Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm a Democrat. However I said on day 1 of the shutdown Schumer went into this against an administration that breaks the law and he probably had no plan for an off ramp. He is not going to get what he wants for all the pain it is causing. That's the sad truth. You can't win a staring contest against people who want to destroy the government. It's time to vote to open the government.

COURTS have orderd the administration to pay SNAP and they are refuseng to do it. It has nothing tp do with the shut down. SNAP benefits were never cut off in a shut down before. Until this one.

Where exactly should the $8 billion come from?

I can’t believe you absolute morons are arguing about who “should” and “should not” receive SNAP while the billionaires are picking your pockets. Fools, all of you.

Anonymous wrote:Look up the charts on what percentage is going to non US born people, mostly from a handful of countries. Already Trump admin has eliminated 700k people who shouldn’t have been on SNAP.

Point to a law or a chart yourself that supports anything you just posted. You can't. Because its not correct.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Look up the charts on what percentage is going to non US born people, mostly from a handful of countries. Already Trump admin has eliminated 700k people who shouldn’t have been on SNAP.

What makes them unworthy of SNAP? Less than 11% of recipients are foreign born, but that alone doesn’t make them ineligible for benefits. The numbers I see show the foreign born recipients are mostly naturalized citizens followed by refugees and other legal permanent residents.

Setting aside refugees, as they should get help for the initial transition period, why would we import poverty? People coming here should have the skills to be self sufficient or their sponsor/guarantor should be paying for their food.

They're citizens and it's unconstitutional to treat them differently.

Well there should be better screening for public charge throughout the process. And those who sponsored them and promised to be a financial support for them should be required to pay those benefits back to taxpayers.

Again with who you think “should” be eligible.

It's already apart of the immigration process to determine if they could potentially become a public charge. It's also apart of the process for them to have a financial sponsor. These aren't things that I think. They are long established rules to avoid this very scenario where people are immigrating here then becoming a financial burden to the country.

I'd also point out that naturalized citizens can be treated differently in some scenarios than born citizens.

Anonymous wrote:I'm a Democrat. However I said on day 1 of the shutdown Schumer went into this against an administration that breaks the law and he probably had no plan for an off ramp. He is not going to get what he wants for all the pain it is causing. That's the sad truth. You can't win a staring contest against people who want to destroy the government. It's time to vote to open the government.

COURTS have orderd the administration to pay SNAP and they are refuseng to do it. It has nothing tp do with the shut down. SNAP benefits were never cut off in a shut down before. Until this one.

Anonymous wrote:Most of the adults on stamps are overweight or obese and probably need to starve to get a little healthier if we are being honest. Of course this excludes the babies, children, and elderly

So you want to starve them to death?

Anonymous wrote:Most of the adults on stamps are overweight or obese and probably need to starve to get a little healthier if we are being honest. Of course this excludes the babies, children, and elderly

You are wrong.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Look up the charts on what percentage is going to non US born people, mostly from a handful of countries. Already Trump admin has eliminated 700k people who shouldn’t have been on SNAP.

What makes them unworthy of SNAP? Less than 11% of recipients are foreign born, but that alone doesn’t make them ineligible for benefits. The numbers I see show the foreign born recipients are mostly naturalized citizens followed by refugees and other legal permanent residents.

Setting aside refugees, as they should get help for the initial transition period, why would we import poverty? People coming here should have the skills to be self sufficient or their sponsor/guarantor should be paying for their food.

They're citizens and it's unconstitutional to treat them differently.

Well there should be better screening for public charge throughout the process. And those who sponsored them and promised to be a financial support for them should be required to pay those benefits back to taxpayers.

Again with who you think “should” be eligible.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Look up the charts on what percentage is going to non US born people, mostly from a handful of countries. Already Trump admin has eliminated 700k people who shouldn’t have been on SNAP.

What makes them unworthy of SNAP? Less than 11% of recipients are foreign born, but that alone doesn’t make them ineligible for benefits. The numbers I see show the foreign born recipients are mostly naturalized citizens followed by refugees and other legal permanent residents.

Setting aside refugees, as they should get help for the initial transition period, why would we import poverty? People coming here should have the skills to be self sufficient or their sponsor/guarantor should be paying for their food.

That doesn’t answer the question. Which recipients shouldn’t be on SNAP? What makes them ineligible?

It does. No one immigrating here should be eligible other than refugees. The same goes for section8 housing/vouchers

“Should”? Says who? You?

These people were/are eligible.

Anonymous wrote:Most of the adults on stamps are overweight or obese and probably need to starve to get a little healthier if we are being honest. Of course this excludes the babies, children, and elderly

Do you have these statistics? I think it’s less than 40%.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Look up the charts on what percentage is going to non US born people, mostly from a handful of countries. Already Trump admin has eliminated 700k people who shouldn’t have been on SNAP.

What makes them unworthy of SNAP? Less than 11% of recipients are foreign born, but that alone doesn’t make them ineligible for benefits. The numbers I see show the foreign born recipients are mostly naturalized citizens followed by refugees and other legal permanent residents.

Setting aside refugees, as they should get help for the initial transition period, why would we import poverty? People coming here should have the skills to be self sufficient or their sponsor/guarantor should be paying for their food.

They're citizens and it's unconstitutional to treat them differently.

Well there should be better screening for public charge throughout the process. And those who sponsored them and promised to be a financial support for them should be required to pay those benefits back to taxpayers.

Most of the adults on stamps are overweight or obese and probably need to starve to get a little healthier if we are being honest. Of course this excludes the babies, children, and elderly

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Look up the charts on what percentage is going to non US born people, mostly from a handful of countries. Already Trump admin has eliminated 700k people who shouldn’t have been on SNAP.

What makes them unworthy of SNAP? Less than 11% of recipients are foreign born, but that alone doesn’t make them ineligible for benefits. The numbers I see show the foreign born recipients are mostly naturalized citizens followed by refugees and other legal permanent residents.

Setting aside refugees, as they should get help for the initial transition period, why would we import poverty? People coming here should have the skills to be self sufficient or their sponsor/guarantor should be paying for their food.

They're citizens and it's unconstitutional to treat them differently.

Anonymous wrote:I'm a Democrat. However I said on day 1 of the shutdown Schumer went into this against an administration that breaks the law and he probably had no plan for an off ramp. He is not going to get what he wants for all the pain it is causing. That's the sad truth. You can't win a staring contest against people who want to destroy the government. It's time to vote to open the government.

I’m a Democrat and agree it’s hard to negotiate with nihilists. However, the SNAP debate has nothing to do with the shutdown.

Trump is legally bound, regardless, if the government is shut down or not. What makes you think that by opening the government SNAP benefits would resume?

This administration has been gunning to destroy any public assistance from the get-go. They’re using the shut down as an excuse to hurt people.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:SNAP wasn't halted in the last shutdown.

The Trump administration CHOSE to do it. The courts ruled they need to continue SNAP but the Trump administration is fighting it.

Meanwhile they have billions for Argentina, private jets for Noem and everything else, but not SNAP.

Sorry but "it's the Dems fault" just doesn't fly.

No other shutdown has gone this long.

Why is that relevant?

Why??

Why is it ok congress isn’t working???
Why do we pay them??

This is a Republican shit dish wasting taxpayer monies so Trump can continue to steal from taxpayers and keep Epstein files closed it’s sick and it’s wrong !