SNAP's cuts have many worried.

[JustAnotherNut]

3 in a one bedroom apartment...….ok....and assuming all 3 work and share expenses????? They should be able to put food on the table without SNAP, but there is still food banks available to fill in

Yea & If the food pantry is empty there's always a soup line, right "Christian"?

Since the article doesn't say it.....I think it's safe to assume atleast ONE of the 3 are working. Though probably all 3 are, but who knows how many hours (part time or full time?) IF they all are working parttime at minimum wage they only have about $2400 (after taxes) between all of them. And true that in a big city like Chicago, it's damn expensive to live there.

Since atleast the guy in the article is 'able bodied' and currently on SNAP...…..his best bet would be to take advantage of the training & other programs, to help him get a better, full time job while he's still getting SNAP, Same with the other 2 if they are in the same boat. Sure they'll still lose the benefits, but they'll be making more in wages

 

[JustAnotherNut]

3 in a one bedroom apartment...….ok....and assuming all 3 work and share expenses????? They should be able to put food on the table without SNAP, but there is still food banks available to fill in

The person highlighted is 25 years old in a city with a super economy. The article doesn't state the age of his roommates, but I'm assuming they are all around the same age.

They also did not include if he could work, if he works, how many hours, or a lot of other factors that make you wonder why they left them out.

All we really know is that he's had a tough life. But that shouldn't matter when it comes to being physically able to work and getting a job.

The article did say it specifically, but if he's getting SNAP, without dependents he has to either be working 20 hours, go to job training or in school. At 25 (likewise assuming all 3) I doubt any of them are willing to let the other(s) get a free ride. So they all have to be bringing in some kind of money from somewhere, especially living in Chicago.


(they left out a lot of pertinent information because it wouldn't make for the 'sympathy' factor)

 

[Thunk]

able-bodied, without dependents between the ages 18 and 49, unless they meet certain work, training or school requirements

Give me a damn break! He doesn't intend to EVER stop the freebie train from rolling in!

Go get some job training or school & he can keep the benefits for a little bit longer.

I have an old friend from school & these "benefits" have destroyed him! He now lives such a pathetic life I can't stand speaking with him...It is actually painful to hear how he lives, and it would not be the case if it wasn't for gov't hand outs!

I asked him once if he thought he would be doing better without these handouts...if they were holding him back...and he answered "YES...without a doubt".

 

[DrLove]

My recollection had been that you were a reasonably intelligent feller Will. Either Donald Dumbed you Down or my recollection was off

If Trump hadn't come along, I'd have to have run and won the Presidency....I'm late in the 4th quarter so I let him do it and am enjoying the hell out of him doing it while I kick back and enjoy my golden years. Your drug-addled recollections obviously didn't include my years on the Slate board calling for open warfare with the Swamp.

Ahh good ol' Slate. I found that place during the 2000 hanging chad debacle when SCOTUS selected Junior. Mostly BallotBox as I recall. All the boards eventually become cesspool RW fever swamps. This one no exception.

The SCOTUS didn't select anybody. They asked the lower Florida courts to explain their judicial legislation.

Your opinion. What Scalia essentially said was that continuing to count the votes could be detrimental to Junior. It was pure partisan BS. But Jeb! and his sidekick Katherine "Cruella" Harris put the fix in. And we got Iraq. Yay us!

No, it was judicial legislation. The recount laws were very clear. Recount all you want, but have the ballots certified on the seventh day, no ifs, ands, or buts about it. What the Florida courts said is "This is is Al Gore, so we rule that this law does not have to be followed." That's why the SC sent it back asking for an explanation. They wanted to know what gave the Florida courts the right to subvert written law.

This has been debated to death & we’ll never agree so whatevs eh?

 

[XponentialChaos]

Or

Limit what can be bought instead.

No junk food, sodas and so on...

Or

Have Walmart deliver a box weekly that can feed those on Snap...

This.

Food stamps should force people using them to eat healthy. Just the basics there to sustain you.

If you want Cheetos, then you can pay for them with your own damn money.

 

[XponentialChaos]

 

[irosie91]

di

CHICAGO (AP) — Having food stamps offers Richard Butler stability he’s rarely known in his 25 years. He was in state custody at age 2, spent his teen years at a Chicago boys’ home and jail for burglary, and has since struggled to find a permanent home.

