HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Clerk loses job for refus...

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 03:05 PM

Clerk loses job for refusing to let customer use welfare money to pay for cigarettes

The wingnuts on my local board are all up in arms over this.

PETERBOROUGH — Jackie R. Whiton of Antrim had been a six-year employee at the Big Apple convenience store in Peterborough until a single transaction sent her job up in smoke.

The store clerk was fired after she refused to take a customer’s Electronic Balance Transfer card to pay for cigarettes.

Whiton said a young man came in to the store to buy two packs or cigarettes on May 29. When she asked him for his ID, he handed her his EBT card.

EBT cards are used for both food and cash assistance programs. There are two types of cards: one can only be used for food. The other can be spent on anything and used just like a debit card.

Whiton said she did not think EBT cards could be used to purchase cigarettes and refused to sell to him. The two “had a little go-around” as the line got longer behind him, said Whiton.

more . . . http://www.sentinelsource.com/news/local/clerk-loses-job-over-stand/article_87627ed5-5d4e-5ff0-a781-f14deb034771.html

179 replies, 20417 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 179 replies Author Time Post
Reply Clerk loses job for refusing to let customer use welfare money to pay for cigarettes (Original post)
proud2BlibKansan Jun 2012 OP
ProudToBeBlueInRhody Jun 2012 #1
proud2BlibKansan Jun 2012 #2
CTyankee Jun 2012 #5
EFerrari Jun 2012 #13
CTyankee Jun 2012 #23
EFerrari Jun 2012 #25
CTyankee Jun 2012 #31
EFerrari Jun 2012 #33
SammyWinstonJack Jun 2012 #50
EFerrari Jun 2012 #51
progressiveinaction Jun 2012 #132
EFerrari Jun 2012 #144
Pyrzqxgl Jun 2012 #85
proud2BlibKansan Jun 2012 #104
Art_from_Ark Jun 2012 #156
TomClash Jun 2012 #37
EFerrari Jun 2012 #45
TomClash Jun 2012 #129
russspeakeasy Jun 2012 #82
IdaBriggs Jun 2012 #139
Scootaloo Jun 2012 #32
CTyankee Jun 2012 #44
ProudToBeBlueInRhody Jun 2012 #48
CTyankee Jun 2012 #55
sabrina 1 Jun 2012 #72
CTyankee Jun 2012 #93
HiPointDem Jun 2012 #95
bullwinkle428 Jun 2012 #148
RKP5637 Jun 2012 #53
EFerrari Jun 2012 #63
msongs Jun 2012 #124
EFerrari Jun 2012 #146
lumberjack_jeff Jun 2012 #162
EFerrari Jun 2012 #164
lumberjack_jeff Jun 2012 #165
EFerrari Jun 2012 #168
lumberjack_jeff Jun 2012 #169
EFerrari Jun 2012 #170
DiverDave Sep 2012 #177
cynatnite Jun 2012 #16
CTyankee Jun 2012 #26
Warren Stupidity Jun 2012 #152
Marinedem Jun 2012 #9
EFerrari Jun 2012 #11
Nuclear Unicorn Jun 2012 #17
EFerrari Jun 2012 #21
Nuclear Unicorn Jun 2012 #35
EFerrari Jun 2012 #43
Nuclear Unicorn Jun 2012 #54
EFerrari Jun 2012 #60
Nuclear Unicorn Jun 2012 #73
EFerrari Jun 2012 #74
Nuclear Unicorn Jun 2012 #77
EFerrari Jun 2012 #79
Nuclear Unicorn Jun 2012 #81
EFerrari Jun 2012 #83
Nuclear Unicorn Jun 2012 #98
EFerrari Jun 2012 #101
HiPointDem Jun 2012 #89
HiPointDem Jun 2012 #103
Nuclear Unicorn Jun 2012 #113
HiPointDem Jun 2012 #118
Nuclear Unicorn Jun 2012 #120
Luminous Animal Jun 2012 #125
Nuclear Unicorn Jun 2012 #147
ChazII Jun 2012 #166
unblock Jun 2012 #12
cynatnite Jun 2012 #18
Nuclear Unicorn Jun 2012 #19
cynatnite Jun 2012 #20
Nuclear Unicorn Jun 2012 #22
cynatnite Jun 2012 #24
Warren Stupidity Jun 2012 #154
Marinedem Jun 2012 #30
cynatnite Jun 2012 #36
HiPointDem Jun 2012 #106
LanternWaste Jun 2012 #28
Marinedem Jun 2012 #34
cynatnite Jun 2012 #39
rbrnmw Sep 2012 #178
SickOfTheOnePct Jun 2012 #123
XemaSab Jul 2012 #175
freshwest Jul 2012 #176
blogslut Jun 2012 #3
unblock Jun 2012 #6
Erose999 Jun 2012 #8
SickOfTheOnePct Jun 2012 #122
LiberalFighter Jun 2012 #167
Kalidurga Jun 2012 #4
unblock Jun 2012 #7
ieoeja Jun 2012 #29
Ikonoklast Jun 2012 #40
cynatnite Jun 2012 #42
Liberal_in_LA Jun 2012 #10
4th law of robotics Jun 2012 #14
cynatnite Jun 2012 #15
4th law of robotics Jun 2012 #41
cynatnite Jun 2012 #46
4th law of robotics Jun 2012 #58
cynatnite Jun 2012 #59
4th law of robotics Jun 2012 #66
cynatnite Jun 2012 #68
4th law of robotics Jun 2012 #75
cynatnite Jun 2012 #80
Bandit Jun 2012 #94
EFerrari Jun 2012 #99
cynatnite Jun 2012 #100
Nuclear Unicorn Jun 2012 #111
cthulu2016 Jun 2012 #107
4th law of robotics Jun 2012 #136
cynatnite Jun 2012 #137
4th law of robotics Jun 2012 #138
cynatnite Jun 2012 #142
Marrah_G Jun 2012 #150
HiPointDem Jun 2012 #112
Luminous Animal Jun 2012 #126
MrTriumph Jun 2012 #84
cynatnite Jun 2012 #88
MrTriumph Jun 2012 #109
cynatnite Jun 2012 #117
mizzuz pibb Jul 2012 #172
HiPointDem Jun 2012 #114
Bluerthanblue Jun 2012 #160
ProudToBeBlueInRhody Jun 2012 #47
MightyOkie Jun 2012 #38
opiate69 Jun 2012 #52
MightyOkie Jun 2012 #56
opiate69 Jun 2012 #62
cynatnite Jun 2012 #61
Nuclear Unicorn Jun 2012 #76
4th law of robotics Jun 2012 #140
cynatnite Jun 2012 #141
southernyankeebelle Jun 2012 #27
MightyOkie Jun 2012 #49
cynatnite Jun 2012 #57
Lionessa Jun 2012 #65
Egalitarian Thug Jun 2012 #64
EFerrari Jun 2012 #67
coalition_unwilling Jun 2012 #69
HiPointDem Jun 2012 #86
ArnoldLayne Jun 2012 #70
cynatnite Jun 2012 #71
MrTriumph Jun 2012 #87
cynatnite Jun 2012 #90
EFerrari Jun 2012 #91
EFerrari Jun 2012 #78
Egalitarian Thug Jun 2012 #127
Marrah_G Jun 2012 #151
Warren Stupidity Jun 2012 #155
HiPointDem Jun 2012 #92
EFerrari Jun 2012 #96
HiPointDem Jun 2012 #115
proud2BlibKansan Jun 2012 #97
EFerrari Jun 2012 #105
proud2BlibKansan Jun 2012 #108
EFerrari Jun 2012 #110
HiPointDem Jun 2012 #116
cynatnite Jun 2012 #102
Posteritatis Jun 2012 #131
Odin2005 Jun 2012 #133
Taitertots Jun 2012 #119
EFerrari Jun 2012 #121
SoCalNative Jun 2012 #128
Smilo Jun 2012 #130
Odin2005 Jun 2012 #134
BlueCheese Jun 2012 #135
Marrah_G Jun 2012 #149
jcboon Jun 2012 #143
Warren Stupidity Jun 2012 #157
mizzuz pibb Jul 2012 #171
Rowdyboy Jul 2012 #173
a kennedy Jun 2012 #145
Marrah_G Jun 2012 #153
SoCalDem Jun 2012 #158
unreadierLizard Jun 2012 #159
lumberjack_jeff Jun 2012 #161
tjwash Jun 2012 #163
RFKHumphreyObama Jul 2012 #174
rbrnmw Sep 2012 #179

