[Elphaba]

Originally Posted by SisterofJared

The fact is, food stamp requirements do not require that all the household be husband/wife/children. A niece can live with you and you get food stamps for them. A group of unrelated people can live together and get food stamps. It's based on the number of people and the income, not relationship.(emphasis mine)

This is not true.

You’re confusing a “household” with all of the people in the house. A “household” is determined by all of the people one can claim on a tax return. Under your scenario, if the father and mother can claim the niece on their tax return, she is part of their “household,“ and the family would be eligible for the extra food and money allotment needed to take care of their niece.

But if the niece files her own tax return, then no, they cannot claim her as a deduction; thus, she is not part of the “household,' and the family will receive no allotments for her.

It has nothing to do with the fact that they all live in the same house.

A group of unrelated people can live together and get food stamps. It's based on the number of people and the income, not relationship.

This is completely untrue.

Again, it has to do with the “household,” as determined by the tax return--and if they all file separate tax returns, they are not a "household," and would never qualify for cash or food allotments.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Edited to change this paragraph:

So it's obviously not fraud for a man to get food stamps for his 3 wives and 12 kids.

strikeout---It would be if he got away with it. There is no reason for him to claim all three of his wives on his tax return, as, being capable adults, they should be able to claim themselves, and file their own tax return. ---strikeout

The change: If you're saying he should be allowed to represent his family, which I'm assuming would include his entire family, at workforce services when they file for assistance, I agree.

However, if you're saying he merits more than one person's worth of cash or food allotment, because he has three families, I disagree with that.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I would have no problem making polygamy legal either, which would make it legal for him to claim all three wives.

In fact, I keep saying same-sex marriage and polygamy are going to be legal one day, because there’s no constitutional reason for them not to be.

But until that day comes, he can only claim one of his wives on his tax return; thus, the others are not part of his “household.” (I’m sure there are exceptions; I’m just going by the most common situation I am aware of.)

The program is an immoral program. It is socialist and is against the free agency God gave us.

What program?

If you're talking about welfare, there is no such thing anymore. It is called Training Asisstance for Needy Families, (TANF), and is limited to an up to five-year program, depending on the training goals outlined from the very beginning.

It is not immoral. It is a program that has helped hundreds of thousands of people, the vast majority of them parents, receive training so they can get out of poverty and find jobs that give their families a better quality of life. (However, as the poverty rate rises, this is, unfortunately, not the case like it used to be.)

The head of the household then contributes money back into the tax base, thus paying for the next student to have the same chance she did.

She, in this case, was me, and once I finished school I made a very good wage, and eventually an excellent wage.

I will always be incredibly grateful to the federal government and the state of Utah for helping me better the quality of my son’s life, by helping me better mine.

And even though I had already paid my share back when I became disabled, if I were still working I'd glady pay back more, if it helps the next person who comes along. Gladly.

I'm not sure this is what you were referring to, so if it was not, then just do a jig while you read it again to make it enjoyable.

Elphaba