$2 Million in the bank and he still gets food stamps

stuwee

And it's perfectly legal, he doesn't seem to think he's wrong! This ain't right :mad: if I was the manager of a supermarket, I'd flat out refuse to accept his 'bridge card' or 'food stamp car'!! This is insane.....http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_localdtw/20110518/ts_yblog_localdtw/2m-michigan-lottery-winner-defends-use-of-food-stamps

polkfarmboy

The wutang clan star old drty **** still went and got his food stamps and free money and was taped doing so

If they do pass a law to stop him getting the food stamps I also think they should make him pay back every penny he received too .Just think about all the poor people out there and you got this greedy lil man running around taking our taxes so he can save a couple of bucks

Guys like this need punished

seeclear

Good comment, how can lottery winnings be taxed as income, but then you turn around and don't count it as income for this program???? It really is no wonder our country is going to hell in a hand basket!

aviator

Once a leech, always a leech.

steveinaz

Vote in 2012. Time to transform this Country.

George Grand

And multi-millionaires also collect social security. There's a GREAT deal of work to be done.

aviator

George Grand wrote: »

And multi-millionaires also collect social security. There's a GREAT deal of work to be done.

Absolutely - those that pay in the most should get absolutely nothing.

pdxfj

I have a friend that works in the state welfare office. They told me this once..

When applying for food stamps, one thing that is taken into consideration is your car payment. So one day this very well dressed woman comes in. She applies for food stamps and is approved because of her $750/mo payment on her Cadillac Escalade.

I agree the system is fubar and needs to be fixed.

exalted512

wow...things like car payments should be capped at like $300.

I also think there should be mandatory drug testing for anyone taking food stamps, but thats another discussion...
-Cody

DMara

This is just small potato. Think about those gigantic corporations who made a great deal of profit but did not have to pay tax. Now that's something to whine about

cnh

You'd think he'd have a bit of 'humility' or that he would have learned about it by this age! But, then again, this guy is pretty anomalous, he makes good press in an 'election' period as politicians maneuver by promising to cut, cut, cut (some things 'only').

cnh

steveinaz

There is no such thing as humility anymore, or integrity. Look at how many people walk away from their debt. It's BS. You borrow money, you pay it back--honor your debt, it's a direct reflection of your integrity.

cheif pontiac

This is only the tip of the iceberg for the Michigan Bridge card system. MIchigan Bridge cards are a Debit card issued in lieu of food stamps. Money is deposited once a month and it runs through a standard CC machine with a PIN pad.It was reported that Bridge cards had been used in other states(Disney World) including cruise ships. If your mom is a drug addict and you don't know who your daddy is, you get a bridge card, even if you are 2 years old. One day I watched 5 kids in a row all charge a pop, bag of chips, candy bar and an ice cream to their bridge cards. The card is sent to the guardian but the kids name is on it, the same is the case with convicted felons. No idea is required all you need is the PIN. This leaves it open to be exploited. Cards are sold for a percentage of value for cash. A recent sting on merchants shows that the merchant will buy the card at a percentage redeeming the full value. I am sure some families are helped but the abuse is so flagrant an overhaul is needed.
My Blood is boiling maybe I'll have more later.

stuwee

steveinaz wrote: »

There is no such thing as humility anymore, or integrity. Look at how many people walk away from their debt. It's BS. You borrow money, you pay it back--honor your debt, it's a direct reflection of your integrity.

Well said Steve!

Tony M

George Grand wrote: »

And multi-millionaires also collect social security. There's a GREAT deal of work to be done.

That's so true. I've met a couple that received their checks and all they(the funds) did were grow in a savings account. Granted they worked for it and put into the system so...I'm on a fence about them.


But the millions who didn't work for it and receive it, that kinda bothers me.

This lottery winner Should pay his collections back since receiving a lottery win and I also agree that a leopard can't change his spots! Proof is in his actions.

George Grand

aviator wrote: »

Absolutely - those that pay in the most should get absolutely nothing.

Have to be a pilot. The only thing cheaper than a pilot is two pilots.

shack

I gotta disagree with you on this one George. SS is not about a handout...it is not welfare...it is a payment due to someone who earned inome and is based on how much they paid into the system and how long they worked. IT IS THEIR MONEY...regardless of how much money they make/have...not the governments to determine who should get what. Federal welfare comes out of income taxes.

aviator

George Grand wrote: »

Have to be a pilot. The only thing cheaper than a pilot is two pilots.

Why the insult about being cheap George?

I was only agreeing with you, that those who have paid the most should get nothing.

Isn't that the way it's supposed to work? Some's place in life is to do all the paying and some's place in life is to have eveything paid for them. Isn't that the natural order of things today?

Come on George, throw no more rocks, I'm on your side.

Tony M

steveinaz wrote: »

There is no such thing as humility anymore, or integrity. Look at how many people walk away from their debt. It's BS. You borrow money, you pay it back--honor your debt, it's a direct reflection of your integrity.

