comment
stringlengths 1
9.9k
| context
listlengths 0
835
|
|---|---|
>
The United States doesn’t need it.
|
[
"/u/SeanFromQueens (OP) has awarded 1 delta(s) in this post.\nAll comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed here, in /r/DeltaLog.\nPlease note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.\n^Delta System Explained ^| ^Deltaboards",
">\n\nIt adds a new headache to me grocery shopping to figure out what is or is not SNAP eligible and pay for groceries with two separate funding sources instead of just handing over my Visa card. \nQuite a bit of money would be lost in the new bureaucracy. How many government bureaucrats are we going to have to pay to effectively take our money and then give it back to us?\nIf someone would rather go hungry than use a SNAP card that's available to them, why is that my problem? We're already doing our duty by offering them the benefits.\nAssuming you're going to buy groceries no matter what, groceries are effectively not taxed already because you can take a standard tax deduction of $13,850 (I'm not especially frugal and even with current inflation I spend a lot less than that on groceries) and in my state there are no sales taxes on basic groceries.",
">\n\n\nthat it being universal would also eliminate the stigma of using SNAP benefits because no one would know whether you qualify for additional SNAP benefits or you are just using it as a Health Savings Account (HSA)but for your groceries and decreasing your tax liabilities.\n\n\nI see your point in trying to remove the stigma by making it universal, but people would still very much be aware that some people receive more benefits than others (i.e. the benefits are not really universal and are still means-tested to some extent) so it definitely would not eliminate the stigma, even if it does reduce the stigma.\nThis proposal disproportionately benefits people who spend more money on food (i.e. people with higher incomes/wealth). Let's say you're a middle income person and I've got a nice hefty salary. Sure you won't pay taxes on that $5 you spend on ground beef you'll eat for dinner, but I won't pay taxes on the $150 I spend on my dry aged steak and lobster I'll eat for dinner. You won't pay taxes on the $4 bag of chips you're eating with your burger, I won't pay taxes on the $200 in truffles I'm going to put on my baked potato I'm having with my steak and lobster. Further, you're saving money in your highest tax bracket, which is much lower than my tax bracket. Do you find this outcome acceptable? Why?",
">\n\nLower income people spend a much larger percentage of their paycheck on food than higher income people do.",
">\n\nYes they do, but I'm not sure what point you're trying to make. Could you explain?",
">\n\nA wealthier person getting 7% of their spending tax free (35-37%) benefits less than a poorer person getting 30% of their spending tax free (10-15%)\nSo it's slightly progressive, not regressive. More so if you add the deposits and if you don't count restaurants or food purchased abroad.",
">\n\nIt's a huge expense for the federal government that disproportionately benefits those with higher incomes. Hey poor people, here's a couple hundred dollars over the course of the year! I know it's not much and that people who don't need a tax cut are saving 10+ times more than you, but as a percentage of your household income it's a greater savings than theirs so yay! \nNot buying it. But more to the point reducing taxes for high income folks isn't furthering OP's stated goal for the proposal:\n\nThe goal of the proposal is to assure Americans getting fed healthy food is easier for all Americans, the goal is not what I'm open to changing but that this proposal is the best means to achieve said goal.",
">\n\nYou mean disproportionately benefits lower income people. And is presumably offset by an increase in income taxes, which disproportionately fall on people with higher incomes.",
">\n\n\nYou mean disproportionately benefits lower income people.\n\nNope, I mean disproportionately benefits higher income people, but thanks.\nDisproportionate: too small or too large in comparison with something else.\nIn my view, the actual dollars saved by high income folks is disproportionate. In your view the percentage of income tax saved by low income folks is disproportionate. \nWe can both use the word correctly and come to different conclusions :) \n\nAnd is presumably offset by an increase in income taxes,\n\nOP didn't stipulate how this would be paid for.",
">\n\n\nNope, I mean disproportionately benefits higher income people, but thanks.\n\nThen you're simply incorrect. The previous commenter has it right. \nTo your analogy, a flat tax like sales tax is practically regressive because the loss in marginal utility weighs heavier on poorer people. On the other side, flat subsidies for foodstuffs are progressive for the same reason, poorer people extract more net marginal utility from it than wealthier people.",
">\n\nAs a middle class person, this system just sounds annoying to me. I'd much rather just have the $1200 a year and have the government subsidize food than have to manage a separate SNAP card and have to deposit income into my SNAP account.",
">\n\nManage a seperate card is too much of a burden? I've got two credit cards, two debit cards, personally adding a 5th card would not be much of a bother for me, but that's just me. Most mass transit have there own payment service that one could use with their phone, I would expect that this would behave in a similar manner where your SNAP account is either another plastic card or a just another account on your Apple/Google pay wallet. \nGovernment subsidizing food being handed out to the food producers hasn't worked out for farmers or the consumer just the multinational agribusinesses like ADM and Conagra, though this doesn't address this specific problem it doesn't exasperate the problem either.",
">\n\nIt makes regular income people feel like poor people to have an extra card with a negligible amount of money in it. It’s annoying, like the other person said",
">\n\nI've had transitchek card for monthly subway fares. I currently have a HSA for health care costs. Having the similar tax benefits but for groceries, it would be as much money as you elect it to be, or just forgo it altogether and pay groceries with post-tax dollars as you go now. You are free to do you boo.",
">\n\nAn HSA card and a subway card are not like credit/debit cards. Also most people in the country do not have subway cards. I don’t know what the percentage is on HSA card, but I bet it’s not as high as you seem to think. The fact is that most people use one debit card for their everyday transactions. Full stop. Adding anything to that, is going to piss people off royally. If there’s not enough money on the card, which will happen all the time, people will need to use two means of payment. Yet another way to piss people off. \nThe additional card is hardly one of my top concerns with your proposal, but it would be one of the things that royally pisses people off.",
">\n\nI think I see the goal here pretty clearly:\n\nIt is my view that this would be an efficient means to alleviate cost concerns for Americans trying to put food on the table\nThe goal of the proposal is to assure Americans getting fed healthy food is easier for all Americans\n\nThe poor pay essentially nothing in taxes. When you give them government aid, they are really getting aid. They get more out of the system then they put into. That makes sense to me, we should give aid to people who need it for lots of reasons ethical and pragmatic.\nWhen the government gives money to the middle class, it doesn't have the same effect. The middle class pays the taxes that create the funds that the government distributes.\nYour police will cost 400 billion dollars, and it will be paid by the tax payer. What sense do it make to raise my taxes by 1200 dollars so that you can turn around and give me 1200 dollars in snap benefits? You are certainly not making it easier for me to buy food. \nof course you could also shift around the tax burden. you could raise taxes only on the 1%. But then what do you need this snap program from? Just cut my taxes. there is no sense in taking my money just to give it back to me. Give money to people who need it.\nIf you want to make it easier for people to buy food there is another method. The government can, and does, pay farmers to grow food. These are called farming subsidies. This has a couple of effects. The main one is that is allows American farmers to compete with international farmers. We don't want the agriculture industry to collapse the same why our textile industry did. Domestic food production is a national security issue. But it also has the effect of making food cheaper. You artificially increase the supply which drives prices down. you could play around with this in all sorts of ways. you could cut subsidies on meat, which is very calorie inefficient and increase subsidies on healthy food like beans, rice. Or you could just increase subsidies across the board. You could artificially prop up smaller farms or farms growing more diverse strains of food or do the opposite. You could reward long term investments like fruit and nut trees which don't yield anything for the first 5 or 10 years. You could reward leaving fields fallow. You have a lot of options.\nusing subsidies to drive sustainable and long term food production, I think will do a lot more to accomplish your goal then just taking and returning 1200 dollars to many Americans or redistributing wealth through taxes.",
">\n\n\nof course you could also shift around the tax burden. you could raise taxes only on the 1%. But then what do you need this snap program from? Just cut my taxes. there is no sense in taking my money just to give it back to me. Give money to people who need it.\n\nShifting the tax burden up the economic ladder is a goal of this reform, the universal SNAP benefits could be less but what is most important is the ability for middle income tax payers to use pre-tax dollars to buy their groceries, which creates a negative rate consumption tax that proportionally benefits those who spending a greater percentage of their money on groceries than those who are earning a higher income and could not practically spend as much on groceries. Even if the high income individual spends far more than the middle income individual, it will still be a smaller percentage of their income.",
">\n\nAs a proponent for Universal Basic Income i feel like this proposal is very similar but more complicated and unnessecary restricted. Why not just give everyone money?",
">\n\nIt's an entry level UBI program, and not any more complicated than means tested EBT, actually it's more efficient with economy of scale. If it is started out with the limited scope of groceries there's no argument of \"well that will cause people to waste it on booze/drugs\" and limit the initial universal benefits to something that is universal like food. The next step could be direct cash transfers.",
">\n\nGiven that almost every person will spend more than $100 on food in a given month, your proposal is very similar to a small basic income plan. I am in general more in favor of straight cash rather than money that comes with strings, it reduces the cost of administration of a program, and it provides people with freedom of choice on how they spend. Maybe someone works at a resort where the get board as part of their compensation. Maybe someone is in a nursing home and doesn’t cook. Those people could, I’m sure, still find a way to spend $100 a month in allowed items, but why not let them spend on what’s important to them?",
">\n\nThe small scale of the transfer is a feature not a bug to the proposal, rather than striving for a full basic income system, assisting with food purchases for everyone. This could be expanded afterwards to be a straight cash transfer, but it is easier defended to have food benefit be universal since everyone needs food.",
">\n\nWhy do this instead of a cash UBI?",
">\n\nIt's an intermediary step that is both smaller than what it would take to deliver basic income. Assisting with food costs and allow tax payers to take advantage of lowering tax liability on purchases that are inevitable to be bought anyway.",
">\n\n\neliminate the stigma of using SNAP benefits\n\nHow much of a sigma is there? I used SNAP for a couple of years and never experienced any stigma. I often notice people using an EBT card at supermarkets, but can't remember it ever being an issue for anyone.\nIf there is a problem with sigma, wouldn't a better solution be to make the card look like an unrecognizable debit card?",
">\n\nYou’ve never experienced the stigma? Gawd, I’m jealous!\nI had gotten pretty good at hiding my card as I was swiping so people wouldn’t see it - but with the introduction of card chips, the fact that I’m using a SNAP card is once again obvious to the holier-than-thou pearl-clutchers around me. The ones who feel they absolutely must comment on the food I’m buying. If it’s healthy, they say “It must be nice buying all that with MY money. You eat better than I do.” If it’s all store brands and ramen noodles, they say “I can’t believe you’re buying junk food with MY tax dollars!” If they can’t find anything about my food to complain about, then it’s my clothes or my phone or my tattoo… never mind that I got my clothes at a thrift store, or my phone on a payment plan, or my tattoo when I was 18 and no responsibilities. \nThis is why I preferred grocery shopping at 2am, when the stores were practically empty. Covid ruined that.",
">\n\nFrom what you’re saying, I think the chip dip problem is that the card processor requires stores to invest in the tech. Small shops for example. The only benefit is to the processor, because chips have less fraud. Without any evidence I’d imagine small shop lobby groups (or grocers, etc.) don’t want every EBT user that buys cheap cheese to suddenly require upgraded equipment to remain EBT-compliant and thus have access to EBT money. The corner bodega and their lobbyists wouldn’t encourage a chip card because it’s not to their benefit. Then again, the stigma in a bodega or similar probably doesn’t exist because that’s where a lot of poorer customers shop, not a big supermarket with “regular” chip users and a big company behind it with negotiating power with credit processors.",
">\n\nAll this would do, is raise the prices of all the cheapest stuff, negatively impacting the people you want to help. It also taxes the business the poor person is working for more, reducing their pay.",
">\n\nWhat evidence do you have that it would raise prices?",
">\n\nEverything the government has ever subsidized?\nGovernment loans drove up the price of college. Mandates that employers provide health insurance has driven up the price of health care.\nAny time you give people money to spend on something without adding to the supply of that thing, more money chasing the same amount of goods necessarily means price increases.\nNow, since money is fungible, lots of people would take their universal SNAP benefits and replace part of their existing food budget with it, but that just means they're going to have more money to spend in other parts of the economy, so while I'd expect the price increases to be concentrated in food markets, it would probably cause inflation across the economy.",
">\n\nThe relationship between employer healthcare costs and healthcare costs is inverse. As healthcare costs increase fewer employers take on the burden, and shift to less risk, and less expensive coverage. Even as the economy improves, employers cannot keep up the burden of sponsoring employee plans, so they don’t. They don’t hire, or they use FSAs, or they work with unions, something else but not cause costs to rise merely by requiring coverage.",
">\n\nThat's definitely a better policy then what we have now, but if you were going to do that you should just go ahead and give people cash directly to spend however they want.\nFor poor people in actual need, food is important, but often some other emergency is more critical; a car repair that keeps you from losing your job, a doctor visit that treats a problem early before it develops into a life-long condition.\nAnd for everyone else, giving coupons that can only be spent on a few things distorts the market, in ways that just make it less efficient and less useful for everyone. For example, if you gave everyone $50/month that can only be spent on eggs, the price of eggs would go up a ton until supply and demand equalized again. \nEfficient markets are fueled by people freely spending how they want, so if you want to subsidize them just give them cash directly.\nThe restrictions on SNAP benefits are mostly there to reassure voters that poor people aren't being allowed to be happy, just being allowed to survive; they're a means to discipline the labor force by making poverty worse to endure. They don't serve any good, pro-social function, really.",
">\n\nI think your comment has shown the actual reason why SNAP is for specific things. The purpose of the program is to reduce hunger, but as you have said - if it wasn’t limited to food necessities then poor people would spend it on other things and go hungry.\nIt’s not about wanting them to not be happy - it’s about making sure they eat well.",
">\n\nFood is sort of an inflexible expense. A person expecting to enjoy other goods and services will need food to actually enjoy them at some point. Politically it’s easy to imagine someone will spend $99 on whiskey and go hungry. But that’s not really reality, right. They may have a different basket of goods at the end of the day, but there will be food in the basket. Like alcohol. For things we really worry about — like addictive drugs — that’s for social programs and enforcement paid by taxes to address most effectively, not restricting dollars to food. We wouldn’t say the war on drugs demands restricting food aid: the war on drugs demands attacking addiction and the substances and suppliers themselves.",
">\n\nThe comment I replied to said that poor people would spend money on vehicles or rent instead of food. While those are important things, they are not food and snap focuses on food insecurity not general poverty.\nEdit to add: my social worker husband disagrees with you on the drugs - unrestricted cash could cause a huge problem for his clients.",
">\n\nSo you're going to raise everyone's taxes by $100 to give them $100 in food stamps?\nIt's not hard to get healthy food: people who aren't eating healthy don't want to. People claim it's a price issue, but the fact is that fresh fruits and vegetables are cheaper than junk food. Bananas are like 25 cents each, but people would rather buy a bag of chips. Water is basically free, put people pay for soda.",
">\n\nProbably more like raising everyone's taxes by $110 to give them $100, once you account for the government waste and bureaucracy in the program.",
">\n\nIf everyone gets it automatically and there is no need to review any applications, wouldn't that cut down on the administrative costs?",
">\n\nQuestion, do you believe the underlying problem is related to income/wealth inequality? America is the richest nation per capita but struggle to live happy, healthy lives. \nIf you improved how the wealth of the nation is distributed, do you think it would fix the problem?",
">\n\nAmericans have the highest disposal income of any country in the world. Yes. More than Europeans. We just spend it like idiots.\nThe issue isn't wealth inequality, Its the lack of economic education in school. In US schools you dont ever take a single economics course. I was one of about twelve students in a school of 1200 that took an economics course. And even then, that was more just about how global economies function. There are absolutely 0 Classes that american students take on proper budgeting. This means that many americans, despite having more disposible income than their european counterparts still struggle since they blow their money pointlessly.",
">\n\nTo confirm, people starve despite having more then enough money to buy all the food they want? Doubt.",
">\n\n\\~100 people in the US die of starvation every year with the vast majority being people with mental illness who cannot support themselves or neglected children. People aren't starving. The problem is that we talk about poor food quality issues.\nThe issue here comes primarily from 2 places.\n1.) Time. Eating healthy, Or at a minimum, Not like complete shit. Is cheaper than trash eating. You can buy a pack of chicken breasts for the cost of a large Baconator Combo. The issue is the time it takes to cook. These people are either unable or unwilling for a variety of issues to take the 30m to cook a healthy meal.\n2.) Access. When you see places like New York where all they have is tiny little corner stores and you have to travel basically out of the city to find a proper grocery store. That is a problem. You can either eat the trash from the Bodega, or travel 30m to get to a proper Albertsons (or whatever they have in NY).\n\nThis is why Poverty in the US isn't represented by starved thin people, its Obesity. They are getting plenty of calories and are eating plenty of food. Its just the food quality isnt there.\n\nEDIT: Also something to remember. Many, If not the majority of low income earners smoke. And if they are a pack a day smoker, that is \\~$15USD per day for their habit. THAT IS A FULL MEAL! They are addicted to a substance that drains a full meal worth of income from them per day. Imagine what eating 4 meals a day would do you your budget. And that is per person. If your partner smokes as well that is 2 Meals per day of household income just thrown away. And many people are 2-3 pack a day smokes. Meaning they can be spending up to 3 meals a day worth of income on an addiction. Clearly, Money isnt the issue.",
">\n\nYou are talking about something different than OP. \n\ntrying to put food on the table\n\nI'm sure people would cook more healthy and varied meals if they had more income. You identify the issue yourself, insufficient time off to spend it finding healthy foods, living in places with basic kitchens and eating nutritional food. \nI have no idea why you were saying education is the actual problem. I also don't know why you are banging on about smoking. It's going not to do with the point. \nYou really got to identify the point your making and be concise. \nYour anecdotal opinions about what poor people aren't/are doing isn't convincing, it's just story telling.",
">\n\n\"To confirm, people starve despite having more then enough money to buy all the food they want? Doubt.\"\nNice redirection. I responded to your comment. Not OP. YOU said people were starving. That is why I refuted it.",
">\n\n\nI responded to your comment. Not OP.\n\nMaybe respond to OP and not to me, I dont have a view here.",
">\n\ni guess i'm struggling to see the benefit of it, i get that you get a tax break but you're also paying money off of your paycheck to pay for something that most people already get. so its kinda a wash \nthe problem with food stamps i think is that its for people who are on the fringes by definition, who are also shamed into being very quiet about their usage of it. so when people hear about people abusing them, they don't have a frame of reference for people actually using them like they're supposed to \nso i think either this just needs to be simpler and even more universal, or just tweak the current system a little more so people see more use out of it",
">\n\nIt's like a Health Savings Account, but for groceries. A household will spend x dollars on groceries every year, but under this plan the x dollars would be pre-tax dollars making whatever is spent on groceries a decrease in the household taxable income (both income tax and the payroll taxes like social security and Medicare). In another way, it is treating what a household needs to spend money on as a operating cost when a business is taxed. For businesses operating expenses are not counted as taxable income, for a typical household health care expenses can be uaed lower taxable income as a necessary expense, but not groceries - this would change that.",
">\n\nThis is too wonkish and misses the root of the problem. Why are there people who don't have enough to eat? Why is there so much poverty in the first place?",
">\n\nThe people that need this the most likely don't pay any income tax in the first place. Getting an extra tax deduction means nothing at that point. Where it will mean a possible deduction that is useful is the middle class and upper class. The middle class is forced to use it or end up paying more in tax for not playing the game. The upper class has an accountant who will figure the optimal amount for them right off the bat. \nIn order to find the extra benefits, we either need to raise taxes or just crank up the debt even more. I know a lot of people like to ignore the debt but it will come back to bite us at some point. As it is, something like $400 billion in interest is paid in a year. Over the next few years, that could reach into the trillions.",
">\n\nThe people who already qualify for SNAP would still get the level of benefits (which would be above $100/month), the wider and new benefit would be for the middle income who currently buy their groceries with post-tax dollars and would be able to buy groceries with pre-tax dollars lowering their tax liability without changing their behavior.",
">\n\nIf current recipients are going to get the same amount, and the middle and upper classes are going to be the ones getting the benefit under this proposal, you are increasing spending while powering tax revenue. I don't see that being a good idea given the current budget situation.",
">\n\nShow Me Your Budget, And I’ll Show You What You Value\nIf the federal budget needs to be brought in line to reflect the values of the American people that would value life sustaining resources over bombs, then so be it.",
">\n\nIt seems redundant to expect everyone in the country to pay additional taxes to cover their own SNAP benefits. I don’t know cost concerns you’re trying to alleviate. Assume every single person’s taxes increase $100/month so they can get a get a $100 SNAP card? And since it’s universal, the Kardashians, Elon Musk, CEOs, doctors, lawyers… would all get $100 every month? \nThe whole reason that SNAP works is because the population who is better off, helps cover the expenses for those lesser well off. \nThis is the prime example of why good intentions don’t necessarily mean it’s a good idea",
">\n\nThere is a form of food stamps everywhere minus 26 countries. Yes I do agree.",
">\n\nSo you want to take a relatively simple system (relatively speaking) and replace it with a more complicated, more costly, confusing system. All just to cover more people. \nThis is a shitty idea for so many reasons. The two biggest would be: 1) Cost: you are making a program much more expensive than it needs to be. The most significant costs will be in the IRS to enforce this program, since you have now effectively put it in their jurisdiction. You may not realize this, but that is the result. This will also disproportionately effect people on the margins, the working poor. These people may not qualify under your proposal, and they didn’t qualify for the old one. Now you’re making their financial lives more complex, and making their tax filings more complex. Again, you may not have thought of this….but is unavoidable. \n 2) You now made a relatively niche program that the majority of taxpayers never give a second thought to, and you’re making it a vital part of everyone’s lives. This would suddenly make it ‘everyone’s issue’. And it will get debated and potentially cut at rates much greater than the current program. \nTrying to cover more people is a cause I agree with. I would be absolutely disgusted if the government did something like what you’re suggesting. It is so economically inefficient, it will end up increasing the projects cost many times. It takes a program that only benefits a minority of people, and makes it everyone’s issue. And all for literally no reason. The amount of bureaucracy required in your plan is just absurd. \nThere are many other reasons that your idea sucks, these are just the two most glaringly troublesome in my eyes.",
">\n\nWhy not simply provide everyone with a universal basic income? There's much less of a likelihood of creating inflation on everyday goods with that approach, and it'd allow each family to be flexible about where they lived and how they spent their money, which would help alleviate the densification of the working population that drives costs up for things like housing.",
">\n\nGreat take an extra 500 dollars from those who do not need assistance and give us back 100 dollars. There is no limit on how much of another persons money the government (and those who support them) is willing to spend.",
">\n\nAlmost all food is already not taxed in most states. SNAP for everyone would discourage people from working as much. People can already live on Ramen noodles for $150 per year and I once bought sixty eggs and a gallon of milk for $60, plus a bag of shredded cheese for a few more dollars. Costco, whose membership is refundable after purchases, sells a 25-lb bag of rice for $18 and a 50-lb bag of rice for $19. Black beans are also very cheap, and people can live on their only nutrients as being from potatoes and butter.",
">\n\nThis would go the extra step of giving tax advantages for every dollar spent on groceries, like HSAs the money being elected by each person would be pre-tax thereby lowering the taxable income. Why should there be tax advantages for investing but not for everyone who eats food that they prepare themselves? Food doesn't have a sales tax, but the money used to buy that food is taxed when it's earned in a paycheck, whether it is payroll tax (social security and Medicare) or for those earning more income tax, this proposal would give the working American hundreds of dollars back in their pockets and it wouldn't be means tested (just like social security and Medicare) meaning everyone benefits.\nThe argument that \"if people have any of their basic needs meet, they become lazy\" just isn't born out in reality. Prison delivers basic needs and most prisoners don't become ostensibly comatose out of sheer slovenly nature of having basic needs met. If you had security that you would not be homeless, starving and left destitute would you tien into a lethargic rhetorical slug? I don't know you but I suspect that the answer is \"no\". Alleviating the possibility of destitution hasn't turned the rest of the wealthy nations of the world into a nation of lazy bums, their people are less likely to die deaths of despair, seek out academic achievement at higher levels, have more free time with friends and family, and all that across 30+ countries that have robust welfare states. Maybe reality is not that there needs to be economic retribution to every individual who is maximally providing their labor to their employers (more often than not, multiple jobs need to be worked for the bottom of the labor market). There's burger flippers in all those other wealthy countries and they don't need to work 2-3 of those low wage jobs, but somehow only the American worker needs to karmically punished and economically tortured because if they didn't the American would somehow be sinfully free to lead his/her life to as they want?\nEveryone eats food, this proposal just makes it easier for everyone by providing relief for the thing everyone will paying for anyway. Why shouldn't it be made easier for everyone's wallet to eat? What moral danger is there to take some of that household expenses off everyone's family budget? If it works out and the public likes joining the rest of the developed nations having a government that provides services and benefits to them and not just the wealthy and well connected, isn't that what a government of the people, by the people, and for the people should be doing anyway?",
">\n\nAre you going to fund this, or are you going to demand others have their money stolen to fund it?",
">\n\nIf you don't consent to taxes feel free to renounce your citizenship and leave",
">\n\nWe shouldn't have to NEED SNAP that's the problem",
">\n\nWe don't need snap.",
">\n\nWho's we you got a turd in your pocket?"
] |
>
That's very general. And I disagree
|
[
"/u/SeanFromQueens (OP) has awarded 1 delta(s) in this post.\nAll comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed here, in /r/DeltaLog.\nPlease note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.\n^Delta System Explained ^| ^Deltaboards",
">\n\nIt adds a new headache to me grocery shopping to figure out what is or is not SNAP eligible and pay for groceries with two separate funding sources instead of just handing over my Visa card. \nQuite a bit of money would be lost in the new bureaucracy. How many government bureaucrats are we going to have to pay to effectively take our money and then give it back to us?\nIf someone would rather go hungry than use a SNAP card that's available to them, why is that my problem? We're already doing our duty by offering them the benefits.\nAssuming you're going to buy groceries no matter what, groceries are effectively not taxed already because you can take a standard tax deduction of $13,850 (I'm not especially frugal and even with current inflation I spend a lot less than that on groceries) and in my state there are no sales taxes on basic groceries.",
">\n\n\nthat it being universal would also eliminate the stigma of using SNAP benefits because no one would know whether you qualify for additional SNAP benefits or you are just using it as a Health Savings Account (HSA)but for your groceries and decreasing your tax liabilities.\n\n\nI see your point in trying to remove the stigma by making it universal, but people would still very much be aware that some people receive more benefits than others (i.e. the benefits are not really universal and are still means-tested to some extent) so it definitely would not eliminate the stigma, even if it does reduce the stigma.\nThis proposal disproportionately benefits people who spend more money on food (i.e. people with higher incomes/wealth). Let's say you're a middle income person and I've got a nice hefty salary. Sure you won't pay taxes on that $5 you spend on ground beef you'll eat for dinner, but I won't pay taxes on the $150 I spend on my dry aged steak and lobster I'll eat for dinner. You won't pay taxes on the $4 bag of chips you're eating with your burger, I won't pay taxes on the $200 in truffles I'm going to put on my baked potato I'm having with my steak and lobster. Further, you're saving money in your highest tax bracket, which is much lower than my tax bracket. Do you find this outcome acceptable? Why?",
">\n\nLower income people spend a much larger percentage of their paycheck on food than higher income people do.",
">\n\nYes they do, but I'm not sure what point you're trying to make. Could you explain?",
">\n\nA wealthier person getting 7% of their spending tax free (35-37%) benefits less than a poorer person getting 30% of their spending tax free (10-15%)\nSo it's slightly progressive, not regressive. More so if you add the deposits and if you don't count restaurants or food purchased abroad.",
">\n\nIt's a huge expense for the federal government that disproportionately benefits those with higher incomes. Hey poor people, here's a couple hundred dollars over the course of the year! I know it's not much and that people who don't need a tax cut are saving 10+ times more than you, but as a percentage of your household income it's a greater savings than theirs so yay! \nNot buying it. But more to the point reducing taxes for high income folks isn't furthering OP's stated goal for the proposal:\n\nThe goal of the proposal is to assure Americans getting fed healthy food is easier for all Americans, the goal is not what I'm open to changing but that this proposal is the best means to achieve said goal.",
">\n\nYou mean disproportionately benefits lower income people. And is presumably offset by an increase in income taxes, which disproportionately fall on people with higher incomes.",
">\n\n\nYou mean disproportionately benefits lower income people.\n\nNope, I mean disproportionately benefits higher income people, but thanks.\nDisproportionate: too small or too large in comparison with something else.\nIn my view, the actual dollars saved by high income folks is disproportionate. In your view the percentage of income tax saved by low income folks is disproportionate. \nWe can both use the word correctly and come to different conclusions :) \n\nAnd is presumably offset by an increase in income taxes,\n\nOP didn't stipulate how this would be paid for.",
">\n\n\nNope, I mean disproportionately benefits higher income people, but thanks.\n\nThen you're simply incorrect. The previous commenter has it right. \nTo your analogy, a flat tax like sales tax is practically regressive because the loss in marginal utility weighs heavier on poorer people. On the other side, flat subsidies for foodstuffs are progressive for the same reason, poorer people extract more net marginal utility from it than wealthier people.",
">\n\nAs a middle class person, this system just sounds annoying to me. I'd much rather just have the $1200 a year and have the government subsidize food than have to manage a separate SNAP card and have to deposit income into my SNAP account.",
">\n\nManage a seperate card is too much of a burden? I've got two credit cards, two debit cards, personally adding a 5th card would not be much of a bother for me, but that's just me. Most mass transit have there own payment service that one could use with their phone, I would expect that this would behave in a similar manner where your SNAP account is either another plastic card or a just another account on your Apple/Google pay wallet. \nGovernment subsidizing food being handed out to the food producers hasn't worked out for farmers or the consumer just the multinational agribusinesses like ADM and Conagra, though this doesn't address this specific problem it doesn't exasperate the problem either.",
">\n\nIt makes regular income people feel like poor people to have an extra card with a negligible amount of money in it. It’s annoying, like the other person said",
">\n\nI've had transitchek card for monthly subway fares. I currently have a HSA for health care costs. Having the similar tax benefits but for groceries, it would be as much money as you elect it to be, or just forgo it altogether and pay groceries with post-tax dollars as you go now. You are free to do you boo.",
">\n\nAn HSA card and a subway card are not like credit/debit cards. Also most people in the country do not have subway cards. I don’t know what the percentage is on HSA card, but I bet it’s not as high as you seem to think. The fact is that most people use one debit card for their everyday transactions. Full stop. Adding anything to that, is going to piss people off royally. If there’s not enough money on the card, which will happen all the time, people will need to use two means of payment. Yet another way to piss people off. \nThe additional card is hardly one of my top concerns with your proposal, but it would be one of the things that royally pisses people off.",
">\n\nI think I see the goal here pretty clearly:\n\nIt is my view that this would be an efficient means to alleviate cost concerns for Americans trying to put food on the table\nThe goal of the proposal is to assure Americans getting fed healthy food is easier for all Americans\n\nThe poor pay essentially nothing in taxes. When you give them government aid, they are really getting aid. They get more out of the system then they put into. That makes sense to me, we should give aid to people who need it for lots of reasons ethical and pragmatic.\nWhen the government gives money to the middle class, it doesn't have the same effect. The middle class pays the taxes that create the funds that the government distributes.\nYour police will cost 400 billion dollars, and it will be paid by the tax payer. What sense do it make to raise my taxes by 1200 dollars so that you can turn around and give me 1200 dollars in snap benefits? You are certainly not making it easier for me to buy food. \nof course you could also shift around the tax burden. you could raise taxes only on the 1%. But then what do you need this snap program from? Just cut my taxes. there is no sense in taking my money just to give it back to me. Give money to people who need it.\nIf you want to make it easier for people to buy food there is another method. The government can, and does, pay farmers to grow food. These are called farming subsidies. This has a couple of effects. The main one is that is allows American farmers to compete with international farmers. We don't want the agriculture industry to collapse the same why our textile industry did. Domestic food production is a national security issue. But it also has the effect of making food cheaper. You artificially increase the supply which drives prices down. you could play around with this in all sorts of ways. you could cut subsidies on meat, which is very calorie inefficient and increase subsidies on healthy food like beans, rice. Or you could just increase subsidies across the board. You could artificially prop up smaller farms or farms growing more diverse strains of food or do the opposite. You could reward long term investments like fruit and nut trees which don't yield anything for the first 5 or 10 years. You could reward leaving fields fallow. You have a lot of options.\nusing subsidies to drive sustainable and long term food production, I think will do a lot more to accomplish your goal then just taking and returning 1200 dollars to many Americans or redistributing wealth through taxes.",
">\n\n\nof course you could also shift around the tax burden. you could raise taxes only on the 1%. But then what do you need this snap program from? Just cut my taxes. there is no sense in taking my money just to give it back to me. Give money to people who need it.\n\nShifting the tax burden up the economic ladder is a goal of this reform, the universal SNAP benefits could be less but what is most important is the ability for middle income tax payers to use pre-tax dollars to buy their groceries, which creates a negative rate consumption tax that proportionally benefits those who spending a greater percentage of their money on groceries than those who are earning a higher income and could not practically spend as much on groceries. Even if the high income individual spends far more than the middle income individual, it will still be a smaller percentage of their income.",
">\n\nAs a proponent for Universal Basic Income i feel like this proposal is very similar but more complicated and unnessecary restricted. Why not just give everyone money?",
">\n\nIt's an entry level UBI program, and not any more complicated than means tested EBT, actually it's more efficient with economy of scale. If it is started out with the limited scope of groceries there's no argument of \"well that will cause people to waste it on booze/drugs\" and limit the initial universal benefits to something that is universal like food. The next step could be direct cash transfers.",
">\n\nGiven that almost every person will spend more than $100 on food in a given month, your proposal is very similar to a small basic income plan. I am in general more in favor of straight cash rather than money that comes with strings, it reduces the cost of administration of a program, and it provides people with freedom of choice on how they spend. Maybe someone works at a resort where the get board as part of their compensation. Maybe someone is in a nursing home and doesn’t cook. Those people could, I’m sure, still find a way to spend $100 a month in allowed items, but why not let them spend on what’s important to them?",
">\n\nThe small scale of the transfer is a feature not a bug to the proposal, rather than striving for a full basic income system, assisting with food purchases for everyone. This could be expanded afterwards to be a straight cash transfer, but it is easier defended to have food benefit be universal since everyone needs food.",
">\n\nWhy do this instead of a cash UBI?",
">\n\nIt's an intermediary step that is both smaller than what it would take to deliver basic income. Assisting with food costs and allow tax payers to take advantage of lowering tax liability on purchases that are inevitable to be bought anyway.",
">\n\n\neliminate the stigma of using SNAP benefits\n\nHow much of a sigma is there? I used SNAP for a couple of years and never experienced any stigma. I often notice people using an EBT card at supermarkets, but can't remember it ever being an issue for anyone.\nIf there is a problem with sigma, wouldn't a better solution be to make the card look like an unrecognizable debit card?",
">\n\nYou’ve never experienced the stigma? Gawd, I’m jealous!\nI had gotten pretty good at hiding my card as I was swiping so people wouldn’t see it - but with the introduction of card chips, the fact that I’m using a SNAP card is once again obvious to the holier-than-thou pearl-clutchers around me. The ones who feel they absolutely must comment on the food I’m buying. If it’s healthy, they say “It must be nice buying all that with MY money. You eat better than I do.” If it’s all store brands and ramen noodles, they say “I can’t believe you’re buying junk food with MY tax dollars!” If they can’t find anything about my food to complain about, then it’s my clothes or my phone or my tattoo… never mind that I got my clothes at a thrift store, or my phone on a payment plan, or my tattoo when I was 18 and no responsibilities. \nThis is why I preferred grocery shopping at 2am, when the stores were practically empty. Covid ruined that.",
">\n\nFrom what you’re saying, I think the chip dip problem is that the card processor requires stores to invest in the tech. Small shops for example. The only benefit is to the processor, because chips have less fraud. Without any evidence I’d imagine small shop lobby groups (or grocers, etc.) don’t want every EBT user that buys cheap cheese to suddenly require upgraded equipment to remain EBT-compliant and thus have access to EBT money. The corner bodega and their lobbyists wouldn’t encourage a chip card because it’s not to their benefit. Then again, the stigma in a bodega or similar probably doesn’t exist because that’s where a lot of poorer customers shop, not a big supermarket with “regular” chip users and a big company behind it with negotiating power with credit processors.",
">\n\nAll this would do, is raise the prices of all the cheapest stuff, negatively impacting the people you want to help. It also taxes the business the poor person is working for more, reducing their pay.",
">\n\nWhat evidence do you have that it would raise prices?",
">\n\nEverything the government has ever subsidized?\nGovernment loans drove up the price of college. Mandates that employers provide health insurance has driven up the price of health care.\nAny time you give people money to spend on something without adding to the supply of that thing, more money chasing the same amount of goods necessarily means price increases.\nNow, since money is fungible, lots of people would take their universal SNAP benefits and replace part of their existing food budget with it, but that just means they're going to have more money to spend in other parts of the economy, so while I'd expect the price increases to be concentrated in food markets, it would probably cause inflation across the economy.",
">\n\nThe relationship between employer healthcare costs and healthcare costs is inverse. As healthcare costs increase fewer employers take on the burden, and shift to less risk, and less expensive coverage. Even as the economy improves, employers cannot keep up the burden of sponsoring employee plans, so they don’t. They don’t hire, or they use FSAs, or they work with unions, something else but not cause costs to rise merely by requiring coverage.",
">\n\nThat's definitely a better policy then what we have now, but if you were going to do that you should just go ahead and give people cash directly to spend however they want.\nFor poor people in actual need, food is important, but often some other emergency is more critical; a car repair that keeps you from losing your job, a doctor visit that treats a problem early before it develops into a life-long condition.\nAnd for everyone else, giving coupons that can only be spent on a few things distorts the market, in ways that just make it less efficient and less useful for everyone. For example, if you gave everyone $50/month that can only be spent on eggs, the price of eggs would go up a ton until supply and demand equalized again. \nEfficient markets are fueled by people freely spending how they want, so if you want to subsidize them just give them cash directly.\nThe restrictions on SNAP benefits are mostly there to reassure voters that poor people aren't being allowed to be happy, just being allowed to survive; they're a means to discipline the labor force by making poverty worse to endure. They don't serve any good, pro-social function, really.",
">\n\nI think your comment has shown the actual reason why SNAP is for specific things. The purpose of the program is to reduce hunger, but as you have said - if it wasn’t limited to food necessities then poor people would spend it on other things and go hungry.\nIt’s not about wanting them to not be happy - it’s about making sure they eat well.",
">\n\nFood is sort of an inflexible expense. A person expecting to enjoy other goods and services will need food to actually enjoy them at some point. Politically it’s easy to imagine someone will spend $99 on whiskey and go hungry. But that’s not really reality, right. They may have a different basket of goods at the end of the day, but there will be food in the basket. Like alcohol. For things we really worry about — like addictive drugs — that’s for social programs and enforcement paid by taxes to address most effectively, not restricting dollars to food. We wouldn’t say the war on drugs demands restricting food aid: the war on drugs demands attacking addiction and the substances and suppliers themselves.",
">\n\nThe comment I replied to said that poor people would spend money on vehicles or rent instead of food. While those are important things, they are not food and snap focuses on food insecurity not general poverty.\nEdit to add: my social worker husband disagrees with you on the drugs - unrestricted cash could cause a huge problem for his clients.",
">\n\nSo you're going to raise everyone's taxes by $100 to give them $100 in food stamps?\nIt's not hard to get healthy food: people who aren't eating healthy don't want to. People claim it's a price issue, but the fact is that fresh fruits and vegetables are cheaper than junk food. Bananas are like 25 cents each, but people would rather buy a bag of chips. Water is basically free, put people pay for soda.",
">\n\nProbably more like raising everyone's taxes by $110 to give them $100, once you account for the government waste and bureaucracy in the program.",
">\n\nIf everyone gets it automatically and there is no need to review any applications, wouldn't that cut down on the administrative costs?",
">\n\nQuestion, do you believe the underlying problem is related to income/wealth inequality? America is the richest nation per capita but struggle to live happy, healthy lives. \nIf you improved how the wealth of the nation is distributed, do you think it would fix the problem?",
">\n\nAmericans have the highest disposal income of any country in the world. Yes. More than Europeans. We just spend it like idiots.\nThe issue isn't wealth inequality, Its the lack of economic education in school. In US schools you dont ever take a single economics course. I was one of about twelve students in a school of 1200 that took an economics course. And even then, that was more just about how global economies function. There are absolutely 0 Classes that american students take on proper budgeting. This means that many americans, despite having more disposible income than their european counterparts still struggle since they blow their money pointlessly.",
">\n\nTo confirm, people starve despite having more then enough money to buy all the food they want? Doubt.",
">\n\n\\~100 people in the US die of starvation every year with the vast majority being people with mental illness who cannot support themselves or neglected children. People aren't starving. The problem is that we talk about poor food quality issues.\nThe issue here comes primarily from 2 places.\n1.) Time. Eating healthy, Or at a minimum, Not like complete shit. Is cheaper than trash eating. You can buy a pack of chicken breasts for the cost of a large Baconator Combo. The issue is the time it takes to cook. These people are either unable or unwilling for a variety of issues to take the 30m to cook a healthy meal.\n2.) Access. When you see places like New York where all they have is tiny little corner stores and you have to travel basically out of the city to find a proper grocery store. That is a problem. You can either eat the trash from the Bodega, or travel 30m to get to a proper Albertsons (or whatever they have in NY).\n\nThis is why Poverty in the US isn't represented by starved thin people, its Obesity. They are getting plenty of calories and are eating plenty of food. Its just the food quality isnt there.\n\nEDIT: Also something to remember. Many, If not the majority of low income earners smoke. And if they are a pack a day smoker, that is \\~$15USD per day for their habit. THAT IS A FULL MEAL! They are addicted to a substance that drains a full meal worth of income from them per day. Imagine what eating 4 meals a day would do you your budget. And that is per person. If your partner smokes as well that is 2 Meals per day of household income just thrown away. And many people are 2-3 pack a day smokes. Meaning they can be spending up to 3 meals a day worth of income on an addiction. Clearly, Money isnt the issue.",
">\n\nYou are talking about something different than OP. \n\ntrying to put food on the table\n\nI'm sure people would cook more healthy and varied meals if they had more income. You identify the issue yourself, insufficient time off to spend it finding healthy foods, living in places with basic kitchens and eating nutritional food. \nI have no idea why you were saying education is the actual problem. I also don't know why you are banging on about smoking. It's going not to do with the point. \nYou really got to identify the point your making and be concise. \nYour anecdotal opinions about what poor people aren't/are doing isn't convincing, it's just story telling.",
">\n\n\"To confirm, people starve despite having more then enough money to buy all the food they want? Doubt.\"\nNice redirection. I responded to your comment. Not OP. YOU said people were starving. That is why I refuted it.",
">\n\n\nI responded to your comment. Not OP.\n\nMaybe respond to OP and not to me, I dont have a view here.",
">\n\ni guess i'm struggling to see the benefit of it, i get that you get a tax break but you're also paying money off of your paycheck to pay for something that most people already get. so its kinda a wash \nthe problem with food stamps i think is that its for people who are on the fringes by definition, who are also shamed into being very quiet about their usage of it. so when people hear about people abusing them, they don't have a frame of reference for people actually using them like they're supposed to \nso i think either this just needs to be simpler and even more universal, or just tweak the current system a little more so people see more use out of it",
">\n\nIt's like a Health Savings Account, but for groceries. A household will spend x dollars on groceries every year, but under this plan the x dollars would be pre-tax dollars making whatever is spent on groceries a decrease in the household taxable income (both income tax and the payroll taxes like social security and Medicare). In another way, it is treating what a household needs to spend money on as a operating cost when a business is taxed. For businesses operating expenses are not counted as taxable income, for a typical household health care expenses can be uaed lower taxable income as a necessary expense, but not groceries - this would change that.",
">\n\nThis is too wonkish and misses the root of the problem. Why are there people who don't have enough to eat? Why is there so much poverty in the first place?",
">\n\nThe people that need this the most likely don't pay any income tax in the first place. Getting an extra tax deduction means nothing at that point. Where it will mean a possible deduction that is useful is the middle class and upper class. The middle class is forced to use it or end up paying more in tax for not playing the game. The upper class has an accountant who will figure the optimal amount for them right off the bat. \nIn order to find the extra benefits, we either need to raise taxes or just crank up the debt even more. I know a lot of people like to ignore the debt but it will come back to bite us at some point. As it is, something like $400 billion in interest is paid in a year. Over the next few years, that could reach into the trillions.",
">\n\nThe people who already qualify for SNAP would still get the level of benefits (which would be above $100/month), the wider and new benefit would be for the middle income who currently buy their groceries with post-tax dollars and would be able to buy groceries with pre-tax dollars lowering their tax liability without changing their behavior.",
">\n\nIf current recipients are going to get the same amount, and the middle and upper classes are going to be the ones getting the benefit under this proposal, you are increasing spending while powering tax revenue. I don't see that being a good idea given the current budget situation.",
">\n\nShow Me Your Budget, And I’ll Show You What You Value\nIf the federal budget needs to be brought in line to reflect the values of the American people that would value life sustaining resources over bombs, then so be it.",
">\n\nIt seems redundant to expect everyone in the country to pay additional taxes to cover their own SNAP benefits. I don’t know cost concerns you’re trying to alleviate. Assume every single person’s taxes increase $100/month so they can get a get a $100 SNAP card? And since it’s universal, the Kardashians, Elon Musk, CEOs, doctors, lawyers… would all get $100 every month? \nThe whole reason that SNAP works is because the population who is better off, helps cover the expenses for those lesser well off. \nThis is the prime example of why good intentions don’t necessarily mean it’s a good idea",
">\n\nThere is a form of food stamps everywhere minus 26 countries. Yes I do agree.",
">\n\nSo you want to take a relatively simple system (relatively speaking) and replace it with a more complicated, more costly, confusing system. All just to cover more people. \nThis is a shitty idea for so many reasons. The two biggest would be: 1) Cost: you are making a program much more expensive than it needs to be. The most significant costs will be in the IRS to enforce this program, since you have now effectively put it in their jurisdiction. You may not realize this, but that is the result. This will also disproportionately effect people on the margins, the working poor. These people may not qualify under your proposal, and they didn’t qualify for the old one. Now you’re making their financial lives more complex, and making their tax filings more complex. Again, you may not have thought of this….but is unavoidable. \n 2) You now made a relatively niche program that the majority of taxpayers never give a second thought to, and you’re making it a vital part of everyone’s lives. This would suddenly make it ‘everyone’s issue’. And it will get debated and potentially cut at rates much greater than the current program. \nTrying to cover more people is a cause I agree with. I would be absolutely disgusted if the government did something like what you’re suggesting. It is so economically inefficient, it will end up increasing the projects cost many times. It takes a program that only benefits a minority of people, and makes it everyone’s issue. And all for literally no reason. The amount of bureaucracy required in your plan is just absurd. \nThere are many other reasons that your idea sucks, these are just the two most glaringly troublesome in my eyes.",
">\n\nWhy not simply provide everyone with a universal basic income? There's much less of a likelihood of creating inflation on everyday goods with that approach, and it'd allow each family to be flexible about where they lived and how they spent their money, which would help alleviate the densification of the working population that drives costs up for things like housing.",
">\n\nGreat take an extra 500 dollars from those who do not need assistance and give us back 100 dollars. There is no limit on how much of another persons money the government (and those who support them) is willing to spend.",
">\n\nAlmost all food is already not taxed in most states. SNAP for everyone would discourage people from working as much. People can already live on Ramen noodles for $150 per year and I once bought sixty eggs and a gallon of milk for $60, plus a bag of shredded cheese for a few more dollars. Costco, whose membership is refundable after purchases, sells a 25-lb bag of rice for $18 and a 50-lb bag of rice for $19. Black beans are also very cheap, and people can live on their only nutrients as being from potatoes and butter.",
">\n\nThis would go the extra step of giving tax advantages for every dollar spent on groceries, like HSAs the money being elected by each person would be pre-tax thereby lowering the taxable income. Why should there be tax advantages for investing but not for everyone who eats food that they prepare themselves? Food doesn't have a sales tax, but the money used to buy that food is taxed when it's earned in a paycheck, whether it is payroll tax (social security and Medicare) or for those earning more income tax, this proposal would give the working American hundreds of dollars back in their pockets and it wouldn't be means tested (just like social security and Medicare) meaning everyone benefits.\nThe argument that \"if people have any of their basic needs meet, they become lazy\" just isn't born out in reality. Prison delivers basic needs and most prisoners don't become ostensibly comatose out of sheer slovenly nature of having basic needs met. If you had security that you would not be homeless, starving and left destitute would you tien into a lethargic rhetorical slug? I don't know you but I suspect that the answer is \"no\". Alleviating the possibility of destitution hasn't turned the rest of the wealthy nations of the world into a nation of lazy bums, their people are less likely to die deaths of despair, seek out academic achievement at higher levels, have more free time with friends and family, and all that across 30+ countries that have robust welfare states. Maybe reality is not that there needs to be economic retribution to every individual who is maximally providing their labor to their employers (more often than not, multiple jobs need to be worked for the bottom of the labor market). There's burger flippers in all those other wealthy countries and they don't need to work 2-3 of those low wage jobs, but somehow only the American worker needs to karmically punished and economically tortured because if they didn't the American would somehow be sinfully free to lead his/her life to as they want?\nEveryone eats food, this proposal just makes it easier for everyone by providing relief for the thing everyone will paying for anyway. Why shouldn't it be made easier for everyone's wallet to eat? What moral danger is there to take some of that household expenses off everyone's family budget? If it works out and the public likes joining the rest of the developed nations having a government that provides services and benefits to them and not just the wealthy and well connected, isn't that what a government of the people, by the people, and for the people should be doing anyway?",
">\n\nAre you going to fund this, or are you going to demand others have their money stolen to fund it?",
">\n\nIf you don't consent to taxes feel free to renounce your citizenship and leave",
">\n\nWe shouldn't have to NEED SNAP that's the problem",
">\n\nWe don't need snap.",
">\n\nWho's we you got a turd in your pocket?",
">\n\nThe United States doesn’t need it."
