The benefits trap as it's known here is even harder to get out of in the UK. I'm living off benefits myself at the moment and whilst I know full well I can waltz into a high paid job once my leg heals, I can easily see how someone would prefer to sit on their arse watching telly all day and pull in the same amount of cash as a minimum wage job, if not more. Even with no kids and a partner in full employment I'm getting my rent and council tax paid for me and just over £100 a week to live off, which is more than enough frankly.

Personally I aspire to more than just getting by on benefits but when one sees so many chav families decked out in labelled clothing, with full Sky subscriptions, a brand new DS for each kid and five dogs, one can't help but feel a bit resentful. I'm not advocating forcing people to live in hardship but having more kids to increase your benefits payouts shouldn't really be allowed to be such an attractive lifestyle choice. It's that more than our drinking culture that's fucking up Britain at the moment, although I suspect our benefits are far more generous than in the US so I may not be comparing like with like.

Look, all I know is that my state has had the highest unemployment in the union since before the World Trade Center bombing. We went from 10% unemployment in January to 15% near the end of the year.

Given that, how likely do you reckon it is for the unemployed to get back on their feet? How much money can my state throw at the unemployed to keep them in their labelled clothing and their Comcast subscriptions and their DSes?

I'm not too sure if you and Brady mis-read my post or what the deal was, but no, my salary that I earn isn't enough to support one child, let alone 5. I just know for the last 5 years of my life I, myself, have been denied aid from the government as far as loans and grants for college go because my single mother makes about 25k a year and that's 'rich' according to the letter of rejection they sent me.

But then again I'm not going out and trying to have 5 kids before I reach the legal drinking age here in america.

But, and I could be getting this wrong, are you and Brady saying that it is a better life decision, as a young woman, to go out and get knocked up as much as you can so you can live off the state?

I could just be reading it wrong but that's how it sounds to me.

My girlfriend receives $200 dollars a month worth of food stamps. She's in the local Public Allies program which is a public service organization that spreads out a bunch of young adults into the community to asses some problems and try to fix or add soemthing beneficial to the community itself. They are also obligated to work for a local nonprofit which they apply to and are chosen by the nonprofits.

She's paid a good wage by Public Allies to work for said nonprofit but her wages are not recognized as a wage by the Food Stamp committee (or whoever is in charge of that).

With that said, allow me to tell you a story. It's about a girl and a boy living together, living on the bare essentials, making the most of out little. What we ate was OK as we are both adept to the kitchen, but by no means was any of it particularly amazing.

BUT THEN!

FOOD STAMPS!?

The day we received them (in a form of something like a Debit/Credit card) we headed to the local grocery (Giant Eagle) and we at. That night we prepared an amazing dinner for us and two of our friends. A double dinner date at home. Not uncommon these days as we spread the wealth around.

And how we ate, on food stamps we know what to buy and it's completely free. We eat all sorts of fancy foods, Filet Minon, Halibut, blocks of various cheeses. We are living the life, I now know what it's like to be part of the upper crust, sipping wine and eating fine.

A shocking waste of taxpayer money, I'm sure. I'm somewhat flabergasted that she gets food stamps when she makes an average wage, and when combined with mine, we wouldn't have any problems, unless you consider a lack of Filet Minon in our stomachs a problem.

So basically what you're saying is your girlfriend knew she could get away with getting undeserved/unneeded food stamps so she spent how many hours in a welfare office to apply so you and your friends could have a fancy dinner.

Sounds like a keeper!

Yes, that's what he's saying. Diviner of secrets, read these chicken bones and tell me my destiny.

What I'm asking is whether you think you deserve federal assistance money as an adult son of a woman who makes 25k a year more than five prepubescent children of a woman who makes 0 dollars a year.

But for the hell of it, I'm also asking why you think you have it worse off as a working adult than a non-working mother of five.

btw, I got federal loans and scholarships even though my 4 member one income family only topped around $40k in income, so forgive me for thinking you're either lazy or full of shit.

You're probably doing it wrong.

Ditto, received federal aid for college with 5 member two income at more than lurker's. So I support RR's suggestion.

Before I say anything else, holy Christ are you dumb. It's time to seriously start thinking about how you think, because you're not doing it.

Being a single mother living off of welfare is never a good life decision, unless you want to think that raising five kids on next-to-nothing sounds like a fun time. The idea that somebody chooses to raise children while unemployed is indicative of our privileged lifestyles. People don't always have inputs when it comes to life-altering change, especially when biological differences mean that a night of passion becomes a lifelong-burden from a father who might just as well skip town as pay child support or raise a single goddamn finger to help raise his kids.

Raising children requires a lot of work and dedication, and when the job markets are already so limited for someone who can only work so much while juggling their children, they need help! Not everybody has the support structures we have (friends, family, sometimes corporate daycare), and children shouldn't be punished for the irresponsibility of their parents. Hell, families didn't even have to be destitute for the Right to want their children to become crippling medical burdens when they attacked S-Chip.

And furthermore, what right do you have to question the lifestyle choices of people living in poverty, as if they have much of a fucking choice when it comes to doing anything that helps them forget about the fact that they have no future?

We got into this mess because society placed more value on capital than people, yet you still question policies that are the literal difference between life and death for hundreds of thousands of Americans.

You couldn't even figure out how to get student aid when your guardian makes 25,000 a year. Get new friends, do drugs, move to another state, do anything that will allow you to consider things outside of your perspective, for the love of God.

Hmm, a people that care more about consumerism than bettering themselves, almost like every other First World nation on the planet!

