Of course there is some fraud…as there is in basically everything.
The rate of fraud will never be 0% for anything.
40 million + people receive and use SNAP to feed their family.
If pubs want to run on eliminating SNAP, go for it.
This is one of my pet peeves with Democrats. I’d rather the snap program costs us more - adding more to ensure people aren’t abusing the program as opposed to just accepting that some fraud will occur.
It turns my stomach when I see someone pay with an EBT card and then pull out a wad of cash to pay for things not authorized on an EBT card.
2 Likes
I concur. Sadly there is no way to eliminate fraud 100%. That being said, the scenario you describe is not very common.
Also, having a wad of cash does not mean someone is wealthy. If one cashes their $900 check every 2 weeks, it may looke like they have a lot of cash…but not really. Most peole on SNAP have jobs, they just do not make enough to feed their family.
A lot of the fraud is people skimming EBT cards.
Correct. EBT is a supplement. That’s what the “S” stands for. The rest of their life is paid with cash or a credit card. (And I’ve had my share of delays when the person in line gets X-amount covered by the EBT card, and they keep trying credit card after credit card that gets rejected to pay the rest, and then they have to decide what to send back, and the checkout person has to figure out how to back out the extra items from the total…) And yes, some people live cash-only lives. (Especially people who cannot get credit.) So a wad of cash doesn’t indicate a whole lot.
… and I see what that card covered. We’ve seen some examples of outrageous things (I think in this thread – the edible panties.) But even what our culture calls groceries should really be reevaluated. Candy. Soda. Junk food.
And at the other extreme, high-end items like kobe steaks and lobsters and caviar.
If I were in charge, I would implement a Prosciutto-and-Pop limitation to what SNAP covers. (Actually I’ve posted elsewhere that I would rather see food welfare managed as physical items, limited to basics and essentials that the recipient physically picks up. That’s your SUPPLEMENT.)
You know what would cut down on all of this? You’d have no people taking advantage of this benefit. Just those that truly need it. Restrict it to only foods that don’t taste very good or are bland. Restrict all liquids to only water. The idea is to encourage people to get off food stamps.
1 Like
I do a lot of grocery shopping in my life…I have never seen that happen.
Not saying it does not happen.
How many times have you seen it yourself?
Wow..you are very lucky if you have never not had enough money to eat.
I suppose having to watch people use SNAP, and get upset about it, is a common 1st world problem.
LOL, I’m lucky to never need SNAP? I never came close to needing it. I’m just suggesting something that would discourage people from a lifetime of SNAP. I don’t get upset that people need aid. Hell, I’m about to make myself a jalapeno bacon cheeseburger with fries that I paid for with my own money.
3 Likes
You do realize that SNAP is not a life time benefit. And if you aren’t working you only get three months of benefits in a three year period without proof your looking for gainful employment.
I shop at Wal Mart.
You need no other explanation.
2 Likes
I also shop at Walmart. Use Self check out often though.
Any food can be made tastier with proper prep and cooking.
In my opinion, just requiring the recipient to pick up a weekly package of approved food would practically eliminate the secondary market for reselling EBT funds. Jars of peanut butter and blocks of cheese don’t have the same attractiveness to the under-the-table world.
1 Like
Aren’t those conditions relatively new?
I’ve lived in my current location for 25 years. I’ve been to my local Walmart maybe a handful of times. I avoid it at all costs. I’m not going to bother saying why, it’s just not a pleasant experience. There is also no reason for me to go there. If the place disappeared tomorrow, I wouldn’t even know.
No…its not relatively new…but its not like the food stamp program of the 70s and 80s. Ive been involves with SNAP and EBT for my job the last 26 years…and its always been this way. The bottom line, unless you have a disability, or are working, its not lasting forever like the OP video portrays. And if you are working your SNAP is based on your pay. Some people are only getting a bag or two of groceries per month.
That “proof” is easy to get…I had to provide the same after I graduated from OSU to get the 2 month stipend. Takes no time at all to submit apps online to jobs you know you won’t get, but have to show “proof” of job searches
I doubt it is any different.
3 Likes
So then why did the Left get upset when the Trump Administration announced work requirements?
3 Likes
Not sure. In my research for a project Im implementing…most people work the required amount or have approved exemptions 92% fall into this category. My project is to help people earn more money while retaining their health benefits. My project/program was developed because of the work requirements…not in spite of them. Over the summer while researching, Ive come to realize the work requirements can actually be a push to help people earn more.
No…no…no…not eliminate.
Just make sure scamers don’t get them.
