SNAP benefits ( gentally)

[rambot]

I didn’t mention anyone specifically. I said an expose should be done on the faction of christianity that holds the negative perspectives against the poor and needy that are articulated on the site. The majority would be surprised to learn how you really feel. And I think they should know.

~bella

Sadly, I am positive there are QUITE a few American Christians with a terribly negative perspective and some not cool prejudices against the poor.

The fact that they are on this site? Well, that's just gonna be a law of averages kinda thing.

 

[bèlla]

Sadly, I am positive there are QUITE a few American Christians with a terribly negative perspective and some not cool prejudices against the poor.

I agree and we’re in a period where we needn’t be uninformed. A person who presents themselves as followers of Christ who holds anti christian views about the poor should be dealt with in the natural and spiritual. You don’t let anyone defame what the Father esteems. You pray their words back to Him and remind Him of His word and let Him handle it. If you allow leaven to go unchecked it spreads so you cut off the head to shut it down.

We address all wrongs in prayer. Not just our enemies. Many believers need to be taken before the throne for correction because they’re out of order. When a person feels comfortable making statements like these it isn‘t the whole. There’s more where that came from. The shutdown was the catalyst for them to say what they really felt.

~bella

 

[JustaPewFiller]

eh...

There are ways to do that that are healthy and ways to do it that are controlling and toxic. Anybody who's ever worked in university administration (as my wife does) can tell you just how much of a mess that approach can become even when the donors are well-meaning and not overbearing. University endowments aren't giant, singular pots of money; they're typically collections of many smaller pots, each earmarked for specific purposes. Funding projects and staff positions often winds up being a ridiculous and inefficient juggling act pulling money from all over the place.



Which makes sense if SNAP families are more likely to have limited food prep time due to having young kids and/or working jobs with odd schedules. (Nearly half of SNAP recipients are under 18.) I buy frozen food all the time, because I need to cook dinner for the kid in <20 minutes every night.

Yup - I know a few families on SNAP who are comprised of a single parent holding down more than 1 part time job and more than 1 kid in house. Sometimes "convenience" is a necessity in those cases.

 

[Chesterton]

I didn’t mention anyone specifically.

I noticed; hence the request to mention someone specifically.

I said an expose should be done on the faction of christianity that holds the negative perspectives against the poor and needy that are articulated on the site. The majority would be surprised to learn how you really feel. And I think they should know.

I'll take that "you" I underlined to be a general "you", because I know you can't be aiming it at me. In this thread I was specifically calling for some charity work to be done. In fact, I think I'll start my own charity called Snickers For Snappers. You want my PayPal info?

 

[JosephZ]

In this thread I was specifically calling for some charity work to be done. In fact, I think I'll start my own charity called Snickers For Snappers. You want my PayPal info?

Why would anyone take you serious when you are dehumanizing beneficiaries of SNAP?

 

[Chesterton]

Why would anyone take you serious...

Take me serious about what? I made an offer to be a consultant and give you compassionate people an actual way to show your compassion. Sadly, no one's replied to hear my ideas.

...when you are dehumanizing beneficiaries of SNAP?

I'm doing that? That's horrible. Or maybe not. What are they now? I've always wanted to be an eagle.

 

[JosephZ]

I'm doing that? That's horrible. Or maybe not. What are they now? I've always wanted to be an eagle

They're not "Snappers who can't get through the day without a Snickers."

I can think of at least two different ways you can find and help out Snappers who can't get through the day without a Snickers.

 

[Chesterton]

They're not "Snappers who can't get through the day without a Snickers."

But they would still be humans.

It's working men like me who feel "dehumanized" when we experience stuff like this. And that post was intended to be short. I didn't spend my whole life as a middle class suburban white guy. I've been around, I know what goes on.

And my posts here are intended to show the hypocrisy of people who are very generous with other people's money; people who say they care, but not enough want to actually know how to help with their own money.

 

[Belk]

Because when they are using other people's money, the other people have every right to tell people how and where they should spend it.

They do? Not in any situation I can recall. No one called me up asking permission to fly bombing runs in Iraq when I thought it was a stupid idea.

 

[Belk]

@JosephZ @Paulos23 @Belk @Desk trauma

What's preventing you guys from getting them "treats"? You don't need to show your performative virtue. You can actually effect demonstrable virtue! And it'll feel so good because you'd be using [more of] your own money.

I can think of at least two different ways you can find and help out Snappers who can't get through the day without a Snickers. If you want me to tell you, then reply to this and ask.

What is preventing us from allowing this through SNAP? That is the discussion on the table.

 

[Chesterton]

What is preventing us from allowing this through SNAP? That is the discussion on the table.

The Democratic/Democrat members of Congress. (I can't remember which word is illegal here.)

 

[Belk]

The Democratic/Democrat members of Congress. (I can't remember which word is illegal here.)

Democrat is the one to avoid, though I only think that is in reference to the entire party.

No, the Democrats have not proposed legislation limiting "treats".

 

[JosephZ]

The Democratic/Democrat members of Congress.

Republicans could provide full funding for SNAP by tomorrow if they wanted.

 

[Oompa Loompa]

They do? Not in any situation I can recall. No one called me up asking permission to fly bombing runs in Iraq when I thought it was a stupid idea.

So, if you gave money to a hungry family for the purpose of them buying food for their children, only to discover they were spending the money to fly bombing runs in Iraq, you would consider it micromanaging to be upset and cut their funding?

 

[asquirrel]

The only viable fix to this is to get rid of SNAP all together. "I'm from the government and I'm here to help" is a warning. When you pass off your responsibility to make sure your neighbors have something to eat to the government, you create the very source of disdain for the poor on display in this thread. When you have to know whether your neighbors are hungry or not, you suddenly become much more invested in their lives. This is why rich and poor were to live together under the law of Moses.

The simple truth is that calories are incredibly cheap. But people are also incredibly lazy. I say this as a fairly lazy person myself. But really, for $2-3/day you can get someone 2000 calories. Unless they work in construction or some other physical job, that's plenty. Even if they need 4000 cal/day, which is what I'd expect for manual labor at a construction site, that's only $4/day. Nutrition is a concern, you can't just give them bread, milk, and oil and call it good. A multivitamin isn't going to pick up the slack. The point is, it's INCREDIBLY cheap to feed people. For reference, the average SNAP benefit is about $6.18 per day per person. So that's $2/day of waste or preference, compared to what should work. Or, said differently, by having the government provide for their needs, every 3 people who get fed deprive one person of food.

We are all called, individually, to make sure the needs of the poor are taken care of. When I was a kid, I helped an old man in my neighborhood drive around to the local grocery stores and pass out all the expired food that was going to be thrown out (stuff that was still good, like boxed juices, or yogurt; it was just passed its 'best by' date). Grocery stores near me no longer allow that to happen for legal liability reasons.

We are sick in spirit. Sick like diseased. "And because lawlessness will be increased, the love of many will grow cold." Matthew 24:12 We have incredible lawlessness. Everyone knows how someone else is breaking the law and getting away with it. We watch our own elected officials commit crimes and not get punished. Is it any wonder our hearts are so cold to the poor and needy? I don't know how to change it, but I do know passing your responsibility to someone else doesn't work. Take care of the person to your right, and hope your neighbor takes care of the person to your left.

 

[Belk]

So, if you gave money to a hungry family for the purpose of them buying food for their children, only to discover they were spending the money to fly bombing runs in Iraq, you would consider it micromanaging to be upset and cut their funding?

If you gave money to a family to buy food and they bought food you did not like would you castigate them and insist they can only buy what you approve of? That is not charity, that is being a control freak.

 

[rambot]

When my church hands out grocery cards to poor neighbour's we don't expect receipts back.

What a pathetic state.

 

[rambot]

If you gave money to a family to buy food and they bought food you did not like would you castigate them and insist they can only buy what you approve of? That is not charity, that is being a control freak.

I'd suggest it's also mighty rude. If you give money foe food and rhey buy food, your opinions is unwelcome.

Why didn't you buy wonderbread and tomatoes???

What're you gonna do with Naan and palace paneer???

