• ZeroCool@slrpnk.netOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    184
    ·
    9 months ago

    States that participate in the federal program are required to cover half of the administrative costs, which would cost Nebraska an estimated $300,000. Advocates of the program note that the administrative cost is far outweighed by the $18 million benefit, which the U.S. Department of Agriculture estimates would benefit 175,000 Nebraska children who might otherwise go hungry on some days during the summer.

    Imagine being such a reprehensible monster that you’d let 175k children in your state starve rather than participate in a federal program that’d help feed them when school is out each summer. It’s unconscionable.

    • Nobody@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      61
      ·
      9 months ago

      Don’t look for any moral center for these crooks. As you’ve shown, they are complete and utter hypocrites. He condemns “welfare” because it gets him votes, while he gladly uses taxpayer money to fund himself and his wealthy campaign contributors. It’s the GOP long con.

    • werty@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      9 months ago

      “When someone shows you who they are, believe them the first time.” Projection as always…

    • Itsamemario@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      9 months ago

      I think the best course of action would be to reframe their thinking, instead of allowing things to keep in being called subsidies, force them to try to clarify the difference between a subsidy and welfare. Ie, farming subsidy? You mean farming welfare. Banking subsidy? You mean banking welfare. Did you know that Boeing Corp has received $15 Billion in subsidies not paid back? You mean $15 Billion in welfare, they in fact, received nearly $75 Billion in welfare, most of that welfare being received since 2000, and of that ~$75 Billion in welfare received, they actually paid back ~$60 Billion. So they received $15 Billion dollars in welfare from the US taxpayers. They are by no means the sole corporate beneficiary of welfare from the taxpayers, just the first one I stumbled upon. Point being, force the language to reflect what they hate so their hypocrisy can be exposed and other people’s eyes can be opened. Most people don’t know exactly what a subsidy is, they think there is some sort of justification for it that makes it beyond criticizing, a subsidy is just welfare for corporations or farms to keep them in business, we want them in business, sure, but we also want kids to be able to eat over the summer, and if farms and Boeing and banks are deserving of welfare from the government, and hence from the US taxpayers, why aren’t kids?

        • DrPop@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          9 months ago

          This is for their voters too, we need to target those who vote for them and those who don’t to try and make a difference. They do this shit because they know their base doesn’t care so we need to make that base as small as possible to topple this bullshit.

    • Kosmokomeno@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      19
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      Those entitled brats made a deal with the devil when they took the money. Greed got the better of them. It always does.

  • originalucifer@moist.catsweat.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    58
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    9 months ago

    maybe if we called it a ‘subsidy’. ha

    subsidies for very profitable corporations: a-ok ! tax cuts for people with more money than they could ever actually spend: you betcha! the welfare jobs program we call ‘the united states military’: ha, no reductons there, ever!

    human beings who need to eat food: go fuck yourself

    the lack of empathy in the republican party is so stark its hard to fathom.

  • Daft_ish@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    54
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    Ohh, so when I say, “I don’t believe in god” and you still force your Christian morality on me that’s OK. When you “don’t believe” in a real tangible thing that helps countless numbers of people you can just hand wave that away.

    Good to know the douche bag demographic is still overly represented in every facet of American life.

    • CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      When these jerks talk about “freedom”, they don’t mean it in the sense that normal people think about it. Normal people think freedom means that I, as a free citizen in a secular nation, can ignore the xtian cult’s demands on what I’m required to do if I so wish, but governments (local and federal) may seek to provide services for their citizens.

      For them, “freedom” means they get to dictate that everyone bend the knee to their little book club and other people’s kids starve so that taxes are as low as possible (for the rich - regressive taxes on the poor and middle class can be high AF).

  • MeanEYE@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    47
    ·
    9 months ago

    So he pays for his campaign out of his own pocket? He doesn’t collect donations. Surely.

    • orgrinrt@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      9 months ago

      I bet he considers them investments.

      Welfare is an investment too, however, and a damn good one.

      But that requires you to recognize everyone’s life valuable.

  • Bransons404@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    43
    ·
    9 months ago

    The sadder part of this is that $40 can hardly feed anyone for a week, and that’s if you REALY stretch it on bulk rice and beans.

    • Olgratin_Magmatoe@startrek.website
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      21
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      It’s worse than that.

      It’s $40/month, and only for the 3 months of summer to make up for impoverished children not getting meals through school during the summer.

      These people are ghouls.

      • AA5B@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        And its only administrative costs: the federal government would be paying for the program. He doesn’t want to pay for someone to coordinate and do the paperwork for someone else to feed his state’s disadvantaged program. He doesn’t want to pay for someone to run a program to bring like 50 times the spending into his state

        • Lifter@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          9 months ago

          That would be a more interesting headline: Nebraska governor doesn’t want to pay 1 million to get children 50 million worth of federal food grant.

  • Itsamemario@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    34
    ·
    9 months ago

    The way that he is opting out is by refusing to spend the ~$300k that is the federal government’s requirement to be part of the grant program. I wonder if it would be possible to do an end run around that waste of oxygen, and have a charity raise the ~$300k and accept the $18m the federal government is offering, to be distributed by the charity instead…