3 ms·
> In the US, Despite our country having vast and endless supplies of food from megafarms and their accompanying subsidies, there is very little safety net in Am
by unishark 7y ago
> In the US, Despite our country having vast and endless supplies of food from megafarms and their accompanying subsidies, there is very little safety net in America to ensure anyone is fed at all once they are unemployed.
On the contrary, food stamps (SNAP) is pretty much the only federal welfare program that covers everyone based only on need (i.e. low enough assets and income).
There is a 3-month limit for many people (e.g. able-bodied males who don't have kids) but states have the power to extend it in times/locations of high unemployment.
- justin66 7y ago> states have the power to extend it in times/locations of high unemployment The federal government under Trump took some of this ability away in December, with changes targeted to take effect April 1st. The plan was that roughly 700,000 people would lose the ability to receive food stamps in order to, according to Agriculture Secretary Sonny Perdue, "restore the dignity of work to a sizable segment of our population." I wish I was making that up. Today, the unemployment rate is likely to spike so high just about everywhere that the new rules will probably not make a difference, but it's important to keep in mind that there's a portion of the US body politic that is happy to see some people go hungry, as long as it's the right people.
- bruceb 7y ago(e.g. able-bodied males who don't have kids) I doubt it is gender specific. that being said a better safety net is needed. A savings account started in high school would be nice as well.