On Sat, 1 Jun 2013 08:38:48 -0700 (PDT), "
wrote in alt.atheism:
....
All of which are doing exactly what I said. They are paying a hell of
a lot in total taxes. It's just that the effective rate gets reduced
from 35% to 15% or 20% through various tax exemptions.
So what? It has nothing to do with people getting all kinds of
free handouts from the govt who are PAYING NO INCOME
TAX at all. Capiche?

So it's okay with you if GE doesn't pay income tax, but if a person
living on $8,000/year doesn't pay any income tax, you are livid.

You must be very sad that Michele Bachmann decided not to run again.

On Sat, 1 Jun 2013 09:30:13 -0500, "Attila Iskander"
wrote in alt.atheism:

"Free Lunch" wrote in message
.. .
On Fri, 31 May 2013 21:34:08 -0700, (Jason) wrote in
alt.atheism:

In article , Free Lunch
wrote:

On Fri, 31 May 2013 19:22:25 -0700, (Jason) wrote in
alt.atheism:

In article , Free Lunch
wrote:
...
How much are you willing to spend in enforcement to avoid $1,000 in
fraud?

About 5 to 10 percent of the money spent on the food stamp program.

So you want to spend billions in enforcement to avoid a thousand in
waste. How foolish of you.

I meant to investigate cases of possible fraud and abuse.

But fraud and abuse are far less than 5% of the cost now.

Based on what data ?

http://www.fns.usda.gov/snap/fraud/fraud_2.htm

On Sat, 1 Jun 2013 09:23:06 -0500, "Attila Iskander"
wrote in alt.atheism:

"Free Lunch" wrote in message
.. .
On Fri, 31 May 2013 19:22:25 -0700, (Jason) wrote in
alt.atheism:

In article , Free Lunch
wrote:

On Fri, 31 May 2013 16:57:42 -0700, (Jason) wrote in
alt.atheism:

In article , Free Lunch
wrote:

On Fri, 31 May 2013 13:55:49 -0700, (Jason) wrote in
alt.atheism:

In article ,
wrote:

On 5/27/2013 8:49 PM, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
In article ,
Free Lunch wrote:

On Mon, 27 May 2013 11:33:19 -0400, Kurt Ullman

wrote in alt.atheism:

In article ,

wrote:

Remaining President when you know you are no longer capable
of
performing the duties is the worst kind of treason because
it's
endangers the country more than almost anything anyone could
do.

Show me where that is grounds for treason. You lefties
really are
dumb****s.


When there is a lefty getting all up in arms about RR and
his
alleged
Alzheimers, I ask them if that is true, aren't they sorta
ashamed
by the
fact that this demented old man handed their assess to them on
numerous
occassions?
Tends to shut them up at least temporarily.

We're being nice to him. If he did not have Alzheimers, he was
just
being a very bad man. The fact that he could get enough
hate-filled
Americans to support him in his war on the poor (particularly
if they
were of color) shows us how much racism, sexism and bigotry
still
remains in this country.

Of course, today, the GOP would never consider Reagan because
he was far
too liberal for their taste. They worship a fake St. Ronnie who
looks
little like the man who was actually president.

The War on Hunger had been won by the time Reagan became
President. He
dismantled the apparatus that had worked and now we have 50
million
Americans who are food insecure, almost all of the children, the
elderly, and hard-working adults.

For that alone, Reagan deserves to be cursed every single day.


Perhaps the program suffered the malaise of many government
giveaway
programs which is becoming a huge corrupted and wasteful
organization.
Food Stamps became the secondary legal tender for the underground
and
criminal economy. The EBT card is being used in the same way. I've
seen
the credit on the cards being sold for 50 cents on the dollar by
someone
who wanted to buy booze or dope. Food Stamps now the EBT card is a
major
part of the illegal drug trade. I've seen people trade their
EBT credit for cash to buy cigarets, pot and alcohol instead of
food
for "their children". So the P.L.L.C.F. blame the behavior of the
parents on Republican presidents. Gee, that makes a lot of sense.
^_^

TDD

Thanks for the best post that I have seen today. I know the story of
a
local mother of three kids. She trades her food stamps for marijuana
and
cocaine.

And that is a crime, but it is not an excuse to take food stamps away
from those who are not violating the law. Clearly those who want to
take
food stamps away from everyone are people who hate what Jesus taught,
who mock what Jesus taught.

I agree that it's not an escuse to end the food stamp program. However,
it
is evidence that officials need to do a better job of enforcing the
food
stamp rules.

How much are you willing to spend in enforcement to avoid $1,000 in
fraud?

About 5 to 10 percent of the money spent on the food stamp program.

So you want to spend billions in enforcement to avoid a thousand in
waste. How foolish of you.


Another false argument
You have waste in the MILLIONS, if not billions

I asked Jason how much he would be willing to spend to avoid $1,000 in
fraud.

Take it up with Jason, he's the one who wants to spend huge amounts.

USDA says fraud is about 1% of SNAP. Do you have a cost-effective way to
cut it further? They want to hear about it.

On Sat, 1 Jun 2013 09:22:26 -0500, "Attila Iskander"
wrote in alt.atheism:

"Free Lunch" wrote in message
.. .
On Fri, 31 May 2013 16:57:42 -0700, (Jason) wrote in
alt.atheism:

In article , Free Lunch
wrote:

On Fri, 31 May 2013 13:55:49 -0700, (Jason) wrote in
alt.atheism:

In article ,
wrote:

On 5/27/2013 8:49 PM, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
In article ,
Free Lunch wrote:

On Mon, 27 May 2013 11:33:19 -0400, Kurt Ullman

wrote in alt.atheism:

In article ,

wrote:

Remaining President when you know you are no longer capable of
performing the duties is the worst kind of treason because it's
endangers the country more than almost anything anyone could
do.

Show me where that is grounds for treason. You lefties really
are
dumb****s.


When there is a lefty getting all up in arms about RR and his
alleged
Alzheimers, I ask them if that is true, aren't they sorta ashamed
by the
fact that this demented old man handed their assess to them on
numerous
occassions?
Tends to shut them up at least temporarily.

We're being nice to him. If he did not have Alzheimers, he was
just
being a very bad man. The fact that he could get enough
hate-filled
Americans to support him in his war on the poor (particularly if
they
were of color) shows us how much racism, sexism and bigotry still
remains in this country.

Of course, today, the GOP would never consider Reagan because he
was far
too liberal for their taste. They worship a fake St. Ronnie who
looks
little like the man who was actually president.

The War on Hunger had been won by the time Reagan became President.
He
dismantled the apparatus that had worked and now we have 50 million
Americans who are food insecure, almost all of the children, the
elderly, and hard-working adults.

For that alone, Reagan deserves to be cursed every single day.


Perhaps the program suffered the malaise of many government giveaway
programs which is becoming a huge corrupted and wasteful
organization.
Food Stamps became the secondary legal tender for the underground and
criminal economy. The EBT card is being used in the same way. I've
seen
the credit on the cards being sold for 50 cents on the dollar by
someone
who wanted to buy booze or dope. Food Stamps now the EBT card is a
major
part of the illegal drug trade. I've seen people trade their
EBT credit for cash to buy cigarets, pot and alcohol instead of food
for "their children". So the P.L.L.C.F. blame the behavior of the
parents on Republican presidents. Gee, that makes a lot of sense. ^_^

TDD

Thanks for the best post that I have seen today. I know the story of a
local mother of three kids. She trades her food stamps for marijuana
and
cocaine.

And that is a crime, but it is not an excuse to take food stamps away
from those who are not violating the law. Clearly those who want to take
food stamps away from everyone are people who hate what Jesus taught,
who mock what Jesus taught.

I agree that it's not an escuse to end the food stamp program. However, it
is evidence that officials need to do a better job of enforcing the food
stamp rules.

How much are you willing to spend in enforcement to avoid $1,000 in
fraud?

How much fraud and waste are you willing to tolerate ?

I will tolerate all waste and fraud that cannot be rooted out in a cost
effective manner.

Think about it
That fraud and waste is cheating not only those paying for it, but those who
really need it.

I will not take two dollars from the poor who need SNAP benefits to try
to root out one dollar in fraud. Criminal prosecution needs to be done
by the Justice department, not at the expense of those in need.

" wrote in
:

On Jun 1, 9:30*am, Mitchell Holman nomailverizon.net wrote:
" wrote
innews:c26f7eae-81a
:





On Jun 1, 8:29*am, "Alex W." wrote:
On Sat, 01 Jun 2013 07:19:58 -0500, Free Lunch wrote:
On Fri, 31 May 2013 21:34:08 -0700, (Jason)
wrote in alt.atheism:

In article , Free
Lunch wrote:

On Fri, 31 May 2013 19:22:25 -0700, (Jason)
wrote in alt.atheism:

In article , Free
Lunch wrote:
...
How much are you willing to spend in enforcement to avoid
$1,000 i
n
fraud?

About 5 to 10 percent of the money spent on the food stamp
program.

So you want to spend billions in enforcement to avoid a
thousand in waste. How foolish of you.

I meant to investigate cases of possible fraud and abuse.

But fraud and abuse are far less than 5% of the cost now.

Which may be true but is immaterial to the debate since this
is a political issue, and politics is largely the art of
wrestling with and managing public perception. *Similar
examples are a perceived crime wave when actual figures show
a downturn in crime,

Nice analogy. *There are 48 mil on food stamps today, up
70% in the last 4 years. *If crime were up like that, it would
be one hell of a mess. *Actually, crime is one hell of a mess
in places like Detroit and Chicago that are run by you libs.

or the view that illegal immgirants are
welfare spongers when the evidence shows they are by and
large extremely hard workers,

hard worker or not, they are still illegal aliens. *And there
are plenty of them taking advantage of the USA.

Illegal Immigration Provides Benefits to States
Fox Busniess News

Putting the law and morality of illegal entry aside, several
studies have shown the illegal immigrant population is more
of an economic contributor to state and local economies than
politicians like to tell an angry electorate. The numbers can
be broken down into the fiscal cost (or gain) of illegal
immigrants to states, along with the economic contribution of
the population.

The most thorough study on the fiscal and economic impact of
immigration was done by the non-partisan Texas Comptrollers’
Office in 2006, which showed Texas earned more in taxes and
economic output from illegal immigrants than governments spent
to provide services. According to the Comptrollers’ office,
state and local governments spent $1.16 billion to provide
services like education, health care and safety, but raised
an estimated $1.58 billion in tax revenues. Based on the data,
the Texas taxpayer made a $424.7 million profit on its illegal
immigrant population in 2006.


Liar, liar, pants on fire! You carefull edited out this part which
totally
changes the math:

"Undocumented immigrants produced $1.58 billion in state revenues,
which exceeded the $1.16 billion in state services they received.
However, local governments bore the burden of $1.44 billion in
uncompensated health care costs and local law enforcement costs not
paid for by the state.”

So:

$1.58bil - $1.16bil - $1.44 bil = - $1bil

In other words illegal alliens actually cost the citizens of TX,
$1bil.


You aren't factoring in the consumer cost of
goods and service kept artifically low by the
work of illegals. How high would wages (and thus
prices) have to go to lure Americans into fields
to pick lettuce and strawberries and to gut cattle
and "process" chickens and pigs?

Why do you think growers have to go as far away
as Jamaica to find legal field hands?




Eastern Washington farm hires 300 Jamaican workers
May 24, 2010

A farm in Eastern Washington is employing hundreds of
Jamaican workers to replace the illegal immigrants it
lost after an Immigration and Customs Enforcement
investigation last year.

Gebbers Farms in Brewster, WA, which grows apple and
cherry trees, is hiring 300 workers from Jamaica
through the H-2A visa program, issuing temporary
agricultural visas.

Gebbers Farms is certified through the Department of
Labor to hire foreign workers. Mike Gempler, with the
Washington Growers League, told KIRO Radio's Dave Ross,
that US citizens get the opportunity to apply for the
jobs, but that the farm still didn't find enough
Americans to harvest its fruit.

Gempler said, "The problem is there's no guarantee that
the people looking for jobs now will have legal documents.
So you have businesses that are subject to enforcement
actions by Department of Homeland Security."
http://www.mynorthwest.com/?nid=11&sid=324409


-----------------------------



or the widespread belief that
America spends huge sums on third-world fireign aid when the
actual sums involved are only a tiny part of the budget.

And where is the evidence that it's doing us much good?
You cool with the idea of giving the muslim brotherhood
govt in Egypt money from struggling Americans?

* *Well, that IS the elected government there.
Do you have a problem with supporting democracy?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Yes, when the elected govt is anti-American, denies basic human
rights to women, persecutes Christians and supports our enemies.



Oh, puh-leeze. Where was that concern for womens
rights and "supporting our enemies" when it comes to
US aid to Saudi monarchy?




Saudi Document Shows Kingdom Linked with Al-Qaeda Terror
May 25 2010

An Iraqi news agency has revealed more evidence linking
Saudi Arabia with terror. The Buratha news service
published what it said it is a secret document disclosing
how much money the Saudi kingdom has transferred to Al-Qaeda
in Iraq. The kingdom reportedly sends explosives and weapons
to terrorist groups in Iraq.

Saudi Arabia did not comment on the report and instead
criticized intelligence officials for disclosing the
document. Buratha said that King Abdullah bin Abdul Aziz
ordered a special committee to investigate the intelligence
leak and inform him about those liable in the case. Saudi
authorities reportedly have arrested 37 of the country's
intelligence officials for being behind the leak.
http://tinyurl.com/27ra64g

In article ,
Mitchell Holman nomailverizon.net wrote:

" wrote in
:

On Jun 1, 9:30*am, Mitchell Holman nomailverizon.net wrote:
" wrote
innews:c26f7eae-81a
:





On Jun 1, 8:29*am, "Alex W." wrote:
On Sat, 01 Jun 2013 07:19:58 -0500, Free Lunch wrote:
On Fri, 31 May 2013 21:34:08 -0700, (Jason)
wrote in alt.atheism:

In article , Free
Lunch wrote:

On Fri, 31 May 2013 19:22:25 -0700, (Jason)
wrote in alt.atheism:

In article , Free
Lunch wrote:
...
How much are you willing to spend in enforcement to avoid
$1,000 i
n
fraud?

About 5 to 10 percent of the money spent on the food stamp
program.

So you want to spend billions in enforcement to avoid a
thousand in waste. How foolish of you.

I meant to investigate cases of possible fraud and abuse.

But fraud and abuse are far less than 5% of the cost now.

Which may be true but is immaterial to the debate since this
is a political issue, and politics is largely the art of
wrestling with and managing public perception. *Similar
examples are a perceived crime wave when actual figures show
a downturn in crime,

Nice analogy. *There are 48 mil on food stamps today, up
70% in the last 4 years. *If crime were up like that, it would
be one hell of a mess. *Actually, crime is one hell of a mess
in places like Detroit and Chicago that are run by you libs.

or the view that illegal immgirants are
welfare spongers when the evidence shows they are by and
large extremely hard workers,

hard worker or not, they are still illegal aliens. *And there
are plenty of them taking advantage of the USA.

