Reading Time: 3 minutes

This video, in conjunction with some recently published articles have really, as a close friend would say, ripped my jeans!  We have got to #snapback. The way judgement is passed on those in need makes self-important assumptions and inspires several different sentiments:

Those who have never experienced poverty are magically experts on how those in poverty should live.

I am amazed that it is possible to be a politician, government official, or even a president is one of few jobs in america where real experience is not required.  No one is lining up to visit the doctor with no medical training….you can draw your own conclusions on the rest of that one. Why has no one bothered to investigate the correlation between obesity, cheap foods, poverty, and access to quality ingredients?

If we are talking about whats being purchased with government food subsidies, which we are, why does it cost more to buy a loaf of bread than it does to buy a gallon of fruit drink (AKA “RED”)? Over and over again the ” uninformed”, the most polite moniker I can assign them currently, say things like: you should work two jobs, you should not have kids you cant afford, we need to keep them from being able to buy pop and candy and salty snacks with government money.

“Your” president

“Your” president has not been stopped from wasting government money on Rogaine, spray tan, fillers for Ms. Orange (ms. because I have not seen the marriage license in English yet), Viagra and trips to Florida. Whereupon he visits the estate he bullied and robbed millions of people of billions of, what were eventually tax fee dollars to pay for? Last I checked the shenanigans are still in full swing, so the answer is obviously a resounding NO.

Let’s have a quick peek at some incidental figures that represent government spending.

They? Where are They?

What is really concerning is the identity of this mythical they that is getting more? The needy?  The socially disenfranchised?  Could this “they” be the same they that it always is when we are talking about the category of people labeled as “other”?  The real issue is, people believe because they are struggling and do not qualify for assistance, those who are getting assistance are having an easier time of it.

Many may think others are receiving a benefit that is not being afforded to all, or perhaps they are experiencing a similar struggle.

This is the same generic brand of rhetoric that allowed the current miscreant to inhabit his current office.  Similar is the key point here, a similar struggle, not the same struggle.  Has anyone stopped to consider that not qualifying indicates another issue, one that is specific to an individual situation and others may be in a more precarious situation? It is possible that others are living with less and providing for more.

Telling people what they can and cannot buy with public assistance dollars is not new.  There has always been a list of convenience foods that were not eligible for purchase since the inception of SNAP.  The motivation behind all of this banter, is the same as it has always been… continue to make the poor poorer while the rich continue to widen the gap between those that have and those that do not.  At some point, what really needs a revision or more regulatory control, is the power wielded by specific governmental offices, namely the president.  The powers of the president have not been reviewed since 19XX (insert actual date here because I don’t know, hell a long ass time).It is time for the power of the many to check the power of the few.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Comments Protected by WP-SpamShield for WordPress