View Single Post
  #85  
Old 25 May 2011, 02:30 AM
Troodon Troodon is offline
 
Join Date: 06 January 2004
Location: Waltham, MA
Posts: 8,077
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by LizzyBean View Post
And to get back to the OP as an example, a "poor" person has every damn right to have lobster and steak once in a while, just like someone not on food stamps. If they want to buy those and then budget out the rest of the month with ramen and toast, that's their business. No one has the right to tell someone else how to use their benefits. The second we start telling people what they can and can't buy, we're getting into a slippery slope that we really shouldn't be going down. Because, quite frankly, when I was buying the food I bought 98% good stuff, and 2% "bad" stuff like ice cream or soda for me and my son. You know why? Because we deserve treats too, just like regular people. The little things make life bearable, especially when you're living a depressing life like I was. Sometimes ice cream can be a God send.
As I see it, the issue is not that poor people don't have the right to save up some food stamps to buy lobster and steak occasionally, but that if poor people can save up food stamps at all, that means that they could have survived if given fewer food stamps.

Now, I personally think that cutting wasteful spending should start with oil subsidies and the defense budget, and food stamps are such a small issue that they wouldn't even make it onto my list. On the other hand, if instead of paying a dollar of my taxes (the fraction I estimate goes to food stamps) I was given a choice of keeping a dollar or giving it to an anonymous poor person who I would never see so that he could afford a treat, I think I'd keep the dollar. I know that sounds terrible, but is it really worse than not donating a spare dollar to charity?
Reply With Quote