Republican SNAP Proposals Could Take Food Away From Millions of Low-Income Individuals and Families

[jc456]

Lunch and breakfast are free here. They even pass out lunches to students for free during summer break.

how are they free?

 

[jc456]

I bet it's poison

I bet it comes with some tap water to wash it down.

Free means at our expense. Nothing is free. He has a brain disorder.

 

[el midgetron]

how are they free?

They are “free” in the sense that the students do not directly pay for them.

 

[jc456]

They are “free” in the sense that the students do not directly pay for them.

so they aren't free. So you lied.

 

[el midgetron]

so they aren't free. So you lied.

Go cry to someone else, ******.

I started this thread about removing subsidies from undeserving people, which I fully support. I know very well that nothing from the government is “free”. FFS you are preaching to the choir.

Try reading the thread before spitting your beans all over yourself.

 

[jc456]

Go cry to someone else, ******.

I started this thread about removing subsidies from undeserving people, which I fully support. I know very well that nothing from the government is “free”. FFS you are preaching to the choir.

Try reading the thread before spitting your beans all over yourself.

I just wanted everyone to know that they aren't free. They are subsidized with our money. Oh, and it was the OP post.

 

[Concerned American]

Meaning the pleasure of having children you cant support?

Don't put your thoughts in my post. I didn't say anything that came anywhere close to what you suggest. Everyone is NOT on public assistance, indeed they are in the minority. To make a blanket statement that all people should just quit having children is just plain stupid.

 

[el midgetron]

I just wanted everyone to know that they aren't free. They are subsidized with our money. Oh, and it was the OP post.

Did you read the OP? I wrote it.

Just take a deep breath, brother.

Why are able-bodied people without dependents on subsidies? I’m not even sure why having dependents is an issue. Most people with kids work everyday. Yet it’s a big “mystery” why there are different outcomes for some people in this country.

 

[jc456]

Did you read the OP? I wrote it.

Just take a deep breath, brother.

I posted off of it. So yeah? You used the word Free. Didn't you or did you forget?

 

[TruthNotBS]

What is your complaint against Winco?

If I am supposed to hate that company tell me why

I never said you shouldn't like Winco. How did you infer that from what I posted? You should support your local worker-owned cooperatives. I wouldn't be surprised if you get a great product and service when buying from them and you're contributing to the cause of more freedom and power for the working-class (94% of the population, the American People). It's patriotic to buy from co-ops.

 

[Mac-7]

To make a blanket statement that all people should just quit having children is just plain stupid.

When did I say that?

Never

The topic is children - domestic anchor babies - that women cannot support

Not all are bad members of society

But many are

 

[Concerned American]

When did I say that?

Never

The topic is children - domestic anchor babies - that women cannot support

Not all are bad members of society

But many are

The post that you answered was my response to a moron that preaches that people should not enter into committed relationships or have children. It had nothing to do with economic status of the young folks. He has made these statements on this thread. This thread hasn't had a topic for a couple days now, so I guess your misinterpretation of my statement is to be expected.

 

[initforme]

As long as we cater to corporations and their needs free school lunches don't budget my anger meter.

 

[el midgetron]

I posted off of it. So yeah? You used the word Free. Didn't you or did you forget?

I did not use the word “free” in the original post (OP). Maybe it’s in the text from the article I posted…. ?

It was a later post of mine that you replied to. I did say “free” in that post but in the context of the discussion you might have understood I am not advocating for subsidies or think they are magical free stuff from the government.

I know full well the tax payer flips the bill for this stuff. That’s why I support government-assistance reform and kicking these lazy ass able-bodied freeloaders off the gravy train.

 

[Mac-7]

The post that you answered was my response to a moron that preaches that people should not enter into committed relationships or have children. It had nothing to do with economic status of the young folks. He has made these statements on this thread. This thread hasn't had a topic for a couple days now, so I guess your misinterpretation of my statement is to be expected.

And your response to the other extreme was just as bad if not worse

To wit:

“ Just because you haven't gotten any for over thirty years doesn't mean you should try to deny healthy young folks the pleasure.“

Of course economic status matters, particularly
if the persons are unmarried and low income

 

[jc456]

I did not use the word “free” in the original post (OP). Maybe it’s in the text from the article I posted…. ?

It was a later post of mine that you replied to. I did say “free” in that post but in the context of the discussion you might have understood I am not advocating for subsidies or think they are magical free stuff from the government.

I know full well the tax payer flips the bill for this stuff. That’s why I support government-assistance reform and kicking these lazy ass able-bodied freeloaders off the gravy train.

yep, in the article in the OP it says free lunches.

 

[TruthNotBS]

You may not have explicitly said low-wage workers are worthless, but your entire attitude towards them, your refusal to acknowledge their right to a living wage, implies exactly that.

Wrong.

If you truly believed they had value, you wouldn’t be so flippant about them earning wages that don’t even cover their basic survival.

A guy cleaning the toilets at the bank has value. He's not worth $100K a year.

Moreover, Workers absolutely produce the wealth that billionaires hoard.

