Food stamps: a lifeline for America’s poor that Trump wants to cut
Residents of the Congress Heights section of Washington DC tell of the devastating impact the president’s plan to cut food stamps would have on their families

Yadda, yadda, cuts, teh bastards, chunter.

They then talk to a number of people who get food stamps. None of whom, so far as I can see, would lose any money under the proposals.

Because what is being said is that eligibility should be tightened up to what it was pre-recession. Particularly, able bodied (and single,) people will have to do at least some work (which, from memory, can be as little as 6 hours volunteering a week) to get them.

But here’s The G interviewing disabled people with children about the coming loss of their food stamps, something that isn’t going to happen.

8 thoughts on “This is fun”

  1. So Much For Subtlety

    Those are two women who could do with eating a lot less.

    There have been state-level reforms. Imposing even the most trivial work requirement has led to massive drops in numbers claiming. Up to a third I sort of remember. It is a fraud that is being abused by welfare queens.

  2. So Much For Subtlety

    Green has been on food stamps since Nija’s birth in 1998 prompted her to leave her job in childcare. “They made a big difference because I don’t really make a lot so it helped me bring food for my kids.”

    That girl is *nine*? But what might she do? I don’t. How about getting a f**king job? I think that 18 years on welfare is long enough. And it is not as if her children are small ….

  3. I can remember a BBC report from around 20 years ago, where they the train companies were getting rid of guards on goods trains. They decided to shadow a guard on a passenger train, doing lots of “caring” stuff like looking after children, then covered themselves at the end by saying “this job is not under threat”. Jaw dropping sometimes 🙂

  4. Social Justice Warrior

    Most of the projected savings are going to come by cutting federal funding wholesale, inviting states to pay 25% of the cost.

    There’s some merit in that, but do you really think it won’t result in large cuts in some states?

  5. “Most of the projected savings are going to come by cutting federal funding wholesale, inviting states to pay 25% of the cost.”

    Fortunately, true to their honestly-held and not-in-any-way-virtue-signalling beliefs, SJWs everywhere will be dipping into their own pockets. Especially since they won’t be needing to send so much money to the Federal government.

    That’s assuming they’ve got any money left after personally housing all those refugees.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *