Skip to main content

View Diary: New bipartisan plan to 'only' cut food stamp benefits for 1.7 million (54 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  help me understand (6+ / 0-)

    about how getting LIHEAP would increase the amount of SNAP one gets? Usually any additional benefit for poorer people results in the reduction of another benefit so one never ever gets more spending power than before - it gets worse every year.
    I may be clueless because I never hear about energy assistance in my community anymore. There used to be public service announcements in local papers and radio for food banks and commodities too but that's no longer done so it getting difficult to find out about available help

    •  I'd be for eliminating the LIHEAP addtion (3+ / 0-)

      ... if the entirety of the funding would go straight to SNAP without the additional qualification.

      I don't really understand why LIHEAP would increase SNAP - if you need SNAP, you need SNAP, at whatever level you need it at. Heating bills don't change that.

      That should simplify the application process, too.

      Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves. - William Pitt

      by Phoenix Rising on Tue Dec 10, 2013 at 02:46:54 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  No (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Social Contract

        There is no connection.  This is only used to "justify" more cuts, and is merely the continuation of years of upward wealth redistribution. As you know, welfare aid itself was wiped out, and we've continued using mandatory workfare labor to replace other workers (albeit at a fraction of the wages). On poverty levels in the US, the very poor who no longer receive any type of aid are simply no longer included in our poverty statistics, as those statistics are mainly determined by the number of recipients of aid. No aid, no poverty.  Americans today can and do die as a result of deprivation; so far, it is mostly those over the age of 50. Since Reagan, we have shipped out the bulk of our family-supporting jobs. There simply are not jobs for all who desperately need one, and this generation has no complaints about that.  Our surplus of workers makes it possible to suppress/slash wages. We've been redistributing money not only out of our former poverty relief system (which is a fraction of what it was in 1980), but out of everything (except war and prisons) -- schools, R&D, science, transportation, etc., etc. The catch is, those who are still in the middle class applaud this, unconcerned about the inevitable consequences.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site