Illegal Immigration Provides Benefits to States
Fox Busniess News

Putting the law and morality of illegal entry aside, several
studies have shown the illegal immigrant population is more
of an economic contributor to state and local economies than
politicians like to tell an angry electorate. The numbers can
be broken down into the fiscal cost (or gain) of illegal
immigrants to states, along with the economic contribution of
the population.

The most thorough study on the fiscal and economic impact of
immigration was done by the non-partisan Texas Comptrollers’
Office in 2006, which showed Texas earned more in taxes and
economic output from illegal immigrants than governments spent
to provide services. According to the Comptrollers’ office,
state and local governments spent $1.16 billion to provide
services like education, health care and safety, but raised
an estimated $1.58 billion in tax revenues. Based on the data,
the Texas taxpayer made a $424.7 million profit on its illegal
immigrant population in 2006.


Liar, liar, pants on fire! You carefull edited out this part which
totally
changes the math:

"Undocumented immigrants produced $1.58 billion in state revenues,
which exceeded the $1.16 billion in state services they received.
However, local governments bore the burden of $1.44 billion in
uncompensated health care costs and local law enforcement costs not
paid for by the state.”

So:

$1.58bil - $1.16bil - $1.44 bil = - $1bil

In other words illegal alliens actually cost the citizens of TX,
$1bil.


You aren't factoring in the consumer cost of
goods and service kept artifically low by the
work of illegals. How high would wages (and thus
prices) have to go to lure Americans into fields
to pick lettuce and strawberries and to gut cattle
and "process" chickens and pigs?


I always ask people how much more they're willing to pay for their
produce in order to avoid having them picked by undocumented workers.

--

JD

"Osama Bin Laden is dead and GM is alive."--VP Joseph Biden

On Fri, 31 May 2013 20:35:53 -0500, Free Lunch
wrote:

On Fri, 31 May 2013 16:57:42 -0700, (Jason) wrote in
alt.atheism:

In article , Free Lunch
wrote:

On Fri, 31 May 2013 13:55:49 -0700, (Jason) wrote in
alt.atheism:

In article ,
wrote:

On 5/27/2013 8:49 PM, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
In article ,
Free Lunch wrote:

On Mon, 27 May 2013 11:33:19 -0400, Kurt Ullman
wrote in alt.atheism:

In article ,
wrote:

Remaining President when you know you are no longer capable of
performing the duties is the worst kind of treason because it's
endangers the country more than almost anything anyone could do.

Show me where that is grounds for treason. You lefties really are
dumb****s.


When there is a lefty getting all up in arms about RR and his
alleged
Alzheimers, I ask them if that is true, aren't they sorta ashamed
by the
fact that this demented old man handed their assess to them on numerous
occassions?
Tends to shut them up at least temporarily.

We're being nice to him. If he did not have Alzheimers, he was just
being a very bad man. The fact that he could get enough hate-filled
Americans to support him in his war on the poor (particularly if they
were of color) shows us how much racism, sexism and bigotry still
remains in this country.

Of course, today, the GOP would never consider Reagan because he was far
too liberal for their taste. They worship a fake St. Ronnie who looks
little like the man who was actually president.

The War on Hunger had been won by the time Reagan became President. He
dismantled the apparatus that had worked and now we have 50 million
Americans who are food insecure, almost all of the children, the
elderly, and hard-working adults.

For that alone, Reagan deserves to be cursed every single day.


Perhaps the program suffered the malaise of many government giveaway
programs which is becoming a huge corrupted and wasteful organization.
Food Stamps became the secondary legal tender for the underground and
criminal economy. The EBT card is being used in the same way. I've seen
the credit on the cards being sold for 50 cents on the dollar by someone
who wanted to buy booze or dope. Food Stamps now the EBT card is a major
part of the illegal drug trade. I've seen people trade their
EBT credit for cash to buy cigarets, pot and alcohol instead of food
for "their children". So the P.L.L.C.F. blame the behavior of the
parents on Republican presidents. Gee, that makes a lot of sense. ^_^

TDD

Thanks for the best post that I have seen today. I know the story of a
local mother of three kids. She trades her food stamps for marijuana and
cocaine.

And that is a crime, but it is not an excuse to take food stamps away
from those who are not violating the law. Clearly those who want to take
food stamps away from everyone are people who hate what Jesus taught,
who mock what Jesus taught.

I agree that it's not an escuse to end the food stamp program. However, it
is evidence that officials need to do a better job of enforcing the food
stamp rules.

How much are you willing to spend in enforcement to avoid $1,000 in
fraud?

Idiot. It doesn't cost much to limit the uses of "food stamps". Will
it get 100% of the fraud? No, but it's a *lot* better than having
handing out EBT cards that can be used in any cash machine.

On Fri, 31 May 2013 21:26:49 -0500, Free Lunch
wrote:

On Fri, 31 May 2013 19:22:25 -0700, (Jason) wrote in
alt.atheism:

In article , Free Lunch
wrote:

On Fri, 31 May 2013 16:57:42 -0700, (Jason) wrote in
alt.atheism:

In article , Free Lunch
wrote:

On Fri, 31 May 2013 13:55:49 -0700, (Jason) wrote in
alt.atheism:

In article ,
wrote:

On 5/27/2013 8:49 PM, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
In article ,
Free Lunch wrote:

On Mon, 27 May 2013 11:33:19 -0400, Kurt Ullman

wrote in alt.atheism:

In article ,

wrote:

Remaining President when you know you are no longer capable of
performing the duties is the worst kind of treason because it's
endangers the country more than almost anything anyone could do.

Show me where that is grounds for treason. You lefties really are
dumb****s.


When there is a lefty getting all up in arms about RR and his
alleged
Alzheimers, I ask them if that is true, aren't they sorta ashamed
by the
fact that this demented old man handed their assess to them on
numerous
occassions?
Tends to shut them up at least temporarily.

We're being nice to him. If he did not have Alzheimers, he was just
being a very bad man. The fact that he could get enough hate-filled
Americans to support him in his war on the poor (particularly if they
were of color) shows us how much racism, sexism and bigotry still
remains in this country.

Of course, today, the GOP would never consider Reagan because
he was far
too liberal for their taste. They worship a fake St. Ronnie who looks
little like the man who was actually president.

The War on Hunger had been won by the time Reagan became President. He
dismantled the apparatus that had worked and now we have 50 million
Americans who are food insecure, almost all of the children, the
elderly, and hard-working adults.

For that alone, Reagan deserves to be cursed every single day.


Perhaps the program suffered the malaise of many government giveaway
programs which is becoming a huge corrupted and wasteful organization.
Food Stamps became the secondary legal tender for the underground and
criminal economy. The EBT card is being used in the same way. I've seen
the credit on the cards being sold for 50 cents on the dollar by
someone
who wanted to buy booze or dope. Food Stamps now the EBT card is a
major
part of the illegal drug trade. I've seen people trade their
EBT credit for cash to buy cigarets, pot and alcohol instead of food
for "their children". So the P.L.L.C.F. blame the behavior of the
parents on Republican presidents. Gee, that makes a lot of sense. ^_^

TDD

Thanks for the best post that I have seen today. I know the story of a
local mother of three kids. She trades her food stamps for marijuana and
cocaine.

And that is a crime, but it is not an excuse to take food stamps away
from those who are not violating the law. Clearly those who want to take
food stamps away from everyone are people who hate what Jesus taught,
who mock what Jesus taught.

I agree that it's not an escuse to end the food stamp program. However, it
is evidence that officials need to do a better job of enforcing the food
stamp rules.

How much are you willing to spend in enforcement to avoid $1,000 in
fraud?

About 5 to 10 percent of the money spent on the food stamp program.

So you want to spend billions in enforcement to avoid a thousand in
waste. How foolish of you.

Idiot. It's *NOT* thousands. It's Billion$.

On Fri, 31 May 2013 21:35:01 -0700, (Jason) wrote:

In article , Jeanne
Douglas wrote:

In article ,
Free Lunch wrote:

On Fri, 31 May 2013 19:22:25 -0700, (Jason) wrote in
alt.atheism:

In article , Free Lunch
wrote:

On Fri, 31 May 2013 16:57:42 -0700, (Jason) wrote in
alt.atheism:

In article , Free Lunch
wrote:

On Fri, 31 May 2013 13:55:49 -0700, (Jason) wrote in
alt.atheism:

In article ,
wrote:

On 5/27/2013 8:49 PM, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
In article ,
Free Lunch wrote:

On Mon, 27 May 2013 11:33:19 -0400, Kurt Ullman

wrote in alt.atheism:

In article ,

wrote:

Remaining President when you know you are no longer
capable of
performing the duties is the worst kind of treason because
it's
endangers the country more than almost anything anyone could
do.

Show me where that is grounds for treason. You lefties
really
are
dumb****s.


When there is a lefty getting all up in arms about RR
and his
alleged
Alzheimers, I ask them if that is true, aren't they sorta
ashamed
by the
fact that this demented old man handed their assess to them on
numerous
occassions?
Tends to shut them up at least temporarily.

We're being nice to him. If he did not have Alzheimers, he was
just
being a very bad man. The fact that he could get enough
hate-filled
Americans to support him in his war on the poor
(particularly if
they
were of color) shows us how much racism, sexism and
bigotry still
remains in this country.

Of course, today, the GOP would never consider Reagan because
he was far
too liberal for their taste. They worship a fake St. Ronnie who
looks
little like the man who was actually president.

The War on Hunger had been won by the time Reagan became
President. He
dismantled the apparatus that had worked and now we have 50
million
Americans who are food insecure, almost all of the children, the
elderly, and hard-working adults.

For that alone, Reagan deserves to be cursed every single day.


Perhaps the program suffered the malaise of many government
giveaway
programs which is becoming a huge corrupted and wasteful
organization.
Food Stamps became the secondary legal tender for the underground
and
criminal economy. The EBT card is being used in the same way. I've
seen
the credit on the cards being sold for 50 cents on the dollar by
someone
who wanted to buy booze or dope. Food Stamps now the EBT card is a
major
part of the illegal drug trade. I've seen people trade their
EBT credit for cash to buy cigarets, pot and alcohol instead
of food
for "their children". So the P.L.L.C.F. blame the behavior of the
parents on Republican presidents. Gee, that makes a lot of sense.
^_^

TDD

Thanks for the best post that I have seen today. I know the
story of a
local mother of three kids. She trades her food stamps for marijuana
and
cocaine.

And that is a crime, but it is not an excuse to take food stamps away
from those who are not violating the law. Clearly those who want to
take
food stamps away from everyone are people who hate what Jesus taught,
who mock what Jesus taught.

I agree that it's not an escuse to end the food stamp program. However,
it
is evidence that officials need to do a better job of enforcing the food
stamp rules.

How much are you willing to spend in enforcement to avoid $1,000 in
fraud?

About 5 to 10 percent of the money spent on the food stamp program.

So you want to spend billions in enforcement to avoid a thousand in
waste. How foolish of you.

Not to mention the children and elderly people who'll go without food.

The alternative is to do nothing about the fraud and abuse. Is that what
you want to happen?

Of course. The lefties *want* it to be a direct transfer from the
productive to the unproductive. What better way to do it that give
them an EBT card that can be used in the whorehouse, drug den, or
casino of their choice? Lefties really *are* that stupid.

On Sat, 01 Jun 2013 15:57:04 -0400, wrote in alt.atheism:

On Fri, 31 May 2013 21:35:01 -0700, (Jason) wrote:

In article , Jeanne
Douglas wrote:

In article ,
Free Lunch wrote:

On Fri, 31 May 2013 19:22:25 -0700, (Jason) wrote in
alt.atheism:

In article , Free Lunch
wrote:

On Fri, 31 May 2013 16:57:42 -0700, (Jason) wrote in
alt.atheism:

In article , Free Lunch
wrote:

On Fri, 31 May 2013 13:55:49 -0700, (Jason) wrote in
alt.atheism:

In article ,
wrote:

On 5/27/2013 8:49 PM, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
In article ,
Free Lunch wrote:

On Mon, 27 May 2013 11:33:19 -0400, Kurt Ullman

wrote in alt.atheism:

In article ,

wrote:

Remaining President when you know you are no longer
capable of
performing the duties is the worst kind of treason because
it's
endangers the country more than almost anything anyone could
do.

Show me where that is grounds for treason. You lefties
really
are
dumb****s.


When there is a lefty getting all up in arms about RR
and his
alleged
Alzheimers, I ask them if that is true, aren't they sorta
ashamed
by the
fact that this demented old man handed their assess to them on
numerous
occassions?
Tends to shut them up at least temporarily.

We're being nice to him. If he did not have Alzheimers, he was
just
being a very bad man. The fact that he could get enough
hate-filled
Americans to support him in his war on the poor
(particularly if
they
were of color) shows us how much racism, sexism and
bigotry still
remains in this country.

Of course, today, the GOP would never consider Reagan because
he was far
too liberal for their taste. They worship a fake St. Ronnie who
looks
little like the man who was actually president.

The War on Hunger had been won by the time Reagan became
President. He
dismantled the apparatus that had worked and now we have 50
million
Americans who are food insecure, almost all of the children, the
elderly, and hard-working adults.

For that alone, Reagan deserves to be cursed every single day.


Perhaps the program suffered the malaise of many government
giveaway
programs which is becoming a huge corrupted and wasteful
organization.
Food Stamps became the secondary legal tender for the underground
and
criminal economy. The EBT card is being used in the same way. I've
seen
the credit on the cards being sold for 50 cents on the dollar by
someone
who wanted to buy booze or dope. Food Stamps now the EBT card is a
major
part of the illegal drug trade. I've seen people trade their
EBT credit for cash to buy cigarets, pot and alcohol instead
of food
for "their children". So the P.L.L.C.F. blame the behavior of the
parents on Republican presidents. Gee, that makes a lot of sense.
^_^

TDD

Thanks for the best post that I have seen today. I know the
story of a
local mother of three kids. She trades her food stamps for marijuana
and
cocaine.

And that is a crime, but it is not an excuse to take food stamps away
from those who are not violating the law. Clearly those who want to
take
food stamps away from everyone are people who hate what Jesus taught,
who mock what Jesus taught.

I agree that it's not an escuse to end the food stamp program. However,
it
is evidence that officials need to do a better job of enforcing the food
stamp rules.

How much are you willing to spend in enforcement to avoid $1,000 in
fraud?

About 5 to 10 percent of the money spent on the food stamp program.

So you want to spend billions in enforcement to avoid a thousand in
waste. How foolish of you.

Not to mention the children and elderly people who'll go without food.

The alternative is to do nothing about the fraud and abuse. Is that what
you want to happen?

Of course. The lefties *want* it to be a direct transfer from the
productive to the unproductive. What better way to do it that give
them an EBT card that can be used in the whorehouse, drug den, or
casino of their choice? Lefties really *are* that stupid.

Clearly you have no idea how the program works.