Response to proud2BlibKansan (Original post)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 03:09 PM

1. She wasn't fired, she quit

But to be honest, it's amazing that buying toilet paper is out of bounds but cigs and beer is okay? A truly FUBAR system.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProudToBeBlueInRhody (Reply #1)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 03:09 PM

2. Oh I agree

But the bottom line is she refused to make a sale. If I owned the store, I would have fired her too.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to proud2BlibKansan (Reply #2)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 03:24 PM

5. this kind of thing does make the progressives case for income assistance look bad...

Of course, it wasn't up to the employee to make that decision, but I hate these stories because it just stokes the fires of the RW who want to paint all welfare recipients as a bunch of cheats, sucking off the tax payers, while buying booze and cigarettes.

Yes, I know we can go on and on about how the rich are ripping taxpayers off, but we lose the argument when this kind of thing happens...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CTyankee (Reply #5)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 03:51 PM

13. This kind of thing? You mean, ignorant people trying to humiliate the poor and powerless?

I hope that doesn't cost us any arguments because it's all over the culture.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EFerrari (Reply #13)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 04:15 PM

23. No, I don't like that at all. Not saying that.

I'm saying it doesn't make our job easier to defend buying cigarettes with income assistance money. We liberals talk about the plight of the poor and rightfully so, we should. But in the RWingers demented brain, this is ALL the poor do with "taxpayers money" (as if the poor don't pay taxes).

That's all I'm saying here...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CTyankee (Reply #23)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 04:18 PM

25. I just read a quote the other night: "I'm too old to spend my life worrying

about what stupid people think." -- But for the life of me, can't remember who it was. lol

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EFerrari (Reply #25)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 04:27 PM

31. You are right and I think of that. But I just had one of those "conversations" with my auto repair

person who told me we shouldn't be divisive by accusing the rich for not paying their fair share of taxes. So I came home from having my oil change a little depressed that the needle hasn't moved on these RW talking points. I've been his customer for YEARS and we still get into these arguments...and his grandkids are on the state HUSKY health care program because their parents don't have health insurance.

I guess it's all a lost cause...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CTyankee (Reply #31)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 04:28 PM

33. With all the rightwing media money being spent

to make sure your mechanic is on their side, we can say for sure that propaganda works, really well.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EFerrari (Reply #33)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 04:44 PM

50. See, I can't understand WHY propaganda works, really well, on some

people and not others.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SammyWinstonJack (Reply #50)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 04:46 PM

51. John Dean wrote that book about authoritarians.

That's how I understand it. There must be some kind of biological variation that some people have and some don't have.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EFerrari (Reply #51)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 08:46 PM

132. But if it's biological

It would be hard to hold anything against the propagandized right?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to progressiveinaction (Reply #132)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 11:58 PM

144. Well, resenting people for who they are

isn't very profitable any way, regardless of why they are who they are.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SammyWinstonJack (Reply #50)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 05:29 PM

85. I Think you have to come from a progressive background & an open family where political

discussion is encouraged & ideas are exchanged to become a real progressive. I've seen kids rebel against super right wing parents by becoming more liberal, just to piss the parents off, but that kind of political conversion is iffy at best. The best conversion to a Progressive ideology comes from a free
discussion of ideas & an open mind. The Right winger has no such problem to arrive at a political position, because it doesn't take much thinking to be greedy or hateful.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Pyrzqxgl (Reply #85)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 05:45 PM

104. You may have a point there

I grew up in a large Catholic family in the 1960s when the Catholics were largely Democrats and more concerned about feeding the poor than stopping abortion. Bobby Kennedy was speaking out against poverty when I was a teenager. I was 14 or 15 when he was killed. I remember long conversations at the dinner table about how best to help the poor, how wonderful Medicare and Head Start were and the shame of the growing poverty in the US. Never once did I get the impression that poor people were to be ridiculed or treated badly just because they were poor. I was an adult in my 30s before I ever heard any of this crap from the right wing about poor people not deserving to be helped. It sounded disgusting them and it still sounds disgusting today.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SammyWinstonJack (Reply #50)

Thu Jun 28, 2012, 10:04 AM

156. Abraham Lincoln summed it up when he noted,

"You can fool some of the people all of the time..."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EFerrari (Reply #25)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 04:30 PM

37. Sam Waterson's character in the first episode of Newsroom said:

"I'm too old to be governed by fear of dumb people."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TomClash (Reply #37)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 04:36 PM

45. That was it! Thank you! ETA

Someone caught the line and tweeted it.

It's my new favorite thing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EFerrari (Reply #45)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 07:56 PM

129. It was great

And true

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EFerrari (Reply #25)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 05:25 PM

82. Thanks.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EFerrari (Reply #25)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 11:18 PM

139. It was the new HBO show "Network."

Absolutely fantastic and completely inspiring.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CTyankee (Reply #23)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 04:27 PM

32. Tell me...

Do you believe that people on the TANF program (Targeted Assistance for Needy Families; food stamps) should be barred from buying, oh say, a ribeye steak? Should they be restricted to a diet of lentils and tripes?

Of course you don't think that, right? They're human beings, and as such are, in fact, entitled to have some pleasure in their lives.

If the funds allow for the purchase of cigarettes, I have no problem with that. And frankly given that cigarettes aren't really "optional" for their addicts, I find it harder to hold a grudge on that one.

It's easy to defend; simply make the argument that being poor does not subliminate a person into some "subhuman" status, where htye must be denied the perks of being a person.

Hell, if it were up to me, there'd be a "quality of life" fund for needy families that could be used to purchase access to concerts or theaters or the like. Why? Because goddamn it, human beings can't live like "work, eat, sleep, work, eat, sleep, work, eat, sleep, die"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scootaloo (Reply #32)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 04:36 PM

44. I'm sorry, too, that we don't live in that kind of world, or at least not here in the U.S.

I mean, the world you want. That cold, hard fact is we don't. We, as progressives, try very hard to humanize the poor and this one instance gets to be the poster child for the RW rant about how "those" people are wasting tax payers money on cigarettes.

Personally, I would rather see money spent on smoking cessation programs because I see no good in hastening the physical disease and early death that are direct results of cigarette smoking. Helping the poor live sicker and die sooner is hardly a value that I subscribe to.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CTyankee (Reply #44)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 04:41 PM

48. Well, I made this suggestion the other day here....

...about encouraging the poor to give up smoking by funding a program like that, and was told to mind my own business.....just because I'm for public health care doesn't mean I'm for rushing people to the most expensive option of lung cancer.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProudToBeBlueInRhody (Reply #48)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 04:52 PM

55. It differs from the anti-obesity arguments in that people have to eat to live but not smoke to live.

In fact, both can harm you and kill you. I still strongly believe that public money can be better spent on prevention with regard to cigarettes. Harder to limit what food people on welfare can buy since even fruit juice can be potentially harmful...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CTyankee (Reply #44)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 05:09 PM

72. But don't you think it's hypocritical to slam the poor for trying to find a little pleasure in

lives, even if it is a cigarette or a beer, when the wealthiest and biggest screw-ups who toppled our economy, get bailed out with tax dollars, use it to reward themselves with huge bonuses, are not held accountable for their corruption, and no one even asks what they are spending our tax dollars on?