Like Scrooge McDuck?

Do you seriously believe that workers making $14 an hour can somehow save up enough to buy out the billionaires who own their companies?

Are these companies worth billions? Weird.

Todd fires from his keyboard:

"Wrong"

A guy cleaning the toilets at the bank has value. He's not worth $100K a year.

Todd, once again, you miss the entire point because you can’t refute it. You’re so fixated on pretending billionaires are the ones creating wealth that you refuse to acknowledge the simple fact that wealth is generated by workers, collectively, not by a handful of elites sitting in corporate boardrooms. You scoff at the idea of worker ownership while ignoring the fact that without HUMAN workers, your beloved capitalists wouldn’t have a dime to their name, unless they got a job, then they'd have some money to live.

No one is arguing that every worker should make the same wage or that wages should be arbitrarily inflated, what I’m arguing is that every worker deserves a living wage and a stake in the wealth they create. Worker cooperatives prove that this is not just possible but more sustainable than the exploitative, capitalist-dictator-run (top-down rule) wage-labor model you defend.

Your sarcastic “Scrooge McDuck” comment is nothing more than an attempt to deflect from the fact that billionaires hoard wealth produced by others. They aren’t physically stacking gold coins like a cartoon character, but they absolutely sit on massive amounts of wealth while their workers struggle to survive. Most likely, being a member of the working class (those who need to rent their lives to a capitalist to eat), don't you have a problem with that? Do you actually believe that's good, when we took power away from kings, replacing them with democratic Republics, only to wake up in the morning and go to a workplace essentially led by a king.

Todd, don’t act like what I'm referring to is some fringe conspiracy. Corporate stock buybacks, offshore accounts, and tax loopholes ensure that billionaires hoard wealth that could otherwise be reinvested into higher wages, better working conditions, or expanded job opportunities. Instead, they keep wages as low as possible while funneling profits to shareholders and executives, extracting wealth from society that could be used to build national infrastructure and serve human labor.

And when that model inevitably causes problems, when workers can’t afford to be consumers anymore, suddenly, these same capitalists turn to government bailouts and subsidies to keep their system afloat. Ironically, they have Todd to defend them on a forum like this, a man that's probably, likely, a working-class Joe, like the rest of us.

Todd responded to the following snippet of my post, where I said:

Do you seriously believe that workers making $14 an hour can somehow save up enough to buy out the billionaires who own their companies?

Todd fires:

Are these companies worth billions? Weird.

Mass production is a social process, not a private one.

​

It takes thousands, sometimes millions, of workers to keep these enterprises running, from the lowest-paid janitor to the highest-paid manager. No single person generates billions of dollars in value alone. A billionaire without workers is just a guy with a pile of machinery and land that does nothing on its own. The moment capitalists can fully replace human labor with machines, that’s the moment capitalism starts to die, because no workers = no wages, and no wages = no paying customers.

That’s why capitalists today are scrambling to push for a government-funded Universal Basic Income, to artificially maintain a consumer base after they’ve rendered most human labor unnecessary. But at that point, what you have isn’t capitalism anymore, it’s a techno-feudalist oligarchy, where the wealthy elites own everything, and the rest of society is reduced to dependent consumer serfs.

​

And here’s what really exposes the hypocrisy of some of your fellow right-wing conservatives (I know you're not in favor of this..): They have no problem with the government bailing out banks, subsidizing corporations, and now even considering UBI to sustain capitalism when it fails under its own weight, but the moment someone suggests that the government should help the working class establish worker cooperatives, they and you unfortunately, suddenly clutch your pearls and scream about “fairness” and the “free market.” and THE SCARY USSR...

​

Why? If the government can step in to keep capitalists in power, why shouldn’t it step in to empower workers to own their workplaces? Worker cooperatives have already proven to be just as, if not more, resilient and productive than traditional corporate structures, yet they receive little to no support from the banks or the Small Business Administration. If billionaires get government help to maintain their power, why shouldn’t the people who actually do the work get the same support to take control of their own labor?

You think an individual worker is worth less because he doesn’t generate billions? Well, neither does the capitalist. It’s the collective workforce that produces those billions. It’s time they had control over what they create. Whether you like it or not, the future belongs to worker ownership, not billionaire exploitation and their totalitarian, plutocratic rule. We forced kings under our heels in previous centuries and today we will do the same with the kings and exploiters of our human labor.