On Sat, 01 Jun 2013 08:54:21 -0500, Tom McDonald
wrote:

On 5/31/2013 11:35 PM, Jason wrote:
In article , Jeanne
Douglas wrote:

In article ,
Free Lunch wrote:

On Fri, 31 May 2013 19:22:25 -0700, (Jason) wrote in
alt.atheism:

In article , Free Lunch
wrote:

On Fri, 31 May 2013 16:57:42 -0700, (Jason) wrote in
alt.atheism:

In article , Free Lunch
wrote:

On Fri, 31 May 2013 13:55:49 -0700, (Jason) wrote in
alt.atheism:

In article ,
wrote:

On 5/27/2013 8:49 PM, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
In article ,
Free Lunch wrote:

On Mon, 27 May 2013 11:33:19 -0400, Kurt Ullman

wrote in alt.atheism:

In article ,

wrote:

Remaining President when you know you are no longer
capable of
performing the duties is the worst kind of treason because
it's
endangers the country more than almost anything anyone could
do.

Show me where that is grounds for treason. You lefties
really
are
dumb****s.


When there is a lefty getting all up in arms about RR
and his
alleged
Alzheimers, I ask them if that is true, aren't they sorta
ashamed
by the
fact that this demented old man handed their assess to them on
numerous
occassions?
Tends to shut them up at least temporarily.

We're being nice to him. If he did not have Alzheimers, he was
just
being a very bad man. The fact that he could get enough
hate-filled
Americans to support him in his war on the poor
(particularly if
they
were of color) shows us how much racism, sexism and
bigotry still
remains in this country.

Of course, today, the GOP would never consider Reagan because
he was far
too liberal for their taste. They worship a fake St. Ronnie who
looks
little like the man who was actually president.

The War on Hunger had been won by the time Reagan became
President. He
dismantled the apparatus that had worked and now we have 50
million
Americans who are food insecure, almost all of the children, the
elderly, and hard-working adults.

For that alone, Reagan deserves to be cursed every single day.


Perhaps the program suffered the malaise of many government
giveaway
programs which is becoming a huge corrupted and wasteful
organization.
Food Stamps became the secondary legal tender for the underground
and
criminal economy. The EBT card is being used in the same way. I've
seen
the credit on the cards being sold for 50 cents on the dollar by
someone
who wanted to buy booze or dope. Food Stamps now the EBT card is a
major
part of the illegal drug trade. I've seen people trade their
EBT credit for cash to buy cigarets, pot and alcohol instead
of food
for "their children". So the P.L.L.C.F. blame the behavior of the
parents on Republican presidents. Gee, that makes a lot of sense.
^_^

TDD

Thanks for the best post that I have seen today. I know the
story of a
local mother of three kids. She trades her food stamps for marijuana
and
cocaine.

And that is a crime, but it is not an excuse to take food stamps away
from those who are not violating the law. Clearly those who want to
take
food stamps away from everyone are people who hate what Jesus taught,
who mock what Jesus taught.

I agree that it's not an escuse to end the food stamp program. However,
it
is evidence that officials need to do a better job of enforcing the food
stamp rules.

How much are you willing to spend in enforcement to avoid $1,000 in
fraud?

About 5 to 10 percent of the money spent on the food stamp program.

So you want to spend billions in enforcement to avoid a thousand in
waste. How foolish of you.

Not to mention the children and elderly people who'll go without food.

The alternative is to do nothing about the fraud and abuse. Is that what
you want to happen?


Do you have the same zeal for ferreting out fraud and abuse when it
comes to big corporations that get billions from the taxpayers? Or is it
only the poor and powerless that get your scorn and ire?

Certainly! I'm all for GE paying *something* in taxes. I'm even for
government employees paying their taxes (or no longer being government
employees, if not paid in full each 4/15). You lefties think it's
just peachy that your own skates. Idiots!

On Sat, 1 Jun 2013 07:06:48 -0700 (PDT), "
wrote:

On Jun 1, 9:54*am, Tom McDonald wrote:
On 5/31/2013 11:35 PM, Jason wrote:



In article , Jeanne
Douglas wrote:

In article ,
* Free Lunch wrote:

On Fri, 31 May 2013 19:22:25 -0700, (Jason) wrote in
alt.atheism:

In article , Free Lunch
wrote:

On Fri, 31 May 2013 16:57:42 -0700, (Jason) wrote in
alt.atheism:

In article , Free Lunch
wrote:

On Fri, 31 May 2013 13:55:49 -0700, (Jason) wrote in
alt.atheism:

In article ,
wrote:

On 5/27/2013 8:49 PM, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
In article ,
* *Free Lunch wrote:

On Mon, 27 May 2013 11:33:19 -0400, Kurt Ullman

wrote in alt.atheism:

In article ,

wrote:

Remaining President when you know you are no longer
capable of
performing the duties is the worst kind of treason because
it's
endangers the country more than almost anything anyone could
do.

Show me where that is grounds for treason. *You lefties
really
are
dumb****s.

* * When there is a lefty getting all up in arms about RR
and his
alleged
Alzheimers, I ask them if that is true, aren't they sorta
ashamed
by the
fact that this demented old man handed their assess to them on
numerous
occassions?
* * * Tends to shut them up at least temporarily.

We're being nice to him. If he did not have Alzheimers, he was
just
being a very bad man. The fact that he could get enough
hate-filled
Americans to support him in his war on the poor
(particularly if
they
were of color) shows us how much racism, sexism and
bigotry still
remains in this country.

Of course, today, the GOP would never consider Reagan because
he was far
too liberal for their taste. They worship a fake St. Ronnie who
looks
little like the man who was actually president.

The War on Hunger had been won by the time Reagan became
President. He
dismantled the apparatus that had worked and now we have 50
million
Americans who are food insecure, almost all of the children, the
elderly, and hard-working adults.

For that alone, Reagan deserves to be cursed every single day.

Perhaps the program suffered the malaise of many government
giveaway
programs which is becoming a huge corrupted and wasteful
organization.
Food Stamps became the secondary legal tender for the underground
and
criminal economy. The EBT card is being used in the same way. I've
seen
the credit on the cards being sold for 50 cents on the dollar by
someone
who wanted to buy booze or dope. Food Stamps now the EBT card is a
major
part of the illegal drug trade. I've seen people trade their
EBT credit for cash to buy cigarets, pot and alcohol instead
of food
for "their children". So the P.L.L.C.F. blame the behavior of the
parents on Republican presidents. Gee, that makes a lot of sense.
^_^

TDD

Thanks for the best post that I have seen today. I know the
story of a
local mother of three kids. She trades her food stamps for marijuana
and
cocaine.

And that is a crime, but it is not an excuse to take food stamps away
from those who are not violating the law. Clearly those who want to
take
food stamps away from everyone are people who hate what Jesus taught,
who mock what Jesus taught.

I agree that it's not an escuse to end the food stamp program. However,
it
is evidence that officials need to do a better job of enforcing the food
stamp rules.

How much are you willing to spend in enforcement to avoid $1,000 in
fraud?

About 5 to 10 percent of the money spent on the food stamp program.

So you want to spend billions in enforcement to avoid a thousand in
waste. How foolish of you.

Not to mention the children and elderly people who'll go without food.

The alternative is to do nothing about the fraud and abuse. Is that what
you want to happen?

Do you have the same zeal for ferreting out fraud and abuse when it
comes to big corporations that get billions from the taxpayers? Or is it
only the poor and powerless that get your scorn and ire?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Again, for the most part, corporations are not getting billions from
the taxpayers. It's that you libs like a tax system where you have
a high theoretical rate, so you can make it look like you're socking
it to those evil companies. Then you also pass all kinds of
exemptions
and loopholes that reduce their rate, so instead of paying 35%, they
actually wind up paying 20%.

You fell into the straw pit. The issue isn't avoiding taxes by
OBEYING THE LAW, it's *FRAUD*. If a corporation is involved in
*FRAUD*, I think we agree that they should be prosecuted to the
fullest extent of the law. Why should welfare queens be any
different?

Kind of like when you do your own
taxes. You do know how to fill out an IRS form, don't you? We
conservatives would cut that 35% rate, one of the highest in the
world,
to something like 20% and get rid of all the loopholes, nonsense, etc.
But you libs will have none of it because you like to keep waging
classwarfare and pretending that corporations are evil.

How about the abomination congress put Apple through?

Now there is some direct handout to corporations, but the best
example of that would be the recent experience of the govt and
Solyndra and all the other failed miracle energy companies. And
yes, with regard to any govt handouts or tax breaks, I'm all
for rooting out the fraud. Of course, the less of these we have
to begin with, the less fraud to worry about. If there was no
govt handouts to the likes of Solyndra, there would be no fraud.

It's the lefties who are all for crony capitalism. They *love* GE.

On Sat, 01 Jun 2013 09:38:34 -0500, Tom McDonald
wrote:

On 6/1/2013 9:06 AM, wrote:
On Jun 1, 9:54 am, Tom McDonald wrote:
On 5/31/2013 11:35 PM, Jason wrote:



In article , Jeanne
Douglas wrote:

In article ,
Free Lunch wrote:

On Fri, 31 May 2013 19:22:25 -0700, (Jason) wrote in
alt.atheism:

In article , Free Lunch
wrote:

On Fri, 31 May 2013 16:57:42 -0700, (Jason) wrote in
alt.atheism:

In article , Free Lunch
wrote:

On Fri, 31 May 2013 13:55:49 -0700, (Jason) wrote in
alt.atheism:

In article ,
wrote:

On 5/27/2013 8:49 PM, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
In article ,
Free Lunch wrote:

On Mon, 27 May 2013 11:33:19 -0400, Kurt Ullman

wrote in alt.atheism:

In article ,

wrote:

Remaining President when you know you are no longer
capable of
performing the duties is the worst kind of treason because
it's
endangers the country more than almost anything anyone could
do.

Show me where that is grounds for treason. You lefties
really
are
dumb****s.

When there is a lefty getting all up in arms about RR
and his
alleged
Alzheimers, I ask them if that is true, aren't they sorta
ashamed
by the
fact that this demented old man handed their assess to them on
numerous
occassions?
Tends to shut them up at least temporarily.

We're being nice to him. If he did not have Alzheimers, he was
just
being a very bad man. The fact that he could get enough
hate-filled
Americans to support him in his war on the poor
(particularly if
they
were of color) shows us how much racism, sexism and
bigotry still
remains in this country.

Of course, today, the GOP would never consider Reagan because
he was far
too liberal for their taste. They worship a fake St. Ronnie who
looks
little like the man who was actually president.

The War on Hunger had been won by the time Reagan became
President. He
dismantled the apparatus that had worked and now we have 50
million
Americans who are food insecure, almost all of the children, the
elderly, and hard-working adults.

For that alone, Reagan deserves to be cursed every single day.

Perhaps the program suffered the malaise of many government
giveaway
programs which is becoming a huge corrupted and wasteful
organization.
Food Stamps became the secondary legal tender for the underground
and
criminal economy. The EBT card is being used in the same way. I've
seen
the credit on the cards being sold for 50 cents on the dollar by
someone
who wanted to buy booze or dope. Food Stamps now the EBT card is a
major
part of the illegal drug trade. I've seen people trade their
EBT credit for cash to buy cigarets, pot and alcohol instead
of food
for "their children". So the P.L.L.C.F. blame the behavior of the
parents on Republican presidents. Gee, that makes a lot of sense.
^_^

TDD

Thanks for the best post that I have seen today. I know the
story of a
local mother of three kids. She trades her food stamps for marijuana
and
cocaine.

And that is a crime, but it is not an excuse to take food stamps away
from those who are not violating the law. Clearly those who want to
take
food stamps away from everyone are people who hate what Jesus taught,
who mock what Jesus taught.

I agree that it's not an escuse to end the food stamp program. However,
it
is evidence that officials need to do a better job of enforcing the food
stamp rules.

How much are you willing to spend in enforcement to avoid $1,000 in
fraud?

About 5 to 10 percent of the money spent on the food stamp program.

So you want to spend billions in enforcement to avoid a thousand in
waste. How foolish of you.

Not to mention the children and elderly people who'll go without food.

The alternative is to do nothing about the fraud and abuse. Is that what
you want to happen?

Do you have the same zeal for ferreting out fraud and abuse when it
comes to big corporations that get billions from the taxpayers? Or is it
only the poor and powerless that get your scorn and ire?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Again, for the most part, corporations are not getting billions from
the taxpayers. It's that you libs like a tax system where you have
a high theoretical rate, so you can make it look like you're socking
it to those evil companies. Then you also pass all kinds of
exemptions
and loopholes that reduce their rate, so instead of paying 35%, they
actually wind up paying 20%. Kind of like when you do your own
taxes. You do know how to fill out an IRS form, don't you? We
conservatives would cut that 35% rate, one of the highest in the
world,
to something like 20% and get rid of all the loopholes, nonsense, etc.
But you libs will have none of it because you like to keep waging
classwarfare and pretending that corporations are evil.

Now there is some direct handout to corporations, but the best
example of that would be the recent experience of the govt and
Solyndra and all the other failed miracle energy companies. And
yes, with regard to any govt handouts or tax breaks, I'm all
for rooting out the fraud. Of course, the less of these we have
to begin with, the less fraud to worry about. If there was no
govt handouts to the likes of Solyndra, there would be no fraud.

KBR. Haliburton. Exxon and other oil companies. Etc.

Do tell us about the fraud these companies have committed. I bet you
*love* GE, though.

Jeanne Douglas wrote in news:hlwdjsd2-
:

In article ,
Mitchell Holman nomailverizon.net wrote:

" wrote in
:

On Jun 1, 9:30*am, Mitchell Holman nomailverizon.net wrote:
" wrote
innews:c26f7eae-81a
:





On Jun 1, 8:29*am, "Alex W." wrote:
On Sat, 01 Jun 2013 07:19:58 -0500, Free Lunch wrote:
On Fri, 31 May 2013 21:34:08 -0700, (Jason)
wrote in alt.atheism:

In article , Free
Lunch wrote:

On Fri, 31 May 2013 19:22:25 -0700, (Jason)
wrote in alt.atheism:

In article ,
Free
Lunch wrote:
...
How much are you willing to spend in enforcement to avoid
$1,000 i
n
fraud?

About 5 to 10 percent of the money spent on the food stamp
program.

So you want to spend billions in enforcement to avoid a
thousand in waste. How foolish of you.

I meant to investigate cases of possible fraud and abuse.

But fraud and abuse are far less than 5% of the cost now.

Which may be true but is immaterial to the debate since this
is a political issue, and politics is largely the art of
wrestling with and managing public perception. *Similar
examples are a perceived crime wave when actual figures show
a downturn in crime,

Nice analogy. *There are 48 mil on food stamps today, up
70% in the last 4 years. *If crime were up like that, it would
be one hell of a mess. *Actually, crime is one hell of a mess
in places like Detroit and Chicago that are run by you libs.

or the view that illegal immgirants are
welfare spongers when the evidence shows they are by and
large extremely hard workers,

hard worker or not, they are still illegal aliens. *And there
are plenty of them taking advantage of the USA.

