this post was submitted on 10 Jan 2024
393 points (98.8% liked)

politics

19170 readers
5179 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Moving beyond efforts to block expansion of health care for the poor and disabled, Republican governors in 15 states are now rejecting a new, federally funded summer program to give food assistance to hungry children.

The program is expected to serve 21 million youngsters starting around June, providing $2.5 billion in relief across the country.

all 44 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] WhiteOakBayou@lemmy.world 74 points 10 months ago (1 children)

It's probably no one's fault that the kids are poor but it definitely isn't the kids' fault. It's easy to have these conservative principles when it's not your kids being hungry.

[–] thefartographer@lemm.ee 12 points 10 months ago (1 children)

But hunger saves money. And that hunger feeds character. And strong character + malnourishment = strong workforce

Why have personally motivated workers who are healthy enough to have good attendance when you can instead have people die on the job? Then you can use their bones to feed the capitalism machine!

See? Everybody wins!

Well, the poors don't win, but they're not people because the capitalism machine doesn't eat people, only bones. Greg over in printshop made a sign and everything. It says "Don't worry, I don't eat people! Keep hands and loose clothing away at all times."

[–] SinningStromgald@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Greg over in printshop made a sign and everything. It says "Don't worry, I don't eat people! Keep hands and loose clothing away at all times."

Greg better have paid for that himself or he's getting fired for misuse of company resources.

[–] Good_morning@lemmynsfw.com 6 points 10 months ago (1 children)

It's ok, he did it when nobody was watching using Tom's print code, and Tom quit last week ago so he's covered.

[–] thefartographer@lemm.ee 1 points 10 months ago

Yeah, fuck Tom! Dude slept with my wife and never called her back and she's beginning to think he didn't mean it when he said he liked her. No one sleeps with my wife and doesn't call her back! No one...

[–] paddirn@lemmy.world 61 points 10 months ago (3 children)

So we have to take away people's rights for the sake of unborn children, but as soon as they're born, they're on their own? Am I understanding that right? The Republican platform seems to just be '• Needless Cruelty, no matter what' and '• Make the government as dysfunctional as we tell people it is'.

[–] Hegar@kbin.social 28 points 10 months ago

as soon as they’re born, they’re on their own?

No, not at all! Just as soon as they're poor. If they'd had the strength of character to be born rich then we wouldn't need to punish them for the sin of being poor.

[–] lurch@sh.itjust.works 5 points 10 months ago

They think that way they'll get more cheap workers and can fill their pockets exploiting them, but it will just turn their states into absolute shitholes and people will move to better states.

Making the government as dysfunctional as possible is a major component of their strategy for governance.

Why act in good faith in service to your constituents when you can make things worse and get reelected when you point to how poorly you run things and call it "government waste"?

American voters fail to see this connection and thus continue the churn of ineffective government.

[–] jjjalljs@ttrpg.network 46 points 10 months ago (2 children)

Stop voting for Republicans. Being a Republican is not okay.

[–] silence7 11 points 10 months ago

If you can, do more than vote: volunteer and give money to campaigns.

I recommend picking out close races to work on. Besides president, there are a ton of house, senate, and state-level races to be involved with.

[–] HubertManne@kbin.social 4 points 10 months ago

I was thinking with the fauci hearings how insane it is that we have so many folks that vote for these guys.

[–] kameecoding@lemmy.world 37 points 10 months ago (4 children)

Abortion is murder but starving children is fine

[–] cultsuperstar@lemmy.world 9 points 10 months ago (2 children)

They only care about unborn. Fuck you after you're born.

[–] Diplomjodler3@lemmy.world 6 points 9 months ago

No they don't. They only care about hurting women.

[–] A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world 9 points 9 months ago

No one cares about kids once they are outside the womans body.

Weird, innit?

Almost as if its all a big elaborate ruse to punish and control women and not about the blessed holy sanctity of life /s

[–] Spacehooks@reddthat.com 5 points 9 months ago

Same crowd asking why don't we have grandkids!?

[–] Diplomjodler3@lemmy.world 4 points 9 months ago

The cruelty is the point.

