amount of food stamp money compared to some other government givaways (compare AFDC to the mortgage deduction, to Social Security). Yet we don't ask middle-income homeowners who get thousands in the form of mortgage deductions whether they are spending too much money on cake. Or SS recipients. It just seems unseemly here.

Apples to oranges and you know it.People that get mortgage deductions arent getting a handout. They get a tax deduction. Any "middle income" person taking a mortgage interest deduction isn't "getting thousands".

Tell you what. Take away the property taxes and the city assessment and I will happily give up my mortgage interest deduction. I will even write a check for an extra grand to any charity you want. Deal?

Property taxes and city assessments go to purchase things that are beneficial to you as a landowner (i.e., a long-term resident) in the city in which you reside. Federal taxes go to pay for things that you as a person who lives in this country need (i.e., an Army to defend you). So you can't play one against the other. If you are a landowner, you should pay property taxes for the city, state or locality you live in.And I would certainly qualify the mortgage deductions as a handout, but I can be talked out of it, I guess. You are responsible to pay a certain amount of federal taxes, just like your friend who makes just as much as you, but who rents. If you have to pay less in federal taxes than the person who rents, and the only reason is that you own a house (i.e., the country wants to encourage home ownership), then yes, that is a handout.

We are getting into a different discussion point here which I am sure exists in another thread. I will maybe do a search later so we don't clog this one up. My city assessment currently that we pay 2500 dollars a year for 6 years was to put city water access at the front of my house. I already had city water access at the back of my lot if I wanted it. I don't have city water. I have a well and some of the best tasting water ever. Because I am not on city water the city also makes me pay money for not being on it. Pretty sure that project actually makes the city money. So my 15k contribution goes to something else that the renter also enjoys and didnt pay for. But again now we are straying way off so I will stop...

 

[parasaurolophus]

Im back. Glad I wasn't posting more or some really smart people might have told me how I should have spent my time instead. I bought my mom a klondike bar because I didn't think she deserved a cake. My brother got some hamburger meat. I felt bad wasting money on them like that because they're mentally ill and poor and don't deserve a moment's happiness. I told them that they should just eat gruel and wait to die but they didn't seem to like it. Or maybe they did. Like many of you, I don't spend any thought at all about actual poor people except how they're always stealing from the tax coffers. Then I rushed back to keep my post count up.

Fred you are making some excellent points in this thread and I honestly think you have some people rethinking their perspective (it wouldn't be the first time you have got me to reconsider my viewpoint) but I wish you wouldn't continue with this refrain. It wasn't a choice between a $41 cake and zero happiness for eternity. Go to any major super market and you will see literally dozens of options between zero happiness for eternity and a $41 cake. If that's how she thought it was best to achieve her goal that's fine, I honestly have no problem with it, her food income is fixed and hers to do with as she likes, but let's not pretend that there weren't other options between $41 ice cream cake and zero happiness.

The thing is, we don't know what's going on in this story. This may be the one big splurge for the year, or ever, for a single mom who fell on hard times and an underprivileged kid is going to get his big day. Or it could be the grafter that others want to see in this story. If we are talking about someone buying a forty dollar cake because its warm out and she likes ice cream, then she's not a sympathetic figure at all. But the assumptions made in the article and by many on this board are pretty myopic. Do I think the state should be in the business of buying fancy cakes for people? Of course not. Do I think someone poor - and by poor i dont mean lazy, but unable to work for whatever reason - is within their rights to use their money on a rare frivolity? I hope so. To be fair, there's a separate function for people like that, like the ssd my brother receives, because our society doesn't want to handle its mental health problems by locking them up in perpetuity and feeding them beans and water. The foodstamps really are intended for necessary food, regardless of whether they go to people on welfare or social security or low income laborers. But then, does it matter if he uses foodstamp dollars or ssd dollars?

According to the author of the article and many on this board, it seems like we can vilify these people for ever spending a dollar we think is unwise, and we can make assumptions about their intentions, and whether they can afford to shop around for better deals, and if they have a place to store or cook their own food. And that's tremendously insulting to the people who have spent their liftimes fighting an uphill battle to stay alive in a country that wishes they'd just go away.

I feel for you any your brothers situation but I still do not agree with you about tax payers not having a say in how their money is spent. Your brothers situation is an exception I believe not the norm and there is a dimensioning return of investment with welfare. Society cannot save everyone for various reasons and I don't believe we should try as there is only a fixed amount of dollars and many priorities. Also it is illegal to lock up people solely for mental health problems but sadly that would probably be best for those folks for reasons your own brother stated.

I'm not on these boards to know enough about particular people, but I am assuming you are a small-government advocate. I can't imagine the additional bureaucracy necessary to implement the bolded. If we as a country decide it is better to give poor people money for food than not (purely on an analytical basis), then we should also analyze what is the best WAY to give that money. I guess we could implement something like the WIC program (giving money for only certain types of foods (and I am a huge fan of WIC), so maybe you are right; maybe it would work that way.But I repeat: We give poor people a *minimal* amount of food stamp money compared to some other government givaways (compare AFDC to the mortgage deduction, to Social Security). Yet we don't ask middle-income homeowners who get thousands in the form of mortgage deductions whether they are spending too much money on cake. Or SS recipients. It just seems unseemly here.

Apples to oranges and you know it.People that get mortgage deductions arent getting a handout. They get a tax deduction. Any "middle income" person taking a mortgage interest deduction isn't "getting thousands".

Tell you what. Take away the property taxes and the city assessment and I will happily give up my mortgage interest deduction. I will even write a check for an extra grand to any charity you want. Deal?

The mortgage deduction can absolutely be considered a hand out. What services are you providing for this reduction of taxes? And to say it's not worth 000's is bs too. The annual interest on my $280k 30 year mortgage at 5.25% lowered my total tax liability by several thoughsand dollars.

Then you would not be middle income. Perhaps my math is off(which is possible as I just did a quick comparison factoring standard deduction etc didnt consider other factors) but I dont see how your tax liability goes down several thousand dollars if you fall in the 40-60k salary range. I really don't see it in the 75k range either, but again just a quick calc. could be wrong.