Illegal Immigration Provides Benefits to States
Fox Busniess News

Putting the law and morality of illegal entry aside, several
studies have shown the illegal immigrant population is more
of an economic contributor to state and local economies than
politicians like to tell an angry electorate. The numbers can
be broken down into the fiscal cost (or gain) of illegal
immigrants to states, along with the economic contribution of
the population.

The most thorough study on the fiscal and economic impact of
immigration was done by the non-partisan Texas Comptrollers’
Office in 2006, which showed Texas earned more in taxes and
economic output from illegal immigrants than governments spent
to provide services. According to the Comptrollers’ office,
state and local governments spent $1.16 billion to provide
services like education, health care and safety, but raised
an estimated $1.58 billion in tax revenues. Based on the data,
the Texas taxpayer made a $424.7 million profit on its illegal
immigrant population in 2006.


Liar, liar, pants on fire! You carefull edited out this part which
totally
changes the math:

"Undocumented immigrants produced $1.58 billion in state revenues,
which exceeded the $1.16 billion in state services they received.
However, local governments bore the burden of $1.44 billion in
uncompensated health care costs and local law enforcement costs not
paid for by the state.”

So:

$1.58bil - $1.16bil - $1.44 bil = - $1bil

In other words illegal alliens actually cost the citizens of TX,
$1bil.


You aren't factoring in the consumer cost of
goods and service kept artifically low by the
work of illegals. How high would wages (and thus
prices) have to go to lure Americans into fields
to pick lettuce and strawberries and to gut cattle
and "process" chickens and pigs?


I always ask people how much more they're willing to pay for their
produce in order to avoid having them picked by undocumented workers.



I spent a while (in my more destitute post college
years) working in the strawberry fields for a living.
I was highly motivated after that to go to law school
and never work outdoors again........

"Free Lunch" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 1 Jun 2013 06:08:43 -0700 (PDT), "
wrote in alt.atheism:

On Jun 1, 8:19 am, Free Lunch wrote:
On Fri, 31 May 2013 21:35:01 -0700, (Jason) wrote in
alt.atheism:





In article , Jeanne
Douglas wrote:

In article ,
Free Lunch wrote:

On Fri, 31 May 2013 19:22:25 -0700, (Jason) wrote
in
alt.atheism:

In article , Free
Lunch
wrote:
...
How much are you willing to spend in enforcement to avoid $1,000
in
fraud?

About 5 to 10 percent of the money spent on the food stamp
program.

So you want to spend billions in enforcement to avoid a thousand in
waste. How foolish of you.

Not to mention the children and elderly people who'll go without
food.

The alternative is to do nothing about the fraud and abuse. Is that
what
you want to happen?

You make a reasonable effort to make it uninviting and difficult to
engage in SNAP fraud and punish those who are caught doing so, but as
with every other type of crime, we know that some people will get away
with it.

It is much more wasteful to spend 10% on enforcement than allow a far
smaller amount to be diverted to fraud. Like most law enforcement, the
first few dollars are the most effective.

Of course the concept that the first few dollars are the most
effective doesn't apply to the welfare programs themselves,
right? Why no. In that case, the sky is the limit:

"Better there be a little bit of fraud than have ANYone go hungry"

We passed the point of people going hungry anywhere even
close to what really going hungry means around the world
a very long time ago. Today, look at people on welfare and
they have TV, cable, AC, Fritos.,....

What welfare program are you speaking of? Which country?


The one where the poor people are also the fattest in the world
To the best of my knowledge you don't get fat being hungry

"Free Lunch" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 1 Jun 2013 07:06:48 -0700 (PDT), "
wrote in alt.atheism:

On Jun 1, 9:54 am, Tom McDonald wrote:
On 5/31/2013 11:35 PM, Jason wrote:
...
The alternative is to do nothing about the fraud and abuse. Is that
what
you want to happen?

Do you have the same zeal for ferreting out fraud and abuse when it
comes to big corporations that get billions from the taxpayers? Or is it
only the poor and powerless that get your scorn and ire?- Hide quoted
text -

- Show quoted text -

Again, for the most part, corporations are not getting billions from
the taxpayers.

Of course they are. How ignorant are you of government spending?

It's that you libs like a tax system where you have
a high theoretical rate, so you can make it look like you're socking
it to those evil companies. Then you also pass all kinds of exemptions
and loopholes that reduce their rate, so instead of paying 35%, they
actually wind up paying 20%. Kind of like when you do your own
taxes. You do know how to fill out an IRS form, don't you? We
conservatives would cut that 35% rate, one of the highest in the world,
to something like 20% and get rid of all the loopholes, nonsense, etc.
But you libs will have none of it because you like to keep waging
classwarfare and pretending that corporations are evil.

This has nothing to do with the absurdly low taxes that corporations pay
because the 35% rate is a joke that is paid by few companies if any.
This is about the huge amount of money spent by the government.

Now there is some direct handout to corporations, but the best
example of that would be the recent experience of the govt and
Solyndra and all the other failed miracle energy companies.

Don't you wish that George W Bush hadn't set up that program? Goodness,
look how much of a failure Tesla is, oh, nevermind.


I think it's time to set up a rule that whenever George W Bush is brouhgt up
by some moron, the thread is dead



Now, let's talk about overpriced goodies that the Defense Department
buys, or the billions in subsidies that huge corporate farms get, or the
billions spent making the "Beltway Bandits" rich in their consulting
gigs.


As your fellow (idiot) traveller likes to post,
Redirection noted, redirection rejected


And yes, with regard to any govt handouts or tax breaks, I'm all
for rooting out the fraud. Of course, the less of these we have
to begin with, the less fraud to worry about. If there was no
govt handouts to the likes of Solyndra, there would be no fraud.

Let's start by making it a crime for professional sports teams to demand
handouts.

No problem there.
Let's do that for ALL business ventures.

"Free Lunch" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 1 Jun 2013 08:38:48 -0700 (PDT), "
wrote in alt.atheism:
...
All of which are doing exactly what I said. They are paying a hell of
a lot in total taxes. It's just that the effective rate gets reduced
from 35% to 15% or 20% through various tax exemptions.
So what? It has nothing to do with people getting all kinds of
free handouts from the govt who are PAYING NO INCOME
TAX at all. Capiche?

So it's okay with you if GE doesn't pay income tax, but if a person
living on $8,000/year doesn't pay any income tax, you are livid.

You must be very sad that Michele Bachmann decided not to run again.



Not a SINGLE corporate entity actually pays "income tax"
For the very simple reason that to a corporation a tax is just another cost
that is factored into the bottom line
The tax is ultimately paid by the consumer
Corporate tax is nothing but indirect citizen tax

"Free Lunch" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 1 Jun 2013 09:30:13 -0500, "Attila Iskander"
wrote in alt.atheism:

"Free Lunch" wrote in message
. ..
On Fri, 31 May 2013 21:34:08 -0700, (Jason) wrote in
alt.atheism:

In article , Free Lunch
wrote:

On Fri, 31 May 2013 19:22:25 -0700, (Jason) wrote in
alt.atheism:

In article , Free Lunch
wrote:
...
How much are you willing to spend in enforcement to avoid $1,000 in
fraud?

About 5 to 10 percent of the money spent on the food stamp program.

So you want to spend billions in enforcement to avoid a thousand in
waste. How foolish of you.

I meant to investigate cases of possible fraud and abuse.

But fraud and abuse are far less than 5% of the cost now.

Based on what data ?

http://www.fns.usda.gov/snap/fraud/fraud_2.htm


LOL
The very people who aren't smart enough to avoid it.

"Free Lunch" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 1 Jun 2013 09:23:06 -0500, "Attila Iskander"
wrote in alt.atheism:

"Free Lunch" wrote in message
. ..
On Fri, 31 May 2013 19:22:25 -0700, (Jason) wrote in
alt.atheism:

In article , Free Lunch
wrote:

On Fri, 31 May 2013 16:57:42 -0700, (Jason) wrote in
alt.atheism:

In article , Free Lunch
wrote:

On Fri, 31 May 2013 13:55:49 -0700, (Jason) wrote
in
alt.atheism:

In article ,
wrote:

On 5/27/2013 8:49 PM, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
In article ,
Free Lunch wrote:

On Mon, 27 May 2013 11:33:19 -0400, Kurt Ullman

wrote in alt.atheism:

In article ,

wrote:

Remaining President when you know you are no longer
capable
of
performing the duties is the worst kind of treason because
it's
endangers the country more than almost anything anyone
could
do.

Show me where that is grounds for treason. You lefties
really are
dumb****s.


When there is a lefty getting all up in arms about RR and
his
alleged
Alzheimers, I ask them if that is true, aren't they sorta
ashamed
by the
fact that this demented old man handed their assess to them
on
numerous
occassions?
Tends to shut them up at least temporarily.

We're being nice to him. If he did not have Alzheimers, he
was
just
being a very bad man. The fact that he could get enough
hate-filled
Americans to support him in his war on the poor (particularly
if they
were of color) shows us how much racism, sexism and bigotry
still
remains in this country.

Of course, today, the GOP would never consider Reagan because
he was far
too liberal for their taste. They worship a fake St. Ronnie
who
looks
little like the man who was actually president.

The War on Hunger had been won by the time Reagan became
President. He
dismantled the apparatus that had worked and now we have 50
million
Americans who are food insecure, almost all of the children,
the
elderly, and hard-working adults.

For that alone, Reagan deserves to be cursed every single day.


Perhaps the program suffered the malaise of many government
giveaway
programs which is becoming a huge corrupted and wasteful
organization.
Food Stamps became the secondary legal tender for the
underground
and
criminal economy. The EBT card is being used in the same way.
I've
seen
the credit on the cards being sold for 50 cents on the dollar by
someone
who wanted to buy booze or dope. Food Stamps now the EBT card is
a
major
part of the illegal drug trade. I've seen people trade their
EBT credit for cash to buy cigarets, pot and alcohol instead of
food
for "their children". So the P.L.L.C.F. blame the behavior of
the
parents on Republican presidents. Gee, that makes a lot of
sense.
^_^

TDD

Thanks for the best post that I have seen today. I know the story
of
a
local mother of three kids. She trades her food stamps for
marijuana
and
cocaine.

And that is a crime, but it is not an excuse to take food stamps
away
from those who are not violating the law. Clearly those who want to
take
food stamps away from everyone are people who hate what Jesus
taught,
who mock what Jesus taught.

I agree that it's not an escuse to end the food stamp program.
However,
it
is evidence that officials need to do a better job of enforcing the
food
stamp rules.

How much are you willing to spend in enforcement to avoid $1,000 in
fraud?

About 5 to 10 percent of the money spent on the food stamp program.

So you want to spend billions in enforcement to avoid a thousand in
waste. How foolish of you.


Another false argument
You have waste in the MILLIONS, if not billions

I asked Jason how much he would be willing to spend to avoid $1,000 in
fraud.

Take it up with Jason, he's the one who wants to spend huge amounts.

USDA says fraud is about 1% of SNAP. Do you have a cost-effective way to
cut it further? They want to hear about it.

In your previous post you claimed 5%
Apparently your numbers fluctuate with every post
And they you wonder why no one takes you seriously

"Free Lunch" wrote in message
news
On Sat, 1 Jun 2013 09:22:26 -0500, "Attila Iskander"
wrote in alt.atheism:

"Free Lunch" wrote in message
. ..
On Fri, 31 May 2013 16:57:42 -0700, (Jason) wrote in
alt.atheism:

In article , Free Lunch
wrote:

On Fri, 31 May 2013 13:55:49 -0700, (Jason) wrote in
alt.atheism:

In article ,
wrote:

On 5/27/2013 8:49 PM, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
In article ,
Free Lunch wrote:

On Mon, 27 May 2013 11:33:19 -0400, Kurt Ullman

wrote in alt.atheism:

In article ,

wrote:

Remaining President when you know you are no longer capable
of
performing the duties is the worst kind of treason because
it's
endangers the country more than almost anything anyone could
do.

Show me where that is grounds for treason. You lefties really
are
dumb****s.


When there is a lefty getting all up in arms about RR and
his
alleged
Alzheimers, I ask them if that is true, aren't they sorta
ashamed
by the
fact that this demented old man handed their assess to them on
numerous
occassions?
Tends to shut them up at least temporarily.

We're being nice to him. If he did not have Alzheimers, he was
just
being a very bad man. The fact that he could get enough
hate-filled
Americans to support him in his war on the poor (particularly if
they
were of color) shows us how much racism, sexism and bigotry
still
remains in this country.

Of course, today, the GOP would never consider Reagan because he
was far
too liberal for their taste. They worship a fake St. Ronnie who
looks
little like the man who was actually president.

The War on Hunger had been won by the time Reagan became
President.
He
dismantled the apparatus that had worked and now we have 50
million
Americans who are food insecure, almost all of the children, the
elderly, and hard-working adults.

For that alone, Reagan deserves to be cursed every single day.


Perhaps the program suffered the malaise of many government
giveaway
programs which is becoming a huge corrupted and wasteful
organization.
Food Stamps became the secondary legal tender for the underground
and
criminal economy. The EBT card is being used in the same way. I've
seen
the credit on the cards being sold for 50 cents on the dollar by
someone
who wanted to buy booze or dope. Food Stamps now the EBT card is a
major
part of the illegal drug trade. I've seen people trade their
EBT credit for cash to buy cigarets, pot and alcohol instead of
food
for "their children". So the P.L.L.C.F. blame the behavior of the
parents on Republican presidents. Gee, that makes a lot of sense.
^_^

TDD

Thanks for the best post that I have seen today. I know the story of
a
local mother of three kids. She trades her food stamps for marijuana
and
cocaine.

And that is a crime, but it is not an excuse to take food stamps away
from those who are not violating the law. Clearly those who want to
take
food stamps away from everyone are people who hate what Jesus taught,
who mock what Jesus taught.

I agree that it's not an escuse to end the food stamp program. However,
it
is evidence that officials need to do a better job of enforcing the food
stamp rules.

How much are you willing to spend in enforcement to avoid $1,000 in
fraud?

How much fraud and waste are you willing to tolerate ?

I will tolerate all waste and fraud that cannot be rooted out in a cost
effective manner.



More fool you, because that is one dollar that goes to a thief and not a
deserving person
It should also be noted that such will attract more thieves so your numbers
will start increasing incrementally as more thieves latch on to the public
tit.

Think about it
That fraud and waste is cheating not only those paying for it, but those
who
really need it.

I will not take two dollars from the poor who need SNAP benefits to try
to root out one dollar in fraud. Criminal prosecution needs to be done
by the Justice department, not at the expense of those in need.



More fool you, because that is one dollar that goes to a thief and not a
deserving person
It should also be noted that such will attract more thieves so your numbers
will start increasing incrementally as more thieves latch on to the public
tit.

