SNAP benefits to end due to US govt shutdown

Side comment: Google AI is a pretty fluid thing. Friday got a message from one of the medical care team that my wife is assigned to. I didn't recognize the initials after this person's name, so I googled it. The answer made perfect sense, essentially stating what the degree was and the US equivalent. I was telling this to my wife later in the afternoon and couldn't remember the list of countries it pertained to, so I googled the exact same question again-- got a different answer. It wasn't a completely different answer, about 1/2 of the information was different though. Just another reason I really don't blindly trust getting info from the internet.
 

Flarbalard said:
Side comment: Google AI is a pretty fluid thing. Friday got a message from one of the medical care team that my wife is assigned to. I didn't recognize the initials after this person's name, so I googled it. The answer made perfect sense, essentially stating what the degree was and the US equivalent. I was telling this to my wife later in the afternoon and couldn't remember the list of countries it pertained to, so I googled the exact same question again-- got a different answer. It wasn't a completely different answer, about 1/2 of the information was different though. Just another reason I really don't blindly trust getting info from the internet.
Click to expand...
Yes, that's why I look for supporting data when AI is supplying "facts."
 
Trade said:
I don't know what the Hell old people did before Social Security if they weren't rich. I guess gramps and granny sat at the dinner table with the rest of the family like they did on "The Waltons"
Click to expand...
One of my grandmothers had to live near relatives after she was widowed, until such point she became frail enough she needed to live w relatives. We passed her around btwn her 4 children's families and some cousins.
 

againstthegrain said:
One of my grandmothers had to live near relatives after she was widowed, until such point she became frail enough she needed to live w relatives. We passed her around btwn her 4 children's families and some cousins.
Click to expand...
One grandmother lived with my family from the time she was widowed in 1948 until her death in the early 70s. She kicked in most of her small SS check toward the family food bill and helped with cooking, cleaning and childcare.

My other grandparents were helped out financially by their four children as special needs (like a new roof) arose.

From my observations at the time, the above were fairly standard practices.
 
With my extensive hacking skills, I was able to create a valid identification to penetrate a nearby secret underground base.

I have access to a med bed and an AI medical android. With frequency manipulation and alien medical tech, all of my medical concerns are taken care of. So the government shutdown restricting medical care and facilities is not a concern for me.

Thank god YouTube enlightened me on all of this advanced secret scientific and medical tech that our government hides from us ;)
 
outlander said:
With my extensive hacking skills, I was able to create a valid identification to penetrate a nearby secret underground base.

I have access to a med bed and an AI medical android. With frequency manipulation and alien medical tech, all of my medical concerns are taken care of. So the government shutdown restricting medical care and facilities is not a concern for me.

Thank god YouTube enlightened me on all of this advanced secret scientific and medical tech that our government hides from us ;)
Click to expand...
...you too ?.... :unsure::sneaky:
 
StarSong said:
I can't find any supporting data for this AI info though. Can you?

Whatever the poverty rate was in the 1950s, I think we can agree that homelessness wasn't the issue it is today. People may have been poor, but many lived rurally (e.g., Mississippi) with access to more resources than exist today. They had larger pieces of land and the skills to grow/hunt food. Hand pump wells brought free water, phones weren't a necessity, firewood was free for the harvesting, and utility bills - if they had them - weren't the budget busters they are today.

I will disagree with you about the "tax the rich" trope. Their riches came from the pockets of fellow Americans or the harvesting of mineral/oil rich resources of this country. Contributing a sizeable percentage of those riches back to the kitty is not an unreasonable expectation.

Elon Musk's net worth is over half a trillion dollars. He's not known for his propensity to help the poor, so if he's forced to recirculate some of that money via taxes on himself and his companies, I can live with that.

The rich create the laws, including the loopholes that benefit themselves. Very convenient how that works out, doncha think?
Click to expand...
This link charts poverty from 1959 to 2010. Tax rates fell, and so did poverty.

U.S. Poverty Rate: 1959 to 2009

Musk paid about $11 billion in taxes in the year 2021. Whether that's too much or too little, I can't say.