] |
>
Any adult worthwhile to society can feed themselves.
|
[
"/u/SeanFromQueens (OP) has awarded 1 delta(s) in this post.\nAll comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed here, in /r/DeltaLog.\nPlease note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.\n^Delta System Explained ^| ^Deltaboards",
">\n\nIt adds a new headache to me grocery shopping to figure out what is or is not SNAP eligible and pay for groceries with two separate funding sources instead of just handing over my Visa card. \nQuite a bit of money would be lost in the new bureaucracy. How many government bureaucrats are we going to have to pay to effectively take our money and then give it back to us?\nIf someone would rather go hungry than use a SNAP card that's available to them, why is that my problem? We're already doing our duty by offering them the benefits.\nAssuming you're going to buy groceries no matter what, groceries are effectively not taxed already because you can take a standard tax deduction of $13,850 (I'm not especially frugal and even with current inflation I spend a lot less than that on groceries) and in my state there are no sales taxes on basic groceries.",
">\n\n\nthat it being universal would also eliminate the stigma of using SNAP benefits because no one would know whether you qualify for additional SNAP benefits or you are just using it as a Health Savings Account (HSA)but for your groceries and decreasing your tax liabilities.\n\n\nI see your point in trying to remove the stigma by making it universal, but people would still very much be aware that some people receive more benefits than others (i.e. the benefits are not really universal and are still means-tested to some extent) so it definitely would not eliminate the stigma, even if it does reduce the stigma.\nThis proposal disproportionately benefits people who spend more money on food (i.e. people with higher incomes/wealth). Let's say you're a middle income person and I've got a nice hefty salary. Sure you won't pay taxes on that $5 you spend on ground beef you'll eat for dinner, but I won't pay taxes on the $150 I spend on my dry aged steak and lobster I'll eat for dinner. You won't pay taxes on the $4 bag of chips you're eating with your burger, I won't pay taxes on the $200 in truffles I'm going to put on my baked potato I'm having with my steak and lobster. Further, you're saving money in your highest tax bracket, which is much lower than my tax bracket. Do you find this outcome acceptable? Why?",
">\n\nLower income people spend a much larger percentage of their paycheck on food than higher income people do.",
">\n\nYes they do, but I'm not sure what point you're trying to make. Could you explain?",
">\n\nA wealthier person getting 7% of their spending tax free (35-37%) benefits less than a poorer person getting 30% of their spending tax free (10-15%)\nSo it's slightly progressive, not regressive. More so if you add the deposits and if you don't count restaurants or food purchased abroad.",
">\n\nIt's a huge expense for the federal government that disproportionately benefits those with higher incomes. Hey poor people, here's a couple hundred dollars over the course of the year! I know it's not much and that people who don't need a tax cut are saving 10+ times more than you, but as a percentage of your household income it's a greater savings than theirs so yay! \nNot buying it. But more to the point reducing taxes for high income folks isn't furthering OP's stated goal for the proposal:\n\nThe goal of the proposal is to assure Americans getting fed healthy food is easier for all Americans, the goal is not what I'm open to changing but that this proposal is the best means to achieve said goal.",
">\n\nYou mean disproportionately benefits lower income people. And is presumably offset by an increase in income taxes, which disproportionately fall on people with higher incomes.",
">\n\n\nYou mean disproportionately benefits lower income people.\n\nNope, I mean disproportionately benefits higher income people, but thanks.\nDisproportionate: too small or too large in comparison with something else.\nIn my view, the actual dollars saved by high income folks is disproportionate. In your view the percentage of income tax saved by low income folks is disproportionate. \nWe can both use the word correctly and come to different conclusions :) \n\nAnd is presumably offset by an increase in income taxes,\n\nOP didn't stipulate how this would be paid for.",
">\n\n\nNope, I mean disproportionately benefits higher income people, but thanks.\n\nThen you're simply incorrect. The previous commenter has it right. \nTo your analogy, a flat tax like sales tax is practically regressive because the loss in marginal utility weighs heavier on poorer people. On the other side, flat subsidies for foodstuffs are progressive for the same reason, poorer people extract more net marginal utility from it than wealthier people.",
">\n\nAs a middle class person, this system just sounds annoying to me. I'd much rather just have the $1200 a year and have the government subsidize food than have to manage a separate SNAP card and have to deposit income into my SNAP account.",
">\n\nManage a seperate card is too much of a burden? I've got two credit cards, two debit cards, personally adding a 5th card would not be much of a bother for me, but that's just me. Most mass transit have there own payment service that one could use with their phone, I would expect that this would behave in a similar manner where your SNAP account is either another plastic card or a just another account on your Apple/Google pay wallet. \nGovernment subsidizing food being handed out to the food producers hasn't worked out for farmers or the consumer just the multinational agribusinesses like ADM and Conagra, though this doesn't address this specific problem it doesn't exasperate the problem either.",
">\n\nIt makes regular income people feel like poor people to have an extra card with a negligible amount of money in it. It’s annoying, like the other person said",
">\n\nI've had transitchek card for monthly subway fares. I currently have a HSA for health care costs. Having the similar tax benefits but for groceries, it would be as much money as you elect it to be, or just forgo it altogether and pay groceries with post-tax dollars as you go now. You are free to do you boo.",
">\n\nAn HSA card and a subway card are not like credit/debit cards. Also most people in the country do not have subway cards. I don’t know what the percentage is on HSA card, but I bet it’s not as high as you seem to think. The fact is that most people use one debit card for their everyday transactions. Full stop. Adding anything to that, is going to piss people off royally. If there’s not enough money on the card, which will happen all the time, people will need to use two means of payment. Yet another way to piss people off. \nThe additional card is hardly one of my top concerns with your proposal, but it would be one of the things that royally pisses people off.",
">\n\nI think I see the goal here pretty clearly:\n\nIt is my view that this would be an efficient means to alleviate cost concerns for Americans trying to put food on the table\nThe goal of the proposal is to assure Americans getting fed healthy food is easier for all Americans\n\nThe poor pay essentially nothing in taxes. When you give them government aid, they are really getting aid. They get more out of the system then they put into. That makes sense to me, we should give aid to people who need it for lots of reasons ethical and pragmatic.\nWhen the government gives money to the middle class, it doesn't have the same effect. The middle class pays the taxes that create the funds that the government distributes.\nYour police will cost 400 billion dollars, and it will be paid by the tax payer. What sense do it make to raise my taxes by 1200 dollars so that you can turn around and give me 1200 dollars in snap benefits? You are certainly not making it easier for me to buy food. \nof course you could also shift around the tax burden. you could raise taxes only on the 1%. But then what do you need this snap program from? Just cut my taxes. there is no sense in taking my money just to give it back to me. Give money to people who need it.\nIf you want to make it easier for people to buy food there is another method. The government can, and does, pay farmers to grow food. These are called farming subsidies. This has a couple of effects. The main one is that is allows American farmers to compete with international farmers. We don't want the agriculture industry to collapse the same why our textile industry did. Domestic food production is a national security issue. But it also has the effect of making food cheaper. You artificially increase the supply which drives prices down. you could play around with this in all sorts of ways. you could cut subsidies on meat, which is very calorie inefficient and increase subsidies on healthy food like beans, rice. Or you could just increase subsidies across the board. You could artificially prop up smaller farms or farms growing more diverse strains of food or do the opposite. You could reward long term investments like fruit and nut trees which don't yield anything for the first 5 or 10 years. You could reward leaving fields fallow. You have a lot of options.\nusing subsidies to drive sustainable and long term food production, I think will do a lot more to accomplish your goal then just taking and returning 1200 dollars to many Americans or redistributing wealth through taxes.",
">\n\n\nof course you could also shift around the tax burden. you could raise taxes only on the 1%. But then what do you need this snap program from? Just cut my taxes. there is no sense in taking my money just to give it back to me. Give money to people who need it.\n\nShifting the tax burden up the economic ladder is a goal of this reform, the universal SNAP benefits could be less but what is most important is the ability for middle income tax payers to use pre-tax dollars to buy their groceries, which creates a negative rate consumption tax that proportionally benefits those who spending a greater percentage of their money on groceries than those who are earning a higher income and could not practically spend as much on groceries. Even if the high income individual spends far more than the middle income individual, it will still be a smaller percentage of their income.",
">\n\nAs a proponent for Universal Basic Income i feel like this proposal is very similar but more complicated and unnessecary restricted. Why not just give everyone money?",
">\n\nIt's an entry level UBI program, and not any more complicated than means tested EBT, actually it's more efficient with economy of scale. If it is started out with the limited scope of groceries there's no argument of \"well that will cause people to waste it on booze/drugs\" and limit the initial universal benefits to something that is universal like food. The next step could be direct cash transfers.",
">\n\nGiven that almost every person will spend more than $100 on food in a given month, your proposal is very similar to a small basic income plan. I am in general more in favor of straight cash rather than money that comes with strings, it reduces the cost of administration of a program, and it provides people with freedom of choice on how they spend. Maybe someone works at a resort where the get board as part of their compensation. Maybe someone is in a nursing home and doesn’t cook. Those people could, I’m sure, still find a way to spend $100 a month in allowed items, but why not let them spend on what’s important to them?",
">\n\nThe small scale of the transfer is a feature not a bug to the proposal, rather than striving for a full basic income system, assisting with food purchases for everyone. This could be expanded afterwards to be a straight cash transfer, but it is easier defended to have food benefit be universal since everyone needs food.",
">\n\nWhy do this instead of a cash UBI?",
">\n\nIt's an intermediary step that is both smaller than what it would take to deliver basic income. Assisting with food costs and allow tax payers to take advantage of lowering tax liability on purchases that are inevitable to be bought anyway.",
">\n\n\neliminate the stigma of using SNAP benefits\n\nHow much of a sigma is there? I used SNAP for a couple of years and never experienced any stigma. I often notice people using an EBT card at supermarkets, but can't remember it ever being an issue for anyone.\nIf there is a problem with sigma, wouldn't a better solution be to make the card look like an unrecognizable debit card?",
">\n\nYou’ve never experienced the stigma? Gawd, I’m jealous!\nI had gotten pretty good at hiding my card as I was swiping so people wouldn’t see it - but with the introduction of card chips, the fact that I’m using a SNAP card is once again obvious to the holier-than-thou pearl-clutchers around me. The ones who feel they absolutely must comment on the food I’m buying. If it’s healthy, they say “It must be nice buying all that with MY money. You eat better than I do.” If it’s all store brands and ramen noodles, they say “I can’t believe you’re buying junk food with MY tax dollars!” If they can’t find anything about my food to complain about, then it’s my clothes or my phone or my tattoo… never mind that I got my clothes at a thrift store, or my phone on a payment plan, or my tattoo when I was 18 and no responsibilities. \nThis is why I preferred grocery shopping at 2am, when the stores were practically empty. Covid ruined that.",
">\n\nFrom what you’re saying, I think the chip dip problem is that the card processor requires stores to invest in the tech. Small shops for example. The only benefit is to the processor, because chips have less fraud. Without any evidence I’d imagine small shop lobby groups (or grocers, etc.) don’t want every EBT user that buys cheap cheese to suddenly require upgraded equipment to remain EBT-compliant and thus have access to EBT money. The corner bodega and their lobbyists wouldn’t encourage a chip card because it’s not to their benefit. Then again, the stigma in a bodega or similar probably doesn’t exist because that’s where a lot of poorer customers shop, not a big supermarket with “regular” chip users and a big company behind it with negotiating power with credit processors.",
">\n\nAll this would do, is raise the prices of all the cheapest stuff, negatively impacting the people you want to help. It also taxes the business the poor person is working for more, reducing their pay.",
">\n\nWhat evidence do you have that it would raise prices?",
">\n\nEverything the government has ever subsidized?\nGovernment loans drove up the price of college. Mandates that employers provide health insurance has driven up the price of health care.\nAny time you give people money to spend on something without adding to the supply of that thing, more money chasing the same amount of goods necessarily means price increases.\nNow, since money is fungible, lots of people would take their universal SNAP benefits and replace part of their existing food budget with it, but that just means they're going to have more money to spend in other parts of the economy, so while I'd expect the price increases to be concentrated in food markets, it would probably cause inflation across the economy.",
">\n\nThe relationship between employer healthcare costs and healthcare costs is inverse. As healthcare costs increase fewer employers take on the burden, and shift to less risk, and less expensive coverage. Even as the economy improves, employers cannot keep up the burden of sponsoring employee plans, so they don’t. They don’t hire, or they use FSAs, or they work with unions, something else but not cause costs to rise merely by requiring coverage.",
">\n\nThat's definitely a better policy then what we have now, but if you were going to do that you should just go ahead and give people cash directly to spend however they want.\nFor poor people in actual need, food is important, but often some other emergency is more critical; a car repair that keeps you from losing your job, a doctor visit that treats a problem early before it develops into a life-long condition.\nAnd for everyone else, giving coupons that can only be spent on a few things distorts the market, in ways that just make it less efficient and less useful for everyone. For example, if you gave everyone $50/month that can only be spent on eggs, the price of eggs would go up a ton until supply and demand equalized again. \nEfficient markets are fueled by people freely spending how they want, so if you want to subsidize them just give them cash directly.\nThe restrictions on SNAP benefits are mostly there to reassure voters that poor people aren't being allowed to be happy, just being allowed to survive; they're a means to discipline the labor force by making poverty worse to endure. They don't serve any good, pro-social function, really.",
">\n\nI think your comment has shown the actual reason why SNAP is for specific things. The purpose of the program is to reduce hunger, but as you have said - if it wasn’t limited to food necessities then poor people would spend it on other things and go hungry.\nIt’s not about wanting them to not be happy - it’s about making sure they eat well.",
">\n\nFood is sort of an inflexible expense. A person expecting to enjoy other goods and services will need food to actually enjoy them at some point. Politically it’s easy to imagine someone will spend $99 on whiskey and go hungry. But that’s not really reality, right. They may have a different basket of goods at the end of the day, but there will be food in the basket. Like alcohol. For things we really worry about — like addictive drugs — that’s for social programs and enforcement paid by taxes to address most effectively, not restricting dollars to food. We wouldn’t say the war on drugs demands restricting food aid: the war on drugs demands attacking addiction and the substances and suppliers themselves.",
">\n\nThe comment I replied to said that poor people would spend money on vehicles or rent instead of food. While those are important things, they are not food and snap focuses on food insecurity not general poverty.\nEdit to add: my social worker husband disagrees with you on the drugs - unrestricted cash could cause a huge problem for his clients.",
">\n\nSo you're going to raise everyone's taxes by $100 to give them $100 in food stamps?\nIt's not hard to get healthy food: people who aren't eating healthy don't want to. People claim it's a price issue, but the fact is that fresh fruits and vegetables are cheaper than junk food. Bananas are like 25 cents each, but people would rather buy a bag of chips. Water is basically free, put people pay for soda.",
">\n\nProbably more like raising everyone's taxes by $110 to give them $100, once you account for the government waste and bureaucracy in the program.",
">\n\nIf everyone gets it automatically and there is no need to review any applications, wouldn't that cut down on the administrative costs?",
">\n\nQuestion, do you believe the underlying problem is related to income/wealth inequality? America is the richest nation per capita but struggle to live happy, healthy lives. \nIf you improved how the wealth of the nation is distributed, do you think it would fix the problem?",
">\n\nAmericans have the highest disposal income of any country in the world. Yes. More than Europeans. We just spend it like idiots.\nThe issue isn't wealth inequality, Its the lack of economic education in school. In US schools you dont ever take a single economics course. I was one of about twelve students in a school of 1200 that took an economics course. And even then, that was more just about how global economies function. There are absolutely 0 Classes that american students take on proper budgeting. This means that many americans, despite having more disposible income than their european counterparts still struggle since they blow their money pointlessly.",
">\n\nTo confirm, people starve despite having more then enough money to buy all the food they want? Doubt.",
">\n\n\\~100 people in the US die of starvation every year with the vast majority being people with mental illness who cannot support themselves or neglected children. People aren't starving. The problem is that we talk about poor food quality issues.\nThe issue here comes primarily from 2 places.\n1.) Time. Eating healthy, Or at a minimum, Not like complete shit. Is cheaper than trash eating. You can buy a pack of chicken breasts for the cost of a large Baconator Combo. The issue is the time it takes to cook. These people are either unable or unwilling for a variety of issues to take the 30m to cook a healthy meal.\n2.) Access. When you see places like New York where all they have is tiny little corner stores and you have to travel basically out of the city to find a proper grocery store. That is a problem. You can either eat the trash from the Bodega, or travel 30m to get to a proper Albertsons (or whatever they have in NY).\n\nThis is why Poverty in the US isn't represented by starved thin people, its Obesity. They are getting plenty of calories and are eating plenty of food. Its just the food quality isnt there.\n\nEDIT: Also something to remember. Many, If not the majority of low income earners smoke. And if they are a pack a day smoker, that is \\~$15USD per day for their habit. THAT IS A FULL MEAL! They are addicted to a substance that drains a full meal worth of income from them per day. Imagine what eating 4 meals a day would do you your budget. And that is per person. If your partner smokes as well that is 2 Meals per day of household income just thrown away. And many people are 2-3 pack a day smokes. Meaning they can be spending up to 3 meals a day worth of income on an addiction. Clearly, Money isnt the issue.",
">\n\nYou are talking about something different than OP. \n\ntrying to put food on the table\n\nI'm sure people would cook more healthy and varied meals if they had more income. You identify the issue yourself, insufficient time off to spend it finding healthy foods, living in places with basic kitchens and eating nutritional food. \nI have no idea why you were saying education is the actual problem. I also don't know why you are banging on about smoking. It's going not to do with the point. \nYou really got to identify the point your making and be concise. \nYour anecdotal opinions about what poor people aren't/are doing isn't convincing, it's just story telling.",
">\n\n\"To confirm, people starve despite having more then enough money to buy all the food they want? Doubt.\"\nNice redirection. I responded to your comment. Not OP. YOU said people were starving. That is why I refuted it.",
">\n\n\nI responded to your comment. Not OP.\n\nMaybe respond to OP and not to me, I dont have a view here.",
">\n\ni guess i'm struggling to see the benefit of it, i get that you get a tax break but you're also paying money off of your paycheck to pay for something that most people already get. so its kinda a wash \nthe problem with food stamps i think is that its for people who are on the fringes by definition, who are also shamed into being very quiet about their usage of it. so when people hear about people abusing them, they don't have a frame of reference for people actually using them like they're supposed to \nso i think either this just needs to be simpler and even more universal, or just tweak the current system a little more so people see more use out of it",
">\n\nIt's like a Health Savings Account, but for groceries. A household will spend x dollars on groceries every year, but under this plan the x dollars would be pre-tax dollars making whatever is spent on groceries a decrease in the household taxable income (both income tax and the payroll taxes like social security and Medicare). In another way, it is treating what a household needs to spend money on as a operating cost when a business is taxed. For businesses operating expenses are not counted as taxable income, for a typical household health care expenses can be uaed lower taxable income as a necessary expense, but not groceries - this would change that.",
">\n\nThis is too wonkish and misses the root of the problem. Why are there people who don't have enough to eat? Why is there so much poverty in the first place?",
">\n\nThe people that need this the most likely don't pay any income tax in the first place. Getting an extra tax deduction means nothing at that point. Where it will mean a possible deduction that is useful is the middle class and upper class. The middle class is forced to use it or end up paying more in tax for not playing the game. The upper class has an accountant who will figure the optimal amount for them right off the bat. \nIn order to find the extra benefits, we either need to raise taxes or just crank up the debt even more. I know a lot of people like to ignore the debt but it will come back to bite us at some point. As it is, something like $400 billion in interest is paid in a year. Over the next few years, that could reach into the trillions.",
">\n\nThe people who already qualify for SNAP would still get the level of benefits (which would be above $100/month), the wider and new benefit would be for the middle income who currently buy their groceries with post-tax dollars and would be able to buy groceries with pre-tax dollars lowering their tax liability without changing their behavior.",
">\n\nIf current recipients are going to get the same amount, and the middle and upper classes are going to be the ones getting the benefit under this proposal, you are increasing spending while powering tax revenue. I don't see that being a good idea given the current budget situation.",
">\n\nShow Me Your Budget, And I’ll Show You What You Value\nIf the federal budget needs to be brought in line to reflect the values of the American people that would value life sustaining resources over bombs, then so be it.",
">\n\nIt seems redundant to expect everyone in the country to pay additional taxes to cover their own SNAP benefits. I don’t know cost concerns you’re trying to alleviate. Assume every single person’s taxes increase $100/month so they can get a get a $100 SNAP card? And since it’s universal, the Kardashians, Elon Musk, CEOs, doctors, lawyers… would all get $100 every month? \nThe whole reason that SNAP works is because the population who is better off, helps cover the expenses for those lesser well off. \nThis is the prime example of why good intentions don’t necessarily mean it’s a good idea",
">\n\nThere is a form of food stamps everywhere minus 26 countries. Yes I do agree.",
">\n\nSo you want to take a relatively simple system (relatively speaking) and replace it with a more complicated, more costly, confusing system. All just to cover more people. \nThis is a shitty idea for so many reasons. The two biggest would be: 1) Cost: you are making a program much more expensive than it needs to be. The most significant costs will be in the IRS to enforce this program, since you have now effectively put it in their jurisdiction. You may not realize this, but that is the result. This will also disproportionately effect people on the margins, the working poor. These people may not qualify under your proposal, and they didn’t qualify for the old one. Now you’re making their financial lives more complex, and making their tax filings more complex. Again, you may not have thought of this….but is unavoidable. \n 2) You now made a relatively niche program that the majority of taxpayers never give a second thought to, and you’re making it a vital part of everyone’s lives. This would suddenly make it ‘everyone’s issue’. And it will get debated and potentially cut at rates much greater than the current program. \nTrying to cover more people is a cause I agree with. I would be absolutely disgusted if the government did something like what you’re suggesting. It is so economically inefficient, it will end up increasing the projects cost many times. It takes a program that only benefits a minority of people, and makes it everyone’s issue. And all for literally no reason. The amount of bureaucracy required in your plan is just absurd. \nThere are many other reasons that your idea sucks, these are just the two most glaringly troublesome in my eyes.",
">\n\nWhy not simply provide everyone with a universal basic income? There's much less of a likelihood of creating inflation on everyday goods with that approach, and it'd allow each family to be flexible about where they lived and how they spent their money, which would help alleviate the densification of the working population that drives costs up for things like housing.",
">\n\nGreat take an extra 500 dollars from those who do not need assistance and give us back 100 dollars. There is no limit on how much of another persons money the government (and those who support them) is willing to spend.",
">\n\nAlmost all food is already not taxed in most states. SNAP for everyone would discourage people from working as much. People can already live on Ramen noodles for $150 per year and I once bought sixty eggs and a gallon of milk for $60, plus a bag of shredded cheese for a few more dollars. Costco, whose membership is refundable after purchases, sells a 25-lb bag of rice for $18 and a 50-lb bag of rice for $19. Black beans are also very cheap, and people can live on their only nutrients as being from potatoes and butter.",
">\n\nThis would go the extra step of giving tax advantages for every dollar spent on groceries, like HSAs the money being elected by each person would be pre-tax thereby lowering the taxable income. Why should there be tax advantages for investing but not for everyone who eats food that they prepare themselves? Food doesn't have a sales tax, but the money used to buy that food is taxed when it's earned in a paycheck, whether it is payroll tax (social security and Medicare) or for those earning more income tax, this proposal would give the working American hundreds of dollars back in their pockets and it wouldn't be means tested (just like social security and Medicare) meaning everyone benefits.\nThe argument that \"if people have any of their basic needs meet, they become lazy\" just isn't born out in reality. Prison delivers basic needs and most prisoners don't become ostensibly comatose out of sheer slovenly nature of having basic needs met. If you had security that you would not be homeless, starving and left destitute would you tien into a lethargic rhetorical slug? I don't know you but I suspect that the answer is \"no\". Alleviating the possibility of destitution hasn't turned the rest of the wealthy nations of the world into a nation of lazy bums, their people are less likely to die deaths of despair, seek out academic achievement at higher levels, have more free time with friends and family, and all that across 30+ countries that have robust welfare states. Maybe reality is not that there needs to be economic retribution to every individual who is maximally providing their labor to their employers (more often than not, multiple jobs need to be worked for the bottom of the labor market). There's burger flippers in all those other wealthy countries and they don't need to work 2-3 of those low wage jobs, but somehow only the American worker needs to karmically punished and economically tortured because if they didn't the American would somehow be sinfully free to lead his/her life to as they want?\nEveryone eats food, this proposal just makes it easier for everyone by providing relief for the thing everyone will paying for anyway. Why shouldn't it be made easier for everyone's wallet to eat? What moral danger is there to take some of that household expenses off everyone's family budget? If it works out and the public likes joining the rest of the developed nations having a government that provides services and benefits to them and not just the wealthy and well connected, isn't that what a government of the people, by the people, and for the people should be doing anyway?",
">\n\nAre you going to fund this, or are you going to demand others have their money stolen to fund it?",
">\n\nIf you don't consent to taxes feel free to renounce your citizenship and leave",
">\n\nWe shouldn't have to NEED SNAP that's the problem",
">\n\nWe don't need snap.",
">\n\nWho's we you got a turd in your pocket?",
">\n\nThe United States doesn’t need it.",
">\n\nThat's very general. And I disagree"
] |
>
There are a lot of people that don't just feed themselves... And could before
|
[
"/u/SeanFromQueens (OP) has awarded 1 delta(s) in this post.\nAll comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed here, in /r/DeltaLog.\nPlease note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.\n^Delta System Explained ^| ^Deltaboards",
">\n\nIt adds a new headache to me grocery shopping to figure out what is or is not SNAP eligible and pay for groceries with two separate funding sources instead of just handing over my Visa card. \nQuite a bit of money would be lost in the new bureaucracy. How many government bureaucrats are we going to have to pay to effectively take our money and then give it back to us?\nIf someone would rather go hungry than use a SNAP card that's available to them, why is that my problem? We're already doing our duty by offering them the benefits.\nAssuming you're going to buy groceries no matter what, groceries are effectively not taxed already because you can take a standard tax deduction of $13,850 (I'm not especially frugal and even with current inflation I spend a lot less than that on groceries) and in my state there are no sales taxes on basic groceries.",
">\n\n\nthat it being universal would also eliminate the stigma of using SNAP benefits because no one would know whether you qualify for additional SNAP benefits or you are just using it as a Health Savings Account (HSA)but for your groceries and decreasing your tax liabilities.\n\n\nI see your point in trying to remove the stigma by making it universal, but people would still very much be aware that some people receive more benefits than others (i.e. the benefits are not really universal and are still means-tested to some extent) so it definitely would not eliminate the stigma, even if it does reduce the stigma.\nThis proposal disproportionately benefits people who spend more money on food (i.e. people with higher incomes/wealth). Let's say you're a middle income person and I've got a nice hefty salary. Sure you won't pay taxes on that $5 you spend on ground beef you'll eat for dinner, but I won't pay taxes on the $150 I spend on my dry aged steak and lobster I'll eat for dinner. You won't pay taxes on the $4 bag of chips you're eating with your burger, I won't pay taxes on the $200 in truffles I'm going to put on my baked potato I'm having with my steak and lobster. Further, you're saving money in your highest tax bracket, which is much lower than my tax bracket. Do you find this outcome acceptable? Why?",
">\n\nLower income people spend a much larger percentage of their paycheck on food than higher income people do.",
">\n\nYes they do, but I'm not sure what point you're trying to make. Could you explain?",
">\n\nA wealthier person getting 7% of their spending tax free (35-37%) benefits less than a poorer person getting 30% of their spending tax free (10-15%)\nSo it's slightly progressive, not regressive. More so if you add the deposits and if you don't count restaurants or food purchased abroad.",
">\n\nIt's a huge expense for the federal government that disproportionately benefits those with higher incomes. Hey poor people, here's a couple hundred dollars over the course of the year! I know it's not much and that people who don't need a tax cut are saving 10+ times more than you, but as a percentage of your household income it's a greater savings than theirs so yay! \nNot buying it. But more to the point reducing taxes for high income folks isn't furthering OP's stated goal for the proposal:\n\nThe goal of the proposal is to assure Americans getting fed healthy food is easier for all Americans, the goal is not what I'm open to changing but that this proposal is the best means to achieve said goal.",
">\n\nYou mean disproportionately benefits lower income people. And is presumably offset by an increase in income taxes, which disproportionately fall on people with higher incomes.",
">\n\n\nYou mean disproportionately benefits lower income people.\n\nNope, I mean disproportionately benefits higher income people, but thanks.\nDisproportionate: too small or too large in comparison with something else.\nIn my view, the actual dollars saved by high income folks is disproportionate. In your view the percentage of income tax saved by low income folks is disproportionate. \nWe can both use the word correctly and come to different conclusions :) \n\nAnd is presumably offset by an increase in income taxes,\n\nOP didn't stipulate how this would be paid for.",
">\n\n\nNope, I mean disproportionately benefits higher income people, but thanks.\n\nThen you're simply incorrect. The previous commenter has it right. \nTo your analogy, a flat tax like sales tax is practically regressive because the loss in marginal utility weighs heavier on poorer people. On the other side, flat subsidies for foodstuffs are progressive for the same reason, poorer people extract more net marginal utility from it than wealthier people.",
">\n\nAs a middle class person, this system just sounds annoying to me. I'd much rather just have the $1200 a year and have the government subsidize food than have to manage a separate SNAP card and have to deposit income into my SNAP account.",
">\n\nManage a seperate card is too much of a burden? I've got two credit cards, two debit cards, personally adding a 5th card would not be much of a bother for me, but that's just me. Most mass transit have there own payment service that one could use with their phone, I would expect that this would behave in a similar manner where your SNAP account is either another plastic card or a just another account on your Apple/Google pay wallet. \nGovernment subsidizing food being handed out to the food producers hasn't worked out for farmers or the consumer just the multinational agribusinesses like ADM and Conagra, though this doesn't address this specific problem it doesn't exasperate the problem either.",
">\n\nIt makes regular income people feel like poor people to have an extra card with a negligible amount of money in it. It’s annoying, like the other person said",
">\n\nI've had transitchek card for monthly subway fares. I currently have a HSA for health care costs. Having the similar tax benefits but for groceries, it would be as much money as you elect it to be, or just forgo it altogether and pay groceries with post-tax dollars as you go now. You are free to do you boo.",
">\n\nAn HSA card and a subway card are not like credit/debit cards. Also most people in the country do not have subway cards. I don’t know what the percentage is on HSA card, but I bet it’s not as high as you seem to think. The fact is that most people use one debit card for their everyday transactions. Full stop. Adding anything to that, is going to piss people off royally. If there’s not enough money on the card, which will happen all the time, people will need to use two means of payment. Yet another way to piss people off. \nThe additional card is hardly one of my top concerns with your proposal, but it would be one of the things that royally pisses people off.",
">\n\nI think I see the goal here pretty clearly:\n\nIt is my view that this would be an efficient means to alleviate cost concerns for Americans trying to put food on the table\nThe goal of the proposal is to assure Americans getting fed healthy food is easier for all Americans\n\nThe poor pay essentially nothing in taxes. When you give them government aid, they are really getting aid. They get more out of the system then they put into. That makes sense to me, we should give aid to people who need it for lots of reasons ethical and pragmatic.\nWhen the government gives money to the middle class, it doesn't have the same effect. The middle class pays the taxes that create the funds that the government distributes.\nYour police will cost 400 billion dollars, and it will be paid by the tax payer. What sense do it make to raise my taxes by 1200 dollars so that you can turn around and give me 1200 dollars in snap benefits? You are certainly not making it easier for me to buy food. \nof course you could also shift around the tax burden. you could raise taxes only on the 1%. But then what do you need this snap program from? Just cut my taxes. there is no sense in taking my money just to give it back to me. Give money to people who need it.\nIf you want to make it easier for people to buy food there is another method. The government can, and does, pay farmers to grow food. These are called farming subsidies. This has a couple of effects. The main one is that is allows American farmers to compete with international farmers. We don't want the agriculture industry to collapse the same why our textile industry did. Domestic food production is a national security issue. But it also has the effect of making food cheaper. You artificially increase the supply which drives prices down. you could play around with this in all sorts of ways. you could cut subsidies on meat, which is very calorie inefficient and increase subsidies on healthy food like beans, rice. Or you could just increase subsidies across the board. You could artificially prop up smaller farms or farms growing more diverse strains of food or do the opposite. You could reward long term investments like fruit and nut trees which don't yield anything for the first 5 or 10 years. You could reward leaving fields fallow. You have a lot of options.\nusing subsidies to drive sustainable and long term food production, I think will do a lot more to accomplish your goal then just taking and returning 1200 dollars to many Americans or redistributing wealth through taxes.",
">\n\n\nof course you could also shift around the tax burden. you could raise taxes only on the 1%. But then what do you need this snap program from? Just cut my taxes. there is no sense in taking my money just to give it back to me. Give money to people who need it.\n\nShifting the tax burden up the economic ladder is a goal of this reform, the universal SNAP benefits could be less but what is most important is the ability for middle income tax payers to use pre-tax dollars to buy their groceries, which creates a negative rate consumption tax that proportionally benefits those who spending a greater percentage of their money on groceries than those who are earning a higher income and could not practically spend as much on groceries. Even if the high income individual spends far more than the middle income individual, it will still be a smaller percentage of their income.",
">\n\nAs a proponent for Universal Basic Income i feel like this proposal is very similar but more complicated and unnessecary restricted. Why not just give everyone money?",
">\n\nIt's an entry level UBI program, and not any more complicated than means tested EBT, actually it's more efficient with economy of scale. If it is started out with the limited scope of groceries there's no argument of \"well that will cause people to waste it on booze/drugs\" and limit the initial universal benefits to something that is universal like food. The next step could be direct cash transfers.",
">\n\nGiven that almost every person will spend more than $100 on food in a given month, your proposal is very similar to a small basic income plan. I am in general more in favor of straight cash rather than money that comes with strings, it reduces the cost of administration of a program, and it provides people with freedom of choice on how they spend. Maybe someone works at a resort where the get board as part of their compensation. Maybe someone is in a nursing home and doesn’t cook. Those people could, I’m sure, still find a way to spend $100 a month in allowed items, but why not let them spend on what’s important to them?",
">\n\nThe small scale of the transfer is a feature not a bug to the proposal, rather than striving for a full basic income system, assisting with food purchases for everyone. This could be expanded afterwards to be a straight cash transfer, but it is easier defended to have food benefit be universal since everyone needs food.",
">\n\nWhy do this instead of a cash UBI?",
">\n\nIt's an intermediary step that is both smaller than what it would take to deliver basic income. Assisting with food costs and allow tax payers to take advantage of lowering tax liability on purchases that are inevitable to be bought anyway.",
">\n\n\neliminate the stigma of using SNAP benefits\n\nHow much of a sigma is there? I used SNAP for a couple of years and never experienced any stigma. I often notice people using an EBT card at supermarkets, but can't remember it ever being an issue for anyone.\nIf there is a problem with sigma, wouldn't a better solution be to make the card look like an unrecognizable debit card?",
">\n\nYou’ve never experienced the stigma? Gawd, I’m jealous!\nI had gotten pretty good at hiding my card as I was swiping so people wouldn’t see it - but with the introduction of card chips, the fact that I’m using a SNAP card is once again obvious to the holier-than-thou pearl-clutchers around me. The ones who feel they absolutely must comment on the food I’m buying. If it’s healthy, they say “It must be nice buying all that with MY money. You eat better than I do.” If it’s all store brands and ramen noodles, they say “I can’t believe you’re buying junk food with MY tax dollars!” If they can’t find anything about my food to complain about, then it’s my clothes or my phone or my tattoo… never mind that I got my clothes at a thrift store, or my phone on a payment plan, or my tattoo when I was 18 and no responsibilities. \nThis is why I preferred grocery shopping at 2am, when the stores were practically empty. Covid ruined that.",
">\n\nFrom what you’re saying, I think the chip dip problem is that the card processor requires stores to invest in the tech. Small shops for example. The only benefit is to the processor, because chips have less fraud. Without any evidence I’d imagine small shop lobby groups (or grocers, etc.) don’t want every EBT user that buys cheap cheese to suddenly require upgraded equipment to remain EBT-compliant and thus have access to EBT money. The corner bodega and their lobbyists wouldn’t encourage a chip card because it’s not to their benefit. Then again, the stigma in a bodega or similar probably doesn’t exist because that’s where a lot of poorer customers shop, not a big supermarket with “regular” chip users and a big company behind it with negotiating power with credit processors.",
">\n\nAll this would do, is raise the prices of all the cheapest stuff, negatively impacting the people you want to help. It also taxes the business the poor person is working for more, reducing their pay.",
">\n\nWhat evidence do you have that it would raise prices?",
">\n\nEverything the government has ever subsidized?\nGovernment loans drove up the price of college. Mandates that employers provide health insurance has driven up the price of health care.\nAny time you give people money to spend on something without adding to the supply of that thing, more money chasing the same amount of goods necessarily means price increases.\nNow, since money is fungible, lots of people would take their universal SNAP benefits and replace part of their existing food budget with it, but that just means they're going to have more money to spend in other parts of the economy, so while I'd expect the price increases to be concentrated in food markets, it would probably cause inflation across the economy.",
">\n\nThe relationship between employer healthcare costs and healthcare costs is inverse. As healthcare costs increase fewer employers take on the burden, and shift to less risk, and less expensive coverage. Even as the economy improves, employers cannot keep up the burden of sponsoring employee plans, so they don’t. They don’t hire, or they use FSAs, or they work with unions, something else but not cause costs to rise merely by requiring coverage.",
">\n\nThat's definitely a better policy then what we have now, but if you were going to do that you should just go ahead and give people cash directly to spend however they want.\nFor poor people in actual need, food is important, but often some other emergency is more critical; a car repair that keeps you from losing your job, a doctor visit that treats a problem early before it develops into a life-long condition.\nAnd for everyone else, giving coupons that can only be spent on a few things distorts the market, in ways that just make it less efficient and less useful for everyone. For example, if you gave everyone $50/month that can only be spent on eggs, the price of eggs would go up a ton until supply and demand equalized again. \nEfficient markets are fueled by people freely spending how they want, so if you want to subsidize them just give them cash directly.\nThe restrictions on SNAP benefits are mostly there to reassure voters that poor people aren't being allowed to be happy, just being allowed to survive; they're a means to discipline the labor force by making poverty worse to endure. They don't serve any good, pro-social function, really.",
">\n\nI think your comment has shown the actual reason why SNAP is for specific things. The purpose of the program is to reduce hunger, but as you have said - if it wasn’t limited to food necessities then poor people would spend it on other things and go hungry.\nIt’s not about wanting them to not be happy - it’s about making sure they eat well.",
">\n\nFood is sort of an inflexible expense. A person expecting to enjoy other goods and services will need food to actually enjoy them at some point. Politically it’s easy to imagine someone will spend $99 on whiskey and go hungry. But that’s not really reality, right. They may have a different basket of goods at the end of the day, but there will be food in the basket. Like alcohol. For things we really worry about — like addictive drugs — that’s for social programs and enforcement paid by taxes to address most effectively, not restricting dollars to food. We wouldn’t say the war on drugs demands restricting food aid: the war on drugs demands attacking addiction and the substances and suppliers themselves.",
">\n\nThe comment I replied to said that poor people would spend money on vehicles or rent instead of food. While those are important things, they are not food and snap focuses on food insecurity not general poverty.\nEdit to add: my social worker husband disagrees with you on the drugs - unrestricted cash could cause a huge problem for his clients.",
">\n\nSo you're going to raise everyone's taxes by $100 to give them $100 in food stamps?\nIt's not hard to get healthy food: people who aren't eating healthy don't want to. People claim it's a price issue, but the fact is that fresh fruits and vegetables are cheaper than junk food. Bananas are like 25 cents each, but people would rather buy a bag of chips. Water is basically free, put people pay for soda.",
">\n\nProbably more like raising everyone's taxes by $110 to give them $100, once you account for the government waste and bureaucracy in the program.",
">\n\nIf everyone gets it automatically and there is no need to review any applications, wouldn't that cut down on the administrative costs?",
">\n\nQuestion, do you believe the underlying problem is related to income/wealth inequality? America is the richest nation per capita but struggle to live happy, healthy lives. \nIf you improved how the wealth of the nation is distributed, do you think it would fix the problem?",
">\n\nAmericans have the highest disposal income of any country in the world. Yes. More than Europeans. We just spend it like idiots.\nThe issue isn't wealth inequality, Its the lack of economic education in school. In US schools you dont ever take a single economics course. I was one of about twelve students in a school of 1200 that took an economics course. And even then, that was more just about how global economies function. There are absolutely 0 Classes that american students take on proper budgeting. This means that many americans, despite having more disposible income than their european counterparts still struggle since they blow their money pointlessly.",
">\n\nTo confirm, people starve despite having more then enough money to buy all the food they want? Doubt.",
">\n\n\\~100 people in the US die of starvation every year with the vast majority being people with mental illness who cannot support themselves or neglected children. People aren't starving. The problem is that we talk about poor food quality issues.\nThe issue here comes primarily from 2 places.\n1.) Time. Eating healthy, Or at a minimum, Not like complete shit. Is cheaper than trash eating. You can buy a pack of chicken breasts for the cost of a large Baconator Combo. The issue is the time it takes to cook. These people are either unable or unwilling for a variety of issues to take the 30m to cook a healthy meal.\n2.) Access. When you see places like New York where all they have is tiny little corner stores and you have to travel basically out of the city to find a proper grocery store. That is a problem. You can either eat the trash from the Bodega, or travel 30m to get to a proper Albertsons (or whatever they have in NY).\n\nThis is why Poverty in the US isn't represented by starved thin people, its Obesity. They are getting plenty of calories and are eating plenty of food. Its just the food quality isnt there.\n\nEDIT: Also something to remember. Many, If not the majority of low income earners smoke. And if they are a pack a day smoker, that is \\~$15USD per day for their habit. THAT IS A FULL MEAL! They are addicted to a substance that drains a full meal worth of income from them per day. Imagine what eating 4 meals a day would do you your budget. And that is per person. If your partner smokes as well that is 2 Meals per day of household income just thrown away. And many people are 2-3 pack a day smokes. Meaning they can be spending up to 3 meals a day worth of income on an addiction. Clearly, Money isnt the issue.",
">\n\nYou are talking about something different than OP. \n\ntrying to put food on the table\n\nI'm sure people would cook more healthy and varied meals if they had more income. You identify the issue yourself, insufficient time off to spend it finding healthy foods, living in places with basic kitchens and eating nutritional food. \nI have no idea why you were saying education is the actual problem. I also don't know why you are banging on about smoking. It's going not to do with the point. \nYou really got to identify the point your making and be concise. \nYour anecdotal opinions about what poor people aren't/are doing isn't convincing, it's just story telling.",
">\n\n\"To confirm, people starve despite having more then enough money to buy all the food they want? Doubt.\"\nNice redirection. I responded to your comment. Not OP. YOU said people were starving. That is why I refuted it.",
">\n\n\nI responded to your comment. Not OP.\n\nMaybe respond to OP and not to me, I dont have a view here.",
">\n\ni guess i'm struggling to see the benefit of it, i get that you get a tax break but you're also paying money off of your paycheck to pay for something that most people already get. so its kinda a wash \nthe problem with food stamps i think is that its for people who are on the fringes by definition, who are also shamed into being very quiet about their usage of it. so when people hear about people abusing them, they don't have a frame of reference for people actually using them like they're supposed to \nso i think either this just needs to be simpler and even more universal, or just tweak the current system a little more so people see more use out of it",
">\n\nIt's like a Health Savings Account, but for groceries. A household will spend x dollars on groceries every year, but under this plan the x dollars would be pre-tax dollars making whatever is spent on groceries a decrease in the household taxable income (both income tax and the payroll taxes like social security and Medicare). In another way, it is treating what a household needs to spend money on as a operating cost when a business is taxed. For businesses operating expenses are not counted as taxable income, for a typical household health care expenses can be uaed lower taxable income as a necessary expense, but not groceries - this would change that.",
">\n\nThis is too wonkish and misses the root of the problem. Why are there people who don't have enough to eat? Why is there so much poverty in the first place?",
">\n\nThe people that need this the most likely don't pay any income tax in the first place. Getting an extra tax deduction means nothing at that point. Where it will mean a possible deduction that is useful is the middle class and upper class. The middle class is forced to use it or end up paying more in tax for not playing the game. The upper class has an accountant who will figure the optimal amount for them right off the bat. \nIn order to find the extra benefits, we either need to raise taxes or just crank up the debt even more. I know a lot of people like to ignore the debt but it will come back to bite us at some point. As it is, something like $400 billion in interest is paid in a year. Over the next few years, that could reach into the trillions.",
">\n\nThe people who already qualify for SNAP would still get the level of benefits (which would be above $100/month), the wider and new benefit would be for the middle income who currently buy their groceries with post-tax dollars and would be able to buy groceries with pre-tax dollars lowering their tax liability without changing their behavior.",
">\n\nIf current recipients are going to get the same amount, and the middle and upper classes are going to be the ones getting the benefit under this proposal, you are increasing spending while powering tax revenue. I don't see that being a good idea given the current budget situation.",
">\n\nShow Me Your Budget, And I’ll Show You What You Value\nIf the federal budget needs to be brought in line to reflect the values of the American people that would value life sustaining resources over bombs, then so be it.",
">\n\nIt seems redundant to expect everyone in the country to pay additional taxes to cover their own SNAP benefits. I don’t know cost concerns you’re trying to alleviate. Assume every single person’s taxes increase $100/month so they can get a get a $100 SNAP card? And since it’s universal, the Kardashians, Elon Musk, CEOs, doctors, lawyers… would all get $100 every month? \nThe whole reason that SNAP works is because the population who is better off, helps cover the expenses for those lesser well off. \nThis is the prime example of why good intentions don’t necessarily mean it’s a good idea",
">\n\nThere is a form of food stamps everywhere minus 26 countries. Yes I do agree.",
">\n\nSo you want to take a relatively simple system (relatively speaking) and replace it with a more complicated, more costly, confusing system. All just to cover more people. \nThis is a shitty idea for so many reasons. The two biggest would be: 1) Cost: you are making a program much more expensive than it needs to be. The most significant costs will be in the IRS to enforce this program, since you have now effectively put it in their jurisdiction. You may not realize this, but that is the result. This will also disproportionately effect people on the margins, the working poor. These people may not qualify under your proposal, and they didn’t qualify for the old one. Now you’re making their financial lives more complex, and making their tax filings more complex. Again, you may not have thought of this….but is unavoidable. \n 2) You now made a relatively niche program that the majority of taxpayers never give a second thought to, and you’re making it a vital part of everyone’s lives. This would suddenly make it ‘everyone’s issue’. And it will get debated and potentially cut at rates much greater than the current program. \nTrying to cover more people is a cause I agree with. I would be absolutely disgusted if the government did something like what you’re suggesting. It is so economically inefficient, it will end up increasing the projects cost many times. It takes a program that only benefits a minority of people, and makes it everyone’s issue. And all for literally no reason. The amount of bureaucracy required in your plan is just absurd. \nThere are many other reasons that your idea sucks, these are just the two most glaringly troublesome in my eyes.",
">\n\nWhy not simply provide everyone with a universal basic income? There's much less of a likelihood of creating inflation on everyday goods with that approach, and it'd allow each family to be flexible about where they lived and how they spent their money, which would help alleviate the densification of the working population that drives costs up for things like housing.",
">\n\nGreat take an extra 500 dollars from those who do not need assistance and give us back 100 dollars. There is no limit on how much of another persons money the government (and those who support them) is willing to spend.",
">\n\nAlmost all food is already not taxed in most states. SNAP for everyone would discourage people from working as much. People can already live on Ramen noodles for $150 per year and I once bought sixty eggs and a gallon of milk for $60, plus a bag of shredded cheese for a few more dollars. Costco, whose membership is refundable after purchases, sells a 25-lb bag of rice for $18 and a 50-lb bag of rice for $19. Black beans are also very cheap, and people can live on their only nutrients as being from potatoes and butter.",
">\n\nThis would go the extra step of giving tax advantages for every dollar spent on groceries, like HSAs the money being elected by each person would be pre-tax thereby lowering the taxable income. Why should there be tax advantages for investing but not for everyone who eats food that they prepare themselves? Food doesn't have a sales tax, but the money used to buy that food is taxed when it's earned in a paycheck, whether it is payroll tax (social security and Medicare) or for those earning more income tax, this proposal would give the working American hundreds of dollars back in their pockets and it wouldn't be means tested (just like social security and Medicare) meaning everyone benefits.\nThe argument that \"if people have any of their basic needs meet, they become lazy\" just isn't born out in reality. Prison delivers basic needs and most prisoners don't become ostensibly comatose out of sheer slovenly nature of having basic needs met. If you had security that you would not be homeless, starving and left destitute would you tien into a lethargic rhetorical slug? I don't know you but I suspect that the answer is \"no\". Alleviating the possibility of destitution hasn't turned the rest of the wealthy nations of the world into a nation of lazy bums, their people are less likely to die deaths of despair, seek out academic achievement at higher levels, have more free time with friends and family, and all that across 30+ countries that have robust welfare states. Maybe reality is not that there needs to be economic retribution to every individual who is maximally providing their labor to their employers (more often than not, multiple jobs need to be worked for the bottom of the labor market). There's burger flippers in all those other wealthy countries and they don't need to work 2-3 of those low wage jobs, but somehow only the American worker needs to karmically punished and economically tortured because if they didn't the American would somehow be sinfully free to lead his/her life to as they want?\nEveryone eats food, this proposal just makes it easier for everyone by providing relief for the thing everyone will paying for anyway. Why shouldn't it be made easier for everyone's wallet to eat? What moral danger is there to take some of that household expenses off everyone's family budget? If it works out and the public likes joining the rest of the developed nations having a government that provides services and benefits to them and not just the wealthy and well connected, isn't that what a government of the people, by the people, and for the people should be doing anyway?",
">\n\nAre you going to fund this, or are you going to demand others have their money stolen to fund it?",
">\n\nIf you don't consent to taxes feel free to renounce your citizenship and leave",
">\n\nWe shouldn't have to NEED SNAP that's the problem",
">\n\nWe don't need snap.",
">\n\nWho's we you got a turd in your pocket?",
">\n\nThe United States doesn’t need it.",
">\n\nThat's very general. And I disagree",
">\n\nAny adult worthwhile to society can feed themselves."
