The state said this week it will not participate in a federal program that would provide $120 in benefits to each eligible child, citing administrative hurdles.
We’re now seeing red states refusing federal aid because 1) it shows the federal government isn’t the demon they make it out to be and 2) if they don’t accept federal funds, they don’t have to accept federal stipulations like “you can’t not give this to poor gay children” and “Black children deserve to eat too.”
Don’t forget the “welfare queens” lies that a lot of the right believes. I know a lot of idiots that believe poor people are poor because they’re lazy.
My credit was destroyed while I was still in college and hadn’t yet built up basically any credit. My crime for having my financial future ruined for the next 7 years? I was hit by someone who turned their SUV into me because they didn’t look whether there was anyone in the crosswalk, and I was a broke college student, so I couldn’t pay for all of the medical bills.
(Tangential note: I don’t like the phrase “hit by a car”. Until cars are fully autonomous, no one ever gets hit by a car; they get hit by a person driving a car. Also, fuck that lady and her trying to get out of the $67 ticket she got for hitting me and permanently injuring my knee. “I didn’t see anybody” isn’t an excuse. Especially when that person was wearing orange. If you do that, you just didn’t look.)
Edit: Also, the US credit system is a scam designed to benefit the well off and punish those who are poorer.
Confused. How did she not pay for it if she caused it? Is this just a major fuck up on your part for not holding her to account? I’ve never been in a wreck but my car has been hit in parking lots and I’ve never paid a dime, always the person at fault.
Not who you are responding to, but it happens all the time. Idiot driver is uninsured so there’s no insurance to pay the bills. Or they are under-insured and their insurance will only pay a fraction of the bills. What are you going to do? If you can afford it, you can sue them and maybe get some money out of them, but unless they are rich the odds are you won’t get enough wealth to pay the bills either. And if they are rich, they’ll tie you up in court for so long that your credit will be destroyed and you’ll run out of money to keep paying your lawyer to keep suing them.
None of this would be an issue if the medical bills were covered by single payer. I learned in other countries there’s no “ambulance chasers” because there’s no reason to have them - a whole parasitic industry nonexistent.
Good things happening while a Democrat is in the Whitehouse is bad for business. If anyone ever asks the GOP why they rejected the funds it’ll be some lie about illegal immigrants getting the money.
sadly you are correct. Ask most conservatives about feeding white or christian children they are for it. Sudden including all those other kinds of people and they would rather let their own starve rather give help to 1 person they think is unworthy.
When Christians are hating Christians because of their ethnicity, it doesn’t seem like a problem stemming from religion to me.
I think it’s just racists plastering a thin veneer of “Christian” like talk over their racism to make themselves appear to be holy. Literally taking the Lord’s name in vain, which kinda goes against actual Christian values.
The problem here is that the federal government didn’t provide the framework and services for states to use this federal aid - it’s up to the states to each create the new infrastructure and data collection/reporting services themselves. That’s a backwards arse way of doing it. The federal government should have created the necessary services and given the states access.
We give states way too much power when it comes to these types of policies. I grew up on the free lunch program and a lot of times it was the best meal I can get. I could never in good conscience suggest that kids don’t deserve to have free lunch and breakfast. Especially if they have to be there.
Yep, this should not have been a state decision, nor should the states have to have been the ones to try and implement it, because as this shows many can’t and/or won’t.
If the federal government was serious about providing food aid for low income children, they would do it at a federal level.
The difference is huge, and not hard to understand.
Apparently it is, for you.
The federal agency is called USDA, and it’s the one that runs the P-EBT program. The service is there, ready to dole out the cash, they just need the info to best disburse the funds. The onus is on MO to work with the federal gov to communicate information about its own citizens to those services.
There’s about zero chance in hell that red states are going to allow the feds to roll in to town and pull school district information that it would need to disburse the funds. The states already have those records, and they best know how to aggregate them. They just need to <gulp> swallow their hangups about gov bureaucracy and actual spend some tax money to serve their citizens.
Again, the federal agency makes the program available but doesn’t actually build the infrastructure required for the states to use it. This very article we’re commenting on points that out a number of times.
You can shout “Republicans hate kids!” as much as you want, but aren’t republicans the ones encouraging people to have more kids and less abortions? How does that logic work?
No, of course it wouldn’t, but you really haven’t been paying attention to American politics if you think the Republicans wouldn’t say that immediately.
nothing is preventing someone from creating a bill that would offer financial assistance to helping those who cant afford to move to “greener pastures”.
We’re now seeing red states refusing federal aid because 1) it shows the federal government isn’t the demon they make it out to be and 2) if they don’t accept federal funds, they don’t have to accept federal stipulations like “you can’t not give this to poor gay children” and “Black children deserve to eat too.”
Dark times are ahead.
Don’t forget the “welfare queens” lies that a lot of the right believes. I know a lot of idiots that believe poor people are poor because they’re lazy.
Corporations are bigger welfare queens than poor people will ever be.
it doesnt matter how lazy they are - if poor people keep having children, they will remain poor.