I would go for some restrictions on how tax dollars used to help people out so long as those restrictions were equally applied to Wall Street Bankers.

Right wingers don't want to ask corrupt Wall Street Bankers what they spent our handouts to them, on. But whenever I have a conversation like this with one of them, I always ask them to explain why we do not apply the same standards to those taking Corporate Welfare. And I always mention drugs and alcohol and ask them is what they want their tax dollars to be spent on. It doesn't shut them up, but it puts them on the defensive for a change.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sabrina 1 (Reply #72)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 05:36 PM

93. But I didn't "slam the poor" on anything. I was talking about the hard, political reality that we

lose when we try to make a case for what used to be called "the deserving poor" receiving public assistance. The reality is that it is used us against time and time again. "You see what those welfare recipients are spending YOUR tax money for? Cigarettes!" What I am talking about is a political reality, not what I think is "moral."

Personally, I don't think public money should be spent on further addicting people to Big Tobacco and their fortunes. I would rather see smoking cessation programs for everyone. But it is unpopular here because some see this as denying the poor the pittance of a cigarette, rather than seeing it as public money paying for a large corporation that makes huge amounts of money out of the illness and early death of tobacco addicts...

Just my 2 cents on some of the 1%...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CTyankee (Reply #23)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 05:38 PM

95. if tobacco is eligible, it's because corporations & tobacco farmers lobbied to make it

 

so.

you don't need to argue against the wingers' fake arguments; the people actually receiving the welfare $$$ = corporations.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HiPointDem (Reply #95)

Thu Jun 28, 2012, 09:38 AM

148. GREAT point, and one's that very likely to be missed amongst the heat of the debate, even at DU.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EFerrari (Reply #13)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 04:50 PM

53. Yep, it is the new American culture. The ignorant rising up ripe with

stupidity and often in positions of power today, from the cash register to the board room, as well as politicians. Sensibility has fled the America of today in so many ways. The country is diseased with ignorance and stupidity.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RKP5637 (Reply #53)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 04:57 PM

63. Yep. The climate has definitely changed. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EFerrari (Reply #13)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 07:09 PM

124. that's not a nice things to say about a drug addict trying to score nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to msongs (Reply #124)

Thu Jun 28, 2012, 12:14 AM

146. I don't think authoritarianism is officially an addiction. Yet, anyway. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EFerrari (Reply #13)

Sat Jun 30, 2012, 10:53 AM

162. The citizens of the state bought those cigarettes.

I'd be pissed too.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lumberjack_jeff (Reply #162)

Sat Jun 30, 2012, 11:09 AM

164. Wait, are you questioning this aid recipient's citizenship?

Or are you saying only people with incomes can use resources paid for with tax money? Neither position makes a lick of sense.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EFerrari (Reply #164)

Sat Jun 30, 2012, 11:27 AM

165. In the absence of voters consent to provide aid, he would have been unable to buy cigarettes.

Welfare isn't an obligation on my part.

Citizens provide welfare to the poor for their own reasons. If directly handing him a pack of smokes doesn't fulfill those purposes, then it is justified to evaluate the program.

Do you think it be a good idea to set up a tobacco/liquor/ammo bank next door to the food bank so that poor folks can get free cigarettes, guns and booze? If not, then you (just like me) are setting conditions on the kinds of aid which are appropriate for public funds.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lumberjack_jeff (Reply #165)

Sat Jun 30, 2012, 11:40 AM

168. When that money is allocated to that individual, it isn't yours any more.

Are you going to follow the mailman around, too, to make sure he doesn't deliver mail to the unemployed? Are you out on the highway making sure only people with jobs drive on it? What about the jobless using the electrical grid or our water supply?

Seriously, the position makes no sense whatsoever. If you want to sit in judgment of other people, that's one thing. But if you want to put special limitations on cash grants, you need to take it up with the state, not with the person who is simply following the rules.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EFerrari (Reply #168)

Sat Jun 30, 2012, 08:04 PM

169. It's public money, and public funds, up to the point that a EBT card is funded.

Public support for welfare is contingent on the money being spent to promote the recipients welfare.

I'm not bashing the guy buying cigarettes with welfare funds. He's living within the rules you're creating and promoting. Those rules cause demonstrable harm to public attitudes about welfare, and risk the cashflow upon which it depends.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lumberjack_jeff (Reply #169)

Sat Jun 30, 2012, 08:19 PM

170. LOL, so now this situation is my fault? Still doesn't make a lick of sense. n/;t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lumberjack_jeff (Reply #169)

Mon Sep 3, 2012, 08:11 AM

177. Take it up with the TOBACCO

company's.
They lobbied to have smokes included, why the pol's allowed it I'll never know. (well, yeah, for their money)
But to yell at the guy for buying them is misplaced anger.
Just DONT allow him, and he cant.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CTyankee (Reply #5)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 04:05 PM

16. We don't lose any argument when you've got corporate welfare...

It makes the RW look bad because they are telling poor people what to do with what little money they get.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cynatnite (Reply #16)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 04:19 PM

26. I wish I could say that everybody is on to the corporate welfare scam in this country but they

aren't, sad but true. Demonizing the poor is what Fox News does all the time. "Look what they've done now...buying cigarettes with your hard earned taxpayer dollars!" Outrage!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CTyankee (Reply #5)

Thu Jun 28, 2012, 09:49 AM

152. Yes indeed, in particular the purchase of Cadillacs using ebt cards just has to stop.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to proud2BlibKansan (Reply #2)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 03:46 PM

9. That's odd.

 

I would have given her a raise.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Marinedem (Reply #9)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 03:49 PM

11. Really? You'd reward discriminatory behavior

that could get your store in trouble with the state and the feds?

Brilliant.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EFerrari (Reply #11)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 04:06 PM

17. Discriminatory?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Reply #17)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 04:15 PM

21. Yes, if you refuse to allow a sale simply because the person is using a Welfare card

(which allows the purchase), that's discrimination.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EFerrari (Reply #21)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 04:28 PM

35. I don't think it would make for a good civil rights complaint.

In fact, I've seen more than 1 sign at a store or restaurant that says they refuse the right to serve anyone.

One the same note the employer apparently has the legal right to fire the employee for cutting into his sales. It's weird seeing an avowed socialist siding with employer profits over the employee.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Reply #35)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 04:35 PM

43. It's even more than just straight sales.

Retail store owners have to cultivate good relations with everyone from the beat cop to the county board to the feds to stay open for business.

And those signs don't absolve anyone from the law. You can toss a guy for being rowdy. You can't toss him for being in a wheel chair and so on. Or, you can, but then you have to deal with the consequences.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EFerrari (Reply #43)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 04:51 PM

54. Cigarettes, unlike disabilities, are not a protected class.

just sayin'

A rousing defense of free market theory, by the way.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Reply #54)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 04:54 PM

60. Refusing service to someone with a Welfare card

for no reason could get your permit pulled, just sayin'.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EFerrari (Reply #60)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 05:09 PM

73. The clerk made a good faith refusal

And once upon a time it was the progressive position that tobacco companies were killing people for money. Now we're supposed to be propping them up with tax dollars meant to help people which is ironic considering we'll also have to pay for any subsequent lung cancer treatments but we'll have less money for that since we're too busy paying for cigarettes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Reply #73)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 05:12 PM

74. We really don't know if her refusal was in good faith or not.

Since she worked at that store for more than two weeks, it's doubtful.