The $194 deposited monthly on his benefits card buys fresh produce and meat.

“It means the world to me,” said Butler, who shares a one-bedroom apartment with two others. “We can go without a lot of things, like phones and music. We can’t go without eating.”

But that stability is being threatened for people like Butler, who are able-bodied, without dependents and between the ages 18 and 49. New Trump administration rules taking effect April 1 put hundreds of thousands of people in his situation at risk of losing their benefits. They hit particularly hard in places like Illinois, which also has been dealing with a separate, similar change in the nation's third-largest city.

From Hawaii to Pennsylvania, states are scrambling to blunt the impact, with roughly 700,000 people at risk of losing benefits unless they meet certain work, training or school requirements. They've filed a multi-state lawsuit, expanded publicly funded job training, developed pilot programs and doubled down efforts to reach vulnerable communities, including the homeless, rural residents and people of color.

States scramble to prepare ahead of food stamps rule change

Just a little something different from the 50 primary topics today.

For the last year or so, all we have seen are the leftists on this board protest Trump's spending. Well, Trump heard your pleas. Now he's cutting spending. This is not a new idea, it's been implemented in many of the Republican governed states, and seems to have been successful.

Now that Trump is cutting the budget to reduce the deficit, how many of you spending complainers approve of his idea? After all, the economy is doing well, so you can't complain that some people can't get a job. It won't hurt our elderly as the age limit is up to 49. It won't hurt the children because these standards only apply to those with no dependents. What can you object to?

This guy is unmarried and living with two others in a one deb apartment... He has little in life and you think he needs motivation by making him starve...

This guy didn't have a great time growing up.. Thing is you don't care, has he refused programs? are the programs any good?

Let's start, Why didn't Trump increase funding for public funding job training first, are you sure there is enough spaces?

What does not having a good life have to do with getting a job and working for your food? If his other two buddies are also receiving the same amount in food stamps, they are bringing in close to $600.00 a month for food alone.

of all the entitlements----FOOD STAMPS is the one to which I have absolutely no
objection. Lots of people cannot work--------all are ENTITLED to eat in our
society. The food stamp allotment is SO good-----that if a parent or caregiver
has anything like a brain------no kid will go hungry----and disabled people with
brains or family with brains will not go hungry<<<<< that is good. SOMEHOW there are idiot politicians out there who INSIST "kids are hungry" so the answer is not HOLD THE PARENTS OR CARETAKERS RESPONSIBLE FOR
USING THE STAMPS WELL-------------do-----FREE MEALS AT SCHOOL-----
SHEEEEEEESH thet ^^^^^^^^^^
is really stupid. It is a political ploy------like the classical "BREAD AND CIRCUSES" attn.diblasio

 

[irosie91]

Or

Limit what can be bought instead.

No junk food, sodas and so on...

Or

Have Walmart deliver a box weekly that can feed those on Snap...

This.

Food stamps should force people using them to eat healthy. Just the basics there to sustain you.

If you want Cheetos, then you can pay for them with your own damn money.

actually------I would agree if such restrictions were feasible and not subject
to extreme agitation. -------my mom would OUTLAW white sugar

 

[Kilroy2]

CHICAGO (AP) — Having food stamps offers Richard Butler stability he’s rarely known in his 25 years. He was in state custody at age 2, spent his teen years at a Chicago boys’ home and jail for burglary, and has since struggled to find a permanent home.

The $194 deposited monthly on his benefits card buys fresh produce and meat.

“It means the world to me,” said Butler, who shares a one-bedroom apartment with two others. “We can go without a lot of things, like phones and music. We can’t go without eating.”

But that stability is being threatened for people like Butler, who are able-bodied, without dependents and between the ages 18 and 49. New Trump administration rules taking effect April 1 put hundreds of thousands of people in his situation at risk of losing their benefits. They hit particularly hard in places like Illinois, which also has been dealing with a separate, similar change in the nation's third-largest city.

From Hawaii to Pennsylvania, states are scrambling to blunt the impact, with roughly 700,000 people at risk of losing benefits unless they meet certain work, training or school requirements. They've filed a multi-state lawsuit, expanded publicly funded job training, developed pilot programs and doubled down efforts to reach vulnerable communities, including the homeless, rural residents and people of color.