Drug use is a big contributor to poverty, as are unwed births. Neither were much of a factor in the 1950s.

I'm just saying that eradicating poverty is a worthy goal, but getting there isn't as easy as one might think.
 
Last edited:
Trade said:
OOPS! Missed that one didn't I? :ROFLMAO:
Click to expand...
I gave your previous post a "like" and at that time, I actually overlooked the 15 year discrepancy [on] when the first SS checks went out. I was more focused on the impact of SS and Medicare, and the fact remains that yes, those programs "dramatically reduced senior citizen poverty" [As you stated.]

And that fact contributed to explaining the statement, "In the 1950s, marginal tax rates on income were in excess of 90 percent. Yet the poverty rate in 1956 was 22 percent. Today it is 10.6 percent" [Post 93]. That tends to be is misleading, since the 90% marginal tax rates of the 1950s applied only to the very wealthiest Americans. The decline in poverty over the next few decades is mainly due to growth of the economy and expansion of social programs - and the closing of some (but not enough) loopholes on the wealthiest taxpayers.
 
MACKTEXAS said:
I gave your previous post a "like" and at that time, I actually overlooked the 15 year discrepancy [on] when the first SS checks went out. I was more focused on the impact of SS and Medicare, and the fact remains that yes, those programs "dramatically reduced senior citizen poverty" [As you stated.]

And that fact contributed to explaining the statement, "In the 1950s, marginal tax rates on income were in excess of 90 percent. Yet the poverty rate in 1956 was 22 percent. Today it is 10.6 percent" [Post 93]. That tends to be is misleading, since the 90% marginal tax rates of the 1950s applied only to the very wealthiest Americans. The decline in poverty over the next few decades is mainly due to growth of the economy and expansion of social programs - and the closing of some (but not enough) loopholes on the wealthiest taxpayers.
Click to expand...
Actually, I think the decline in poverty rates and the decline in tax rates are only very loosely linked. As you noted, the economy has grown explosively and most current social programs didn't exist in the 1950s.
 
Irishdude said:
Actually, I think the decline in poverty rates and the decline in tax rates are only very loosely linked. As you noted, the economy has grown explosively and most current social programs didn't exist in the 1950s.
Click to expand...
The figures in your post (the one that I quoted) agreed with historical data I looked at. I was just linking the changes over time to what another member wrote about the influence of SS, Medicare, etc. on the figures. Also, for the last 50 years (+ or -) more families have had 2 wage earners as more women entered the work force - all of which complicates direct comparisons of poverty levels across the decades.
 
Irishdude said:
That's a load of BS. The top 10 percent of earners pay about three-quarters of all taxes. The bottom 50 percent pay almost nothing in federal taxes.

Welcome to SF!
Click to expand...

The top 10% own about 68% of the wealth in this country, while the bottom 50% own about 2.5%.

That is just plain wrong and unsustainable. And since I'm in neither one of those categories I feel I can be objective in my opinion.
 
States have sued .gov for the SNAP $$$$. There was a hearing in fed court today.


"The [Name Redacted] administration on Thursday staunchly defended its decision to stop paying food stamps during the government shutdown, telling a federal court that it could not tap a tranche of available funds to provide aid to millions of poor Americans in November."

The arguments at times appeared to frustrate and confound a federal judge, who promised to rule soon on a lawsuit filed by roughly two dozen states that seek to ensure people do not go hungry as a result of a budgetary dispute.

The legal wrangling concerned the imminent fate of the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, which provides monthly benefits to roughly 42 million people nationally. By Nov. 1, the program is set to exhaust its remaining funds, making it the most significant and dire casualty of a governmentwide closure that has now stretched into its fifth week.

Entering the hearing, top officials in the [Name Redacted] administration had acknowledged that they had billions of dollars left over across multiple federal accounts, including money in an emergency reserve specifically for SNAP. The amounts appeared to total more than would be needed to cover the full costs of providing food stamps if the shutdown continued through November."

It's us against the billionaires!
 