I've also met alot(yes alot)of people who have laughed at their stupid (their own noun)lenders for giving them the chance to have money or own something KNOWING they were never going to pay it back. SAD people. Living in a dream world and don't even know it. They think they they are on top of the game as they called it.

SAD

bobman1235

C'mon guys. 2 million bucks, after taxes you're down to a paltry million. Lexus payments, a little bit of blow... who can be expected to pay for food after all that?

exalted512

shack wrote: »

it is a payment due to someone who earned inome and is based on how much they paid into the system and how long they worked. IT IS THEIR MONEY.

so why is your generation taking all of it and I'm going to be left with nada?
-Cody

shack

exalted512 wrote:

so why is your generation taking all of it and I'm going to be left with nada?
-Cody

Not my fault. I assure you, had I been able to take the 14% of my salary contributed by me and my employers...and invest it myself, the government would never have to pay another cent for my welfare...regardless of how long I might live. It is not my fault the government spent those funds elsewhere instead of placing it in trust for my benefit.

obieone

steveinaz wrote: »

Vote in 2012. Time to transform this Country.

LOL, I tried that 6 months ago. Still waiting for them to do SOMETHING?!:mad:

inspiredsports

DMara wrote: »

This is just small potato. Think about those gigantic corporations who made a great deal of profit but did not have to pay tax. Now that's something to whine about

That's a good thing. Then they stay here instead of headquartering in another country. And they pay rent, and pay workers, and buy things, and pay dividends. I like that gigantic potato. Let's not tun it into french fries.

With a little luck, karma and Fick (the lottery winning food stamp guy) will meet.

kevhed72

I dunno...give me all the money I have paid into SS thus far, I'll put it into a 401k myself, and be happy not putting another dime into SS. What you pay in over your lifetime + a resonable rate of interest is what you should get out. SHOULD being the important word here...

shack

Here is a pretty simple calculation. Contributions to SS and Medicare Medicaid are around 14% of your salary (half by you and half by your employer or all by you if self employed). Any person should at a minimum put 6% of their salary into a 401K or IRA. Most employers will match half of that (3%). Assume one starts full time employment at an average age of 20 (some earlier - some later) with a starting salary of $25,000 and a minimum of 3% annual increases (raises or COL increases). You work until the traditional retirement age of 65 (45 years). Plug all of this into a calculator.

IF you can realize a 5% rate of return...at 65 you would have $1,581,000 in a retirement account.

If you did a little better and realized an 8% rate of return...you would have $3,678,000 in your retirement account.

There are quite a few assumptions to these calculations and they really don't take into account inflation, SS cutoff contribution levels and such...but as you see...with only the minimum amount any person should consider saving (6%) and being able to invest your SS and MM taxes yourself...one could completely negate the need for SS or MM.

Of course...there would be a great number of irresponsible citizens that still wouldn't save a penny. Maybe those should be relegated to a "poor farm". (some of you old guys may remember that term).

These numbers also show that if the government would actually put SS and MM funds aside and invest them prudently...there would never be a shortage of funds for these programs. But of course...that also will never happen.

bobman1235

I thought the way it worked in the real world is what you contribute to social security today gets given to someone who is ON social security today, and what you GET in social security when you retire is what someone in THAT time is contributing, and so on? It's not like you have a fund somewhere in your name, you just have a promise that in 30 years there will be a workforce comparable to today's that is giving you the same amount you gave... or something to that effect.

exalted512

bobman1235 wrote: »

It's not like you have a fund somewhere in your name

From what I've heard, your entire post is true. I quoted this because with today's technology, it shouldn't be THAT hard to implement something like this. You put in money into something in YOUR name and YOU get it back when you retire, plus whatever interest you might've earned, minus any costs associated with keeping the account.

Why this is such a hard concept, I don't know.
-Cody

bobman1235

exalted512 wrote: »

From what I've heard, your entire post is true. I quoted this because with today's technology, it shouldn't be THAT hard to implement something like this. You put in money into something in YOUR name and YOU get it back when you retire, plus whatever interest you might've earned, minus any costs associated with keeping the account.

Why this is such a hard concept, I don't know.
-Cody

Because, if what I said is correct (and I do not know that it is, so please don't call me an idiot if I'm wrong), an entire generation would have to go WITHOUT social security for this to be implemented. Or an entire generation would have to put in twice.

exalted512

I haven't put a whole lot of thought in it, but I don't see how.

Say I stopped putting money into a 'pool' today, and tomorrow, everything I pay in goes to my account. There's still money in the social security pool that could be divided amongst everyone proportionally, correct?

I don't have a grasp of how it really works, but there will be an entire generation WITHOUT social security...mine.
-Cody

kevhed72

Heres my big problem with it....the baby boomers, who will eat up alot of the money in the next, say, 20 years....are they getting back ROUGHLY what they paid into it over their lifetimes (+ the reasonable rate of interest), or is the whole system so out of whack that one generation will "make out" by drawing benefits they never even nearly put into the program.

Now I understand there needs to be a social safety net for people who are way below the poverty line, cannot care for themselves, etc.
But, how out of whack is the system for everyone else in terms of what they pay in vs. what they draw at retirment?