 

[rambot]

The only viable fix to this is to get rid of SNAP all together. "I'm from the government and I'm here to help" is a warning. When you pass off your responsibility to make sure your neighbors have something to eat to the government, you create the very source of disdain for the poor on display in this thread. When you have to know whether your neighbors are hungry or not, you suddenly become much more invested in their lives. This is why rich and poor were to live together under the law of Moses.

The simple truth is that calories are incredibly cheap. But people are also incredibly lazy. I say this as a fairly lazy person myself. But really, for $2-3/day you can get someone 2000 calories. Unless they work in construction or some other physical job, that's plenty. Even if they need 4000 cal/day, which is what I'd expect for manual labor at a construction site, that's only $4/day. Nutrition is a concern, you can't just give them bread, milk, and oil and call it good. A multivitamin isn't going to pick up the slack. The point is, it's INCREDIBLY cheap to feed people. For reference, the average SNAP benefit is about $6.18 per day per person. So that's $2/day of waste or preference, compared to what should work. Or, said differently, by having the government provide for their needs, every 3 people who get fed deprive one person of food.

We are all called, individually, to make sure the needs of the poor are taken care of. When I was a kid, I helped an old man in my neighborhood drive around to the local grocery stores and pass out all the expired food that was going to be thrown out (stuff that was still good, like boxed juices, or yogurt; it was just passed its 'best by' date). Grocery stores near me no longer allow that to happen for legal liability reasons.

They can and do. It goes to these evil corporations called "food banks" that also centralized a giving target and work with most grocers to arrange very reduced prices for goods or even donations.

The problem with being hung up on " individually" is that there is an assumption that God abhors any other efforts to help the poor. "
We don't have to use taxes or support local food banks cause God told us only to do it as "individuals".

Bah. You are missing rhe spirit of the message there.

We are sick in spirit. Sick like diseased. "And because lawlessness will be increased, the love of many will grow cold." Matthew 24:12 We have incredible lawlessness. Everyone knows how someone else is breaking the law and getting away with it. We watch our own elected officials commit crimes and not get punished. Is it any wonder our hearts are so cold to the poor and needy? I don't know how to change it, but I do know passing your responsibility to someone else doesn't work. Take care of the person to your right, and hope your neighbor takes care of the person to your left.

This reads like you want to treat people like chattel

 

[asquirrel]

They can and do. It goes to these evil corporations called "food banks" that also centralized a giving target and work with most grocers to arrange very reduced prices for goods or even donations.

The problem with being hung up on " individually" is that there is an assumption that God abhors any other efforts to help the poor. "
We don't have to use taxes or support local food banks cause God told us only to do it as "individuals".

Bah. You are missing rhe spirit of the message there.

This reads like you want to treat people like chattel

People only become chattel when they fall so far that they have nothing left of value except their labor. We don't call it being a 'wage slave' for nothing. The treatment is far better than historical slavery, but let's not pretend it's any less of an exchange of effort for existence to those people. You know the kind, the ones with debt or mortgages, who are terrified to say no to anything because they 'need the money'.

The grocery stores near me to give some things to food banks, but much of it goes into dumpsters. I know because I've seen it with my own eyes.

And you're right, I phrased my argument poorly. In the time of Roman oppression, when the people were being taxed, the church *should* have stepped in to feed the poor and shelter the homeless. Instead, they wanted to keep their fine robes, cushy buildings, and important status. They couldn't give up their boons to those with less because it made them feel 'less'. I have no issue with people grouping together to provide, I have issue with an individual not knowing *how* they personally are providing for the poor beyond some hand-wave of 'food banks exist' or 'the government has programs'. Have you ever used those programs? Have you ever gotten food from a food bank? It is important to know how these things work.

Only once in my life did I ever claim unemployment. Less because I needed it and more because I qualified for it. To sit in the office and have a worker tell me "You're actually trying to follow the rules and read instructions, and the system punishes you for that. It's literally setup for people who cheat." was very telling. But I would have never learned that if I hadn't tested the very system I spent decades paying into.

That's the point I'm trying to make. The burden an individual has is to not just assume someone else will take care of a problem for them. Inspect, check, question, investigate, learn. Be curious. Care.