toldailytopic: Food stamps. Good idea or bad idea?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Nathon Detroit

LIFETIME MEMBER
LIFETIME MEMBER
The TheologyOnline.com TOPIC OF THE DAY for January 27th, 2011 10:38 AM


toldailytopic: Food stamps. Good idea or bad idea?






Take the topic above and run with it! Slice it, dice it, give us your general thoughts about it. Everyday there will be a new TOL Topic of the Day.
If you want to make suggestions for the Topic of the Day send a Tweet to @toldailytopic or @theologyonline or send it to us via Facebook.
 

TomO

Get used to it.
Hall of Fame
Good in principle.....abysmal in execution. :plain:

Fun fact: The current going rate for food stamps (card useage) in this area is .50 cents on the dollar. :juggle:
 

aSeattleConserv

BANNED
Banned
Food stamps. Good idea or bad idea?

The FORCED redistribution of wealth is always a bad idea (unless your name is Traditio).

Government has no right to take from one to give to another (see above exception).

The private sector always has worked best when it comes to charity. Less government and God's Word always brings prosperity to a nation.
 

ragTagblues

New member
The private sector always has worked best when it comes to charity.

I think this is just about the only thing me and your are ever likely to agree on . . . I'm ashamed to say.

The problem being is to make the change over would cause such disruption to already existing and valuable services. . . if this could be done fluently then no problem.

I have worked both for charities and organisations in the private sector, the quality of care and organisation of a charity is laughable at time, where in the other it is high with real results.
 

King cobra

DOCTA
LIFETIME MEMBER
The TheologyOnline.com TOPIC OF THE DAY for January 27th, 2011 10:38 AM


toldailytopic: Food stamps. Good idea or bad idea?






Take the topic above and run with it! Slice it, dice it, give us your general thoughts about it. Everyday there will be a new TOL Topic of the Day.
If you want to make suggestions for the Topic of the Day send a Tweet to @toldailytopic or @theologyonline or send it to us via Facebook.

Bad idea. I would never get anything mailed.
 

oatmeal

Well-known member
The FORCED redistribution of wealth is always a bad idea (unless your name is Traditio).

Government has no right to take from one to give to another (see above exception).

The private sector always has worked best when it comes to charity. Less government and God's Word always brings prosperity to a nation.

aSeattleConserv,

Amen,

One step further:

God's word believed brings prosperity to a nation.

oatmeal
 

Cracked

New member
Good in principle.....abysmal in execution. :plain:

Fun fact: The current going rate for food stamps (card useage) in this area is .50 cents on the dollar. :juggle:

Yeah, I think that we could definitely improve the system.
 

aSeattleConserv

BANNED
Banned
I think this is just about the only thing me and your are ever likely to agree on . . . I'm ashamed to say.

I'm sure we might agree on a few different things rTb. The "basis" for agreeing on things is where we differ. Mine comes from Scripture and the common sense that comes with it; your's comes from man's moral relative reasoning.
 

ragTagblues

New member
I'm sure we might agree on a few different things rTb. The "basis" for agreeing on things is where we differ. Mine comes from Scripture and the common sense that comes with it; your's comes from man's moral relative reasoning.

Remind me never to share a cab with you then . . . .
 

Lighthouse

The Dark Knight
Gold Subscriber
Hall of Fame
In and of themselves not a bad idea.

If it were about trading in money for food stamps, it would be great for those who may not trust themselves to spend money properly; they would then only be able to buy food with the food stamps instead of spending money on whatever. Of course, they should not trade all of their money for food stamps.

The problem is in giving food stamps to people for nothing in return.
 

aSeattleConserv

BANNED
Banned
Maybe you should read the rest of my post before making stupid remarks.

I read the entire post comrade. Food Stamps is a FEDERAL PROGRAM, not some "trade" program.

Stick with the laws of God Einstein. You won't look as smart as you try to be, but you'll never go wrong.
 

Lighthouse

The Dark Knight
Gold Subscriber
Hall of Fame
I read the entire post comrade. Food Stamps is a FEDERAL PROGRAM, not some "trade" program.

Stick with the laws of God Einstein. You won't look as smart as you try to be, but you'll never go wrong.
And I said if they were a trade program there wouldn't be anything wrong with them.

I never said they were a trade program. I know they are not.

So stop being an idiot.
 

Zeke

Well-known member
The FORCED redistribution of wealth is always a bad idea (unless your name is Traditio).

Government has no right to take from one to give to another (see above exception).

The private sector always has worked best when it comes to charity. Less government and God's Word always brings prosperity to a nation.

The Government does have the right! it owns you and your property.

The native Americans might disgaree.

The laws, Taxes, Licenses, and regulations make it impossible to make a living today. Unless you work for the Mafia Beast then you get the livable perks, and pensions. But a few foodstamps to the cattle is bad:rolleyes:
 

bybee

New member
The Government does have the right! it owns you and your property.

The native Americans might disgaree.

The laws, Taxes, Licenses, and regulations make it impossible to make a living today. Unless you work for the Mafia Beast then you get the livable perks, and pensions. But a few foodstamps to the cattle is bad:rolleyes:

You make an interesting point. Think of how congress prospers at our expense.
 

Newman

New member
Food stamps are bad. Whenever anything is held below its equilibrium price, a massive shortage occurs, consumers become more dependent on handouts, and producers have fewer incentives to make a better product.

Charity belongs to individuals, private charity organizations, benevolent organizations, and churches, not government. It's not within the stated or appropriate role of government.

This does not mean that we are less responsible for the poor, sick, and hungry, but even more so. We are charged with that job, and we are to do it without stealing from or hurting anybody else, which is what the government does.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top