States scramble to prepare ahead of food stamps rule change

Just a little something different from the 50 primary topics today.

For the last year or so, all we have seen are the leftists on this board protest Trump's spending. Well, Trump heard your pleas. Now he's cutting spending. This is not a new idea, it's been implemented in many of the Republican governed states, and seems to have been successful.

Now that Trump is cutting the budget to reduce the deficit, how many of you spending complainers approve of his idea? After all, the economy is doing well, so you can't complain that some people can't get a job. It won't hurt our elderly as the age limit is up to 49. It won't hurt the children because these standards only apply to those with no dependents. What can you object to?

This is the result of tax breaks for the rich. He bent over backwards to reduce taxes for the rich and now that less money is coming in. he is looking to cut spending on welfare programs. His solution is to reduce welfare for those who need it while proving tax benefits and inheritance benefits for those in the top tier.

It seems that there is not enough people on the street begging for money and he is looking to put more out there. I doubt a rich guy going to stop along the street and give a homeless guy money.

No it the lower classes and churches that are showing compassion

the most wealth tax rate is now lower than does in the lower tax brackets

Who does it benefit and who does it hurt

The benefits for Trump and family are obvious and with his antics of trying to have a meeting of world leaders at one of his resort but later recanted from the pressure of people telling him that it was a bad idea

it never occurred to him in the beginning that it was a bad idea for the President of the US to recommend that this meeting be held at his resort. No conflict of interest in his mind. Its busy as usual. He now has unlimited money to go hog wild while the homeless numbers are increasing

In 2019, there were about 567,715 homeless people living in the United States. While this number had been steadily decreasing since 2007, in the last two years it has started to increase.

quite the conundrum while obvious people are making money there are those who don't

but Trump doesn't care about them


Instead of increase taxes on the wealth, his solution is to cut spending on the lower income people who barely make a living. Thus pushing them into the streets and possible a life of crime.

• Government spending for FY 2021 budget is $4.829 trillion.
• Despite sequestration to curb government spending, deficit spending has increased with the government’s effort to continually boost economic growth

To call Trump economic plan a economic plan is disingenuous
its a ploy to help him get rich
its a ploy to help him get reelected
its a ploy to leave it up to the demos to correct it

sounds like a broken record

 

[XponentialChaos]

Or

Limit what can be bought instead.

No junk food, sodas and so on...

Or

Have Walmart deliver a box weekly that can feed those on Snap...

This.

Food stamps should force people using them to eat healthy. Just the basics there to sustain you.

If you want Cheetos, then you can pay for them with your own damn money.

actually------I would agree if such restrictions were feasible and not subject
to extreme agitation. -------my mom would OUTLAW white sugar

What's so unfeasible about it? It would be easy.

 

[irosie91]

Or

Limit what can be bought instead.

No junk food, sodas and so on...

Or

Have Walmart deliver a box weekly that can feed those on Snap...

This.

Food stamps should force people using them to eat healthy. Just the basics there to sustain you.

If you want Cheetos, then you can pay for them with your own damn money.

actually------I would agree if such restrictions were feasible and not subject
to extreme agitation. -------my mom would OUTLAW white sugar

What's so unfeasible about it? It would be easy.

nope----FOOD is a very touchy issue. Different folks do different things and it is
related to their CULTURE ( ---something like religion)

 

[XponentialChaos]

Or

Limit what can be bought instead.

No junk food, sodas and so on...

Or

Have Walmart deliver a box weekly that can feed those on Snap...

This.

Food stamps should force people using them to eat healthy. Just the basics there to sustain you.

If you want Cheetos, then you can pay for them with your own damn money.

actually------I would agree if such restrictions were feasible and not subject
to extreme agitation. -------my mom would OUTLAW white sugar

What's so unfeasible about it? It would be easy.

nope----FOOD is a very touchy issue. Different folks do different things and it is
related to their CULTURE ( ---something like religion)

That doesn't make it unfeasible.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

CHICAGO (AP) — Having food stamps offers Richard Butler stability he’s rarely known in his 25 years. He was in state custody at age 2, spent his teen years at a Chicago boys’ home and jail for burglary, and has since struggled to find a permanent home.

The $194 deposited monthly on his benefits card buys fresh produce and meat.

