Why does replacing food stamps with food so anger liberals?


President Trump has proposed replacing some food stamp grants with actual food. This has curiously enraged liberals, who you would think would be delighted to see "hungry" people getting food. The program in question is called "SNAP", which I think, due to repeated accounts of fraud, is more appropriately called SUCK (Stealing Unearned Cash Knowingly).

The Trump administration is proposing a major shake-up in one of the country's most important "safety net" programs, the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, formerly known as food stamps. Under the proposal, most SNAP recipients would lose much of their ability to choose the food they buy with their SNAP benefits.

But if you like your supermarket you can keep your supermarket, right? Heh heh heh.

Click here to see the rest of this article
Under the proposal, which was announced Monday, low-income Americans who receive at least $90 a month — just over 80 percent of all SNAP recipients — would get about half of their benefits in the form of a "USDA Foods package." The package was described in the budget as consisting of "shelf-stable milk, ready to eat cereals, pasta, peanut butter, beans and canned fruit and vegetables."

Joel Berg, CEO of Hunger Free America, a hunger advocacy group that also helps clients access food-assistance services, said the administration's plan left him baffled. "They have managed to propose nearly the impossible, taking over $200 billion worth of food from low-income Americans while increasing bureaucracy and reducing choices," Berg says.

Do you think before today that this poverty pimp has ever been concerned about the bureaucracy of any government program?

He says SNAP is efficient because it is a "free market model" that lets recipients shop at stores for their benefits. The Trump administration's proposal, he said, "is a far more intrusive, Big Government answer. They think a bureaucrat in D.C. is better at picking out what your family needs than you are?"

Extolling the free market. Condemning big government. Criticizing DC bureaucrats. Hey, Trump finally accomplished something! He's gotten liberals to talk like conservatives!

Douglas Greenaway, president of the National WIC Association, echoed that sentiment. "Removing choice from SNAP flies in the face of encouraging personal responsibility," he said. He says "the budget seems to assume that participating in SNAP is a character flaw."

He's right, participating in SNAP is a character flaw. No one should be on SNAP for years. Get a job! As for removing choice discouraging personal responsibility, just the opposite. If you want a choice of what food to buy, get a job!

Critics of the proposal said distributing that much food presents a logistical nightmare. "Among the problems, it's going to be costly and take money out of the [SNAP] program from the administrative side. It's going to stigmatize people when they have to go to certain places to pick up benefits," says Jim Weill, president of the nonprofit Food Research and Action Center.

And people aren't stigmatized using EBT cards in supermarkets? They wave them around like Visa Platinum cards!

Stacy Dean, vice president for food assistance policy at the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities, called the proposal "radical and risky."

Gay marriage. Boys in girls' bathrooms. Gutting the military. Obamacare. Leaving our borders unprotected. None of these are "radical and risky". But giving food to poor people instead of money, that's "radical and risky".

It isn't clear whether the boxes will come with directions on how to cook the foods inside. "It could be something that [SNAP recipients] don't even know how to make," notes Miguelina Diaz, whose team at Hunger Free America works directly with families to help them access food aid.

I can see it now: police, responding to reports of a strange smell, enter a home to find an entire family starved to death, surrounded by dozens of boxes of unopened macaroni. If only the instructions had contained pictograms!

If people are too dumb to cook a box of noodles, why are they voting? Or is voting easier than cooking a box of noodles, when the Democrats tell you what to do?

The startling thing about this entire discussion is that liberals are outraged that people on food stamps are being deprived of choice. Liberals didn't care about depriving people of choice when it came to Obamacare, or gun control, or raising taxes. They didn't even care when it came to Michelle Obama, the cultural tsarina in charge of food tastes, tried to tell our kids what they should be eating in school.

Why such a different attitude when it comes to food stamps?

Occam's Razor suggests that the simplest answer is also most likely the correct one. The simplest answer is that liberals don't care about feeding the poor. SNAP and a hundred programs just like it are all about income redistribution, not feeding the hungry. Any limits on transferring cash from taxpayers to those on welfare interferes with liberals' social engineering schemes.

Exit question:

If you were President Trump's advisor on food policy, what foods would you advise him to distribute to people on welfare?

[originally in AT]



Related articles:
Medicaid recipients find $1 premiums too confusing to pay

Amazon offering 50% off on Prime Membership for people on food stamps

If there are "Well-to-do", are there also "Well-to-don'ts"?








Trump calls for money for border wall by 2028, a week too late


President Trump's budget calls for funding for his border wall. Kudos, President Trump, mega-kudos to you!
CONTINUE READING

Related articles:
New budget allocates no money for border wall for two years

White House calls for citizenship for "Lazy Dreamers"

Phony ICE raids warn illegals in advance and catch none




Let's replace the words "Trump" with "Obama" in biased headlines


The liberal media, which bills itself as non-partisan, is running especially rabid now that President Trump has released his budget containing modest proposed cuts for certain agencies. Looking at the ferocity of the biased headlines, I wonder what the headlines would look like if Trump's name were replaced with Obama, as well as adjusting for circumstances.
CONTINUE READING Related articles:
How many buzzwords can the liberal media use in one sentence?

