Comments about ‘How food stamps keep families in a cycle of poverty’

Return to article »

Published: Friday, Sept. 6 2013 6:00 a.m. MDT

  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Hayden, ID

But is wins elections for Democrats, which is really the point, isn't it? Dependency on government votes for more dependency, always has, always will.

Chad S
Lorton, VA

I reject the notion that a family cannot eat healthy on a limited budget. Rice, beans, and fresh fruit (apples, oranges, and other in-season fruit are easily purchased in bulk) can all be done on a limited budget. Cut the junk -- mac & cheese, nutella, and pre-packaged freez-dry meals, etc -- and learn how to cook like the rest of the world who live on much less than a $400/month food budget.

Certainly there is room for SNAP changes, but learning how to cook inexpensive meal items should be step one.

LDS Liberal
Farmington, UT

So then - raise the minimum wage.
Push it back onto the businesses who take advantage of it.

SNAP is adjusted for cost-of-living.
Minimum wage is not.
Minimum wage has not kept up.

That's why more and more people qualify now than before.

Omaha, NE

@ LDS Liberal
Without adjusting the problems addressed here, the poor will just spend their money frivolously and not save. If you have to suddenly face a year or more of $400-800 dollars less in income because you started saving... you won't save. Pretty simple. Raising the minimum wage won't address the core problem talked about in this article. I'm not saying it shouldn't be raised nor am I saying it shouldn't. It would simply fail to address the problem.

Christofer B
Salt Lake, UT

And barack considers this unprecedented increase a "success"

tucson, az

Looking at the graph makes me feel good that most of the SNAP money is going to feed children, but at the same time the numbers insinuate that poor people are probably having children they can't afford. The poor married couple in the story is anecdotal proof since they are having their fifth child. With interest on savings at historical lows, paying off high interest debt instead of putting the money in a savings account is probably the way to go for people wanting to continue SNAP benefits. No easy solutions to government social engineering and dependency.

Farmington, UT

What is baffling to me is that this family makes $21,000 per year, lives on food stamps, and is about to have their FIFTH child. I'm not saying you have to be rich to have kids, but I firmly believe that you get your affairs in order first. Don't bring another innocent child into a life of poverty. Irresponsible!

Hey It's Me
Salt Lake City, UT

I live on a limited income, don't own my own home, I would not apply for food stamps,etc, but that's my choice. However, isn't it cheating me and my tax dollars if you are accepting food stamps and then trying to save for a home. I'm sure a lot of people would love the opportunity to get free food while they save their money. I feel really bad for this family. They sound like they are hard-working blue-collar people like myself. The husbands job has ridiculously low pay and to support 7 people with 21,000.00 is probably unheard of. There are food banks that might help them as well as lots of agencies that can direct or help them with clothing, food etc. I feel so bad when I read stories like this, I wish I knew who they were so I could help with what little I have. I wouldn't ever want my grandkids to only be able to have a spoon of nutella or whatever.

LDS Liberal
Farmington, UT


I'm a Veteran.
MOST military families qualify and receive SNAP.

$18,000 - $21,000 per YEAR.
[$9 to $10 per hour -- NOT including deployments overseas year after year.]

Ya - all those lazy good for nothing's serving in the Military, keeping you free to complain about their livelihoods.

Your ingratitude is duly noted!

Ironic still - those complaining about large families don't support birth control or abortions either.

William Gronberg
Payson, UT

When a family seeks food help through their LDS bishop, I believe $3,000 in savings would probably also impact his decision in the same way as Utah SNAP policy.. If, again if I am correct, then does church “Asset tests impede the process of moving from dependence on” church “assistance to self-sufficiency,”??

I do not know the answer to my own question. There are far more “angles” to welfare than I even have a hint of knowledge or understanding about.

But I am smart enough to know that government and church welfare serves far more good purposes than just attracting “votes” and church membership.


So - women should have to pay for birth control on their own, they can't have an abortion if the birth control fails, but let's all condemn them for having children they cannot afford.

Oh - and let's blame Obama for welfare rules instituted under Clinton because Obama is just that powerful!

And let us not forget that we are a Christian nation living according to Christ's dictates to "Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind." and to "Love your neighbor as yourself."

The self-love is so evident on these comment boards.

