this post was submitted on 04 Nov 2025
176 points (100.0% liked)

News

32999 readers
2611 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil

Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.

2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.

Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.

3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.

Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.

4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.

Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.

5. Only recent news is allowed.

Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.

6. All posts must be news articles.

No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.

7. No duplicate posts.

If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.

8. Misinformation is prohibited.

Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.

9. No link shorteners.

The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.

10. Don't copy entire article in your post body

For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
JonsJava@lemmy.world
gedaliyah@lemmy.world
little_cow@lemmy.world
jeffw@lemmy.world
enu@lemmy.world
rjc@lemmy.world
Tenthrow@lemmy.world
176
Americans ‘dumbfounded by cruelty’ of Trump officials slashing SNAP benefits (www.theguardian.com)
submitted 11 hours ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world
25 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Those among the 42 million enrolled in the program worry that cutoff of the benefit will send their lives into a tailspin

Across the country, Americans who depend on government help to buy groceries are preparing for the worst.

As a result of the ongoing federal government shutdown, Donald Trump has threatened to, for the first time in the program’s more than 60-year history, cut off benefits provided by the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance program (SNAP). A federal judge last week prevented the US Department of Agriculture from suspending Snap altogether, but the Trump administration now says enrollees will receive only half of their usual benefits.

The Guardian wanted to know how important Snap was to the approximately 42 million people enrolled in the program. Many of those who responded to our callout were elderly, or out of the workforce because of significant mental of physical health issues, and worried that a cutoff of the benefit would send their lives into a tailspin.

top 25 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 17 points 6 hours ago

Just what the fuck do some of these people think the Republican platform truly IS?

Sure, they distract dumbass racists, transphobes, xenophobes with the prospect of punching down on "the others", but the true heart of conservatism is extracting money from the poor and middle class and sending it upwards.

If that means kids get to starve, oh well.

[–] hydrashok@sh.itjust.works 68 points 10 hours ago (3 children)

Then realize that many of them voted for this because they’d rather starve themselves than help those that don’t look or act like they do.

All peoples should be fed and housed. Full stop; no conditions. Rich, poor, parent, single, married, immigrant, citizen, young, old, political affiliation, whatever. Food insecurity is a horrible problem and shouldn’t be a worry for anybody these days, especially for the kids.

[–] hcf@sh.itjust.works 42 points 9 hours ago

At least 16 million of them could not possibly have voted for this.

An estimated 39% of SNAP recipients are children.

[–] BlameThePeacock@lemmy.ca 24 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

We need Universal Basic Incomes, for everyone.

[–] tornavish@lemmy.cafe 4 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

Never ever ever gonna happen in the US until the states break up.

[–] BlameThePeacock@lemmy.ca 2 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

I will bet on that happening in my lifetime too.

[–] tornavish@lemmy.cafe 1 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

Which do you think will be the first to split? All at once or slow?

[–] BlameThePeacock@lemmy.ca 1 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago)

California probably, if things keep going down the stupid path.

Florida if the pendulum swings back to sanity.

I'd bet it's slow.

[–] capt_wolf@lemmy.world 9 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

Hey... What's my nose doing on the floor!? It was just on my face a minute ago!

Why's this bloody knife in my hand? I couldn't have done this... Could I? No... I don't think so.

I should check it for fingerprints. What!? Only my prints are on it!?

Stranger and stranger...

[–] hcf@sh.itjust.works 4 points 8 hours ago

"Hey kids! Sorry, we can't eat this week because the neighbors voted Trump. Oopsie."

[–] Wilco@lemmy.zip 6 points 7 hours ago

Dirty ass MAGA trailer park trash are mad because the liberals took their "foodstamp cash".

[–] MyOpinion@lemmy.today 20 points 10 hours ago

Get this through your heads the GOP is evil though and through. They always have been and you are a fool to vote for them if you are a working person.