] |
>
In the US those who qualify for Supplemental Nutritional Assistance Program (SNAP, initially named food stamps but renamed SNAP in the 1960s) is a means to provide food for those in need, I propose to expand it to everyone where every individual gets a minimum of $100/month. For those who qualify they would get additional funds transferred into their account and those who don't qualify could elect to contribute more from their pre-tax wages into their account to avoid tax liability on what they spend on their groceries.
Government money could be better spent. What is the point of giving people government funding if they don’t need it.
According to the census there are about 80 million families within the United States. If I’m not mistaken, 15 to 20% of American households constitute upper middle class.
So, roughly, that’s 20 million families that probably would not need a measly $100 from the government. Of which, can be better spent on something else.
You also propose tax liability. Correct me if I’m wrong, does this not mean that your universal snap benefit would make people susceptible to tax penalties depending on how much they make and how much they choose to spend. If your goal is to help people, then I don’t see how this does that.
It is my view that this would be an efficient means to alleviate cost concerns for Americans trying to put food on the table
Sure, but you don’t really explain why this method is better than the current one. Either way you’re going to have lower income individuals who receive government funding.
and that it being universal would also eliminate the stigma of using SNAP benefits because no one would know whether you qualify for additional SNAP benefits or you are just using it as a Health Savings Account (HSA)but for your groceries and decreasing your tax liabilities.
This seems like a really shaky argument. If you believe that universal things should exist to reduce stigma. You can make this argument for pretty much any level of government assistance. Furthermore, how are you going to ensure that others don’t know whether you qualify for additional SNAP?
People are going to talk about how they qualify for more stuff. People are going to talk about how it’s unfair how certain people qualify for more stuff. There are going to be government websites most likely outlining the requirements necessary to receive more government funding. Is there going to still be something like the EBT card? Because if you walk around with an EBT card people know that you’re on government assistance. At most large big box stores the computer automatically filters what EBT can and cannot apply to. So this stuff is going to be on your receipt.
What actual methods do you propose to prevent people from knowing if someone is on government assistance?
Contributions to this new universal SNAP benefits would come from the Federal government and payroll withholdings from wages only, unlike other vehicles that could be abused by wealthy individuals to grow nest egg of untaxed wealth and like HSAs SNAP funds could only used for groceries.
I don’t really know a lot about how taxes work in the United States so I really could be wrong here. But don’t Americans complain about all of the money that’s taken out of their wages and taxes anyhow, doesn’t this just increase the amount of money people lose their paycheck?
The goal of the proposal is to assure Americans getting fed healthy food is easier for all Americans, the goal is not what I'm open to changing but that this proposal is the best means to achieve said goal.
Again, I don’t really understand how your proposal is any better than what is currently happening. In fact, it seems like a waste considering there are tax brackets of people who absolutely do not need the money from the government.
|
[
"/u/SeanFromQueens (OP) has awarded 1 delta(s) in this post.\nAll comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed here, in /r/DeltaLog.\nPlease note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.\n^Delta System Explained ^| ^Deltaboards",
">\n\nIt adds a new headache to me grocery shopping to figure out what is or is not SNAP eligible and pay for groceries with two separate funding sources instead of just handing over my Visa card. \nQuite a bit of money would be lost in the new bureaucracy. How many government bureaucrats are we going to have to pay to effectively take our money and then give it back to us?\nIf someone would rather go hungry than use a SNAP card that's available to them, why is that my problem? We're already doing our duty by offering them the benefits.\nAssuming you're going to buy groceries no matter what, groceries are effectively not taxed already because you can take a standard tax deduction of $13,850 (I'm not especially frugal and even with current inflation I spend a lot less than that on groceries) and in my state there are no sales taxes on basic groceries.",
">\n\n\nthat it being universal would also eliminate the stigma of using SNAP benefits because no one would know whether you qualify for additional SNAP benefits or you are just using it as a Health Savings Account (HSA)but for your groceries and decreasing your tax liabilities.\n\n\nI see your point in trying to remove the stigma by making it universal, but people would still very much be aware that some people receive more benefits than others (i.e. the benefits are not really universal and are still means-tested to some extent) so it definitely would not eliminate the stigma, even if it does reduce the stigma.\nThis proposal disproportionately benefits people who spend more money on food (i.e. people with higher incomes/wealth). Let's say you're a middle income person and I've got a nice hefty salary. Sure you won't pay taxes on that $5 you spend on ground beef you'll eat for dinner, but I won't pay taxes on the $150 I spend on my dry aged steak and lobster I'll eat for dinner. You won't pay taxes on the $4 bag of chips you're eating with your burger, I won't pay taxes on the $200 in truffles I'm going to put on my baked potato I'm having with my steak and lobster. Further, you're saving money in your highest tax bracket, which is much lower than my tax bracket. Do you find this outcome acceptable? Why?",
">\n\nLower income people spend a much larger percentage of their paycheck on food than higher income people do.",
">\n\nYes they do, but I'm not sure what point you're trying to make. Could you explain?",
">\n\nA wealthier person getting 7% of their spending tax free (35-37%) benefits less than a poorer person getting 30% of their spending tax free (10-15%)\nSo it's slightly progressive, not regressive. More so if you add the deposits and if you don't count restaurants or food purchased abroad.",
">\n\nIt's a huge expense for the federal government that disproportionately benefits those with higher incomes. Hey poor people, here's a couple hundred dollars over the course of the year! I know it's not much and that people who don't need a tax cut are saving 10+ times more than you, but as a percentage of your household income it's a greater savings than theirs so yay! \nNot buying it. But more to the point reducing taxes for high income folks isn't furthering OP's stated goal for the proposal:\n\nThe goal of the proposal is to assure Americans getting fed healthy food is easier for all Americans, the goal is not what I'm open to changing but that this proposal is the best means to achieve said goal.",
">\n\nYou mean disproportionately benefits lower income people. And is presumably offset by an increase in income taxes, which disproportionately fall on people with higher incomes.",
">\n\n\nYou mean disproportionately benefits lower income people.\n\nNope, I mean disproportionately benefits higher income people, but thanks.\nDisproportionate: too small or too large in comparison with something else.\nIn my view, the actual dollars saved by high income folks is disproportionate. In your view the percentage of income tax saved by low income folks is disproportionate. \nWe can both use the word correctly and come to different conclusions :) \n\nAnd is presumably offset by an increase in income taxes,\n\nOP didn't stipulate how this would be paid for.",
">\n\n\nNope, I mean disproportionately benefits higher income people, but thanks.\n\nThen you're simply incorrect. The previous commenter has it right. \nTo your analogy, a flat tax like sales tax is practically regressive because the loss in marginal utility weighs heavier on poorer people. On the other side, flat subsidies for foodstuffs are progressive for the same reason, poorer people extract more net marginal utility from it than wealthier people.",
">\n\nAs a middle class person, this system just sounds annoying to me. I'd much rather just have the $1200 a year and have the government subsidize food than have to manage a separate SNAP card and have to deposit income into my SNAP account.",
">\n\nManage a seperate card is too much of a burden? I've got two credit cards, two debit cards, personally adding a 5th card would not be much of a bother for me, but that's just me. Most mass transit have there own payment service that one could use with their phone, I would expect that this would behave in a similar manner where your SNAP account is either another plastic card or a just another account on your Apple/Google pay wallet. \nGovernment subsidizing food being handed out to the food producers hasn't worked out for farmers or the consumer just the multinational agribusinesses like ADM and Conagra, though this doesn't address this specific problem it doesn't exasperate the problem either.",
">\n\nIt makes regular income people feel like poor people to have an extra card with a negligible amount of money in it. It’s annoying, like the other person said",
">\n\nI've had transitchek card for monthly subway fares. I currently have a HSA for health care costs. Having the similar tax benefits but for groceries, it would be as much money as you elect it to be, or just forgo it altogether and pay groceries with post-tax dollars as you go now. You are free to do you boo.",
">\n\nAn HSA card and a subway card are not like credit/debit cards. Also most people in the country do not have subway cards. I don’t know what the percentage is on HSA card, but I bet it’s not as high as you seem to think. The fact is that most people use one debit card for their everyday transactions. Full stop. Adding anything to that, is going to piss people off royally. If there’s not enough money on the card, which will happen all the time, people will need to use two means of payment. Yet another way to piss people off. \nThe additional card is hardly one of my top concerns with your proposal, but it would be one of the things that royally pisses people off.",
">\n\nI think I see the goal here pretty clearly:\n\nIt is my view that this would be an efficient means to alleviate cost concerns for Americans trying to put food on the table\nThe goal of the proposal is to assure Americans getting fed healthy food is easier for all Americans\n\nThe poor pay essentially nothing in taxes. When you give them government aid, they are really getting aid. They get more out of the system then they put into. That makes sense to me, we should give aid to people who need it for lots of reasons ethical and pragmatic.\nWhen the government gives money to the middle class, it doesn't have the same effect. The middle class pays the taxes that create the funds that the government distributes.\nYour police will cost 400 billion dollars, and it will be paid by the tax payer. What sense do it make to raise my taxes by 1200 dollars so that you can turn around and give me 1200 dollars in snap benefits? You are certainly not making it easier for me to buy food. \nof course you could also shift around the tax burden. you could raise taxes only on the 1%. But then what do you need this snap program from? Just cut my taxes. there is no sense in taking my money just to give it back to me. Give money to people who need it.\nIf you want to make it easier for people to buy food there is another method. The government can, and does, pay farmers to grow food. These are called farming subsidies. This has a couple of effects. The main one is that is allows American farmers to compete with international farmers. We don't want the agriculture industry to collapse the same why our textile industry did. Domestic food production is a national security issue. But it also has the effect of making food cheaper. You artificially increase the supply which drives prices down. you could play around with this in all sorts of ways. you could cut subsidies on meat, which is very calorie inefficient and increase subsidies on healthy food like beans, rice. Or you could just increase subsidies across the board. You could artificially prop up smaller farms or farms growing more diverse strains of food or do the opposite. You could reward long term investments like fruit and nut trees which don't yield anything for the first 5 or 10 years. You could reward leaving fields fallow. You have a lot of options.\nusing subsidies to drive sustainable and long term food production, I think will do a lot more to accomplish your goal then just taking and returning 1200 dollars to many Americans or redistributing wealth through taxes.",
">\n\n\nof course you could also shift around the tax burden. you could raise taxes only on the 1%. But then what do you need this snap program from? Just cut my taxes. there is no sense in taking my money just to give it back to me. Give money to people who need it.\n\nShifting the tax burden up the economic ladder is a goal of this reform, the universal SNAP benefits could be less but what is most important is the ability for middle income tax payers to use pre-tax dollars to buy their groceries, which creates a negative rate consumption tax that proportionally benefits those who spending a greater percentage of their money on groceries than those who are earning a higher income and could not practically spend as much on groceries. Even if the high income individual spends far more than the middle income individual, it will still be a smaller percentage of their income.",
">\n\nAs a proponent for Universal Basic Income i feel like this proposal is very similar but more complicated and unnessecary restricted. Why not just give everyone money?",
">\n\nIt's an entry level UBI program, and not any more complicated than means tested EBT, actually it's more efficient with economy of scale. If it is started out with the limited scope of groceries there's no argument of \"well that will cause people to waste it on booze/drugs\" and limit the initial universal benefits to something that is universal like food. The next step could be direct cash transfers.",
">\n\nGiven that almost every person will spend more than $100 on food in a given month, your proposal is very similar to a small basic income plan. I am in general more in favor of straight cash rather than money that comes with strings, it reduces the cost of administration of a program, and it provides people with freedom of choice on how they spend. Maybe someone works at a resort where the get board as part of their compensation. Maybe someone is in a nursing home and doesn’t cook. Those people could, I’m sure, still find a way to spend $100 a month in allowed items, but why not let them spend on what’s important to them?",
">\n\nThe small scale of the transfer is a feature not a bug to the proposal, rather than striving for a full basic income system, assisting with food purchases for everyone. This could be expanded afterwards to be a straight cash transfer, but it is easier defended to have food benefit be universal since everyone needs food.",
">\n\nWhy do this instead of a cash UBI?",
">\n\nIt's an intermediary step that is both smaller than what it would take to deliver basic income. Assisting with food costs and allow tax payers to take advantage of lowering tax liability on purchases that are inevitable to be bought anyway.",
">\n\n\neliminate the stigma of using SNAP benefits\n\nHow much of a sigma is there? I used SNAP for a couple of years and never experienced any stigma. I often notice people using an EBT card at supermarkets, but can't remember it ever being an issue for anyone.\nIf there is a problem with sigma, wouldn't a better solution be to make the card look like an unrecognizable debit card?",
">\n\nYou’ve never experienced the stigma? Gawd, I’m jealous!\nI had gotten pretty good at hiding my card as I was swiping so people wouldn’t see it - but with the introduction of card chips, the fact that I’m using a SNAP card is once again obvious to the holier-than-thou pearl-clutchers around me. The ones who feel they absolutely must comment on the food I’m buying. If it’s healthy, they say “It must be nice buying all that with MY money. You eat better than I do.” If it’s all store brands and ramen noodles, they say “I can’t believe you’re buying junk food with MY tax dollars!” If they can’t find anything about my food to complain about, then it’s my clothes or my phone or my tattoo… never mind that I got my clothes at a thrift store, or my phone on a payment plan, or my tattoo when I was 18 and no responsibilities. \nThis is why I preferred grocery shopping at 2am, when the stores were practically empty. Covid ruined that.",
">\n\nFrom what you’re saying, I think the chip dip problem is that the card processor requires stores to invest in the tech. Small shops for example. The only benefit is to the processor, because chips have less fraud. Without any evidence I’d imagine small shop lobby groups (or grocers, etc.) don’t want every EBT user that buys cheap cheese to suddenly require upgraded equipment to remain EBT-compliant and thus have access to EBT money. The corner bodega and their lobbyists wouldn’t encourage a chip card because it’s not to their benefit. Then again, the stigma in a bodega or similar probably doesn’t exist because that’s where a lot of poorer customers shop, not a big supermarket with “regular” chip users and a big company behind it with negotiating power with credit processors.",
">\n\nAll this would do, is raise the prices of all the cheapest stuff, negatively impacting the people you want to help. It also taxes the business the poor person is working for more, reducing their pay.",
">\n\nWhat evidence do you have that it would raise prices?",
">\n\nEverything the government has ever subsidized?\nGovernment loans drove up the price of college. Mandates that employers provide health insurance has driven up the price of health care.\nAny time you give people money to spend on something without adding to the supply of that thing, more money chasing the same amount of goods necessarily means price increases.\nNow, since money is fungible, lots of people would take their universal SNAP benefits and replace part of their existing food budget with it, but that just means they're going to have more money to spend in other parts of the economy, so while I'd expect the price increases to be concentrated in food markets, it would probably cause inflation across the economy.",
">\n\nThe relationship between employer healthcare costs and healthcare costs is inverse. As healthcare costs increase fewer employers take on the burden, and shift to less risk, and less expensive coverage. Even as the economy improves, employers cannot keep up the burden of sponsoring employee plans, so they don’t. They don’t hire, or they use FSAs, or they work with unions, something else but not cause costs to rise merely by requiring coverage.",
">\n\nThat's definitely a better policy then what we have now, but if you were going to do that you should just go ahead and give people cash directly to spend however they want.\nFor poor people in actual need, food is important, but often some other emergency is more critical; a car repair that keeps you from losing your job, a doctor visit that treats a problem early before it develops into a life-long condition.\nAnd for everyone else, giving coupons that can only be spent on a few things distorts the market, in ways that just make it less efficient and less useful for everyone. For example, if you gave everyone $50/month that can only be spent on eggs, the price of eggs would go up a ton until supply and demand equalized again. \nEfficient markets are fueled by people freely spending how they want, so if you want to subsidize them just give them cash directly.\nThe restrictions on SNAP benefits are mostly there to reassure voters that poor people aren't being allowed to be happy, just being allowed to survive; they're a means to discipline the labor force by making poverty worse to endure. They don't serve any good, pro-social function, really.",
">\n\nI think your comment has shown the actual reason why SNAP is for specific things. The purpose of the program is to reduce hunger, but as you have said - if it wasn’t limited to food necessities then poor people would spend it on other things and go hungry.\nIt’s not about wanting them to not be happy - it’s about making sure they eat well.",
">\n\nFood is sort of an inflexible expense. A person expecting to enjoy other goods and services will need food to actually enjoy them at some point. Politically it’s easy to imagine someone will spend $99 on whiskey and go hungry. But that’s not really reality, right. They may have a different basket of goods at the end of the day, but there will be food in the basket. Like alcohol. For things we really worry about — like addictive drugs — that’s for social programs and enforcement paid by taxes to address most effectively, not restricting dollars to food. We wouldn’t say the war on drugs demands restricting food aid: the war on drugs demands attacking addiction and the substances and suppliers themselves.",
">\n\nThe comment I replied to said that poor people would spend money on vehicles or rent instead of food. While those are important things, they are not food and snap focuses on food insecurity not general poverty.\nEdit to add: my social worker husband disagrees with you on the drugs - unrestricted cash could cause a huge problem for his clients.",
">\n\nSo you're going to raise everyone's taxes by $100 to give them $100 in food stamps?\nIt's not hard to get healthy food: people who aren't eating healthy don't want to. People claim it's a price issue, but the fact is that fresh fruits and vegetables are cheaper than junk food. Bananas are like 25 cents each, but people would rather buy a bag of chips. Water is basically free, put people pay for soda.",
">\n\nProbably more like raising everyone's taxes by $110 to give them $100, once you account for the government waste and bureaucracy in the program.",
">\n\nIf everyone gets it automatically and there is no need to review any applications, wouldn't that cut down on the administrative costs?",
">\n\nQuestion, do you believe the underlying problem is related to income/wealth inequality? America is the richest nation per capita but struggle to live happy, healthy lives. \nIf you improved how the wealth of the nation is distributed, do you think it would fix the problem?",
">\n\nAmericans have the highest disposal income of any country in the world. Yes. More than Europeans. We just spend it like idiots.\nThe issue isn't wealth inequality, Its the lack of economic education in school. In US schools you dont ever take a single economics course. I was one of about twelve students in a school of 1200 that took an economics course. And even then, that was more just about how global economies function. There are absolutely 0 Classes that american students take on proper budgeting. This means that many americans, despite having more disposible income than their european counterparts still struggle since they blow their money pointlessly.",
">\n\nTo confirm, people starve despite having more then enough money to buy all the food they want? Doubt.",
">\n\n\\~100 people in the US die of starvation every year with the vast majority being people with mental illness who cannot support themselves or neglected children. People aren't starving. The problem is that we talk about poor food quality issues.\nThe issue here comes primarily from 2 places.\n1.) Time. Eating healthy, Or at a minimum, Not like complete shit. Is cheaper than trash eating. You can buy a pack of chicken breasts for the cost of a large Baconator Combo. The issue is the time it takes to cook. These people are either unable or unwilling for a variety of issues to take the 30m to cook a healthy meal.\n2.) Access. When you see places like New York where all they have is tiny little corner stores and you have to travel basically out of the city to find a proper grocery store. That is a problem. You can either eat the trash from the Bodega, or travel 30m to get to a proper Albertsons (or whatever they have in NY).\n\nThis is why Poverty in the US isn't represented by starved thin people, its Obesity. They are getting plenty of calories and are eating plenty of food. Its just the food quality isnt there.\n\nEDIT: Also something to remember. Many, If not the majority of low income earners smoke. And if they are a pack a day smoker, that is \\~$15USD per day for their habit. THAT IS A FULL MEAL! They are addicted to a substance that drains a full meal worth of income from them per day. Imagine what eating 4 meals a day would do you your budget. And that is per person. If your partner smokes as well that is 2 Meals per day of household income just thrown away. And many people are 2-3 pack a day smokes. Meaning they can be spending up to 3 meals a day worth of income on an addiction. Clearly, Money isnt the issue.",
">\n\nYou are talking about something different than OP. \n\ntrying to put food on the table\n\nI'm sure people would cook more healthy and varied meals if they had more income. You identify the issue yourself, insufficient time off to spend it finding healthy foods, living in places with basic kitchens and eating nutritional food. \nI have no idea why you were saying education is the actual problem. I also don't know why you are banging on about smoking. It's going not to do with the point. \nYou really got to identify the point your making and be concise. \nYour anecdotal opinions about what poor people aren't/are doing isn't convincing, it's just story telling.",
">\n\n\"To confirm, people starve despite having more then enough money to buy all the food they want? Doubt.\"\nNice redirection. I responded to your comment. Not OP. YOU said people were starving. That is why I refuted it.",
">\n\n\nI responded to your comment. Not OP.\n\nMaybe respond to OP and not to me, I dont have a view here.",
">\n\ni guess i'm struggling to see the benefit of it, i get that you get a tax break but you're also paying money off of your paycheck to pay for something that most people already get. so its kinda a wash \nthe problem with food stamps i think is that its for people who are on the fringes by definition, who are also shamed into being very quiet about their usage of it. so when people hear about people abusing them, they don't have a frame of reference for people actually using them like they're supposed to \nso i think either this just needs to be simpler and even more universal, or just tweak the current system a little more so people see more use out of it",
">\n\nIt's like a Health Savings Account, but for groceries. A household will spend x dollars on groceries every year, but under this plan the x dollars would be pre-tax dollars making whatever is spent on groceries a decrease in the household taxable income (both income tax and the payroll taxes like social security and Medicare). In another way, it is treating what a household needs to spend money on as a operating cost when a business is taxed. For businesses operating expenses are not counted as taxable income, for a typical household health care expenses can be uaed lower taxable income as a necessary expense, but not groceries - this would change that.",
">\n\nThis is too wonkish and misses the root of the problem. Why are there people who don't have enough to eat? Why is there so much poverty in the first place?",
">\n\nThe people that need this the most likely don't pay any income tax in the first place. Getting an extra tax deduction means nothing at that point. Where it will mean a possible deduction that is useful is the middle class and upper class. The middle class is forced to use it or end up paying more in tax for not playing the game. The upper class has an accountant who will figure the optimal amount for them right off the bat. \nIn order to find the extra benefits, we either need to raise taxes or just crank up the debt even more. I know a lot of people like to ignore the debt but it will come back to bite us at some point. As it is, something like $400 billion in interest is paid in a year. Over the next few years, that could reach into the trillions.",
">\n\nThe people who already qualify for SNAP would still get the level of benefits (which would be above $100/month), the wider and new benefit would be for the middle income who currently buy their groceries with post-tax dollars and would be able to buy groceries with pre-tax dollars lowering their tax liability without changing their behavior.",
">\n\nIf current recipients are going to get the same amount, and the middle and upper classes are going to be the ones getting the benefit under this proposal, you are increasing spending while powering tax revenue. I don't see that being a good idea given the current budget situation.",
">\n\nShow Me Your Budget, And I’ll Show You What You Value\nIf the federal budget needs to be brought in line to reflect the values of the American people that would value life sustaining resources over bombs, then so be it.",
">\n\nIt seems redundant to expect everyone in the country to pay additional taxes to cover their own SNAP benefits. I don’t know cost concerns you’re trying to alleviate. Assume every single person’s taxes increase $100/month so they can get a get a $100 SNAP card? And since it’s universal, the Kardashians, Elon Musk, CEOs, doctors, lawyers… would all get $100 every month? \nThe whole reason that SNAP works is because the population who is better off, helps cover the expenses for those lesser well off. \nThis is the prime example of why good intentions don’t necessarily mean it’s a good idea",
">\n\nThere is a form of food stamps everywhere minus 26 countries. Yes I do agree.",
">\n\nSo you want to take a relatively simple system (relatively speaking) and replace it with a more complicated, more costly, confusing system. All just to cover more people. \nThis is a shitty idea for so many reasons. The two biggest would be: 1) Cost: you are making a program much more expensive than it needs to be. The most significant costs will be in the IRS to enforce this program, since you have now effectively put it in their jurisdiction. You may not realize this, but that is the result. This will also disproportionately effect people on the margins, the working poor. These people may not qualify under your proposal, and they didn’t qualify for the old one. Now you’re making their financial lives more complex, and making their tax filings more complex. Again, you may not have thought of this….but is unavoidable. \n 2) You now made a relatively niche program that the majority of taxpayers never give a second thought to, and you’re making it a vital part of everyone’s lives. This would suddenly make it ‘everyone’s issue’. And it will get debated and potentially cut at rates much greater than the current program. \nTrying to cover more people is a cause I agree with. I would be absolutely disgusted if the government did something like what you’re suggesting. It is so economically inefficient, it will end up increasing the projects cost many times. It takes a program that only benefits a minority of people, and makes it everyone’s issue. And all for literally no reason. The amount of bureaucracy required in your plan is just absurd. \nThere are many other reasons that your idea sucks, these are just the two most glaringly troublesome in my eyes.",
">\n\nWhy not simply provide everyone with a universal basic income? There's much less of a likelihood of creating inflation on everyday goods with that approach, and it'd allow each family to be flexible about where they lived and how they spent their money, which would help alleviate the densification of the working population that drives costs up for things like housing.",
">\n\nGreat take an extra 500 dollars from those who do not need assistance and give us back 100 dollars. There is no limit on how much of another persons money the government (and those who support them) is willing to spend.",
">\n\nAlmost all food is already not taxed in most states. SNAP for everyone would discourage people from working as much. People can already live on Ramen noodles for $150 per year and I once bought sixty eggs and a gallon of milk for $60, plus a bag of shredded cheese for a few more dollars. Costco, whose membership is refundable after purchases, sells a 25-lb bag of rice for $18 and a 50-lb bag of rice for $19. Black beans are also very cheap, and people can live on their only nutrients as being from potatoes and butter.",
">\n\nThis would go the extra step of giving tax advantages for every dollar spent on groceries, like HSAs the money being elected by each person would be pre-tax thereby lowering the taxable income. Why should there be tax advantages for investing but not for everyone who eats food that they prepare themselves? Food doesn't have a sales tax, but the money used to buy that food is taxed when it's earned in a paycheck, whether it is payroll tax (social security and Medicare) or for those earning more income tax, this proposal would give the working American hundreds of dollars back in their pockets and it wouldn't be means tested (just like social security and Medicare) meaning everyone benefits.\nThe argument that \"if people have any of their basic needs meet, they become lazy\" just isn't born out in reality. Prison delivers basic needs and most prisoners don't become ostensibly comatose out of sheer slovenly nature of having basic needs met. If you had security that you would not be homeless, starving and left destitute would you tien into a lethargic rhetorical slug? I don't know you but I suspect that the answer is \"no\". Alleviating the possibility of destitution hasn't turned the rest of the wealthy nations of the world into a nation of lazy bums, their people are less likely to die deaths of despair, seek out academic achievement at higher levels, have more free time with friends and family, and all that across 30+ countries that have robust welfare states. Maybe reality is not that there needs to be economic retribution to every individual who is maximally providing their labor to their employers (more often than not, multiple jobs need to be worked for the bottom of the labor market). There's burger flippers in all those other wealthy countries and they don't need to work 2-3 of those low wage jobs, but somehow only the American worker needs to karmically punished and economically tortured because if they didn't the American would somehow be sinfully free to lead his/her life to as they want?\nEveryone eats food, this proposal just makes it easier for everyone by providing relief for the thing everyone will paying for anyway. Why shouldn't it be made easier for everyone's wallet to eat? What moral danger is there to take some of that household expenses off everyone's family budget? If it works out and the public likes joining the rest of the developed nations having a government that provides services and benefits to them and not just the wealthy and well connected, isn't that what a government of the people, by the people, and for the people should be doing anyway?",
">\n\nAre you going to fund this, or are you going to demand others have their money stolen to fund it?",
">\n\nIf you don't consent to taxes feel free to renounce your citizenship and leave",
">\n\nWe shouldn't have to NEED SNAP that's the problem",
">\n\nWe don't need snap.",
">\n\nWho's we you got a turd in your pocket?",
">\n\nThe United States doesn’t need it.",
">\n\nThat's very general. And I disagree",
">\n\nAny adult worthwhile to society can feed themselves.",
">\n\nThere are a lot of people that don't just feed themselves... And could before"
] |
>
|
[
"/u/SeanFromQueens (OP) has awarded 1 delta(s) in this post.\nAll comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed here, in /r/DeltaLog.\nPlease note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.\n^Delta System Explained ^| ^Deltaboards",
">\n\nIt adds a new headache to me grocery shopping to figure out what is or is not SNAP eligible and pay for groceries with two separate funding sources instead of just handing over my Visa card. \nQuite a bit of money would be lost in the new bureaucracy. How many government bureaucrats are we going to have to pay to effectively take our money and then give it back to us?\nIf someone would rather go hungry than use a SNAP card that's available to them, why is that my problem? We're already doing our duty by offering them the benefits.\nAssuming you're going to buy groceries no matter what, groceries are effectively not taxed already because you can take a standard tax deduction of $13,850 (I'm not especially frugal and even with current inflation I spend a lot less than that on groceries) and in my state there are no sales taxes on basic groceries.",
">\n\n\nthat it being universal would also eliminate the stigma of using SNAP benefits because no one would know whether you qualify for additional SNAP benefits or you are just using it as a Health Savings Account (HSA)but for your groceries and decreasing your tax liabilities.\n\n\nI see your point in trying to remove the stigma by making it universal, but people would still very much be aware that some people receive more benefits than others (i.e. the benefits are not really universal and are still means-tested to some extent) so it definitely would not eliminate the stigma, even if it does reduce the stigma.\nThis proposal disproportionately benefits people who spend more money on food (i.e. people with higher incomes/wealth). Let's say you're a middle income person and I've got a nice hefty salary. Sure you won't pay taxes on that $5 you spend on ground beef you'll eat for dinner, but I won't pay taxes on the $150 I spend on my dry aged steak and lobster I'll eat for dinner. You won't pay taxes on the $4 bag of chips you're eating with your burger, I won't pay taxes on the $200 in truffles I'm going to put on my baked potato I'm having with my steak and lobster. Further, you're saving money in your highest tax bracket, which is much lower than my tax bracket. Do you find this outcome acceptable? Why?",
">\n\nLower income people spend a much larger percentage of their paycheck on food than higher income people do.",
">\n\nYes they do, but I'm not sure what point you're trying to make. Could you explain?",
">\n\nA wealthier person getting 7% of their spending tax free (35-37%) benefits less than a poorer person getting 30% of their spending tax free (10-15%)\nSo it's slightly progressive, not regressive. More so if you add the deposits and if you don't count restaurants or food purchased abroad.",
">\n\nIt's a huge expense for the federal government that disproportionately benefits those with higher incomes. Hey poor people, here's a couple hundred dollars over the course of the year! I know it's not much and that people who don't need a tax cut are saving 10+ times more than you, but as a percentage of your household income it's a greater savings than theirs so yay! \nNot buying it. But more to the point reducing taxes for high income folks isn't furthering OP's stated goal for the proposal:\n\nThe goal of the proposal is to assure Americans getting fed healthy food is easier for all Americans, the goal is not what I'm open to changing but that this proposal is the best means to achieve said goal.",
">\n\nYou mean disproportionately benefits lower income people. And is presumably offset by an increase in income taxes, which disproportionately fall on people with higher incomes.",
">\n\n\nYou mean disproportionately benefits lower income people.\n\nNope, I mean disproportionately benefits higher income people, but thanks.\nDisproportionate: too small or too large in comparison with something else.\nIn my view, the actual dollars saved by high income folks is disproportionate. In your view the percentage of income tax saved by low income folks is disproportionate. \nWe can both use the word correctly and come to different conclusions :) \n\nAnd is presumably offset by an increase in income taxes,\n\nOP didn't stipulate how this would be paid for.",
">\n\n\nNope, I mean disproportionately benefits higher income people, but thanks.\n\nThen you're simply incorrect. The previous commenter has it right. \nTo your analogy, a flat tax like sales tax is practically regressive because the loss in marginal utility weighs heavier on poorer people. On the other side, flat subsidies for foodstuffs are progressive for the same reason, poorer people extract more net marginal utility from it than wealthier people.",
">\n\nAs a middle class person, this system just sounds annoying to me. I'd much rather just have the $1200 a year and have the government subsidize food than have to manage a separate SNAP card and have to deposit income into my SNAP account.",
">\n\nManage a seperate card is too much of a burden? I've got two credit cards, two debit cards, personally adding a 5th card would not be much of a bother for me, but that's just me. Most mass transit have there own payment service that one could use with their phone, I would expect that this would behave in a similar manner where your SNAP account is either another plastic card or a just another account on your Apple/Google pay wallet. \nGovernment subsidizing food being handed out to the food producers hasn't worked out for farmers or the consumer just the multinational agribusinesses like ADM and Conagra, though this doesn't address this specific problem it doesn't exasperate the problem either.",
">\n\nIt makes regular income people feel like poor people to have an extra card with a negligible amount of money in it. It’s annoying, like the other person said",
">\n\nI've had transitchek card for monthly subway fares. I currently have a HSA for health care costs. Having the similar tax benefits but for groceries, it would be as much money as you elect it to be, or just forgo it altogether and pay groceries with post-tax dollars as you go now. You are free to do you boo.",
">\n\nAn HSA card and a subway card are not like credit/debit cards. Also most people in the country do not have subway cards. I don’t know what the percentage is on HSA card, but I bet it’s not as high as you seem to think. The fact is that most people use one debit card for their everyday transactions. Full stop. Adding anything to that, is going to piss people off royally. If there’s not enough money on the card, which will happen all the time, people will need to use two means of payment. Yet another way to piss people off. \nThe additional card is hardly one of my top concerns with your proposal, but it would be one of the things that royally pisses people off.",
">\n\nI think I see the goal here pretty clearly:\n\nIt is my view that this would be an efficient means to alleviate cost concerns for Americans trying to put food on the table\nThe goal of the proposal is to assure Americans getting fed healthy food is easier for all Americans\n\nThe poor pay essentially nothing in taxes. When you give them government aid, they are really getting aid. They get more out of the system then they put into. That makes sense to me, we should give aid to people who need it for lots of reasons ethical and pragmatic.\nWhen the government gives money to the middle class, it doesn't have the same effect. The middle class pays the taxes that create the funds that the government distributes.\nYour police will cost 400 billion dollars, and it will be paid by the tax payer. What sense do it make to raise my taxes by 1200 dollars so that you can turn around and give me 1200 dollars in snap benefits? You are certainly not making it easier for me to buy food. \nof course you could also shift around the tax burden. you could raise taxes only on the 1%. But then what do you need this snap program from? Just cut my taxes. there is no sense in taking my money just to give it back to me. Give money to people who need it.\nIf you want to make it easier for people to buy food there is another method. The government can, and does, pay farmers to grow food. These are called farming subsidies. This has a couple of effects. The main one is that is allows American farmers to compete with international farmers. We don't want the agriculture industry to collapse the same why our textile industry did. Domestic food production is a national security issue. But it also has the effect of making food cheaper. You artificially increase the supply which drives prices down. you could play around with this in all sorts of ways. you could cut subsidies on meat, which is very calorie inefficient and increase subsidies on healthy food like beans, rice. Or you could just increase subsidies across the board. You could artificially prop up smaller farms or farms growing more diverse strains of food or do the opposite. You could reward long term investments like fruit and nut trees which don't yield anything for the first 5 or 10 years. You could reward leaving fields fallow. You have a lot of options.\nusing subsidies to drive sustainable and long term food production, I think will do a lot more to accomplish your goal then just taking and returning 1200 dollars to many Americans or redistributing wealth through taxes.",
">\n\n\nof course you could also shift around the tax burden. you could raise taxes only on the 1%. But then what do you need this snap program from? Just cut my taxes. there is no sense in taking my money just to give it back to me. Give money to people who need it.\n\nShifting the tax burden up the economic ladder is a goal of this reform, the universal SNAP benefits could be less but what is most important is the ability for middle income tax payers to use pre-tax dollars to buy their groceries, which creates a negative rate consumption tax that proportionally benefits those who spending a greater percentage of their money on groceries than those who are earning a higher income and could not practically spend as much on groceries. Even if the high income individual spends far more than the middle income individual, it will still be a smaller percentage of their income.",
">\n\nAs a proponent for Universal Basic Income i feel like this proposal is very similar but more complicated and unnessecary restricted. Why not just give everyone money?",
">\n\nIt's an entry level UBI program, and not any more complicated than means tested EBT, actually it's more efficient with economy of scale. If it is started out with the limited scope of groceries there's no argument of \"well that will cause people to waste it on booze/drugs\" and limit the initial universal benefits to something that is universal like food. The next step could be direct cash transfers.",
">\n\nGiven that almost every person will spend more than $100 on food in a given month, your proposal is very similar to a small basic income plan. I am in general more in favor of straight cash rather than money that comes with strings, it reduces the cost of administration of a program, and it provides people with freedom of choice on how they spend. Maybe someone works at a resort where the get board as part of their compensation. Maybe someone is in a nursing home and doesn’t cook. Those people could, I’m sure, still find a way to spend $100 a month in allowed items, but why not let them spend on what’s important to them?",
">\n\nThe small scale of the transfer is a feature not a bug to the proposal, rather than striving for a full basic income system, assisting with food purchases for everyone. This could be expanded afterwards to be a straight cash transfer, but it is easier defended to have food benefit be universal since everyone needs food.",
">\n\nWhy do this instead of a cash UBI?",
">\n\nIt's an intermediary step that is both smaller than what it would take to deliver basic income. Assisting with food costs and allow tax payers to take advantage of lowering tax liability on purchases that are inevitable to be bought anyway.",
">\n\n\neliminate the stigma of using SNAP benefits\n\nHow much of a sigma is there? I used SNAP for a couple of years and never experienced any stigma. I often notice people using an EBT card at supermarkets, but can't remember it ever being an issue for anyone.\nIf there is a problem with sigma, wouldn't a better solution be to make the card look like an unrecognizable debit card?",
">\n\nYou’ve never experienced the stigma? Gawd, I’m jealous!\nI had gotten pretty good at hiding my card as I was swiping so people wouldn’t see it - but with the introduction of card chips, the fact that I’m using a SNAP card is once again obvious to the holier-than-thou pearl-clutchers around me. The ones who feel they absolutely must comment on the food I’m buying. If it’s healthy, they say “It must be nice buying all that with MY money. You eat better than I do.” If it’s all store brands and ramen noodles, they say “I can’t believe you’re buying junk food with MY tax dollars!” If they can’t find anything about my food to complain about, then it’s my clothes or my phone or my tattoo… never mind that I got my clothes at a thrift store, or my phone on a payment plan, or my tattoo when I was 18 and no responsibilities. \nThis is why I preferred grocery shopping at 2am, when the stores were practically empty. Covid ruined that.",
">\n\nFrom what you’re saying, I think the chip dip problem is that the card processor requires stores to invest in the tech. Small shops for example. The only benefit is to the processor, because chips have less fraud. Without any evidence I’d imagine small shop lobby groups (or grocers, etc.) don’t want every EBT user that buys cheap cheese to suddenly require upgraded equipment to remain EBT-compliant and thus have access to EBT money. The corner bodega and their lobbyists wouldn’t encourage a chip card because it’s not to their benefit. Then again, the stigma in a bodega or similar probably doesn’t exist because that’s where a lot of poorer customers shop, not a big supermarket with “regular” chip users and a big company behind it with negotiating power with credit processors.",
">\n\nAll this would do, is raise the prices of all the cheapest stuff, negatively impacting the people you want to help. It also taxes the business the poor person is working for more, reducing their pay.",