Salt Lake City, UT

Don't lose track of the underlying issue: a low wage economy that has been developing over the last 30 years - stagnant real wages. Can capitalism ever return to a higher wage base? The answer is not clear. If it can't then capitalism as we have known it is going to tank completely and we will have to go on to another type of system. This is the issue staring us in the face.


The great thing about the LDS welfare system is that every case is taken on a 1 on 1 basis. There are no broad rules placed on everyone that people are trying or can't work around. The Bishop is given a set of guidelines and he acts as he sees best for each family that comes in and talks with him.

Hayden, ID

Easy welfare is just another attempt by the left to mitigate the consequences of poor personal choices. Why are people poor in America? Why didn't they develop some marketable job skills? Why do so many people use drugs and alcohol and think there will be no consequences? And the rest of us are told they are the victims?

William Gronberg
Payson, UT

My wife and I recently successfully completed a one year mission with LDS Employment Resource Services. We missionaries often observed that far more people entered the Bishop's Storehouse than our office. All patrons entered the same first door. They then had to make a choice between either selecting the door to the Storehouse or selecting the door to LDS Employment Resource Services.

The above facts are absolutely correct. However, isolated facts by themselves do NOT always tell the whole truth. However, the above observation was, and still is, shall we say interesting.

Liberal Ted
Salt Lake City, UT

Jimmy Jimmy Jimmy....I understand your thought process of taking your tax refund and saving up for future events (ie buying a home etc). However, there are options to get out of your situation. You can get a second job to pay for the babies you currently can't afford to feed. You can go back to school and change your career path. You can look at other career options (ie oil fields in North Dakota, Alaska fishing).

It sounds like only 9% of the people on snap should be on it. The rest need to get a job, stop breeding, grow their own food.

I just don't understand why people and families on welfare get bigger budgets than my family has to do the same thing? We budget $150-200 for the same family size per month. These people get more than double. They get a tax refund that they didn't even pay taxes towards. When you add all of their benefits up, it makes more sense to be a security guard and not go to school and make the same as someone that gained an education and has more responsibility.

Just sayin.

South Jordan, UT

In the article it states that the family may have to cut out fruits and vegetables due to a decrease in their SNAP allowance. However, based on their income, the amount of children (I'm assuming some of them are under five), and the fact that she is pregnant I'm sure they are also receiving WIC, which now provides fresh fruits and vegetables, along with cheese, milk, eggs, cereal, etc. I'm sure they also qualify for Medicaid, and probably housing assistance to boot. If you couple these resources with a food bank, the $21,000 a year seems like more than enough to provide for all of their NEEDS without SNAP (and a down payment on a house doesn't fall into the NEEDS category IMHO). Also, if he wanted to go back to school and earn a degree that would allow him to get a better paying job, I'm sure they would qualify for financial aid. Wow, how would it be to have someone paying for everything.......

Stalwart Sentinel
San Jose, CA


Your statements are factually and demonstrably incorrect. According to the USDA, when comparing state eligibility to participation rate, the states w/ highest participation over the past few years are evenly split among Republican-controlled and Democrat-controlled state bodies. The only 6 states with consistently low participation rates, however, were comprised of 2 Republican-controlled and 4 democrat-controlled state bodies. Translation, on the whole, Republican states have higher SNAP participation rates.

Further, as a citizen of Idaho, you may want to clean up your own house before you rail on other people for accepting aid. According to IRS data, over the past 30 years Idaho is a net debtor in federal funds to the tune of roughly $28 billion dollars or so. In fact, from 1981 forward, I couldn't identify a single year in which Idaho didn't receive more in federal funding than it paid. Your entire state is on federal welfare so show a little compassion towards the individuals that are temporarily in a rough situation, you and your state have been doling off our hard work for decades and show no signs of becoming self-sufficient.

S. Jordan, UT

"Your ingratitude is duly noted!"

Typically fallback on emotion laced tirade.

That is why I rarely respond to these kind of posters.

Nothing that was posted implied anything that was set up in this straw man indignation.

Open Minded Mormon
Everett, 00

I see no problem with CEOs and Corporations earnings swelling by a factor of almost 10 over the past 2 decades,
if minimum wage and the Middle Class incomes had increased by that same factor!

But they haven't.

And thus we see the huge disparity between the makers and the REAL takes in America.

The 1% who now own 85% of everything in this nation vs. the 99% who own nothing.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments