Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Wednesday, December 05, 2018

Rep. Thomas Massie isn't sure that Americans should have a right to food. Massie, a Republican from Kentucky, posed the question on Twitter, seemingly in an attempt to combat criticism from Democrats of conservative lawmakers' proposals to reform the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), commonly known as food stamps, against a backdrop of Democrats, emboldened after the midterms, proposing that Medicare be made available to all Americans.

More

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

"If healthcare is a right, is food as well?"

For everyone except you. Your pantry: Hand it over.

#1 | Posted by Zed at 2018-12-04 04:49 PM | Reply

Let them eat cake.

#2 | Posted by bored at 2018-12-04 04:55 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 4

I've always felt that the government should give everybody maybe $100 a month in food stamps, plus stuff for kids, It's a truism that for every dollar that comes out of the earth, seven dollars are generated, I honestly heard that for every $1 the government spends on food-stamps, it get back $1.10 in taxes.

#3 | Posted by HeliumRat at 2018-12-04 06:41 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

You can't collect taxes on a population that has starved to death.

#4 | Posted by IndianaJones at 2018-12-04 07:29 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

The part of the population that thought Hillary Clinton was a viable candidate in 2016 need to pay us back for the wasted O2 resources.

#5 | Posted by Spork at 2018-12-05 03:32 PM | Reply

No one is starving in the United States.

We have a bad parenting issue here. Parents who havent grown up who are having kids and cant raise them.

#6 | Posted by boaz at 2018-12-05 04:11 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

"No one is starving in the United States."

That's like when Ahmadinejad said there are no homosexuals in Iran.

#7 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-12-05 04:16 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

"No one is starving in the United States." - #6 | Posted by boaz at 2018-12-05 04:11 PM

New Report Finds that More Americans, Particularly Children, are at Risk of Hunger
Oops.

#8 | Posted by Hans at 2018-12-05 04:18 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

"Parents who havent grown up who are having kids and cant raise them." - #6 | Posted by boaz at 2018-12-05 04:11 PM

So the kids should starve?

'Let them eat cake,' eh, Clayton?

#9 | Posted by Hans at 2018-12-05 04:20 PM | Reply

If people have a right to life then they also have a right to sustain that life.

#10 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2018-12-05 04:49 PM | Reply

Screw the kids with bad parents... That's what Jesus said anyways...

~Boaz

#11 | Posted by lfthndthrds at 2018-12-05 04:52 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

In typical Republican fashion, this question is framed precisely backwards.

Back in Jolly Olde England around 1600 or so, they increased the penalty for stealing bread to death by hanging.

People still stole bread.

Because the other option was starve to death.

#12 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-12-05 05:19 PM | Reply

No one is starving in the United States.
We have a bad parenting issue here. Parents who havent grown up who are having kids and cant raise them.
#6 | POSTED BY BOAZ

Boaz seems to going for dumbest post of the day, everyday.

1) People are starving in America. You ignorant fool.

2) If you're worried about people having kids they can't raise. Then you should be in favor of sexual education, free contraception, and abortions for all.

Good luck on your quest to be dumber than Sniper. I have faith in your ability to post stupid stuff. Keep up the ignorance!

#13 | Posted by ClownShack at 2018-12-05 05:25 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

The real question is, do we need humans to live past the age of 60 if they cant afford it?

To save money, fix our budget and help planet earth. All poor* people over the age 60 should be purged.

I bet if I worded that a little better, I could get republican approval for the measure.

*poor people are those making less that $250k a year.

#14 | Posted by ClownShack at 2018-12-05 05:38 PM | Reply

#10 So you are against abortion?

#15 | Posted by gracieamazed at 2018-12-05 06:42 PM | Reply

Then you should be in favor of sexual education, free contraception, and abortions for all.

I'm not in favor of sexual education in schools, that's a parents responsibility and talk.
I am for free contraception for certain income levels.
I am not for free abortions. But I am for abortions up to a certain point. Say 2 or three months max.

#16 | Posted by boaz at 2018-12-05 07:25 PM | Reply

If people have a right to life

The irony is dripping..

#17 | Posted by boaz at 2018-12-05 07:26 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"I'm not in favor of sexual education in schools, that's a parents responsibility and talk."

What about the parents don't educate?
They are why these classes exist.

#18 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-12-05 07:27 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"I am not for free abortions. But I am for abortions up to a certain point. Say 2 or three months max."

Three month window for elective abortion is basically okay, under Roe v. Wade. So you should be basically okay with Roe v. Wade then.

#19 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-12-05 07:30 PM | Reply

"I'm not in favor of sexual education in schools"

Then you're going to have to deal with more sexual activity, more unwanted pregnancies, and more abortions. Is that worth it?

#20 | Posted by Danforth at 2018-12-05 07:38 PM | Reply

"Then you're going to have to deal with more sexual activity, more unwanted pregnancies, and more abortions. Is that worth it?" - #20 | Posted by Danforth at 2018-12-05 07:38 PM

boaz is a member of the pregnancy-as-punishment crowd.

So that's worth it to him.

#21 | Posted by Hans at 2018-12-05 07:41 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

Then you're going to have to deal with more sexual activity, more unwanted pregnancies, and more abortions. Is that worth it?

POSTED BY DANFORTH AT 2018-12-05 07:38 PM | REPLY

Boaz is not in favour of any education that involves a rise in the social consciousness of the American populace. This includes sexual education in schools and LGBTQI studies. Republicans are adverse to these things.

#22 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2018-12-05 07:47 PM | Reply

Screw the kids with bad parents... That's what Darwin said anyways....

FTFY

Who doesnt believe in evolution?

#23 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2018-12-05 07:53 PM | Reply

Who doesnt believe in evolution?

Evangelicals

#24 | Posted by ClownShack at 2018-12-05 07:56 PM | Reply

Republican hypocrisy is two-fold on this issue.

They claim they want less abortions, but refuse what every study proves leads to less abortions: honest, frank education, and easy access to affordable birth control.

The other rank hypocrisy is, while claiming to want women to bring pregnancies to term, they don't lift a finger to encourage it: no maternal education, no pre-natal care, no early childhood development, no support for child care.

My wife, who has the finest-tuned bullsschitt meter of anyone I know, cuts to the chase: "It'a all about men trying to control women down there.

#25 | Posted by Danforth at 2018-12-05 07:57 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

LGBTQI

What's the I?

(Q is -----?)

#26 | Posted by ClownShack at 2018-12-05 07:58 PM | Reply

What's the I?
(Q is -----?)

POSTED BY CLOWNSHACK AT 2018-12-05 07:58 PM | REPLY

Inter-sex Used to be called Hermaphrodites.

#27 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2018-12-05 08:00 PM | Reply

Screw the kids with bad parents... That's what Darwin said anyways....
FTFY
Who doesnt believe in evolution?

#23 | POSTED BY ANDREAMACKRIS AT 2018-12-05 07:53 PM | FLAG:

so you're an atheist now?

#28 | Posted by lfthndthrds at 2018-12-05 08:24 PM | Reply

LGBTQI. #22 | POSTED BY LAURAMOHR

You dropped an "A" at the end of that acronym, bigot.

#29 | Posted by GOnoles92 at 2018-12-05 08:52 PM | Reply | Funny: 4

Are there no workhouses?

#30 | Posted by cbob at 2018-12-05 10:33 PM | Reply

Yes, there is no reason anyone in this country should starve. Nor is there any reason why they should be entitled to Doritos, Coca-Cola or Cocoa-Puffs. Oatmeal, rice and beans, dried milk, tea, flour and canned vegetables should be available to all who need it, including migrants. Even Mexico has more heart than Trump or Bozo.

#31 | Posted by bayviking at 2018-12-06 12:30 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

#31 | Posted by bayviking at 2018-12-06 12:30 AMFlag: ReceivedFunnyNewsworthy

I'm very much in agreement with that. It really bothers me that a person on food stamps could buy anything from sugary sodas to candy. poor people need nutrition, but even more than that they need instruction as Danforth pointed out above.

#32 | Posted by lfthndthrds at 2018-12-06 07:24 AM | Reply

So which is it Boaz? Are parents the problem or the solution?

#33 | Posted by TFDNihilist at 2018-12-06 08:07 AM | Reply

"Next they'll be demanding air." Rs are working on that by repealing clean air laws. Like in China, only people who can afford home air purification systems deserve clean air.

#34 | Posted by SomebodyElse at 2018-12-06 08:40 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Interesting timing on this article.

A local radio station is running a holiday charity event where you can call in and pay money for them to play any song. The more outside of the station format, the more they ask you to pay. All money raised goes to the Boston Food bank I believe. They had someone on from the charity that said for every $10 dollars donated they are able to provide 30 healthy meals.

Got me to thinking...

If a billion is a thousand millions, then the federal government could give 20 food shelters in each state a million dollars. This would be 6 million healthy meals in each state.

A quote from a Huffpo article states:

"Feeding America did not interview people who use food programs outside of its own network. The USDA said last year there were 49 million Americans who lack consistent access to enough food, suggesting there are millions in the U.S. experiencing hunger who aren't using food pantries or soup kitchens served by the organization. "

Lets call this 50 million or 1 million per state. At 1 billion dollars we could feed each of these people almost a meal a day for a week.

If we spent 50 billion in this way we could feed them 1 healthy meal a day for roughly the entire year.

Looking at the 2016 budget for the SNAP program...

"SNAP benefits cost $70.9 billion in fiscal year 2016 and supplied roughly 44.2 million Americans (14% of the population) with a monthly average of $125.51 per person in food assistance."

and then for 2019

US Food Stamps Spending for 2019 - Charts
www.usgovernmentspending.com
Table of US Government Spending by function, Federal, State, and Local: Pensions, Healthcare, ... Food Stamp spending for FY2019 is budgeted at $84 billion.

It would seem that these numbers are just going up, if we took all the food assistance programs we have and funneled those funds directly to facilities that can make the most of bulk purchasing we could ensure that everyone who was in need could have access to a healthy meal virtually twice a day. This seems MUCH more effective than the impact of ~125 per person per month.

Just a thought experiment, there are a lot of implementation details to be certain, but it seems that the potential for better results could be had by providing healthy prepared meals rather than assistance funds.

#35 | Posted by kwrx25 at 2018-12-06 01:27 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Dude sounds like pos. Bet he considers himself a Christian too. People shouldn't skip meals to pay the light bill.

#36 | Posted by byrdman at 2018-12-06 04:10 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

The answer is easy.

Yes.

#37 | Posted by donnerboy at 2018-12-06 07:05 PM | Reply

Multiple generals have now literally spelled out for congress the need for food stamps if America is going to have a standing military.

If the generals aren't a big enough deal for the bumpkin congress jerk has he ever heard of Jesus?

#38 | Posted by Tor at 2018-12-06 07:53 PM | Reply

"Just a thought experiment, there are a lot of implementation details to be certain, but it seems that the potential for better results could be had by providing healthy prepared meals rather than assistance funds."

SNAP's biggest supporters reside in the grocery industry. Because they're guaranteed all that money be funneled through their stores. And they could give a ---- whether those cards are being used to buy broccolini or Ruffles.

#39 | Posted by madbomber at 2018-12-06 08:36 PM | Reply

But forcing people into buying healthy stuff would likely cost votes for those politicians who are banking on buying votes from those who want Ruffles.

#40 | Posted by madbomber at 2018-12-06 08:39 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

"Just a thought experiment, there are a lot of implementation details to be certain, but it seems that the potential for better results could be had by providing healthy prepared meals rather than assistance funds."

That's called a soup kitchen.

They exist.

There's one in downtown San Diego that has served something like two million meals in the past decade.

There's also Meals on Wheels, for those who are homebound.

In related news, there's more than one way to skin a cat.

#41 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-12-06 08:40 PM | Reply

wow, really... no s**t snoofy. I'm talking about a major expansion of them. expanded to the point were virtually anyone might eat a meal there.

#42 | Posted by kwrx25 at 2018-12-06 09:47 PM | Reply

I've been in favor of that for years.

We should make the National Guard do it.

#43 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-12-06 09:51 PM | Reply

You dropped an "A" at the end of that acronym, bigot.

POSTED BY GONOLES92 AT 2018-12-05 08:52 PM | REPLY |

I didn't forget the A honey. I figured that ------- was your area of expertise.

#44 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2018-12-06 09:53 PM | Reply

Nah, it looks like you purposely discriminated against those whom the "A" represent in your acronym shoutout.
If you're going to shorten it, the go-to is LGBT+

#45 | Posted by GOnoles92 at 2018-12-06 10:32 PM | Reply

Meh. It's obvious his intent was that is paying for everyone's food a right. And that, my friends, is what we call a 21st century NOPE...an argument that, if you get involved in, you are guaranteed to piss off half of the country no matter what you say.

Let Cali split off from America, have them pay for everyone to eat what the government says they are allowed to eat, and pay for the people who want to live under those rules to fly there. Easiest solution I can think of. Otherwise, there isn't one.

#46 | Posted by humtake at 2018-12-07 12:31 PM | Reply

Meh. It's obvious his intent was that is paying for everyone's food a right.

And it's a strawman, and a slippery slope fallacy, since nobody has actually proposed what he is talking about.

The only way economies of scale can be used to bring healthcare costs back from the brink is to enact a single-payer system. You can't really compare the food/ag economy to healthcare, and the two are already subsidized in so many different ways. But again, nobody even proposed what he brought up so it's a stupid argument.

#47 | Posted by JOE at 2018-12-07 12:52 PM | Reply

#46 | POSTED BY HUMTAKE

Great solution. Except for all the people that will starve in the US and the fact that it will bankrupt the nation.

But as a Californian, I'll finally get some high speed rail, so its fine by me. I'd love a world where my tax dollars don't go toward helping racists and pedophiles in the south.

#48 | Posted by IndianaJones at 2018-12-07 01:21 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

--But as a Californian, I'll finally get some high speed rail

If the Moonbeam Express is ever completed.

#49 | Posted by nullifidian at 2018-12-07 03:03 PM | Reply

"I'd love a world where my tax dollars don't go toward helping racists and pedophiles in the south."

If only racists and peophiles lived in the South but there is a pretty good percentage of the population who are just good, hard working, non-racist people trying to eek out living. My aunt and uncle lived in Alabama their entire married life. He had a little insurance agency and she was a teacher. They raised three fine boys. When my uncle died virtually every black person in the county attended his funeral. He was their go to man whenever they had legal documents, etc. that they needed to understand and he did it for them free of charge for his entire life. He was greatly loved and respected. My aunt was my mother's older sister and a finer woman you will never meet in your life. They were for equality long before Civil Rights came along and the black people (colored in those days) loved and respected them.

#50 | Posted by danni at 2018-12-07 03:10 PM | Reply

"The nickname was coined by Mike Royko, the famed Chicago columnist, who in 1976 said that Mr. Brown appeared to be attracting "the moonbeam vote," which in Chicago political parlance meant young, idealistic and nontraditional.

In a 1991 column in The Chicago Tribune, he called the label, an "idiotic, damn-fool, meaningless, throw-away line," and pleaded with people to stop using it.

"Enough of this ‘Moonbeam' stuff," Mr. Royko concluded. "I declare it null, void and deceased.""

www.nytimes.com

Sounds like Dulli; null, void, and semi-deceased.

#51 | Posted by Corky at 2018-12-07 03:15 PM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2018 World Readable

Drudge Retort