Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

Food stamps

I have seen a lot of questions on food stamps lately, most likely due to the economy and the fact that more people than ever are on assistance. I know this is a touchy subject. One ? was do you think it is fair for people not on food stamps to suggest or decide what those on food stamps should be able to buy? Example only generic brands, no junk food or pop, no nice cuts of steak etc. It was suggested that a mom should not by fruit snacks for her children as that is not frugal. It has never entered my head to dictate what those on food stamps buy. I don't think I would have the balls to go get lobster and whip out food stamps, but do you think this is fair? I am speaking of those using them to get by not welfare lifers. Don't low income kids deserve a fruit snack too? Why take out our frustration as tax payers on innocent kids? Your thoughts?

 
salexander

Asked by salexander at 12:10 PM on Mar. 20, 2009 in Politics & Current Events

Level 26 (28,366 Credits)
This question is closed.
Answers (61)
  • Agreed. I would never presume to tell someone what they are "allowed' to buy, of course as long as it's food. That should be and is the requirement. What if it is your child's birthday? Would you have to get a voucher for a cake and some chips? lol. We have to decide in this country if we are willing to feed the hungry, and if we do, we better just shut up about it. How would this be regulated? Would an alarm go off if an 'unapproved" item was purchased? lol.
    stacymomof2

    Answer by stacymomof2 at 12:19 PM on Mar. 20, 2009

  • Yes, I do think it's fair. I think that those who are asking others to pay for their food should be frugal with the money. Nobody "deserves" fruit snacks or any other treat. They are luxuries. And when you can't afford luxuries you shouldn't buy them. Teaching your child that they "deserve" what they haven't earned and cannot afford is a good indicator of why America is in the mess it's in. People thinking they "deserve" homes they couldn't afford, and clothes they couldn't afford, and cars they couldn't afford. But everyone wants to "treat" themselves, blah blah blah.
    Anonymous

    Answer by Anonymous at 12:16 PM on Mar. 20, 2009

  • I just think that the money shoudl be used to buy food that has some sort of nutritional value. Ya know what I mean? Yeah fruit snacks are yummy and all but they dont provide anything but empty calories. I feel the same about all junk food. I do think there should be limits, but i'm not one to make a big deal about it. As long as there are no restraints buy whatever you want, but I would totally support limits being placed on it.
    Chandra034

    Answer by Chandra034 at 12:17 PM on Mar. 20, 2009

  • I worked in a grocery store for a long time & a lot of the people on food stamps were eating gooooooood - lobster, steaks, etc. It does suck but I dont think we should have that much of a say on what they can/cant buy. As it is they cant buy things like fried chicken (anything cooked) or soda pop out of the fountain at the store - which is fair. But I think its rude to say they cant buy things like fruit snacks for their kids... why cant their kids be the same as ours? Its just a normal lunch or snack item
    Anonymous

    Answer by Anonymous at 12:17 PM on Mar. 20, 2009

  • Where do you draw the lline? If people are DEPENDENT on the government for financial assistance, and the government NEEDS taxpayer money to fullfill one's DEPENDENCY, then the TAXPAYER has a right to voice their opinion on where the money should be allowed to go.

    EXAMPLE: Someone makes poor food choices while on foodstamps, their child develops type II diabetes at the age of 10. Now that child is in need of healthcare for a disease that COULD HAVE BEEN PREVENTED. Now, the taxpayers are RESPONSIBLE even more so. If people won't make healthy decisions on their own and they are DEPENDENT on the GOVERNMENT for Financial Assistance, they taxpayers have a say.
    grlygrlz2

    Answer by grlygrlz2 at 12:24 PM on Mar. 20, 2009

  • Well this was kind of my point. Do children have to "earn" a fruit snack? Like I said before if I had to go on food stamps I do not think I would be gutsy enough to go get lobster! I do however think that my kids should have a fruit snack in their lunch like any normal kid. Should low income people who have fallen on hard times lay off etc send stale bread and water with their kids to school? Isn't that a bit harsh? Again I am not talking about women with 6 kids and one on the way and a cart full of steak and junk food. Just the average mom on assistance while getting back on her feet. Could you really go up to a 2nd grader in school and say "sorry but I am taking your fruit snacks because your parents are on food stamps and therefore you don't deserve them? Seems a bit heartless to me.
    salexander

    Answer by salexander at 12:24 PM on Mar. 20, 2009

  • i dont think any one said they should only be allowed to have stale bread and water. As for every kid NEEDS fruit snacks...I'm not on food stamps and my kid doesnt get fruit snacks. He gets FRUIT.
    Chandra034

    Answer by Chandra034 at 12:27 PM on Mar. 20, 2009

  • it upsets me sometimes to hear or see people going on government help because they "need" help when in reality they have a great life.. a brand new remodeled house, two new cars and their kids in a "good" school. in that case yes the more restrictions the better., but when they really need it then they should be able to get some junk but not all.
    Anonymous

    Answer by Anonymous at 12:27 PM on Mar. 20, 2009

  • I agree with you. Not everyone on assistance is out to rob the system. Kids shouldn't be burdened with financial problems at young ages anyways, so parents should maintain as normal of a atmosphere as they can.
    BabyBeans0506

    Answer by BabyBeans0506 at 12:30 PM on Mar. 20, 2009

  • Thank you babybeans this is my point. Should we really punish children for things beyond their control? I just think it seems kind of harsh and I would certainly not want to be the fruit snack police and tell little kids they can't have them because they are poor and not as good or deserving as everyone else. I am using fruit snacks because it is the example the original poster used when making her point about how there should be restrictions in place. I thought there already were. No hot premade foods, no beer, cigerettes etc, no pet food. If you can't eat it you can't buy it. Who am I to say no fruit snacks. You would have to feed your kid boxes and boxes of them in order for them to become ill and fruit snacks do not cause diabetes as one poster suggested. My brother has type 1...it is genetic and he would have gotten it whether or not my mom sent him fruit snacks in his lunch.
    salexander

    Answer by salexander at 12:38 PM on Mar. 20, 2009