And once upon a time, it wasn't necessary to explain why the poor were entitled to their human dignity -- oh, wait, that's wrong. It has always been necessary to explain why the poor have the same human rights other people have.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EFerrari (Reply #74)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 05:13 PM

77. Yeah, those workers are always cutting into the profit margin

And when did buying tobacco become a sign of dignity?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Reply #77)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 05:17 PM

79. Discriminating against poor people is not "work", it's discrimination.

And choice has always been a measure of dignity.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EFerrari (Reply #79)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 05:25 PM

81. When did Big Tobacco care about choice? Remember the decptive adds and studies?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Reply #81)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 05:27 PM

83. But I'm not talking to Big Tabacco, I'm talking to you

about a cashier that was an asshole to one of her customers because they had a Welfare card.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EFerrari (Reply #83)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 05:43 PM

98. "I'm not talking to Big Tabacco, I'm talking to you"

I don't know why. I'm not making any profit off the sale. They're profiting off of addictions they advertise to instill in people and they're profiting off of public money while stiffing the public for the tab when it comes to treating wholly preventable diseases. And now they'll get more money to buy more advertising.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Reply #98)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 05:44 PM

101. This isn't a discussion about corporate propaganda. For that, you'd need to start your own thread.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Reply #54)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 05:33 PM

89. if you can buy cigarettes with benefits, it's for the benefit of the corporations &

 

tobacco farmers.

just saying.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Reply #54)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 05:45 PM

103. it's an eligible product on the card, what don't you get? and it's eligible because

 

corporations and tobacco farmers lobbied to make it one.

what you're suggesting is no different from a clerk refusing to sell you a cake because she thinks you're too far.

or from a clerk refusing to sell you birth control because it's against god's will.

everybody thinks poor people are in need of their management.

fuck the lot of them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HiPointDem (Reply #103)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 05:53 PM

113. Then we should lobby to have it made ineligible

At any rate I don't see why a honest person should be fired over this. Who fires someone over a single minor, honest infraction?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Reply #113)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 06:00 PM

118. yeah, that's a very important issue, why don't you go work on it.

 

meanwhile, the world is on fire.

but don't let any poor people spend public money on cigarettes, that'll fix it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HiPointDem (Reply #118)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 06:20 PM

120. It is possible to do more than one thing at a time.

And I'd love to see the argument against listing cigs as ineligible if it does get proposed (and with this news story, it may well be proposed).

I seem to remember massive, nationwide lawsuits taking the tobacco companies to task for killing hundreds of thousands of people per year and overburdening the healthcare system. Not that healthcare is current or anything. So instead of holding them to account for deceptive practices and getting states reimbursed for their costs we're spending ever-tightening supplies of public welfare funding to prop them up.

And arguing over it on what may well be the eve of the ACA being struck down.

How can this NOT be germane?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Reply #120)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 07:11 PM

125. We live in a system that guarantees that there will be poor people. Poor people are not infants...

they don't need to have their lives micro-managed by a society that already treats them like shit. What poor people need (besides the necessities - which they barely get)) is their right to privacy like any other citizen in the U.S. Welfare is the price that we, a capitalist society, pay in order to maintain that capitalist society. There will never be 100% employment and there will never be a population that is 100% employable.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Luminous Animal (Reply #125)

Thu Jun 28, 2012, 09:34 AM

147. Rant: ON

Poor people are not infants they don't need to have their lives micro-managed by a society that already treats them like shit.


You're absolutely right but you don't go far enough.

We're all being micromanaged and treated like crap. What do you think The Mandate is? It's one, big, "No, you're not allowed to not buy insurance because X, Y or Z could happen to you so we're going to tell you what is best for you even though statistically there's no real reason for you to have this." Look at the TSA. Look at standardized testing. Look at the food police. Look at the TSA feeling-up grandma's colostomy bag.

Name one facet of our lives where we can go and there isn't some agency brought to you by the same crew that brought us bank bailouts. There they stand, looking over your shoulder and wagging a disapproving finger. I don't smoke but if I went to buy a pack of cigarettes with money I made selling lemonade made from lemons I grew in my own backyard I'd have to run a vertiable gauntlet of lectures and condescending sneers because someone, somewhere decided they knew what was best for me. Assuming of course the local stores didn't pay-off the city council to pass so-called "food safety" ordinances to shut me down because I didn't have an inspection permit from office that never answers its phone or pay fees only large businesses can afford. The only way people would have defended the cashier in the OP was if it were Wal-Mart doing the firing.

I wish the people standing up for the rights and dignity of welfare recipients would stand up for the rights and dignity of the people whose livelihoods support welfare. NO! That's not a slam against people on welfare. To paraphrase Ben Franklin: If we don't hang together we shall surely hang separately. A single mother working and going to school to better her place in life is a hero, as much a hero as those who serve in the US military IMHO and she deserves as much support, admiration and encouragement. My dad was that single mother! ( ) YES! I believe they should be treated equally -- but that's the point isn't it? We aren't being treated equally because those who contribute are being treated as lessers. Not by those being helped, they're too busy just trying to eke out a new day form themselves and their families. The contributors are being treated like pre-criminals from The Minority Report. And as soon as that single mother gets off welfare and becomes a contributor she too will be treated as if it was always her fault that some people are poor. God forbid she move up to a 6-digit salary, then she might as well be a 17th century witch.

I saw a man 6 months out of work not make the cut-off for hiring because the contractor chose a half dozen parolees for the tax credits. He walked away hiding his tears. Yes, it's important to give criminals a chance to reform but the man who never broke the law lost out because of it. He had just as good a resume as the others, maybe better; his only crime was he had never committed a crime. Would society be better served if he too committed a crime, clogged up the system and had to be warehoused just so he was more attractive through tax credits? Where is the defense of his dignity, respect and equality?

Do you really trust the people who make up such distorted programs to alleviate poverty? I'm seriously starting to think that the single greatest act of charity and dignity we could affect on behalf of those who are genuinely suffering would be to get them the hell away from the government that wiretaps and molests the rest of us. I don't know where the cure is but I starting to get an inkling of where it isn't.

Rant: OFF

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Reply #147)

Sat Jun 30, 2012, 11:31 AM

166. Food for thought.

Thank you for giving me something to think about. Your last 3 paragraphs are insightful, imho.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Marinedem (Reply #9)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 03:50 PM

12. for what, holding up a line? refusing a sale? humiliating a customer?

how exactly is this helping the owner, from a business perspective?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Marinedem (Reply #9)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 04:06 PM

18. You think you have a right to tell poor people what to buy?

With how little help they get, you want to stand over their shoulder and tell them what not to buy because you don't approve of it?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cynatnite (Reply #18)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 04:07 PM

19. What if she wanted a soda that was larger than 32 ounces?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Reply #19)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 04:11 PM

20. Um...let me think about that...

I don't fucking care if she wanted a chocolate bacon cheeseburger, a six pack of beer, and a case of smokes. The money is hers to do with as she sees fit. It's no one's business what she does with it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cynatnite (Reply #20)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 04:15 PM

22. Would that the rest of us had such freedoms with our own money

I'm not saying you're responsible for Bloomberg's nonsense but you get my drift.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Reply #22)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 04:17 PM

24. Of course. Totally agree. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Reply #19)

Thu Jun 28, 2012, 09:52 AM

154. Then in NYC she would be treated like every other supermarket customer.

The purchase would wrung up. The law only applies to restaurants.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cynatnite (Reply #18)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 04:24 PM

30. It's bullcrap.

 

It's bullcrap. Using assistance on cigarettes instead of more food, clothing or something of real value. Cigarettes only increase costs to society through medical expenses in the long run. There should be a provision to keep those things from being purchased with EBT. How about guns? Should you be able to spend EBT on that? How about Romney fundraiser T-shirts and buttons?

