Originally Posted by DrPhil (Post 2012957)

There is a reason why "food stamp" receipients cannot use them to purchase alcohol and tobacco products (among other things). One reason is that tax payers such as myself do not want the tons of tax payer dollars that go into food stamps to fund such nonnecessities as alcohol, tobacco, lottery tickets, crab legs and beef rib dinners, etc.. I firmly believe that people who wish to consume alcohol and tobacco or buy lottery tickets and eat crab legs need to do so on their own dollar that they earned without government assistance. There are certain "freedoms" that are lost when you do not have money.

As for the photo in this thread, the couple of people in this thread who find the photo ironic are not the only ones who see the irony in that photo. The comments section of that article says a lot. It also isn't impossible that the photographer and reporter took that photo with irony in mind. That happens.

People fall on hard times but it is also the case that the average person lives paycheck to paycheck with no cushion in case they are jobless for 1 year. That fact is what the Black community has been disproportionately struggling with to the point where BGLOs, churches and nonprofits sponsor financial literacy programs to teach Black folks that they need to build their wealth instead of spending most of what they have left at the end of the month on a flatscreen TV (even if it is on sale). It's the same thing that I see when I drive around the housing projects and see some residents with Dish TV and SUVs with rims. Sure, some of these people may have received these TVs, cable, cars, or whatever else as a gift or purchased it during more profitable times. However, the trend of poverty and overconsumption makes it more likely that these were not gifts but rather purchased in a paycheck-to-paycheck context instead of saving money. Again, that is not being judgmental, that is knowing the cycle of poverty that has disproportionately hit the Black community and speaking on it.

[If this was a white person in that photo, my response would be the same but it wouldn't be about disproportionate poverty. Despite the higher median income of whites, the average white person also lives paycheck to paycheck and there is a greater number of whites receiving government assistance than there are Blacks.]

Originally Posted by AOII Angel (Post 2012960)

IMHO, selling your 50" flatscreen isn't going to get you very far

Originally Posted by AOII Angel (Post 2012960)

and buying a six pack of beer with your own hard earned money even when you need food stamps does not rise to the label of FRAUD.

Originally Posted by AOII Angel (Post 2012960)

There are a lot of hardworking people who are out of work because of the state of our economy who are no different than the average American who has no money tucked away for a rainy day.

Originally Posted by DrPhil (Post 2012962)

That depends on how far you expect to get. Desperate times call for desperate, legal measures. That woman not only has a big flat screen TV, she also has what looks like a video game system and another technology item in that photo. She's "free" to own those items but she's also "free" to try to sell them if she needs help.



"Fraud" is an unnecessary label because it implies illegality. It is only illegal if you use the food stamps to purchase the items--stores are not supposed to allow people to do that. "Dumb" or "inappropriate" are more appropriate labels depending on the context. Many people who live paycheck to paycheck would be more well off if they put $50 in their savings accounts and lessened the frequency at which they consume alcohol and tobacco products. Many of these people aren't just consuming alcohol and/or tobacco products on the weekends or special occasions, they are doing so everyday. Corner marts and liquor stores are elated and many of these are located in lower income areas of cities for a reason.



Of course they are no different. Not saving money sets the stage for not having a cushion during hard times (unemployment, underemployment, emergencies, etc).

Originally Posted by AOII Angel (Post 2012964)

Exactly. Fraud is an ugly word. I think every person who criticizes could probably look at their own finances and find items they waste their own money on and could stand to save more. Fraud, as you said, implies that they are breaking the law or are unethical at the least. As for her TV, etc., she could sell it, but who knows what someone would pay for it and how long that money would last to pay her bills, rent, etc. An xbox isn't likely to fetch much on the used market. The truth of the matter is that the government doesn't want us to save money. The economy NEEDS us to spend, spend, spend to grow the economy which leads to a large number of people left vulnerable to this situation.

Originally Posted by AOII Angel (Post 2012964)

I think every person who criticizes could probably look at their own finances and find items they waste their own money on and could stand to save more.

Originally Posted by AOII Angel (Post 2012964)

As for her TV, etc., she could sell it, but who knows what someone would pay for it and how long that money would last to pay her bills, rent, etc. An xbox isn't likely to fetch much on the used market.

Originally Posted by DrPhil (Post 2012967)

If those people who criticize have saved money and are building some level of wealth, they can "waste" a percentage of their own money.

I know that people who live paycheck to paycheck are often unable to save money (although, putting $20 in a savings account per month is better than spending to your last cent if you don't have to) and that's why this topic is also based on where people are situated. There are people whose wasteful spending lends itself to immediately needing financial assistance during hard times. Financial literacy programs in the Black community, for example, are based on the premise of financial freedom to spend your money however you choose. But that freedom comes with financial responsibility so that tax payers do not end up footing the bill. Those who see that reality as being critical or judgmental will have to get over it.



People who are truly truly truly struggling will try and see how much they can get for whatever they are able to sell. Assuming that you won't get much money is much less productive than seeing how much money you are able to get for it.

Originally Posted by AOII Angel (Post 2012964)

Exactly. Fraud is an ugly word. I think every person who criticizes could probably look at their own finances and find items they waste their own money on and could stand to save more. Fraud, as you said, implies that they are breaking the law or are unethical at the least. As for her TV, etc., she could sell it, but who knows what someone would pay for it and how long that money would last to pay her bills, rent, etc. An xbox isn't likely to fetch much on the used market. The truth of the matter is that the government doesn't want us to save money. The economy NEEDS us to spend, spend, spend to grow the economy which leads to a large number of people left vulnerable to this situation.

Originally Posted by AOII Angel (Post 2012978)

I don't think that gives me the right to be smug and look down on those who aren't are fortunately situated or didn't put away money in savings when they could have.

Originally Posted by AOII Angel (Post 2012978)

Hindsight, after all is 20/20.

Originally Posted by knight_shadow (Post 2012990)

But really, you were the one who took it there.

The previous posters initially pointed out the fact that it looked bad.

Originally Posted by DrPhil (Post 2012983)

I don't see where being smug and looking down on anyone is even part of this discussion. That may be what this topic is fundamentally about to some people but that isn't what this topic is about to me.



The point is that foresight is 20/20 and that is what many supporters of financial literacy programs and financial assistance programs are hoping people of all income levels will learn.

Originally Posted by PiKA2001 (Post 2012884)

But I did think. I think she should sell her $1500 TV and buy a $150 Vizio from Wal-Mart and use the remaining $1350 to pay her utilities. ;)

If you go through life living beyond your means it WILL eventually catch up with you and bite you in the ass no matter your income level. I believe there are people more deserving of public assistance, like the people out there that have already pawned and eliminated their luxuries such as cable television. I'm sick of people taking advantage of the system, as should you. If the only people who used public assistance where the ones who truly needed it, there would be more money in the coffers to help them. Why should a woman who has a 50in flat screen TV and a woman who can't afford to get her children a winter coat get the same amount of assistance?

I was in line at a grocery store once and the man in front of me only had a bottle of ketchup and a 24 case of Bud Light. He ran each item as a separate purchase, pulling out a $20 bill to pay for the beer than whipping out his foodstamp EBT card to pay for his ketchup. :rolleyes: I was tempted to ask him why he could spend $20 on beer but couldn't spend $2 on a bottle of ketchup. What bothers me the most about this is that there are people who's only source of food IS FROM THE FOODSTAMP PROGRAM.....NOTHING ELSE! If we could knock these cheaters and slugs off the program we would be able to give the people who really need help more than just $250 (or whatever the amount is) a month for food.