Mothering Forum banner

Food Stamps and "assets"

6K views 75 replies 31 participants last post by  Polliwog 
#1 ·
I know that to receive FS, you have to have less than $2000 in assets. What I'm wondering is how far back into your bank acct do they look? For instance, we meet the income requirements, but last month (and every month before) we had more than $2000 in the bank. Now we don't (and won't even remotely soon).

Do they just look at your current balance (along with other assets, which we don't have) or do they look at past months as well? I'm just wondering if we can go ahead and apply or if I should wait until we've been tight on money for a few months.

Hope this makes sense.
 
#2 ·
I think when I applied, all they asked for was a statement with my current bank account balances.
 
#6 ·
Check with your state. The application mentioned the $2000 limit, but I don't think they asked for anything of ours, not that we had anything anyway. If I had money, I wouldn't be applying for FS. I do remember hearing that some states have done away with the asset limits at least temporarily, especially ones with high unemployment. I don't know that for sure, but there was a news article about a local person who had like $50,000 in the bank, but still got FS b/c they'd recently lost their job.
 
#7 ·
I don't remember the exact details, but we had something like 2 grand in the bank before we applied and use it for our mortgage. The money I think was from owed vacay pay to dh when he lost his job so it wasn't money that we would be expecting again. We had to fill out a statement saying where the money came from, where it went (mortgage was acceptable to them) and how we won't be receiving any future payments like that I don't know how different it is if it's just money you saved up for a while, but the case worker will probably guide you the best way possible!
 
#9 ·
It seems to me that it would make more sense to encourage people to keep savings in the bank, so they can continue paying for their homes and necessities like health insurance when they lose their jobs and give them food stamps so those assets can last longer.

I find this rule really grating. People who save should still be able to get help when they hit a rough patch. I really dislike how the US system basically creates incentives to spend every dime you make. You're not going to get any help unless you are broke!

Bleh.....
 
#16 ·
We just applied and recieved FS 2 months ago. they wanted one months but they were leinent. We live in a HCOL area my modist morgage is 1445$ a month, of course if all my other bills were due at the same time, and I could pay the all at once I might have more then $2k. With the economy I think they are playing it by ear
 
#17 ·
Quote:

Originally Posted by Hannah32 View Post
It seems to me that it would make more sense to encourage people to keep savings in the bank, so they can continue paying for their homes and necessities like health insurance when they lose their jobs and give them food stamps so those assets can last longer.

I find this rule really grating. People who save should still be able to get help when they hit a rough patch. I really dislike how the US system basically creates incentives to spend every dime you make. You're not going to get any help unless you are broke!

Bleh.....
I disagree. My dh's income is high enough that we don't qualify, but too low for us to save to any real degree. So our tax dollars should pay for FS for people w/money in the bank? Where is the sense in that?
 
#19 ·
Quote:

Originally Posted by Usually Curious View Post
I disagree. My dh's income is high enough that we don't qualify, but too low for us to save to any real degree. So our tax dollars should pay for FS for people w/money in the bank? Where is the sense in that?
I totally see your point, but on the other hand my neighbor (about 50 years old with a partner that has always stayed home and two active high school kids who I'm sure eat like crazy) who just got laid off from a good job. If unemployment is his family's only income they would qualify for FS. Is his family less deserving of support if they had lived below their means for the last 20 years than if spent every dime the second they got it?
 
#20 ·
Quote:

Originally Posted by mnnice View Post
I totally see your point, but on the other hand my neighbor (about 50 years old with a partner that has always stayed home and two active high school kids who I'm sure eat like crazy) who just got laid off from a good job. If unemployment is his family's only income they would qualify for FS. Is his family less deserving of support if they had lived below their means for the last 20 years than if spent every dime the second they got it?
It's not really a matter of being 'deserving' or not. If he has the resources then, yes, he should use them.
 
#21 ·
Quote:

Originally Posted by Usually Curious View Post
It's not really a matter of being 'deserving' or not. If he has the resources then, yes, he should use them.
Yea but $2,000 is a really small amount. I have more cash on hand than that to pay some of my bills that only come due a few times per year especially since they tend to inconviently come due all at the same time. (glamorous non-essential stuff like my homeowner's insurance, property taxes, and the water bill). Right now my family has fewer bills than pretty much anyone I know.

Right now laid off people get a subsidy on COBRA, but some people on COBRA would spent all off the $2000 on a single COBRA payment.
 
#22 ·
Quote:

Originally Posted by Usually Curious View Post
It's not really a matter of being 'deserving' or not. If he has the resources then, yes, he should use them.
I just don't think it's right to essentially punish people for saving when they do run into trouble. Hubby and I make sacrifice after sacrifice to save on our modest income. I'm just wondering why we bother? Because, like others have said, just maintaining health insurance would eat up our savings pretty fast. And on top of that, we don't merit help because we've been living waaaaaay below our means?

My job is still looking good and hubby has his seasonal gig back, so this is likely only a theoretical for us, but it does grate on me from time to time. I just don't like how it's always on the individual in this country. I'm expected to be my own safety net, so I go about trying to do that, while spending every last dime is being rewarded. Maybe I'm just too conscientious?

I want a stronger safety net for all.
 
#25 ·
Quote:

Originally Posted by Usually Curious View Post
When my dh was laid off we went through our savings and 401k. Oh well, it was money that we had access to. I don't understand why it is acceptable to use someone else's money when you have your own.
I can def understand that pov, but at the same time, what about people who have been paying their taxes for years, like 40 years, struggled to make ends meet, and still not been able to get assistance. Then they lose their jobs, and it's either have no retirement money and have to work until they die, or get public assistance? I see no problem in helping people in situations like that, people whose money has already gone to help others. It's just one big circle.

BTW, do FS only go to people with families? Does it differ by state?
 
#26 ·
This is the main reason why I haven't applied for fs in Nevada. We definitely qualify based on our monthly income(which is only $1400 for a family of 4), but since DP got his tax return-that amount is too great. It's a shame too, because I've heard stories of people living in million dollars home being able to receive fs all because their bank account is low. It really does discourage any type of savings. I just hate though, how all of these banks get help from the government, no one cares what they do with the money
, but the little guy has to jump through hoops and ladder just to get help for food.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top