If you want cigarettes, you should have to find some way to pay for them other than EBT, or better yet, give them up.

And people wonder why right wingers want to completely do away with thwe system. It's crap like this.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Marinedem (Reply #30)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 04:29 PM

36. It's not crap...it's none of your business is what it is...

You want to get in the faces of poor people and tell them exactly how to spend money given to them. Would you do it to someone who is on social security? Disability? What about politicians who are paid by taxpayer dollars? Where do you draw the line?

It's money they have a right to spend at their own discretion no matter your feelings. I am as anti-smoking as they come, but I draw the line at telling people how to spend money given to them. I don't care if they're buying NRA loves Sarah Palin t-shirts. I don't care.

Besides, cigarettes don't just increase costs just because of poor people, you know.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Marinedem (Reply #30)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 05:47 PM

106. no, your post is bullcrap: i pay $9 a pack for cigarettes, and most of it is tax.

 

the entire state budget is being funded on cigarette taxes it seems.

so don't talk to me about "increasing the cost to society".

that's the real crap.

and tobacco is eligible because corporations and tobacco farmers want it to be, and that's where the money ultimately goes. back to the state, and back to the corporations.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Marinedem (Reply #9)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 04:21 PM

28. I imagine you then run a most successful company...

I imagine you then run a most successful company in which people are given raises for validating your own personal, political opinions, yes?

What then is that company...?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LanternWaste (Reply #28)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 04:28 PM

34. Not political

 

Personal. Society doesn't benefit from government incentivizing of harmful behaviors like smoking. How much more money for needy EBT users could be available if selfish asses didn't spend EBT money on smokes. Every pack of smokes is one healthy meal not available to the truly needy.

Maybe we can see EBT guns and ammo next quarter. After all, whose business is it?

Disgusting.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Marinedem (Reply #34)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 04:32 PM

39. What if they were buying nothing but junk food with their food stamps? n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Marinedem (Reply #9)

Mon Sep 3, 2012, 09:15 AM

178. Some States are using EBT for Child Support and Unemployment Benefits

maybe it was Public Assistance at all

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to proud2BlibKansan (Reply #2)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 07:06 PM

123. For me, it would depend

If she truly thought the card was food stamps only, then I wouldn't fire her for refusing that sale, since it's not only illegal for people to buy non-food with food stamp EBTs, it's also illegal to sell such items.

They must not have had a scanner type register; otherwise, he could have swiped the card, and if it didn't allow cash sales, it wouldn't have accepted the payment.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to proud2BlibKansan (Reply #2)

Tue Jul 3, 2012, 11:28 PM

175. They have sting operations here where minors try to buy booze

The clerks who sell to minors typically lose their jobs and the store owners are fined thousands of dollars.

Although it doesn't say that she suspected that it was a sting operation, sometimes when a clerk refuses to sell something to someone there's a reason for it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to proud2BlibKansan (Reply #2)

Tue Jul 3, 2012, 11:48 PM

176. Yes, she was playing morality police. If it'd been a mistake* I'd be for her. But she ran her mouth.

By mistake* I mean about what the cards covered. I had no idea that they covered cigarettes, and did not know they did not cover toilet paper!

So I confess to being clueless about this issue, but she didn't have to get on her high horse. Sorry, but some people are as addicted to cigarettes as others are to coffee or soda pop for the caffeine or sugar.

Sounds like she was pushing her religion or whatever it was and she didn't give a damn or need a job. Maybe she thought she'd get to sue or something!

Heck, give the guy her job -- I'm sure he wants one. And as far as the tax payers paying for cigarettes - how much did she pay into the Medicare, Medicaid or Social Security she's probably going to get?

Will those who complain about those being welfare want to check and see what she buys with that money?

This was enlightening about what these cards pay or don't pay for, but it's hard I guess to tell what is what with them. AFAIK, they are treated like credit or debit cards and no one's business.

Big stores take these now, like COSTCO. It's not her business, not anyone's. It's still good money.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProudToBeBlueInRhody (Reply #1)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 03:21 PM

3. I don't think that's the case

If the EBT card was food-only then the cardholder could buy neither beer nor cigarettes nor toilet paper. The strip on the EBT card will tell the register whether or not to accept the card as payment for the item(s). The decision isn't up to the judgement of the cashier.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProudToBeBlueInRhody (Reply #1)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 03:26 PM

6. the article says one type is for food only, the other type is for anything, even gambling.

my guess is that ebts for "food stamps" programs are good only (no toilet paper, no cigs, no booze, no gambling)
and ebts for other programs, such as wic or child support, can be used for anything (including toilet paper, cigs, booze, and gambling)

i'm not clear on which program permits cigs and booze but not toilet paper...?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to unblock (Reply #6)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 03:45 PM

8. WIC is a voucher. Very specific as to what you can buy with it. Milk, cheese, eggs, beans, juice,



and cereal. And even for those items you have to buy stuff that meets nutritional guidelines. Its a paper voucher that can only be exchanged for food.

SNAP (aka food stamps) is a debit card you can only use for food. And "food" does include junk food and some items like "bloody mary mix" but not anything with actual alcohol in it. Well maybe vanilla extract or something... but its a stretch to assume people are getting loaded on cake flavoring. You can't buy any "prepared foods" with SNAP, so no deli sandwiches, fried chicken, etc that grocery stores sell in their deli section.

TANF (temporary assistance for needy families) as I understand it is "welfare". Its a debit card that you can spend like cash. Not sure if it can be used for booze or gambling.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProudToBeBlueInRhody (Reply #1)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 06:57 PM

122. I haven't read the entire thread, so this may have already been said

But you can buy toilet paper, beer and cigarettes with cash benefits on the EBT. You can't buy them with food stamp benefits on an EBT.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProudToBeBlueInRhody (Reply #1)

Sat Jun 30, 2012, 11:40 AM

167. Read the story.

She was going to quit but not soon enough for the store. So they fired her after she stated she was giving them 1 week notice.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to proud2BlibKansan (Original post)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 03:23 PM

4. Jackie R. Whiton, had been a six-year employee at the Big Apple convenience store ...

Really, and she didn't know that there are two kinds of EBT cards or two kinds of payments cash and food? Really??? In most stores this situation happens on a daily basis. Sounds to me like she had a stick up her arse that day, it wasn't just not knowing. And lets say that this scenario of not knowing didn't reek of falsehood, yeah right. Anyway, in that situation nothing prevents a cashier from asking a question or calling a manager.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kalidurga (Reply #4)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 03:30 PM

7. exactly. in fact, i'd bet she was looking for an excuse to quit.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kalidurga (Reply #4)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 04:22 PM

29. Further in the article it states, “She didn’t think it was right and just wasn’t going to sell..."


"'She didn’t think it was right and just wasn’t going to sell to people in that program anymore,' Wilkins said."

The business offered to let her stay, but she said she would not take them anymore. She gave them a week's notice and said she would not accept the cards during that week.

That is when they fired her.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ieoeja (Reply #29)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 04:32 PM

40. If she did stay, who would she decide to 'punish' the following week?

No candy bars for overweight people?
No booze if she perceived you were an alcoholic?

She just randomly makes up 'rules' as she went along, because of personal prejudices?


She would have been fired on the spot for refusing a legally allowable transaction at the unionized grocery store where I used to work, and it would have been damned difficult to save her job for that one.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ieoeja (Reply #29)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 04:34 PM

42. Good fucking riddance. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to proud2BlibKansan (Original post)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 03:47 PM

10. it was none of her business

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to proud2BlibKansan (Original post)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 04:01 PM

14. You can use welfare funds to buy cigarettes?

 

I didn't know that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 4th law of robotics (Reply #14)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 04:03 PM

15. The cash portion can be spent at the discretion of the reciever of the assistance. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cynatnite (Reply #15)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 04:33 PM

41. I could see letting the cash portion be largely unregulated

 

but it seems like there should be a short list of prohibited items.

It just strikes me as odd that we spend however many millions to tell people that tobacco is bad for them, we raise taxes on them on the assumption that we should be forcing people to stop by making it harder to buy them, we drastically limit where you can smoke but then . . . we allow this.

Seems hypocritical.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 4th law of robotics (Reply #41)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 04:37 PM

46. If you're not going to allow poor people to buy smokes, why should you allow the rest?

Illegal drugs is probably on the list.

When it comes to the cash, let them get whatever they want. I don't care. Food stamps have enough restrictions on it as it is. This is such a non-issue, IMO. Especially when most people don't even blink an eye when it comes to corporate welfare. That's the real hypocrisy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cynatnite (Reply #46)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 04:52 PM

58. I never said they wouldn't be allowed to buy smokes

 

just not with that money.

You don't see it as odd that we spend so much effort trying to get people to quit or never start then we literally pay some people to smoke?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 4th law of robotics (Reply #58)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 04:54 PM

59. It's none of our business what they buy with that money.

I have a problem getting in people's private business like this.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cynatnite (Reply #59)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 05:01 PM

66. Do you think food stamps should be altered as well then?

 

Since there are limits on what those can be used for.

They should be usable for purchasing anything right? Since otherwise we'd be "getting in their business".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 4th law of robotics (Reply #66)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 05:03 PM

68. Yes, I do...

I think the amount should be raised and what's allowed expanded to include non-food items such as toilet paper, toothpaste, diapers, shoes, etc. There are numerous other things that are not food which should be covered, IMO.

It's demeaning enough as it is. Why make it worse for people by getting in their shopping carts and telling them what's not okay to buy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cynatnite (Reply #68)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 05:12 PM

75. Interesting.

 

Lottery tickets?

Consumer electronics?

Tattoos?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 4th law of robotics (Reply #75)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 05:19 PM

80. Why do you care so much about what they spend?

It's not our business. I don't care what they spend the money on. They'd still have to be just as responsible as the rest of us. Once the money is gone, it's gone.

It'd still be gone if they followed your limitations and were irresponsible with the funds.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cynatnite (Reply #80)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 05:38 PM

94. Why do you keep saying it isn't our business when it is our money they are spending?

If they want to spend their own money on whatever, well that is up to them but when they accept tax payer money there should be some limitations and tobacco should be one of those limitations as should be alcohol and gambling.....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bandit (Reply #94)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 05:43 PM

99. It is their money as citizens of this country

just as it would be yours next year when you lose your job and your home and need a hand for a while.

Or, maybe you'd like your contribution back. In that case, you'd need to promise to stop using all the services we all pay for, from your power lines to the road under your tires. You decide.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bandit (Reply #94)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 05:43 PM

100. Politicians are spending our money...

Corporations get taxpayer money. Retired people get social security.

So, let's limit what they all spend with their money if we're going to do this to poor people.

Or should only poor people be subjected to this?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cynatnite (Reply #100)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 05:52 PM

111. Corporations should NOT be getting taxpayer money

and certainly not for cigarettes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bandit (Reply #94)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 05:48 PM

107. "our" money "they" are spending

The average recipient of this kind of aid has also been, or will again be, a taxpayer.

And perhaps some of them vote. They would be surprised to find that policies for which thy voted are actually to be determined, instead, by the attitudes of people who pay more in taxes.

And I have a great discomfort with the entire "our money" concept. If "we" have a special say in the disposition of "our" money then wealthy people can, and should, tell me to shut up about government policy because the funding is much more "their" money than "my" money.

(Despite the gross under-taxation of the rich, the fact remains that even in America the rich pay much more net money in taxes than I ever have or ever will.)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cynatnite (Reply #80)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 11:05 PM

136. Awesome

 

so just to be clear you think food stamps should be used for purchasing cigarettes, booze, lottery tickets, tattoos, car washes, and so on.

I wonder if there will be any left over for food after all that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 4th law of robotics (Reply #136)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 11:12 PM

137. I also think that the poor should have greater access to the internet...

free college education and assistance with transportation. I'm all for anything that gets them out of poverty and against anything which further degrades them. That includes restrictive food stamps.

How responsible can you expect anyone to be if they're not given the opportunity to be responsible? How do you expect to fight poverty if the resources needed to fight it are difficult or just outright restricted?

Instead, we get a society that wants to treat poor people like children and blames them for their lot in life.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cynatnite (Reply #137)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 11:15 PM

138. Yes clearly it is the lack of access to tobacco

 

that is keeping the poor in poverty.

That is why being able to get free cigarettes is exactly the same thing as getting free education or transportation.

Literally the same thing.

/can't get to your job = staying in poverty. Can't qualify for a good job due to lack of education = staying poor. Can't smoke = kinda bitchy for a while.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 4th law of robotics (Reply #138)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 11:37 PM

142. Did I say that anywhere?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 4th law of robotics (Reply #75)

Thu Jun 28, 2012, 09:46 AM

150. It's the cash portion

It's not alot of money, by any standards. People who spend it foolishly generally end up without toilet paper by the end of the month.

The money can be used for anything, It can be taken out of the ATM to spend as the person sees fit.

The welfare queen myth is just more RW propaganda to direct people away from the real people that are ripping them off.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cynatnite (Reply #68)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 05:52 PM

112. moving to put all public benefits on these cards gives the public ever so many more

 

opportunities to demonize poor people.

it used to be you got a welfare check, cashed it, and no one knew you were on benefits --your money was as good as anyone elses.

now nosy parkers feel its their job to scrutinize all your purchases, not just your food purchases.

and this will be used in aid of further cutbacks in public spending.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HiPointDem (Reply #112)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 07:12 PM

126. +1

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cynatnite (Reply #59)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 05:28 PM

84. Yes, it is. Most people work hard for their money and when they see it squandered

they get mad.

And, yes, the same applies when wage earners see their tax money squandered by others on junk food. How do I know this? Becaue I saw that very thing just the other day in a grocery store in Fort Worth and I thought that I and other hard working tax payers were being ripped off.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MrTriumph (Reply #84)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 05:33 PM

88. But you're ripped off by big corporations all the time...

Where's that outrage? They get handouts all the time.

Besides, I can't think of anything more demeaning than having someone get in your shopping cart telling you what you're allowed to buy.

It's not your business despite you thinking you've got a right to go up to a poor person and tell them how to use the funds they're given.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cynatnite (Reply #88)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 05:50 PM

109. Where's the outrage? As a Democrat I am disgusted when

corporations evade taxes or otherwise rip off the taxpayer. In fact, the same principle applies. Taxpayers don't want their tax dollars squandered by anyone.

You know what's really demeaning? Someone abusing the assistance that I as a taxpayer have sacrificed to provide. That, cynatnite, is what's demeaning.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MrTriumph (Reply #109)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 05:59 PM

117. You are basing that on your own personal values...

which is not the same as everyone else.

People on assistance are being told what they can spend with their food stamps. If they do happen to get cash assistance, which is considerably less than food stamps, they should be able to buy what they want without some busybody picking through their cart and telling them what they think is acceptable.

