Skip to content
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Daily Kos)   Decades after blaming Democrats for keeping poor people on welfare, Ohio GOP introduces a new plan to penalize poor people who try to save money to get ahead so they can get off welfare. When did we move to the upside down world?   (dailykos.com) divider line
    More: Asinine, Democratic Party, United States Senate, Blog, Daily Kos, Republican Party, Party leaders of the United States Senate, John Kerry, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer  
•       •       •

2752 clicks; posted to Politics » on 14 Jun 2021 at 2:15 PM (6 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



108 Comments     (+0 »)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2021-06-14 1:19:33 PM  
Hey subby, it was back in the 1980s...

media1.giphy.comView Full Size
 
2021-06-14 1:51:40 PM  
Being evil is the point.
 
2021-06-14 1:53:54 PM  
This is a way to force them to spend their money on refrigerators, washing machines, and garbage cans.

Then go after them for having those items.
 
2021-06-14 2:03:18 PM  
Hey... rich people who live behind gates... little hint for you... those gates aren't high enough and these people will come for you.
 
2021-06-14 2:16:57 PM  
Submitter must have fallen into a coma sometime in 1949.
 
2021-06-14 2:16:59 PM  
No, no... they're being consistent. They like to punish poor people. Nothing's changed.
 
2021-06-14 2:18:22 PM  

anjin-san: No, no... they're being consistent. They like to punish poor people. Nothing's changed.


And it's not even poor people in particular, it's just that poor people are blacker than average but it's socially acceptable to shiat on them.
 
2021-06-14 2:19:55 PM  

Im_Gumby: Hey subby, it was back in the 1980s...

[media1.giphy.com image 403x200]


It was acceptable at the time.

Calvin Harris - Acceptable in the 80's (Official Video)
Youtube dOV5WXISM24
 
2021-06-14 2:21:01 PM  
Time is money. The real question is not how many assets they have but the asset to debt ratio. How long can they live off that $2250? If it's months, then sure, why give them SNAP on top?

But I don't know anyone who can live off of that for more than a few weeks at best.
 
2021-06-14 2:23:03 PM  
Fark user imageView Full Size


The point is the underclass must remain the underclass to help underpin the belief that they are the underclass for moral reasons.
 
2021-06-14 2:23:06 PM  
Malcolm X said, if you're not careful, they will make you hate the oppressed and love the oppressor. Just shows how old the Republican state of mind is in the US.
 
2021-06-14 2:23:16 PM  
It's right there in the bible. The only people who got fish & bread were those that didn't have fish or bread. /s
 
2021-06-14 2:23:18 PM  
It's their own fault for not being born rich.
 
2021-06-14 2:23:29 PM  

Shaggy_C: Time is money. The real question is not how many assets they have but the asset to debt ratio. How long can they live off that $2250? If it's months, then sure, why give them SNAP on top?


So they can get ahead and off of SNAP.

This just creates a perfect rationale to work under the table.
 
2021-06-14 2:24:04 PM  
Not coincidentally, I'm sure, $2000 is the cutoff for savings for SSDI and SSA recipients.
 
2021-06-14 2:25:19 PM  
I had this 30? years ago. In a NE state.  I lost my job and was broke. I applied for welfare. They said my car was too valuable to qualify. I would have to eat my car? The sadder part is that it was broken down and no where near the book value. I had lost oil pressure and the engine fried. So I did not rally have any car at all to use.
:(
 
2021-06-14 2:26:53 PM  
The upper class keeps all of the money, pays none of the taxes. The middle class pays all of the taxes, does all of the work. The poor are there just to scare the shiat out of the middle class. Keep 'em showin' up at those jobs.

- George Carlin (Back when we still had a middle class)
 
2021-06-14 2:28:00 PM  
And I bet they consider themselves christians.
 
2021-06-14 2:28:29 PM  
Ohioan here. I know and have met many an Ohio soul who is barely scrapping by, has insane home and car loans just to live and work, have a net worth far into the negatives, yet will vote straight down the line GOP time and time again. I know more than one person who is on welfare and entirely lives due to public assistance, who votes straight GOP and decorated their yards with Trump signs. It literally comes down to they hate the same people that they hate. Minorities and poors. And these poors don't consider themselves poors, they only have a lack of economic stability due to bad breaks caused by others. These people who claim to be the party of responsibility take no responsibility for their own lives. Its always immigration or affirmative action screwed them. They will gladly accept this savings penalty with open arms, because it may well hurt them, but it will hurt those they hate as well. As long as the have enough change to hold up the line at the corner store on Friday night buying a 6er of Bud Light so they can sit in their yard and biatch about everyone, they are doing alright in their minds. There will be no grand revolution. These people get spanked in the rear and say "Thank You Sir May I Have Another...."
 
2021-06-14 2:30:04 PM  
Federal law essentially defines "assets," as people's net worth minus their home, retirement accounts, burial plots for household members, and any value of their car beyond $4,650.

So basically a bunch of people with cars that are worth 7 grand or more are going to lose food assistance for their families.
 
2021-06-14 2:30:48 PM  
I'm starting to tail Tucker Carlson.
 
2021-06-14 2:31:18 PM  

Shaggy_C: Time is money. The real question is not how many assets they have but the asset to debt ratio. How long can they live off that $2250? If it's months, then sure, why give them SNAP on top?

But I don't know anyone who can live off of that for more than a few weeks at best.


Because we are the richest country that has ever farking existed. We can afford it and don't have to be monsters.

But you are one of those.
 
2021-06-14 2:32:10 PM  
Seriously, I want off this farked up planet.
 
2021-06-14 2:32:25 PM  

Shaggy_C: Time is money. The real question is not how many assets they have but the asset to debt ratio. How long can they live off that $2250? If it's months, then sure, why give them SNAP on top?

But I don't know anyone who can live off of that for more than a few weeks at best.


It gives the lie to the absurd claim that conservatives want to get anybody out of poverty.
They want to keep people poor, and keep bringing in people who are illegal, so that they can be exploited.
It's like the claim that they oppose abortion, while they push policies that will actually mean more of them take place.
Everything the right says is a photographic negative of the truth.
 
2021-06-14 2:33:20 PM  
I'm 40 and can't remember a single time in my life that Republicans were right about any issue.  Are any older farkers able to remember the last time it happened?
 
2021-06-14 2:33:30 PM  

Tor_Eckman: Seriously, I want off this farked up planet.


Why? It's the fascist who suck - why should YOU have to move?
 
2021-06-14 2:33:51 PM  
Democrats also have a problem with means testing. When I was underemployed for multiple years, I had saved up money to pay for rent for awhile (a privilege, I know), and was thus denied food stamps, lower electricity bills and cheaper bus fare while I was out of work.

Also, when I occasionally worked as a Temp, despite collectively being under the annual salary cap for our poverty Medicare, I was kicked off whenever I got a temp assignment.
 
2021-06-14 2:34:03 PM  

Shaggy_C: Time is money. The real question is not how many assets they have but the asset to debt ratio. How long can they live off that $2250? If it's months, then sure, why give them SNAP on top?

But I don't know anyone who can live off of that for more than a few weeks at best.


Agreed.

What this does is cause a loop and I'm having trouble with conservative-thinkers not realizing that. Because they have to and there is no other way around it.

Say you make that magical $2250 point and they take you off of SNAP or any other food assistance.

Now you have to consider cutting into that $2250 + savings in order to keep things around the house 'normally' running as it would any other day. Up until the point you're back under $2250 and now can apply again.

This is the logical conclusion any conservative-thinker would have to come to. It's math... not liberal thinking.

Forget that engine repair on your car might be what you're saving up in order to keep a car running, getting the most out of it...a conservative value even, could likely cost MORE than $2250 (or other expensive car repairs such as suspension, etc...)

Under this scenario, you can't ever get your car's engine repaired unless you have credit... which a poor person may not. (Due to not making enough money in the first place) And would only ever be able to afford a used car because of the same problem with that amount.

I'm no conspiracy theory but there is far too much that is left obvious here for me to think it's even a happy accident. This cruelty keeps a status-quo that allows them to continue pointing to 'those people' as the problem because they are simply making sure that they're always 'those people'.

At the very least, it should be on a slide-scale with the cap being FAR higher, maybe I could swallow a $5000. If you can save $5000 on your regular wage-earnings, then MAYBE you shouldn't qualify for food assistance at THAT point.

$2250 is stupid low.
 
2021-06-14 2:34:04 PM  
 
2021-06-14 2:34:17 PM  

Tor_Eckman: Seriously, I want off this farked up planet.


What if we take it back from the scumbags who stole it?
 
2021-06-14 2:35:14 PM  

HotWingConspiracy: Shaggy_C: Time is money. The real question is not how many assets they have but the asset to debt ratio. How long can they live off that $2250? If it's months, then sure, why give them SNAP on top?

So they can get ahead and off of SNAP.

This just creates a perfect rationale to work under the table.


It's a method to prevent savings.

It's done with SSDI/SSA recipients, because they are permanent recipients of state and federal entitlements; they typically have caseworkers managing their incomes and expenses, they have subsidized housing and food, and should not have anything left over. The chronically seriously disabled are given these benefits because society recognizes that their contributions are likely to be minimal and they cannot care for themselves.

People who can care for themselves who are in temporary straits can make substantial contributions, but they need a hand up. They need help until they can manage alone. Nobody is helping pay for their rent or other expenses, or their medical care, they need to cover that with what is left over.

So they need the chance to have as much left over as possible. If they can save $2300 a month for a year, then maybe we can talk about cutting their benefits. Otherwise, no.
 