">\n\nWhat evidence do you have that it would raise prices?",
">\n\nEverything the government has ever subsidized?\nGovernment loans drove up the price of college. Mandates that employers provide health insurance has driven up the price of health care.\nAny time you give people money to spend on something without adding to the supply of that thing, more money chasing the same amount of goods necessarily means price increases.\nNow, since money is fungible, lots of people would take their universal SNAP benefits and replace part of their existing food budget with it, but that just means they're going to have more money to spend in other parts of the economy, so while I'd expect the price increases to be concentrated in food markets, it would probably cause inflation across the economy.",
">\n\nThe relationship between employer healthcare costs and healthcare costs is inverse. As healthcare costs increase fewer employers take on the burden, and shift to less risk, and less expensive coverage. Even as the economy improves, employers cannot keep up the burden of sponsoring employee plans, so they don’t. They don’t hire, or they use FSAs, or they work with unions, something else but not cause costs to rise merely by requiring coverage.",
">\n\nThat's definitely a better policy then what we have now, but if you were going to do that you should just go ahead and give people cash directly to spend however they want.\nFor poor people in actual need, food is important, but often some other emergency is more critical; a car repair that keeps you from losing your job, a doctor visit that treats a problem early before it develops into a life-long condition.\nAnd for everyone else, giving coupons that can only be spent on a few things distorts the market, in ways that just make it less efficient and less useful for everyone. For example, if you gave everyone $50/month that can only be spent on eggs, the price of eggs would go up a ton until supply and demand equalized again. \nEfficient markets are fueled by people freely spending how they want, so if you want to subsidize them just give them cash directly.\nThe restrictions on SNAP benefits are mostly there to reassure voters that poor people aren't being allowed to be happy, just being allowed to survive; they're a means to discipline the labor force by making poverty worse to endure. They don't serve any good, pro-social function, really.",
">\n\nI think your comment has shown the actual reason why SNAP is for specific things. The purpose of the program is to reduce hunger, but as you have said - if it wasn’t limited to food necessities then poor people would spend it on other things and go hungry.\nIt’s not about wanting them to not be happy - it’s about making sure they eat well.",
">\n\nFood is sort of an inflexible expense. A person expecting to enjoy other goods and services will need food to actually enjoy them at some point. Politically it’s easy to imagine someone will spend $99 on whiskey and go hungry. But that’s not really reality, right. They may have a different basket of goods at the end of the day, but there will be food in the basket. Like alcohol. For things we really worry about — like addictive drugs — that’s for social programs and enforcement paid by taxes to address most effectively, not restricting dollars to food. We wouldn’t say the war on drugs demands restricting food aid: the war on drugs demands attacking addiction and the substances and suppliers themselves.",
">\n\nThe comment I replied to said that poor people would spend money on vehicles or rent instead of food. While those are important things, they are not food and snap focuses on food insecurity not general poverty.\nEdit to add: my social worker husband disagrees with you on the drugs - unrestricted cash could cause a huge problem for his clients.",
">\n\nSo you're going to raise everyone's taxes by $100 to give them $100 in food stamps?\nIt's not hard to get healthy food: people who aren't eating healthy don't want to. People claim it's a price issue, but the fact is that fresh fruits and vegetables are cheaper than junk food. Bananas are like 25 cents each, but people would rather buy a bag of chips. Water is basically free, put people pay for soda.",
">\n\nProbably more like raising everyone's taxes by $110 to give them $100, once you account for the government waste and bureaucracy in the program.",
">\n\nIf everyone gets it automatically and there is no need to review any applications, wouldn't that cut down on the administrative costs?",
">\n\nQuestion, do you believe the underlying problem is related to income/wealth inequality? America is the richest nation per capita but struggle to live happy, healthy lives. \nIf you improved how the wealth of the nation is distributed, do you think it would fix the problem?",
">\n\nAmericans have the highest disposal income of any country in the world. Yes. More than Europeans. We just spend it like idiots.\nThe issue isn't wealth inequality, Its the lack of economic education in school. In US schools you dont ever take a single economics course. I was one of about twelve students in a school of 1200 that took an economics course. And even then, that was more just about how global economies function. There are absolutely 0 Classes that american students take on proper budgeting. This means that many americans, despite having more disposible income than their european counterparts still struggle since they blow their money pointlessly.",
">\n\nTo confirm, people starve despite having more then enough money to buy all the food they want? Doubt.",
">\n\n\\~100 people in the US die of starvation every year with the vast majority being people with mental illness who cannot support themselves or neglected children. People aren't starving. The problem is that we talk about poor food quality issues.\nThe issue here comes primarily from 2 places.\n1.) Time. Eating healthy, Or at a minimum, Not like complete shit. Is cheaper than trash eating. You can buy a pack of chicken breasts for the cost of a large Baconator Combo. The issue is the time it takes to cook. These people are either unable or unwilling for a variety of issues to take the 30m to cook a healthy meal.\n2.) Access. When you see places like New York where all they have is tiny little corner stores and you have to travel basically out of the city to find a proper grocery store. That is a problem. You can either eat the trash from the Bodega, or travel 30m to get to a proper Albertsons (or whatever they have in NY).\n\nThis is why Poverty in the US isn't represented by starved thin people, its Obesity. They are getting plenty of calories and are eating plenty of food. Its just the food quality isnt there.\n\nEDIT: Also something to remember. Many, If not the majority of low income earners smoke. And if they are a pack a day smoker, that is \\~$15USD per day for their habit. THAT IS A FULL MEAL! They are addicted to a substance that drains a full meal worth of income from them per day. Imagine what eating 4 meals a day would do you your budget. And that is per person. If your partner smokes as well that is 2 Meals per day of household income just thrown away. And many people are 2-3 pack a day smokes. Meaning they can be spending up to 3 meals a day worth of income on an addiction. Clearly, Money isnt the issue.",
">\n\nYou are talking about something different than OP. \n\ntrying to put food on the table\n\nI'm sure people would cook more healthy and varied meals if they had more income. You identify the issue yourself, insufficient time off to spend it finding healthy foods, living in places with basic kitchens and eating nutritional food. \nI have no idea why you were saying education is the actual problem. I also don't know why you are banging on about smoking. It's going not to do with the point. \nYou really got to identify the point your making and be concise. \nYour anecdotal opinions about what poor people aren't/are doing isn't convincing, it's just story telling.",
">\n\n\"To confirm, people starve despite having more then enough money to buy all the food they want? Doubt.\"\nNice redirection. I responded to your comment. Not OP. YOU said people were starving. That is why I refuted it.",
">\n\n\nI responded to your comment. Not OP.\n\nMaybe respond to OP and not to me, I dont have a view here.",
">\n\ni guess i'm struggling to see the benefit of it, i get that you get a tax break but you're also paying money off of your paycheck to pay for something that most people already get. so its kinda a wash \nthe problem with food stamps i think is that its for people who are on the fringes by definition, who are also shamed into being very quiet about their usage of it. so when people hear about people abusing them, they don't have a frame of reference for people actually using them like they're supposed to \nso i think either this just needs to be simpler and even more universal, or just tweak the current system a little more so people see more use out of it",
">\n\nIt's like a Health Savings Account, but for groceries. A household will spend x dollars on groceries every year, but under this plan the x dollars would be pre-tax dollars making whatever is spent on groceries a decrease in the household taxable income (both income tax and the payroll taxes like social security and Medicare). In another way, it is treating what a household needs to spend money on as a operating cost when a business is taxed. For businesses operating expenses are not counted as taxable income, for a typical household health care expenses can be uaed lower taxable income as a necessary expense, but not groceries - this would change that.",
">\n\nThis is too wonkish and misses the root of the problem. Why are there people who don't have enough to eat? Why is there so much poverty in the first place?",
">\n\nThe people that need this the most likely don't pay any income tax in the first place. Getting an extra tax deduction means nothing at that point. Where it will mean a possible deduction that is useful is the middle class and upper class. The middle class is forced to use it or end up paying more in tax for not playing the game. The upper class has an accountant who will figure the optimal amount for them right off the bat. \nIn order to find the extra benefits, we either need to raise taxes or just crank up the debt even more. I know a lot of people like to ignore the debt but it will come back to bite us at some point. As it is, something like $400 billion in interest is paid in a year. Over the next few years, that could reach into the trillions.",
">\n\nThe people who already qualify for SNAP would still get the level of benefits (which would be above $100/month), the wider and new benefit would be for the middle income who currently buy their groceries with post-tax dollars and would be able to buy groceries with pre-tax dollars lowering their tax liability without changing their behavior.",
">\n\nIf current recipients are going to get the same amount, and the middle and upper classes are going to be the ones getting the benefit under this proposal, you are increasing spending while powering tax revenue. I don't see that being a good idea given the current budget situation.",
">\n\nShow Me Your Budget, And I’ll Show You What You Value\nIf the federal budget needs to be brought in line to reflect the values of the American people that would value life sustaining resources over bombs, then so be it.",
">\n\nIt seems redundant to expect everyone in the country to pay additional taxes to cover their own SNAP benefits. I don’t know cost concerns you’re trying to alleviate. Assume every single person’s taxes increase $100/month so they can get a get a $100 SNAP card? And since it’s universal, the Kardashians, Elon Musk, CEOs, doctors, lawyers… would all get $100 every month? \nThe whole reason that SNAP works is because the population who is better off, helps cover the expenses for those lesser well off. \nThis is the prime example of why good intentions don’t necessarily mean it’s a good idea",
">\n\nThere is a form of food stamps everywhere minus 26 countries. Yes I do agree.",
">\n\nSo you want to take a relatively simple system (relatively speaking) and replace it with a more complicated, more costly, confusing system. All just to cover more people. \nThis is a shitty idea for so many reasons. The two biggest would be: 1) Cost: you are making a program much more expensive than it needs to be. The most significant costs will be in the IRS to enforce this program, since you have now effectively put it in their jurisdiction. You may not realize this, but that is the result. This will also disproportionately effect people on the margins, the working poor. These people may not qualify under your proposal, and they didn’t qualify for the old one. Now you’re making their financial lives more complex, and making their tax filings more complex. Again, you may not have thought of this….but is unavoidable. \n 2) You now made a relatively niche program that the majority of taxpayers never give a second thought to, and you’re making it a vital part of everyone’s lives. This would suddenly make it ‘everyone’s issue’. And it will get debated and potentially cut at rates much greater than the current program. \nTrying to cover more people is a cause I agree with. I would be absolutely disgusted if the government did something like what you’re suggesting. It is so economically inefficient, it will end up increasing the projects cost many times. It takes a program that only benefits a minority of people, and makes it everyone’s issue. And all for literally no reason. The amount of bureaucracy required in your plan is just absurd. \nThere are many other reasons that your idea sucks, these are just the two most glaringly troublesome in my eyes.",
">\n\nWhy not simply provide everyone with a universal basic income? There's much less of a likelihood of creating inflation on everyday goods with that approach, and it'd allow each family to be flexible about where they lived and how they spent their money, which would help alleviate the densification of the working population that drives costs up for things like housing.",
">\n\nGreat take an extra 500 dollars from those who do not need assistance and give us back 100 dollars. There is no limit on how much of another persons money the government (and those who support them) is willing to spend.",
">\n\nAlmost all food is already not taxed in most states. SNAP for everyone would discourage people from working as much. People can already live on Ramen noodles for $150 per year and I once bought sixty eggs and a gallon of milk for $60, plus a bag of shredded cheese for a few more dollars. Costco, whose membership is refundable after purchases, sells a 25-lb bag of rice for $18 and a 50-lb bag of rice for $19. Black beans are also very cheap, and people can live on their only nutrients as being from potatoes and butter.",
">\n\nThis would go the extra step of giving tax advantages for every dollar spent on groceries, like HSAs the money being elected by each person would be pre-tax thereby lowering the taxable income. Why should there be tax advantages for investing but not for everyone who eats food that they prepare themselves? Food doesn't have a sales tax, but the money used to buy that food is taxed when it's earned in a paycheck, whether it is payroll tax (social security and Medicare) or for those earning more income tax, this proposal would give the working American hundreds of dollars back in their pockets and it wouldn't be means tested (just like social security and Medicare) meaning everyone benefits.\nThe argument that \"if people have any of their basic needs meet, they become lazy\" just isn't born out in reality. Prison delivers basic needs and most prisoners don't become ostensibly comatose out of sheer slovenly nature of having basic needs met. If you had security that you would not be homeless, starving and left destitute would you tien into a lethargic rhetorical slug? I don't know you but I suspect that the answer is \"no\". Alleviating the possibility of destitution hasn't turned the rest of the wealthy nations of the world into a nation of lazy bums, their people are less likely to die deaths of despair, seek out academic achievement at higher levels, have more free time with friends and family, and all that across 30+ countries that have robust welfare states. Maybe reality is not that there needs to be economic retribution to every individual who is maximally providing their labor to their employers (more often than not, multiple jobs need to be worked for the bottom of the labor market). There's burger flippers in all those other wealthy countries and they don't need to work 2-3 of those low wage jobs, but somehow only the American worker needs to karmically punished and economically tortured because if they didn't the American would somehow be sinfully free to lead his/her life to as they want?\nEveryone eats food, this proposal just makes it easier for everyone by providing relief for the thing everyone will paying for anyway. Why shouldn't it be made easier for everyone's wallet to eat? What moral danger is there to take some of that household expenses off everyone's family budget? If it works out and the public likes joining the rest of the developed nations having a government that provides services and benefits to them and not just the wealthy and well connected, isn't that what a government of the people, by the people, and for the people should be doing anyway?",
">\n\nAre you going to fund this, or are you going to demand others have their money stolen to fund it?",
">\n\nIf you don't consent to taxes feel free to renounce your citizenship and leave",
">\n\nWe shouldn't have to NEED SNAP that's the problem",
">\n\nWe don't need snap.",
">\n\nWho's we you got a turd in your pocket?",
">\n\nThe United States doesn’t need it.",
">\n\nThat's very general. And I disagree",
">\n\nAny adult worthwhile to society can feed themselves.",
">\n\nThere are a lot of people that don't just feed themselves... And could before",
">\n\n\nIn the US those who qualify for Supplemental Nutritional Assistance Program (SNAP, initially named food stamps but renamed SNAP in the 1960s) is a means to provide food for those in need, I propose to expand it to everyone where every individual gets a minimum of $100/month. For those who qualify they would get additional funds transferred into their account and those who don't qualify could elect to contribute more from their pre-tax wages into their account to avoid tax liability on what they spend on their groceries. \n\nGovernment money could be better spent. What is the point of giving people government funding if they don’t need it. \nAccording to the census there are about 80 million families within the United States. If I’m not mistaken, 15 to 20% of American households constitute upper middle class.\nSo, roughly, that’s 20 million families that probably would not need a measly $100 from the government. Of which, can be better spent on something else.\nYou also propose tax liability. Correct me if I’m wrong, does this not mean that your universal snap benefit would make people susceptible to tax penalties depending on how much they make and how much they choose to spend. If your goal is to help people, then I don’t see how this does that.\n\nIt is my view that this would be an efficient means to alleviate cost concerns for Americans trying to put food on the table \n\nSure, but you don’t really explain why this method is better than the current one. Either way you’re going to have lower income individuals who receive government funding.\n\nand that it being universal would also eliminate the stigma of using SNAP benefits because no one would know whether you qualify for additional SNAP benefits or you are just using it as a Health Savings Account (HSA)but for your groceries and decreasing your tax liabilities. \n\nThis seems like a really shaky argument. If you believe that universal things should exist to reduce stigma. You can make this argument for pretty much any level of government assistance. Furthermore, how are you going to ensure that others don’t know whether you qualify for additional SNAP?\nPeople are going to talk about how they qualify for more stuff. People are going to talk about how it’s unfair how certain people qualify for more stuff. There are going to be government websites most likely outlining the requirements necessary to receive more government funding. Is there going to still be something like the EBT card? Because if you walk around with an EBT card people know that you’re on government assistance. At most large big box stores the computer automatically filters what EBT can and cannot apply to. So this stuff is going to be on your receipt. \nWhat actual methods do you propose to prevent people from knowing if someone is on government assistance?\n\nContributions to this new universal SNAP benefits would come from the Federal government and payroll withholdings from wages only, unlike other vehicles that could be abused by wealthy individuals to grow nest egg of untaxed wealth and like HSAs SNAP funds could only used for groceries. \n\nI don’t really know a lot about how taxes work in the United States so I really could be wrong here. But don’t Americans complain about all of the money that’s taken out of their wages and taxes anyhow, doesn’t this just increase the amount of money people lose their paycheck?\n\nThe goal of the proposal is to assure Americans getting fed healthy food is easier for all Americans, the goal is not what I'm open to changing but that this proposal is the best means to achieve said goal.\n\nAgain, I don’t really understand how your proposal is any better than what is currently happening. In fact, it seems like a waste considering there are tax brackets of people who absolutely do not need the money from the government."
] |
Uh I think he has every anti-vaxer vote on lock. FL loves the guy. But nationally he can't court the independent voters and that's where the election is.
|
[] |
>
I just don't see any excuse to why though, were they just content with DeSantis and Rubio? What was the point of not voting? - this is a hypothetical question
|
[
"Uh I think he has every anti-vaxer vote on lock. FL loves the guy. But nationally he can't court the independent voters and that's where the election is."
] |
>
The common problems I see quoted for the bad turnout are:
FL Dems have no system for nurturing talent so we ended up with an uninspiring candidate.
FL Dems ground game was weak and only available during election season. Some teams couldnt even get door hangers or fliers to hand out.
Dem turnout may have been suppressed by DeSantis election police force publicly arresting voters a few weeks before the election.
Gov DeSantis used the state government to implement popular policies just before the election (eg gas holiday) or delay unpopular policies till after the election (eg electricity price hikes)
Gov DeSantis's probably illegal Congressional map likely depressed some Dem turnout as Dem districts were wiped out - so why bother voting?
National Dem groups abandoned Florida. In 2028, they spent $38m here. In 2022, its was less than $2m.
Gov DeSantis - thanks to huge donations, especially from outside groups - was able to spend $250m in his campaign. Crist could only spend $40m.
Florida went for Obama twice which scared the Republicans shitless. So they spent the last 14 years constantly registering new voters. FL Dems didnt seem to respond at a state level.
Florida seems to be the "leave me alone" state (while getting 1/3 of its budget from the Federal government) and DeSantis tapped into that with his mask bans etc.
I also see rumors about FL Dems relying too much on external vendors who consistently fail (whereas FL Republicans do not outsource as much). And various fights within FL Dems stops them from breaking away from failing vendors.
|
[
"Uh I think he has every anti-vaxer vote on lock. FL loves the guy. But nationally he can't court the independent voters and that's where the election is.",
">\n\nI just don't see any excuse to why though, were they just content with DeSantis and Rubio? What was the point of not voting? - this is a hypothetical question"
] |
>
Wow I didn't actually expect a response. Thanks for the good response, wish there was something we could do though
|
[
"Uh I think he has every anti-vaxer vote on lock. FL loves the guy. But nationally he can't court the independent voters and that's where the election is.",
">\n\nI just don't see any excuse to why though, were they just content with DeSantis and Rubio? What was the point of not voting? - this is a hypothetical question",
">\n\nThe common problems I see quoted for the bad turnout are:\n\nFL Dems have no system for nurturing talent so we ended up with an uninspiring candidate.\nFL Dems ground game was weak and only available during election season. Some teams couldnt even get door hangers or fliers to hand out.\nDem turnout may have been suppressed by DeSantis election police force publicly arresting voters a few weeks before the election.\nGov DeSantis used the state government to implement popular policies just before the election (eg gas holiday) or delay unpopular policies till after the election (eg electricity price hikes)\nGov DeSantis's probably illegal Congressional map likely depressed some Dem turnout as Dem districts were wiped out - so why bother voting?\nNational Dem groups abandoned Florida. In 2028, they spent $38m here. In 2022, its was less than $2m.\nGov DeSantis - thanks to huge donations, especially from outside groups - was able to spend $250m in his campaign. Crist could only spend $40m.\nFlorida went for Obama twice which scared the Republicans shitless. So they spent the last 14 years constantly registering new voters. FL Dems didnt seem to respond at a state level.\nFlorida seems to be the \"leave me alone\" state (while getting 1/3 of its budget from the Federal government) and DeSantis tapped into that with his mask bans etc.\nI also see rumors about FL Dems relying too much on external vendors who consistently fail (whereas FL Republicans do not outsource as much). And various fights within FL Dems stops them from breaking away from failing vendors."
] |
>
When a person selected to be surgeon general goes out of his way to misinform and put citizens in danger, what is the point anymore?
|
[
"Uh I think he has every anti-vaxer vote on lock. FL loves the guy. But nationally he can't court the independent voters and that's where the election is.",
">\n\nI just don't see any excuse to why though, were they just content with DeSantis and Rubio? What was the point of not voting? - this is a hypothetical question",
">\n\nThe common problems I see quoted for the bad turnout are:\n\nFL Dems have no system for nurturing talent so we ended up with an uninspiring candidate.\nFL Dems ground game was weak and only available during election season. Some teams couldnt even get door hangers or fliers to hand out.\nDem turnout may have been suppressed by DeSantis election police force publicly arresting voters a few weeks before the election.\nGov DeSantis used the state government to implement popular policies just before the election (eg gas holiday) or delay unpopular policies till after the election (eg electricity price hikes)\nGov DeSantis's probably illegal Congressional map likely depressed some Dem turnout as Dem districts were wiped out - so why bother voting?\nNational Dem groups abandoned Florida. In 2028, they spent $38m here. In 2022, its was less than $2m.\nGov DeSantis - thanks to huge donations, especially from outside groups - was able to spend $250m in his campaign. Crist could only spend $40m.\nFlorida went for Obama twice which scared the Republicans shitless. So they spent the last 14 years constantly registering new voters. FL Dems didnt seem to respond at a state level.\nFlorida seems to be the \"leave me alone\" state (while getting 1/3 of its budget from the Federal government) and DeSantis tapped into that with his mask bans etc.\nI also see rumors about FL Dems relying too much on external vendors who consistently fail (whereas FL Republicans do not outsource as much). And various fights within FL Dems stops them from breaking away from failing vendors.",
">\n\nWow I didn't actually expect a response. Thanks for the good response, wish there was something we could do though"
] |
>
I think I can answer that. The point is Florida.
|
[
"Uh I think he has every anti-vaxer vote on lock. FL loves the guy. But nationally he can't court the independent voters and that's where the election is.",
">\n\nI just don't see any excuse to why though, were they just content with DeSantis and Rubio? What was the point of not voting? - this is a hypothetical question",
">\n\nThe common problems I see quoted for the bad turnout are:\n\nFL Dems have no system for nurturing talent so we ended up with an uninspiring candidate.\nFL Dems ground game was weak and only available during election season. Some teams couldnt even get door hangers or fliers to hand out.\nDem turnout may have been suppressed by DeSantis election police force publicly arresting voters a few weeks before the election.\nGov DeSantis used the state government to implement popular policies just before the election (eg gas holiday) or delay unpopular policies till after the election (eg electricity price hikes)\nGov DeSantis's probably illegal Congressional map likely depressed some Dem turnout as Dem districts were wiped out - so why bother voting?\nNational Dem groups abandoned Florida. In 2028, they spent $38m here. In 2022, its was less than $2m.\nGov DeSantis - thanks to huge donations, especially from outside groups - was able to spend $250m in his campaign. Crist could only spend $40m.\nFlorida went for Obama twice which scared the Republicans shitless. So they spent the last 14 years constantly registering new voters. FL Dems didnt seem to respond at a state level.\nFlorida seems to be the \"leave me alone\" state (while getting 1/3 of its budget from the Federal government) and DeSantis tapped into that with his mask bans etc.\nI also see rumors about FL Dems relying too much on external vendors who consistently fail (whereas FL Republicans do not outsource as much). And various fights within FL Dems stops them from breaking away from failing vendors.",
">\n\nWow I didn't actually expect a response. Thanks for the good response, wish there was something we could do though",
">\n\nWhen a person selected to be surgeon general goes out of his way to misinform and put citizens in danger, what is the point anymore?"
] |
>
Just the tip 🍆
|
[
"Uh I think he has every anti-vaxer vote on lock. FL loves the guy. But nationally he can't court the independent voters and that's where the election is.",
">\n\nI just don't see any excuse to why though, were they just content with DeSantis and Rubio? What was the point of not voting? - this is a hypothetical question",
">\n\nThe common problems I see quoted for the bad turnout are:\n\nFL Dems have no system for nurturing talent so we ended up with an uninspiring candidate.\nFL Dems ground game was weak and only available during election season. Some teams couldnt even get door hangers or fliers to hand out.\nDem turnout may have been suppressed by DeSantis election police force publicly arresting voters a few weeks before the election.\nGov DeSantis used the state government to implement popular policies just before the election (eg gas holiday) or delay unpopular policies till after the election (eg electricity price hikes)\nGov DeSantis's probably illegal Congressional map likely depressed some Dem turnout as Dem districts were wiped out - so why bother voting?\nNational Dem groups abandoned Florida. In 2028, they spent $38m here. In 2022, its was less than $2m.\nGov DeSantis - thanks to huge donations, especially from outside groups - was able to spend $250m in his campaign. Crist could only spend $40m.\nFlorida went for Obama twice which scared the Republicans shitless. So they spent the last 14 years constantly registering new voters. FL Dems didnt seem to respond at a state level.\nFlorida seems to be the \"leave me alone\" state (while getting 1/3 of its budget from the Federal government) and DeSantis tapped into that with his mask bans etc.\nI also see rumors about FL Dems relying too much on external vendors who consistently fail (whereas FL Republicans do not outsource as much). And various fights within FL Dems stops them from breaking away from failing vendors.",
">\n\nWow I didn't actually expect a response. Thanks for the good response, wish there was something we could do though",
">\n\nWhen a person selected to be surgeon general goes out of his way to misinform and put citizens in danger, what is the point anymore?",
">\n\nI think I can answer that. The point is Florida."
] |
>
I don’t understand the pride in ignorance.
|
[
"Uh I think he has every anti-vaxer vote on lock. FL loves the guy. But nationally he can't court the independent voters and that's where the election is.",
">\n\nI just don't see any excuse to why though, were they just content with DeSantis and Rubio? What was the point of not voting? - this is a hypothetical question",
">\n\nThe common problems I see quoted for the bad turnout are:\n\nFL Dems have no system for nurturing talent so we ended up with an uninspiring candidate.\nFL Dems ground game was weak and only available during election season. Some teams couldnt even get door hangers or fliers to hand out.\nDem turnout may have been suppressed by DeSantis election police force publicly arresting voters a few weeks before the election.\nGov DeSantis used the state government to implement popular policies just before the election (eg gas holiday) or delay unpopular policies till after the election (eg electricity price hikes)\nGov DeSantis's probably illegal Congressional map likely depressed some Dem turnout as Dem districts were wiped out - so why bother voting?\nNational Dem groups abandoned Florida. In 2028, they spent $38m here. In 2022, its was less than $2m.\nGov DeSantis - thanks to huge donations, especially from outside groups - was able to spend $250m in his campaign. Crist could only spend $40m.\nFlorida went for Obama twice which scared the Republicans shitless. So they spent the last 14 years constantly registering new voters. FL Dems didnt seem to respond at a state level.\nFlorida seems to be the \"leave me alone\" state (while getting 1/3 of its budget from the Federal government) and DeSantis tapped into that with his mask bans etc.\nI also see rumors about FL Dems relying too much on external vendors who consistently fail (whereas FL Republicans do not outsource as much). And various fights within FL Dems stops them from breaking away from failing vendors.",
">\n\nWow I didn't actually expect a response. Thanks for the good response, wish there was something we could do though",
">\n\nWhen a person selected to be surgeon general goes out of his way to misinform and put citizens in danger, what is the point anymore?",
">\n\nI think I can answer that. The point is Florida.",
">\n\nJust the tip 🍆"
] |
>
I wonder if the plan is just to build a dumbass army of bedridden down there.
|
[
"Uh I think he has every anti-vaxer vote on lock. FL loves the guy. But nationally he can't court the independent voters and that's where the election is.",
">\n\nI just don't see any excuse to why though, were they just content with DeSantis and Rubio? What was the point of not voting? - this is a hypothetical question",
">\n\nThe common problems I see quoted for the bad turnout are:\n\nFL Dems have no system for nurturing talent so we ended up with an uninspiring candidate.\nFL Dems ground game was weak and only available during election season. Some teams couldnt even get door hangers or fliers to hand out.\nDem turnout may have been suppressed by DeSantis election police force publicly arresting voters a few weeks before the election.\nGov DeSantis used the state government to implement popular policies just before the election (eg gas holiday) or delay unpopular policies till after the election (eg electricity price hikes)\nGov DeSantis's probably illegal Congressional map likely depressed some Dem turnout as Dem districts were wiped out - so why bother voting?\nNational Dem groups abandoned Florida. In 2028, they spent $38m here. In 2022, its was less than $2m.\nGov DeSantis - thanks to huge donations, especially from outside groups - was able to spend $250m in his campaign. Crist could only spend $40m.\nFlorida went for Obama twice which scared the Republicans shitless. So they spent the last 14 years constantly registering new voters. FL Dems didnt seem to respond at a state level.\nFlorida seems to be the \"leave me alone\" state (while getting 1/3 of its budget from the Federal government) and DeSantis tapped into that with his mask bans etc.\nI also see rumors about FL Dems relying too much on external vendors who consistently fail (whereas FL Republicans do not outsource as much). And various fights within FL Dems stops them from breaking away from failing vendors.",
">\n\nWow I didn't actually expect a response. Thanks for the good response, wish there was something we could do though",
">\n\nWhen a person selected to be surgeon general goes out of his way to misinform and put citizens in danger, what is the point anymore?",
">\n\nI think I can answer that. The point is Florida.",
">\n\nJust the tip 🍆",
">\n\nI don’t understand the pride in ignorance."
] |
>
He's already done that, the retirement homes are full of them ready to die for him
|
[
"Uh I think he has every anti-vaxer vote on lock. FL loves the guy. But nationally he can't court the independent voters and that's where the election is.",
">\n\nI just don't see any excuse to why though, were they just content with DeSantis and Rubio? What was the point of not voting? - this is a hypothetical question",
">\n\nThe common problems I see quoted for the bad turnout are:\n\nFL Dems have no system for nurturing talent so we ended up with an uninspiring candidate.\nFL Dems ground game was weak and only available during election season. Some teams couldnt even get door hangers or fliers to hand out.\nDem turnout may have been suppressed by DeSantis election police force publicly arresting voters a few weeks before the election.\nGov DeSantis used the state government to implement popular policies just before the election (eg gas holiday) or delay unpopular policies till after the election (eg electricity price hikes)\nGov DeSantis's probably illegal Congressional map likely depressed some Dem turnout as Dem districts were wiped out - so why bother voting?\nNational Dem groups abandoned Florida. In 2028, they spent $38m here. In 2022, its was less than $2m.\nGov DeSantis - thanks to huge donations, especially from outside groups - was able to spend $250m in his campaign. Crist could only spend $40m.\nFlorida went for Obama twice which scared the Republicans shitless. So they spent the last 14 years constantly registering new voters. FL Dems didnt seem to respond at a state level.\nFlorida seems to be the \"leave me alone\" state (while getting 1/3 of its budget from the Federal government) and DeSantis tapped into that with his mask bans etc.\nI also see rumors about FL Dems relying too much on external vendors who consistently fail (whereas FL Republicans do not outsource as much). And various fights within FL Dems stops them from breaking away from failing vendors.",
">\n\nWow I didn't actually expect a response. Thanks for the good response, wish there was something we could do though",
">\n\nWhen a person selected to be surgeon general goes out of his way to misinform and put citizens in danger, what is the point anymore?",
">\n\nI think I can answer that. The point is Florida.",
">\n\nJust the tip 🍆",
">\n\nI don’t understand the pride in ignorance.",
">\n\nI wonder if the plan is just to build a dumbass army of bedridden down there."
] |
>
Wow, Florida...DeSantis turning your whole state into the village idiot.
|
[
"Uh I think he has every anti-vaxer vote on lock. FL loves the guy. But nationally he can't court the independent voters and that's where the election is.",
">\n\nI just don't see any excuse to why though, were they just content with DeSantis and Rubio? What was the point of not voting? - this is a hypothetical question",
">\n\nThe common problems I see quoted for the bad turnout are:\n\nFL Dems have no system for nurturing talent so we ended up with an uninspiring candidate.\nFL Dems ground game was weak and only available during election season. Some teams couldnt even get door hangers or fliers to hand out.\nDem turnout may have been suppressed by DeSantis election police force publicly arresting voters a few weeks before the election.\nGov DeSantis used the state government to implement popular policies just before the election (eg gas holiday) or delay unpopular policies till after the election (eg electricity price hikes)\nGov DeSantis's probably illegal Congressional map likely depressed some Dem turnout as Dem districts were wiped out - so why bother voting?\nNational Dem groups abandoned Florida. In 2028, they spent $38m here. In 2022, its was less than $2m.\nGov DeSantis - thanks to huge donations, especially from outside groups - was able to spend $250m in his campaign. Crist could only spend $40m.\nFlorida went for Obama twice which scared the Republicans shitless. So they spent the last 14 years constantly registering new voters. FL Dems didnt seem to respond at a state level.\nFlorida seems to be the \"leave me alone\" state (while getting 1/3 of its budget from the Federal government) and DeSantis tapped into that with his mask bans etc.\nI also see rumors about FL Dems relying too much on external vendors who consistently fail (whereas FL Republicans do not outsource as much). And various fights within FL Dems stops them from breaking away from failing vendors.",
">\n\nWow I didn't actually expect a response. Thanks for the good response, wish there was something we could do though",
">\n\nWhen a person selected to be surgeon general goes out of his way to misinform and put citizens in danger, what is the point anymore?",
">\n\nI think I can answer that. The point is Florida.",
">\n\nJust the tip 🍆",
">\n\nI don’t understand the pride in ignorance.",
">\n\nI wonder if the plan is just to build a dumbass army of bedridden down there.",
">\n\nHe's already done that, the retirement homes are full of them ready to die for him"
] |
>
Not a very sharp turn
|
[
"Uh I think he has every anti-vaxer vote on lock. FL loves the guy. But nationally he can't court the independent voters and that's where the election is.",
">\n\nI just don't see any excuse to why though, were they just content with DeSantis and Rubio? What was the point of not voting? - this is a hypothetical question",
">\n\nThe common problems I see quoted for the bad turnout are:\n\nFL Dems have no system for nurturing talent so we ended up with an uninspiring candidate.\nFL Dems ground game was weak and only available during election season. Some teams couldnt even get door hangers or fliers to hand out.\nDem turnout may have been suppressed by DeSantis election police force publicly arresting voters a few weeks before the election.\nGov DeSantis used the state government to implement popular policies just before the election (eg gas holiday) or delay unpopular policies till after the election (eg electricity price hikes)\nGov DeSantis's probably illegal Congressional map likely depressed some Dem turnout as Dem districts were wiped out - so why bother voting?\nNational Dem groups abandoned Florida. In 2028, they spent $38m here. In 2022, its was less than $2m.\nGov DeSantis - thanks to huge donations, especially from outside groups - was able to spend $250m in his campaign. Crist could only spend $40m.\nFlorida went for Obama twice which scared the Republicans shitless. So they spent the last 14 years constantly registering new voters. FL Dems didnt seem to respond at a state level.\nFlorida seems to be the \"leave me alone\" state (while getting 1/3 of its budget from the Federal government) and DeSantis tapped into that with his mask bans etc.\nI also see rumors about FL Dems relying too much on external vendors who consistently fail (whereas FL Republicans do not outsource as much). And various fights within FL Dems stops them from breaking away from failing vendors.",
">\n\nWow I didn't actually expect a response. Thanks for the good response, wish there was something we could do though",
">\n\nWhen a person selected to be surgeon general goes out of his way to misinform and put citizens in danger, what is the point anymore?",
">\n\nI think I can answer that. The point is Florida.",
">\n\nJust the tip 🍆",
">\n\nI don’t understand the pride in ignorance.",
">\n\nI wonder if the plan is just to build a dumbass army of bedridden down there.",
">\n\nHe's already done that, the retirement homes are full of them ready to die for him",
">\n\nWow, Florida...DeSantis turning your whole state into the village idiot."
] |
>
Honestly, any licensed doctor who is actively antivax should have their medical license revoked.
|
[
"Uh I think he has every anti-vaxer vote on lock. FL loves the guy. But nationally he can't court the independent voters and that's where the election is.",
">\n\nI just don't see any excuse to why though, were they just content with DeSantis and Rubio? What was the point of not voting? - this is a hypothetical question",
">\n\nThe common problems I see quoted for the bad turnout are:\n\nFL Dems have no system for nurturing talent so we ended up with an uninspiring candidate.\nFL Dems ground game was weak and only available during election season. Some teams couldnt even get door hangers or fliers to hand out.\nDem turnout may have been suppressed by DeSantis election police force publicly arresting voters a few weeks before the election.\nGov DeSantis used the state government to implement popular policies just before the election (eg gas holiday) or delay unpopular policies till after the election (eg electricity price hikes)\nGov DeSantis's probably illegal Congressional map likely depressed some Dem turnout as Dem districts were wiped out - so why bother voting?\nNational Dem groups abandoned Florida. In 2028, they spent $38m here. In 2022, its was less than $2m.\nGov DeSantis - thanks to huge donations, especially from outside groups - was able to spend $250m in his campaign. Crist could only spend $40m.\nFlorida went for Obama twice which scared the Republicans shitless. So they spent the last 14 years constantly registering new voters. FL Dems didnt seem to respond at a state level.\nFlorida seems to be the \"leave me alone\" state (while getting 1/3 of its budget from the Federal government) and DeSantis tapped into that with his mask bans etc.\nI also see rumors about FL Dems relying too much on external vendors who consistently fail (whereas FL Republicans do not outsource as much). And various fights within FL Dems stops them from breaking away from failing vendors.",
">\n\nWow I didn't actually expect a response. Thanks for the good response, wish there was something we could do though",
">\n\nWhen a person selected to be surgeon general goes out of his way to misinform and put citizens in danger, what is the point anymore?",
">\n\nI think I can answer that. The point is Florida.",
">\n\nJust the tip 🍆",
">\n\nI don’t understand the pride in ignorance.",
">\n\nI wonder if the plan is just to build a dumbass army of bedridden down there.",
">\n\nHe's already done that, the retirement homes are full of them ready to die for him",
">\n\nWow, Florida...DeSantis turning your whole state into the village idiot.",
">\n\nNot a very sharp turn"
] |
>
Remember the crazy "demon sperm causes disease" woman? She got a medical degree in Nigeria and Texas accepts it as a real medical degree with no further questions.
The Surgeon General of Florida was standing next to her when she was making all these insane statements.
|
[
"Uh I think he has every anti-vaxer vote on lock. FL loves the guy. But nationally he can't court the independent voters and that's where the election is.",
">\n\nI just don't see any excuse to why though, were they just content with DeSantis and Rubio? What was the point of not voting? - this is a hypothetical question",
">\n\nThe common problems I see quoted for the bad turnout are:\n\nFL Dems have no system for nurturing talent so we ended up with an uninspiring candidate.\nFL Dems ground game was weak and only available during election season. Some teams couldnt even get door hangers or fliers to hand out.\nDem turnout may have been suppressed by DeSantis election police force publicly arresting voters a few weeks before the election.\nGov DeSantis used the state government to implement popular policies just before the election (eg gas holiday) or delay unpopular policies till after the election (eg electricity price hikes)\nGov DeSantis's probably illegal Congressional map likely depressed some Dem turnout as Dem districts were wiped out - so why bother voting?\nNational Dem groups abandoned Florida. In 2028, they spent $38m here. In 2022, its was less than $2m.\nGov DeSantis - thanks to huge donations, especially from outside groups - was able to spend $250m in his campaign. Crist could only spend $40m.\nFlorida went for Obama twice which scared the Republicans shitless. So they spent the last 14 years constantly registering new voters. FL Dems didnt seem to respond at a state level.\nFlorida seems to be the \"leave me alone\" state (while getting 1/3 of its budget from the Federal government) and DeSantis tapped into that with his mask bans etc.\nI also see rumors about FL Dems relying too much on external vendors who consistently fail (whereas FL Republicans do not outsource as much). And various fights within FL Dems stops them from breaking away from failing vendors.",
">\n\nWow I didn't actually expect a response. Thanks for the good response, wish there was something we could do though",
">\n\nWhen a person selected to be surgeon general goes out of his way to misinform and put citizens in danger, what is the point anymore?",
">\n\nI think I can answer that. The point is Florida.",
">\n\nJust the tip 🍆",
">\n\nI don’t understand the pride in ignorance.",
">\n\nI wonder if the plan is just to build a dumbass army of bedridden down there.",
">\n\nHe's already done that, the retirement homes are full of them ready to die for him",
">\n\nWow, Florida...DeSantis turning your whole state into the village idiot.",
">\n\nNot a very sharp turn",
">\n\nHonestly, any licensed doctor who is actively antivax should have their medical license revoked."
] |
>
True, but the Surgeon General doesn't decide that. It goes up to a medical licensing board in Florida that is part of a national collective called the Federation of State Medical Boards. It's hard to get your license revoked for sure, but the main factor of medical malpractice is failing to meet the accepted standard of care. That is to say, they can be found in violation of this if their level of care deviates from the level of care any other reasonable doctor would provide in the same field and with the same qualifications.
Vaccinations are a standard of care in medical care, and only a select few doctors deviate from that. We're at the point where action needs to be taken against them.
|
[
"Uh I think he has every anti-vaxer vote on lock. FL loves the guy. But nationally he can't court the independent voters and that's where the election is.",
">\n\nI just don't see any excuse to why though, were they just content with DeSantis and Rubio? What was the point of not voting? - this is a hypothetical question",
">\n\nThe common problems I see quoted for the bad turnout are:\n\nFL Dems have no system for nurturing talent so we ended up with an uninspiring candidate.\nFL Dems ground game was weak and only available during election season. Some teams couldnt even get door hangers or fliers to hand out.\nDem turnout may have been suppressed by DeSantis election police force publicly arresting voters a few weeks before the election.\nGov DeSantis used the state government to implement popular policies just before the election (eg gas holiday) or delay unpopular policies till after the election (eg electricity price hikes)\nGov DeSantis's probably illegal Congressional map likely depressed some Dem turnout as Dem districts were wiped out - so why bother voting?\nNational Dem groups abandoned Florida. In 2028, they spent $38m here. In 2022, its was less than $2m.\nGov DeSantis - thanks to huge donations, especially from outside groups - was able to spend $250m in his campaign. Crist could only spend $40m.\nFlorida went for Obama twice which scared the Republicans shitless. So they spent the last 14 years constantly registering new voters. FL Dems didnt seem to respond at a state level.\nFlorida seems to be the \"leave me alone\" state (while getting 1/3 of its budget from the Federal government) and DeSantis tapped into that with his mask bans etc.\nI also see rumors about FL Dems relying too much on external vendors who consistently fail (whereas FL Republicans do not outsource as much). And various fights within FL Dems stops them from breaking away from failing vendors.",
">\n\nWow I didn't actually expect a response. Thanks for the good response, wish there was something we could do though",
">\n\nWhen a person selected to be surgeon general goes out of his way to misinform and put citizens in danger, what is the point anymore?",
">\n\nI think I can answer that. The point is Florida.",
">\n\nJust the tip 🍆",
">\n\nI don’t understand the pride in ignorance.",
">\n\nI wonder if the plan is just to build a dumbass army of bedridden down there.",
">\n\nHe's already done that, the retirement homes are full of them ready to die for him",
">\n\nWow, Florida...DeSantis turning your whole state into the village idiot.",
">\n\nNot a very sharp turn",
">\n\nHonestly, any licensed doctor who is actively antivax should have their medical license revoked.",
">\n\nRemember the crazy \"demon sperm causes disease\" woman? She got a medical degree in Nigeria and Texas accepts it as a real medical degree with no further questions.\nThe Surgeon General of Florida was standing next to her when she was making all these insane statements."
] |
>
Nice, court the quickly dwindling demographic of voters!
That’s the problem with death cults, they tend to go extinct.
|
[
"Uh I think he has every anti-vaxer vote on lock. FL loves the guy. But nationally he can't court the independent voters and that's where the election is.",
">\n\nI just don't see any excuse to why though, were they just content with DeSantis and Rubio? What was the point of not voting? - this is a hypothetical question",
">\n\nThe common problems I see quoted for the bad turnout are:\n\nFL Dems have no system for nurturing talent so we ended up with an uninspiring candidate.\nFL Dems ground game was weak and only available during election season. Some teams couldnt even get door hangers or fliers to hand out.\nDem turnout may have been suppressed by DeSantis election police force publicly arresting voters a few weeks before the election.\nGov DeSantis used the state government to implement popular policies just before the election (eg gas holiday) or delay unpopular policies till after the election (eg electricity price hikes)\nGov DeSantis's probably illegal Congressional map likely depressed some Dem turnout as Dem districts were wiped out - so why bother voting?\nNational Dem groups abandoned Florida. In 2028, they spent $38m here. In 2022, its was less than $2m.\nGov DeSantis - thanks to huge donations, especially from outside groups - was able to spend $250m in his campaign. Crist could only spend $40m.\nFlorida went for Obama twice which scared the Republicans shitless. So they spent the last 14 years constantly registering new voters. FL Dems didnt seem to respond at a state level.\nFlorida seems to be the \"leave me alone\" state (while getting 1/3 of its budget from the Federal government) and DeSantis tapped into that with his mask bans etc.\nI also see rumors about FL Dems relying too much on external vendors who consistently fail (whereas FL Republicans do not outsource as much). And various fights within FL Dems stops them from breaking away from failing vendors.",
">\n\nWow I didn't actually expect a response. Thanks for the good response, wish there was something we could do though",
">\n\nWhen a person selected to be surgeon general goes out of his way to misinform and put citizens in danger, what is the point anymore?",
">\n\nI think I can answer that. The point is Florida.",
">\n\nJust the tip 🍆",
">\n\nI don’t understand the pride in ignorance.",
">\n\nI wonder if the plan is just to build a dumbass army of bedridden down there.",
">\n\nHe's already done that, the retirement homes are full of them ready to die for him",
">\n\nWow, Florida...DeSantis turning your whole state into the village idiot.",
">\n\nNot a very sharp turn",
">\n\nHonestly, any licensed doctor who is actively antivax should have their medical license revoked.",
">\n\nRemember the crazy \"demon sperm causes disease\" woman? She got a medical degree in Nigeria and Texas accepts it as a real medical degree with no further questions.\nThe Surgeon General of Florida was standing next to her when she was making all these insane statements.",
">\n\nTrue, but the Surgeon General doesn't decide that. It goes up to a medical licensing board in Florida that is part of a national collective called the Federation of State Medical Boards. It's hard to get your license revoked for sure, but the main factor of medical malpractice is failing to meet the accepted standard of care. That is to say, they can be found in violation of this if their level of care deviates from the level of care any other reasonable doctor would provide in the same field and with the same qualifications.\nVaccinations are a standard of care in medical care, and only a select few doctors deviate from that. We're at the point where action needs to be taken against them."
] |
>
must be trans people killing them all
|
[
"Uh I think he has every anti-vaxer vote on lock. FL loves the guy. But nationally he can't court the independent voters and that's where the election is.",
">\n\nI just don't see any excuse to why though, were they just content with DeSantis and Rubio? What was the point of not voting? - this is a hypothetical question",
">\n\nThe common problems I see quoted for the bad turnout are:\n\nFL Dems have no system for nurturing talent so we ended up with an uninspiring candidate.\nFL Dems ground game was weak and only available during election season. Some teams couldnt even get door hangers or fliers to hand out.\nDem turnout may have been suppressed by DeSantis election police force publicly arresting voters a few weeks before the election.\nGov DeSantis used the state government to implement popular policies just before the election (eg gas holiday) or delay unpopular policies till after the election (eg electricity price hikes)\nGov DeSantis's probably illegal Congressional map likely depressed some Dem turnout as Dem districts were wiped out - so why bother voting?\nNational Dem groups abandoned Florida. In 2028, they spent $38m here. In 2022, its was less than $2m.\nGov DeSantis - thanks to huge donations, especially from outside groups - was able to spend $250m in his campaign. Crist could only spend $40m.\nFlorida went for Obama twice which scared the Republicans shitless. So they spent the last 14 years constantly registering new voters. FL Dems didnt seem to respond at a state level.\nFlorida seems to be the \"leave me alone\" state (while getting 1/3 of its budget from the Federal government) and DeSantis tapped into that with his mask bans etc.\nI also see rumors about FL Dems relying too much on external vendors who consistently fail (whereas FL Republicans do not outsource as much). And various fights within FL Dems stops them from breaking away from failing vendors.",
">\n\nWow I didn't actually expect a response. Thanks for the good response, wish there was something we could do though",
">\n\nWhen a person selected to be surgeon general goes out of his way to misinform and put citizens in danger, what is the point anymore?",
">\n\nI think I can answer that. The point is Florida.",
">\n\nJust the tip 🍆",
">\n\nI don’t understand the pride in ignorance.",
">\n\nI wonder if the plan is just to build a dumbass army of bedridden down there.",
">\n\nHe's already done that, the retirement homes are full of them ready to die for him",
">\n\nWow, Florida...DeSantis turning your whole state into the village idiot.",
">\n\nNot a very sharp turn",
">\n\nHonestly, any licensed doctor who is actively antivax should have their medical license revoked.",
">\n\nRemember the crazy \"demon sperm causes disease\" woman? She got a medical degree in Nigeria and Texas accepts it as a real medical degree with no further questions.\nThe Surgeon General of Florida was standing next to her when she was making all these insane statements.",
">\n\nTrue, but the Surgeon General doesn't decide that. It goes up to a medical licensing board in Florida that is part of a national collective called the Federation of State Medical Boards. It's hard to get your license revoked for sure, but the main factor of medical malpractice is failing to meet the accepted standard of care. That is to say, they can be found in violation of this if their level of care deviates from the level of care any other reasonable doctor would provide in the same field and with the same qualifications.\nVaccinations are a standard of care in medical care, and only a select few doctors deviate from that. We're at the point where action needs to be taken against them.",
">\n\nNice, court the quickly dwindling demographic of voters!\nThat’s the problem with death cults, they tend to go extinct."
] |
>
It's not hard to court the dumbest people in the country.
|
[
"Uh I think he has every anti-vaxer vote on lock. FL loves the guy. But nationally he can't court the independent voters and that's where the election is.",
">\n\nI just don't see any excuse to why though, were they just content with DeSantis and Rubio? What was the point of not voting? - this is a hypothetical question",
">\n\nThe common problems I see quoted for the bad turnout are:\n\nFL Dems have no system for nurturing talent so we ended up with an uninspiring candidate.\nFL Dems ground game was weak and only available during election season. Some teams couldnt even get door hangers or fliers to hand out.\nDem turnout may have been suppressed by DeSantis election police force publicly arresting voters a few weeks before the election.\nGov DeSantis used the state government to implement popular policies just before the election (eg gas holiday) or delay unpopular policies till after the election (eg electricity price hikes)\nGov DeSantis's probably illegal Congressional map likely depressed some Dem turnout as Dem districts were wiped out - so why bother voting?\nNational Dem groups abandoned Florida. In 2028, they spent $38m here. In 2022, its was less than $2m.\nGov DeSantis - thanks to huge donations, especially from outside groups - was able to spend $250m in his campaign. Crist could only spend $40m.\nFlorida went for Obama twice which scared the Republicans shitless. So they spent the last 14 years constantly registering new voters. FL Dems didnt seem to respond at a state level.\nFlorida seems to be the \"leave me alone\" state (while getting 1/3 of its budget from the Federal government) and DeSantis tapped into that with his mask bans etc.\nI also see rumors about FL Dems relying too much on external vendors who consistently fail (whereas FL Republicans do not outsource as much). And various fights within FL Dems stops them from breaking away from failing vendors.",
">\n\nWow I didn't actually expect a response. Thanks for the good response, wish there was something we could do though",
">\n\nWhen a person selected to be surgeon general goes out of his way to misinform and put citizens in danger, what is the point anymore?",
">\n\nI think I can answer that. The point is Florida.",
">\n\nJust the tip 🍆",
">\n\nI don’t understand the pride in ignorance.",
">\n\nI wonder if the plan is just to build a dumbass army of bedridden down there.",
">\n\nHe's already done that, the retirement homes are full of them ready to die for him",
">\n\nWow, Florida...DeSantis turning your whole state into the village idiot.",
">\n\nNot a very sharp turn",
">\n\nHonestly, any licensed doctor who is actively antivax should have their medical license revoked.",
">\n\nRemember the crazy \"demon sperm causes disease\" woman? She got a medical degree in Nigeria and Texas accepts it as a real medical degree with no further questions.\nThe Surgeon General of Florida was standing next to her when she was making all these insane statements.",
">\n\nTrue, but the Surgeon General doesn't decide that. It goes up to a medical licensing board in Florida that is part of a national collective called the Federation of State Medical Boards. It's hard to get your license revoked for sure, but the main factor of medical malpractice is failing to meet the accepted standard of care. That is to say, they can be found in violation of this if their level of care deviates from the level of care any other reasonable doctor would provide in the same field and with the same qualifications.\nVaccinations are a standard of care in medical care, and only a select few doctors deviate from that. We're at the point where action needs to be taken against them.",
">\n\nNice, court the quickly dwindling demographic of voters!\nThat’s the problem with death cults, they tend to go extinct.",
">\n\nmust be trans people killing them all"
] |
>
Not exactly a growing demographic, is it Ronny?
|
[
"Uh I think he has every anti-vaxer vote on lock. FL loves the guy. But nationally he can't court the independent voters and that's where the election is.",
">\n\nI just don't see any excuse to why though, were they just content with DeSantis and Rubio? What was the point of not voting? - this is a hypothetical question",
">\n\nThe common problems I see quoted for the bad turnout are:\n\nFL Dems have no system for nurturing talent so we ended up with an uninspiring candidate.\nFL Dems ground game was weak and only available during election season. Some teams couldnt even get door hangers or fliers to hand out.\nDem turnout may have been suppressed by DeSantis election police force publicly arresting voters a few weeks before the election.\nGov DeSantis used the state government to implement popular policies just before the election (eg gas holiday) or delay unpopular policies till after the election (eg electricity price hikes)\nGov DeSantis's probably illegal Congressional map likely depressed some Dem turnout as Dem districts were wiped out - so why bother voting?\nNational Dem groups abandoned Florida. In 2028, they spent $38m here. In 2022, its was less than $2m.\nGov DeSantis - thanks to huge donations, especially from outside groups - was able to spend $250m in his campaign. Crist could only spend $40m.\nFlorida went for Obama twice which scared the Republicans shitless. So they spent the last 14 years constantly registering new voters. FL Dems didnt seem to respond at a state level.\nFlorida seems to be the \"leave me alone\" state (while getting 1/3 of its budget from the Federal government) and DeSantis tapped into that with his mask bans etc.\nI also see rumors about FL Dems relying too much on external vendors who consistently fail (whereas FL Republicans do not outsource as much). And various fights within FL Dems stops them from breaking away from failing vendors.",
">\n\nWow I didn't actually expect a response. Thanks for the good response, wish there was something we could do though",
">\n\nWhen a person selected to be surgeon general goes out of his way to misinform and put citizens in danger, what is the point anymore?",
">\n\nI think I can answer that. The point is Florida.",
">\n\nJust the tip 🍆",
">\n\nI don’t understand the pride in ignorance.",
">\n\nI wonder if the plan is just to build a dumbass army of bedridden down there.",
">\n\nHe's already done that, the retirement homes are full of them ready to die for him",
">\n\nWow, Florida...DeSantis turning your whole state into the village idiot.",
">\n\nNot a very sharp turn",
">\n\nHonestly, any licensed doctor who is actively antivax should have their medical license revoked.",
">\n\nRemember the crazy \"demon sperm causes disease\" woman? She got a medical degree in Nigeria and Texas accepts it as a real medical degree with no further questions.\nThe Surgeon General of Florida was standing next to her when she was making all these insane statements.",
">\n\nTrue, but the Surgeon General doesn't decide that. It goes up to a medical licensing board in Florida that is part of a national collective called the Federation of State Medical Boards. It's hard to get your license revoked for sure, but the main factor of medical malpractice is failing to meet the accepted standard of care. That is to say, they can be found in violation of this if their level of care deviates from the level of care any other reasonable doctor would provide in the same field and with the same qualifications.\nVaccinations are a standard of care in medical care, and only a select few doctors deviate from that. We're at the point where action needs to be taken against them.",
">\n\nNice, court the quickly dwindling demographic of voters!\nThat’s the problem with death cults, they tend to go extinct.",
">\n\nmust be trans people killing them all",
">\n\nIt's not hard to court the dumbest people in the country."
] |
>
I really don’t get this guy. His anti-vax crusade is not going to go over well with the majority of the country, so I have trouble understanding why he’s doubling down on it.
I think he’s going to get a very nasty surprise when the 2024 primary and general election campaigns start in full swing.
|
[
"Uh I think he has every anti-vaxer vote on lock. FL loves the guy. But nationally he can't court the independent voters and that's where the election is.",
">\n\nI just don't see any excuse to why though, were they just content with DeSantis and Rubio? What was the point of not voting? - this is a hypothetical question",
">\n\nThe common problems I see quoted for the bad turnout are:\n\nFL Dems have no system for nurturing talent so we ended up with an uninspiring candidate.\nFL Dems ground game was weak and only available during election season. Some teams couldnt even get door hangers or fliers to hand out.\nDem turnout may have been suppressed by DeSantis election police force publicly arresting voters a few weeks before the election.\nGov DeSantis used the state government to implement popular policies just before the election (eg gas holiday) or delay unpopular policies till after the election (eg electricity price hikes)\nGov DeSantis's probably illegal Congressional map likely depressed some Dem turnout as Dem districts were wiped out - so why bother voting?\nNational Dem groups abandoned Florida. In 2028, they spent $38m here. In 2022, its was less than $2m.\nGov DeSantis - thanks to huge donations, especially from outside groups - was able to spend $250m in his campaign. Crist could only spend $40m.\nFlorida went for Obama twice which scared the Republicans shitless. So they spent the last 14 years constantly registering new voters. FL Dems didnt seem to respond at a state level.\nFlorida seems to be the \"leave me alone\" state (while getting 1/3 of its budget from the Federal government) and DeSantis tapped into that with his mask bans etc.\nI also see rumors about FL Dems relying too much on external vendors who consistently fail (whereas FL Republicans do not outsource as much). And various fights within FL Dems stops them from breaking away from failing vendors.",
">\n\nWow I didn't actually expect a response. Thanks for the good response, wish there was something we could do though",
">\n\nWhen a person selected to be surgeon general goes out of his way to misinform and put citizens in danger, what is the point anymore?",
">\n\nI think I can answer that. The point is Florida.",
">\n\nJust the tip 🍆",
">\n\nI don’t understand the pride in ignorance.",
">\n\nI wonder if the plan is just to build a dumbass army of bedridden down there.",
">\n\nHe's already done that, the retirement homes are full of them ready to die for him",
">\n\nWow, Florida...DeSantis turning your whole state into the village idiot.",
">\n\nNot a very sharp turn",
">\n\nHonestly, any licensed doctor who is actively antivax should have their medical license revoked.",
">\n\nRemember the crazy \"demon sperm causes disease\" woman? She got a medical degree in Nigeria and Texas accepts it as a real medical degree with no further questions.\nThe Surgeon General of Florida was standing next to her when she was making all these insane statements.",
">\n\nTrue, but the Surgeon General doesn't decide that. It goes up to a medical licensing board in Florida that is part of a national collective called the Federation of State Medical Boards. It's hard to get your license revoked for sure, but the main factor of medical malpractice is failing to meet the accepted standard of care. That is to say, they can be found in violation of this if their level of care deviates from the level of care any other reasonable doctor would provide in the same field and with the same qualifications.\nVaccinations are a standard of care in medical care, and only a select few doctors deviate from that. We're at the point where action needs to be taken against them.",
">\n\nNice, court the quickly dwindling demographic of voters!\nThat’s the problem with death cults, they tend to go extinct.",
">\n\nmust be trans people killing them all",
">\n\nIt's not hard to court the dumbest people in the country.",
">\n\nNot exactly a growing demographic, is it Ronny?"
] |
>
Yea I used to think he would be a dangerous candidate in 2024, but I'm really starting to doubt his ability to court national voters in a general election. Even considering the electoral college. I thought he was just taking advantage of Trump's base, but seems like he's a true believer autocrat with a chip on his shoulder. And I'm not sure that will play well for him like it did for an outsider showman like Trump. Hopefully that's not just my wishful thinking.
|
[
"Uh I think he has every anti-vaxer vote on lock. FL loves the guy. But nationally he can't court the independent voters and that's where the election is.",
">\n\nI just don't see any excuse to why though, were they just content with DeSantis and Rubio? What was the point of not voting? - this is a hypothetical question",
">\n\nThe common problems I see quoted for the bad turnout are:\n\nFL Dems have no system for nurturing talent so we ended up with an uninspiring candidate.\nFL Dems ground game was weak and only available during election season. Some teams couldnt even get door hangers or fliers to hand out.\nDem turnout may have been suppressed by DeSantis election police force publicly arresting voters a few weeks before the election.\nGov DeSantis used the state government to implement popular policies just before the election (eg gas holiday) or delay unpopular policies till after the election (eg electricity price hikes)\nGov DeSantis's probably illegal Congressional map likely depressed some Dem turnout as Dem districts were wiped out - so why bother voting?\nNational Dem groups abandoned Florida. In 2028, they spent $38m here. In 2022, its was less than $2m.\nGov DeSantis - thanks to huge donations, especially from outside groups - was able to spend $250m in his campaign. Crist could only spend $40m.\nFlorida went for Obama twice which scared the Republicans shitless. So they spent the last 14 years constantly registering new voters. FL Dems didnt seem to respond at a state level.\nFlorida seems to be the \"leave me alone\" state (while getting 1/3 of its budget from the Federal government) and DeSantis tapped into that with his mask bans etc.\nI also see rumors about FL Dems relying too much on external vendors who consistently fail (whereas FL Republicans do not outsource as much). And various fights within FL Dems stops them from breaking away from failing vendors.",
">\n\nWow I didn't actually expect a response. Thanks for the good response, wish there was something we could do though",
">\n\nWhen a person selected to be surgeon general goes out of his way to misinform and put citizens in danger, what is the point anymore?",
">\n\nI think I can answer that. The point is Florida.",
">\n\nJust the tip 🍆",
">\n\nI don’t understand the pride in ignorance.",
">\n\nI wonder if the plan is just to build a dumbass army of bedridden down there.",
">\n\nHe's already done that, the retirement homes are full of them ready to die for him",
">\n\nWow, Florida...DeSantis turning your whole state into the village idiot.",
">\n\nNot a very sharp turn",
">\n\nHonestly, any licensed doctor who is actively antivax should have their medical license revoked.",
">\n\nRemember the crazy \"demon sperm causes disease\" woman? She got a medical degree in Nigeria and Texas accepts it as a real medical degree with no further questions.\nThe Surgeon General of Florida was standing next to her when she was making all these insane statements.",
">\n\nTrue, but the Surgeon General doesn't decide that. It goes up to a medical licensing board in Florida that is part of a national collective called the Federation of State Medical Boards. It's hard to get your license revoked for sure, but the main factor of medical malpractice is failing to meet the accepted standard of care. That is to say, they can be found in violation of this if their level of care deviates from the level of care any other reasonable doctor would provide in the same field and with the same qualifications.\nVaccinations are a standard of care in medical care, and only a select few doctors deviate from that. We're at the point where action needs to be taken against them.",
">\n\nNice, court the quickly dwindling demographic of voters!\nThat’s the problem with death cults, they tend to go extinct.",
">\n\nmust be trans people killing them all",
">\n\nIt's not hard to court the dumbest people in the country.",
">\n\nNot exactly a growing demographic, is it Ronny?",
">\n\nI really don’t get this guy. His anti-vax crusade is not going to go over well with the majority of the country, so I have trouble understanding why he’s doubling down on it.\nI think he’s going to get a very nasty surprise when the 2024 primary and general election campaigns start in full swing."
] |
>
Of course he's courting anti-vaxers. It's wilfully-ignorant, anti-"liberal" identity signaling that Tronald Dump established among the drooling dregs of his base that DeSantis is cashing in on.
|
[
"Uh I think he has every anti-vaxer vote on lock. FL loves the guy. But nationally he can't court the independent voters and that's where the election is.",
">\n\nI just don't see any excuse to why though, were they just content with DeSantis and Rubio? What was the point of not voting? - this is a hypothetical question",
">\n\nThe common problems I see quoted for the bad turnout are:\n\nFL Dems have no system for nurturing talent so we ended up with an uninspiring candidate.\nFL Dems ground game was weak and only available during election season. Some teams couldnt even get door hangers or fliers to hand out.\nDem turnout may have been suppressed by DeSantis election police force publicly arresting voters a few weeks before the election.\nGov DeSantis used the state government to implement popular policies just before the election (eg gas holiday) or delay unpopular policies till after the election (eg electricity price hikes)\nGov DeSantis's probably illegal Congressional map likely depressed some Dem turnout as Dem districts were wiped out - so why bother voting?\nNational Dem groups abandoned Florida. In 2028, they spent $38m here. In 2022, its was less than $2m.\nGov DeSantis - thanks to huge donations, especially from outside groups - was able to spend $250m in his campaign. Crist could only spend $40m.\nFlorida went for Obama twice which scared the Republicans shitless. So they spent the last 14 years constantly registering new voters. FL Dems didnt seem to respond at a state level.\nFlorida seems to be the \"leave me alone\" state (while getting 1/3 of its budget from the Federal government) and DeSantis tapped into that with his mask bans etc.\nI also see rumors about FL Dems relying too much on external vendors who consistently fail (whereas FL Republicans do not outsource as much). And various fights within FL Dems stops them from breaking away from failing vendors.",
">\n\nWow I didn't actually expect a response. Thanks for the good response, wish there was something we could do though",
">\n\nWhen a person selected to be surgeon general goes out of his way to misinform and put citizens in danger, what is the point anymore?",
">\n\nI think I can answer that. The point is Florida.",
">\n\nJust the tip 🍆",
">\n\nI don’t understand the pride in ignorance.",
">\n\nI wonder if the plan is just to build a dumbass army of bedridden down there.",
">\n\nHe's already done that, the retirement homes are full of them ready to die for him",
">\n\nWow, Florida...DeSantis turning your whole state into the village idiot.",
">\n\nNot a very sharp turn",
">\n\nHonestly, any licensed doctor who is actively antivax should have their medical license revoked.",
">\n\nRemember the crazy \"demon sperm causes disease\" woman? She got a medical degree in Nigeria and Texas accepts it as a real medical degree with no further questions.\nThe Surgeon General of Florida was standing next to her when she was making all these insane statements.",
">\n\nTrue, but the Surgeon General doesn't decide that. It goes up to a medical licensing board in Florida that is part of a national collective called the Federation of State Medical Boards. It's hard to get your license revoked for sure, but the main factor of medical malpractice is failing to meet the accepted standard of care. That is to say, they can be found in violation of this if their level of care deviates from the level of care any other reasonable doctor would provide in the same field and with the same qualifications.\nVaccinations are a standard of care in medical care, and only a select few doctors deviate from that. We're at the point where action needs to be taken against them.",
">\n\nNice, court the quickly dwindling demographic of voters!\nThat’s the problem with death cults, they tend to go extinct.",
">\n\nmust be trans people killing them all",
">\n\nIt's not hard to court the dumbest people in the country.",
">\n\nNot exactly a growing demographic, is it Ronny?",
">\n\nI really don’t get this guy. His anti-vax crusade is not going to go over well with the majority of the country, so I have trouble understanding why he’s doubling down on it.\nI think he’s going to get a very nasty surprise when the 2024 primary and general election campaigns start in full swing.",
">\n\nYea I used to think he would be a dangerous candidate in 2024, but I'm really starting to doubt his ability to court national voters in a general election. Even considering the electoral college. I thought he was just taking advantage of Trump's base, but seems like he's a true believer autocrat with a chip on his shoulder. And I'm not sure that will play well for him like it did for an outsider showman like Trump. Hopefully that's not just my wishful thinking."
] |
>
Are they keeping a death graph of courted, won, died?
|
[
"Uh I think he has every anti-vaxer vote on lock. FL loves the guy. But nationally he can't court the independent voters and that's where the election is.",
">\n\nI just don't see any excuse to why though, were they just content with DeSantis and Rubio? What was the point of not voting? - this is a hypothetical question",
">\n\nThe common problems I see quoted for the bad turnout are:\n\nFL Dems have no system for nurturing talent so we ended up with an uninspiring candidate.\nFL Dems ground game was weak and only available during election season. Some teams couldnt even get door hangers or fliers to hand out.\nDem turnout may have been suppressed by DeSantis election police force publicly arresting voters a few weeks before the election.\nGov DeSantis used the state government to implement popular policies just before the election (eg gas holiday) or delay unpopular policies till after the election (eg electricity price hikes)\nGov DeSantis's probably illegal Congressional map likely depressed some Dem turnout as Dem districts were wiped out - so why bother voting?\nNational Dem groups abandoned Florida. In 2028, they spent $38m here. In 2022, its was less than $2m.\nGov DeSantis - thanks to huge donations, especially from outside groups - was able to spend $250m in his campaign. Crist could only spend $40m.\nFlorida went for Obama twice which scared the Republicans shitless. So they spent the last 14 years constantly registering new voters. FL Dems didnt seem to respond at a state level.\nFlorida seems to be the \"leave me alone\" state (while getting 1/3 of its budget from the Federal government) and DeSantis tapped into that with his mask bans etc.\nI also see rumors about FL Dems relying too much on external vendors who consistently fail (whereas FL Republicans do not outsource as much). And various fights within FL Dems stops them from breaking away from failing vendors.",
">\n\nWow I didn't actually expect a response. Thanks for the good response, wish there was something we could do though",
">\n\nWhen a person selected to be surgeon general goes out of his way to misinform and put citizens in danger, what is the point anymore?",
">\n\nI think I can answer that. The point is Florida.",
">\n\nJust the tip 🍆",
">\n\nI don’t understand the pride in ignorance.",
">\n\nI wonder if the plan is just to build a dumbass army of bedridden down there.",
">\n\nHe's already done that, the retirement homes are full of them ready to die for him",
">\n\nWow, Florida...DeSantis turning your whole state into the village idiot.",
">\n\nNot a very sharp turn",
">\n\nHonestly, any licensed doctor who is actively antivax should have their medical license revoked.",
">\n\nRemember the crazy \"demon sperm causes disease\" woman? She got a medical degree in Nigeria and Texas accepts it as a real medical degree with no further questions.\nThe Surgeon General of Florida was standing next to her when she was making all these insane statements.",
">\n\nTrue, but the Surgeon General doesn't decide that. It goes up to a medical licensing board in Florida that is part of a national collective called the Federation of State Medical Boards. It's hard to get your license revoked for sure, but the main factor of medical malpractice is failing to meet the accepted standard of care. That is to say, they can be found in violation of this if their level of care deviates from the level of care any other reasonable doctor would provide in the same field and with the same qualifications.\nVaccinations are a standard of care in medical care, and only a select few doctors deviate from that. We're at the point where action needs to be taken against them.",
">\n\nNice, court the quickly dwindling demographic of voters!\nThat’s the problem with death cults, they tend to go extinct.",
">\n\nmust be trans people killing them all",
">\n\nIt's not hard to court the dumbest people in the country.",
">\n\nNot exactly a growing demographic, is it Ronny?",
">\n\nI really don’t get this guy. His anti-vax crusade is not going to go over well with the majority of the country, so I have trouble understanding why he’s doubling down on it.\nI think he’s going to get a very nasty surprise when the 2024 primary and general election campaigns start in full swing.",
">\n\nYea I used to think he would be a dangerous candidate in 2024, but I'm really starting to doubt his ability to court national voters in a general election. Even considering the electoral college. I thought he was just taking advantage of Trump's base, but seems like he's a true believer autocrat with a chip on his shoulder. And I'm not sure that will play well for him like it did for an outsider showman like Trump. Hopefully that's not just my wishful thinking.",
">\n\nOf course he's courting anti-vaxers. It's wilfully-ignorant, anti-\"liberal\" identity signaling that Tronald Dump established among the drooling dregs of his base that DeSantis is cashing in on."
] |
>
How’s he doing on the home insurance crisis?
|
[
"Uh I think he has every anti-vaxer vote on lock. FL loves the guy. But nationally he can't court the independent voters and that's where the election is.",
">\n\nI just don't see any excuse to why though, were they just content with DeSantis and Rubio? What was the point of not voting? - this is a hypothetical question",
">\n\nThe common problems I see quoted for the bad turnout are:\n\nFL Dems have no system for nurturing talent so we ended up with an uninspiring candidate.\nFL Dems ground game was weak and only available during election season. Some teams couldnt even get door hangers or fliers to hand out.\nDem turnout may have been suppressed by DeSantis election police force publicly arresting voters a few weeks before the election.\nGov DeSantis used the state government to implement popular policies just before the election (eg gas holiday) or delay unpopular policies till after the election (eg electricity price hikes)\nGov DeSantis's probably illegal Congressional map likely depressed some Dem turnout as Dem districts were wiped out - so why bother voting?\nNational Dem groups abandoned Florida. In 2028, they spent $38m here. In 2022, its was less than $2m.\nGov DeSantis - thanks to huge donations, especially from outside groups - was able to spend $250m in his campaign. Crist could only spend $40m.\nFlorida went for Obama twice which scared the Republicans shitless. So they spent the last 14 years constantly registering new voters. FL Dems didnt seem to respond at a state level.\nFlorida seems to be the \"leave me alone\" state (while getting 1/3 of its budget from the Federal government) and DeSantis tapped into that with his mask bans etc.\nI also see rumors about FL Dems relying too much on external vendors who consistently fail (whereas FL Republicans do not outsource as much). And various fights within FL Dems stops them from breaking away from failing vendors.",
">\n\nWow I didn't actually expect a response. Thanks for the good response, wish there was something we could do though",
">\n\nWhen a person selected to be surgeon general goes out of his way to misinform and put citizens in danger, what is the point anymore?",
">\n\nI think I can answer that. The point is Florida.",
">\n\nJust the tip 🍆",
">\n\nI don’t understand the pride in ignorance.",
">\n\nI wonder if the plan is just to build a dumbass army of bedridden down there.",
">\n\nHe's already done that, the retirement homes are full of them ready to die for him",
">\n\nWow, Florida...DeSantis turning your whole state into the village idiot.",
">\n\nNot a very sharp turn",
">\n\nHonestly, any licensed doctor who is actively antivax should have their medical license revoked.",
">\n\nRemember the crazy \"demon sperm causes disease\" woman? She got a medical degree in Nigeria and Texas accepts it as a real medical degree with no further questions.\nThe Surgeon General of Florida was standing next to her when she was making all these insane statements.",
">\n\nTrue, but the Surgeon General doesn't decide that. It goes up to a medical licensing board in Florida that is part of a national collective called the Federation of State Medical Boards. It's hard to get your license revoked for sure, but the main factor of medical malpractice is failing to meet the accepted standard of care. That is to say, they can be found in violation of this if their level of care deviates from the level of care any other reasonable doctor would provide in the same field and with the same qualifications.\nVaccinations are a standard of care in medical care, and only a select few doctors deviate from that. We're at the point where action needs to be taken against them.",
">\n\nNice, court the quickly dwindling demographic of voters!\nThat’s the problem with death cults, they tend to go extinct.",
">\n\nmust be trans people killing them all",
">\n\nIt's not hard to court the dumbest people in the country.",
">\n\nNot exactly a growing demographic, is it Ronny?",
">\n\nI really don’t get this guy. His anti-vax crusade is not going to go over well with the majority of the country, so I have trouble understanding why he’s doubling down on it.\nI think he’s going to get a very nasty surprise when the 2024 primary and general election campaigns start in full swing.",
">\n\nYea I used to think he would be a dangerous candidate in 2024, but I'm really starting to doubt his ability to court national voters in a general election. Even considering the electoral college. I thought he was just taking advantage of Trump's base, but seems like he's a true believer autocrat with a chip on his shoulder. And I'm not sure that will play well for him like it did for an outsider showman like Trump. Hopefully that's not just my wishful thinking.",
">\n\nOf course he's courting anti-vaxers. It's wilfully-ignorant, anti-\"liberal\" identity signaling that Tronald Dump established among the drooling dregs of his base that DeSantis is cashing in on.",
">\n\nAre they keeping a death graph of courted, won, died?"
] |
>
Ron DeSantis, a brown Nazi, is nothing more than a fucking asshole.
|
[
"Uh I think he has every anti-vaxer vote on lock. FL loves the guy. But nationally he can't court the independent voters and that's where the election is.",
">\n\nI just don't see any excuse to why though, were they just content with DeSantis and Rubio? What was the point of not voting? - this is a hypothetical question",
">\n\nThe common problems I see quoted for the bad turnout are:\n\nFL Dems have no system for nurturing talent so we ended up with an uninspiring candidate.\nFL Dems ground game was weak and only available during election season. Some teams couldnt even get door hangers or fliers to hand out.\nDem turnout may have been suppressed by DeSantis election police force publicly arresting voters a few weeks before the election.\nGov DeSantis used the state government to implement popular policies just before the election (eg gas holiday) or delay unpopular policies till after the election (eg electricity price hikes)\nGov DeSantis's probably illegal Congressional map likely depressed some Dem turnout as Dem districts were wiped out - so why bother voting?\nNational Dem groups abandoned Florida. In 2028, they spent $38m here. In 2022, its was less than $2m.\nGov DeSantis - thanks to huge donations, especially from outside groups - was able to spend $250m in his campaign. Crist could only spend $40m.\nFlorida went for Obama twice which scared the Republicans shitless. So they spent the last 14 years constantly registering new voters. FL Dems didnt seem to respond at a state level.\nFlorida seems to be the \"leave me alone\" state (while getting 1/3 of its budget from the Federal government) and DeSantis tapped into that with his mask bans etc.\nI also see rumors about FL Dems relying too much on external vendors who consistently fail (whereas FL Republicans do not outsource as much). And various fights within FL Dems stops them from breaking away from failing vendors.",
">\n\nWow I didn't actually expect a response. Thanks for the good response, wish there was something we could do though",
">\n\nWhen a person selected to be surgeon general goes out of his way to misinform and put citizens in danger, what is the point anymore?",
">\n\nI think I can answer that. The point is Florida.",
">\n\nJust the tip 🍆",
">\n\nI don’t understand the pride in ignorance.",
">\n\nI wonder if the plan is just to build a dumbass army of bedridden down there.",
">\n\nHe's already done that, the retirement homes are full of them ready to die for him",
">\n\nWow, Florida...DeSantis turning your whole state into the village idiot.",
">\n\nNot a very sharp turn",
">\n\nHonestly, any licensed doctor who is actively antivax should have their medical license revoked.",
">\n\nRemember the crazy \"demon sperm causes disease\" woman? She got a medical degree in Nigeria and Texas accepts it as a real medical degree with no further questions.\nThe Surgeon General of Florida was standing next to her when she was making all these insane statements.",
">\n\nTrue, but the Surgeon General doesn't decide that. It goes up to a medical licensing board in Florida that is part of a national collective called the Federation of State Medical Boards. It's hard to get your license revoked for sure, but the main factor of medical malpractice is failing to meet the accepted standard of care. That is to say, they can be found in violation of this if their level of care deviates from the level of care any other reasonable doctor would provide in the same field and with the same qualifications.\nVaccinations are a standard of care in medical care, and only a select few doctors deviate from that. We're at the point where action needs to be taken against them.",
">\n\nNice, court the quickly dwindling demographic of voters!\nThat’s the problem with death cults, they tend to go extinct.",
">\n\nmust be trans people killing them all",
">\n\nIt's not hard to court the dumbest people in the country.",
">\n\nNot exactly a growing demographic, is it Ronny?",
">\n\nI really don’t get this guy. His anti-vax crusade is not going to go over well with the majority of the country, so I have trouble understanding why he’s doubling down on it.\nI think he’s going to get a very nasty surprise when the 2024 primary and general election campaigns start in full swing.",
">\n\nYea I used to think he would be a dangerous candidate in 2024, but I'm really starting to doubt his ability to court national voters in a general election. Even considering the electoral college. I thought he was just taking advantage of Trump's base, but seems like he's a true believer autocrat with a chip on his shoulder. And I'm not sure that will play well for him like it did for an outsider showman like Trump. Hopefully that's not just my wishful thinking.",
">\n\nOf course he's courting anti-vaxers. It's wilfully-ignorant, anti-\"liberal\" identity signaling that Tronald Dump established among the drooling dregs of his base that DeSantis is cashing in on.",
">\n\nAre they keeping a death graph of courted, won, died?",
">\n\nHow’s he doing on the home insurance crisis?"
] |
>
You ever notice that left leaning news is behind a paywall 10000x more often than right leaning websites?
|
[
"Uh I think he has every anti-vaxer vote on lock. FL loves the guy. But nationally he can't court the independent voters and that's where the election is.",
">\n\nI just don't see any excuse to why though, were they just content with DeSantis and Rubio? What was the point of not voting? - this is a hypothetical question",
">\n\nThe common problems I see quoted for the bad turnout are:\n\nFL Dems have no system for nurturing talent so we ended up with an uninspiring candidate.\nFL Dems ground game was weak and only available during election season. Some teams couldnt even get door hangers or fliers to hand out.\nDem turnout may have been suppressed by DeSantis election police force publicly arresting voters a few weeks before the election.\nGov DeSantis used the state government to implement popular policies just before the election (eg gas holiday) or delay unpopular policies till after the election (eg electricity price hikes)\nGov DeSantis's probably illegal Congressional map likely depressed some Dem turnout as Dem districts were wiped out - so why bother voting?\nNational Dem groups abandoned Florida. In 2028, they spent $38m here. In 2022, its was less than $2m.\nGov DeSantis - thanks to huge donations, especially from outside groups - was able to spend $250m in his campaign. Crist could only spend $40m.\nFlorida went for Obama twice which scared the Republicans shitless. So they spent the last 14 years constantly registering new voters. FL Dems didnt seem to respond at a state level.\nFlorida seems to be the \"leave me alone\" state (while getting 1/3 of its budget from the Federal government) and DeSantis tapped into that with his mask bans etc.\nI also see rumors about FL Dems relying too much on external vendors who consistently fail (whereas FL Republicans do not outsource as much). And various fights within FL Dems stops them from breaking away from failing vendors.",
">\n\nWow I didn't actually expect a response. Thanks for the good response, wish there was something we could do though",
">\n\nWhen a person selected to be surgeon general goes out of his way to misinform and put citizens in danger, what is the point anymore?",
">\n\nI think I can answer that. The point is Florida.",
">\n\nJust the tip 🍆",
">\n\nI don’t understand the pride in ignorance.",
">\n\nI wonder if the plan is just to build a dumbass army of bedridden down there.",
">\n\nHe's already done that, the retirement homes are full of them ready to die for him",
">\n\nWow, Florida...DeSantis turning your whole state into the village idiot.",
">\n\nNot a very sharp turn",
">\n\nHonestly, any licensed doctor who is actively antivax should have their medical license revoked.",
">\n\nRemember the crazy \"demon sperm causes disease\" woman? She got a medical degree in Nigeria and Texas accepts it as a real medical degree with no further questions.\nThe Surgeon General of Florida was standing next to her when she was making all these insane statements.",
">\n\nTrue, but the Surgeon General doesn't decide that. It goes up to a medical licensing board in Florida that is part of a national collective called the Federation of State Medical Boards. It's hard to get your license revoked for sure, but the main factor of medical malpractice is failing to meet the accepted standard of care. That is to say, they can be found in violation of this if their level of care deviates from the level of care any other reasonable doctor would provide in the same field and with the same qualifications.\nVaccinations are a standard of care in medical care, and only a select few doctors deviate from that. We're at the point where action needs to be taken against them.",
">\n\nNice, court the quickly dwindling demographic of voters!\nThat’s the problem with death cults, they tend to go extinct.",
">\n\nmust be trans people killing them all",
">\n\nIt's not hard to court the dumbest people in the country.",
">\n\nNot exactly a growing demographic, is it Ronny?",
">\n\nI really don’t get this guy. His anti-vax crusade is not going to go over well with the majority of the country, so I have trouble understanding why he’s doubling down on it.\nI think he’s going to get a very nasty surprise when the 2024 primary and general election campaigns start in full swing.",
">\n\nYea I used to think he would be a dangerous candidate in 2024, but I'm really starting to doubt his ability to court national voters in a general election. Even considering the electoral college. I thought he was just taking advantage of Trump's base, but seems like he's a true believer autocrat with a chip on his shoulder. And I'm not sure that will play well for him like it did for an outsider showman like Trump. Hopefully that's not just my wishful thinking.",
">\n\nOf course he's courting anti-vaxers. It's wilfully-ignorant, anti-\"liberal\" identity signaling that Tronald Dump established among the drooling dregs of his base that DeSantis is cashing in on.",
">\n\nAre they keeping a death graph of courted, won, died?",
">\n\nHow’s he doing on the home insurance crisis?",
">\n\nRon DeSantis, a brown Nazi, is nothing more than a fucking asshole."