“It means the world to me,” said Butler, who shares a one-bedroom apartment with two others. “We can go without a lot of things, like phones and music. We can’t go without eating.”

But that stability is being threatened for people like Butler, who are able-bodied, without dependents and between the ages 18 and 49. New Trump administration rules taking effect April 1 put hundreds of thousands of people in his situation at risk of losing their benefits. They hit particularly hard in places like Illinois, which also has been dealing with a separate, similar change in the nation's third-largest city.

From Hawaii to Pennsylvania, states are scrambling to blunt the impact, with roughly 700,000 people at risk of losing benefits unless they meet certain work, training or school requirements. They've filed a multi-state lawsuit, expanded publicly funded job training, developed pilot programs and doubled down efforts to reach vulnerable communities, including the homeless, rural residents and people of color.

States scramble to prepare ahead of food stamps rule change

Just a little something different from the 50 primary topics today.

For the last year or so, all we have seen are the leftists on this board protest Trump's spending. Well, Trump heard your pleas. Now he's cutting spending. This is not a new idea, it's been implemented in many of the Republican governed states, and seems to have been successful.

Now that Trump is cutting the budget to reduce the deficit, how many of you spending complainers approve of his idea? After all, the economy is doing well, so you can't complain that some people can't get a job. It won't hurt our elderly as the age limit is up to 49. It won't hurt the children because these standards only apply to those with no dependents. What can you object to?

This guy is unmarried and living with two others in a one deb apartment... He has little in life and you think he needs motivation by making him starve...

This guy didn't have a great time growing up.. Thing is you don't care, has he refused programs? are the programs any good?

Let's start, Why didn't Trump increase funding for public funding job training first, are you sure there is enough spaces?

if you are able to work get a fucking job or starve to death I really don't give a fuck
I've worked all my life starting at 7 years old in the tobacco fields of North Carolina
I have no sympathy for the fucker.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

CHICAGO (AP) — Having food stamps offers Richard Butler stability he’s rarely known in his 25 years. He was in state custody at age 2, spent his teen years at a Chicago boys’ home and jail for burglary, and has since struggled to find a permanent home.

The $194 deposited monthly on his benefits card buys fresh produce and meat.

“It means the world to me,” said Butler, who shares a one-bedroom apartment with two others. “We can go without a lot of things, like phones and music. We can’t go without eating.”

But that stability is being threatened for people like Butler, who are able-bodied, without dependents and between the ages 18 and 49. New Trump administration rules taking effect April 1 put hundreds of thousands of people in his situation at risk of losing their benefits. They hit particularly hard in places like Illinois, which also has been dealing with a separate, similar change in the nation's third-largest city.

From Hawaii to Pennsylvania, states are scrambling to blunt the impact, with roughly 700,000 people at risk of losing benefits unless they meet certain work, training or school requirements. They've filed a multi-state lawsuit, expanded publicly funded job training, developed pilot programs and doubled down efforts to reach vulnerable communities, including the homeless, rural residents and people of color.

States scramble to prepare ahead of food stamps rule change

Just a little something different from the 50 primary topics today.

For the last year or so, all we have seen are the leftists on this board protest Trump's spending. Well, Trump heard your pleas. Now he's cutting spending. This is not a new idea, it's been implemented in many of the Republican governed states, and seems to have been successful.

Now that Trump is cutting the budget to reduce the deficit, how many of you spending complainers approve of his idea? After all, the economy is doing well, so you can't complain that some people can't get a job. It won't hurt our elderly as the age limit is up to 49. It won't hurt the children because these standards only apply to those with no dependents. What can you object to?

A majority of the folks on SNAP are Trump supporters. This won't go well for the Mango Menace.

got a link???

How many you need? Remember, these are largely the poorly educated that Donald so loves.

Trump-Voting States Most Utilize SNAP (Food Stamps) | hungerfreeamerica.org
Trump Voters Would Be Hit Hardest by GOP’s Food Stamp Work Rules
The Trump administration plans to gut food stamps, hitting red states hardest
Federal Anti-Poverty Programs Primarily Help the GOP's Base
SNAP food stamp programs will hurt Trump supporters most

More fake news

 

[ThunderKiss1965]

CHICAGO (AP) — Having food stamps offers Richard Butler stability he’s rarely known in his 25 years. He was in state custody at age 2, spent his teen years at a Chicago boys’ home and jail for burglary, and has since struggled to find a permanent home.

