2w ago

In the US we have Breast Cancer Awarnes month and a bunch of others. All we do is throw money at a problem and hope it goes away How come the Gov don't take care of people from starving?

Can someone math it up to see the total cost for it.? I am in a starving situation but would volunteer to help. It should not be that hard to give american families at least two meals a day maybe possible three?

11 comments

Cruelty is the point, as is poverty. Keeping you poor and always looking for the next meal means you will work for slave wages and let capitalism extract maximum value from your labor.
The rich are convinced there is only enough for them and that they must prevent you from having more to stay rich. In addition to that the rich think they are better people because they are rich. They dont give money away to actually help, they do it because it makes them feel like good people. Thanks in part to evangelicalism in the US there is also a perception that being wealthy is a blessing from God, so people who are poor, must not be with God. If the poor are not with God, then they should be punished for being Godless, which means they should be punished for being poor.
When you hear the phrase "eat the rich" its critique of this capitalist system that pushiness the poor and hungry for the gain of a few fragile ego's.
You want change? Then we need to replace the government with people who are working class, and not class traitors like Fettermen. Find progressive and socialist candidates like Bernie Sanders, Zohran Mamdani, Platner, and people who stand up for the many like Jasmine Crockett, AOC, and Katie Porter.
- I feel like a fool for getting pumped about Fetterman. He really sounded like a stand up guy before he ran for senator. But, considering the alternative was Dr. Oz, I don't think I would have changed my vote even if I knew what I know now.
  
  Totally understand, but now we need to primary him and get someone who will actually do the job, and not kowtow to AIPAC.
The US government does not like welfare programs because it gives money to the poor. They would rather give tax reliefs to the rich instead.
There is loads of evidence that welfare programs can save more money then they cost. But that does not funnel money to those in charge.
Some people want to talk about the rich, but it is also important to talk about the rest of the people voting for it.
There is a deep cultural mindset in a lot of conservative parts of the country where you're only really supposed to take care of your own people. In countries with established ethnic groups, it is easy for the state to assume that the default person is within the dominant ethnic group's kith, or very extended family. That assumption isn't the case in the USA.
So, there may be an expectation that you support your kith or extended family, but it doesn't map to a state because there are several ethnic groups, especially when you take into account that the acceptance of white as one group only came about recently. Therefore, the competing kiths don't want an equalizimg economic playing field that a welfare state can provide. So, those systems don't get built.
Also, somewhat tied into it, there is a lot of shame if a person has to go out of their kith for aid, like welfare or Medicaid. So, people will act as if they are not on those programs because of the shame. Worse, government agencies will make sure that using government welfare is known. For instance, a lot of school districts will have different ways of processing students on subsidized lunch programs over those that pay full price and parents won't sign up for the subsidized system because of the shame.
But then what leverage would horrible jobs have to prevent you from quitting if you weren't worried of starving? and where is the money to start more wars and fund failing nations like argentina going to come from if we spend all our taxes helping the american people
I meant to write not in a starving situation.---
How come the Gov don't take care of people from starving?
Not being from there myself, but: if I learned this correctly, Us governments have a strong tradition of not taking care of people.
!askusa@discuss.online
Hahahahahhaahahha...
Oh you're serious?
In 2018, SNAP benefits supplied roughly 40 million Americans, at an expenditure of $57.1 billion.[2][3] In 2017, approximately 9.2% of American households obtained SNAP benefits at some point, with approximately 16.7% of all children living in households with SNAP benefits.[2]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supplemental_Nutrition_Assistance_Program
In the scheme of things, the interruption of SNAP benefits was a blip. A cruel blip, but I don't think it's fair to say we don't do anything.

11 comments