Quote:
|
Originally Posted by The_Jazz
Except that I don't think that it is the same deal. Food stamps aren't money. They are redeemed by the retailer for money, and they aren't subject to taxes. Welfare money is designed to be used for a wide range of things - rent, food, water, electricity, phone and, yes, discretionary items. The problem that I have with what you're proposing is that there has to be a line drawn somewhere. Are we going to say that folks on welfare can only buy 3 light bulbs a month? More would be wasting the money. How about that a mother on welfare can't buy her 5 year old a Hot Wheels car? Or that a family on welfare can't buy birthday candles for a cake? Who gets to set the criteria? You? Me? Ustwo (god forbid)?
|
You, me AND Ustwo get to set the criteria... because it's OUR money. This is in much the same way that we directly and indirectly decide what other tax dollars are spent on. That's part of a Democratic Republic. That's part of being able to vote. Having grown up with welfare assistance, I can say assuredly that it CAN be abused. I think the Bridge Cards for food stamps was a good step, since it prevents the sale of your food stamps outright. I think programs that do limit expenditures of welfare income would be greatly beneficial. In fact, I'm not really FOR welfare to begin with. Especially everlasting welfare. I like the 3 years limit.
As to the OP question... yes, as a private business they should be able to ban people by their own criteria.