Not sure what to think? Convince me one way or another.

18 comments

• shadowcat

  •

  13 years ago

  Not sure how these ATMs work. If they dispense cash, then there is nothing to stop a person from getting cash at another ATM and spending it at a strip club, etc. So nothing accomplished.
• thesamurai

  •

  13 years ago

  Makes it more inconvenient. Some people are that lazy, it may just deter them lol.
• Jackmd

  •

  13 years ago

  All those places usually have high fees so I agree. Make them go to a low fee ATM then they can go to the stripclub or liquor store or casino.
• rh48hr

  •

  13 years ago

  That money should be going towards food, clothing and shelter, not strip clubs, liquor and gambling. That is slapping the face of the system. Why would you get off of welfare if you don't have to work and can enjoy these pleasures on someone else's dime.
• Alucard

  •

  13 years ago

  I think it is a wash. If someone wants money for a stripclub or liquor store or casino, they find & get it somewhere.
• mjx01

  •

  13 years ago

  Government assistance is for necessities: food, clothing, and shelter. Some leway for transportation depending on the availability of public transportation services. Nothing else. No boose, no boobie, no gambling, no smokes. No cash withdrawls which aren't traceable.
  
  Government assistance should all be done thru a debit card system where it can only be used for food, clothing, shelter. In order for walmarts etc to participate in the program they have to setup their check out systems to reject paying for unapproved items.
  
  And boo hoo if that makes progressives feel bad. It's not supposed to be comfortable on welfare. It should suck so there's motivation to get off welfare. Guys like Ben Franklin understood this.
• mjx01

  •

  13 years ago

  and it isn't a bad idea to insist on some sore of job training or communit service is exchange for tax dollars.
  
  But the reality is these programs today aren't intended to help anyone. (not even the people receiving benfits) It all just a scam to buy votes. People think the gov takes care of them so the people on benefits keep there reps in power. While just barely getting by prevents social mobility. Keeping poor people poor ensures that the rich stay in power.
• mjx01

  •

  13 years ago

  grr... I need to switch to firefox... built in spell check
• Ermita_Nights

  •

  13 years ago

  Fees are a factor. The ATM at Landing Strip (Detroit) charges $20!
  
  But I'd take issue with the liquor store part. In Detroit you'd have a hard time finding a food store that wasn't also a liquor store.
• bang69

  •

  13 years ago

  ATM's at strip clubs charge a high usage fee
• inno123

  •

  13 years ago

  The LA Times did a big expose on this article. In terms of the size of the program the quantity of funds cashed at strip clubs was minuscule. Moreover they simply presumed that the withdrawls were being made by customers of the club and not any of the dancers, waitresses, or staff. In addition they failed to note that the club that they were singling out as an example, Sam's Hofbrau, is in an industrial area with few other ATMs for the many people who work in the area.
• rh48hr

  •

  13 years ago

  Ermita - I know what you're saying, but if you can set up the system to reject non-food items, you could set it up to reject alcohol. Most states sell liquor in the stories. I know there are some that have state stores or separate liquor selling outlets. But its a trick situation regardless.
• Clubber

  •

  13 years ago

  Don't confuse use of TAXPAYER $'s with a morality issue. And, there will always be some black-market enterprise running as long as the government is involved.
• DFFECHSWU

  •

  13 years ago

  Prolly well meant just to save taxpayers a bit of quan. Those ATM's charge an exorbitant fee just to take out a few bucks! BTW, how many welfare recipients do you expect to have a checking/savings account, so that stipulation may be mostly irrelevant when all is said and done. It's a slippery slope with social welfare, and this is only my opinion ... but ... if you're someone in need of funds, those that provide it to you should have some say in how it's spent. I would rather my tax dollars go for food than a fifth of booze and a pack of smokes from the local liquor store. I think they tried that in CA, i.e. give the recipients cards for food and acutal necessities, but the ACLU got involved and it was canned. Either way, I see why they added that clause but am not sure what validity it holds.
• minnow

  •

  13 years ago

  Unless you're a welfare recipient, why are you wasting brain cells on this? If a goldbricker wants to piss away welfare money on vices, they'll just make withdrawls at regular ATM's. But, as one poster mentioned, some people are too lazy to do even that............
• MADDOG_ROMEO

  •

  13 years ago

  IMO the government should help subsidize my SC habit....I would not be adverse to some manner of rebate program and/or tax breaks....I'd welcome incentive initiatives....F#ck, would it be too much to ask for a free f#ckn dance once in a f#ckn while....
• gatorfan

  •

  13 years ago

  No you read wrong they are banning Ass to Mouth ATM at Strip Clubs
• Cheo_D

  •

  13 years ago

  One of the issues is that the states are moving/have moved to a system by which ALL assistance (not just food stamps) is accessed through one single debit-type card, so indeed that card may have access to accounts that ARE supposed to be partly or wholly disbursable in cash. But it is true that the system can be programmed so that a transaction for a non-eligible item or service, so the "liquor store" restriction could be addressed that way; the bars and strip clubs themselves already never accepted the Assistance plastic. I'm actually kind of surprised it took this long for the regulators to notice their ATMs. That said I'd be surprised if ATMs at strip clubs make up anything but a vanishingly small fraction of those withdrawals(contrast OTOH the busful of old ladies who invade the casino when the Social Security payment comes in), mentioning it evokes c.1980 pandering to the mythical "welfare queen" caricature .