[–] PeacefulForest@lemmy.world 4 points 7 hours ago

It’s almost as if… it’s a sedition… no it couldn’t possibly be

[–] Sanctus@anarchist.nexus 8 points 10 hours ago (2 children)

Sucks to reap what you sow huh

[–] Catoblepas@piefed.blahaj.zone 26 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

Did I miss a part of the article that linked voting for Trump and being on SNAP? Or are we just taking a moment to teabag the poor, disabled, and elderly because they live in the US?

[–] CannonFodder@lemmy.world 5 points 10 hours ago (3 children)

Plenty enough of the poor, disabled and elderly in the U.S. failed to vote against Trump such that they caused this.

[–] Tm12@lemmy.ca 8 points 8 hours ago

And here I thought it was the Muslims standing up for Gaza.

[–] hcf@sh.itjust.works 2 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

Harris received 6.8 million votes fewer than Biden received in 2020. Even assuming every single one of those 6.8 million votes were SNAP recipients, you're essentially saying that 42 million people deserve to go hungry because 3 in 20 (or around 16%) of them chose not to vote in 2024.

Moreover, DJT only received 2.8 million more votes in 2024 than he did in 2020. So let's assume all 2.8 million of those were SNAP recipients, and then let's assume SNAP recipients entirely determined the election result. 2.8 million + 6.8 million voters is about 22% of all SNAP recipients (or about 1 in 5).

Never mind the fact that around 39% of SNAP recipients are children (i.e. unable to vote).

So 2 children and 3 adults deserve to go hungry if 1 of the adults either doesn't vote or votes for the wrong person?

Do you realize how incredibly fucking insane you sound?

[–] FlexibleToast@lemmy.world 1 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

That's not how statistics works.

[–] hcf@sh.itjust.works 4 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

"ThATs NoT hOW sTatIStICS wORks" he says, in the midst of a conversation in which the motion being debated is whether some of the poors not voting correctly means all of the poors deserve to go hungry.

Forgive me if I don't take your "nuh uh" as a persuasive rationale for starving 16 million kids. You're clearly the more intelligent of the two of us.

[–] FlexibleToast@lemmy.world 1 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

I'm not weighing in on your argument. Just that the case you made is made up of useless statistics making it incredibly easy to dismiss.

[–] hcf@sh.itjust.works 7 points 6 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago)

Because it was a hypothetical based upon an argument from absurdity.

I know that the statistics were absurd. The premise was, "let's assume everyone who didn't show up to vote this time around and everyone that voted for Trump (but didn't last time) are at fault."

My goal was not to demonstrate what statistically plausible number of people that were "responsible for Trump winning" that were on SNAP benefits.

My entire point was that even if you do shitty, uncharitable, worst-case-scenario statistics about the election, the original argument would amount to saying 42 million people should go hungry because less than a quarter of them didn't vote hard enough. My point was that even lying with the numbers would still result in the original premise being flimsy.

Your gripe is that my math is wrong. My gripe is that even shitty math can't come close to justifying 42 million people thrown off SNAP, which further highlights the assholery of stating "hurr durr didn't vote hard enough so let them eat cake".

Your pedantry misses the sarcasm and tone of my response, and—judging from your comment history—is perfectly in line with your MO of dropping one liners designed to be maximally contrarian without contributing further to the discussion.

Like... no shit the real stats are wildly different—they would very likely show that a much smaller number of people who determined the outcome of the 2024 election are currently SNAP recipients. Which, again, would not make the original premise that I was responding to any stronger.

You're failing at reading comprehension.

[–] hcf@sh.itjust.works 6 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

This is giving real "well have they tried not being poor?" energy.

[–] Sanctus@anarchist.nexus -5 points 8 hours ago

All of us cognizant Americans are responsible for this. No matter who you voted for, this was the end road of high tech imperialism. Everyone is just pissed the boomerang finally came back around and clocked us in the jaw.