The $194 deposited monthly on his benefits card buys fresh produce and meat.

“It means the world to me,” said Butler, who shares a one-bedroom apartment with two others. “We can go without a lot of things, like phones and music. We can’t go without eating.”

But that stability is being threatened for people like Butler, who are able-bodied, without dependents and between the ages 18 and 49. New Trump administration rules taking effect April 1 put hundreds of thousands of people in his situation at risk of losing their benefits. They hit particularly hard in places like Illinois, which also has been dealing with a separate, similar change in the nation's third-largest city.

From Hawaii to Pennsylvania, states are scrambling to blunt the impact, with roughly 700,000 people at risk of losing benefits unless they meet certain work, training or school requirements. They've filed a multi-state lawsuit, expanded publicly funded job training, developed pilot programs and doubled down efforts to reach vulnerable communities, including the homeless, rural residents and people of color.

States scramble to prepare ahead of food stamps rule change

Just a little something different from the 50 primary topics today.

For the last year or so, all we have seen are the leftists on this board protest Trump's spending. Well, Trump heard your pleas. Now he's cutting spending. This is not a new idea, it's been implemented in many of the Republican governed states, and seems to have been successful.

Now that Trump is cutting the budget to reduce the deficit, how many of you spending complainers approve of his idea? After all, the economy is doing well, so you can't complain that some people can't get a job. It won't hurt our elderly as the age limit is up to 49. It won't hurt the children because these standards only apply to those with no dependents. What can you object to?

This guy is unmarried and living with two others in a one deb apartment... He has little in life and you think he needs motivation by making him starve...

This guy didn't have a great time growing up.. Thing is you don't care, has he refused programs? are the programs any good?

Let's start, Why didn't Trump increase funding for public funding job training first, are you sure there is enough spaces?

Get out and get a job its not the tax payers fault he fucked up his life.

 

[irosie91]

Or

Limit what can be bought instead.

No junk food, sodas and so on...

Or

Have Walmart deliver a box weekly that can feed those on Snap...

This.

Food stamps should force people using them to eat healthy. Just the basics there to sustain you.

If you want Cheetos, then you can pay for them with your own damn money.

actually------I would agree if such restrictions were feasible and not subject
to extreme agitation. -------my mom would OUTLAW white sugar

What's so unfeasible about it? It would be easy.

nope----FOOD is a very touchy issue. Different folks do different things and it is
related to their CULTURE ( ---something like religion)

That doesn't make it unfeasible.

well----sounds nice but it will not work in a culturally diverse society.
Food is very tied up in culture, religion, individual physiology, and
individual tastes. I would have no idea what to do with the okra in
my Walmart basket. I tried-----but it never worked. Do you have any
idea how the people of the "Jain" religion eat? Food stamps not only
provide food for the poor------it also boosts the "supermarket" and thus
the agricultural communities

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

This.

Food stamps should force people using them to eat healthy. Just the basics there to sustain you.

If you want Cheetos, then you can pay for them with your own damn money.

actually------I would agree if such restrictions were feasible and not subject
to extreme agitation. -------my mom would OUTLAW white sugar

What's so unfeasible about it? It would be easy.

nope----FOOD is a very touchy issue. Different folks do different things and it is
related to their CULTURE ( ---something like religion)

That doesn't make it unfeasible.

well----sounds nice but it will not work in a culturally diverse society.
Food is very tied up in culture, religion, individual physiology, and
individual tastes. I would have no idea what to do with the okra in
my Walmart basket. I tried-----but it never worked. Do you have any
idea how the people of the "Jain" religion eat? Food stamps not only
provide food for the poor------it also boosts the "supermarket" and thus
the agricultural communities

That's an old leftist wives tale. If people didn't have food stamps, do you think they would just stop eating?

 

[DrLove]

CHICAGO (AP) — Having food stamps offers Richard Butler stability he’s rarely known in his 25 years. He was in state custody at age 2, spent his teen years at a Chicago boys’ home and jail for burglary, and has since struggled to find a permanent home.

The $194 deposited monthly on his benefits card buys fresh produce and meat.