"Jeanne Douglas" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Mitchell Holman nomailverizon.net wrote:

" wrote in
:

On Jun 1, 9:30 am, Mitchell Holman nomailverizon.net wrote:
" wrote
innews:c26f7eae-81a
:





On Jun 1, 8:29 am, "Alex W." wrote:
On Sat, 01 Jun 2013 07:19:58 -0500, Free Lunch wrote:
On Fri, 31 May 2013 21:34:08 -0700, (Jason)
wrote in alt.atheism:

In article , Free
Lunch wrote:

On Fri, 31 May 2013 19:22:25 -0700, (Jason)
wrote in alt.atheism:

In article , Free
Lunch wrote:
...
How much are you willing to spend in enforcement to avoid
$1,000 i
n
fraud?

About 5 to 10 percent of the money spent on the food stamp
program.

So you want to spend billions in enforcement to avoid a
thousand in waste. How foolish of you.

I meant to investigate cases of possible fraud and abuse.

But fraud and abuse are far less than 5% of the cost now.

Which may be true but is immaterial to the debate since this
is a political issue, and politics is largely the art of
wrestling with and managing public perception. Similar
examples are a perceived crime wave when actual figures show
a downturn in crime,

Nice analogy. There are 48 mil on food stamps today, up
70% in the last 4 years. If crime were up like that, it would
be one hell of a mess. Actually, crime is one hell of a mess
in places like Detroit and Chicago that are run by you libs.

or the view that illegal immgirants are
welfare spongers when the evidence shows they are by and
large extremely hard workers,

hard worker or not, they are still illegal aliens. And there
are plenty of them taking advantage of the USA.

Illegal Immigration Provides Benefits to States
Fox Busniess News

Putting the law and morality of illegal entry aside, several
studies have shown the illegal immigrant population is more
of an economic contributor to state and local economies than
politicians like to tell an angry electorate. The numbers can
be broken down into the fiscal cost (or gain) of illegal
immigrants to states, along with the economic contribution of
the population.

The most thorough study on the fiscal and economic impact of
immigration was done by the non-partisan Texas Comptrollers’
Office in 2006, which showed Texas earned more in taxes and
economic output from illegal immigrants than governments spent
to provide services. According to the Comptrollers’ office,
state and local governments spent $1.16 billion to provide
services like education, health care and safety, but raised
an estimated $1.58 billion in tax revenues. Based on the data,
the Texas taxpayer made a $424.7 million profit on its illegal
immigrant population in 2006.


Liar, liar, pants on fire! You carefull edited out this part which
totally
changes the math:

"Undocumented immigrants produced $1.58 billion in state revenues,
which exceeded the $1.16 billion in state services they received.
However, local governments bore the burden of $1.44 billion in
uncompensated health care costs and local law enforcement costs not
paid for by the state.”

So:

$1.58bil - $1.16bil - $1.44 bil = - $1bil

In other words illegal alliens actually cost the citizens of TX,
$1bil.


You aren't factoring in the consumer cost of
goods and service kept artifically low by the
work of illegals. How high would wages (and thus
prices) have to go to lure Americans into fields
to pick lettuce and strawberries and to gut cattle
and "process" chickens and pigs?


I always ask people how much more they're willing to pay for their
produce in order to avoid having them picked by undocumented workers.


Considering that documented workers get paid the same as undocumented ones,
There would be no additional cost
Come back when you have something other than a false argument.

On Sat, 1 Jun 2013 16:07:51 -0500, "Attila Iskander"
wrote in alt.atheism:

"Free Lunch" wrote in message
.. .
On Sat, 1 Jun 2013 06:08:43 -0700 (PDT), "
wrote in alt.atheism:

On Jun 1, 8:19 am, Free Lunch wrote:
On Fri, 31 May 2013 21:35:01 -0700, (Jason) wrote in
alt.atheism:





In article , Jeanne
Douglas wrote:

In article ,
Free Lunch wrote:

On Fri, 31 May 2013 19:22:25 -0700, (Jason) wrote
in
alt.atheism:

In article , Free
Lunch
wrote:
...
How much are you willing to spend in enforcement to avoid $1,000
in
fraud?

About 5 to 10 percent of the money spent on the food stamp
program.

So you want to spend billions in enforcement to avoid a thousand in
waste. How foolish of you.

Not to mention the children and elderly people who'll go without
food.

The alternative is to do nothing about the fraud and abuse. Is that
what
you want to happen?

You make a reasonable effort to make it uninviting and difficult to
engage in SNAP fraud and punish those who are caught doing so, but as
with every other type of crime, we know that some people will get away
with it.

It is much more wasteful to spend 10% on enforcement than allow a far
smaller amount to be diverted to fraud. Like most law enforcement, the
first few dollars are the most effective.

Of course the concept that the first few dollars are the most
effective doesn't apply to the welfare programs themselves,
right? Why no. In that case, the sky is the limit:

"Better there be a little bit of fraud than have ANYone go hungry"

We passed the point of people going hungry anywhere even
close to what really going hungry means around the world
a very long time ago. Today, look at people on welfare and
they have TV, cable, AC, Fritos.,....

What welfare program are you speaking of? Which country?


The one where the poor people are also the fattest in the world
To the best of my knowledge you don't get fat being hungry

Your knowledge is rarely trustworthy.

In article , "Alex W."
wrote:

On Sat, 01 Jun 2013 07:19:58 -0500, Free Lunch wrote:

On Fri, 31 May 2013 21:34:08 -0700, (Jason) wrote in
alt.atheism:

In article , Free Lunch
wrote:

On Fri, 31 May 2013 19:22:25 -0700, (Jason) wrote in
alt.atheism:

In article , Free Lunch
wrote:
...
How much are you willing to spend in enforcement to avoid $1,000 in
fraud?

About 5 to 10 percent of the money spent on the food stamp program.

So you want to spend billions in enforcement to avoid a thousand in
waste. How foolish of you.

I meant to investigate cases of possible fraud and abuse.

But fraud and abuse are far less than 5% of the cost now.

Which may be true but is immaterial to the debate since this
is a political issue, and politics is largely the art of
wrestling with and managing public perception. Similar
examples are a perceived crime wave when actual figures show
a downturn in crime, or the view that illegal immgirants are
welfare spongers when the evidence shows they are by and
large extremely hard workers, or the widespread belief that
America spends huge sums on third-world fireign aid when the
actual sums involved are only a tiny part of the budget.
Even if politicians wanted to deal with these issues
rationally and on the basis of facts, their voters demand
action on the basis of their perception and enforce this at
the ballot box.

Is the alternative to ignore the issue of fraud and abuse and just allow
it to happen?

"Free Lunch" wrote in message
news
On Sat, 01 Jun 2013 15:57:04 -0400, wrote in alt.atheism:

On Fri, 31 May 2013 21:35:01 -0700, (Jason) wrote:

In article , Jeanne
Douglas wrote:

In article ,
Free Lunch wrote:

On Fri, 31 May 2013 19:22:25 -0700, (Jason) wrote in
alt.atheism:

In article , Free Lunch
wrote:

On Fri, 31 May 2013 16:57:42 -0700, (Jason) wrote
in
alt.atheism:

In article , Free
Lunch
wrote:

On Fri, 31 May 2013 13:55:49 -0700, (Jason)
wrote in
alt.atheism:

In article ,
wrote:

On 5/27/2013 8:49 PM, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
In article ,
Free Lunch wrote:

On Mon, 27 May 2013 11:33:19 -0400, Kurt Ullman

wrote in alt.atheism:

In article ,

wrote:

Remaining President when you know you are no longer
capable of
performing the duties is the worst kind of treason
because
it's
endangers the country more than almost anything anyone
could
do.

Show me where that is grounds for treason. You lefties
really
are
dumb****s.


When there is a lefty getting all up in arms about RR
and his
alleged
Alzheimers, I ask them if that is true, aren't they
sorta
ashamed
by the
fact that this demented old man handed their assess to
them on
numerous
occassions?
Tends to shut them up at least temporarily.

We're being nice to him. If he did not have Alzheimers,
he was
just
being a very bad man. The fact that he could get enough
hate-filled
Americans to support him in his war on the poor
(particularly if
they
were of color) shows us how much racism, sexism and
bigotry still
remains in this country.

Of course, today, the GOP would never consider Reagan
because
he was far
too liberal for their taste. They worship a fake St.
Ronnie who
looks
little like the man who was actually president.

The War on Hunger had been won by the time Reagan became
President. He
dismantled the apparatus that had worked and now we have
50
million
Americans who are food insecure, almost all of the
children, the
elderly, and hard-working adults.

For that alone, Reagan deserves to be cursed every single
day.


Perhaps the program suffered the malaise of many government
giveaway
programs which is becoming a huge corrupted and wasteful
organization.
Food Stamps became the secondary legal tender for the
underground
and
criminal economy. The EBT card is being used in the same
way. I've
seen
the credit on the cards being sold for 50 cents on the
dollar by
someone
who wanted to buy booze or dope. Food Stamps now the EBT
card is a
major
part of the illegal drug trade. I've seen people trade their
EBT credit for cash to buy cigarets, pot and alcohol instead
of food
for "their children". So the P.L.L.C.F. blame the behavior
of the
parents on Republican presidents. Gee, that makes a lot of
sense.
^_^

TDD

Thanks for the best post that I have seen today. I know the
story of a
local mother of three kids. She trades her food stamps for
marijuana
and
cocaine.

And that is a crime, but it is not an excuse to take food
stamps away
from those who are not violating the law. Clearly those who
want to
take
food stamps away from everyone are people who hate what Jesus
taught,
who mock what Jesus taught.

I agree that it's not an escuse to end the food stamp program.
However,
it
is evidence that officials need to do a better job of enforcing
the food
stamp rules.

How much are you willing to spend in enforcement to avoid $1,000
in
fraud?

About 5 to 10 percent of the money spent on the food stamp program.

So you want to spend billions in enforcement to avoid a thousand in
waste. How foolish of you.

Not to mention the children and elderly people who'll go without food.

The alternative is to do nothing about the fraud and abuse. Is that what
you want to happen?

Of course. The lefties *want* it to be a direct transfer from the
productive to the unproductive. What better way to do it that give
them an EBT card that can be used in the whorehouse, drug den, or
casino of their choice? Lefties really *are* that stupid.

Clearly you have no idea how the program works.


LOL
Avoid looking in a mirror when you post.

You looked in a mirror,

On Sat, 1 Jun 2013 16:11:09 -0500, "Attila Iskander"
wrote in alt.atheism:

"Free Lunch" wrote in message
.. .
On Sat, 1 Jun 2013 08:38:48 -0700 (PDT), "
wrote in alt.atheism:
...
All of which are doing exactly what I said. They are paying a hell of
a lot in total taxes. It's just that the effective rate gets reduced
from 35% to 15% or 20% through various tax exemptions.
So what? It has nothing to do with people getting all kinds of
free handouts from the govt who are PAYING NO INCOME
TAX at all. Capiche?

So it's okay with you if GE doesn't pay income tax, but if a person
living on $8,000/year doesn't pay any income tax, you are livid.

You must be very sad that Michele Bachmann decided not to run again.



Not a SINGLE corporate entity actually pays "income tax"
For the very simple reason that to a corporation a tax is just another cost
that is factored into the bottom line
The tax is ultimately paid by the consumer
Corporate tax is nothing but indirect citizen tax

Which is a great argument for a gross receipts tax, which is far harder
for corporations to dodge.

On Sat, 01 Jun 2013 14:17:09 -0700, (Jason) wrote in
alt.atheism:

In article , "Alex W."
wrote:

On Sat, 01 Jun 2013 07:19:58 -0500, Free Lunch wrote:

On Fri, 31 May 2013 21:34:08 -0700, (Jason) wrote in
alt.atheism:

In article , Free Lunch
wrote:

On Fri, 31 May 2013 19:22:25 -0700, (Jason) wrote in
alt.atheism:

In article , Free Lunch
wrote:
...
How much are you willing to spend in enforcement to avoid $1,000 in
fraud?

About 5 to 10 percent of the money spent on the food stamp program.

So you want to spend billions in enforcement to avoid a thousand in
waste. How foolish of you.

I meant to investigate cases of possible fraud and abuse.

But fraud and abuse are far less than 5% of the cost now.

Which may be true but is immaterial to the debate since this
is a political issue, and politics is largely the art of
wrestling with and managing public perception. Similar
examples are a perceived crime wave when actual figures show
a downturn in crime, or the view that illegal immgirants are
welfare spongers when the evidence shows they are by and
large extremely hard workers, or the widespread belief that
America spends huge sums on third-world fireign aid when the
actual sums involved are only a tiny part of the budget.
Even if politicians wanted to deal with these issues
rationally and on the basis of facts, their voters demand
action on the basis of their perception and enforce this at
the ballot box.

Is the alternative to ignore the issue of fraud and abuse and just allow
it to happen?

No, that is a strawman set up by reactionaries like you who only ignore
fraud and abuse by the very rich.

On Sat, 1 Jun 2013 16:13:20 -0500, "Attila Iskander"
wrote in alt.atheism:

"Free Lunch" wrote in message
.. .
On Sat, 1 Jun 2013 09:23:06 -0500, "Attila Iskander"
wrote in alt.atheism:

"Free Lunch" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 31 May 2013 19:22:25 -0700, (Jason) wrote in
alt.atheism:

In article , Free Lunch
wrote:

On Fri, 31 May 2013 16:57:42 -0700, (Jason) wrote in
alt.atheism:

In article , Free Lunch
wrote:

On Fri, 31 May 2013 13:55:49 -0700, (Jason) wrote
in
alt.atheism:

In article ,
wrote:

On 5/27/2013 8:49 PM, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
In article ,
Free Lunch wrote:

On Mon, 27 May 2013 11:33:19 -0400, Kurt Ullman

wrote in alt.atheism:

In article ,

wrote:

Remaining President when you know you are no longer
capable
of
performing the duties is the worst kind of treason because
it's
endangers the country more than almost anything anyone
could
do.

Show me where that is grounds for treason. You lefties
really are
dumb****s.


When there is a lefty getting all up in arms about RR and
his
alleged
Alzheimers, I ask them if that is true, aren't they sorta
ashamed
by the
fact that this demented old man handed their assess to them
on
numerous
occassions?
Tends to shut them up at least temporarily.

We're being nice to him. If he did not have Alzheimers, he
was
just
being a very bad man. The fact that he could get enough
hate-filled
Americans to support him in his war on the poor (particularly
if they
were of color) shows us how much racism, sexism and bigotry
still
remains in this country.

Of course, today, the GOP would never consider Reagan because
he was far
too liberal for their taste. They worship a fake St. Ronnie
who
looks
little like the man who was actually president.

The War on Hunger had been won by the time Reagan became
President. He
dismantled the apparatus that had worked and now we have 50
million
Americans who are food insecure, almost all of the children,
the
elderly, and hard-working adults.

For that alone, Reagan deserves to be cursed every single day.