All by phone, actually. And by "getting away with" you of course mean "completely legitimate and legal" I assume. And that's dinners.

Ideally everyone in the country should receive foodstamps, if not because they have no income, but because it will round out their available groceries with foods that aren't shit.

Rasputina, $200 is the maximum allotment for a Food Stamp household of 1. It could very well be that your girlfriend's wages are excluded when determining eligibility and benefit amounts. The type of income does determine how it is counted.

You could be categorized as an unrelated adult male, but from the description of events in your post, I don't believe your girlfriend qualifies as a separate Food Stamp household due to the fact that you purchase and prepare together. If I were processing your girlfriend's Food Stamp application and discovered the information revealed in your post, I would have determined there to be a Food Stamp household of 2 and requested verification of your income and property in order to determine if the Food Stamp household of 2 is eligible.

So . . . umm... Grail: why would the GOVERNMENT deny you a loan?

I mean, I got more money from the government once I was no longer a dependent, but I was a member of a two-income, four member family that made more than your mom did, so... I mean, yes, the family falls into "rich" for certain purposes, but they still offered loans. Grants came once I was no longer a financial dependent.

Actually, my girlfriend was working on that, it was something she overlooked when she first applied. I'm not sure where you where going with the statement, however.

There are limits in property, gross income, and net income. When these limits are exceeded by the household, the entire household is ineligible. Your Food Stamp household is composed of you and your girlfriend. Let's say that all of your girlfriend's income is excluded and her property is either excluded depending on the type or has no countable value.

This would leave your income and property to be applied towards those limits. If your property was within limits, a budget would be computed to see if your income was within the gross income limit; if your gross income was within limits, another budget would be computed to see if your income was within the net income limit. After all budgets have been computed and the limits have not been exceeded, the countable income determines the benefit amount the household is eligible to receive.

In your case, this could mean that your household is eligible to an amount less than $200 on the basis of the countable income or not eligible at all in the event any of the limits have been exceeded. The difference from what the household received and what the household is eligible to receive would be an overissuance. Adults in the household would be required to pay back the amount of the overissuance.

I have computed claims for overissuance when my clients have reported incorrect information or knowingly reported false information. When an investigation is conducted and it is revealed that the latter has occurred, the penalties can include a fine, disqualification, or imprisonment. I have sent referrals to our investigation unit at the District Attorney's office when there are too many discrepancies in the information that is being reported. I am hoping that your girlfriend is being truthful when she is interviewed by her case worker and when she completes her paperwork.

I'd hate to pretend I know anything about the finite details but I am confident that my girlfriend reviewed the rules and, now that she's working on combining our incomes, she has let me know that with my low low income we would likely receive more than 200 a month.

With that said I do appreciate the words on my situation.

I will point out, in response to the initial reaction I received from my personal experience, I wasn't trying to show off or prove something by pretending that I "beat the system." I was merely demonstrating that it was remarkably easy and surprising that we where eligible.

I reckon you'll get even more money if you get her preggers.

I'm not here to argue against the food stamps. They are good. Everybody deserves to eat, if nothing else. I'll even exclude the argument that Americans, even the most measly and poor, have taken to gluttony.


I feel for Grail. I also applied for FAFSA when I was single. All I was approved for was a loan, because my folks made around 40k a year combined (mind you, this was after I moved out and my brother was a teenager, allowing them the ability to both work once again).
The loan was not even that much. Enough to help me through a small amount of community college, and certainly not enough to live off of. And the realistic income from my job in the first 5 years of employment in that field was not much to pay it back without the interest crippling me.

Now, I have a friend who's sister had a baby. She's receiving something like 5 grand a semester to go to school and raise her kid.
I HAD TO JOIN THE FUCKING ARMY TO GET FREE SCHOOL.

Do you see the comparison?


My question is, who the fuck thinks being a mom is a legitimate job? That's what welfare has turned it into. Have a kid? We'll pay your for it.
Some cases are fair. Families are doing what they can or getting by, and tax benefits help them out, or possibly welfare in crippling and uncontrollable situations.
But in most cases that I've seen, it is from unprepared parents having children when they can barely get my themselves. This, by my assessment, is an irresponsible act, especially considering the contraceptive technology we have these days.
Who's being rewarded for this irresponsibility? The parents. Sure, the kids get to eat and have clothes and roof, but it's the parents that get the money. it's the parents we send to higher education, not the children. Do you see the flaw?


Overall, there is just not enough money for the amount of people who want it. The solution I honestly believe would help is to have government funded vasectomy and tubal litigation programs and administer tax benefits to those who've taken advantage of them, and on top of that, stop issuing tax benefits to families beyond 2 children. Why the fuck do I need to pay for your 3rd, 4th, and 5th? YOU pay for them.

Of course! We should just let those parents stay ignorant, low-income earners so their kids can be too when they grow up. Somebody's got to flip my burgers.

Additional Spam:
I understand the injustice that you had to join the military to get an education, but the solution to that problem is to make education free, not make it harder for single parents to get an education.

I believe that's what's known as The American Way.

Well, from my viewpoint, people aren't that likely to change once they start fucking up. And I know you can't politically apply this stereotype, but I honestly think that if you want help these families out of poverty, you would start with the generation that hasn't muggled it up yet.

Free education does sound appealing, though.

We used to do that and were world leaders in probably everything. Now we've started adopting US style charges for university and are rapidly turning into a nation of retards. Some bright spark in governement will probably decide charging for healthcare is a good idea next.