In Louisiana, where 20% of the people use SNAP benefits-

"With nearly unanimous support from the Legislature, Gov. Jeff Landry, a Republican, said on Wednesday that the state would use about $147 million in emergency funds to keep food assistance flowing temporarily for older residents, those who are disabled and households with children, starting Saturday."

The state won't cover all the people on SNAP, just the elderly, disabled, and households w children.
 
MACKTEXAS said:
I gave your previous post a "like" and at that time, I actually overlooked the 15 year discrepancy [on] when the first SS checks went out. I was more focused on the impact of SS and Medicare, and the fact remains that yes, those programs "dramatically reduced senior citizen poverty" [As you stated.]

And that fact contributed to explaining the statement, "In the 1950s, marginal tax rates on income were in excess of 90 percent. Yet the poverty rate in 1956 was 22 percent. Today it is 10.6 percent" [Post 93]. That tends to be is misleading, since the 90% marginal tax rates of the 1950s applied only to the very wealthiest Americans. The decline in poverty over the next few decades is mainly due to growth of the economy and expansion of social programs - and the closing of some (but not enough) loopholes on the wealthiest taxpayers.
Click to expand...

My wife has had several expensive Hospital stays since turning 65 and I have had one. I'm pretty sure that without Medicare I would be broke.
 
OneEyedDiva said:
But they found money to send 20 billion dollars to Argentina! This sh*t burns me up! 🤬
Click to expand...

OneEyedDiva said:
They can't find money anywhere in the budgets to feed hungry Americans including children and seniors. But they found money to send 20 billion dollars to Argentina! This sh*t burns me up! 🤬
Click to expand...

That's been upped to $40 Billion.

Gotta Make Argentina Great Again doncha know?
 
Trade said:
That's been upped to $40 Billion.

Gotta Make Argentina Great Again doncha know?
Click to expand...
Oh yeah...I did see a YT video where a young woman mentioned 40 billion. I thought she was exaggerating to emphasize her point. Yeah gotta make Argentina great because "It" thinks Argentina is "such a beautiful country" !! :mad:
 
againstthegrain said:
States have sued .gov for the SNAP $$$$. There was a hearing in fed court today.


"The [Name Redacted] administration on Thursday staunchly defended its decision to stop paying food stamps during the government shutdown, telling a federal court that it could not tap a tranche of available funds to provide aid to millions of poor Americans in November."

The arguments at times appeared to frustrate and confound a federal judge, who promised to rule soon on a lawsuit filed by roughly two dozen states that seek to ensure people do not go hungry as a result of a budgetary dispute.

The legal wrangling concerned the imminent fate of the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, which provides monthly benefits to roughly 42 million people nationally. By Nov. 1, the program is set to exhaust its remaining funds, making it the most significant and dire casualty of a governmentwide closure that has now stretched into its fifth week.

Entering the hearing, top officials in the [Name Redacted] administration had acknowledged that they had billions of dollars left over across multiple federal accounts, including money in an emergency reserve specifically for SNAP. The amounts appeared to total more than would be needed to cover the full costs of providing food stamps if the shutdown continued through November."

It's us against the billionaires!
Click to expand...

Yes, I've heard of this emergency fund and that it was used in another government shut down. Hopefully this Judge will make the right decision.

From AI Overview
There is an emergency reserve fund, or contingency fund, set aside for SNAP (Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program) to cover benefits and state administrative costs during government shutdowns
. However, recent reports indicate the USDA is currently refusing to use the $6 billion in this fund, despite it being available and previously used for this purpose in the past, which has led to legal challenges and a potential crisis for recipients as benefits may be delayed or suspended.
 
Before Social Security and Medicare, widows were taken in and supported by family members. Usually female relatives. Men worked until they died or were so disabled they could physically no longer do anything. If your family couldn’t or wouldn’t support you, one ended up at the poor farm - segregated by sex and forced to do labor to earn their keep. They should have been called forced labor internment camps. Only the most elderly and disabled were allowed to “rest.” Poor farms were to be avoided at all costs. The social stigma plus the miserable conditions. Retirement and leisure is a relatively new thing (post depression era) for the poor and working class.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top