LogFAQs > #926007482

RCtheWSBC posted...

That had nothing to do with my comment but okay

The same arguments they outlined for supporting this new policy (self-sufficiency) are the same ones that organizations like ALEC distribute across state legislatures to support cutting access to safety net programs and services as a whole. Today they can feel good about targeted legalized immigrants, but native-born citizens living in poverty who utilize these programs have been and continue to be in the chopping block. They're targeting the poorest Americans, naturalized or otherwise.

I'd say those are separate things. Those who have a particular distain of illegal immigration and those who distain the poor do have significant crossover, but there's plenty non-convergence on the Venn diagram. There are those who hate immigration because it effects Americans and there are those who hate immigration because it effects Americans and they are American.

RCtheWSBC posted...

If the only distinction of someone who legally resides in the US being "worthy" of accessing SNAP, WIC, or Medicaid is their country of origin, then yikes. The income and eligibility requirements for these programs are already limited, as well as their "payouts".

Considering how Medicaid was deliberately sabotaged to be a political weapon, I'm not surprised it's not helping. I'd say the rest is due to the right generally having an issue with government spending conceptually so the restrictions are attempts at cost-savings.

RCtheWSBC posted...

This is a further delineation of the "deserving vs deserving" poor: https://nonprofitquarterly.org/the-deserving-and-undeserving-poor-a-persistent-frame-with-consequences/

I'd say it's saying "You being poor doesn't make it our responsibility to help you, particularly when any tax burden you create would push more Americans in to a undeserving poor state."
---

Doctor Foxx posted...
The demonizing of soy has a lot to do with xenophobic ideas.