Perhaps the program suffered the malaise of many government
giveaway
programs which is becoming a huge corrupted and wasteful
organization.
Food Stamps became the secondary legal tender for the
underground
and
criminal economy. The EBT card is being used in the same way.
I've
seen
the credit on the cards being sold for 50 cents on the dollar by
someone
who wanted to buy booze or dope. Food Stamps now the EBT card is
a
major
part of the illegal drug trade. I've seen people trade their
EBT credit for cash to buy cigarets, pot and alcohol instead of
food
for "their children". So the P.L.L.C.F. blame the behavior of
the
parents on Republican presidents. Gee, that makes a lot of
sense.
^_^

TDD

Thanks for the best post that I have seen today. I know the story
of
a
local mother of three kids. She trades her food stamps for
marijuana
and
cocaine.

And that is a crime, but it is not an excuse to take food stamps
away
from those who are not violating the law. Clearly those who want to
take
food stamps away from everyone are people who hate what Jesus
taught,
who mock what Jesus taught.

I agree that it's not an escuse to end the food stamp program.
However,
it
is evidence that officials need to do a better job of enforcing the
food
stamp rules.

How much are you willing to spend in enforcement to avoid $1,000 in
fraud?

About 5 to 10 percent of the money spent on the food stamp program.

So you want to spend billions in enforcement to avoid a thousand in
waste. How foolish of you.


Another false argument
You have waste in the MILLIONS, if not billions

I asked Jason how much he would be willing to spend to avoid $1,000 in
fraud.

Take it up with Jason, he's the one who wants to spend huge amounts.

USDA says fraud is about 1% of SNAP. Do you have a cost-effective way to
cut it further? They want to hear about it.

In your previous post you claimed 5%
Apparently your numbers fluctuate with every post
And they you wonder why no one takes you seriously


I don't recall claiming any percentage before this post. The 5% to 10%
was how much Jason was willing to waste on added enforcement costs.

In article , Mitchell
Holman nomailverizon.net wrote:

" wrote in
:

On Jun 1, 9:30*am, Mitchell Holman nomailverizon.net wrote:
" wrote
innews:c26f7eae-81a
:





On Jun 1, 8:29*am, "Alex W." wrote:
On Sat, 01 Jun 2013 07:19:58 -0500, Free Lunch wrote:
On Fri, 31 May 2013 21:34:08 -0700, (Jason)
wrote in alt.atheism:

In article , Free
Lunch wrote:

On Fri, 31 May 2013 19:22:25 -0700, (Jason)
wrote in alt.atheism:

In article , Free
Lunch wrote:
...
How much are you willing to spend in enforcement to avoid
$1,000 i
n
fraud?

About 5 to 10 percent of the money spent on the food stamp
program.

So you want to spend billions in enforcement to avoid a
thousand in waste. How foolish of you.

I meant to investigate cases of possible fraud and abuse.

But fraud and abuse are far less than 5% of the cost now.

Which may be true but is immaterial to the debate since this
is a political issue, and politics is largely the art of
wrestling with and managing public perception. *Similar
examples are a perceived crime wave when actual figures show
a downturn in crime,

Nice analogy. *There are 48 mil on food stamps today, up
70% in the last 4 years. *If crime were up like that, it would
be one hell of a mess. *Actually, crime is one hell of a mess
in places like Detroit and Chicago that are run by you libs.

or the view that illegal immgirants are
welfare spongers when the evidence shows they are by and
large extremely hard workers,

hard worker or not, they are still illegal aliens. *And there
are plenty of them taking advantage of the USA.

Illegal Immigration Provides Benefits to States
Fox Busniess News

Putting the law and morality of illegal entry aside, several
studies have shown the illegal immigrant population is more
of an economic contributor to state and local economies than
politicians like to tell an angry electorate. The numbers can
be broken down into the fiscal cost (or gain) of illegal
immigrants to states, along with the economic contribution of
the population.

The most thorough study on the fiscal and economic impact of
immigration was done by the non-partisan Texas Comptrollers’
Office in 2006, which showed Texas earned more in taxes and
economic output from illegal immigrants than governments spent
to provide services. According to the Comptrollers’ office,
state and local governments spent $1.16 billion to provide
services like education, health care and safety, but raised
an estimated $1.58 billion in tax revenues. Based on the data,
the Texas taxpayer made a $424.7 million profit on its illegal
immigrant population in 2006.


Liar, liar, pants on fire! You carefull edited out this part which
totally
changes the math:

"Undocumented immigrants produced $1.58 billion in state revenues,
which exceeded the $1.16 billion in state services they received.
However, local governments bore the burden of $1.44 billion in
uncompensated health care costs and local law enforcement costs not
paid for by the state.”

So:

$1.58bil - $1.16bil - $1.44 bil = - $1bil

In other words illegal alliens actually cost the citizens of TX,
$1bil.


You aren't factoring in the consumer cost of
goods and service kept artifically low by the
work of illegals. How high would wages (and thus
prices) have to go to lure Americans into fields
to pick lettuce and strawberries and to gut cattle
and "process" chickens and pigs?

Why do you think growers have to go as far away
as Jamaica to find legal field hands?




Eastern Washington farm hires 300 Jamaican workers
May 24, 2010

A farm in Eastern Washington is employing hundreds of
Jamaican workers to replace the illegal immigrants it
lost after an Immigration and Customs Enforcement
investigation last year.

Gebbers Farms in Brewster, WA, which grows apple and
cherry trees, is hiring 300 workers from Jamaica
through the H-2A visa program, issuing temporary
agricultural visas.

Gebbers Farms is certified through the Department of
Labor to hire foreign workers. Mike Gempler, with the
Washington Growers League, told KIRO Radio's Dave Ross,
that US citizens get the opportunity to apply for the
jobs, but that the farm still didn't find enough
Americans to harvest its fruit.

Gempler said, "The problem is there's no guarantee that
the people looking for jobs now will have legal documents.
So you have businesses that are subject to enforcement
actions by Department of Homeland Security."
http://www.mynorthwest.com/?nid=11&sid=324409


-----------------------------



or the widespread belief that
America spends huge sums on third-world fireign aid when the
actual sums involved are only a tiny part of the budget.

And where is the evidence that it's doing us much good?
You cool with the idea of giving the muslim brotherhood
govt in Egypt money from struggling Americans?

* *Well, that IS the elected government there.
Do you have a problem with supporting democracy?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Yes, when the elected govt is anti-American, denies basic human
rights to women, persecutes Christians and supports our enemies.



Oh, puh-leeze. Where was that concern for womens
rights and "supporting our enemies" when it comes to
US aid to Saudi monarchy?




Saudi Document Shows Kingdom Linked with Al-Qaeda Terror
May 25 2010

An Iraqi news agency has revealed more evidence linking
Saudi Arabia with terror. The Buratha news service
published what it said it is a secret document disclosing
how much money the Saudi kingdom has transferred to Al-Qaeda
in Iraq. The kingdom reportedly sends explosives and weapons
to terrorist groups in Iraq.

Saudi Arabia did not comment on the report and instead
criticized intelligence officials for disclosing the
document. Buratha said that King Abdullah bin Abdul Aziz
ordered a special committee to investigate the intelligence
leak and inform him about those liable in the case. Saudi
authorities reportedly have arrested 37 of the country's
intelligence officials for being behind the leak.
http://tinyurl.com/27ra64g

Thanks. I seem to recall that some of the 9-11 Muslim terrorists were from
Suudi Arabia.

On Sat, 1 Jun 2013 16:15:02 -0500, "Attila Iskander"
wrote in alt.atheism:

"Free Lunch" wrote in message
news
On Sat, 1 Jun 2013 09:22:26 -0500, "Attila Iskander"
wrote in alt.atheism:

"Free Lunch" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 31 May 2013 16:57:42 -0700, (Jason) wrote in
alt.atheism:

In article , Free Lunch
wrote:

On Fri, 31 May 2013 13:55:49 -0700, (Jason) wrote in
alt.atheism:

In article ,
wrote:

On 5/27/2013 8:49 PM, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
In article ,
Free Lunch wrote:

On Mon, 27 May 2013 11:33:19 -0400, Kurt Ullman

wrote in alt.atheism:

In article ,

wrote:

Remaining President when you know you are no longer capable
of
performing the duties is the worst kind of treason because
it's
endangers the country more than almost anything anyone could
do.

Show me where that is grounds for treason. You lefties really
are
dumb****s.


When there is a lefty getting all up in arms about RR and
his
alleged
Alzheimers, I ask them if that is true, aren't they sorta
ashamed
by the
fact that this demented old man handed their assess to them on
numerous
occassions?
Tends to shut them up at least temporarily.

We're being nice to him. If he did not have Alzheimers, he was
just
being a very bad man. The fact that he could get enough
hate-filled
Americans to support him in his war on the poor (particularly if
they
were of color) shows us how much racism, sexism and bigotry
still
remains in this country.

Of course, today, the GOP would never consider Reagan because he
was far
too liberal for their taste. They worship a fake St. Ronnie who
looks
little like the man who was actually president.

The War on Hunger had been won by the time Reagan became
President.
He
dismantled the apparatus that had worked and now we have 50
million
Americans who are food insecure, almost all of the children, the
elderly, and hard-working adults.

For that alone, Reagan deserves to be cursed every single day.


Perhaps the program suffered the malaise of many government
giveaway
programs which is becoming a huge corrupted and wasteful
organization.
Food Stamps became the secondary legal tender for the underground
and
criminal economy. The EBT card is being used in the same way. I've
seen
the credit on the cards being sold for 50 cents on the dollar by
someone
who wanted to buy booze or dope. Food Stamps now the EBT card is a
major
part of the illegal drug trade. I've seen people trade their
EBT credit for cash to buy cigarets, pot and alcohol instead of
food
for "their children". So the P.L.L.C.F. blame the behavior of the
parents on Republican presidents. Gee, that makes a lot of sense.
^_^

TDD

Thanks for the best post that I have seen today. I know the story of
a
local mother of three kids. She trades her food stamps for marijuana
and
cocaine.

And that is a crime, but it is not an excuse to take food stamps away
from those who are not violating the law. Clearly those who want to
take
food stamps away from everyone are people who hate what Jesus taught,
who mock what Jesus taught.

I agree that it's not an escuse to end the food stamp program. However,
it
is evidence that officials need to do a better job of enforcing the food
stamp rules.

How much are you willing to spend in enforcement to avoid $1,000 in
fraud?

How much fraud and waste are you willing to tolerate ?

I will tolerate all waste and fraud that cannot be rooted out in a cost
effective manner.

More fool you, because that is one dollar that goes to a thief and not a
deserving person

Funny how the reactionaries use fraud as an excuse to cut the benefits
and make certain thta the deserving lose a lot more.

Why should we waste thousands or millions trying to catch the last
dollar of fraud when that money can be used helping the people in need
instead? Do you really want us to have thousands of new cops reviewing
your income taxes?

It should also be noted that such will attract more thieves so your numbers
will start increasing incrementally as more thieves latch on to the public
tit.

Not at all. Your allegation makes no sense at all.

Think about it
That fraud and waste is cheating not only those paying for it, but those
who
really need it.

I will not take two dollars from the poor who need SNAP benefits to try
to root out one dollar in fraud. Criminal prosecution needs to be done
by the Justice department, not at the expense of those in need.



More fool you, because that is one dollar that goes to a thief and not a
deserving person
It should also be noted that such will attract more thieves so your numbers
will start increasing incrementally as more thieves latch on to the public
tit.

Fine, let's triple the size of IRS auditors who are the ones most likely
to find things like food stamp fraud. If it happens to catch thousands
of small businessmen who have been fiddling their books, that's just a
cost of better enforcement.

On Sat, 1 Jun 2013 16:16:35 -0500, "Attila Iskander"
wrote in alt.atheism:

"Jeanne Douglas" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Mitchell Holman nomailverizon.net wrote:

" wrote in
:

On Jun 1, 9:30 am, Mitchell Holman nomailverizon.net wrote:
" wrote
innews:c26f7eae-81a
:





On Jun 1, 8:29 am, "Alex W." wrote:
On Sat, 01 Jun 2013 07:19:58 -0500, Free Lunch wrote:
On Fri, 31 May 2013 21:34:08 -0700, (Jason)
wrote in alt.atheism:

In article , Free
Lunch wrote:

On Fri, 31 May 2013 19:22:25 -0700, (Jason)
wrote in alt.atheism:

In article , Free
Lunch wrote:
...
How much are you willing to spend in enforcement to avoid
$1,000 i
n
fraud?

About 5 to 10 percent of the money spent on the food stamp
program.

So you want to spend billions in enforcement to avoid a
thousand in waste. How foolish of you.

I meant to investigate cases of possible fraud and abuse.

But fraud and abuse are far less than 5% of the cost now.

Which may be true but is immaterial to the debate since this
is a political issue, and politics is largely the art of
wrestling with and managing public perception. Similar
examples are a perceived crime wave when actual figures show
a downturn in crime,

Nice analogy. There are 48 mil on food stamps today, up
70% in the last 4 years. If crime were up like that, it would
be one hell of a mess. Actually, crime is one hell of a mess
in places like Detroit and Chicago that are run by you libs.

or the view that illegal immgirants are
welfare spongers when the evidence shows they are by and
large extremely hard workers,

hard worker or not, they are still illegal aliens. And there
are plenty of them taking advantage of the USA.

Illegal Immigration Provides Benefits to States
Fox Busniess News

Putting the law and morality of illegal entry aside, several
studies have shown the illegal immigrant population is more
of an economic contributor to state and local economies than
politicians like to tell an angry electorate. The numbers can
be broken down into the fiscal cost (or gain) of illegal
immigrants to states, along with the economic contribution of
the population.

The most thorough study on the fiscal and economic impact of
immigration was done by the non-partisan Texas Comptrollers’
Office in 2006, which showed Texas earned more in taxes and
economic output from illegal immigrants than governments spent
to provide services. According to the Comptrollers’ office,
state and local governments spent $1.16 billion to provide
services like education, health care and safety, but raised
an estimated $1.58 billion in tax revenues. Based on the data,
the Texas taxpayer made a $424.7 million profit on its illegal
immigrant population in 2006.


Liar, liar, pants on fire! You carefull edited out this part which
totally
changes the math:

"Undocumented immigrants produced $1.58 billion in state revenues,
which exceeded the $1.16 billion in state services they received.
However, local governments bore the burden of $1.44 billion in
uncompensated health care costs and local law enforcement costs not
paid for by the state.”

So:

$1.58bil - $1.16bil - $1.44 bil = - $1bil

In other words illegal alliens actually cost the citizens of TX,
$1bil.


You aren't factoring in the consumer cost of
goods and service kept artifically low by the
work of illegals. How high would wages (and thus
prices) have to go to lure Americans into fields
to pick lettuce and strawberries and to gut cattle
and "process" chickens and pigs?


I always ask people how much more they're willing to pay for their
produce in order to avoid having them picked by undocumented workers.


Considering that documented workers get paid the same as undocumented ones,
There would be no additional cost
Come back when you have something other than a false argument.

There is clear evidence that undocumented workers get defrauded by
employers.