Key Contributions Of The Actual American LEFT (Socialists, Classical Liberals/Progressives):
​

1. Worker Protections and Labor Reforms​

1. Eight-Hour Day and 40-Hour Work Week
   
   • The push for shorter working hours dates back to the late 19th-century labor movement, which was strongly supported by socialists and progressive labor organizers.
   • The Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) of 1938, signed by President Franklin D. Roosevelt, officially established the 40-hour workweek, overtime pay, and minimum wage.
2. Overtime Pay
   
   • Also established by the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, requiring employers to pay workers time-and-a-half for hours worked over 40 per week.
3. Minimum Wage
   
   • First introduced at the federal level by the Fair Labor Standards Act. Socialist and progressive labor leaders fought for a guaranteed wage floor to protect low-wage workers from being paid peanuts (starvation wages), for their labor.
4. Child Labor Laws
   
   • Child labor restrictions were championed by socialist-led and progressive labor unions, culminating in federal regulations within the FLSA that set minimum age requirements and hour limits for working minors.
5. Right to Unionize & Collective Bargaining
   
   • The National Labor Relations Act (Wagner Act) of 1935 guaranteed workers the right to form unions and engage in collective bargaining without employer interference. Unions and the broader left, were instrumental in advocating for these rights and having them become law.
6. Unemployment Insurance
   
   • Part of the Social Security Act of 1935, unemployment benefits were a key component of FDR’s New Deal, which socialists , leftist-led organized labor strongly supported.
7. Workers’ Compensation
   
   • Many states began instituting workers’ compensation laws in the early 1900s, largely due to pressure from American socialists and leftist-led labor organizations that sought protection for employees who were injured on the job.
8. Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA)
   
   • Established in 1971 under President Richard Nixon (though with strong backing from leftist labor advocates and left-leaning progressive lawmakers), OSHA enforces safety standards and regulations to prevent workplace injuries and deaths.

---

2. Social Safety Net​

1. Social Security (1935)
   
   • A cornerstone of the New Deal, Social Security provides retirement benefits and disability insurance. It was heavily promoted by FDR and supported by American socialists and leftist-led labor unions, and his left-leaning allies in Congress in response to the Great Depression.
2. Medicare and Medicaid (1965)
   
   • Passed as part of President Lyndon B. Johnson’s “Great Society,” Medicare provides health insurance to Americans 65 and older, while Medicaid offers coverage to low-income individuals. Again, left-leaning, Progressive legislators, social justice activists, and labor unions were pivotal advocates.

---

​

Read:

Not too many people know that Einstein was a socialist. Read his critique of capitalism:

Monthly Review | Why Socialism?

Is it advisable for one who is not an expert on economic and social issues to express views on the subject of socialism? I believe for a number of reasons that it is.… Clarity about the aims and…

monthlyreview.org

Albert Einstein Reference Archive

A library holding the scientific and political works of Albert Einstein

www.marxists.org

Here is another interesting read:

Free PDF version:

https://www.heritage-history.com/site/hclass/secret_societies/ebooks/pdf/butler_racket.pdf

Marxists Internet Archive

The most complete library of Marxism with content in 84 languages and the works of over 720 authors readily accessible by archive, subject, or history.

www.marxists.org

 

[Concerned American]

wealth is generated by workers, collectively, not by a handful of elites sitting in corporate boardrooms.

If that ^^^ is true, why, pray tell, don't you see all of these intelligent workers creating their own successful companies? I notice you aren't pointing any fingers at Gates, Zuckerberg or Bezos. You just want to force the American taxpayer to support your useless laziness. Run along comrade. Stalin, Marx and Mao are calling you.

 

[TruthNotBS]

If that ^^^ is true, why, pray tell, don't you see all of these intelligent workers creating their own successful companies? I notice you aren't pointing any fingers at Gates, Zuckerberg or Bezos. You just want to force the American taxpayer to support your useless laziness. Run along comrade. Stalin, Marx and Mao are calling you.

Wealth is not generated by a single individual magically conjuring money out of thin air. It’s the collective effort of people doing the day-to-day work, designing, building, delivering, and maintaining, that creates real value. When someone says, “If workers truly create all the wealth, why don’t they just start their own companies?” they’re ignoring the very real barriers that keep most people from doing exactly that. Starting any sizable business usually requires significant capital, access to loans, and investor backing. These advantages aren’t equally available to everyone, and a marketplace dominated by massive corporations with huge resources makes it even harder for worker-led enterprises to get off the ground.

Still, worker-owned cooperatives do exist, and many of them succeed. Take Mondragon in Spain, for example, or numerous co-ops in the United States. They show that collective ownership can thrive where the environment is supportive, through legislation, financing options, and a public that recognizes the value of worker-owned and driven enterprises.

 

[Soupnazi630]

Wealth is not generated by a single individual magically conjuring money out of thin air. It’s the collective effort of people doing the day-to-day work, designing, building, delivering, and maintaining, that creates real value. When someone says, “If workers truly create all the wealth, why don’t they just start their own companies?” they’re ignoring the very real barriers that keep most people from doing exactly that. Starting any sizable business usually requires significant capital, access to loans, and investor backing. These advantages aren’t equally available to everyone, and a marketplace dominated by massive corporations with huge resources makes it even harder for worker-led enterprises to get off the ground.

Still, worker-owned cooperatives do exist, and many of them succeed. Take Mondragon in Spain, for example, or numerous co-ops in the United States. They show that collective ownership can thrive where the environment is supportive, through legislation, financing options, and a public that recognizes the value of worker-owned and driven enterprises.

Wrong

Wealth is created by individual minds. ANYONE can start a business with ease and by themselves.

Worker owned coops sghow the opposite. You name a few outliers and exceptions as most of them do not succeed.