These comments are pretty depressing. How many of you have ever used those government services? You are paying for them you know. This article should be encouraging. It worked. They payed in, they needed the help and got it, and now they are back on their feet.
Thank you. No kidding. I grew up on food stamps, and I remind myself that when I realize I'm now well into the 1%. This shit matters and most of the people on these programs aren't on them just so they can be lazy, they're on them because they have limited options.
The glibness of the comments here really rubs me the wrong way. A lot of software people - you know, arguably the MOST employable people on the planet - have no hesitation tut-tuting about what The Poors should do while pushing buttons in a comfy chair in an AC office with the knowledge that if anything were to happen, they'd be OK.
News flash, being poor SUCKS, and it means you work your ass of just to get by every day, always in constant fear of the next unexpected event - your car breaks down or you get sick, then you miss a day of work, then you get fired, then you can't find another job, then you're homeless.
It's almost like a bunch of you ready the article and missed the point.
>It's almost like a bunch of you read the article and missed the point.
What is the point of the article? I mean besides the we-can-sell-ads-ginning-up-outrage-(which-may-or-maynot-be-misplaced). I'd like to see a "The Last Psychiatrist" like take on it:
"Food stamps" now are actually a debit card called an "EBT" card, at least in my state (not sure if the food stamp program is state-by-state or national), which is nice and discreet.
Discreet-ish. At least in my state the cashier had to pull out a book and make sure the constraints weren't violated. It's a slow process and when there's a line you can feel all the eyes on you.
A lot of poor people are trying to fight off addiction, have abusive people in their lives who would put them under a lot of pressure to hand over cash, or live in neighborhoods where there would be a high risk of cash being outright stolen. Mechanisms like food stamps have significant advantages.
Would it work better in the end? Possibly. Are you going to have legions of people up in arms about welfare queens using their hard-earned tax dollars to buy crack? Absolutely.
Economists regularly ask which one gets better results. These days they are trending towards direct payment (rather than "in kind"). It sure seems to be the right answer in third-world countries.
I'm of the opinion that there should be a small amount of no-questions-asked assistance available, so people don't have to prove to themselves that they are poor in order to receive stuff, but of a limited quality/quantity that people of means will voluntarily not bother. That's an entirely separate discussion, though.
I'm not doubting the efficacy or attempting to discredit it. Rather, I am commenting on the political feasibility or the lack thereof. I grew up with a well-off mother and a poor father. I've rubbed shoulders in country clubs and seen people trade EBT for anything and everything illicit.
My feelings and expectations of the poor are still extremely negative despite all of this. Those of the folks who have never had to experience it even more so. You would have a hard time of switching EBT to cash in a "moderate" political climate, say nothing of the current "Fly this plane into the ground" era.