Oh, I'm not arguing with food aid. (I mean, I can see how one can take issue with government subsidies in general, but I agree that food aid to low-income folk

Oh, I'm not arguing with food aid. (I mean, I can see how one can take issue with government subsidies in general, but I agree that food aid to low-income folk is probably the best bang you are going to get for your subsidy 'buck'[1] and, well, it's hard to argue against food for the hungry when you are well fed without being an even bigger asshole than I am willing to be.) I was just pointing out what I think the reason for outrage was. (to be clear, middle-class people have nothing against subsidies... they just prefer their subsidies in the form of tax loopholes. The outrage here is that culturally middle-class (but financially lower-class) people were taking subsidies intended for culturally lower-class people, and using those subsidies in the way you'd expect a culturally middle-class person to use them.) [1]I scare quote 'buck' there because I'm talking about the total cost of the subsidy; not just the monetary cost, but also the market distortion cost. both should be considered before we decide a subsidy is worth it.