2021-06-14 2:35:18 PM  
I literally hope that this cap affects a large number of Republican voters if not just to get them up in arms enough for their leaders to make the change or eliminate the law/proposal all together.
 
2021-06-14 2:35:18 PM  

NewportBarGuy: Tor_Eckman: Seriously, I want off this farked up planet.

What if we take it back from the scumbags who stole it?


The oligarchs?
 
2021-06-14 2:35:23 PM  

cardex: I'm 40 and can't remember a single time in my life that Republicans were right about any issue.  Are any older farkers able to remember the last time it happened?


When Nixon created the EPA.

That's all I can come up with.
 
2021-06-14 2:35:34 PM  
I get that if someone doesn't have an income but is sitting on a huge pile of money, maybe don't give them food stamps. Some trust fund douche getting food stamps would be dumb. But $2250? Yeah, that's just farking the poor.
 
2021-06-14 2:36:44 PM  
FTFA:

It's just that someone who can cobble together $2,250 just isn't poor enough, period. Senate Republicans stated that the new measure was needed to "ensure the food aid only goes to the truly needy." (Also: "$2,250"? Not even a round number?? $2,500 was just too high? Amazing.)

There is a lot of fail by the Daily Kos here.

Why $2,250? Because that's the federal eligibility limit, which states are allowed to increase or eliminate:

https://www.cbpp.org/research/food-as​s​istance/snaps-broad-based-categorical-​eligibility-supports-working-families-​and

So Ohio is doing the minimum.

To be clear, I'm not excusing the OH Republicans - this is awful - but the Daily Kos' reporting on this is terribly lazy, and missing an opportunity to point out how Congress could easily increase the eligibility limit.
 
2021-06-14 2:36:58 PM  
In most European countries, welfare is about encouraging people to get back on their feet.   Medical care, drug/alcohol treatment, education or job training are all standard practices in the European welfare state.   As people begin to make their way back into the world of work, their benefits are slowly cut back.   Let's say one Euro for two Euro's they earn over  the max welfare amount.  Again, it's about encouraging people to try and make an effort.  Of course there will always be people who are happy to live on the dole and stay drunk/high all day.  As long as they don't cause problems for others it's generally tolerated.

Compare and contrast ol' Yurp with US Murica.  For decades welfare has been about providing just enough to the losers to keep them from making their way into the nicer neighborhoods and getting their torch an' pitchfork on.  It is not, and never has been, about actually helping people get back on their feet.  Why would the rich want to elevate people on whose throats they've been standing all these years?
 
2021-06-14 2:39:21 PM  

Hoblit: I literally hope that this cap affects a large number of Republican voters if not just to get them up in arms enough for their leaders to make the change or eliminate the law/proposal all together.


1. It will.
2. It affects "those" people more.

That's all the justification they need to keep voting R.
 
2021-06-14 2:39:36 PM  

cardex: I'm 40 and can't remember a single time in my life that Republicans were right about any issue.  Are any older farkers able to remember the last time it happened?


"Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed. This world in arms is not spending money alone. It is spending the sweat of its laborers, the genius of its scientists, the hopes of its children. The cost of one modern heavy bomber is this: a modern brick school in more than 30 cities. It is two electric power plants, each serving a town of 60,000 population. It is two fine, fully equipped hospitals. It is some 50 miles of concrete highway. We pay for a single fighter plane with a half million bushels of wheat. We pay for a single destroyer with new homes that could have housed more than 8,000 people. This, I repeat, is the best way of life to be found on the road. the world has been taking. This is not a way of life at all, in any true sense. Under the cloud of threatening war, it is humanity hanging from a cross of iron."
Dwight Eisenhower - 4/16/54
 
2021-06-14 2:39:43 PM  

patrick767: I get that if someone doesn't have an income but is sitting on a huge pile of money, maybe don't give them food stamps. Some trust fund douche getting food stamps would be dumb. But $2250? Yeah, that's just farking the poor.


In Washington State, you have to have less than $100 in liquid assets to qualify for SNAP.
 
2021-06-14 2:40:46 PM  
Yorktown (The World Turned Upside Down)
Youtube WQt1RRW_xv0

Right at the start of the "American Experiment," subby.
 
2021-06-14 2:41:40 PM  

misanthropicsob: patrick767: I get that if someone doesn't have an income but is sitting on a huge pile of money, maybe don't give them food stamps. Some trust fund douche getting food stamps would be dumb. But $2250? Yeah, that's just farking the poor.

In Washington State, you have to have less than $100 in liquid assets to qualify for SNAP.


Link to the WA state application form that lists that policy.
 
2021-06-14 2:42:28 PM  

jso2897: cardex: I'm 40 and can't remember a single time in my life that Republicans were right about any issue.  Are any older farkers able to remember the last time it happened?

"Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed. This world in arms is not spending money alone. It is spending the sweat of its laborers, the genius of its scientists, the hopes of its children. The cost of one modern heavy bomber is this: a modern brick school in more than 30 cities. It is two electric power plants, each serving a town of 60,000 population. It is two fine, fully equipped hospitals. It is some 50 miles of concrete highway. We pay for a single fighter plane with a half million bushels of wheat. We pay for a single destroyer with new homes that could have housed more than 8,000 people. This, I repeat, is the best way of life to be found on the road. the world has been taking. This is not a way of life at all, in any true sense. Under the cloud of threatening war, it is humanity hanging from a cross of iron."
Dwight Eisenhower - 4/16/54


Problem. that was 1954. 40 years ago (i still can't believe this) is 1981.....
Time keeps inexorably marching forward.
 
2021-06-14 2:42:30 PM  

misanthropicsob: patrick767: I get that if someone doesn't have an income but is sitting on a huge pile of money, maybe don't give them food stamps. Some trust fund douche getting food stamps would be dumb. But $2250? Yeah, that's just farking the poor.

In Washington State, you have to have less than $100 in liquid assets to qualify for SNAP.


Link was killed because pdf. Try their website.
 
2021-06-14 2:45:33 PM  

cardex: I'm 40 and can't remember a single time in my life that Republicans were right about any issue.  Are any older farkers able to remember the last time it happened?


I'm also 40 and I've been asking this question for years. None of the answers I've gotten are satisfactory. Sometimes I get uselessly generic concepts like "freedom." The closest I've gotten to a real answer is that Republicans support infrastructure--but they only do so on paper, and they're pretty adamant about not paying for it, so it makes their "support" pretty pointless.

Conservatism is the wrong option for literally every single social problem.
 
2021-06-14 2:46:13 PM  

misanthropicsob: patrick767: I get that if someone doesn't have an income but is sitting on a huge pile of money, maybe don't give them food stamps. Some trust fund douche getting food stamps would be dumb. But $2250? Yeah, that's just farking the poor.

In Washington State, you have to have less than $100 in liquid assets to qualify for SNAP.


Well you probably shouldn't be spending money on booze if you can't afford food
 
2021-06-14 2:46:33 PM  
Penalizing the poor has been our motto for decades.
The GOP along with Clinton and Obama punished the poor while cutting taxes for the wealthy and throwing money at Wall Street.
 
2021-06-14 2:46:56 PM  

Hoblit: Agreed.

What this does is cause a loop and I'm having trouble with conservative-thinkers not realizing that. Because they have to and there is no other way around it.

Say you make that magical $2250 point and they take you off of SNAP or any other food assistance.

Now you have to consider cutting into that $2250 + savings in order to keep things around the house 'normally' running as it would any other day. Up until the point you're back under $2250 and now can apply again.

This is the logical conclusion any conservative-thinker would have to come to. It's math... not liberal thinking.


To be fair, this is in some ways the kind of system dreamed up for means-testing elder care; you use your lifetime of assets and savings to pay for your long term medical needs and retirement before the state chips in. Thing is, such a system can't work when the person is going to use those savings over the medium term to create a support basis for themselves. The elder is never going back into the working world to offset lost savings, while the worker is.

I would put the limit much, much higher personally. Everyone's financial goal should be at least one year of net income in cash. The government should be doing everything in its power to help people get there.
 
2021-06-14 2:47:02 PM  

cardex: I'm 40 and can't remember a single time in my life that Republicans were right about any issue.  Are any older farkers able to remember the last time it happened?


1861?

They got that one right.
 
2021-06-14 2:47:48 PM  

thornhill: FTFA:

It's just that someone who can cobble together $2,250 just isn't poor enough, period. Senate Republicans stated that the new measure was needed to "ensure the food aid only goes to the truly needy." (Also: "$2,250"? Not even a round number?? $2,500 was just too high? Amazing.)

There is a lot of fail by the Daily Kos here.

Why $2,250? Because that's the federal eligibility limit, which states are allowed to increase or eliminate:

https://www.cbpp.org/research/food-ass​istance/snaps-broad-based-categorical-​eligibility-supports-working-families-​and

So Ohio is doing the minimum.

To be clear, I'm not excusing the OH Republicans - this is awful - but the Daily Kos' reporting on this is terribly lazy, and missing an opportunity to point out how Congress could easily increase the eligibility limit.


Yes, the Daily Kos suck and I barely ever click on one of their links. They're always a mess and it's more of a 'blog' style than I care for.

But Congress being able to do anything 'easily' is arguable at best. If all of them got the same lightbulb realization at the same time, then we're assured half of them will prevent the other half from raising it because 'reasons'.

There's something really wrong with this country now and that is not hyperbole.
 
Displayed 50 of 108 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking




On Twitter


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.