Page 1 of 10 12345 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 98

Thread: lottery winner continues to collect food stamps...right or wrong?

  1. #1

    Default lottery winner continues to collect food stamps...right or wrong?

    Lotto Winner Defends Using Food Stamps | Featured Videos | Comcast.net

    as a progressive i have always been the first person to stand up and defend the federal food stamp program from its conservative detractors. i beleive its neccesary to help ensure people and families are food secure if they dont have the resources to meet average caloric intake needs.

    i saw this video from fox news whom i dont view as an unbiased news source, but never the less, the story it self is legitimate and the gentleman really didnt defend his position as to why he would continue collecting food stamps after winning 850,000.00 after taxes in the state lottery. especially at his apparent age, 850,000 should allow him to live out the rest of his life comfortably. all he kept saying was that he wasnt breaking the rules so he didnt feel bad.

    my opinion is that this is extremely distasteful for him to do, even if what he is doing is not illegal. the proper thing would have been for him to have given the card back to his worker and thanked his lucky stars that there is still a social safety net in this country. making his 850k stretch farther is not a reason to continue collecting benefits. he is no longer in need...

    sadly conservatives will use this example to argue for the abolishing of all government welfare, except of course for corporations.

  2. #2

    Default

    If it is simply the case he is taking the stamps because he can, I agree it is dishonourable. That said, there may *possibly* be some unreported issues... though the cynic in me thinks otherwise!

  3. #3

    Default

    That really is fucking tacky.

    Then again, knowing Fox News, it could quite possibly be fictional. They have proved many times in the past that they are not above making things up to get their points across.

  4. #4
    Dwhite

    Default

    Um... Yes. It is incredibly wrong, there shouldn't even be a way for him to use the food stamps he still has, let alone get more. Its this kind of milking of the system that moves people (me included) to say that all welfare programs need some serious reform.

  5. #5

    Default



    Quote Originally Posted by KaworuVsDrWily View Post
    That really is fucking tacky.

    Then again, knowing Fox News, it could quite possibly be fictional. They have proved many times in the past that they are not above making things up to get their points across.
    Sadly, as one of my state's senator's has been making a stink about it, it's legit...



    Quote Originally Posted by Dwhite View Post
    Um... Yes. It is incredibly wrong, there shouldn't even be a way for him to use the food stamps he still has, let alone get more. Its this kind of milking of the system that moves people (me included) to say that all welfare programs need some serious reform.
    Not sure about in his state, but in Oklahoma the law allows in a situation like his to use whatever remains of your current balance, but you're off food stamps until the remaining balance of the winnings is under $1000 (assuming you would still qualify at that point that is)

  6. #6

    Default

    Well, it looks to me as if Michigan uses a citizen's employment income as the sole criterion for whether he/she is eligible for food stamps or not. By the same law, I suppose rich people with billions of dollars in the bank who don't have to work could apply for and receive food stamps, if they wanted to for some reason. Is it a loophole? More like a huge oversight big enough to drive a Mack truck through. That's a law that needs fixing.

    But the problem with fixing it is that the only way to know how much money somebody has in the bank is to require banks to report it to the government, which I'm pretty sure that most people are against. Banks certainly are, since it would be a huge amount of work for them, costing them money. And then rich people would just shelter their money from this by putting it in offshore banks, so the law would only affect people who couldn't afford to do that. Not much of a problem when you're talking about food stamps, but this would be a big problem if, for example, the government switched from an income tax to a wealth tax.

    Back to Leroy Fick, here -- what he's doing is tacky, and probably unethical, but it's not illegal. And fixing that law is probably more complicated than it seems at first, or else they'd probably have fixed it already.

  7. #7

    Default

    Technically he appears to be completely eligible for this program if in fact the method to determine eligibility is your job based income.

    Morally it is wrong for someone who is more than able to afford food to be taking away from people who are less able to do so and who rely on those programs to get by.


    While I find his actions distasteful the only thing I find fault with is the design of the laws such that he is legally eligible for food-stamps.

  8. #8

    Default

    TBH I support him, because it's like a big "Fuck you!" to the government for allowing food stamps to work this way, thus making the taxpayers rage at the government.

    But really if dishonestly and immorality is what concerns you, take a look at every major corporation in the US, and the politicians who support them with huge tax cuts.

  9. #9

    Default



    Quote Originally Posted by LilJennie View Post
    Well, it looks to me as if Michigan uses a citizen's employment income as the sole criterion for whether he/she is eligible for food stamps or not. By the same law, I suppose rich people with billions of dollars in the bank who don't have to work could apply for and receive food stamps, if they wanted to for some reason. Is it a loophole? More like a huge oversight big enough to drive a Mack truck through. That's a law that needs fixing.

    But the problem with fixing it is that the only way to know how much money somebody has in the bank is to require banks to report it to the government, which I'm pretty sure that most people are against. Banks certainly are, since it would be a huge amount of work for them, costing them money. And then rich people would just shelter their money from this by putting it in offshore banks, so the law would only affect people who couldn't afford to do that. Not much of a problem when you're talking about food stamps, but this would be a big problem if, for example, the government switched from an income tax to a wealth tax.

    Back to Leroy Fick, here -- what he's doing is tacky, and probably unethical, but it's not illegal. And fixing that law is probably more complicated than it seems at first, or else they'd probably have fixed it already.
    Yep, that's exactly right. One of my good friends is a pharmacist, and he has clients that are on Medicare (medicaid? I always get them confused). They're both lawyers that make a mint, but because of the way they structured their income and their personal corporations, they're on food stamps and Medicare. The state effectively sees them as being below poverty.

    Honestly, though, I don't have a big problem with this guy (and yeah, the story's legit, as I saw it on the local affiliate from my home town, not Fox News). Do you have any idea how much one pays in tax on lottery winnings? The story I saw did not make clear whether he won $850,000, or whether he ended up with $850k. If he only won that much, he paid about $500,000 in tax (leaving him with about $350k of that $850k) and at that point, his contribution into the system well offsets how much he drew out of it, and legally at that.

    I'm certainly glad that they're changing the law to close this loophole, but honestly, what were the chances that some food stamp recipient is going to hit the lottery? I don't fault him, I don't fault the lawmakers that didn't think of this goofy scenario, and I don't really fault the system. Oversights happen, the mistake is being corrected, so I have no real issues with this.

  10. #10

    Default



    Quote Originally Posted by waslost1234abc View Post
    sadly conservatives will use this example to argue for the abolishing of all government welfare, except of course for corporations.
    Don't you think, this might be what the guy in question wants? It's possible he's just trying to prove and point and make a mockery out of a bad and totally inflexible system. This is great fodder for a bi-partisan issue and vote if this isn''t stopped withing a year then the government only proves they got their thumbs up their ass.

    Anyways I find it damn hilarious myself and surprised it hasn't happened sooner.

Similar Threads

  1. Search continues
    By patrick1776 in forum Adult Babies & Littles
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 10-Jan-2011, 02:51
  2. And so it continues...
    By Hex in forum Off-topic
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 03-Jul-2010, 00:03
  3. obama outed as antichrist by lottery?
    By the0silent0alchemist in forum Mature Topics
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 21-Apr-2010, 21:53
  4. You win the jackpot on the lottery..
    By fuctifano in forum Off-topic
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 01-Aug-2009, 22:10

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
ADISC.org - the Adult Baby / Diaper Lover / Incontinence Support Community.
ADISC.org is designed to be viewed in Firefox, with a resolution of at least 1280 x 1024.