I work in a C-Store ( part time) Yesterday, I had to attend a class on the rules for food stamps.
Did you know that a store cannot charge sales tax on any food items.
(Note: in NY State - "real food" in not taxable)
What gets me is that food stamps can be used to purchase "junk food" - ie soda, ice cream, candy, and ect. ( which is otherwise taxable)
I will be writing a letter to my congressman to change the law so that food stamps cannot be used for junk food.
One other thing - in States like New York - we have a bottle deposit law - 5 cents per bottle. So if a person buys a 12 pack of soda - that would be 60 cents in deposit. - which is part of the food stamp purchase. I doubt the individual gives that 60 cents back to the govt - IF he turns in the cans for redemption.
Food stamp pgm has increased 45 % since 2008. Some 47 million Americans are recieve the stamps.
In 2013, the budget was 80 billion dollars. The last year budget was 74 billion.
In addition - there is some 750 million dollars in illegal food stamp fraud.
Its time some changes be made.
I will be writing a letter to my congressman to change the law so that food stamps cannot be used for junk food. Who will join me?
Click for link
Food Stamps
Discussion in 'Political Debate & Discussion' started by Salty, Dec 3, 2016.
Page 1 of 4
-
-
InTheLight Well-Known MemberSite SupporterNot me. People should be free to make their food purchases even if they are stupid choices.
Sent from my Motorola Droid Turbo -
BUT it is NOT their money - it comes from you and me.
and BTW, there are MANY restrictions as to what they can and cannot buy. -
It wouldn't matter. The money would still be spent, and perhaps it means you buy the junk food out of your own pocket. (Food stamps are designed to cover only a portion of the grocery bill--it's in the formula for calculating amounts that food stamps (SNAP) are "Supplemental".
This sounds like a solution that will cause more bureaucratic troubles than anything else. And it wouldn't stop fraud, either, because the buying patterns would just shift--no money saved, all legitimately spent. -
InTheLight Well-Known MemberSite SupporterI can go along with no alcohol as being a restriction, but where would it end? No soda? No candy bars? I don't want the state being the food police.
Is it OK for Michelle Obama to set school lunch menus?
Sent from my Motorola Droid Turbo -
I couldn't agree more. One thing to remember also is that local businesses that accept SNAP have to cover the costs of increased restrictions.
On another point, if anyone wants to look up the formulas for calculating, a Google search is fairly effective. Many people receive SNAP because their job doesn't pay particularly well, and they may not be able to find another job that easily. But these individuals don't seem to show up in the SNAP debates.
For instance, I have a friend whose husband left her and his son, and, while his job paid about three times what she made, she received under $20 a month for SNAP. She finally got some child support, but that $20 is not lavish spending.
SNAP is really designed to minimize output if you have available resources. Also, it's with people who report no income or work under the table that fraud is most likely, IMO.
Many people already look down on SNAP recipients, so I'd prefer not to add to the stigma for people who are just trying to make it "from paycheck to paycheck". -
I used to work at a C-store next door to a seniors home - people wold come and buy the necessitates - such as bread and milk. I NEVER had a problem with that. But buying junk is an abuse of the system - plain and simple.
Currently there are restrictions - (booze) -so far Congress to add to the regulations (which they love to do anyways) would NOT cause any problems. -
Honestly, I don't mind a periodic treat because hey - we all need a little chocolate now and then!! Or it could be that they are having a birthday party for their child and are finally treating them to something special when they don't normally get stuff like that. You just don't know the situation and I know that there are those that abuse it but not everyone tossing a coke in their cart is abusing it.
-
I will tell you where it should end!!! Think the title of the pgm - SNAP - the "N" stands for NUTRITION !
Only food that is nutritional should be allowed - and thus - candy and soda is NOT nutritional.
I will stand extremly firm on this - unless you can show me a good reason not to.
Recommendation - fine - just not required. -
Yeah, I don't want the list to be restricted but there is a problem when soft drinks are the most popular item purchased with EBT cards:
http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article...ry-chain-soft-drinks-no-1-purchase-food-stamp
then again, the obesity problem in America is self-inflicted for the most part, I just wish they would stop letting people purchase fast food at McD and Carl Jrs, with them. Just that would help. -
SNAP benefits cannot be used for fast food (or any food served cooked).
-
Now, here is what is legal - I can buy a burger that is frozen - That I can pay for with food stamps - then walk over to the micro-wave and heat it up - that is within the rules!
-
Revmitchell Well-Known MemberSite SupporterThere is a solution to that...........get off of stamps and support yourself.
-
Unfortunately, soft drinks are often the cheapest beverage that is ready to drink in a store.
-
Revmitchell Well-Known MemberSite SupporterWater is free straight from the faucet. Pretty handy for those living in hard times
-
yes they can and are:
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/business/2011/09/fast-food-chains-getting-into-the-food-stamp-act/
or, it's okay if it's a takeout order:
http://firstquarterfinance.com/does-subway-take-ebt/
in this state they are giving recipients the option of putting it on an EBT card and they are allowed in every fast food place in the state. -
Unless you live in an old building with very questionable pipes. Unfortunately, that's the reality for many.
-
Actually a bottle of water is cheaper - based on the amount.
At our Store - a 16 Oz Soda is 2.09 (or 2 for 3.34) - A bottle of water is 99 cents. -
What state?
Seems to be a limited program in a few states for cooking-challenged beneficiaries (disabled/homeless/elderly). -
I stand corrected. It's not that way in my state, and I assumed it was a federal rule.
Page 1 of 4