The truth behind the underreporting of terrorist incidents

Why do Super Bowl ads feature hard-left propaganda?



Study: Immigration enforcement gives illegal aliens PTSD


Would it surprise you to learn that there is not just one or two but dozens of studies examining the psychological effects of enforcing the law against illegal aliens? Apparently, enforcing immigration law causes all kinds of effects on illegal aliens; it makes them anxious, depressed, and, according to one study, victims of post traumatic stress disorder.
CONTINUE READING Related articles:
New budget allocates no money for border wall for two years

White House calls for citizenship for "Lazy Dreamers"

Phony ICE raids warn illegals in advance and catch none



New budget allocates no money for border wall for two years


In addition to being a an enormously bloated deficit busting spending bill, the two year budget that President Trump signed allocates zero dollars for construction of a border wall for the next two years. So unless Mexico suddenly writes us a check, there will be not an inch constructed of a new border wall three full years into President Trump's term of office.
CONTINUE READING Related articles:
White House calls for citizenship for "Lazy Dreamers"

Phony ICE raids warn illegals in advance and catch none

Trump breaks campaign promise to send Syrian refugees home



Medicaid recipients find $1 premiums too confusing to pay


Imagine if you were poor and you got Medicaid, heavily subsidized by the taxpayer, but you had to pay between $1 and $15 a month in premiums. Wouldn't that be confusing? For many people it is so confusing that they don't understand how to pay and end up being kicked off Medicaid.
CONTINUE READING Related articles:
Amazon offering 50% off on Prime Membership for people on food stamps

If there are "Well-to-do", are there also "Well-to-don'ts"?

Welfare rolls in North Carolina drop 55% after drug testing



If Rand Paul were President, we wouldn't have this Democratic-inspired budget


Senator Rand Paul succeeded in briefly shutting down the government last night when he demanded a vote on restoring the budget spending caps before voting on the GOP deficit busting bill. By the time you read this, however, it is expected that a coalition of Democrats and RINO Republicans will have succeeded in passing a monstrosity of a budget bill which, although it will increase defense spending, will also increase domestic spending by hundreds of billions of dollars over the coming years, and is estimated to create a 1.2 trillion dollar deficit in 2019. That's $1,200,000,000,000 added to the debt in one year alone.
CONTINUE READING Related articles:
Rand Paul fundraises off of 20 minute filibuster

Could Rand Paul be out of a job in 2017?

Donald Trump vs. Rand Paul on attracting black voters



GOP spending $400 million to teach pregnant women how to navigate


If you're on a cruise ship and you learn that the captain is a pregnant woman, wouldn't you still expect that she would know how to steer the boat? I would!
CONTINUE READING Related articles:
A GOP House, a GOP Senate, and a GOP President cannot cut a penny in spending

Trump orders raises for overpaid federal bureaucrats

Trump Admin. promises to do nothing about the national debt



A GOP House, a GOP Senate, and a GOP President cannot cut a penny in spending


The budget agreement reached by the Republican House and Republican Senate would increase spending over 500 billion dollars over the next two years. It does not appear to cut a penny from domestic spending; in fact, along with military increases, it increases domestic spending by hundreds of billions of dollars.
CONTINUE READING Related articles:
Trump orders raises for overpaid federal bureaucrats

Trump Admin. promises to do nothing about the national debt

Trump's budget is bold, brave, and ultimately pointless



White House calls for citizenship for "Lazy Dreamers"


One of the many conspiracy theories floating around to justify President Trump's call for citizenship for 1.8 million illegal aliens is that Trump will vet them thoroughly and permit a number far less than 1.8 million to be granted citizenship.
CONTINUE READING Related articles:
Phony ICE raids warn illegals in advance and catch none

Trump breaks campaign promise to send Syrian refugees home

Mark Levin: Trump's plan will give citizenship to 11 million illegal aliens



Would "Black Panther" have a 100% Rotten Tomatoes score if it were "White Panther"?


The liberal media is going ga-ga over the upcoming superhero movie "Black Panther". What makes Black Panther different from other Marvel films is that the protagonist, as well as most of the cast, are black, and Africa is portrayed as a super technologically advanced continent filled with spaceships. As of this writing the film has a 100% rating on Rotten Tomatoes. What are the odds of every single film reviewer agreeing on this film... or any film?
CONTINUE READING Related articles:
Do you pity an actor who needs 15 mansions to be happy?

Star Trek takes PC to new extremes, even for Hollywood

If liberals created Santa Claus today, what would she be like?




Next Page





Search Topic Areas
o Donald Trump
o Best articles
o Abortion
o Economy
o Education
o Environment
o Hairy feminists
o Gay agenda
o Gun control
o Illegal aliens
o Pop culture
o Radical islam
o Republicans
o Reverse Racism
o Ted Cruz
o Transvestite agenda




NewsMachete.com Copyright 2015
Feedback


Who is NewsMachete?

Privacy policy
Search Topic Areas
o Donald Trump
o Best articles
o Abortion
o Economy
o Education
o Environment
o Hairy feminists
o Gay agenda
o Gun control
o Illegal aliens
o Pop culture
o Radical islam
o Republicans
o Reverse Racism
o Ted Cruz
o Transvestite agenda