Home | About | Donate

Flood of Comments Shows Public 'Utterly Repulsed' By Trump Plan to Take Food Stamps From 750,000 People


Flood of Comments Shows Public 'Utterly Repulsed' By Trump Plan to Take Food Stamps From 750,000 People

Jake Johnson, staff writer

As the Trump administration moves closer to stripping food stamps from as many as 750,000 low-income people by imposing punitive work requirements, a flood of nearly 30,000 comments to the U.S.



I’d like to rotate the issue about 90 degrees. On the face of it this reads as a failing of ethics, social justice, budgetary insight and functional governance. Which in and of itself is condemnation worthy of every word. But lets look at the juncture between “the most vulnerable among us” and these being our family members, fellow citizens, neighbors, community members and relationships of dignity.

Many of us live in “food deserts”. These are characterized by agribusiness products, often times GMO, loaded withchemicals and toxins AND shipped in from an economic source region having nothing to do with community stability. This needs to change and IS being changed by folks I consider to be heroes.

Now, consider food coops. It varies, but in my case, the community sees, for every $1000 spent in the co-op, a value of $1600 resulting circulation in the community. There is also a variation on “round-up”. In this case, each month the odd change from total check-out is rounded up and goes to a designated community organization beneficiary - though not applicable to food stamps, the rest of one’s food budget CAN participate. When as a community we do this, the combined effort results in thousands of dollars each month for community organizations. One has the option of spending on locally grown organic producers and fair-trade. There is a foundation here which, during farmers market season, offers a 1 to 1 match for the food stamp dollar, doubling its value. Again, the dignity of being able to support our local producers and in the long run, given the community benefit, a stunningly wise foundation investment.

This is what capitalism CAN look like. It is the long view of sustainable equilibrium rather than extractive greed. The more succinctly we are able to articulate distinctions such as these, the stronger the grass roots grow. I bet others here know of other programs in their communities that get economics back on track with original meaning of ‘oikos’.



Trump knows that his base is quite sadistic in nature. What his base doesn’t know is that it is quite masochistic. What I know is that it is a basal cell tumor that desperately needs to be excised.



Kill the sick, kill the poor, expel the Others, build the Dome. This is the road to Destruction, not Greatness.



Priorities, priorities. Says a lot about a person. (Or a government.)






Seems to me that I’ve read that most recipients of such government programs tend to reside in Red states, which should work out well for Rump supporters, once again (sarcasm). I foresee this being like when the Obamacare repeal got real and suddenly bunches of Clueless Ones (Rump supporters) came to realize that Obamacare was the very program that made their lives better. Too ignorant to realize who their true benefactors are.



As the number of people on Medicaid decreases, more who become ill end up in emergency rooms. They are sicker because they delayed seeking care since they have no insurance. The emergency rooms must shift the costs to those who have insurance in the form of increased premiums, co-pays and deductibles. As these increase, more and more people and companies are priced out of the system to send more people to the emergency to shift more costs. When Hillary Clinton tried to fix the system about 40 years ago there were 34 million people who lacked health insurance. In 2005, before the Affordable Care act was passed, there were 48 million uninsured. Now, there are still 28 million uninsured. This is the biggest reason for increasing premiums. It is the reason that the Institute of Medicine, whose mission is supposed to be to advise Congress on medical matters, has said several times that the health care system in our country is unsustainable in the 21st Century. The only solution is a publicly funded national health program. It will not happen nationally until it happens in a state or two. It is necessary to show legislators that support is not political suicide, and it is also necessary to show that it will save money. As Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis said the 1930s, the states are the laboratories of democracy. About 20 states are working on the problem. An example is the Single Payer Action Network of Ohio (SPANOhio.org).



But that was the AFFORDABLE CARE ACT, not “Obamacare.”



In New Mexico, average benefits are about $175 per month. Making someone volunteer at least 80 hours a month comes out to a little more than $2/hr. Arrogant lawmakers say they are trying to teach people the value of work. I’d like to see them work for a while at these wages.



Taxing the rich and cutting off government subsidies to wealthy corporations is a step in the right direction. The GOP has already cut food stamp to the bone, it amounts to something like $4/day for an adult for everything. Cruelness and inhumanity waves have engulfed America since Reaganomics and must be reversed. Tax the rich and cure homelessness disease and poverty in America the richest nation in the history of mankind. Poverty has root causes that must be addressed, not everyone can work or must work we have to stop this sick jealousy and hatred among us. Or how about no taxes no benefits let us keep what we earn instead of taxing to death the poor to feed the war machine and the damn fat pigs.



" I don’t want the government taking control over my social security"



If we’re going to pick nits, the full title is “The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.” But based on its provenance, it could legitimately be called “Heritage/Romney/Obamacare” for short.



Obese bunch of suits are going to take away food from down and out Americans? That should go over well with humans still able to think beyond their cult leaders. Meanwhile those same leaders are pouring out the tainted cool aid. Houston we have a problem!



My right wing friends (yes, I hang out with the wrong crowd sometimes) most common response to food stamps is, “I saw one of those welfare cheats buying steaks with food stamps.”
So what! The poor are not supposed to eat certain foods once in awhile? They’re not worthy? I’m sure they don’t eat steak very often. I tell them to make sure they follow these poor folks around the grocery store and monitor what they put in their cart.



Time to take away the so called leaders .
If you have no compassion your not fit for public service .



Take away the ACA, food stamps, plans to gut Medicare/Medicaid/Social Security…what else? I am sure I’ve missed a bunch of things like abortions and what not…if it helps the citizens it has to be gotten rid of, only wall street and the mic matter…kinda smells don’t it? like rotting fish…and where are the demo’s, where are nancy and chuck? where is the push back? where is sanity? where is my brain, why it’s splattered all over the monitor, damn :-(((

1 Like


This is what people seem to miss in regards to austerity. Beyond the obvious (to me) morals of making sure people can feed themselves and their kids. When I heard the Republicans propose cuts all the time, it seems that they think that money, if it enters the economy, is a dead weight or something. Like, if the government spends money, well all should just look at one side of a double entry, and not look at the fact that when the government spends money, there is increased demand, and that money (if it goes to working people and not the rich that don’t need it) will circulate around. There is a well established multiplier with things like food stamps, and the multiplier is clearly higher than giving tax cuts to a rich person that won’t inject the money back into the economy. If cuts are occurring, then the cost isn’t just those cuts, it is also the lost impact from the foregone multiplier benefits.

With local communities, the economy around food could be a means of keeping money flowing in the local economy. If there are food deserts then more money going towards more food production can keep the money local, as people need to eat. If the local economy isn’t producing or providing enough food to people, they will spend outside the community on food, which leads to money leaking out of local economies.

FANIOM’s GDP multiplier of 1.79 for SNAP benefits is comparable with multipliers from some macroeconomic models.



If anything needs to be taken away, it’s the excessive powers of the presidency that Congress has ceded.



Overall, good comment, well said. However, there is a huge danger of a single payer system at the state level. The danger is that states cannot create money when they need it, while the federal government can. So, in a recession, the federal government does not need to cut anything. A single payer system could continue at the federal level through a recession. However, during a recession, states get less in tax revenue, and unlike the federal government, the deficits can make a huge difference. Deficits at the federal are a non-issue, since the state can create money when it wants. Deficits at the state or local level might result in those states having to borrow more, draw on savings or raise taxes. Those things might not be huge issues, but in some contexts, they can be. When a recession hits, and state revenues decline, and if people are dependent on a public health system, it could be a problem. States could manage the situation, it isn’t as if these things cannot often be handled well, but it could endanger single payer, especially if politicians want it to fail and feed into its failure. If we want evidence that single payer works, there is endless evidence. Other single payer systems, traditional Medicare, how well Medicare, Medicaid and the VA system works relative to private insurance (all more popular than private insurance, all more efficient).