] |
>
The real news isn't some dude blogging, they are paid reporters.
|
[
"Uh I think he has every anti-vaxer vote on lock. FL loves the guy. But nationally he can't court the independent voters and that's where the election is.",
">\n\nI just don't see any excuse to why though, were they just content with DeSantis and Rubio? What was the point of not voting? - this is a hypothetical question",
">\n\nThe common problems I see quoted for the bad turnout are:\n\nFL Dems have no system for nurturing talent so we ended up with an uninspiring candidate.\nFL Dems ground game was weak and only available during election season. Some teams couldnt even get door hangers or fliers to hand out.\nDem turnout may have been suppressed by DeSantis election police force publicly arresting voters a few weeks before the election.\nGov DeSantis used the state government to implement popular policies just before the election (eg gas holiday) or delay unpopular policies till after the election (eg electricity price hikes)\nGov DeSantis's probably illegal Congressional map likely depressed some Dem turnout as Dem districts were wiped out - so why bother voting?\nNational Dem groups abandoned Florida. In 2028, they spent $38m here. In 2022, its was less than $2m.\nGov DeSantis - thanks to huge donations, especially from outside groups - was able to spend $250m in his campaign. Crist could only spend $40m.\nFlorida went for Obama twice which scared the Republicans shitless. So they spent the last 14 years constantly registering new voters. FL Dems didnt seem to respond at a state level.\nFlorida seems to be the \"leave me alone\" state (while getting 1/3 of its budget from the Federal government) and DeSantis tapped into that with his mask bans etc.\nI also see rumors about FL Dems relying too much on external vendors who consistently fail (whereas FL Republicans do not outsource as much). And various fights within FL Dems stops them from breaking away from failing vendors.",
">\n\nWow I didn't actually expect a response. Thanks for the good response, wish there was something we could do though",
">\n\nWhen a person selected to be surgeon general goes out of his way to misinform and put citizens in danger, what is the point anymore?",
">\n\nI think I can answer that. The point is Florida.",
">\n\nJust the tip 🍆",
">\n\nI don’t understand the pride in ignorance.",
">\n\nI wonder if the plan is just to build a dumbass army of bedridden down there.",
">\n\nHe's already done that, the retirement homes are full of them ready to die for him",
">\n\nWow, Florida...DeSantis turning your whole state into the village idiot.",
">\n\nNot a very sharp turn",
">\n\nHonestly, any licensed doctor who is actively antivax should have their medical license revoked.",
">\n\nRemember the crazy \"demon sperm causes disease\" woman? She got a medical degree in Nigeria and Texas accepts it as a real medical degree with no further questions.\nThe Surgeon General of Florida was standing next to her when she was making all these insane statements.",
">\n\nTrue, but the Surgeon General doesn't decide that. It goes up to a medical licensing board in Florida that is part of a national collective called the Federation of State Medical Boards. It's hard to get your license revoked for sure, but the main factor of medical malpractice is failing to meet the accepted standard of care. That is to say, they can be found in violation of this if their level of care deviates from the level of care any other reasonable doctor would provide in the same field and with the same qualifications.\nVaccinations are a standard of care in medical care, and only a select few doctors deviate from that. We're at the point where action needs to be taken against them.",
">\n\nNice, court the quickly dwindling demographic of voters!\nThat’s the problem with death cults, they tend to go extinct.",
">\n\nmust be trans people killing them all",
">\n\nIt's not hard to court the dumbest people in the country.",
">\n\nNot exactly a growing demographic, is it Ronny?",
">\n\nI really don’t get this guy. His anti-vax crusade is not going to go over well with the majority of the country, so I have trouble understanding why he’s doubling down on it.\nI think he’s going to get a very nasty surprise when the 2024 primary and general election campaigns start in full swing.",
">\n\nYea I used to think he would be a dangerous candidate in 2024, but I'm really starting to doubt his ability to court national voters in a general election. Even considering the electoral college. I thought he was just taking advantage of Trump's base, but seems like he's a true believer autocrat with a chip on his shoulder. And I'm not sure that will play well for him like it did for an outsider showman like Trump. Hopefully that's not just my wishful thinking.",
">\n\nOf course he's courting anti-vaxers. It's wilfully-ignorant, anti-\"liberal\" identity signaling that Tronald Dump established among the drooling dregs of his base that DeSantis is cashing in on.",
">\n\nAre they keeping a death graph of courted, won, died?",
">\n\nHow’s he doing on the home insurance crisis?",
">\n\nRon DeSantis, a brown Nazi, is nothing more than a fucking asshole.",
">\n\nYou ever notice that left leaning news is behind a paywall 10000x more often than right leaning websites?"
] |
>
This reminded me of a few years ago. A friend of mine made me sit down and watch a video about how the dollar was going to collapse and the world was going to end. It was some bald guy who couldn't be bothered to put on a shirt, in a trailer with curtains that were half broken.
This was the expert that I needed to listen to.
We're not very close friends anymore
|
[
"Uh I think he has every anti-vaxer vote on lock. FL loves the guy. But nationally he can't court the independent voters and that's where the election is.",
">\n\nI just don't see any excuse to why though, were they just content with DeSantis and Rubio? What was the point of not voting? - this is a hypothetical question",
">\n\nThe common problems I see quoted for the bad turnout are:\n\nFL Dems have no system for nurturing talent so we ended up with an uninspiring candidate.\nFL Dems ground game was weak and only available during election season. Some teams couldnt even get door hangers or fliers to hand out.\nDem turnout may have been suppressed by DeSantis election police force publicly arresting voters a few weeks before the election.\nGov DeSantis used the state government to implement popular policies just before the election (eg gas holiday) or delay unpopular policies till after the election (eg electricity price hikes)\nGov DeSantis's probably illegal Congressional map likely depressed some Dem turnout as Dem districts were wiped out - so why bother voting?\nNational Dem groups abandoned Florida. In 2028, they spent $38m here. In 2022, its was less than $2m.\nGov DeSantis - thanks to huge donations, especially from outside groups - was able to spend $250m in his campaign. Crist could only spend $40m.\nFlorida went for Obama twice which scared the Republicans shitless. So they spent the last 14 years constantly registering new voters. FL Dems didnt seem to respond at a state level.\nFlorida seems to be the \"leave me alone\" state (while getting 1/3 of its budget from the Federal government) and DeSantis tapped into that with his mask bans etc.\nI also see rumors about FL Dems relying too much on external vendors who consistently fail (whereas FL Republicans do not outsource as much). And various fights within FL Dems stops them from breaking away from failing vendors.",
">\n\nWow I didn't actually expect a response. Thanks for the good response, wish there was something we could do though",
">\n\nWhen a person selected to be surgeon general goes out of his way to misinform and put citizens in danger, what is the point anymore?",
">\n\nI think I can answer that. The point is Florida.",
">\n\nJust the tip 🍆",
">\n\nI don’t understand the pride in ignorance.",
">\n\nI wonder if the plan is just to build a dumbass army of bedridden down there.",
">\n\nHe's already done that, the retirement homes are full of them ready to die for him",
">\n\nWow, Florida...DeSantis turning your whole state into the village idiot.",
">\n\nNot a very sharp turn",
">\n\nHonestly, any licensed doctor who is actively antivax should have their medical license revoked.",
">\n\nRemember the crazy \"demon sperm causes disease\" woman? She got a medical degree in Nigeria and Texas accepts it as a real medical degree with no further questions.\nThe Surgeon General of Florida was standing next to her when she was making all these insane statements.",
">\n\nTrue, but the Surgeon General doesn't decide that. It goes up to a medical licensing board in Florida that is part of a national collective called the Federation of State Medical Boards. It's hard to get your license revoked for sure, but the main factor of medical malpractice is failing to meet the accepted standard of care. That is to say, they can be found in violation of this if their level of care deviates from the level of care any other reasonable doctor would provide in the same field and with the same qualifications.\nVaccinations are a standard of care in medical care, and only a select few doctors deviate from that. We're at the point where action needs to be taken against them.",
">\n\nNice, court the quickly dwindling demographic of voters!\nThat’s the problem with death cults, they tend to go extinct.",
">\n\nmust be trans people killing them all",
">\n\nIt's not hard to court the dumbest people in the country.",
">\n\nNot exactly a growing demographic, is it Ronny?",
">\n\nI really don’t get this guy. His anti-vax crusade is not going to go over well with the majority of the country, so I have trouble understanding why he’s doubling down on it.\nI think he’s going to get a very nasty surprise when the 2024 primary and general election campaigns start in full swing.",
">\n\nYea I used to think he would be a dangerous candidate in 2024, but I'm really starting to doubt his ability to court national voters in a general election. Even considering the electoral college. I thought he was just taking advantage of Trump's base, but seems like he's a true believer autocrat with a chip on his shoulder. And I'm not sure that will play well for him like it did for an outsider showman like Trump. Hopefully that's not just my wishful thinking.",
">\n\nOf course he's courting anti-vaxers. It's wilfully-ignorant, anti-\"liberal\" identity signaling that Tronald Dump established among the drooling dregs of his base that DeSantis is cashing in on.",
">\n\nAre they keeping a death graph of courted, won, died?",
">\n\nHow’s he doing on the home insurance crisis?",
">\n\nRon DeSantis, a brown Nazi, is nothing more than a fucking asshole.",
">\n\nYou ever notice that left leaning news is behind a paywall 10000x more often than right leaning websites?",
">\n\nThe real news isn't some dude blogging, they are paid reporters."
] |
>
I had a friend's bf explain to me for an uncomfortable amount of time why I needed to put all my money in physical gold. But he couldn't afford it, so he had bought up a bunch of silver dollars and they just sat in piles on the floor of their dining room. Sigh....
|
[
"Uh I think he has every anti-vaxer vote on lock. FL loves the guy. But nationally he can't court the independent voters and that's where the election is.",
">\n\nI just don't see any excuse to why though, were they just content with DeSantis and Rubio? What was the point of not voting? - this is a hypothetical question",
">\n\nThe common problems I see quoted for the bad turnout are:\n\nFL Dems have no system for nurturing talent so we ended up with an uninspiring candidate.\nFL Dems ground game was weak and only available during election season. Some teams couldnt even get door hangers or fliers to hand out.\nDem turnout may have been suppressed by DeSantis election police force publicly arresting voters a few weeks before the election.\nGov DeSantis used the state government to implement popular policies just before the election (eg gas holiday) or delay unpopular policies till after the election (eg electricity price hikes)\nGov DeSantis's probably illegal Congressional map likely depressed some Dem turnout as Dem districts were wiped out - so why bother voting?\nNational Dem groups abandoned Florida. In 2028, they spent $38m here. In 2022, its was less than $2m.\nGov DeSantis - thanks to huge donations, especially from outside groups - was able to spend $250m in his campaign. Crist could only spend $40m.\nFlorida went for Obama twice which scared the Republicans shitless. So they spent the last 14 years constantly registering new voters. FL Dems didnt seem to respond at a state level.\nFlorida seems to be the \"leave me alone\" state (while getting 1/3 of its budget from the Federal government) and DeSantis tapped into that with his mask bans etc.\nI also see rumors about FL Dems relying too much on external vendors who consistently fail (whereas FL Republicans do not outsource as much). And various fights within FL Dems stops them from breaking away from failing vendors.",
">\n\nWow I didn't actually expect a response. Thanks for the good response, wish there was something we could do though",
">\n\nWhen a person selected to be surgeon general goes out of his way to misinform and put citizens in danger, what is the point anymore?",
">\n\nI think I can answer that. The point is Florida.",
">\n\nJust the tip 🍆",
">\n\nI don’t understand the pride in ignorance.",
">\n\nI wonder if the plan is just to build a dumbass army of bedridden down there.",
">\n\nHe's already done that, the retirement homes are full of them ready to die for him",
">\n\nWow, Florida...DeSantis turning your whole state into the village idiot.",
">\n\nNot a very sharp turn",
">\n\nHonestly, any licensed doctor who is actively antivax should have their medical license revoked.",
">\n\nRemember the crazy \"demon sperm causes disease\" woman? She got a medical degree in Nigeria and Texas accepts it as a real medical degree with no further questions.\nThe Surgeon General of Florida was standing next to her when she was making all these insane statements.",
">\n\nTrue, but the Surgeon General doesn't decide that. It goes up to a medical licensing board in Florida that is part of a national collective called the Federation of State Medical Boards. It's hard to get your license revoked for sure, but the main factor of medical malpractice is failing to meet the accepted standard of care. That is to say, they can be found in violation of this if their level of care deviates from the level of care any other reasonable doctor would provide in the same field and with the same qualifications.\nVaccinations are a standard of care in medical care, and only a select few doctors deviate from that. We're at the point where action needs to be taken against them.",
">\n\nNice, court the quickly dwindling demographic of voters!\nThat’s the problem with death cults, they tend to go extinct.",
">\n\nmust be trans people killing them all",
">\n\nIt's not hard to court the dumbest people in the country.",
">\n\nNot exactly a growing demographic, is it Ronny?",
">\n\nI really don’t get this guy. His anti-vax crusade is not going to go over well with the majority of the country, so I have trouble understanding why he’s doubling down on it.\nI think he’s going to get a very nasty surprise when the 2024 primary and general election campaigns start in full swing.",
">\n\nYea I used to think he would be a dangerous candidate in 2024, but I'm really starting to doubt his ability to court national voters in a general election. Even considering the electoral college. I thought he was just taking advantage of Trump's base, but seems like he's a true believer autocrat with a chip on his shoulder. And I'm not sure that will play well for him like it did for an outsider showman like Trump. Hopefully that's not just my wishful thinking.",
">\n\nOf course he's courting anti-vaxers. It's wilfully-ignorant, anti-\"liberal\" identity signaling that Tronald Dump established among the drooling dregs of his base that DeSantis is cashing in on.",
">\n\nAre they keeping a death graph of courted, won, died?",
">\n\nHow’s he doing on the home insurance crisis?",
">\n\nRon DeSantis, a brown Nazi, is nothing more than a fucking asshole.",
">\n\nYou ever notice that left leaning news is behind a paywall 10000x more often than right leaning websites?",
">\n\nThe real news isn't some dude blogging, they are paid reporters.",
">\n\nThis reminded me of a few years ago. A friend of mine made me sit down and watch a video about how the dollar was going to collapse and the world was going to end. It was some bald guy who couldn't be bothered to put on a shirt, in a trailer with curtains that were half broken.\nThis was the expert that I needed to listen to.\nWe're not very close friends anymore"
] |
>
Full truth: when the price of silver drops to really low prices I like to buy a couple hundred ounces because I feel like a pirate. I wait for it to go up a few bucks and then I sell it. Basically break-even after expenses and all.
But I get to feel like a pirate. It's stupid, but it's fun.
|
[
"Uh I think he has every anti-vaxer vote on lock. FL loves the guy. But nationally he can't court the independent voters and that's where the election is.",
">\n\nI just don't see any excuse to why though, were they just content with DeSantis and Rubio? What was the point of not voting? - this is a hypothetical question",
">\n\nThe common problems I see quoted for the bad turnout are:\n\nFL Dems have no system for nurturing talent so we ended up with an uninspiring candidate.\nFL Dems ground game was weak and only available during election season. Some teams couldnt even get door hangers or fliers to hand out.\nDem turnout may have been suppressed by DeSantis election police force publicly arresting voters a few weeks before the election.\nGov DeSantis used the state government to implement popular policies just before the election (eg gas holiday) or delay unpopular policies till after the election (eg electricity price hikes)\nGov DeSantis's probably illegal Congressional map likely depressed some Dem turnout as Dem districts were wiped out - so why bother voting?\nNational Dem groups abandoned Florida. In 2028, they spent $38m here. In 2022, its was less than $2m.\nGov DeSantis - thanks to huge donations, especially from outside groups - was able to spend $250m in his campaign. Crist could only spend $40m.\nFlorida went for Obama twice which scared the Republicans shitless. So they spent the last 14 years constantly registering new voters. FL Dems didnt seem to respond at a state level.\nFlorida seems to be the \"leave me alone\" state (while getting 1/3 of its budget from the Federal government) and DeSantis tapped into that with his mask bans etc.\nI also see rumors about FL Dems relying too much on external vendors who consistently fail (whereas FL Republicans do not outsource as much). And various fights within FL Dems stops them from breaking away from failing vendors.",
">\n\nWow I didn't actually expect a response. Thanks for the good response, wish there was something we could do though",
">\n\nWhen a person selected to be surgeon general goes out of his way to misinform and put citizens in danger, what is the point anymore?",
">\n\nI think I can answer that. The point is Florida.",
">\n\nJust the tip 🍆",
">\n\nI don’t understand the pride in ignorance.",
">\n\nI wonder if the plan is just to build a dumbass army of bedridden down there.",
">\n\nHe's already done that, the retirement homes are full of them ready to die for him",
">\n\nWow, Florida...DeSantis turning your whole state into the village idiot.",
">\n\nNot a very sharp turn",
">\n\nHonestly, any licensed doctor who is actively antivax should have their medical license revoked.",
">\n\nRemember the crazy \"demon sperm causes disease\" woman? She got a medical degree in Nigeria and Texas accepts it as a real medical degree with no further questions.\nThe Surgeon General of Florida was standing next to her when she was making all these insane statements.",
">\n\nTrue, but the Surgeon General doesn't decide that. It goes up to a medical licensing board in Florida that is part of a national collective called the Federation of State Medical Boards. It's hard to get your license revoked for sure, but the main factor of medical malpractice is failing to meet the accepted standard of care. That is to say, they can be found in violation of this if their level of care deviates from the level of care any other reasonable doctor would provide in the same field and with the same qualifications.\nVaccinations are a standard of care in medical care, and only a select few doctors deviate from that. We're at the point where action needs to be taken against them.",
">\n\nNice, court the quickly dwindling demographic of voters!\nThat’s the problem with death cults, they tend to go extinct.",
">\n\nmust be trans people killing them all",
">\n\nIt's not hard to court the dumbest people in the country.",
">\n\nNot exactly a growing demographic, is it Ronny?",
">\n\nI really don’t get this guy. His anti-vax crusade is not going to go over well with the majority of the country, so I have trouble understanding why he’s doubling down on it.\nI think he’s going to get a very nasty surprise when the 2024 primary and general election campaigns start in full swing.",
">\n\nYea I used to think he would be a dangerous candidate in 2024, but I'm really starting to doubt his ability to court national voters in a general election. Even considering the electoral college. I thought he was just taking advantage of Trump's base, but seems like he's a true believer autocrat with a chip on his shoulder. And I'm not sure that will play well for him like it did for an outsider showman like Trump. Hopefully that's not just my wishful thinking.",
">\n\nOf course he's courting anti-vaxers. It's wilfully-ignorant, anti-\"liberal\" identity signaling that Tronald Dump established among the drooling dregs of his base that DeSantis is cashing in on.",
">\n\nAre they keeping a death graph of courted, won, died?",
">\n\nHow’s he doing on the home insurance crisis?",
">\n\nRon DeSantis, a brown Nazi, is nothing more than a fucking asshole.",
">\n\nYou ever notice that left leaning news is behind a paywall 10000x more often than right leaning websites?",
">\n\nThe real news isn't some dude blogging, they are paid reporters.",
">\n\nThis reminded me of a few years ago. A friend of mine made me sit down and watch a video about how the dollar was going to collapse and the world was going to end. It was some bald guy who couldn't be bothered to put on a shirt, in a trailer with curtains that were half broken.\nThis was the expert that I needed to listen to.\nWe're not very close friends anymore",
">\n\nI had a friend's bf explain to me for an uncomfortable amount of time why I needed to put all my money in physical gold. But he couldn't afford it, so he had bought up a bunch of silver dollars and they just sat in piles on the floor of their dining room. Sigh...."
] |
>
Well, see, that is legit! Everyone is having fun! Hoarding it in pile on your carpet next to your credenza is less fun, I think. Less pirate. More.... Bad retirement fund decisions.
|
[
"Uh I think he has every anti-vaxer vote on lock. FL loves the guy. But nationally he can't court the independent voters and that's where the election is.",
">\n\nI just don't see any excuse to why though, were they just content with DeSantis and Rubio? What was the point of not voting? - this is a hypothetical question",
">\n\nThe common problems I see quoted for the bad turnout are:\n\nFL Dems have no system for nurturing talent so we ended up with an uninspiring candidate.\nFL Dems ground game was weak and only available during election season. Some teams couldnt even get door hangers or fliers to hand out.\nDem turnout may have been suppressed by DeSantis election police force publicly arresting voters a few weeks before the election.\nGov DeSantis used the state government to implement popular policies just before the election (eg gas holiday) or delay unpopular policies till after the election (eg electricity price hikes)\nGov DeSantis's probably illegal Congressional map likely depressed some Dem turnout as Dem districts were wiped out - so why bother voting?\nNational Dem groups abandoned Florida. In 2028, they spent $38m here. In 2022, its was less than $2m.\nGov DeSantis - thanks to huge donations, especially from outside groups - was able to spend $250m in his campaign. Crist could only spend $40m.\nFlorida went for Obama twice which scared the Republicans shitless. So they spent the last 14 years constantly registering new voters. FL Dems didnt seem to respond at a state level.\nFlorida seems to be the \"leave me alone\" state (while getting 1/3 of its budget from the Federal government) and DeSantis tapped into that with his mask bans etc.\nI also see rumors about FL Dems relying too much on external vendors who consistently fail (whereas FL Republicans do not outsource as much). And various fights within FL Dems stops them from breaking away from failing vendors.",
">\n\nWow I didn't actually expect a response. Thanks for the good response, wish there was something we could do though",
">\n\nWhen a person selected to be surgeon general goes out of his way to misinform and put citizens in danger, what is the point anymore?",
">\n\nI think I can answer that. The point is Florida.",
">\n\nJust the tip 🍆",
">\n\nI don’t understand the pride in ignorance.",
">\n\nI wonder if the plan is just to build a dumbass army of bedridden down there.",
">\n\nHe's already done that, the retirement homes are full of them ready to die for him",
">\n\nWow, Florida...DeSantis turning your whole state into the village idiot.",
">\n\nNot a very sharp turn",
">\n\nHonestly, any licensed doctor who is actively antivax should have their medical license revoked.",
">\n\nRemember the crazy \"demon sperm causes disease\" woman? She got a medical degree in Nigeria and Texas accepts it as a real medical degree with no further questions.\nThe Surgeon General of Florida was standing next to her when she was making all these insane statements.",
">\n\nTrue, but the Surgeon General doesn't decide that. It goes up to a medical licensing board in Florida that is part of a national collective called the Federation of State Medical Boards. It's hard to get your license revoked for sure, but the main factor of medical malpractice is failing to meet the accepted standard of care. That is to say, they can be found in violation of this if their level of care deviates from the level of care any other reasonable doctor would provide in the same field and with the same qualifications.\nVaccinations are a standard of care in medical care, and only a select few doctors deviate from that. We're at the point where action needs to be taken against them.",
">\n\nNice, court the quickly dwindling demographic of voters!\nThat’s the problem with death cults, they tend to go extinct.",
">\n\nmust be trans people killing them all",
">\n\nIt's not hard to court the dumbest people in the country.",
">\n\nNot exactly a growing demographic, is it Ronny?",
">\n\nI really don’t get this guy. His anti-vax crusade is not going to go over well with the majority of the country, so I have trouble understanding why he’s doubling down on it.\nI think he’s going to get a very nasty surprise when the 2024 primary and general election campaigns start in full swing.",
">\n\nYea I used to think he would be a dangerous candidate in 2024, but I'm really starting to doubt his ability to court national voters in a general election. Even considering the electoral college. I thought he was just taking advantage of Trump's base, but seems like he's a true believer autocrat with a chip on his shoulder. And I'm not sure that will play well for him like it did for an outsider showman like Trump. Hopefully that's not just my wishful thinking.",
">\n\nOf course he's courting anti-vaxers. It's wilfully-ignorant, anti-\"liberal\" identity signaling that Tronald Dump established among the drooling dregs of his base that DeSantis is cashing in on.",
">\n\nAre they keeping a death graph of courted, won, died?",
">\n\nHow’s he doing on the home insurance crisis?",
">\n\nRon DeSantis, a brown Nazi, is nothing more than a fucking asshole.",
">\n\nYou ever notice that left leaning news is behind a paywall 10000x more often than right leaning websites?",
">\n\nThe real news isn't some dude blogging, they are paid reporters.",
">\n\nThis reminded me of a few years ago. A friend of mine made me sit down and watch a video about how the dollar was going to collapse and the world was going to end. It was some bald guy who couldn't be bothered to put on a shirt, in a trailer with curtains that were half broken.\nThis was the expert that I needed to listen to.\nWe're not very close friends anymore",
">\n\nI had a friend's bf explain to me for an uncomfortable amount of time why I needed to put all my money in physical gold. But he couldn't afford it, so he had bought up a bunch of silver dollars and they just sat in piles on the floor of their dining room. Sigh....",
">\n\nFull truth: when the price of silver drops to really low prices I like to buy a couple hundred ounces because I feel like a pirate. I wait for it to go up a few bucks and then I sell it. Basically break-even after expenses and all.\nBut I get to feel like a pirate. It's stupid, but it's fun."
] |
>
anti vax politicians should not be allowed any vaccines again
|
[
"Uh I think he has every anti-vaxer vote on lock. FL loves the guy. But nationally he can't court the independent voters and that's where the election is.",
">\n\nI just don't see any excuse to why though, were they just content with DeSantis and Rubio? What was the point of not voting? - this is a hypothetical question",
">\n\nThe common problems I see quoted for the bad turnout are:\n\nFL Dems have no system for nurturing talent so we ended up with an uninspiring candidate.\nFL Dems ground game was weak and only available during election season. Some teams couldnt even get door hangers or fliers to hand out.\nDem turnout may have been suppressed by DeSantis election police force publicly arresting voters a few weeks before the election.\nGov DeSantis used the state government to implement popular policies just before the election (eg gas holiday) or delay unpopular policies till after the election (eg electricity price hikes)\nGov DeSantis's probably illegal Congressional map likely depressed some Dem turnout as Dem districts were wiped out - so why bother voting?\nNational Dem groups abandoned Florida. In 2028, they spent $38m here. In 2022, its was less than $2m.\nGov DeSantis - thanks to huge donations, especially from outside groups - was able to spend $250m in his campaign. Crist could only spend $40m.\nFlorida went for Obama twice which scared the Republicans shitless. So they spent the last 14 years constantly registering new voters. FL Dems didnt seem to respond at a state level.\nFlorida seems to be the \"leave me alone\" state (while getting 1/3 of its budget from the Federal government) and DeSantis tapped into that with his mask bans etc.\nI also see rumors about FL Dems relying too much on external vendors who consistently fail (whereas FL Republicans do not outsource as much). And various fights within FL Dems stops them from breaking away from failing vendors.",
">\n\nWow I didn't actually expect a response. Thanks for the good response, wish there was something we could do though",
">\n\nWhen a person selected to be surgeon general goes out of his way to misinform and put citizens in danger, what is the point anymore?",
">\n\nI think I can answer that. The point is Florida.",
">\n\nJust the tip 🍆",
">\n\nI don’t understand the pride in ignorance.",
">\n\nI wonder if the plan is just to build a dumbass army of bedridden down there.",
">\n\nHe's already done that, the retirement homes are full of them ready to die for him",
">\n\nWow, Florida...DeSantis turning your whole state into the village idiot.",
">\n\nNot a very sharp turn",
">\n\nHonestly, any licensed doctor who is actively antivax should have their medical license revoked.",
">\n\nRemember the crazy \"demon sperm causes disease\" woman? She got a medical degree in Nigeria and Texas accepts it as a real medical degree with no further questions.\nThe Surgeon General of Florida was standing next to her when she was making all these insane statements.",
">\n\nTrue, but the Surgeon General doesn't decide that. It goes up to a medical licensing board in Florida that is part of a national collective called the Federation of State Medical Boards. It's hard to get your license revoked for sure, but the main factor of medical malpractice is failing to meet the accepted standard of care. That is to say, they can be found in violation of this if their level of care deviates from the level of care any other reasonable doctor would provide in the same field and with the same qualifications.\nVaccinations are a standard of care in medical care, and only a select few doctors deviate from that. We're at the point where action needs to be taken against them.",
">\n\nNice, court the quickly dwindling demographic of voters!\nThat’s the problem with death cults, they tend to go extinct.",
">\n\nmust be trans people killing them all",
">\n\nIt's not hard to court the dumbest people in the country.",
">\n\nNot exactly a growing demographic, is it Ronny?",
">\n\nI really don’t get this guy. His anti-vax crusade is not going to go over well with the majority of the country, so I have trouble understanding why he’s doubling down on it.\nI think he’s going to get a very nasty surprise when the 2024 primary and general election campaigns start in full swing.",
">\n\nYea I used to think he would be a dangerous candidate in 2024, but I'm really starting to doubt his ability to court national voters in a general election. Even considering the electoral college. I thought he was just taking advantage of Trump's base, but seems like he's a true believer autocrat with a chip on his shoulder. And I'm not sure that will play well for him like it did for an outsider showman like Trump. Hopefully that's not just my wishful thinking.",
">\n\nOf course he's courting anti-vaxers. It's wilfully-ignorant, anti-\"liberal\" identity signaling that Tronald Dump established among the drooling dregs of his base that DeSantis is cashing in on.",
">\n\nAre they keeping a death graph of courted, won, died?",
">\n\nHow’s he doing on the home insurance crisis?",
">\n\nRon DeSantis, a brown Nazi, is nothing more than a fucking asshole.",
">\n\nYou ever notice that left leaning news is behind a paywall 10000x more often than right leaning websites?",
">\n\nThe real news isn't some dude blogging, they are paid reporters.",
">\n\nThis reminded me of a few years ago. A friend of mine made me sit down and watch a video about how the dollar was going to collapse and the world was going to end. It was some bald guy who couldn't be bothered to put on a shirt, in a trailer with curtains that were half broken.\nThis was the expert that I needed to listen to.\nWe're not very close friends anymore",
">\n\nI had a friend's bf explain to me for an uncomfortable amount of time why I needed to put all my money in physical gold. But he couldn't afford it, so he had bought up a bunch of silver dollars and they just sat in piles on the floor of their dining room. Sigh....",
">\n\nFull truth: when the price of silver drops to really low prices I like to buy a couple hundred ounces because I feel like a pirate. I wait for it to go up a few bucks and then I sell it. Basically break-even after expenses and all.\nBut I get to feel like a pirate. It's stupid, but it's fun.",
">\n\nWell, see, that is legit! Everyone is having fun! Hoarding it in pile on your carpet next to your credenza is less fun, I think. Less pirate. More.... Bad retirement fund decisions."
] |
>
DeSantis governs with scientific ignorance, and religious bigotry, misogyny, and homophobia.
|
[
"Uh I think he has every anti-vaxer vote on lock. FL loves the guy. But nationally he can't court the independent voters and that's where the election is.",
">\n\nI just don't see any excuse to why though, were they just content with DeSantis and Rubio? What was the point of not voting? - this is a hypothetical question",
">\n\nThe common problems I see quoted for the bad turnout are:\n\nFL Dems have no system for nurturing talent so we ended up with an uninspiring candidate.\nFL Dems ground game was weak and only available during election season. Some teams couldnt even get door hangers or fliers to hand out.\nDem turnout may have been suppressed by DeSantis election police force publicly arresting voters a few weeks before the election.\nGov DeSantis used the state government to implement popular policies just before the election (eg gas holiday) or delay unpopular policies till after the election (eg electricity price hikes)\nGov DeSantis's probably illegal Congressional map likely depressed some Dem turnout as Dem districts were wiped out - so why bother voting?\nNational Dem groups abandoned Florida. In 2028, they spent $38m here. In 2022, its was less than $2m.\nGov DeSantis - thanks to huge donations, especially from outside groups - was able to spend $250m in his campaign. Crist could only spend $40m.\nFlorida went for Obama twice which scared the Republicans shitless. So they spent the last 14 years constantly registering new voters. FL Dems didnt seem to respond at a state level.\nFlorida seems to be the \"leave me alone\" state (while getting 1/3 of its budget from the Federal government) and DeSantis tapped into that with his mask bans etc.\nI also see rumors about FL Dems relying too much on external vendors who consistently fail (whereas FL Republicans do not outsource as much). And various fights within FL Dems stops them from breaking away from failing vendors.",
">\n\nWow I didn't actually expect a response. Thanks for the good response, wish there was something we could do though",
">\n\nWhen a person selected to be surgeon general goes out of his way to misinform and put citizens in danger, what is the point anymore?",
">\n\nI think I can answer that. The point is Florida.",
">\n\nJust the tip 🍆",
">\n\nI don’t understand the pride in ignorance.",
">\n\nI wonder if the plan is just to build a dumbass army of bedridden down there.",
">\n\nHe's already done that, the retirement homes are full of them ready to die for him",
">\n\nWow, Florida...DeSantis turning your whole state into the village idiot.",
">\n\nNot a very sharp turn",
">\n\nHonestly, any licensed doctor who is actively antivax should have their medical license revoked.",
">\n\nRemember the crazy \"demon sperm causes disease\" woman? She got a medical degree in Nigeria and Texas accepts it as a real medical degree with no further questions.\nThe Surgeon General of Florida was standing next to her when she was making all these insane statements.",
">\n\nTrue, but the Surgeon General doesn't decide that. It goes up to a medical licensing board in Florida that is part of a national collective called the Federation of State Medical Boards. It's hard to get your license revoked for sure, but the main factor of medical malpractice is failing to meet the accepted standard of care. That is to say, they can be found in violation of this if their level of care deviates from the level of care any other reasonable doctor would provide in the same field and with the same qualifications.\nVaccinations are a standard of care in medical care, and only a select few doctors deviate from that. We're at the point where action needs to be taken against them.",
">\n\nNice, court the quickly dwindling demographic of voters!\nThat’s the problem with death cults, they tend to go extinct.",
">\n\nmust be trans people killing them all",
">\n\nIt's not hard to court the dumbest people in the country.",
">\n\nNot exactly a growing demographic, is it Ronny?",
">\n\nI really don’t get this guy. His anti-vax crusade is not going to go over well with the majority of the country, so I have trouble understanding why he’s doubling down on it.\nI think he’s going to get a very nasty surprise when the 2024 primary and general election campaigns start in full swing.",
">\n\nYea I used to think he would be a dangerous candidate in 2024, but I'm really starting to doubt his ability to court national voters in a general election. Even considering the electoral college. I thought he was just taking advantage of Trump's base, but seems like he's a true believer autocrat with a chip on his shoulder. And I'm not sure that will play well for him like it did for an outsider showman like Trump. Hopefully that's not just my wishful thinking.",
">\n\nOf course he's courting anti-vaxers. It's wilfully-ignorant, anti-\"liberal\" identity signaling that Tronald Dump established among the drooling dregs of his base that DeSantis is cashing in on.",
">\n\nAre they keeping a death graph of courted, won, died?",
">\n\nHow’s he doing on the home insurance crisis?",
">\n\nRon DeSantis, a brown Nazi, is nothing more than a fucking asshole.",
">\n\nYou ever notice that left leaning news is behind a paywall 10000x more often than right leaning websites?",
">\n\nThe real news isn't some dude blogging, they are paid reporters.",
">\n\nThis reminded me of a few years ago. A friend of mine made me sit down and watch a video about how the dollar was going to collapse and the world was going to end. It was some bald guy who couldn't be bothered to put on a shirt, in a trailer with curtains that were half broken.\nThis was the expert that I needed to listen to.\nWe're not very close friends anymore",
">\n\nI had a friend's bf explain to me for an uncomfortable amount of time why I needed to put all my money in physical gold. But he couldn't afford it, so he had bought up a bunch of silver dollars and they just sat in piles on the floor of their dining room. Sigh....",
">\n\nFull truth: when the price of silver drops to really low prices I like to buy a couple hundred ounces because I feel like a pirate. I wait for it to go up a few bucks and then I sell it. Basically break-even after expenses and all.\nBut I get to feel like a pirate. It's stupid, but it's fun.",
">\n\nWell, see, that is legit! Everyone is having fun! Hoarding it in pile on your carpet next to your credenza is less fun, I think. Less pirate. More.... Bad retirement fund decisions.",
">\n\nanti vax politicians should not be allowed any vaccines again"
] |
>
|
[
"Uh I think he has every anti-vaxer vote on lock. FL loves the guy. But nationally he can't court the independent voters and that's where the election is.",
">\n\nI just don't see any excuse to why though, were they just content with DeSantis and Rubio? What was the point of not voting? - this is a hypothetical question",
">\n\nThe common problems I see quoted for the bad turnout are:\n\nFL Dems have no system for nurturing talent so we ended up with an uninspiring candidate.\nFL Dems ground game was weak and only available during election season. Some teams couldnt even get door hangers or fliers to hand out.\nDem turnout may have been suppressed by DeSantis election police force publicly arresting voters a few weeks before the election.\nGov DeSantis used the state government to implement popular policies just before the election (eg gas holiday) or delay unpopular policies till after the election (eg electricity price hikes)\nGov DeSantis's probably illegal Congressional map likely depressed some Dem turnout as Dem districts were wiped out - so why bother voting?\nNational Dem groups abandoned Florida. In 2028, they spent $38m here. In 2022, its was less than $2m.\nGov DeSantis - thanks to huge donations, especially from outside groups - was able to spend $250m in his campaign. Crist could only spend $40m.\nFlorida went for Obama twice which scared the Republicans shitless. So they spent the last 14 years constantly registering new voters. FL Dems didnt seem to respond at a state level.\nFlorida seems to be the \"leave me alone\" state (while getting 1/3 of its budget from the Federal government) and DeSantis tapped into that with his mask bans etc.\nI also see rumors about FL Dems relying too much on external vendors who consistently fail (whereas FL Republicans do not outsource as much). And various fights within FL Dems stops them from breaking away from failing vendors.",
">\n\nWow I didn't actually expect a response. Thanks for the good response, wish there was something we could do though",
">\n\nWhen a person selected to be surgeon general goes out of his way to misinform and put citizens in danger, what is the point anymore?",
">\n\nI think I can answer that. The point is Florida.",
">\n\nJust the tip 🍆",
">\n\nI don’t understand the pride in ignorance.",
">\n\nI wonder if the plan is just to build a dumbass army of bedridden down there.",
">\n\nHe's already done that, the retirement homes are full of them ready to die for him",
">\n\nWow, Florida...DeSantis turning your whole state into the village idiot.",
">\n\nNot a very sharp turn",
">\n\nHonestly, any licensed doctor who is actively antivax should have their medical license revoked.",
">\n\nRemember the crazy \"demon sperm causes disease\" woman? She got a medical degree in Nigeria and Texas accepts it as a real medical degree with no further questions.\nThe Surgeon General of Florida was standing next to her when she was making all these insane statements.",
">\n\nTrue, but the Surgeon General doesn't decide that. It goes up to a medical licensing board in Florida that is part of a national collective called the Federation of State Medical Boards. It's hard to get your license revoked for sure, but the main factor of medical malpractice is failing to meet the accepted standard of care. That is to say, they can be found in violation of this if their level of care deviates from the level of care any other reasonable doctor would provide in the same field and with the same qualifications.\nVaccinations are a standard of care in medical care, and only a select few doctors deviate from that. We're at the point where action needs to be taken against them.",
">\n\nNice, court the quickly dwindling demographic of voters!\nThat’s the problem with death cults, they tend to go extinct.",
">\n\nmust be trans people killing them all",
">\n\nIt's not hard to court the dumbest people in the country.",
">\n\nNot exactly a growing demographic, is it Ronny?",
">\n\nI really don’t get this guy. His anti-vax crusade is not going to go over well with the majority of the country, so I have trouble understanding why he’s doubling down on it.\nI think he’s going to get a very nasty surprise when the 2024 primary and general election campaigns start in full swing.",
">\n\nYea I used to think he would be a dangerous candidate in 2024, but I'm really starting to doubt his ability to court national voters in a general election. Even considering the electoral college. I thought he was just taking advantage of Trump's base, but seems like he's a true believer autocrat with a chip on his shoulder. And I'm not sure that will play well for him like it did for an outsider showman like Trump. Hopefully that's not just my wishful thinking.",
">\n\nOf course he's courting anti-vaxers. It's wilfully-ignorant, anti-\"liberal\" identity signaling that Tronald Dump established among the drooling dregs of his base that DeSantis is cashing in on.",
">\n\nAre they keeping a death graph of courted, won, died?",
">\n\nHow’s he doing on the home insurance crisis?",
">\n\nRon DeSantis, a brown Nazi, is nothing more than a fucking asshole.",
">\n\nYou ever notice that left leaning news is behind a paywall 10000x more often than right leaning websites?",
">\n\nThe real news isn't some dude blogging, they are paid reporters.",
">\n\nThis reminded me of a few years ago. A friend of mine made me sit down and watch a video about how the dollar was going to collapse and the world was going to end. It was some bald guy who couldn't be bothered to put on a shirt, in a trailer with curtains that were half broken.\nThis was the expert that I needed to listen to.\nWe're not very close friends anymore",
">\n\nI had a friend's bf explain to me for an uncomfortable amount of time why I needed to put all my money in physical gold. But he couldn't afford it, so he had bought up a bunch of silver dollars and they just sat in piles on the floor of their dining room. Sigh....",
">\n\nFull truth: when the price of silver drops to really low prices I like to buy a couple hundred ounces because I feel like a pirate. I wait for it to go up a few bucks and then I sell it. Basically break-even after expenses and all.\nBut I get to feel like a pirate. It's stupid, but it's fun.",
">\n\nWell, see, that is legit! Everyone is having fun! Hoarding it in pile on your carpet next to your credenza is less fun, I think. Less pirate. More.... Bad retirement fund decisions.",
">\n\nanti vax politicians should not be allowed any vaccines again",
">\n\nDeSantis governs with scientific ignorance, and religious bigotry, misogyny, and homophobia."
] |
oo specs pls!
|
[] |
>
This is just a stock EK68 from Epomaker. Goes by the name GMK67 on other stores.
|
[
"oo specs pls!"
] |
>
Series One Pro for the win. Great mouse.
Board looks great!
|
[
"oo specs pls!",
">\n\nThis is just a stock EK68 from Epomaker. Goes by the name GMK67 on other stores."
] |
>
I love that case. What is it?
|
[
"oo specs pls!",
">\n\nThis is just a stock EK68 from Epomaker. Goes by the name GMK67 on other stores.",
">\n\nSeries One Pro for the win. Great mouse. \nBoard looks great!"
] |
>
Gmk67?
|
[
"oo specs pls!",
">\n\nThis is just a stock EK68 from Epomaker. Goes by the name GMK67 on other stores.",
">\n\nSeries One Pro for the win. Great mouse. \nBoard looks great!",
">\n\nI love that case. What is it?"
] |
>
We need banana for scale
|
[
"oo specs pls!",
">\n\nThis is just a stock EK68 from Epomaker. Goes by the name GMK67 on other stores.",
">\n\nSeries One Pro for the win. Great mouse. \nBoard looks great!",
">\n\nI love that case. What is it?",
">\n\nGmk67?"
] |
>
Uyu
!바나나맛우유!<
|
[
"oo specs pls!",
">\n\nThis is just a stock EK68 from Epomaker. Goes by the name GMK67 on other stores.",
">\n\nSeries One Pro for the win. Great mouse. \nBoard looks great!",
">\n\nI love that case. What is it?",
">\n\nGmk67?",
">\n\nWe need banana for scale"
] |
>
What board?
|
[
"oo specs pls!",
">\n\nThis is just a stock EK68 from Epomaker. Goes by the name GMK67 on other stores.",
">\n\nSeries One Pro for the win. Great mouse. \nBoard looks great!",
">\n\nI love that case. What is it?",
">\n\nGmk67?",
">\n\nWe need banana for scale",
">\n\nUyu\n\n!바나나맛우유!<"
] |
>
This is an EK68 from Epomaker
|
[
"oo specs pls!",
">\n\nThis is just a stock EK68 from Epomaker. Goes by the name GMK67 on other stores.",
">\n\nSeries One Pro for the win. Great mouse. \nBoard looks great!",
">\n\nI love that case. What is it?",
">\n\nGmk67?",
">\n\nWe need banana for scale",
">\n\nUyu\n\n!바나나맛우유!<",
">\n\nWhat board?"
] |
>
|
[
"oo specs pls!",
">\n\nThis is just a stock EK68 from Epomaker. Goes by the name GMK67 on other stores.",
">\n\nSeries One Pro for the win. Great mouse. \nBoard looks great!",
">\n\nI love that case. What is it?",
">\n\nGmk67?",
">\n\nWe need banana for scale",
">\n\nUyu\n\n!바나나맛우유!<",
">\n\nWhat board?",
">\n\nThis is an EK68 from Epomaker"
] |
As a fan of the show I completely agree. That’s why I watch it.
|
[] |
>
I loved it up until season 3. I haven’t been able to keep my interest up after that.
|
[
"As a fan of the show I completely agree. That’s why I watch it."
] |
>
Same. By the time the third season rolled around, the fans made me embarrassed about watching it. Plus, it just wasn't as good.
|
[
"As a fan of the show I completely agree. That’s why I watch it.",
">\n\nI loved it up until season 3. I haven’t been able to keep my interest up after that."