"Free Lunch" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 1 Jun 2013 16:16:35 -0500, "Attila Iskander"
wrote in alt.atheism:

"Jeanne Douglas" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Mitchell Holman nomailverizon.net wrote:

" wrote in
:

On Jun 1, 9:30 am, Mitchell Holman nomailverizon.net wrote:
" wrote
innews:c26f7eae-81a
:





On Jun 1, 8:29 am, "Alex W." wrote:
On Sat, 01 Jun 2013 07:19:58 -0500, Free Lunch wrote:
On Fri, 31 May 2013 21:34:08 -0700, (Jason)
wrote in alt.atheism:

In article , Free
Lunch wrote:

On Fri, 31 May 2013 19:22:25 -0700, (Jason)
wrote in alt.atheism:

In article ,
Free
Lunch wrote:
...
How much are you willing to spend in enforcement to avoid
$1,000 i
n
fraud?

About 5 to 10 percent of the money spent on the food stamp
program.

So you want to spend billions in enforcement to avoid a
thousand in waste. How foolish of you.

I meant to investigate cases of possible fraud and abuse.

But fraud and abuse are far less than 5% of the cost now.

Which may be true but is immaterial to the debate since this
is a political issue, and politics is largely the art of
wrestling with and managing public perception. Similar
examples are a perceived crime wave when actual figures show
a downturn in crime,

Nice analogy. There are 48 mil on food stamps today, up
70% in the last 4 years. If crime were up like that, it would
be one hell of a mess. Actually, crime is one hell of a mess
in places like Detroit and Chicago that are run by you libs.

or the view that illegal immgirants are
welfare spongers when the evidence shows they are by and
large extremely hard workers,

hard worker or not, they are still illegal aliens. And there
are plenty of them taking advantage of the USA.

Illegal Immigration Provides Benefits to States
Fox Busniess News

Putting the law and morality of illegal entry aside, several
studies have shown the illegal immigrant population is more
of an economic contributor to state and local economies than
politicians like to tell an angry electorate. The numbers can
be broken down into the fiscal cost (or gain) of illegal
immigrants to states, along with the economic contribution of
the population.

The most thorough study on the fiscal and economic impact of
immigration was done by the non-partisan Texas Comptrollers’
Office in 2006, which showed Texas earned more in taxes and
economic output from illegal immigrants than governments spent
to provide services. According to the Comptrollers’ office,
state and local governments spent $1.16 billion to provide
services like education, health care and safety, but raised
an estimated $1.58 billion in tax revenues. Based on the data,
the Texas taxpayer made a $424.7 million profit on its illegal
immigrant population in 2006.


Liar, liar, pants on fire! You carefull edited out this part which
totally
changes the math:

"Undocumented immigrants produced $1.58 billion in state revenues,
which exceeded the $1.16 billion in state services they received.
However, local governments bore the burden of $1.44 billion in
uncompensated health care costs and local law enforcement costs not
paid for by the state.”

So:

$1.58bil - $1.16bil - $1.44 bil = - $1bil

In other words illegal alliens actually cost the citizens of TX,
$1bil.


You aren't factoring in the consumer cost of
goods and service kept artifically low by the
work of illegals. How high would wages (and thus
prices) have to go to lure Americans into fields
to pick lettuce and strawberries and to gut cattle
and "process" chickens and pigs?


I always ask people how much more they're willing to pay for their
produce in order to avoid having them picked by undocumented workers.


Considering that documented workers get paid the same as undocumented
ones,
There would be no additional cost
Come back when you have something other than a false argument.

There is clear evidence that undocumented workers get defrauded by
employers.


Change of subject noted

"Free Lunch" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 01 Jun 2013 14:17:09 -0700, (Jason) wrote in
alt.atheism:

In article , "Alex W."
wrote:

On Sat, 01 Jun 2013 07:19:58 -0500, Free Lunch wrote:

On Fri, 31 May 2013 21:34:08 -0700, (Jason) wrote in
alt.atheism:

In article , Free Lunch
wrote:

On Fri, 31 May 2013 19:22:25 -0700, (Jason) wrote
in
alt.atheism:

In article , Free Lunch
wrote:
...
How much are you willing to spend in enforcement to avoid $1,000
in
fraud?

About 5 to 10 percent of the money spent on the food stamp program.

So you want to spend billions in enforcement to avoid a thousand in
waste. How foolish of you.

I meant to investigate cases of possible fraud and abuse.

But fraud and abuse are far less than 5% of the cost now.

Which may be true but is immaterial to the debate since this
is a political issue, and politics is largely the art of
wrestling with and managing public perception. Similar
examples are a perceived crime wave when actual figures show
a downturn in crime, or the view that illegal immgirants are
welfare spongers when the evidence shows they are by and
large extremely hard workers, or the widespread belief that
America spends huge sums on third-world fireign aid when the
actual sums involved are only a tiny part of the budget.
Even if politicians wanted to deal with these issues
rationally and on the basis of facts, their voters demand
action on the basis of their perception and enforce this at
the ballot box.

Is the alternative to ignore the issue of fraud and abuse and just allow
it to happen?

No, that is a strawman set up by reactionaries like you who only ignore
fraud and abuse by the very rich.



Stop with the stupid marxist mantra
it just proves the mindless fool you are

On Jun 1, 2:07*pm, "Attila Iskander" wrote:
"Free Lunch" wrote in message

...









On Sat, 1 Jun 2013 06:08:43 -0700 (PDT), "
wrote in alt.atheism:

On Jun 1, 8:19 am, Free Lunch wrote:
On Fri, 31 May 2013 21:35:01 -0700, (Jason) wrote in
alt.atheism:

In article , Jeanne
Douglas wrote:

In article ,
Free Lunch wrote:

On Fri, 31 May 2013 19:22:25 -0700, (Jason) wrote
in
alt.atheism:

In article , Free
Lunch
wrote:
...
How much are you willing to spend in enforcement to avoid $1,000
in
fraud?

About 5 to 10 percent of the money spent on the food stamp
program.

So you want to spend billions in enforcement to avoid a thousand in
waste. How foolish of you.

Not to mention the children and elderly people who'll go without
food.

The alternative is to do nothing about the fraud and abuse. Is that
what
you want to happen?

You make a reasonable effort to make it uninviting and difficult to
engage in SNAP fraud and punish those who are caught doing so, but as
with every other type of crime, we know that some people will get away
with it.

It is much more wasteful to spend 10% on enforcement than allow a far
smaller amount to be diverted to fraud. Like most law enforcement, the
first few dollars are the most effective.

Of course the concept that the first few dollars are the most
effective doesn't apply to the welfare programs themselves,
right? *Why no. *In that case, the sky is the limit:

"Better there be a little bit of fraud than have ANYone go hungry"

We passed the point of people going hungry anywhere even
close to what really going hungry means around the world
a very long time ago. *Today, look at people on welfare and
they have TV, cable, AC, Fritos.,....

What welfare program are you speaking of? Which country?

The one where the poor people are also the fattest in the world
* * To the best of my knowledge you don't get fat being hungry

They're fat not because they've got too much to eat, but because their
food access is limited to the wrong kinds of food. The vast majority
of people on SNAP live in "food deserts," places where full-service
grocery stores are an impractical distance away, and the only food
outlets are convenience stores and fast food restaurants. This
results in diets that are high in simple carbohydrates and over-
processed foods and low in fresh vegetables, fruits, and lean
proteins, things that you have to eat to stay slim. It's not a
question of how many calories they consume, but of *what kind* of
calories are available for consumption. If the only things available
to you to eat are McDonald's, pizza, KFC and packaged mac-and-cheese
dinners, you're going to be fat, too.

Brenda Nelson, A.A.#34 and A+ atheist
BAAWA Knight of the Golden Litterbox
EAC Professor of Feline Thermometrics and Cat-Herding
skyeyes nine at cox dot net OR
skyeyes nine at yahoo dot com

In article , Free Lunch
wrote:

On Sat, 1 Jun 2013 09:23:06 -0500, "Attila Iskander"
wrote in alt.atheism:

"Free Lunch" wrote in message
.. .
On Fri, 31 May 2013 19:22:25 -0700, (Jason) wrote in
alt.atheism:

In article , Free Lunch
wrote:

On Fri, 31 May 2013 16:57:42 -0700, (Jason) wrote in
alt.atheism:

In article , Free Lunch
wrote:

On Fri, 31 May 2013 13:55:49 -0700, (Jason) wrote in
alt.atheism:

In article ,
wrote:

On 5/27/2013 8:49 PM, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
In article ,
Free Lunch wrote:

On Mon, 27 May 2013 11:33:19 -0400, Kurt Ullman

wrote in alt.atheism:

In article ,

wrote:

Remaining President when you know you are no longer capable
of
performing the duties is the worst kind of treason because
it's
endangers the country more than almost anything anyone could
do.

Show me where that is grounds for treason. You lefties
really are
dumb****s.


When there is a lefty getting all up in arms about RR and
his
alleged
Alzheimers, I ask them if that is true, aren't they sorta
ashamed
by the
fact that this demented old man handed their assess to them on
numerous
occassions?
Tends to shut them up at least temporarily.

We're being nice to him. If he did not have Alzheimers, he was
just
being a very bad man. The fact that he could get enough
hate-filled
Americans to support him in his war on the poor (particularly
if they
were of color) shows us how much racism, sexism and bigotry
still
remains in this country.

Of course, today, the GOP would never consider Reagan because
he was far
too liberal for their taste. They worship a fake St. Ronnie who
looks
little like the man who was actually president.

The War on Hunger had been won by the time Reagan became
President. He
dismantled the apparatus that had worked and now we have 50
million
Americans who are food insecure, almost all of the children, the
elderly, and hard-working adults.

For that alone, Reagan deserves to be cursed every single day.


Perhaps the program suffered the malaise of many government
giveaway
programs which is becoming a huge corrupted and wasteful
organization.
Food Stamps became the secondary legal tender for the underground
and
criminal economy. The EBT card is being used in the same way. I've
seen
the credit on the cards being sold for 50 cents on the dollar by
someone
who wanted to buy booze or dope. Food Stamps now the EBT card is a
major
part of the illegal drug trade. I've seen people trade their
EBT credit for cash to buy cigarets, pot and alcohol instead of
food
for "their children". So the P.L.L.C.F. blame the behavior of the
parents on Republican presidents. Gee, that makes a lot of sense.
^_^

TDD

Thanks for the best post that I have seen today. I know the story of
a
local mother of three kids. She trades her food stamps for marijuana
and
cocaine.

And that is a crime, but it is not an excuse to take food stamps away
from those who are not violating the law. Clearly those who want to
take
food stamps away from everyone are people who hate what Jesus taught,
who mock what Jesus taught.

I agree that it's not an escuse to end the food stamp program. However,
it
is evidence that officials need to do a better job of enforcing the
food
stamp rules.

How much are you willing to spend in enforcement to avoid $1,000 in
fraud?

About 5 to 10 percent of the money spent on the food stamp program.

So you want to spend billions in enforcement to avoid a thousand in
waste. How foolish of you.


Another false argument
You have waste in the MILLIONS, if not billions

I asked Jason how much he would be willing to spend to avoid $1,000 in
fraud.

Take it up with Jason, he's the one who wants to spend huge amounts.

USDA says fraud is about 1% of SNAP. Do you have a cost-effective way to
cut it further? They want to hear about it.

I seem to recall that I stated that 5% to 10% of the entire food stamp
program should be set aside to investigate cases of fraud and abuse.

It appears that at least some posters want to do nothing to combat fraud
and abuse. If nothing is done, it means millions of children will suffer
from hunger due to their parent or parents making use of their food stamp
cards to purchase illegal drugs; gambling in casinos and visiting strip
clubs.

Why not go back to the older system where food stamp coupons were used to
buy food and only for real food and not for whiskey. That system worked
very well for dozens of years.

The food stamp cards that work like credit cards make fraud and abuse far
easier.

On 6/1/2013 3:05 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 01 Jun 2013 09:38:34 -0500, Tom McDonald
wrote:

On 6/1/2013 9:06 AM, wrote:
On Jun 1, 9:54 am, Tom McDonald wrote:
On 5/31/2013 11:35 PM, Jason wrote:



In article , Jeanne
Douglas wrote:

In article ,
Free Lunch wrote:

On Fri, 31 May 2013 19:22:25 -0700, (Jason) wrote in
alt.atheism:

In article , Free Lunch
wrote:

On Fri, 31 May 2013 16:57:42 -0700, (Jason) wrote in
alt.atheism:

In article , Free Lunch
wrote:

On Fri, 31 May 2013 13:55:49 -0700, (Jason) wrote in
alt.atheism:

In article ,
wrote:

On 5/27/2013 8:49 PM, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
In article ,
Free Lunch wrote:

On Mon, 27 May 2013 11:33:19 -0400, Kurt Ullman

wrote in alt.atheism:

In article ,

wrote:

Remaining President when you know you are no longer
capable of
performing the duties is the worst kind of treason because
it's
endangers the country more than almost anything anyone could
do.

Show me where that is grounds for treason. You lefties
really
are
dumb****s.

When there is a lefty getting all up in arms about RR
and his
alleged
Alzheimers, I ask them if that is true, aren't they sorta
ashamed
by the
fact that this demented old man handed their assess to them on
numerous
occassions?
Tends to shut them up at least temporarily.

We're being nice to him. If he did not have Alzheimers, he was
just
being a very bad man. The fact that he could get enough
hate-filled
Americans to support him in his war on the poor
(particularly if
they
were of color) shows us how much racism, sexism and
bigotry still
remains in this country.

Of course, today, the GOP would never consider Reagan because
he was far
too liberal for their taste. They worship a fake St. Ronnie who
looks
little like the man who was actually president.

The War on Hunger had been won by the time Reagan became
President. He
dismantled the apparatus that had worked and now we have 50
million
Americans who are food insecure, almost all of the children, the
elderly, and hard-working adults.

For that alone, Reagan deserves to be cursed every single day.

Perhaps the program suffered the malaise of many government
giveaway
programs which is becoming a huge corrupted and wasteful
organization.
Food Stamps became the secondary legal tender for the underground
and
criminal economy. The EBT card is being used in the same way. I've
seen
the credit on the cards being sold for 50 cents on the dollar by
someone
who wanted to buy booze or dope. Food Stamps now the EBT card is a
major
part of the illegal drug trade. I've seen people trade their
EBT credit for cash to buy cigarets, pot and alcohol instead
of food
for "their children". So the P.L.L.C.F. blame the behavior of the
parents on Republican presidents. Gee, that makes a lot of sense.
^_^

TDD

Thanks for the best post that I have seen today. I know the
story of a
local mother of three kids. She trades her food stamps for marijuana
and
cocaine.

And that is a crime, but it is not an excuse to take food stamps away
from those who are not violating the law. Clearly those who want to
take
food stamps away from everyone are people who hate what Jesus taught,
who mock what Jesus taught.

I agree that it's not an escuse to end the food stamp program. However,
it
is evidence that officials need to do a better job of enforcing the food
stamp rules.

How much are you willing to spend in enforcement to avoid $1,000 in
fraud?

About 5 to 10 percent of the money spent on the food stamp program.