I've been on food stamps and had to have assistance. I can't tell you how awful it is to take that fucking card out of my wallet knowing that people are looking at me as if I'm a criminal. That's just for having food stamps. And you want to add to that indignity?

Let me ask you something. If I took my food stamps and bought nothing but chips, candy, ice cream, soda and basically unhealthy junk food, would you be okay with that? Would you limit those? Would you demand that poor people only buy acceptable food?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cynatnite (Reply #88)

Tue Jul 3, 2012, 07:09 PM

172. "They're doing it" so it's okay?

 

What kind of reasoning is that? This is why I call myself a progressive and NOT liberal: these sorts of comments are an embarrassment.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MrTriumph (Reply #84)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 05:54 PM

114. apparently only when poor people "squander" it. albeit the overwhelming majority

 

of the federal budget is squandered for the benefit of the rich.

like that store clerk pays anything appreciable toward the woman's welfare in the first place. most store clerks make shit wages and probably don't pay income tax.

pointing the finger at someone else just makes them feel better about their own shitty lives.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MrTriumph (Reply #84)

Sat Jun 30, 2012, 10:40 AM

160. does it bother you that the military sells cigarettes and junk food to the troops?

where does that money come from if not our tax dollars? Where does the money they purchase things like this come from if not tax dollars?




Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 4th law of robotics (Reply #41)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 04:37 PM

47. The problem with the cash.....

...is that store owners who said "I can't let you use that for cigs or beer or scratch cards" would just watch that person walk down the street and use the cash for the same things at another store that doesn't know where they got that money from. It's a system that protects the business, but it benefits the vice.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 4th law of robotics (Reply #14)


Response to MightyOkie (Reply #38)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 04:49 PM

52. yeah....

those welfare recipients sure are living the good life...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to opiate69 (Reply #52)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 04:52 PM

56. Yep. That's what I wrote...

 

Welfare recipients are living the good life...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MightyOkie (Reply #56)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 04:56 PM

62. the implication is obvious to anybody with 2 brain cells to rub together

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MightyOkie (Reply #38)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 04:55 PM

61. Because life is just so fucking grand for them that they are living it up...

on smokes and beer. Woo fucking hoo.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cynatnite (Reply #61)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 05:12 PM

76. Big tobacco has always been there for the poor people

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cynatnite (Reply #61)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 11:20 PM

140. Fascinating

 

on the one hand there is outrage on here when california failed to increase taxes even further on tobacco products because "OMG it's so evil we have to make it harder for people to get tobacco" on the other hand it isn't that big of deal and is apparently a sacred right to have access to tobacco via public funds.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 4th law of robotics (Reply #140)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 11:36 PM

141. It comes down to choice...

It's not up to you or I to decide for them. Besides, even using assistance to buy cigarettes, they'd still pay taxes just like everyone else.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to proud2BlibKansan (Original post)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 04:21 PM

27. I thought in some states you can't buy smokes or alcohol with welfare cards.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to southernyankeebelle (Reply #27)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 04:42 PM

49. That's what I thought...

 

I do not think government should be in the business of subsidizing addictions and/or party materials with money from working people.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MightyOkie (Reply #49)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 04:52 PM

57. OMG!

Seriously?



You think the government shouldn't be subsidizing addictions and partying?

Seriously, though, the government has been doing just that for...well...a hell of a long time. Let's begin with subsidies for tobacco crops.

What about when the government is being all serious...like a government and is paying for things like wars, drone attacks and spying on activists? Are you okay with that since it's not partying and smoking cigs/

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cynatnite (Reply #57)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 05:00 PM

65. +1

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to proud2BlibKansan (Original post)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 04:59 PM

64. The authoritarian mind, what an awkward twisted place to live. n/t

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Egalitarian Thug (Reply #64)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 05:02 PM

67. Seriously.

No wonder Republicans are so hateful and pissed and humorless. It must be exhausting and frustrating trying to control everybody all the time and getting no thanks for it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to proud2BlibKansan (Original post)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 05:04 PM

69. Notice how the store clerk and the customer are pitted against one another, while

 

the owners of the store keep making money?

Technical question: can you take an EBT card to an ATM and withdraw cold, hard cash? If so, then the EBT card is just a different form of money. When I was still receiving unemployment, the benefits were loaded onto a card but I could go to an ATM and withdraw cash.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to coalition_unwilling (Reply #69)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 05:30 PM

86. +1. and it's because of the media meme -- "lazy welfare cheats, wasting our money"

 

which the clerk has invested in, albeit s/he likely makes crap wages and pays maybe a penny to support welfare spending.

nevertheless, s/he aligns with the ruling class in demonizing the poor.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to proud2BlibKansan (Original post)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 05:05 PM

70. I'm sorry I am very far to the left and an ex-smoker now for 13 years.

I don't want to pay for and the money is for food, not cigarettes!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ArnoldLayne (Reply #70)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 05:08 PM

71. The money is for whatever they want it to be for...

It's not your place to pass a moral judgment on how a poor person spends money given to them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cynatnite (Reply #71)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 05:31 PM

87. Say what!? Taxpayers pass moral judgments every day about how their money is spent.

x

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MrTriumph (Reply #87)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 05:35 PM

90. Sure they do, but you're talking about someone's personal life here...

You think you have a right to tell poor people what to buy and not buy with money they're given. What if someone takes food stamps and buys nothing but junk food? Would you limit that? Would you check for how healthy it is? What if they opted to buy soda rather than juice? Are they in trouble?

Where does it stop?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MrTriumph (Reply #87)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 05:35 PM

91. But they don't get to inflict those decisions on the public at large

on an ad hoc basis, no.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ArnoldLayne (Reply #70)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 05:15 PM

78. How far to the left can you be if you are trying to enforce your wishes

on the lives of other people?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EFerrari (Reply #78)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 07:48 PM

127. They aren't all red, are they? n/t

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ArnoldLayne (Reply #70)

Thu Jun 28, 2012, 09:47 AM

151. The food portion cannot be used for anything but non-prepared food.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ArnoldLayne (Reply #70)

Thu Jun 28, 2012, 09:58 AM

155. I'm sorry but welfare is not for food. It is for your living expenses.

Your spending is not monitored. You can buy things besides food clothing and shelter. Not much, though, because welfare benefits are fucking miserly.

Would you allow a welfare recipient to buy a book? Go to a movie?

Fucking puritanical moralistic bullshit neither left not right.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to proud2BlibKansan (Original post)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 05:36 PM

92. This thread is a prime example of what makes the average person irate: Poor people

 

spending tax money "irresponsibly". Poor people "breeding like rabbits". Poor people being criminal, poor people stepping one inch outside the box of middle-class morality.

Always more comments on these threads than any other kind.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HiPointDem (Reply #92)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 05:40 PM

96. Banksters throw hundreds of thousands of families out of their homes

while they rake in historic bonuses. But, oh man, a poor person tried to buy cigarettes and beer -- get a rope!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EFerrari (Reply #96)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 05:56 PM

115. i've been kicking a thread about the attack on unions for three days. one response.

 

but sunscreen policy in one school in the union -- two threads and hundreds of posts. the horrible, irresponsible teachers! it just keeps going and going, albeit that the issue was solved a week ago.

get a rope, indeed. but it's for our own necks because we're so fucking stupid.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HiPointDem (Reply #92)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 05:40 PM

97. Sad, isn't it?

We seem to have this need to belittle the poor.