] |
>
Some of it can be annoying, mainly the way Morty talk sometimes. Still, I think it’s an alright show.
|
[
"As a fan of the show I completely agree. That’s why I watch it.",
">\n\nI loved it up until season 3. I haven’t been able to keep my interest up after that.",
">\n\nSame. By the time the third season rolled around, the fans made me embarrassed about watching it. Plus, it just wasn't as good."
] |
>
Rick's stupid burping tic is worse than Morty's whine.
|
[
"As a fan of the show I completely agree. That’s why I watch it.",
">\n\nI loved it up until season 3. I haven’t been able to keep my interest up after that.",
">\n\nSame. By the time the third season rolled around, the fans made me embarrassed about watching it. Plus, it just wasn't as good.",
">\n\nSome of it can be annoying, mainly the way Morty talk sometimes. Still, I think it’s an alright show."
] |
>
Weirdly enough it doesn’t bug me. Sometimes I don’t notice it.
|
[
"As a fan of the show I completely agree. That’s why I watch it.",
">\n\nI loved it up until season 3. I haven’t been able to keep my interest up after that.",
">\n\nSame. By the time the third season rolled around, the fans made me embarrassed about watching it. Plus, it just wasn't as good.",
">\n\nSome of it can be annoying, mainly the way Morty talk sometimes. Still, I think it’s an alright show.",
">\n\nRick's stupid burping tic is worse than Morty's whine."
] |
>
I mean, I don’t think it’s exactly aimed at the mature and refined adult
|
[
"As a fan of the show I completely agree. That’s why I watch it.",
">\n\nI loved it up until season 3. I haven’t been able to keep my interest up after that.",
">\n\nSame. By the time the third season rolled around, the fans made me embarrassed about watching it. Plus, it just wasn't as good.",
">\n\nSome of it can be annoying, mainly the way Morty talk sometimes. Still, I think it’s an alright show.",
">\n\nRick's stupid burping tic is worse than Morty's whine.",
">\n\nWeirdly enough it doesn’t bug me. Sometimes I don’t notice it."
] |
>
It's alright especially the first few seasons, but after that it just doesn't have the spark it used to
|
[
"As a fan of the show I completely agree. That’s why I watch it.",
">\n\nI loved it up until season 3. I haven’t been able to keep my interest up after that.",
">\n\nSame. By the time the third season rolled around, the fans made me embarrassed about watching it. Plus, it just wasn't as good.",
">\n\nSome of it can be annoying, mainly the way Morty talk sometimes. Still, I think it’s an alright show.",
">\n\nRick's stupid burping tic is worse than Morty's whine.",
">\n\nWeirdly enough it doesn’t bug me. Sometimes I don’t notice it.",
">\n\nI mean, I don’t think it’s exactly aimed at the mature and refined adult"
] |
>
Its an okay show. Lost interest at season 3/4 i think as i just grew from the comedy
|
[
"As a fan of the show I completely agree. That’s why I watch it.",
">\n\nI loved it up until season 3. I haven’t been able to keep my interest up after that.",
">\n\nSame. By the time the third season rolled around, the fans made me embarrassed about watching it. Plus, it just wasn't as good.",
">\n\nSome of it can be annoying, mainly the way Morty talk sometimes. Still, I think it’s an alright show.",
">\n\nRick's stupid burping tic is worse than Morty's whine.",
">\n\nWeirdly enough it doesn’t bug me. Sometimes I don’t notice it.",
">\n\nI mean, I don’t think it’s exactly aimed at the mature and refined adult",
">\n\nIt's alright especially the first few seasons, but after that it just doesn't have the spark it used to"
] |
>
It's a funny show (in a barren landscape of adult animation).
|
[
"As a fan of the show I completely agree. That’s why I watch it.",
">\n\nI loved it up until season 3. I haven’t been able to keep my interest up after that.",
">\n\nSame. By the time the third season rolled around, the fans made me embarrassed about watching it. Plus, it just wasn't as good.",
">\n\nSome of it can be annoying, mainly the way Morty talk sometimes. Still, I think it’s an alright show.",
">\n\nRick's stupid burping tic is worse than Morty's whine.",
">\n\nWeirdly enough it doesn’t bug me. Sometimes I don’t notice it.",
">\n\nI mean, I don’t think it’s exactly aimed at the mature and refined adult",
">\n\nIt's alright especially the first few seasons, but after that it just doesn't have the spark it used to",
">\n\nIts an okay show. Lost interest at season 3/4 i think as i just grew from the comedy"
] |
>
I agree with some of the comments where it just got a bit old after a few seasons. But what I loved is the underlying jokes. When you catch them, it’s quite funny
|
[
"As a fan of the show I completely agree. That’s why I watch it.",
">\n\nI loved it up until season 3. I haven’t been able to keep my interest up after that.",
">\n\nSame. By the time the third season rolled around, the fans made me embarrassed about watching it. Plus, it just wasn't as good.",
">\n\nSome of it can be annoying, mainly the way Morty talk sometimes. Still, I think it’s an alright show.",
">\n\nRick's stupid burping tic is worse than Morty's whine.",
">\n\nWeirdly enough it doesn’t bug me. Sometimes I don’t notice it.",
">\n\nI mean, I don’t think it’s exactly aimed at the mature and refined adult",
">\n\nIt's alright especially the first few seasons, but after that it just doesn't have the spark it used to",
">\n\nIts an okay show. Lost interest at season 3/4 i think as i just grew from the comedy",
">\n\nIt's a funny show (in a barren landscape of adult animation)."
] |
>
Eh. I thought some concepts, like the citadel, were interesting and well used. However, the last couple seasons have been meh; the incest jokes are just overused and now the recasting that's about to be done probably ensures it'll be over by season 10.
In the meantime, South Park is just coasting and virtually not there - hard to say if things will truly go back to normal for them. Family Guy is and has been a cesspool long overdue to be put out of its misery, and aside from a few good episodes here and there, the Simpsons is limping and probably ready to be retired.
Bob's Burgers is ok, but definitely requires a specific taste to enjoy and beyond that, there really isn't much of anything. A king of the hill reboot is apparently in the works, but I'm not super optimistic. I'm hopeful it'll be good, but it probably won't. It's beginning to sound like the Daria related series, now movie, Jodie may have been cancelled - and the concept sounded awful and the Beavis and Butthead reboot wasn't anything great.
|
[
"As a fan of the show I completely agree. That’s why I watch it.",
">\n\nI loved it up until season 3. I haven’t been able to keep my interest up after that.",
">\n\nSame. By the time the third season rolled around, the fans made me embarrassed about watching it. Plus, it just wasn't as good.",
">\n\nSome of it can be annoying, mainly the way Morty talk sometimes. Still, I think it’s an alright show.",
">\n\nRick's stupid burping tic is worse than Morty's whine.",
">\n\nWeirdly enough it doesn’t bug me. Sometimes I don’t notice it.",
">\n\nI mean, I don’t think it’s exactly aimed at the mature and refined adult",
">\n\nIt's alright especially the first few seasons, but after that it just doesn't have the spark it used to",
">\n\nIts an okay show. Lost interest at season 3/4 i think as i just grew from the comedy",
">\n\nIt's a funny show (in a barren landscape of adult animation).",
">\n\nI agree with some of the comments where it just got a bit old after a few seasons. But what I loved is the underlying jokes. When you catch them, it’s quite funny"
] |
>
Its a great show. Hilarious in fact. But you don't have to worry about it anymore, thry just fired justin roiland, the main voice actor for both characters Rick and Morty.
|
[
"As a fan of the show I completely agree. That’s why I watch it.",
">\n\nI loved it up until season 3. I haven’t been able to keep my interest up after that.",
">\n\nSame. By the time the third season rolled around, the fans made me embarrassed about watching it. Plus, it just wasn't as good.",
">\n\nSome of it can be annoying, mainly the way Morty talk sometimes. Still, I think it’s an alright show.",
">\n\nRick's stupid burping tic is worse than Morty's whine.",
">\n\nWeirdly enough it doesn’t bug me. Sometimes I don’t notice it.",
">\n\nI mean, I don’t think it’s exactly aimed at the mature and refined adult",
">\n\nIt's alright especially the first few seasons, but after that it just doesn't have the spark it used to",
">\n\nIts an okay show. Lost interest at season 3/4 i think as i just grew from the comedy",
">\n\nIt's a funny show (in a barren landscape of adult animation).",
">\n\nI agree with some of the comments where it just got a bit old after a few seasons. But what I loved is the underlying jokes. When you catch them, it’s quite funny",
">\n\nEh. I thought some concepts, like the citadel, were interesting and well used. However, the last couple seasons have been meh; the incest jokes are just overused and now the recasting that's about to be done probably ensures it'll be over by season 10. \nIn the meantime, South Park is just coasting and virtually not there - hard to say if things will truly go back to normal for them. Family Guy is and has been a cesspool long overdue to be put out of its misery, and aside from a few good episodes here and there, the Simpsons is limping and probably ready to be retired. \nBob's Burgers is ok, but definitely requires a specific taste to enjoy and beyond that, there really isn't much of anything. A king of the hill reboot is apparently in the works, but I'm not super optimistic. I'm hopeful it'll be good, but it probably won't. It's beginning to sound like the Daria related series, now movie, Jodie may have been cancelled - and the concept sounded awful and the Beavis and Butthead reboot wasn't anything great."
] |
>
It's fun.
They oversell nihilism which attracts a bunch of edgy vocal kids that hype the show too much though.
|
[
"As a fan of the show I completely agree. That’s why I watch it.",
">\n\nI loved it up until season 3. I haven’t been able to keep my interest up after that.",
">\n\nSame. By the time the third season rolled around, the fans made me embarrassed about watching it. Plus, it just wasn't as good.",
">\n\nSome of it can be annoying, mainly the way Morty talk sometimes. Still, I think it’s an alright show.",
">\n\nRick's stupid burping tic is worse than Morty's whine.",
">\n\nWeirdly enough it doesn’t bug me. Sometimes I don’t notice it.",
">\n\nI mean, I don’t think it’s exactly aimed at the mature and refined adult",
">\n\nIt's alright especially the first few seasons, but after that it just doesn't have the spark it used to",
">\n\nIts an okay show. Lost interest at season 3/4 i think as i just grew from the comedy",
">\n\nIt's a funny show (in a barren landscape of adult animation).",
">\n\nI agree with some of the comments where it just got a bit old after a few seasons. But what I loved is the underlying jokes. When you catch them, it’s quite funny",
">\n\nEh. I thought some concepts, like the citadel, were interesting and well used. However, the last couple seasons have been meh; the incest jokes are just overused and now the recasting that's about to be done probably ensures it'll be over by season 10. \nIn the meantime, South Park is just coasting and virtually not there - hard to say if things will truly go back to normal for them. Family Guy is and has been a cesspool long overdue to be put out of its misery, and aside from a few good episodes here and there, the Simpsons is limping and probably ready to be retired. \nBob's Burgers is ok, but definitely requires a specific taste to enjoy and beyond that, there really isn't much of anything. A king of the hill reboot is apparently in the works, but I'm not super optimistic. I'm hopeful it'll be good, but it probably won't. It's beginning to sound like the Daria related series, now movie, Jodie may have been cancelled - and the concept sounded awful and the Beavis and Butthead reboot wasn't anything great.",
">\n\nIts a great show. Hilarious in fact. But you don't have to worry about it anymore, thry just fired justin roiland, the main voice actor for both characters Rick and Morty."
] |
>
Nobody exists on purpose. Nobody belongs anywhere. Everybody's going to die. Come watch TV.
|
[
"As a fan of the show I completely agree. That’s why I watch it.",
">\n\nI loved it up until season 3. I haven’t been able to keep my interest up after that.",
">\n\nSame. By the time the third season rolled around, the fans made me embarrassed about watching it. Plus, it just wasn't as good.",
">\n\nSome of it can be annoying, mainly the way Morty talk sometimes. Still, I think it’s an alright show.",
">\n\nRick's stupid burping tic is worse than Morty's whine.",
">\n\nWeirdly enough it doesn’t bug me. Sometimes I don’t notice it.",
">\n\nI mean, I don’t think it’s exactly aimed at the mature and refined adult",
">\n\nIt's alright especially the first few seasons, but after that it just doesn't have the spark it used to",
">\n\nIts an okay show. Lost interest at season 3/4 i think as i just grew from the comedy",
">\n\nIt's a funny show (in a barren landscape of adult animation).",
">\n\nI agree with some of the comments where it just got a bit old after a few seasons. But what I loved is the underlying jokes. When you catch them, it’s quite funny",
">\n\nEh. I thought some concepts, like the citadel, were interesting and well used. However, the last couple seasons have been meh; the incest jokes are just overused and now the recasting that's about to be done probably ensures it'll be over by season 10. \nIn the meantime, South Park is just coasting and virtually not there - hard to say if things will truly go back to normal for them. Family Guy is and has been a cesspool long overdue to be put out of its misery, and aside from a few good episodes here and there, the Simpsons is limping and probably ready to be retired. \nBob's Burgers is ok, but definitely requires a specific taste to enjoy and beyond that, there really isn't much of anything. A king of the hill reboot is apparently in the works, but I'm not super optimistic. I'm hopeful it'll be good, but it probably won't. It's beginning to sound like the Daria related series, now movie, Jodie may have been cancelled - and the concept sounded awful and the Beavis and Butthead reboot wasn't anything great.",
">\n\nIts a great show. Hilarious in fact. But you don't have to worry about it anymore, thry just fired justin roiland, the main voice actor for both characters Rick and Morty.",
">\n\nIt's fun.\nThey oversell nihilism which attracts a bunch of edgy vocal kids that hype the show too much though."
] |
>
Well I have good news for you, it’s more than likely gonna end.
|
[
"As a fan of the show I completely agree. That’s why I watch it.",
">\n\nI loved it up until season 3. I haven’t been able to keep my interest up after that.",
">\n\nSame. By the time the third season rolled around, the fans made me embarrassed about watching it. Plus, it just wasn't as good.",
">\n\nSome of it can be annoying, mainly the way Morty talk sometimes. Still, I think it’s an alright show.",
">\n\nRick's stupid burping tic is worse than Morty's whine.",
">\n\nWeirdly enough it doesn’t bug me. Sometimes I don’t notice it.",
">\n\nI mean, I don’t think it’s exactly aimed at the mature and refined adult",
">\n\nIt's alright especially the first few seasons, but after that it just doesn't have the spark it used to",
">\n\nIts an okay show. Lost interest at season 3/4 i think as i just grew from the comedy",
">\n\nIt's a funny show (in a barren landscape of adult animation).",
">\n\nI agree with some of the comments where it just got a bit old after a few seasons. But what I loved is the underlying jokes. When you catch them, it’s quite funny",
">\n\nEh. I thought some concepts, like the citadel, were interesting and well used. However, the last couple seasons have been meh; the incest jokes are just overused and now the recasting that's about to be done probably ensures it'll be over by season 10. \nIn the meantime, South Park is just coasting and virtually not there - hard to say if things will truly go back to normal for them. Family Guy is and has been a cesspool long overdue to be put out of its misery, and aside from a few good episodes here and there, the Simpsons is limping and probably ready to be retired. \nBob's Burgers is ok, but definitely requires a specific taste to enjoy and beyond that, there really isn't much of anything. A king of the hill reboot is apparently in the works, but I'm not super optimistic. I'm hopeful it'll be good, but it probably won't. It's beginning to sound like the Daria related series, now movie, Jodie may have been cancelled - and the concept sounded awful and the Beavis and Butthead reboot wasn't anything great.",
">\n\nIts a great show. Hilarious in fact. But you don't have to worry about it anymore, thry just fired justin roiland, the main voice actor for both characters Rick and Morty.",
">\n\nIt's fun.\nThey oversell nihilism which attracts a bunch of edgy vocal kids that hype the show too much though.",
">\n\nNobody exists on purpose. Nobody belongs anywhere. Everybody's going to die. Come watch TV."
] |
>
They have said they're continuing it without Justin Roiland, he's been fired. They said season 7 is continuing as normal otherwise. So I imagine casting for voice replacements coming soon?
|
[
"As a fan of the show I completely agree. That’s why I watch it.",
">\n\nI loved it up until season 3. I haven’t been able to keep my interest up after that.",
">\n\nSame. By the time the third season rolled around, the fans made me embarrassed about watching it. Plus, it just wasn't as good.",
">\n\nSome of it can be annoying, mainly the way Morty talk sometimes. Still, I think it’s an alright show.",
">\n\nRick's stupid burping tic is worse than Morty's whine.",
">\n\nWeirdly enough it doesn’t bug me. Sometimes I don’t notice it.",
">\n\nI mean, I don’t think it’s exactly aimed at the mature and refined adult",
">\n\nIt's alright especially the first few seasons, but after that it just doesn't have the spark it used to",
">\n\nIts an okay show. Lost interest at season 3/4 i think as i just grew from the comedy",
">\n\nIt's a funny show (in a barren landscape of adult animation).",
">\n\nI agree with some of the comments where it just got a bit old after a few seasons. But what I loved is the underlying jokes. When you catch them, it’s quite funny",
">\n\nEh. I thought some concepts, like the citadel, were interesting and well used. However, the last couple seasons have been meh; the incest jokes are just overused and now the recasting that's about to be done probably ensures it'll be over by season 10. \nIn the meantime, South Park is just coasting and virtually not there - hard to say if things will truly go back to normal for them. Family Guy is and has been a cesspool long overdue to be put out of its misery, and aside from a few good episodes here and there, the Simpsons is limping and probably ready to be retired. \nBob's Burgers is ok, but definitely requires a specific taste to enjoy and beyond that, there really isn't much of anything. A king of the hill reboot is apparently in the works, but I'm not super optimistic. I'm hopeful it'll be good, but it probably won't. It's beginning to sound like the Daria related series, now movie, Jodie may have been cancelled - and the concept sounded awful and the Beavis and Butthead reboot wasn't anything great.",
">\n\nIts a great show. Hilarious in fact. But you don't have to worry about it anymore, thry just fired justin roiland, the main voice actor for both characters Rick and Morty.",
">\n\nIt's fun.\nThey oversell nihilism which attracts a bunch of edgy vocal kids that hype the show too much though.",
">\n\nNobody exists on purpose. Nobody belongs anywhere. Everybody's going to die. Come watch TV.",
">\n\nWell I have good news for you, it’s more than likely gonna end."
] |
>
Huh interesting. I was thinking they couldn’t possibly do it without Roiland but I suppose they’ll made do.
|
[
"As a fan of the show I completely agree. That’s why I watch it.",
">\n\nI loved it up until season 3. I haven’t been able to keep my interest up after that.",
">\n\nSame. By the time the third season rolled around, the fans made me embarrassed about watching it. Plus, it just wasn't as good.",
">\n\nSome of it can be annoying, mainly the way Morty talk sometimes. Still, I think it’s an alright show.",
">\n\nRick's stupid burping tic is worse than Morty's whine.",
">\n\nWeirdly enough it doesn’t bug me. Sometimes I don’t notice it.",
">\n\nI mean, I don’t think it’s exactly aimed at the mature and refined adult",
">\n\nIt's alright especially the first few seasons, but after that it just doesn't have the spark it used to",
">\n\nIts an okay show. Lost interest at season 3/4 i think as i just grew from the comedy",
">\n\nIt's a funny show (in a barren landscape of adult animation).",
">\n\nI agree with some of the comments where it just got a bit old after a few seasons. But what I loved is the underlying jokes. When you catch them, it’s quite funny",
">\n\nEh. I thought some concepts, like the citadel, were interesting and well used. However, the last couple seasons have been meh; the incest jokes are just overused and now the recasting that's about to be done probably ensures it'll be over by season 10. \nIn the meantime, South Park is just coasting and virtually not there - hard to say if things will truly go back to normal for them. Family Guy is and has been a cesspool long overdue to be put out of its misery, and aside from a few good episodes here and there, the Simpsons is limping and probably ready to be retired. \nBob's Burgers is ok, but definitely requires a specific taste to enjoy and beyond that, there really isn't much of anything. A king of the hill reboot is apparently in the works, but I'm not super optimistic. I'm hopeful it'll be good, but it probably won't. It's beginning to sound like the Daria related series, now movie, Jodie may have been cancelled - and the concept sounded awful and the Beavis and Butthead reboot wasn't anything great.",
">\n\nIts a great show. Hilarious in fact. But you don't have to worry about it anymore, thry just fired justin roiland, the main voice actor for both characters Rick and Morty.",
">\n\nIt's fun.\nThey oversell nihilism which attracts a bunch of edgy vocal kids that hype the show too much though.",
">\n\nNobody exists on purpose. Nobody belongs anywhere. Everybody's going to die. Come watch TV.",
">\n\nWell I have good news for you, it’s more than likely gonna end.",
">\n\nThey have said they're continuing it without Justin Roiland, he's been fired. They said season 7 is continuing as normal otherwise. So I imagine casting for voice replacements coming soon?"
] |
>
THANK YOU omfg. Lump it in with family guy and american dad. laaaaaame 👎🏻👎🏻 Bring on the downvotes and defensive comments, 😁
|
[
"As a fan of the show I completely agree. That’s why I watch it.",
">\n\nI loved it up until season 3. I haven’t been able to keep my interest up after that.",
">\n\nSame. By the time the third season rolled around, the fans made me embarrassed about watching it. Plus, it just wasn't as good.",
">\n\nSome of it can be annoying, mainly the way Morty talk sometimes. Still, I think it’s an alright show.",
">\n\nRick's stupid burping tic is worse than Morty's whine.",
">\n\nWeirdly enough it doesn’t bug me. Sometimes I don’t notice it.",
">\n\nI mean, I don’t think it’s exactly aimed at the mature and refined adult",
">\n\nIt's alright especially the first few seasons, but after that it just doesn't have the spark it used to",
">\n\nIts an okay show. Lost interest at season 3/4 i think as i just grew from the comedy",
">\n\nIt's a funny show (in a barren landscape of adult animation).",
">\n\nI agree with some of the comments where it just got a bit old after a few seasons. But what I loved is the underlying jokes. When you catch them, it’s quite funny",
">\n\nEh. I thought some concepts, like the citadel, were interesting and well used. However, the last couple seasons have been meh; the incest jokes are just overused and now the recasting that's about to be done probably ensures it'll be over by season 10. \nIn the meantime, South Park is just coasting and virtually not there - hard to say if things will truly go back to normal for them. Family Guy is and has been a cesspool long overdue to be put out of its misery, and aside from a few good episodes here and there, the Simpsons is limping and probably ready to be retired. \nBob's Burgers is ok, but definitely requires a specific taste to enjoy and beyond that, there really isn't much of anything. A king of the hill reboot is apparently in the works, but I'm not super optimistic. I'm hopeful it'll be good, but it probably won't. It's beginning to sound like the Daria related series, now movie, Jodie may have been cancelled - and the concept sounded awful and the Beavis and Butthead reboot wasn't anything great.",
">\n\nIts a great show. Hilarious in fact. But you don't have to worry about it anymore, thry just fired justin roiland, the main voice actor for both characters Rick and Morty.",
">\n\nIt's fun.\nThey oversell nihilism which attracts a bunch of edgy vocal kids that hype the show too much though.",
">\n\nNobody exists on purpose. Nobody belongs anywhere. Everybody's going to die. Come watch TV.",
">\n\nWell I have good news for you, it’s more than likely gonna end.",
">\n\nThey have said they're continuing it without Justin Roiland, he's been fired. They said season 7 is continuing as normal otherwise. So I imagine casting for voice replacements coming soon?",
">\n\nHuh interesting. I was thinking they couldn’t possibly do it without Roiland but I suppose they’ll made do."
] |
>
We’re you high? Cause otherwise you were doing it wrong.
|
[
"As a fan of the show I completely agree. That’s why I watch it.",
">\n\nI loved it up until season 3. I haven’t been able to keep my interest up after that.",
">\n\nSame. By the time the third season rolled around, the fans made me embarrassed about watching it. Plus, it just wasn't as good.",
">\n\nSome of it can be annoying, mainly the way Morty talk sometimes. Still, I think it’s an alright show.",
">\n\nRick's stupid burping tic is worse than Morty's whine.",
">\n\nWeirdly enough it doesn’t bug me. Sometimes I don’t notice it.",
">\n\nI mean, I don’t think it’s exactly aimed at the mature and refined adult",
">\n\nIt's alright especially the first few seasons, but after that it just doesn't have the spark it used to",
">\n\nIts an okay show. Lost interest at season 3/4 i think as i just grew from the comedy",
">\n\nIt's a funny show (in a barren landscape of adult animation).",
">\n\nI agree with some of the comments where it just got a bit old after a few seasons. But what I loved is the underlying jokes. When you catch them, it’s quite funny",
">\n\nEh. I thought some concepts, like the citadel, were interesting and well used. However, the last couple seasons have been meh; the incest jokes are just overused and now the recasting that's about to be done probably ensures it'll be over by season 10. \nIn the meantime, South Park is just coasting and virtually not there - hard to say if things will truly go back to normal for them. Family Guy is and has been a cesspool long overdue to be put out of its misery, and aside from a few good episodes here and there, the Simpsons is limping and probably ready to be retired. \nBob's Burgers is ok, but definitely requires a specific taste to enjoy and beyond that, there really isn't much of anything. A king of the hill reboot is apparently in the works, but I'm not super optimistic. I'm hopeful it'll be good, but it probably won't. It's beginning to sound like the Daria related series, now movie, Jodie may have been cancelled - and the concept sounded awful and the Beavis and Butthead reboot wasn't anything great.",
">\n\nIts a great show. Hilarious in fact. But you don't have to worry about it anymore, thry just fired justin roiland, the main voice actor for both characters Rick and Morty.",
">\n\nIt's fun.\nThey oversell nihilism which attracts a bunch of edgy vocal kids that hype the show too much though.",
">\n\nNobody exists on purpose. Nobody belongs anywhere. Everybody's going to die. Come watch TV.",
">\n\nWell I have good news for you, it’s more than likely gonna end.",
">\n\nThey have said they're continuing it without Justin Roiland, he's been fired. They said season 7 is continuing as normal otherwise. So I imagine casting for voice replacements coming soon?",
">\n\nHuh interesting. I was thinking they couldn’t possibly do it without Roiland but I suppose they’ll made do.",
">\n\nTHANK YOU omfg. Lump it in with family guy and american dad. laaaaaame 👎🏻👎🏻 Bring on the downvotes and defensive comments, 😁"
] |
>
Yeah it definitely helps if you're high
|
[
"As a fan of the show I completely agree. That’s why I watch it.",
">\n\nI loved it up until season 3. I haven’t been able to keep my interest up after that.",
">\n\nSame. By the time the third season rolled around, the fans made me embarrassed about watching it. Plus, it just wasn't as good.",
">\n\nSome of it can be annoying, mainly the way Morty talk sometimes. Still, I think it’s an alright show.",
">\n\nRick's stupid burping tic is worse than Morty's whine.",
">\n\nWeirdly enough it doesn’t bug me. Sometimes I don’t notice it.",
">\n\nI mean, I don’t think it’s exactly aimed at the mature and refined adult",
">\n\nIt's alright especially the first few seasons, but after that it just doesn't have the spark it used to",
">\n\nIts an okay show. Lost interest at season 3/4 i think as i just grew from the comedy",
">\n\nIt's a funny show (in a barren landscape of adult animation).",
">\n\nI agree with some of the comments where it just got a bit old after a few seasons. But what I loved is the underlying jokes. When you catch them, it’s quite funny",
">\n\nEh. I thought some concepts, like the citadel, were interesting and well used. However, the last couple seasons have been meh; the incest jokes are just overused and now the recasting that's about to be done probably ensures it'll be over by season 10. \nIn the meantime, South Park is just coasting and virtually not there - hard to say if things will truly go back to normal for them. Family Guy is and has been a cesspool long overdue to be put out of its misery, and aside from a few good episodes here and there, the Simpsons is limping and probably ready to be retired. \nBob's Burgers is ok, but definitely requires a specific taste to enjoy and beyond that, there really isn't much of anything. A king of the hill reboot is apparently in the works, but I'm not super optimistic. I'm hopeful it'll be good, but it probably won't. It's beginning to sound like the Daria related series, now movie, Jodie may have been cancelled - and the concept sounded awful and the Beavis and Butthead reboot wasn't anything great.",
">\n\nIts a great show. Hilarious in fact. But you don't have to worry about it anymore, thry just fired justin roiland, the main voice actor for both characters Rick and Morty.",
">\n\nIt's fun.\nThey oversell nihilism which attracts a bunch of edgy vocal kids that hype the show too much though.",
">\n\nNobody exists on purpose. Nobody belongs anywhere. Everybody's going to die. Come watch TV.",
">\n\nWell I have good news for you, it’s more than likely gonna end.",
">\n\nThey have said they're continuing it without Justin Roiland, he's been fired. They said season 7 is continuing as normal otherwise. So I imagine casting for voice replacements coming soon?",
">\n\nHuh interesting. I was thinking they couldn’t possibly do it without Roiland but I suppose they’ll made do.",
">\n\nTHANK YOU omfg. Lump it in with family guy and american dad. laaaaaame 👎🏻👎🏻 Bring on the downvotes and defensive comments, 😁",
">\n\nWe’re you high? Cause otherwise you were doing it wrong."
] |
>
i fuckin love that shit
but my mental age is probably 16 so im not gonna argue your point
|
[
"As a fan of the show I completely agree. That’s why I watch it.",
">\n\nI loved it up until season 3. I haven’t been able to keep my interest up after that.",
">\n\nSame. By the time the third season rolled around, the fans made me embarrassed about watching it. Plus, it just wasn't as good.",
">\n\nSome of it can be annoying, mainly the way Morty talk sometimes. Still, I think it’s an alright show.",
">\n\nRick's stupid burping tic is worse than Morty's whine.",
">\n\nWeirdly enough it doesn’t bug me. Sometimes I don’t notice it.",
">\n\nI mean, I don’t think it’s exactly aimed at the mature and refined adult",
">\n\nIt's alright especially the first few seasons, but after that it just doesn't have the spark it used to",
">\n\nIts an okay show. Lost interest at season 3/4 i think as i just grew from the comedy",
">\n\nIt's a funny show (in a barren landscape of adult animation).",
">\n\nI agree with some of the comments where it just got a bit old after a few seasons. But what I loved is the underlying jokes. When you catch them, it’s quite funny",
">\n\nEh. I thought some concepts, like the citadel, were interesting and well used. However, the last couple seasons have been meh; the incest jokes are just overused and now the recasting that's about to be done probably ensures it'll be over by season 10. \nIn the meantime, South Park is just coasting and virtually not there - hard to say if things will truly go back to normal for them. Family Guy is and has been a cesspool long overdue to be put out of its misery, and aside from a few good episodes here and there, the Simpsons is limping and probably ready to be retired. \nBob's Burgers is ok, but definitely requires a specific taste to enjoy and beyond that, there really isn't much of anything. A king of the hill reboot is apparently in the works, but I'm not super optimistic. I'm hopeful it'll be good, but it probably won't. It's beginning to sound like the Daria related series, now movie, Jodie may have been cancelled - and the concept sounded awful and the Beavis and Butthead reboot wasn't anything great.",
">\n\nIts a great show. Hilarious in fact. But you don't have to worry about it anymore, thry just fired justin roiland, the main voice actor for both characters Rick and Morty.",
">\n\nIt's fun.\nThey oversell nihilism which attracts a bunch of edgy vocal kids that hype the show too much though.",
">\n\nNobody exists on purpose. Nobody belongs anywhere. Everybody's going to die. Come watch TV.",
">\n\nWell I have good news for you, it’s more than likely gonna end.",
">\n\nThey have said they're continuing it without Justin Roiland, he's been fired. They said season 7 is continuing as normal otherwise. So I imagine casting for voice replacements coming soon?",
">\n\nHuh interesting. I was thinking they couldn’t possibly do it without Roiland but I suppose they’ll made do.",
">\n\nTHANK YOU omfg. Lump it in with family guy and american dad. laaaaaame 👎🏻👎🏻 Bring on the downvotes and defensive comments, 😁",
">\n\nWe’re you high? Cause otherwise you were doing it wrong.",
">\n\nYeah it definitely helps if you're high"
] |
>
Rick and Morty is a cinematic masterpiece.
|
[
"As a fan of the show I completely agree. That’s why I watch it.",
">\n\nI loved it up until season 3. I haven’t been able to keep my interest up after that.",
">\n\nSame. By the time the third season rolled around, the fans made me embarrassed about watching it. Plus, it just wasn't as good.",
">\n\nSome of it can be annoying, mainly the way Morty talk sometimes. Still, I think it’s an alright show.",
">\n\nRick's stupid burping tic is worse than Morty's whine.",
">\n\nWeirdly enough it doesn’t bug me. Sometimes I don’t notice it.",
">\n\nI mean, I don’t think it’s exactly aimed at the mature and refined adult",
">\n\nIt's alright especially the first few seasons, but after that it just doesn't have the spark it used to",
">\n\nIts an okay show. Lost interest at season 3/4 i think as i just grew from the comedy",
">\n\nIt's a funny show (in a barren landscape of adult animation).",
">\n\nI agree with some of the comments where it just got a bit old after a few seasons. But what I loved is the underlying jokes. When you catch them, it’s quite funny",
">\n\nEh. I thought some concepts, like the citadel, were interesting and well used. However, the last couple seasons have been meh; the incest jokes are just overused and now the recasting that's about to be done probably ensures it'll be over by season 10. \nIn the meantime, South Park is just coasting and virtually not there - hard to say if things will truly go back to normal for them. Family Guy is and has been a cesspool long overdue to be put out of its misery, and aside from a few good episodes here and there, the Simpsons is limping and probably ready to be retired. \nBob's Burgers is ok, but definitely requires a specific taste to enjoy and beyond that, there really isn't much of anything. A king of the hill reboot is apparently in the works, but I'm not super optimistic. I'm hopeful it'll be good, but it probably won't. It's beginning to sound like the Daria related series, now movie, Jodie may have been cancelled - and the concept sounded awful and the Beavis and Butthead reboot wasn't anything great.",
">\n\nIts a great show. Hilarious in fact. But you don't have to worry about it anymore, thry just fired justin roiland, the main voice actor for both characters Rick and Morty.",
">\n\nIt's fun.\nThey oversell nihilism which attracts a bunch of edgy vocal kids that hype the show too much though.",
">\n\nNobody exists on purpose. Nobody belongs anywhere. Everybody's going to die. Come watch TV.",
">\n\nWell I have good news for you, it’s more than likely gonna end.",
">\n\nThey have said they're continuing it without Justin Roiland, he's been fired. They said season 7 is continuing as normal otherwise. So I imagine casting for voice replacements coming soon?",
">\n\nHuh interesting. I was thinking they couldn’t possibly do it without Roiland but I suppose they’ll made do.",
">\n\nTHANK YOU omfg. Lump it in with family guy and american dad. laaaaaame 👎🏻👎🏻 Bring on the downvotes and defensive comments, 😁",
">\n\nWe’re you high? Cause otherwise you were doing it wrong.",
">\n\nYeah it definitely helps if you're high",
">\n\ni fuckin love that shit\nbut my mental age is probably 16 so im not gonna argue your point"
] |
>
It's honestly one of my favorite shows of all time. Tied with Ted Lasso. I can rewatch any episode multiple times and still enjoy it. There is so much truth in ever scene and every flippant side comment.
|
[
"As a fan of the show I completely agree. That’s why I watch it.",
">\n\nI loved it up until season 3. I haven’t been able to keep my interest up after that.",
">\n\nSame. By the time the third season rolled around, the fans made me embarrassed about watching it. Plus, it just wasn't as good.",
">\n\nSome of it can be annoying, mainly the way Morty talk sometimes. Still, I think it’s an alright show.",
">\n\nRick's stupid burping tic is worse than Morty's whine.",
">\n\nWeirdly enough it doesn’t bug me. Sometimes I don’t notice it.",
">\n\nI mean, I don’t think it’s exactly aimed at the mature and refined adult",
">\n\nIt's alright especially the first few seasons, but after that it just doesn't have the spark it used to",
">\n\nIts an okay show. Lost interest at season 3/4 i think as i just grew from the comedy",
">\n\nIt's a funny show (in a barren landscape of adult animation).",
">\n\nI agree with some of the comments where it just got a bit old after a few seasons. But what I loved is the underlying jokes. When you catch them, it’s quite funny",
">\n\nEh. I thought some concepts, like the citadel, were interesting and well used. However, the last couple seasons have been meh; the incest jokes are just overused and now the recasting that's about to be done probably ensures it'll be over by season 10. \nIn the meantime, South Park is just coasting and virtually not there - hard to say if things will truly go back to normal for them. Family Guy is and has been a cesspool long overdue to be put out of its misery, and aside from a few good episodes here and there, the Simpsons is limping and probably ready to be retired. \nBob's Burgers is ok, but definitely requires a specific taste to enjoy and beyond that, there really isn't much of anything. A king of the hill reboot is apparently in the works, but I'm not super optimistic. I'm hopeful it'll be good, but it probably won't. It's beginning to sound like the Daria related series, now movie, Jodie may have been cancelled - and the concept sounded awful and the Beavis and Butthead reboot wasn't anything great.",
">\n\nIts a great show. Hilarious in fact. But you don't have to worry about it anymore, thry just fired justin roiland, the main voice actor for both characters Rick and Morty.",
">\n\nIt's fun.\nThey oversell nihilism which attracts a bunch of edgy vocal kids that hype the show too much though.",
">\n\nNobody exists on purpose. Nobody belongs anywhere. Everybody's going to die. Come watch TV.",
">\n\nWell I have good news for you, it’s more than likely gonna end.",
">\n\nThey have said they're continuing it without Justin Roiland, he's been fired. They said season 7 is continuing as normal otherwise. So I imagine casting for voice replacements coming soon?",
">\n\nHuh interesting. I was thinking they couldn’t possibly do it without Roiland but I suppose they’ll made do.",
">\n\nTHANK YOU omfg. Lump it in with family guy and american dad. laaaaaame 👎🏻👎🏻 Bring on the downvotes and defensive comments, 😁",
">\n\nWe’re you high? Cause otherwise you were doing it wrong.",
">\n\nYeah it definitely helps if you're high",
">\n\ni fuckin love that shit\nbut my mental age is probably 16 so im not gonna argue your point",
">\n\nRick and Morty is a cinematic masterpiece."
] |
>
I always knew the creator of that cartoon was a sick creep just going off the subject matter.
|
[
"As a fan of the show I completely agree. That’s why I watch it.",
">\n\nI loved it up until season 3. I haven’t been able to keep my interest up after that.",
">\n\nSame. By the time the third season rolled around, the fans made me embarrassed about watching it. Plus, it just wasn't as good.",
">\n\nSome of it can be annoying, mainly the way Morty talk sometimes. Still, I think it’s an alright show.",
">\n\nRick's stupid burping tic is worse than Morty's whine.",
">\n\nWeirdly enough it doesn’t bug me. Sometimes I don’t notice it.",
">\n\nI mean, I don’t think it’s exactly aimed at the mature and refined adult",
">\n\nIt's alright especially the first few seasons, but after that it just doesn't have the spark it used to",
">\n\nIts an okay show. Lost interest at season 3/4 i think as i just grew from the comedy",
">\n\nIt's a funny show (in a barren landscape of adult animation).",
">\n\nI agree with some of the comments where it just got a bit old after a few seasons. But what I loved is the underlying jokes. When you catch them, it’s quite funny",
">\n\nEh. I thought some concepts, like the citadel, were interesting and well used. However, the last couple seasons have been meh; the incest jokes are just overused and now the recasting that's about to be done probably ensures it'll be over by season 10. \nIn the meantime, South Park is just coasting and virtually not there - hard to say if things will truly go back to normal for them. Family Guy is and has been a cesspool long overdue to be put out of its misery, and aside from a few good episodes here and there, the Simpsons is limping and probably ready to be retired. \nBob's Burgers is ok, but definitely requires a specific taste to enjoy and beyond that, there really isn't much of anything. A king of the hill reboot is apparently in the works, but I'm not super optimistic. I'm hopeful it'll be good, but it probably won't. It's beginning to sound like the Daria related series, now movie, Jodie may have been cancelled - and the concept sounded awful and the Beavis and Butthead reboot wasn't anything great.",
">\n\nIts a great show. Hilarious in fact. But you don't have to worry about it anymore, thry just fired justin roiland, the main voice actor for both characters Rick and Morty.",
">\n\nIt's fun.\nThey oversell nihilism which attracts a bunch of edgy vocal kids that hype the show too much though.",
">\n\nNobody exists on purpose. Nobody belongs anywhere. Everybody's going to die. Come watch TV.",
">\n\nWell I have good news for you, it’s more than likely gonna end.",
">\n\nThey have said they're continuing it without Justin Roiland, he's been fired. They said season 7 is continuing as normal otherwise. So I imagine casting for voice replacements coming soon?",
">\n\nHuh interesting. I was thinking they couldn’t possibly do it without Roiland but I suppose they’ll made do.",
">\n\nTHANK YOU omfg. Lump it in with family guy and american dad. laaaaaame 👎🏻👎🏻 Bring on the downvotes and defensive comments, 😁",
">\n\nWe’re you high? Cause otherwise you were doing it wrong.",
">\n\nYeah it definitely helps if you're high",
">\n\ni fuckin love that shit\nbut my mental age is probably 16 so im not gonna argue your point",
">\n\nRick and Morty is a cinematic masterpiece.",
">\n\nIt's honestly one of my favorite shows of all time. Tied with Ted Lasso. I can rewatch any episode multiple times and still enjoy it. There is so much truth in ever scene and every flippant side comment."
] |
>
Sure you did. What other great predictions have you made?
|
[
"As a fan of the show I completely agree. That’s why I watch it.",
">\n\nI loved it up until season 3. I haven’t been able to keep my interest up after that.",
">\n\nSame. By the time the third season rolled around, the fans made me embarrassed about watching it. Plus, it just wasn't as good.",
">\n\nSome of it can be annoying, mainly the way Morty talk sometimes. Still, I think it’s an alright show.",
">\n\nRick's stupid burping tic is worse than Morty's whine.",
">\n\nWeirdly enough it doesn’t bug me. Sometimes I don’t notice it.",
">\n\nI mean, I don’t think it’s exactly aimed at the mature and refined adult",
">\n\nIt's alright especially the first few seasons, but after that it just doesn't have the spark it used to",
">\n\nIts an okay show. Lost interest at season 3/4 i think as i just grew from the comedy",
">\n\nIt's a funny show (in a barren landscape of adult animation).",
">\n\nI agree with some of the comments where it just got a bit old after a few seasons. But what I loved is the underlying jokes. When you catch them, it’s quite funny",
">\n\nEh. I thought some concepts, like the citadel, were interesting and well used. However, the last couple seasons have been meh; the incest jokes are just overused and now the recasting that's about to be done probably ensures it'll be over by season 10. \nIn the meantime, South Park is just coasting and virtually not there - hard to say if things will truly go back to normal for them. Family Guy is and has been a cesspool long overdue to be put out of its misery, and aside from a few good episodes here and there, the Simpsons is limping and probably ready to be retired. \nBob's Burgers is ok, but definitely requires a specific taste to enjoy and beyond that, there really isn't much of anything. A king of the hill reboot is apparently in the works, but I'm not super optimistic. I'm hopeful it'll be good, but it probably won't. It's beginning to sound like the Daria related series, now movie, Jodie may have been cancelled - and the concept sounded awful and the Beavis and Butthead reboot wasn't anything great.",
">\n\nIts a great show. Hilarious in fact. But you don't have to worry about it anymore, thry just fired justin roiland, the main voice actor for both characters Rick and Morty.",
">\n\nIt's fun.\nThey oversell nihilism which attracts a bunch of edgy vocal kids that hype the show too much though.",
">\n\nNobody exists on purpose. Nobody belongs anywhere. Everybody's going to die. Come watch TV.",
">\n\nWell I have good news for you, it’s more than likely gonna end.",
">\n\nThey have said they're continuing it without Justin Roiland, he's been fired. They said season 7 is continuing as normal otherwise. So I imagine casting for voice replacements coming soon?",
">\n\nHuh interesting. I was thinking they couldn’t possibly do it without Roiland but I suppose they’ll made do.",
">\n\nTHANK YOU omfg. Lump it in with family guy and american dad. laaaaaame 👎🏻👎🏻 Bring on the downvotes and defensive comments, 😁",
">\n\nWe’re you high? Cause otherwise you were doing it wrong.",
">\n\nYeah it definitely helps if you're high",
">\n\ni fuckin love that shit\nbut my mental age is probably 16 so im not gonna argue your point",
">\n\nRick and Morty is a cinematic masterpiece.",
">\n\nIt's honestly one of my favorite shows of all time. Tied with Ted Lasso. I can rewatch any episode multiple times and still enjoy it. There is so much truth in ever scene and every flippant side comment.",
">\n\nI always knew the creator of that cartoon was a sick creep just going off the subject matter."