“It means the world to me,” said Butler, who shares a one-bedroom apartment with two others. “We can go without a lot of things, like phones and music. We can’t go without eating.”

But that stability is being threatened for people like Butler, who are able-bodied, without dependents and between the ages 18 and 49. New Trump administration rules taking effect April 1 put hundreds of thousands of people in his situation at risk of losing their benefits. They hit particularly hard in places like Illinois, which also has been dealing with a separate, similar change in the nation's third-largest city.

From Hawaii to Pennsylvania, states are scrambling to blunt the impact, with roughly 700,000 people at risk of losing benefits unless they meet certain work, training or school requirements. They've filed a multi-state lawsuit, expanded publicly funded job training, developed pilot programs and doubled down efforts to reach vulnerable communities, including the homeless, rural residents and people of color.

States scramble to prepare ahead of food stamps rule change

Just a little something different from the 50 primary topics today.

For the last year or so, all we have seen are the leftists on this board protest Trump's spending. Well, Trump heard your pleas. Now he's cutting spending. This is not a new idea, it's been implemented in many of the Republican governed states, and seems to have been successful.

Now that Trump is cutting the budget to reduce the deficit, how many of you spending complainers approve of his idea? After all, the economy is doing well, so you can't complain that some people can't get a job. It won't hurt our elderly as the age limit is up to 49. It won't hurt the children because these standards only apply to those with no dependents. What can you object to?

A majority of the folks on SNAP are Trump supporters. This won't go well for the Mango Menace.

got a link???

How many you need? Remember, these are largely the poorly educated that Donald so loves.

Trump-Voting States Most Utilize SNAP (Food Stamps) | hungerfreeamerica.org
Trump Voters Would Be Hit Hardest by GOP’s Food Stamp Work Rules
The Trump administration plans to gut food stamps, hitting red states hardest
Federal Anti-Poverty Programs Primarily Help the GOP's Base
SNAP food stamp programs will hurt Trump supporters most

More fake news

Translation: Me and my Trumpy pals don't care for facts - - - so we make up our own.

 

[progressive hunter]

CHICAGO (AP) — Having food stamps offers Richard Butler stability he’s rarely known in his 25 years. He was in state custody at age 2, spent his teen years at a Chicago boys’ home and jail for burglary, and has since struggled to find a permanent home.

The $194 deposited monthly on his benefits card buys fresh produce and meat.

“It means the world to me,” said Butler, who shares a one-bedroom apartment with two others. “We can go without a lot of things, like phones and music. We can’t go without eating.”

But that stability is being threatened for people like Butler, who are able-bodied, without dependents and between the ages 18 and 49. New Trump administration rules taking effect April 1 put hundreds of thousands of people in his situation at risk of losing their benefits. They hit particularly hard in places like Illinois, which also has been dealing with a separate, similar change in the nation's third-largest city.

From Hawaii to Pennsylvania, states are scrambling to blunt the impact, with roughly 700,000 people at risk of losing benefits unless they meet certain work, training or school requirements. They've filed a multi-state lawsuit, expanded publicly funded job training, developed pilot programs and doubled down efforts to reach vulnerable communities, including the homeless, rural residents and people of color.

States scramble to prepare ahead of food stamps rule change

Just a little something different from the 50 primary topics today.

For the last year or so, all we have seen are the leftists on this board protest Trump's spending. Well, Trump heard your pleas. Now he's cutting spending. This is not a new idea, it's been implemented in many of the Republican governed states, and seems to have been successful.

Now that Trump is cutting the budget to reduce the deficit, how many of you spending complainers approve of his idea? After all, the economy is doing well, so you can't complain that some people can't get a job. It won't hurt our elderly as the age limit is up to 49. It won't hurt the children because these standards only apply to those with no dependents. What can you object to?

A majority of the folks on SNAP are Trump supporters. This won't go well for the Mango Menace.

got a link???

How many you need? Remember, these are largely the poorly educated that Donald so loves.

