Jump to content

Bill to Regulate Food Stamp Purchases


PhatMack19

Recommended Posts

Good.  They need to add other luxury items to the list.  You shouldn’t be able to buy crawfish and lobster on food stamps.  This bill makes too much sense for them to pass.

 

The proposal would ban people from using food stamps on energy drinks and any beverages containing at least 54 milligrams of caffeine per 8 fluid ounces. This does not include coffee.

This is the hidden content, please

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I’m not Big Girl but I think it’s great.  Folks who live off the Govt should be held accountable for how that money is spent.  

Which brings me back to Medicare for All.  Once in place, everyone is living off the Govt.  To keep your Medicare, you’ll do what the Govt says.  Slippery Slope?  Nay, a freaking cliff..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There was a sign on the cooler at the BC Dollar General a while back that said that the store wouldn't accept EBT payments for energy drinks.  The clerk said that she'd taken several good cussings over it.  

It gets on my nerves that we could go to any grocery store and determine which people were paying with food stamps and which were paying with their own actual money based solely on the contents of their buggies. They need to go back to passing out eggs, butter, and cheese, if you want my opinion.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 The only interesting thing about this thread is the media fascination with bills that have absolutely no support and practically no chance of becoming a law. Every two years it is the same thing.

 Headlines will say things like marijuana to be legal in Texas or DWI now a felony on first offense or Medicare for everyone in Texas or... 

 In truth, likely one guy submitted a bill because he told his constituents that he would. Out of the hundreds of other legislators, no one else would sign off on it but by God he did submit it. It will never come up even for a discussion within a committee much less come even close to becoming a law. 

 It is nothing more than Clickbait. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Member Statistics

    46,201
    Total Members
    1,837
    Most Online
    JBarry68
    Newest Member
    JBarry68
    Joined


  • Posts

    • naw, maaaaybe 7, definitely not 8 deep.  today im avoiding sitting by #10s parents, had to move away yesterday.   "put my son back in jub, put my son back in"  and then crying on every little touch of someone.    lets ball out today ktz!    
    • Very close game until the 2nd half (mostly the 4th) when Orangefield came unraveled. Worse defensive effort I have seen out of the Bobcats in three years. This team has to get back on D and quit getting beat over the top when pressing. Offensively, non ball handlers continually turn it over and their shot selection is poor. Basic basketball, such as: defensive hustle, boxing out, and taking care of the basketball are the areas the Bobcats need to work on most. Whitmire will get them on point, but he shouldn't have to coach effort at the Varsity Level.  We'll be at McnNeese this Friday night at 6pm.
    • I don’t benefit from it, that’s not my area.  But the average cost to imprison someone is around $15k per year (on average in the US) and capital cases cost somewhere between $1.5-$3M with over half being overturned or reduced to life in prison anyway.  These numbers may be inflated since the last report I read but I’m sure it would be on both sides and higher on the DP side if anything. So what’s the point?  We feel better because we got to return the favor on someone (hopefully) who committed a heinous crime?  And I don’t know I can say we have “complicated” it. Which appeal should we cut out?  Our justice system has a pecking order and we have higher courts for a reason. When we are about to impose the ultimate judgment, should we cut steps that other cases have to save a buck?  Or do we not pay for an indigent person’s experts at the trial court level because it’s too expensive? Or do we just lock them up and throw away the key (unless we later find out they weren’t actually guilty, in which case we have a key and a life we haven’t unjustly ended) and save a ton of money?  Seems to me to be an easy and obvious solution but I’m more of a pragmatist.
    • 1 thing for certain. Coach Earned 3 more years to figure it out lol
  • Topics

×
×
  • Create New...