Here's something sadder - one of the local nutbags on my newspaper website was going off on how ministers are good people and never wish harm to gays. So I Googled 'minister wants to kill gays' and got 19 MILLION hits. Blew me away.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to proud2BlibKansan (Reply #97)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 05:46 PM

105. After one of these threads, no one here should ever again claim

that only Republicans don't recognize their own better interests.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EFerrari (Reply #105)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 05:48 PM

108. Oh I know

I probably shouldn't have even started this thread. I just thought it seemed interesting an hour ago. LOL

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to proud2BlibKansan (Reply #108)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 05:52 PM

110. LOL

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EFerrari (Reply #105)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 05:59 PM

116. really. why would any working class person vote democratic, when they're constantly

 

told by upper class dems they don't look right, smell right, eat right, behave right and are too stupid to know what's good for them?

this is where the historic charge of "elitism" comes from that the right manipulates to such good effect.

hey dems, try defending the working class for a change.

here's another thread that can't get any traction on this "liberal" board:

Looking a little further into this moral ideology, it revolves around the dichotomy of stigma and respectability. The reason why Thorpe is so revolted is that she has been stigmatised. She is a respectable 'working mother' (I chose the phrase carefully), and she has been made to look like one of them, a scrounger, a social parasite, the worst sort of person....

if paid work, a commodity whose stock increases as it becomes more scarce, is the ultimate guarantor of respectability in English culture - this is a truism - it is so to the extent that unemployment and poverty are associated with a social demonology, an image of criminal violence, uncultured hedonism, and savagery. So, embedded in respectability is an image of an ideal life, part of whose appeal is that it is clearly demarcated from the dissolute lives of those whom people now call, without embarrassment, 'the underclass'...

But who produces this social image of the ideal life, to which workers aspire? For whom is one respectable? Obviously, the answer is, in part, the people who produce social images: the class of professionals, from media and academia, to the upper reaches of social work and civil service, whose function it is to reflect on social problems, critically account for them, and prescribe some form of intervention...Notice, when watching the interview, that Stratton's metropolitan, upper middle class manners, don't seriously veil her attack - but they do make it seem almost natural that she should be treating her subject in this abusive, judgmental, moralising way. She deploys the skills of her class, their ways of speaking to social inferiors, with persuasive authority...

http://www.leninology.com/2012/05/what-bbc-newsnight-did-to-shanene.html

i think it's brilliant.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HiPointDem (Reply #92)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 05:45 PM

102. Poor people make for good targets, don't they?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HiPointDem (Reply #92)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 08:23 PM

131. Yep. (nt)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HiPointDem (Reply #92)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 08:58 PM

133. It's the "deserving" vs. "undeserving" poor BS.

With the "Deserving" being those who are disabled, old, or scrupulously follow middle class social norms. The rest are considered "lazy, sub-human vermin".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to proud2BlibKansan (Original post)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 06:20 PM

119. Wow, a story with two people making idiotic financial decisions

Quitting because you don't like welfare - Stupid decision
Wasting limited funds on cigarettes - Stupid decision

For the record: I think if the government gives people cash than they should be able to spend it on whatever they want. I also think that people should stop acting like idiots and quit smoking if they are so poor that they are asking other people to support them. People in need should stop making stupid decisions that worsen their situation, but the government should help them anyway.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Taitertots (Reply #119)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 06:53 PM

121. When you figure out a way to make people stop making stupid decisions

patent it. Better. when you find a way to make people accept other people making decisions for them, patent that first.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to proud2BlibKansan (Original post)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 07:55 PM

128. It's a bit ridiculous

because that money can be accessed via ATM so one way or another (EBT card or cash withdrawal) the money will be used to buy not just cigarettes, but alcohol as well.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to proud2BlibKansan (Original post)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 08:21 PM

130. If it wasn't for welfare ......

my Dad became seriously ill and my Mum had to stay home and look after him - as well as the 6 kids still at home. (It was very tough, but we managed and have all gone on to be productive members of society.) But here is the kicker - my mum and dad smoked - rightly or wrongly they smoked - they never went out anywhere, they didn't drink but the loved their cigs. And to deny them that small pleasure would have been terrible.

While we may not always agree with others' choices - the choices - and consequences - are theirs to make - not the clerk, the pharmacist, the doctor, et al, etc.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to proud2BlibKansan (Original post)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 08:59 PM

134. The anti-poor bigotry in this thread is nauseating.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to proud2BlibKansan (Original post)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 09:09 PM

135. I didn't realize that welfare could be used for cigarettes.

The clerk in question shouldn't have interjected her own views into a perfectly legal transaction. And yes, of all public spending, the billions spent on bailing out the financial industry dwarf whatever we spend on welfare.

Having said that, however, this is the kind of thing that makes welfare programs look bad. I think very reasonable people can think that it's odd that public money meant to assist the needy is being spent on something non-essential--in fact something harmful. People think of public assistance as going to food, or clothes, or rent, or medical care, or transportation. I would also include things like a phone plan and Internet access.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BlueCheese (Reply #135)

Thu Jun 28, 2012, 09:43 AM

149. It's the cash portion of the ebt card, used like a debit card

The guy could have gone to the atm, took out 20 bucks, bought cigarettes and the woman wouldn't ever have known.

This is more "welfare queen" propaganda being pushed from the RW.

No one is getting rich or living large off welfare.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to proud2BlibKansan (Original post)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 11:46 PM

143. Do ya'll know any poor people?

Folks will search public ashtrays for long butts if they want a cigarette. I keep some on me so people can enjoy a relatively sanitary smoke once in a while.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jcboon (Reply #143)

Thu Jun 28, 2012, 10:08 AM

157. Welcome to du and thanks for your compassion.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warren Stupidity (Reply #157)


Response to mizzuz pibb (Reply #171)

Tue Jul 3, 2012, 10:49 PM

173. Got called for a jury on your hateful post-then I saw you'd already been PPRed....Good riddence

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to proud2BlibKansan (Original post)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 11:58 PM

145. This just makes me so sad.....the whole idea of power over someone else.....

what the h*ll ever happened to taking care of others....so what, he wanted some instant gratification.......I quit smoking 7 years ago and want one all the time.....what the h*ll....instant gratification when his life probably doesn't even exit beyond that cigarette.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to proud2BlibKansan (Original post)

Thu Jun 28, 2012, 09:49 AM

153. No one is getting rich off welfare

The Welfare queen driving a Cadillac is a myth being once again pushed by the RW to divert attention from the people who are REALLY ripping us off.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to proud2BlibKansan (Original post)

Thu Jun 28, 2012, 10:15 AM

158. Fired because of ..."The two “had a little go-around”...

You call the manager and step aside.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to proud2BlibKansan (Original post)

Thu Jun 28, 2012, 04:33 PM

159. I don't care

Using community money to pay for your own disgusting habits is wrong.

I'd take the benefits away to start.

I say this as someone who's been on welfare before; Booze and drugs are not necessary to live.

Oh, and to those who are all "OMG RW CONSPIRACY THEORY" - welfare fraud DOES happen. There are quite a few freeloaders in the apartment I live in.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to proud2BlibKansan (Original post)

Sat Jun 30, 2012, 10:51 AM

161. Yay for Big Apple! They gotta protect their profits.

As an employee, you gotta do what company policy says, and they would have been perfectly within their rights to make a policy of no tobacco sales with welfare money... but that would have been inconsistent with maximizing shareholder return.

As a citizen? Give the lady a prize.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to proud2BlibKansan (Original post)

Sat Jun 30, 2012, 11:04 AM

163. WELFARE QUEENS IN CADILLACS!!!!!BUYING CIGS AND BOOOOOOZE!!!!11!!

YARGLE BLARGLE BLARG

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to proud2BlibKansan (Original post)

Tue Jul 3, 2012, 11:12 PM

174. Mittens will probably give her the RNC keynote position

She probably figured there's a lot more money and publicity to be had by agreeing to be fired and then going to the media about it

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Reply to this thread