More pension trouble?

Here in California, we don't call it "food stamps" because it may cause too much shame to the people who use them. We have EBT (electronic benefit transfer) and CalFresh. We now have Jack in the Box's, Carls Jr.'s, and liquor stores that advertise with signs outside "We accept EBT". Most of the California public is too ignorant to know what EBT is. It is too bad it doesn't say "We accept food stamps". I would then like to see if there was any public outrage. I have met people on food stamps who had no business being on food stamps, so before I get the forkie or Chilcoot sob story, I suggest they think about what they post.

I would personally like to see food stamps limited to grocery stores. I don't want the recipients to be able to buy liquor or crap food. I only want them to be able to buy fresh produce, bakery goods, and certain proteins. I don't want food stamps to go and buy the Double Western Burger meal.

I get a big laugh out of the excuse most used by Democrats ... "what about Bush?". As far as I'm concerned they are two peas out of the same pod. Both are big spending politicians trying to buy votes with their policies. I believe they rank 1 and 2 as the worst presidents ever.

So, I get a big chuckle when I see the logic impaired always try to point to Bush to make Obama look better. Here's a clue guys, it does not make him look better, but it does make you look seriously deluded.

Congress was under Democratic control for just two of President Reagan's eight years. And in those two years, the Democrats never held the 60 votes necessary to defeat Republican filibusters.

The debt-whiners sure do hate the debt.
They just dont hate the policies that caused it - in fact, they've spent 10 years on this board telling us how vital those policies are. Funny, aint it?

I wonder why Roulette Man doesn't know that food stamps don't pay for liquor. Probably the same reason his posts are always premised on things that aren't true.

As for "crap food", here's why the President George W. Bush Administration opposed further limits on the sorts of food that could be purchased:

• No clear standards exist to define foods as good or bad, or healthy or not healthy;

• Food restrictions would pose major implementation challenges and increase program complexity and costs;

• Restrictions may not change the nature of participants’ food purchases; and

• No evidence exists which indicates that food stamp benefits directly contribute to poor food choices and negative dietary outcomes, such as obesity.

Keep that knee a'jerkin', RM!

Forgot to mention:

Reagan asked Congress to spend more money than Congress ultimately approved. In his 8 years, Congress passed budgets $4.7 billion lower than the budgets Reagan requested.

But knowing that would require knowing stuff, and that's a trait we don't all share.

Why did President Reagan raise it 18 times?
Why did President George W. Bush raise it 7 times?
Why did President Clinton raise it 8 times? (This is your last hint! Anyone know the answer?)

This has been another episode of Answering a Foolish Question with a Smart One.

Does that mean the liquor store that has the sign "we accept EBT" sells only things like candy bars and potato chips to people who come in the store with an EBT card?

No. Those people can buy anything they'd like.

But they can only buy food with their food stamps.

I'm glad to see we're getting somewhere.

Shhh. In Chilcoot's propaganda posts, she fails to mention that EBT fraud is happening all over the country.



EBT card abuse

1,100 + Dead People are on MA EBT