So you want to spend billions in enforcement to avoid a thousand in
waste. How foolish of you.

Not to mention the children and elderly people who'll go without food.

The alternative is to do nothing about the fraud and abuse. Is that what
you want to happen?

Do you have the same zeal for ferreting out fraud and abuse when it
comes to big corporations that get billions from the taxpayers? Or is it
only the poor and powerless that get your scorn and ire?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Again, for the most part, corporations are not getting billions from
the taxpayers. It's that you libs like a tax system where you have
a high theoretical rate, so you can make it look like you're socking
it to those evil companies. Then you also pass all kinds of
exemptions
and loopholes that reduce their rate, so instead of paying 35%, they
actually wind up paying 20%. Kind of like when you do your own
taxes. You do know how to fill out an IRS form, don't you? We
conservatives would cut that 35% rate, one of the highest in the
world,
to something like 20% and get rid of all the loopholes, nonsense, etc.
But you libs will have none of it because you like to keep waging
classwarfare and pretending that corporations are evil.

Now there is some direct handout to corporations, but the best
example of that would be the recent experience of the govt and
Solyndra and all the other failed miracle energy companies. And
yes, with regard to any govt handouts or tax breaks, I'm all
for rooting out the fraud. Of course, the less of these we have
to begin with, the less fraud to worry about. If there was no
govt handouts to the likes of Solyndra, there would be no fraud.

KBR. Haliburton. Exxon and other oil companies. Etc.

Do tell us about the fraud these companies have committed. I bet you
*love* GE, though.

Except for the proven frauds by KBR/Haliburton, I guess you are right.
Unless you think that legalized bribery is fraud.

On Sat, 01 Jun 2013 14:31:46 -0700, (Jason) wrote in
alt.atheism:

In article , Free Lunch
wrote:

On Sat, 1 Jun 2013 09:23:06 -0500, "Attila Iskander"
wrote in alt.atheism:

"Free Lunch" wrote in message
.. .
On Fri, 31 May 2013 19:22:25 -0700, (Jason) wrote in
alt.atheism:

In article , Free Lunch
wrote:

On Fri, 31 May 2013 16:57:42 -0700, (Jason) wrote in
alt.atheism:

In article , Free Lunch
wrote:

On Fri, 31 May 2013 13:55:49 -0700, (Jason) wrote in
alt.atheism:

In article ,
wrote:

On 5/27/2013 8:49 PM, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
In article ,
Free Lunch wrote:

On Mon, 27 May 2013 11:33:19 -0400, Kurt Ullman

wrote in alt.atheism:

In article ,

wrote:

Remaining President when you know you are no longer capable
of
performing the duties is the worst kind of treason because
it's
endangers the country more than almost anything anyone could
do.

Show me where that is grounds for treason. You lefties
really are
dumb****s.


When there is a lefty getting all up in arms about RR and
his
alleged
Alzheimers, I ask them if that is true, aren't they sorta
ashamed
by the
fact that this demented old man handed their assess to them on
numerous
occassions?
Tends to shut them up at least temporarily.

We're being nice to him. If he did not have Alzheimers, he was
just
being a very bad man. The fact that he could get enough
hate-filled
Americans to support him in his war on the poor (particularly
if they
were of color) shows us how much racism, sexism and bigotry
still
remains in this country.

Of course, today, the GOP would never consider Reagan because
he was far
too liberal for their taste. They worship a fake St. Ronnie who
looks
little like the man who was actually president.

The War on Hunger had been won by the time Reagan became
President. He
dismantled the apparatus that had worked and now we have 50
million
Americans who are food insecure, almost all of the children, the
elderly, and hard-working adults.

For that alone, Reagan deserves to be cursed every single day.


Perhaps the program suffered the malaise of many government
giveaway
programs which is becoming a huge corrupted and wasteful
organization.
Food Stamps became the secondary legal tender for the underground
and
criminal economy. The EBT card is being used in the same way. I've
seen
the credit on the cards being sold for 50 cents on the dollar by
someone
who wanted to buy booze or dope. Food Stamps now the EBT card is a
major
part of the illegal drug trade. I've seen people trade their
EBT credit for cash to buy cigarets, pot and alcohol instead of
food
for "their children". So the P.L.L.C.F. blame the behavior of the
parents on Republican presidents. Gee, that makes a lot of sense.
^_^

TDD

Thanks for the best post that I have seen today. I know the story of
a
local mother of three kids. She trades her food stamps for marijuana
and
cocaine.

And that is a crime, but it is not an excuse to take food stamps away
from those who are not violating the law. Clearly those who want to
take
food stamps away from everyone are people who hate what Jesus taught,
who mock what Jesus taught.

I agree that it's not an escuse to end the food stamp program. However,
it
is evidence that officials need to do a better job of enforcing the
food
stamp rules.

How much are you willing to spend in enforcement to avoid $1,000 in
fraud?

About 5 to 10 percent of the money spent on the food stamp program.

So you want to spend billions in enforcement to avoid a thousand in
waste. How foolish of you.


Another false argument
You have waste in the MILLIONS, if not billions

I asked Jason how much he would be willing to spend to avoid $1,000 in
fraud.

Take it up with Jason, he's the one who wants to spend huge amounts.

USDA says fraud is about 1% of SNAP. Do you have a cost-effective way to
cut it further? They want to hear about it.

I seem to recall that I stated that 5% to 10% of the entire food stamp
program should be set aside to investigate cases of fraud and abuse.

Even though, at the moment, fraud only costs 1% of the entire program.
Will you take the money from those in need or get Republicans to vote to
increase the size of the program, a program they are trying to cut at
the moment?

It appears that at least some posters want to do nothing to combat fraud
and abuse.

No, it does not.

If nothing is done, it means millions of children will suffer
from hunger due to their parent or parents making use of their food stamp
cards to purchase illegal drugs; gambling in casinos and visiting strip
clubs.

You have no idea what you are talking about, again.

Why not go back to the older system where food stamp coupons were used to
buy food and only for real food and not for whiskey. That system worked
very well for dozens of years.

The current system is more secure than the old one.

The food stamp cards that work like credit cards make fraud and abuse far
easier.

No, it does not work like a credit card. You are misinformed.

In article ,
Free Lunch wrote:

On Sat, 1 Jun 2013 16:07:51 -0500, "Attila Iskander"
wrote in alt.atheism:

"Free Lunch" wrote in message
.. .
On Sat, 1 Jun 2013 06:08:43 -0700 (PDT), "
wrote in alt.atheism:

On Jun 1, 8:19 am, Free Lunch wrote:
On Fri, 31 May 2013 21:35:01 -0700, (Jason) wrote in
alt.atheism:





In article , Jeanne
Douglas wrote:

In article ,
Free Lunch wrote:

On Fri, 31 May 2013 19:22:25 -0700, (Jason) wrote
in
alt.atheism:

In article , Free
Lunch
wrote:
...
How much are you willing to spend in enforcement to avoid $1,000
in
fraud?

About 5 to 10 percent of the money spent on the food stamp
program.

So you want to spend billions in enforcement to avoid a thousand in
waste. How foolish of you.

Not to mention the children and elderly people who'll go without
food.

The alternative is to do nothing about the fraud and abuse. Is that
what
you want to happen?

You make a reasonable effort to make it uninviting and difficult to
engage in SNAP fraud and punish those who are caught doing so, but as
with every other type of crime, we know that some people will get away
with it.

It is much more wasteful to spend 10% on enforcement than allow a far
smaller amount to be diverted to fraud. Like most law enforcement, the
first few dollars are the most effective.

Of course the concept that the first few dollars are the most
effective doesn't apply to the welfare programs themselves,
right? Why no. In that case, the sky is the limit:

"Better there be a little bit of fraud than have ANYone go hungry"

We passed the point of people going hungry anywhere even
close to what really going hungry means around the world
a very long time ago. Today, look at people on welfare and
they have TV, cable, AC, Fritos.,....

What welfare program are you speaking of? Which country?


The one where the poor people are also the fattest in the world
To the best of my knowledge you don't get fat being hungry

Your knowledge is rarely trustworthy.

piggybacking

The only food that the poor can afford AND have access to is crap junk
food that is cheap because of the subsidies given to huge corporate
farmers.

If you're poor, you're going to find as many calories as cheaply as
possible to try to keep your family's stomachs full. That means you're
going to get fat.

--

JD

"Osama Bin Laden is dead and GM is alive."--VP Joseph Biden

In article ,
(Jason) wrote:

In article , "Alex W."
wrote:

On Sat, 01 Jun 2013 07:19:58 -0500, Free Lunch wrote:

On Fri, 31 May 2013 21:34:08 -0700, (Jason) wrote in
alt.atheism:

In article , Free Lunch
wrote:

On Fri, 31 May 2013 19:22:25 -0700, (Jason) wrote in
alt.atheism:

In article , Free Lunch
wrote:
...
How much are you willing to spend in enforcement to avoid $1,000 in
fraud?

About 5 to 10 percent of the money spent on the food stamp program.

So you want to spend billions in enforcement to avoid a thousand in
waste. How foolish of you.

I meant to investigate cases of possible fraud and abuse.

But fraud and abuse are far less than 5% of the cost now.

Which may be true but is immaterial to the debate since this
is a political issue, and politics is largely the art of
wrestling with and managing public perception. Similar
examples are a perceived crime wave when actual figures show
a downturn in crime, or the view that illegal immgirants are
welfare spongers when the evidence shows they are by and
large extremely hard workers, or the widespread belief that
America spends huge sums on third-world fireign aid when the
actual sums involved are only a tiny part of the budget.
Even if politicians wanted to deal with these issues
rationally and on the basis of facts, their voters demand
action on the basis of their perception and enforce this at
the ballot box.

Is the alternative to ignore the issue of fraud and abuse and just allow
it to happen?

Who said anything so stupid? The exact words.

--

JD

"Osama Bin Laden is dead and GM is alive."--VP Joseph Biden

On Jun 1, 5:55*pm, Jeanne Douglas wrote:
In article ,
*Free Lunch wrote:





On Sat, 1 Jun 2013 16:07:51 -0500, "Attila Iskander"
wrote in alt.atheism:

"Free Lunch" wrote in message
.. .
On Sat, 1 Jun 2013 06:08:43 -0700 (PDT), "
wrote in alt.atheism:

On Jun 1, 8:19 am, Free Lunch wrote:
On Fri, 31 May 2013 21:35:01 -0700, (Jason) wrote in
alt.atheism:

In article , Jeanne
Douglas wrote:

In article ,
Free Lunch wrote:

On Fri, 31 May 2013 19:22:25 -0700, (Jason) wrote
in
alt.atheism:

In article , Free
Lunch
wrote:
...
How much are you willing to spend in enforcement to avoid $1,000
in
fraud?

About 5 to 10 percent of the money spent on the food stamp
program.

So you want to spend billions in enforcement to avoid a thousand in
waste. How foolish of you.

Not to mention the children and elderly people who'll go without
food.

The alternative is to do nothing about the fraud and abuse. Is that
what
you want to happen?

You make a reasonable effort to make it uninviting and difficult to
engage in SNAP fraud and punish those who are caught doing so, but as
with every other type of crime, we know that some people will get away
with it.

It is much more wasteful to spend 10% on enforcement than allow a far
smaller amount to be diverted to fraud. Like most law enforcement, the
first few dollars are the most effective.

Of course the concept that the first few dollars are the most
effective doesn't apply to the welfare programs themselves,
right? *Why no. *In that case, the sky is the limit:

"Better there be a little bit of fraud than have ANYone go hungry"

We passed the point of people going hungry anywhere even
close to what really going hungry means around the world
a very long time ago. *Today, look at people on welfare and
they have TV, cable, AC, Fritos.,....

What welfare program are you speaking of? Which country?

The one where the poor people are also the fattest in the world
* *To the best of my knowledge you don't get fat being hungry

Your knowledge is rarely trustworthy.

piggybacking

The only food that the poor can afford AND have access to is crap junk
food that is cheap because of the subsidies given to huge corporate
farmers.

If you're poor, you're going to find as many calories as cheaply as
possible to try to keep your family's stomachs full. That means you're
going to get fat.

--


I see so they are both fat and starving at the same time.
What a unique condition!

On Jun 1, 5:28*pm, SkyEyes wrote:
On Jun 1, 2:07*pm, "Attila Iskander" wrote:





"Free Lunch" wrote in message

.. .

On Sat, 1 Jun 2013 06:08:43 -0700 (PDT), "
wrote in alt.atheism:

On Jun 1, 8:19 am, Free Lunch wrote:
On Fri, 31 May 2013 21:35:01 -0700, (Jason) wrote in
alt.atheism:

In article , Jeanne
Douglas wrote:

In article ,
Free Lunch wrote:

On Fri, 31 May 2013 19:22:25 -0700, (Jason) wrote
in
alt.atheism:

In article , Free
Lunch
wrote:
...
How much are you willing to spend in enforcement to avoid $1,000
in
fraud?

About 5 to 10 percent of the money spent on the food stamp
program.

So you want to spend billions in enforcement to avoid a thousand in
waste. How foolish of you.

Not to mention the children and elderly people who'll go without
food.

The alternative is to do nothing about the fraud and abuse. Is that
what
you want to happen?

You make a reasonable effort to make it uninviting and difficult to
engage in SNAP fraud and punish those who are caught doing so, but as
with every other type of crime, we know that some people will get away
with it.

It is much more wasteful to spend 10% on enforcement than allow a far
smaller amount to be diverted to fraud. Like most law enforcement, the
first few dollars are the most effective.

Of course the concept that the first few dollars are the most
effective doesn't apply to the welfare programs themselves,
right? *Why no. *In that case, the sky is the limit:

"Better there be a little bit of fraud than have ANYone go hungry"

We passed the point of people going hungry anywhere even
close to what really going hungry means around the world
a very long time ago. *Today, look at people on welfare and
they have TV, cable, AC, Fritos.,....

What welfare program are you speaking of? Which country?

The one where the poor people are also the fattest in the world
* * To the best of my knowledge you don't get fat being hungry

They're fat not because they've got too much to eat, but because their
food access is limited to the wrong kinds of food. *The vast majority
of people on SNAP live in "food deserts," places where full-service
grocery stores are an impractical distance away, and the only food
outlets are convenience stores and fast food restaurants. *This
results in diets that are high in simple carbohydrates and over-
processed foods and low in fresh vegetables, fruits, and lean
proteins, things that you have to eat to stay slim. *It's not a
question of how many calories they consume, but of *what kind* of
calories are available for consumption. *If the only things available
to you to eat are McDonald's, pizza, KFC and packaged mac-and-cheese
dinners, you're going to be fat, too.

Brenda Nelson, A.A.#34 and A+ atheist
BAAWA Knight of the Golden Litterbox
EAC Professor of Feline Thermometrics and Cat-Herding
skyeyes nine at cox dot net OR
skyeyes nine at yahoo dot com- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I see plenty of fat ones using food stamps in line ahead of
me at the grocery store. Just another lib myth.....