Tell that to a $100,000 medical invoice that bankrupted you because you got sick.
My credit was destroyed while I was still in college and hadn’t yet built up basically any credit. My crime for having my financial future ruined for the next 7 years? I was hit by someone who turned their SUV into me because they didn’t look whether there was anyone in the crosswalk, and I was a broke college student, so I couldn’t pay for all of the medical bills.
(Tangential note: I don’t like the phrase “hit by a car”. Until cars are fully autonomous, no one ever gets hit by a car; they get hit by a person driving a car. Also, fuck that lady and her trying to get out of the $67 ticket she got for hitting me and permanently injuring my knee. “I didn’t see anybody” isn’t an excuse. Especially when that person was wearing orange. If you do that, you just didn’t look.)
Edit: Also, the US credit system is a scam designed to benefit the well off and punish those who are poorer.
Confused. How did she not pay for it if she caused it? Is this just a major fuck up on your part for not holding her to account? I’ve never been in a wreck but my car has been hit in parking lots and I’ve never paid a dime, always the person at fault.
Not who you are responding to, but it happens all the time. Idiot driver is uninsured so there’s no insurance to pay the bills. Or they are under-insured and their insurance will only pay a fraction of the bills. What are you going to do? If you can afford it, you can sue them and maybe get some money out of them, but unless they are rich the odds are you won’t get enough wealth to pay the bills either. And if they are rich, they’ll tie you up in court for so long that your credit will be destroyed and you’ll run out of money to keep paying your lawyer to keep suing them.
None of this would be an issue if the medical bills were covered by single payer. I learned in other countries there’s no “ambulance chasers” because there’s no reason to have them - a whole parasitic industry nonexistent.
She eventually did, but her insurance company fought it for a long time.
Don’t know when it was, but nowadays it’s generally best to just ignore medical bills like that vs bankruptcy.
Wooooooow. Some people really out themselves as ignorant and cruel in a spectacular way.
Good things happening while a Democrat is in the Whitehouse is bad for business. If anyone ever asks the GOP why they rejected the funds it’ll be some lie about illegal immigrants getting the money.
sadly you are correct. Ask most conservatives about feeding white or christian children they are for it. Sudden including all those other kinds of people and they would rather let their own starve rather give help to 1 person they think is unworthy.
I think you need to change that “or” to an “and”. Or maybe just remove the Christian part altogether.
The vast majority of immigrants crossing the southern are Christian after all, but that doesn’t seem to evoke much sympathy from the MAGA movement.
Well that because a large part of politically active christian only see white people as Christians
When Christians are hating Christians because of their ethnicity, it doesn’t seem like a problem stemming from religion to me.
I think it’s just racists plastering a thin veneer of “Christian” like talk over their racism to make themselves appear to be holy. Literally taking the Lord’s name in vain, which kinda goes against actual Christian values.
That’s exactly why they’re refusing.
Also how much you wanna bet they’re blaming the feebs?
Honest question, what’s a “feeb”? ^^
An FBI agent (or sometimes more broadly any federal agent, as here.)
The problem here is that the federal government didn’t provide the framework and services for states to use this federal aid - it’s up to the states to each create the new infrastructure and data collection/reporting services themselves. That’s a backwards arse way of doing it. The federal government should have created the necessary services and given the states access.
We give states way too much power when it comes to these types of policies. I grew up on the free lunch program and a lot of times it was the best meal I can get. I could never in good conscience suggest that kids don’t deserve to have free lunch and breakfast. Especially if they have to be there.
Yep, this should not have been a state decision, nor should the states have to have been the ones to try and implement it, because as this shows many can’t and/or won’t.
If the federal government was serious about providing food aid for low income children, they would do it at a federal level.
You mean like the federal government offering millions of dollars to a state to feed hungry kids? That kind of federal level? Oh wait…
No, I mean like the federal government actually making the service that is required to give the millions of dollars to a state to feed hungry kids.
The difference is huge, and not hard to understand.
Apparently it is, for you.
The federal agency is called USDA, and it’s the one that runs the P-EBT program. The service is there, ready to dole out the cash, they just need the info to best disburse the funds. The onus is on MO to work with the federal gov to communicate information about its own citizens to those services.
There’s about zero chance in hell that red states are going to allow the feds to roll in to town and pull school district information that it would need to disburse the funds. The states already have those records, and they best know how to aggregate them. They just need to <gulp> swallow their hangups about gov bureaucracy and actual spend some tax money to serve their citizens.
Again, the federal agency makes the program available but doesn’t actually build the infrastructure required for the states to use it. This very article we’re commenting on points that out a number of times.
You can shout “Republicans hate kids!” as much as you want, but aren’t republicans the ones encouraging people to have more kids and less abortions? How does that logic work?
But that would be “communism”!
No it wouldn’t, and no one would say that.
No, of course it wouldn’t, but you really haven’t been paying attention to American politics if you think the Republicans wouldn’t say that immediately.
Either communism or socialism. Both are the Republican boogyman.
nothing is preventing someone from creating a bill that would offer financial assistance to helping those who cant afford to move to “greener pastures”.