One of the stranger divisive issues to enter American politics recently is the one where people on food stamps should not also buy, with their own money, booze and, gasp (!) tobacco. Newsflash! The sanctimonious blowhards who perpetuate this argument are being completely disingenuous because you can't buy booze or tobacco with food stamps! Get it? They are called food stamps.
Here's the quick story: I pay taxes. A few times over my life I have qualified for food stamps - like right now. Without it, I'd be homeless. Homelessness, we may agree, is a much bigger burden on our welfare system. Some wags will say that the poor should be careful with their "discretionary" income all the while ignoring the enormous burden place upon tax payers by the corporate welfare state. Newsflash #2! The rich are being subsidized by the tax payers. That's why they have lawyers and lobbyists.
So, the rich can party but not the poor? Because some people need assistance from us, the tax payers, they should continue to remove more joyousness from their lives? How does that work into the "happiness" part of the Constitution? Like, "sorry family, we're on food stamps and Christmas is cancelled", or "no birthday for Billy", or "if you want to watch a movie, go to the neighbors", or "well, time to get rid of our pets".
I'll say it again: it is all about housing and corporate welfare! The government has said that housing should account for no more than one-third of monthly income. Well, that's all fine and dandy, but the actual amount is 50% or more, an especial burden for the poor. So, should I be able to buy booze or tobacco with my hard earned money? You bet! We tax payers subsidize the rich through a vast array of resources for them. Know what? They buy booze, too.
Here's the quick story: I pay taxes. A few times over my life I have qualified for food stamps - like right now. Without it, I'd be homeless. Homelessness, we may agree, is a much bigger burden on our welfare system. Some wags will say that the poor should be careful with their "discretionary" income all the while ignoring the enormous burden place upon tax payers by the corporate welfare state. Newsflash #2! The rich are being subsidized by the tax payers. That's why they have lawyers and lobbyists.
So, the rich can party but not the poor? Because some people need assistance from us, the tax payers, they should continue to remove more joyousness from their lives? How does that work into the "happiness" part of the Constitution? Like, "sorry family, we're on food stamps and Christmas is cancelled", or "no birthday for Billy", or "if you want to watch a movie, go to the neighbors", or "well, time to get rid of our pets".
I'll say it again: it is all about housing and corporate welfare! The government has said that housing should account for no more than one-third of monthly income. Well, that's all fine and dandy, but the actual amount is 50% or more, an especial burden for the poor. So, should I be able to buy booze or tobacco with my hard earned money? You bet! We tax payers subsidize the rich through a vast array of resources for them. Know what? They buy booze, too.