Trump-Voting States Most Utilize SNAP (Food Stamps) | hungerfreeamerica.org
Trump Voters Would Be Hit Hardest by GOP’s Food Stamp Work Rules
The Trump administration plans to gut food stamps, hitting red states hardest
Federal Anti-Poverty Programs Primarily Help the GOP's Base
SNAP food stamp programs will hurt Trump supporters most

More fake news

Translation: Me and my Trumpy pals don't care for facts - - - so we make up our own.

the facts are people that depend on government for everyday sustenance are a burden to the rest of us,,,

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

CHICAGO (AP) — Having food stamps offers Richard Butler stability he’s rarely known in his 25 years. He was in state custody at age 2, spent his teen years at a Chicago boys’ home and jail for burglary, and has since struggled to find a permanent home.

The $194 deposited monthly on his benefits card buys fresh produce and meat.

“It means the world to me,” said Butler, who shares a one-bedroom apartment with two others. “We can go without a lot of things, like phones and music. We can’t go without eating.”

But that stability is being threatened for people like Butler, who are able-bodied, without dependents and between the ages 18 and 49. New Trump administration rules taking effect April 1 put hundreds of thousands of people in his situation at risk of losing their benefits. They hit particularly hard in places like Illinois, which also has been dealing with a separate, similar change in the nation's third-largest city.

From Hawaii to Pennsylvania, states are scrambling to blunt the impact, with roughly 700,000 people at risk of losing benefits unless they meet certain work, training or school requirements. They've filed a multi-state lawsuit, expanded publicly funded job training, developed pilot programs and doubled down efforts to reach vulnerable communities, including the homeless, rural residents and people of color.

States scramble to prepare ahead of food stamps rule change

Just a little something different from the 50 primary topics today.

For the last year or so, all we have seen are the leftists on this board protest Trump's spending. Well, Trump heard your pleas. Now he's cutting spending. This is not a new idea, it's been implemented in many of the Republican governed states, and seems to have been successful.

Now that Trump is cutting the budget to reduce the deficit, how many of you spending complainers approve of his idea? After all, the economy is doing well, so you can't complain that some people can't get a job. It won't hurt our elderly as the age limit is up to 49. It won't hurt the children because these standards only apply to those with no dependents. What can you object to?

This is the result of tax breaks for the rich. He bent over backwards to reduce taxes for the rich and now that less money is coming in. he is looking to cut spending on welfare programs. His solution is to reduce welfare for those who need it while proving tax benefits and inheritance benefits for those in the top tier.

It seems that there is not enough people on the street begging for money and he is looking to put more out there. I doubt a rich guy going to stop along the street and give a homeless guy money.

No it the lower classes and churches that are showing compassion

the most wealth tax rate is now lower than does in the lower tax brackets

Who does it benefit and who does it hurt

The benefits for Trump and family are obvious and with his antics of trying to have a meeting of world leaders at one of his resort but later recanted from the pressure of people telling him that it was a bad idea

it never occurred to him in the beginning that it was a bad idea for the President of the US to recommend that this meeting be held at his resort. No conflict of interest in his mind. Its busy as usual. He now has unlimited money to go hog wild while the homeless numbers are increasing

In 2019, there were about 567,715 homeless people living in the United States. While this number had been steadily decreasing since 2007, in the last two years it has started to increase.

quite the conundrum while obvious people are making money there are those who don't

but Trump doesn't care about them


Instead of increase taxes on the wealth, his solution is to cut spending on the lower income people who barely make a living. Thus pushing them into the streets and possible a life of crime.

• Government spending for FY 2021 budget is $4.829 trillion.
• Despite sequestration to curb government spending, deficit spending has increased with the government’s effort to continually boost economic growth

To call Trump economic plan a economic plan is disingenuous
its a ploy to help him get rich
its a ploy to help him get reelected
its a ploy to leave it up to the demos to correct it

sounds like a broken record

Yeah, Trump doesn't even accept his own paychecks from the job, and he lost a billion dollars of worth since announcing his candidacy for President, but that's what he's doing it for, to make himself wealthy.

You see, I knew this was going to happen when I created the thread. All you leftists who bitch about Trump's spending, are now against him cutting spending when it comes to things you want to have. This is why deficits and debt will continue to grow, because we all want something. And everybody can justify their support for spending as well.

So how are we ever going to cut the deficit and spending if nobody will support it? Raise taxes? That's a good way to destroy the economy, but let's do that. Let's have those 47% who pay no income tax at all start paying, and then we can raise the revenue that we need for the spending YOU WANT TO HAVE to cover these programs.