Posted on 02/12/2018 7:40:50 PM PST by E. Pluribus Unum
The budget that President Trump proposed Monday takes a hard whack at the poorest Americans, slashing billions of dollars from food stamps, public health insurance and federal housing vouchers, while trying to tilt the programs in more conservative directions.
The spending plan reaches beyond the White House’s own power over the government social safety net and presumes lawmakers will overhaul long-standing entitlement programs for the poor in ways beyond what Congress so far has been willing to do.
The changes call on lawmakers to eliminate the expansion of Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act and transform the rest of that program into a system of capped payments to states; convert food assistance into a hybrid of commodity deliveries and traditional cash benefits; and expand requirements that low-income people work to qualify for federal assistance.
“We’re very encouraged by their approach to reforming the welfare state, both to taxpayers and the people on these programs,” said Akash Chougule, director of policy for the libertarian group Americans for Prosperity. “We’re encouraged by the president’s rhetoric and recent actions.”
Congress has final say over spending — but Monday’s budget proposal is seen as an important sign of Trump’s priorities.
Specifically, the Trump budget proposal would gut the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), better known as food stamps, by $17.2 billion in 2019 — equivalent to 22 percent of the program’s total cost last year — and implement a boxed food delivery program, a system that White House budget director Mick Mulvaney compared to Blue Apron.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
If a budget in the trillions is presented I have a hard time taking the word slashes seriously.
Under Obozo, transfer payments increased almost 32%. My Social Security payment went up less than 2%. I think if you can fog a mirror, you should work for your welfare. Show everyday at 8AM and leave at 5PM. If you don’t show, neither does your welfare check...and that means ALL payments including rent subsidies, free cell phones, food stamps, etc.
I am beginning to see quite a few help wanted signs on business doors, entry level jobs. The issue will be can they pass drug and basic background checks? I am hearing from people that hire the problem is not getting people to apply- it is that so many cannot pass a drug test! I have no idea how we deal with that.
Such a safety net shouldn’t keep expanding but in a time of abundant jobs should be shrinking. And no Obamaphones...
There are nearly 3 million federal employees, half of which could be permanently laid off and no one except the ones laid off would notice. There are also hundreds of overlapping federal programs that could be combined or eliminated. And don’t get me started on pork barrel spending.
At a bare-bones minimum, how about an AUDIT of some of these hand-out programs?
Tales abound of “welfare queens” driving fancy cars to do their food shopping with a fistful of EBT cards in hand. How is this possible? Are they collecting from multiple states at once? Do we have a clue?
This is how you learn to deal with problems these days, for many people: drug yourself senseless. They don't seem to realize that the problem you sought to escape will still be there when you come down. They don't seem to realize that while drugged, they can't learn anything in school properly or perform a job properly. And that by getting the drugs, they are usually breaking the law, which adds convictions to the mix. They are working, all right---to make themselves unemployable. The only thing they leave themselves open for is stealing stuff. Great.
Well, I do not feel like supporting stupid people who made very bad decisions for the rest of their miserable lives. I worked HARD to get everything that I got---nothing was handed to me. And now that I'm retired, I deserve to enjoy the fruits of that labor--not hand over my income to weakling bums for whom life itself is too h-a-r-d. Perhaps the military could open up a new branch of the service for these unemployable bums and teach them a marketable skill, while they perform menial tasks to free up the actual fighting men and women. I would not trust such people to be able to follow orders (discipline doesn't seem to be their strong suit, right?) well enough to be trusted with weapons or higher order tasks. Perhaps being in such a discipline-rich environment will let some of that rub off on them.
Yup, it IS a hammock for most of them. Bunch of blood suckers killing the host.
The kids might have a shot at having some food in the house.
I was in San Francisco a couple of weeks ago.
Drove by an In and Out Burger. They had a Help Wanted Sign in the Window, starting Pay $16 an Hour.
I noticed a whole bunch of Help Wanted Signs everywhere we went, even in Sausalito.
Perhaps he is moving us from a safety net to a ‘worky net’! MAGA!
It’s not government’s job to take care of the unlucky, the incapable and the indigent. That’s what CHARITY is for!
Safety net? Lol. Apparently, WaPo, along with many other delusional mouthpieces fail miserably to realize the sheer magnitude of those who are using and abusing said ‘safety net’.......
Time to streamline these programs with verifiable requirements. A ‘safety net’ is there to give temporary aid, not become a frakin’ lifestyle, yo! Idiotic WaPo, as par.
well, if we’re deporting a bunch of recipients, coupled with high employment numbers meaning reduced roles anyway, what’s wrong with cutting social services budgets? It’s about time we got away from generational welfare class mentalities. Of course, the lefties will hate it as much as they hate high employment.
No Pepsi and lobster?
Gee how fascist of them. I cannot even eat half of the items listed. Good thing I have not been seriously injured and had to rely on the government for food assistance.
Copyright that! I could only think of non contributors.
If the cost of living in San Fran is anything like that in the NYC metro area, then $16/hour isn’t much at all. One problem with the “safety net” is that it lets idle people live in very expensive areas - in which they probably couldn’t live if they had a job.
Big step in the right direction - those who need the food get it and those who turn the “grocery subsistence” into cash/drugs/booze are severely inconvenienced. Welfare should be subsistence level instead of providing all the comforts and gadgets.
GOOD!!!
Government needs to get OUT of the business of helping the indigent.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.