[–] Ranvier@sopuli.xyz 36 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (5 children)

Iowa Gov. Kim Reynolds (R) said she saw no need to add money to a program that helps food-insecure youths “when childhood obesity has become an epidemic.”

What is wrong with these people? I just can't even.

If these Republican governors were the villains in a book or movie or something, people would say they're too over the top evil and not believable.

[–] HopeOfTheGunblade@kbin.social 9 points 10 months ago

Fiction, unlike reality, must be believable. Reality is under no such obligation.

[–] Fredselfish@lemmy.world 6 points 10 months ago

Oklahoma of course won't join just Governor Shit is okay with 1 in 4 kids going hungry in our state. I Fucking hate Republicans.

[–] trafficnab@lemmy.ca 4 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Clearly the solution to the childhood obesity problem is to just stop feeding them!

[–] Halosheep@lemm.ee 2 points 9 months ago

Finally! The cure for childhood!

They hate children. Plain and simple.

[–] HWK_290@lemmy.world 27 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Let them eat magnets and AR-15s, am I right conservatives?

[–] Endorkend@kbin.social 8 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Hrm, as long as they don't drink water after eating the magnets.

[–] Municipal0379@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago

But they can get vaccinated since the magnets will offset the vax. hardest of eye rolls

[–] LEDZeppelin@lemmy.world 21 points 10 months ago

Party of Family Values™️

[–] Treczoks@lemmy.world 21 points 9 months ago

Why waste money on kids when it can be put to better uses like more tax breaks for the rich? /s, just in case...

[–] _sideffect@lemmy.world 17 points 10 months ago

Give that money to the corporations that need bailouts instead!

Assholes

[–] agitatedpotato@lemmy.world 14 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Cut programs that help people, focus on the small upticks in crimes of subsistence, use them to demoinze, means test, spy on, and incarcerate the poor. Repeat.

[–] Bakkoda@sh.itjust.works 4 points 9 months ago

The best part is the mental, physical and eventually societal cost of the stress from all this bullshit. Health declines, more meds prescribed, more medical bills, less retirement because of medical insurance... Games been rigged since before i was born.

[–] mastefetri@infosec.pub 13 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Just bypass the states entirely and send the money directly to the qualifying families. Federal programs shouldn't need a rubber stamp from backwater states anyways. These assholes are virtue signaling while kids go hungry.

[–] AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world 2 points 10 months ago (1 children)

It's not a bad idea, but how do you let the people who qualify know how to apply? I ask because there are billboards about low income assistance programs for residents of Texas, but said billboards are in someplace like Maryland.

I can't figure out how to find the article, but I remember them pulling this type of shit, and reading about it a few months ago.

[–] Semi-Hemi-Demigod@kbin.social 5 points 10 months ago

If the government already knows they qualify they should just send them a check. Or, even better, a regular delivery of healthy food.

[–] cultsuperstar@lemmy.world 7 points 10 months ago

Sooooo more money to Dem states?

[–] PedroMaldonado@lemmy.world 7 points 10 months ago

The cruelty is the point. Making America great.

[–] telfus@lemm.ee 5 points 10 months ago (1 children)

surprised to see vermont on that list tbh

[–] AA5B@lemmy.world 3 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

Just blame the computers ….

https://www.vermontpublic.org/local-news/2024-01-08/vermont-opts-out-of-new-federal-food-assistance-program-due-to-administrative-costs

In Vermont, meanwhile, the organization that’s leading the charge to end childhood hunger in the state is backing the administration’s decision not to participate in Summer EBT this year.

Anore Horton, executive director of Hunger Free Vermont, said state agencies currently lack the technical infrastructure for a successful launch of Summer EBT.

“Our state agencies are eager to participate in Summer EBT, and they are committed to starting Summer EBT in summer of 2025,” Horton said. “So it’s not that they’re saying, ‘We’re not going to do this.’ They’re saying, ‘We’re not going to do this in Summer 2024.'”

[–] Halosheep@lemm.ee 2 points 9 months ago

Not having the administrative and technical ability to participate, but actually having a plan to fix that is at least understandable and forgivable. Some others have given some very silly reasoning.

[–] HubertManne@kbin.social -3 points 10 months ago

one eight hundred no treats for tots. a s s no treats for tots....