] |
>
That you would reply all mad and butthurt I insulted your favourite show? Kek, too ez
|
[
"As a fan of the show I completely agree. That’s why I watch it.",
">\n\nI loved it up until season 3. I haven’t been able to keep my interest up after that.",
">\n\nSame. By the time the third season rolled around, the fans made me embarrassed about watching it. Plus, it just wasn't as good.",
">\n\nSome of it can be annoying, mainly the way Morty talk sometimes. Still, I think it’s an alright show.",
">\n\nRick's stupid burping tic is worse than Morty's whine.",
">\n\nWeirdly enough it doesn’t bug me. Sometimes I don’t notice it.",
">\n\nI mean, I don’t think it’s exactly aimed at the mature and refined adult",
">\n\nIt's alright especially the first few seasons, but after that it just doesn't have the spark it used to",
">\n\nIts an okay show. Lost interest at season 3/4 i think as i just grew from the comedy",
">\n\nIt's a funny show (in a barren landscape of adult animation).",
">\n\nI agree with some of the comments where it just got a bit old after a few seasons. But what I loved is the underlying jokes. When you catch them, it’s quite funny",
">\n\nEh. I thought some concepts, like the citadel, were interesting and well used. However, the last couple seasons have been meh; the incest jokes are just overused and now the recasting that's about to be done probably ensures it'll be over by season 10. \nIn the meantime, South Park is just coasting and virtually not there - hard to say if things will truly go back to normal for them. Family Guy is and has been a cesspool long overdue to be put out of its misery, and aside from a few good episodes here and there, the Simpsons is limping and probably ready to be retired. \nBob's Burgers is ok, but definitely requires a specific taste to enjoy and beyond that, there really isn't much of anything. A king of the hill reboot is apparently in the works, but I'm not super optimistic. I'm hopeful it'll be good, but it probably won't. It's beginning to sound like the Daria related series, now movie, Jodie may have been cancelled - and the concept sounded awful and the Beavis and Butthead reboot wasn't anything great.",
">\n\nIts a great show. Hilarious in fact. But you don't have to worry about it anymore, thry just fired justin roiland, the main voice actor for both characters Rick and Morty.",
">\n\nIt's fun.\nThey oversell nihilism which attracts a bunch of edgy vocal kids that hype the show too much though.",
">\n\nNobody exists on purpose. Nobody belongs anywhere. Everybody's going to die. Come watch TV.",
">\n\nWell I have good news for you, it’s more than likely gonna end.",
">\n\nThey have said they're continuing it without Justin Roiland, he's been fired. They said season 7 is continuing as normal otherwise. So I imagine casting for voice replacements coming soon?",
">\n\nHuh interesting. I was thinking they couldn’t possibly do it without Roiland but I suppose they’ll made do.",
">\n\nTHANK YOU omfg. Lump it in with family guy and american dad. laaaaaame 👎🏻👎🏻 Bring on the downvotes and defensive comments, 😁",
">\n\nWe’re you high? Cause otherwise you were doing it wrong.",
">\n\nYeah it definitely helps if you're high",
">\n\ni fuckin love that shit\nbut my mental age is probably 16 so im not gonna argue your point",
">\n\nRick and Morty is a cinematic masterpiece.",
">\n\nIt's honestly one of my favorite shows of all time. Tied with Ted Lasso. I can rewatch any episode multiple times and still enjoy it. There is so much truth in ever scene and every flippant side comment.",
">\n\nI always knew the creator of that cartoon was a sick creep just going off the subject matter.",
">\n\nSure you did. What other great predictions have you made?"
] |
>
Ok boomer
|
[
"As a fan of the show I completely agree. That’s why I watch it.",
">\n\nI loved it up until season 3. I haven’t been able to keep my interest up after that.",
">\n\nSame. By the time the third season rolled around, the fans made me embarrassed about watching it. Plus, it just wasn't as good.",
">\n\nSome of it can be annoying, mainly the way Morty talk sometimes. Still, I think it’s an alright show.",
">\n\nRick's stupid burping tic is worse than Morty's whine.",
">\n\nWeirdly enough it doesn’t bug me. Sometimes I don’t notice it.",
">\n\nI mean, I don’t think it’s exactly aimed at the mature and refined adult",
">\n\nIt's alright especially the first few seasons, but after that it just doesn't have the spark it used to",
">\n\nIts an okay show. Lost interest at season 3/4 i think as i just grew from the comedy",
">\n\nIt's a funny show (in a barren landscape of adult animation).",
">\n\nI agree with some of the comments where it just got a bit old after a few seasons. But what I loved is the underlying jokes. When you catch them, it’s quite funny",
">\n\nEh. I thought some concepts, like the citadel, were interesting and well used. However, the last couple seasons have been meh; the incest jokes are just overused and now the recasting that's about to be done probably ensures it'll be over by season 10. \nIn the meantime, South Park is just coasting and virtually not there - hard to say if things will truly go back to normal for them. Family Guy is and has been a cesspool long overdue to be put out of its misery, and aside from a few good episodes here and there, the Simpsons is limping and probably ready to be retired. \nBob's Burgers is ok, but definitely requires a specific taste to enjoy and beyond that, there really isn't much of anything. A king of the hill reboot is apparently in the works, but I'm not super optimistic. I'm hopeful it'll be good, but it probably won't. It's beginning to sound like the Daria related series, now movie, Jodie may have been cancelled - and the concept sounded awful and the Beavis and Butthead reboot wasn't anything great.",
">\n\nIts a great show. Hilarious in fact. But you don't have to worry about it anymore, thry just fired justin roiland, the main voice actor for both characters Rick and Morty.",
">\n\nIt's fun.\nThey oversell nihilism which attracts a bunch of edgy vocal kids that hype the show too much though.",
">\n\nNobody exists on purpose. Nobody belongs anywhere. Everybody's going to die. Come watch TV.",
">\n\nWell I have good news for you, it’s more than likely gonna end.",
">\n\nThey have said they're continuing it without Justin Roiland, he's been fired. They said season 7 is continuing as normal otherwise. So I imagine casting for voice replacements coming soon?",
">\n\nHuh interesting. I was thinking they couldn’t possibly do it without Roiland but I suppose they’ll made do.",
">\n\nTHANK YOU omfg. Lump it in with family guy and american dad. laaaaaame 👎🏻👎🏻 Bring on the downvotes and defensive comments, 😁",
">\n\nWe’re you high? Cause otherwise you were doing it wrong.",
">\n\nYeah it definitely helps if you're high",
">\n\ni fuckin love that shit\nbut my mental age is probably 16 so im not gonna argue your point",
">\n\nRick and Morty is a cinematic masterpiece.",
">\n\nIt's honestly one of my favorite shows of all time. Tied with Ted Lasso. I can rewatch any episode multiple times and still enjoy it. There is so much truth in ever scene and every flippant side comment.",
">\n\nI always knew the creator of that cartoon was a sick creep just going off the subject matter.",
">\n\nSure you did. What other great predictions have you made?",
">\n\nThat you would reply all mad and butthurt I insulted your favourite show? Kek, too ez"
] |
>
ok zoomer
|
[
"As a fan of the show I completely agree. That’s why I watch it.",
">\n\nI loved it up until season 3. I haven’t been able to keep my interest up after that.",
">\n\nSame. By the time the third season rolled around, the fans made me embarrassed about watching it. Plus, it just wasn't as good.",
">\n\nSome of it can be annoying, mainly the way Morty talk sometimes. Still, I think it’s an alright show.",
">\n\nRick's stupid burping tic is worse than Morty's whine.",
">\n\nWeirdly enough it doesn’t bug me. Sometimes I don’t notice it.",
">\n\nI mean, I don’t think it’s exactly aimed at the mature and refined adult",
">\n\nIt's alright especially the first few seasons, but after that it just doesn't have the spark it used to",
">\n\nIts an okay show. Lost interest at season 3/4 i think as i just grew from the comedy",
">\n\nIt's a funny show (in a barren landscape of adult animation).",
">\n\nI agree with some of the comments where it just got a bit old after a few seasons. But what I loved is the underlying jokes. When you catch them, it’s quite funny",
">\n\nEh. I thought some concepts, like the citadel, were interesting and well used. However, the last couple seasons have been meh; the incest jokes are just overused and now the recasting that's about to be done probably ensures it'll be over by season 10. \nIn the meantime, South Park is just coasting and virtually not there - hard to say if things will truly go back to normal for them. Family Guy is and has been a cesspool long overdue to be put out of its misery, and aside from a few good episodes here and there, the Simpsons is limping and probably ready to be retired. \nBob's Burgers is ok, but definitely requires a specific taste to enjoy and beyond that, there really isn't much of anything. A king of the hill reboot is apparently in the works, but I'm not super optimistic. I'm hopeful it'll be good, but it probably won't. It's beginning to sound like the Daria related series, now movie, Jodie may have been cancelled - and the concept sounded awful and the Beavis and Butthead reboot wasn't anything great.",
">\n\nIts a great show. Hilarious in fact. But you don't have to worry about it anymore, thry just fired justin roiland, the main voice actor for both characters Rick and Morty.",
">\n\nIt's fun.\nThey oversell nihilism which attracts a bunch of edgy vocal kids that hype the show too much though.",
">\n\nNobody exists on purpose. Nobody belongs anywhere. Everybody's going to die. Come watch TV.",
">\n\nWell I have good news for you, it’s more than likely gonna end.",
">\n\nThey have said they're continuing it without Justin Roiland, he's been fired. They said season 7 is continuing as normal otherwise. So I imagine casting for voice replacements coming soon?",
">\n\nHuh interesting. I was thinking they couldn’t possibly do it without Roiland but I suppose they’ll made do.",
">\n\nTHANK YOU omfg. Lump it in with family guy and american dad. laaaaaame 👎🏻👎🏻 Bring on the downvotes and defensive comments, 😁",
">\n\nWe’re you high? Cause otherwise you were doing it wrong.",
">\n\nYeah it definitely helps if you're high",
">\n\ni fuckin love that shit\nbut my mental age is probably 16 so im not gonna argue your point",
">\n\nRick and Morty is a cinematic masterpiece.",
">\n\nIt's honestly one of my favorite shows of all time. Tied with Ted Lasso. I can rewatch any episode multiple times and still enjoy it. There is so much truth in ever scene and every flippant side comment.",
">\n\nI always knew the creator of that cartoon was a sick creep just going off the subject matter.",
">\n\nSure you did. What other great predictions have you made?",
">\n\nThat you would reply all mad and butthurt I insulted your favourite show? Kek, too ez",
">\n\nOk boomer"
] |
>
Ok Coomer
|
[
"As a fan of the show I completely agree. That’s why I watch it.",
">\n\nI loved it up until season 3. I haven’t been able to keep my interest up after that.",
">\n\nSame. By the time the third season rolled around, the fans made me embarrassed about watching it. Plus, it just wasn't as good.",
">\n\nSome of it can be annoying, mainly the way Morty talk sometimes. Still, I think it’s an alright show.",
">\n\nRick's stupid burping tic is worse than Morty's whine.",
">\n\nWeirdly enough it doesn’t bug me. Sometimes I don’t notice it.",
">\n\nI mean, I don’t think it’s exactly aimed at the mature and refined adult",
">\n\nIt's alright especially the first few seasons, but after that it just doesn't have the spark it used to",
">\n\nIts an okay show. Lost interest at season 3/4 i think as i just grew from the comedy",
">\n\nIt's a funny show (in a barren landscape of adult animation).",
">\n\nI agree with some of the comments where it just got a bit old after a few seasons. But what I loved is the underlying jokes. When you catch them, it’s quite funny",
">\n\nEh. I thought some concepts, like the citadel, were interesting and well used. However, the last couple seasons have been meh; the incest jokes are just overused and now the recasting that's about to be done probably ensures it'll be over by season 10. \nIn the meantime, South Park is just coasting and virtually not there - hard to say if things will truly go back to normal for them. Family Guy is and has been a cesspool long overdue to be put out of its misery, and aside from a few good episodes here and there, the Simpsons is limping and probably ready to be retired. \nBob's Burgers is ok, but definitely requires a specific taste to enjoy and beyond that, there really isn't much of anything. A king of the hill reboot is apparently in the works, but I'm not super optimistic. I'm hopeful it'll be good, but it probably won't. It's beginning to sound like the Daria related series, now movie, Jodie may have been cancelled - and the concept sounded awful and the Beavis and Butthead reboot wasn't anything great.",
">\n\nIts a great show. Hilarious in fact. But you don't have to worry about it anymore, thry just fired justin roiland, the main voice actor for both characters Rick and Morty.",
">\n\nIt's fun.\nThey oversell nihilism which attracts a bunch of edgy vocal kids that hype the show too much though.",
">\n\nNobody exists on purpose. Nobody belongs anywhere. Everybody's going to die. Come watch TV.",
">\n\nWell I have good news for you, it’s more than likely gonna end.",
">\n\nThey have said they're continuing it without Justin Roiland, he's been fired. They said season 7 is continuing as normal otherwise. So I imagine casting for voice replacements coming soon?",
">\n\nHuh interesting. I was thinking they couldn’t possibly do it without Roiland but I suppose they’ll made do.",
">\n\nTHANK YOU omfg. Lump it in with family guy and american dad. laaaaaame 👎🏻👎🏻 Bring on the downvotes and defensive comments, 😁",
">\n\nWe’re you high? Cause otherwise you were doing it wrong.",
">\n\nYeah it definitely helps if you're high",
">\n\ni fuckin love that shit\nbut my mental age is probably 16 so im not gonna argue your point",
">\n\nRick and Morty is a cinematic masterpiece.",
">\n\nIt's honestly one of my favorite shows of all time. Tied with Ted Lasso. I can rewatch any episode multiple times and still enjoy it. There is so much truth in ever scene and every flippant side comment.",
">\n\nI always knew the creator of that cartoon was a sick creep just going off the subject matter.",
">\n\nSure you did. What other great predictions have you made?",
">\n\nThat you would reply all mad and butthurt I insulted your favourite show? Kek, too ez",
">\n\nOk boomer",
">\n\nok zoomer"
] |
>
Ok loomer (of yarn)
|
[
"As a fan of the show I completely agree. That’s why I watch it.",
">\n\nI loved it up until season 3. I haven’t been able to keep my interest up after that.",
">\n\nSame. By the time the third season rolled around, the fans made me embarrassed about watching it. Plus, it just wasn't as good.",
">\n\nSome of it can be annoying, mainly the way Morty talk sometimes. Still, I think it’s an alright show.",
">\n\nRick's stupid burping tic is worse than Morty's whine.",
">\n\nWeirdly enough it doesn’t bug me. Sometimes I don’t notice it.",
">\n\nI mean, I don’t think it’s exactly aimed at the mature and refined adult",
">\n\nIt's alright especially the first few seasons, but after that it just doesn't have the spark it used to",
">\n\nIts an okay show. Lost interest at season 3/4 i think as i just grew from the comedy",
">\n\nIt's a funny show (in a barren landscape of adult animation).",
">\n\nI agree with some of the comments where it just got a bit old after a few seasons. But what I loved is the underlying jokes. When you catch them, it’s quite funny",
">\n\nEh. I thought some concepts, like the citadel, were interesting and well used. However, the last couple seasons have been meh; the incest jokes are just overused and now the recasting that's about to be done probably ensures it'll be over by season 10. \nIn the meantime, South Park is just coasting and virtually not there - hard to say if things will truly go back to normal for them. Family Guy is and has been a cesspool long overdue to be put out of its misery, and aside from a few good episodes here and there, the Simpsons is limping and probably ready to be retired. \nBob's Burgers is ok, but definitely requires a specific taste to enjoy and beyond that, there really isn't much of anything. A king of the hill reboot is apparently in the works, but I'm not super optimistic. I'm hopeful it'll be good, but it probably won't. It's beginning to sound like the Daria related series, now movie, Jodie may have been cancelled - and the concept sounded awful and the Beavis and Butthead reboot wasn't anything great.",
">\n\nIts a great show. Hilarious in fact. But you don't have to worry about it anymore, thry just fired justin roiland, the main voice actor for both characters Rick and Morty.",
">\n\nIt's fun.\nThey oversell nihilism which attracts a bunch of edgy vocal kids that hype the show too much though.",
">\n\nNobody exists on purpose. Nobody belongs anywhere. Everybody's going to die. Come watch TV.",
">\n\nWell I have good news for you, it’s more than likely gonna end.",
">\n\nThey have said they're continuing it without Justin Roiland, he's been fired. They said season 7 is continuing as normal otherwise. So I imagine casting for voice replacements coming soon?",
">\n\nHuh interesting. I was thinking they couldn’t possibly do it without Roiland but I suppose they’ll made do.",
">\n\nTHANK YOU omfg. Lump it in with family guy and american dad. laaaaaame 👎🏻👎🏻 Bring on the downvotes and defensive comments, 😁",
">\n\nWe’re you high? Cause otherwise you were doing it wrong.",
">\n\nYeah it definitely helps if you're high",
">\n\ni fuckin love that shit\nbut my mental age is probably 16 so im not gonna argue your point",
">\n\nRick and Morty is a cinematic masterpiece.",
">\n\nIt's honestly one of my favorite shows of all time. Tied with Ted Lasso. I can rewatch any episode multiple times and still enjoy it. There is so much truth in ever scene and every flippant side comment.",
">\n\nI always knew the creator of that cartoon was a sick creep just going off the subject matter.",
">\n\nSure you did. What other great predictions have you made?",
">\n\nThat you would reply all mad and butthurt I insulted your favourite show? Kek, too ez",
">\n\nOk boomer",
">\n\nok zoomer",
">\n\nOk Coomer"
] |
>
Okay doomer (idk, some member of a black metal band probably)
|
[
"As a fan of the show I completely agree. That’s why I watch it.",
">\n\nI loved it up until season 3. I haven’t been able to keep my interest up after that.",
">\n\nSame. By the time the third season rolled around, the fans made me embarrassed about watching it. Plus, it just wasn't as good.",
">\n\nSome of it can be annoying, mainly the way Morty talk sometimes. Still, I think it’s an alright show.",
">\n\nRick's stupid burping tic is worse than Morty's whine.",
">\n\nWeirdly enough it doesn’t bug me. Sometimes I don’t notice it.",
">\n\nI mean, I don’t think it’s exactly aimed at the mature and refined adult",
">\n\nIt's alright especially the first few seasons, but after that it just doesn't have the spark it used to",
">\n\nIts an okay show. Lost interest at season 3/4 i think as i just grew from the comedy",
">\n\nIt's a funny show (in a barren landscape of adult animation).",
">\n\nI agree with some of the comments where it just got a bit old after a few seasons. But what I loved is the underlying jokes. When you catch them, it’s quite funny",
">\n\nEh. I thought some concepts, like the citadel, were interesting and well used. However, the last couple seasons have been meh; the incest jokes are just overused and now the recasting that's about to be done probably ensures it'll be over by season 10. \nIn the meantime, South Park is just coasting and virtually not there - hard to say if things will truly go back to normal for them. Family Guy is and has been a cesspool long overdue to be put out of its misery, and aside from a few good episodes here and there, the Simpsons is limping and probably ready to be retired. \nBob's Burgers is ok, but definitely requires a specific taste to enjoy and beyond that, there really isn't much of anything. A king of the hill reboot is apparently in the works, but I'm not super optimistic. I'm hopeful it'll be good, but it probably won't. It's beginning to sound like the Daria related series, now movie, Jodie may have been cancelled - and the concept sounded awful and the Beavis and Butthead reboot wasn't anything great.",
">\n\nIts a great show. Hilarious in fact. But you don't have to worry about it anymore, thry just fired justin roiland, the main voice actor for both characters Rick and Morty.",
">\n\nIt's fun.\nThey oversell nihilism which attracts a bunch of edgy vocal kids that hype the show too much though.",
">\n\nNobody exists on purpose. Nobody belongs anywhere. Everybody's going to die. Come watch TV.",
">\n\nWell I have good news for you, it’s more than likely gonna end.",
">\n\nThey have said they're continuing it without Justin Roiland, he's been fired. They said season 7 is continuing as normal otherwise. So I imagine casting for voice replacements coming soon?",
">\n\nHuh interesting. I was thinking they couldn’t possibly do it without Roiland but I suppose they’ll made do.",
">\n\nTHANK YOU omfg. Lump it in with family guy and american dad. laaaaaame 👎🏻👎🏻 Bring on the downvotes and defensive comments, 😁",
">\n\nWe’re you high? Cause otherwise you were doing it wrong.",
">\n\nYeah it definitely helps if you're high",
">\n\ni fuckin love that shit\nbut my mental age is probably 16 so im not gonna argue your point",
">\n\nRick and Morty is a cinematic masterpiece.",
">\n\nIt's honestly one of my favorite shows of all time. Tied with Ted Lasso. I can rewatch any episode multiple times and still enjoy it. There is so much truth in ever scene and every flippant side comment.",
">\n\nI always knew the creator of that cartoon was a sick creep just going off the subject matter.",
">\n\nSure you did. What other great predictions have you made?",
">\n\nThat you would reply all mad and butthurt I insulted your favourite show? Kek, too ez",
">\n\nOk boomer",
">\n\nok zoomer",
">\n\nOk Coomer",
">\n\nOk loomer (of yarn)"
] |
>
Ok Amy Schumer
|
[
"As a fan of the show I completely agree. That’s why I watch it.",
">\n\nI loved it up until season 3. I haven’t been able to keep my interest up after that.",
">\n\nSame. By the time the third season rolled around, the fans made me embarrassed about watching it. Plus, it just wasn't as good.",
">\n\nSome of it can be annoying, mainly the way Morty talk sometimes. Still, I think it’s an alright show.",
">\n\nRick's stupid burping tic is worse than Morty's whine.",
">\n\nWeirdly enough it doesn’t bug me. Sometimes I don’t notice it.",
">\n\nI mean, I don’t think it’s exactly aimed at the mature and refined adult",
">\n\nIt's alright especially the first few seasons, but after that it just doesn't have the spark it used to",
">\n\nIts an okay show. Lost interest at season 3/4 i think as i just grew from the comedy",
">\n\nIt's a funny show (in a barren landscape of adult animation).",
">\n\nI agree with some of the comments where it just got a bit old after a few seasons. But what I loved is the underlying jokes. When you catch them, it’s quite funny",
">\n\nEh. I thought some concepts, like the citadel, were interesting and well used. However, the last couple seasons have been meh; the incest jokes are just overused and now the recasting that's about to be done probably ensures it'll be over by season 10. \nIn the meantime, South Park is just coasting and virtually not there - hard to say if things will truly go back to normal for them. Family Guy is and has been a cesspool long overdue to be put out of its misery, and aside from a few good episodes here and there, the Simpsons is limping and probably ready to be retired. \nBob's Burgers is ok, but definitely requires a specific taste to enjoy and beyond that, there really isn't much of anything. A king of the hill reboot is apparently in the works, but I'm not super optimistic. I'm hopeful it'll be good, but it probably won't. It's beginning to sound like the Daria related series, now movie, Jodie may have been cancelled - and the concept sounded awful and the Beavis and Butthead reboot wasn't anything great.",
">\n\nIts a great show. Hilarious in fact. But you don't have to worry about it anymore, thry just fired justin roiland, the main voice actor for both characters Rick and Morty.",
">\n\nIt's fun.\nThey oversell nihilism which attracts a bunch of edgy vocal kids that hype the show too much though.",
">\n\nNobody exists on purpose. Nobody belongs anywhere. Everybody's going to die. Come watch TV.",
">\n\nWell I have good news for you, it’s more than likely gonna end.",
">\n\nThey have said they're continuing it without Justin Roiland, he's been fired. They said season 7 is continuing as normal otherwise. So I imagine casting for voice replacements coming soon?",
">\n\nHuh interesting. I was thinking they couldn’t possibly do it without Roiland but I suppose they’ll made do.",
">\n\nTHANK YOU omfg. Lump it in with family guy and american dad. laaaaaame 👎🏻👎🏻 Bring on the downvotes and defensive comments, 😁",
">\n\nWe’re you high? Cause otherwise you were doing it wrong.",
">\n\nYeah it definitely helps if you're high",
">\n\ni fuckin love that shit\nbut my mental age is probably 16 so im not gonna argue your point",
">\n\nRick and Morty is a cinematic masterpiece.",
">\n\nIt's honestly one of my favorite shows of all time. Tied with Ted Lasso. I can rewatch any episode multiple times and still enjoy it. There is so much truth in ever scene and every flippant side comment.",
">\n\nI always knew the creator of that cartoon was a sick creep just going off the subject matter.",
">\n\nSure you did. What other great predictions have you made?",
">\n\nThat you would reply all mad and butthurt I insulted your favourite show? Kek, too ez",
">\n\nOk boomer",
">\n\nok zoomer",
">\n\nOk Coomer",
">\n\nOk loomer (of yarn)",
">\n\nOkay doomer (idk, some member of a black metal band probably)"
] |
>
Okay who? 😜
|
[
"As a fan of the show I completely agree. That’s why I watch it.",
">\n\nI loved it up until season 3. I haven’t been able to keep my interest up after that.",
">\n\nSame. By the time the third season rolled around, the fans made me embarrassed about watching it. Plus, it just wasn't as good.",
">\n\nSome of it can be annoying, mainly the way Morty talk sometimes. Still, I think it’s an alright show.",
">\n\nRick's stupid burping tic is worse than Morty's whine.",
">\n\nWeirdly enough it doesn’t bug me. Sometimes I don’t notice it.",
">\n\nI mean, I don’t think it’s exactly aimed at the mature and refined adult",
">\n\nIt's alright especially the first few seasons, but after that it just doesn't have the spark it used to",
">\n\nIts an okay show. Lost interest at season 3/4 i think as i just grew from the comedy",
">\n\nIt's a funny show (in a barren landscape of adult animation).",
">\n\nI agree with some of the comments where it just got a bit old after a few seasons. But what I loved is the underlying jokes. When you catch them, it’s quite funny",
">\n\nEh. I thought some concepts, like the citadel, were interesting and well used. However, the last couple seasons have been meh; the incest jokes are just overused and now the recasting that's about to be done probably ensures it'll be over by season 10. \nIn the meantime, South Park is just coasting and virtually not there - hard to say if things will truly go back to normal for them. Family Guy is and has been a cesspool long overdue to be put out of its misery, and aside from a few good episodes here and there, the Simpsons is limping and probably ready to be retired. \nBob's Burgers is ok, but definitely requires a specific taste to enjoy and beyond that, there really isn't much of anything. A king of the hill reboot is apparently in the works, but I'm not super optimistic. I'm hopeful it'll be good, but it probably won't. It's beginning to sound like the Daria related series, now movie, Jodie may have been cancelled - and the concept sounded awful and the Beavis and Butthead reboot wasn't anything great.",
">\n\nIts a great show. Hilarious in fact. But you don't have to worry about it anymore, thry just fired justin roiland, the main voice actor for both characters Rick and Morty.",
">\n\nIt's fun.\nThey oversell nihilism which attracts a bunch of edgy vocal kids that hype the show too much though.",
">\n\nNobody exists on purpose. Nobody belongs anywhere. Everybody's going to die. Come watch TV.",
">\n\nWell I have good news for you, it’s more than likely gonna end.",
">\n\nThey have said they're continuing it without Justin Roiland, he's been fired. They said season 7 is continuing as normal otherwise. So I imagine casting for voice replacements coming soon?",
">\n\nHuh interesting. I was thinking they couldn’t possibly do it without Roiland but I suppose they’ll made do.",
">\n\nTHANK YOU omfg. Lump it in with family guy and american dad. laaaaaame 👎🏻👎🏻 Bring on the downvotes and defensive comments, 😁",
">\n\nWe’re you high? Cause otherwise you were doing it wrong.",
">\n\nYeah it definitely helps if you're high",
">\n\ni fuckin love that shit\nbut my mental age is probably 16 so im not gonna argue your point",
">\n\nRick and Morty is a cinematic masterpiece.",
">\n\nIt's honestly one of my favorite shows of all time. Tied with Ted Lasso. I can rewatch any episode multiple times and still enjoy it. There is so much truth in ever scene and every flippant side comment.",
">\n\nI always knew the creator of that cartoon was a sick creep just going off the subject matter.",
">\n\nSure you did. What other great predictions have you made?",
">\n\nThat you would reply all mad and butthurt I insulted your favourite show? Kek, too ez",
">\n\nOk boomer",
">\n\nok zoomer",
">\n\nOk Coomer",
">\n\nOk loomer (of yarn)",
">\n\nOkay doomer (idk, some member of a black metal band probably)",
">\n\nOk Amy Schumer"
] |
>
Amen
It’s a psuedo-intellectual’s futurama but way edgier
|
[
"As a fan of the show I completely agree. That’s why I watch it.",
">\n\nI loved it up until season 3. I haven’t been able to keep my interest up after that.",
">\n\nSame. By the time the third season rolled around, the fans made me embarrassed about watching it. Plus, it just wasn't as good.",
">\n\nSome of it can be annoying, mainly the way Morty talk sometimes. Still, I think it’s an alright show.",
">\n\nRick's stupid burping tic is worse than Morty's whine.",
">\n\nWeirdly enough it doesn’t bug me. Sometimes I don’t notice it.",
">\n\nI mean, I don’t think it’s exactly aimed at the mature and refined adult",
">\n\nIt's alright especially the first few seasons, but after that it just doesn't have the spark it used to",
">\n\nIts an okay show. Lost interest at season 3/4 i think as i just grew from the comedy",
">\n\nIt's a funny show (in a barren landscape of adult animation).",
">\n\nI agree with some of the comments where it just got a bit old after a few seasons. But what I loved is the underlying jokes. When you catch them, it’s quite funny",
">\n\nEh. I thought some concepts, like the citadel, were interesting and well used. However, the last couple seasons have been meh; the incest jokes are just overused and now the recasting that's about to be done probably ensures it'll be over by season 10. \nIn the meantime, South Park is just coasting and virtually not there - hard to say if things will truly go back to normal for them. Family Guy is and has been a cesspool long overdue to be put out of its misery, and aside from a few good episodes here and there, the Simpsons is limping and probably ready to be retired. \nBob's Burgers is ok, but definitely requires a specific taste to enjoy and beyond that, there really isn't much of anything. A king of the hill reboot is apparently in the works, but I'm not super optimistic. I'm hopeful it'll be good, but it probably won't. It's beginning to sound like the Daria related series, now movie, Jodie may have been cancelled - and the concept sounded awful and the Beavis and Butthead reboot wasn't anything great.",
">\n\nIts a great show. Hilarious in fact. But you don't have to worry about it anymore, thry just fired justin roiland, the main voice actor for both characters Rick and Morty.",
">\n\nIt's fun.\nThey oversell nihilism which attracts a bunch of edgy vocal kids that hype the show too much though.",
">\n\nNobody exists on purpose. Nobody belongs anywhere. Everybody's going to die. Come watch TV.",
">\n\nWell I have good news for you, it’s more than likely gonna end.",
">\n\nThey have said they're continuing it without Justin Roiland, he's been fired. They said season 7 is continuing as normal otherwise. So I imagine casting for voice replacements coming soon?",
">\n\nHuh interesting. I was thinking they couldn’t possibly do it without Roiland but I suppose they’ll made do.",
">\n\nTHANK YOU omfg. Lump it in with family guy and american dad. laaaaaame 👎🏻👎🏻 Bring on the downvotes and defensive comments, 😁",
">\n\nWe’re you high? Cause otherwise you were doing it wrong.",
">\n\nYeah it definitely helps if you're high",
">\n\ni fuckin love that shit\nbut my mental age is probably 16 so im not gonna argue your point",
">\n\nRick and Morty is a cinematic masterpiece.",
">\n\nIt's honestly one of my favorite shows of all time. Tied with Ted Lasso. I can rewatch any episode multiple times and still enjoy it. There is so much truth in ever scene and every flippant side comment.",
">\n\nI always knew the creator of that cartoon was a sick creep just going off the subject matter.",
">\n\nSure you did. What other great predictions have you made?",
">\n\nThat you would reply all mad and butthurt I insulted your favourite show? Kek, too ez",
">\n\nOk boomer",
">\n\nok zoomer",
">\n\nOk Coomer",
">\n\nOk loomer (of yarn)",
">\n\nOkay doomer (idk, some member of a black metal band probably)",
">\n\nOk Amy Schumer",
">\n\nOkay who? 😜"
] |
>
That sounds perfect tho
|
[
"As a fan of the show I completely agree. That’s why I watch it.",
">\n\nI loved it up until season 3. I haven’t been able to keep my interest up after that.",
">\n\nSame. By the time the third season rolled around, the fans made me embarrassed about watching it. Plus, it just wasn't as good.",
">\n\nSome of it can be annoying, mainly the way Morty talk sometimes. Still, I think it’s an alright show.",
">\n\nRick's stupid burping tic is worse than Morty's whine.",
">\n\nWeirdly enough it doesn’t bug me. Sometimes I don’t notice it.",
">\n\nI mean, I don’t think it’s exactly aimed at the mature and refined adult",
">\n\nIt's alright especially the first few seasons, but after that it just doesn't have the spark it used to",
">\n\nIts an okay show. Lost interest at season 3/4 i think as i just grew from the comedy",
">\n\nIt's a funny show (in a barren landscape of adult animation).",
">\n\nI agree with some of the comments where it just got a bit old after a few seasons. But what I loved is the underlying jokes. When you catch them, it’s quite funny",
">\n\nEh. I thought some concepts, like the citadel, were interesting and well used. However, the last couple seasons have been meh; the incest jokes are just overused and now the recasting that's about to be done probably ensures it'll be over by season 10. \nIn the meantime, South Park is just coasting and virtually not there - hard to say if things will truly go back to normal for them. Family Guy is and has been a cesspool long overdue to be put out of its misery, and aside from a few good episodes here and there, the Simpsons is limping and probably ready to be retired. \nBob's Burgers is ok, but definitely requires a specific taste to enjoy and beyond that, there really isn't much of anything. A king of the hill reboot is apparently in the works, but I'm not super optimistic. I'm hopeful it'll be good, but it probably won't. It's beginning to sound like the Daria related series, now movie, Jodie may have been cancelled - and the concept sounded awful and the Beavis and Butthead reboot wasn't anything great.",
">\n\nIts a great show. Hilarious in fact. But you don't have to worry about it anymore, thry just fired justin roiland, the main voice actor for both characters Rick and Morty.",
">\n\nIt's fun.\nThey oversell nihilism which attracts a bunch of edgy vocal kids that hype the show too much though.",
">\n\nNobody exists on purpose. Nobody belongs anywhere. Everybody's going to die. Come watch TV.",
">\n\nWell I have good news for you, it’s more than likely gonna end.",
">\n\nThey have said they're continuing it without Justin Roiland, he's been fired. They said season 7 is continuing as normal otherwise. So I imagine casting for voice replacements coming soon?",
">\n\nHuh interesting. I was thinking they couldn’t possibly do it without Roiland but I suppose they’ll made do.",
">\n\nTHANK YOU omfg. Lump it in with family guy and american dad. laaaaaame 👎🏻👎🏻 Bring on the downvotes and defensive comments, 😁",
">\n\nWe’re you high? Cause otherwise you were doing it wrong.",
">\n\nYeah it definitely helps if you're high",
">\n\ni fuckin love that shit\nbut my mental age is probably 16 so im not gonna argue your point",
">\n\nRick and Morty is a cinematic masterpiece.",
">\n\nIt's honestly one of my favorite shows of all time. Tied with Ted Lasso. I can rewatch any episode multiple times and still enjoy it. There is so much truth in ever scene and every flippant side comment.",
">\n\nI always knew the creator of that cartoon was a sick creep just going off the subject matter.",
">\n\nSure you did. What other great predictions have you made?",
">\n\nThat you would reply all mad and butthurt I insulted your favourite show? Kek, too ez",
">\n\nOk boomer",
">\n\nok zoomer",
">\n\nOk Coomer",
">\n\nOk loomer (of yarn)",
">\n\nOkay doomer (idk, some member of a black metal band probably)",
">\n\nOk Amy Schumer",
">\n\nOkay who? 😜",
">\n\nAmen\nIt’s a psuedo-intellectual’s futurama but way edgier"
] |
>
I stand by the first two seasons were really good.
The fandom made it a little embarrassing by the time the third season rolled out.
|
[
"As a fan of the show I completely agree. That’s why I watch it.",
">\n\nI loved it up until season 3. I haven’t been able to keep my interest up after that.",
">\n\nSame. By the time the third season rolled around, the fans made me embarrassed about watching it. Plus, it just wasn't as good.",
">\n\nSome of it can be annoying, mainly the way Morty talk sometimes. Still, I think it’s an alright show.",
">\n\nRick's stupid burping tic is worse than Morty's whine.",
">\n\nWeirdly enough it doesn’t bug me. Sometimes I don’t notice it.",
">\n\nI mean, I don’t think it’s exactly aimed at the mature and refined adult",
">\n\nIt's alright especially the first few seasons, but after that it just doesn't have the spark it used to",
">\n\nIts an okay show. Lost interest at season 3/4 i think as i just grew from the comedy",
">\n\nIt's a funny show (in a barren landscape of adult animation).",
">\n\nI agree with some of the comments where it just got a bit old after a few seasons. But what I loved is the underlying jokes. When you catch them, it’s quite funny",
">\n\nEh. I thought some concepts, like the citadel, were interesting and well used. However, the last couple seasons have been meh; the incest jokes are just overused and now the recasting that's about to be done probably ensures it'll be over by season 10. \nIn the meantime, South Park is just coasting and virtually not there - hard to say if things will truly go back to normal for them. Family Guy is and has been a cesspool long overdue to be put out of its misery, and aside from a few good episodes here and there, the Simpsons is limping and probably ready to be retired. \nBob's Burgers is ok, but definitely requires a specific taste to enjoy and beyond that, there really isn't much of anything. A king of the hill reboot is apparently in the works, but I'm not super optimistic. I'm hopeful it'll be good, but it probably won't. It's beginning to sound like the Daria related series, now movie, Jodie may have been cancelled - and the concept sounded awful and the Beavis and Butthead reboot wasn't anything great.",
">\n\nIts a great show. Hilarious in fact. But you don't have to worry about it anymore, thry just fired justin roiland, the main voice actor for both characters Rick and Morty.",
">\n\nIt's fun.\nThey oversell nihilism which attracts a bunch of edgy vocal kids that hype the show too much though.",
">\n\nNobody exists on purpose. Nobody belongs anywhere. Everybody's going to die. Come watch TV.",
">\n\nWell I have good news for you, it’s more than likely gonna end.",
">\n\nThey have said they're continuing it without Justin Roiland, he's been fired. They said season 7 is continuing as normal otherwise. So I imagine casting for voice replacements coming soon?",
">\n\nHuh interesting. I was thinking they couldn’t possibly do it without Roiland but I suppose they’ll made do.",
">\n\nTHANK YOU omfg. Lump it in with family guy and american dad. laaaaaame 👎🏻👎🏻 Bring on the downvotes and defensive comments, 😁",
">\n\nWe’re you high? Cause otherwise you were doing it wrong.",
">\n\nYeah it definitely helps if you're high",
">\n\ni fuckin love that shit\nbut my mental age is probably 16 so im not gonna argue your point",
">\n\nRick and Morty is a cinematic masterpiece.",
">\n\nIt's honestly one of my favorite shows of all time. Tied with Ted Lasso. I can rewatch any episode multiple times and still enjoy it. There is so much truth in ever scene and every flippant side comment.",
">\n\nI always knew the creator of that cartoon was a sick creep just going off the subject matter.",
">\n\nSure you did. What other great predictions have you made?",
">\n\nThat you would reply all mad and butthurt I insulted your favourite show? Kek, too ez",
">\n\nOk boomer",
">\n\nok zoomer",
">\n\nOk Coomer",
">\n\nOk loomer (of yarn)",
">\n\nOkay doomer (idk, some member of a black metal band probably)",
">\n\nOk Amy Schumer",
">\n\nOkay who? 😜",
">\n\nAmen\nIt’s a psuedo-intellectual’s futurama but way edgier",
">\n\nThat sounds perfect tho"
] |
>
This is a nice upvote bait thanks to recent news. The first 3 seasons rank among the finest sci-fi I've seen on screen. Every episode packs more imagination than entire movies.
And Pickle Rick, by god...
|
[
"As a fan of the show I completely agree. That’s why I watch it.",
">\n\nI loved it up until season 3. I haven’t been able to keep my interest up after that.",
">\n\nSame. By the time the third season rolled around, the fans made me embarrassed about watching it. Plus, it just wasn't as good.",
">\n\nSome of it can be annoying, mainly the way Morty talk sometimes. Still, I think it’s an alright show.",
">\n\nRick's stupid burping tic is worse than Morty's whine.",
">\n\nWeirdly enough it doesn’t bug me. Sometimes I don’t notice it.",
">\n\nI mean, I don’t think it’s exactly aimed at the mature and refined adult",
">\n\nIt's alright especially the first few seasons, but after that it just doesn't have the spark it used to",
">\n\nIts an okay show. Lost interest at season 3/4 i think as i just grew from the comedy",
">\n\nIt's a funny show (in a barren landscape of adult animation).",
">\n\nI agree with some of the comments where it just got a bit old after a few seasons. But what I loved is the underlying jokes. When you catch them, it’s quite funny",
">\n\nEh. I thought some concepts, like the citadel, were interesting and well used. However, the last couple seasons have been meh; the incest jokes are just overused and now the recasting that's about to be done probably ensures it'll be over by season 10. \nIn the meantime, South Park is just coasting and virtually not there - hard to say if things will truly go back to normal for them. Family Guy is and has been a cesspool long overdue to be put out of its misery, and aside from a few good episodes here and there, the Simpsons is limping and probably ready to be retired. \nBob's Burgers is ok, but definitely requires a specific taste to enjoy and beyond that, there really isn't much of anything. A king of the hill reboot is apparently in the works, but I'm not super optimistic. I'm hopeful it'll be good, but it probably won't. It's beginning to sound like the Daria related series, now movie, Jodie may have been cancelled - and the concept sounded awful and the Beavis and Butthead reboot wasn't anything great.",
">\n\nIts a great show. Hilarious in fact. But you don't have to worry about it anymore, thry just fired justin roiland, the main voice actor for both characters Rick and Morty.",
">\n\nIt's fun.\nThey oversell nihilism which attracts a bunch of edgy vocal kids that hype the show too much though.",
">\n\nNobody exists on purpose. Nobody belongs anywhere. Everybody's going to die. Come watch TV.",
">\n\nWell I have good news for you, it’s more than likely gonna end.",
">\n\nThey have said they're continuing it without Justin Roiland, he's been fired. They said season 7 is continuing as normal otherwise. So I imagine casting for voice replacements coming soon?",
">\n\nHuh interesting. I was thinking they couldn’t possibly do it without Roiland but I suppose they’ll made do.",
">\n\nTHANK YOU omfg. Lump it in with family guy and american dad. laaaaaame 👎🏻👎🏻 Bring on the downvotes and defensive comments, 😁",
">\n\nWe’re you high? Cause otherwise you were doing it wrong.",
">\n\nYeah it definitely helps if you're high",
">\n\ni fuckin love that shit\nbut my mental age is probably 16 so im not gonna argue your point",
">\n\nRick and Morty is a cinematic masterpiece.",
">\n\nIt's honestly one of my favorite shows of all time. Tied with Ted Lasso. I can rewatch any episode multiple times and still enjoy it. There is so much truth in ever scene and every flippant side comment.",
">\n\nI always knew the creator of that cartoon was a sick creep just going off the subject matter.",
">\n\nSure you did. What other great predictions have you made?",
">\n\nThat you would reply all mad and butthurt I insulted your favourite show? Kek, too ez",
">\n\nOk boomer",
">\n\nok zoomer",
">\n\nOk Coomer",
">\n\nOk loomer (of yarn)",
">\n\nOkay doomer (idk, some member of a black metal band probably)",
">\n\nOk Amy Schumer",
">\n\nOkay who? 😜",
">\n\nAmen\nIt’s a psuedo-intellectual’s futurama but way edgier",
">\n\nThat sounds perfect tho",
">\n\nI stand by the first two seasons were really good.\nThe fandom made it a little embarrassing by the time the third season rolled out."
] |
>
Many episodes are total shite and some are VERY GOOD.
|
[
"As a fan of the show I completely agree. That’s why I watch it.",
">\n\nI loved it up until season 3. I haven’t been able to keep my interest up after that.",
">\n\nSame. By the time the third season rolled around, the fans made me embarrassed about watching it. Plus, it just wasn't as good.",
">\n\nSome of it can be annoying, mainly the way Morty talk sometimes. Still, I think it’s an alright show.",
">\n\nRick's stupid burping tic is worse than Morty's whine.",
">\n\nWeirdly enough it doesn’t bug me. Sometimes I don’t notice it.",
">\n\nI mean, I don’t think it’s exactly aimed at the mature and refined adult",
">\n\nIt's alright especially the first few seasons, but after that it just doesn't have the spark it used to",
">\n\nIts an okay show. Lost interest at season 3/4 i think as i just grew from the comedy",
">\n\nIt's a funny show (in a barren landscape of adult animation).",
">\n\nI agree with some of the comments where it just got a bit old after a few seasons. But what I loved is the underlying jokes. When you catch them, it’s quite funny",
">\n\nEh. I thought some concepts, like the citadel, were interesting and well used. However, the last couple seasons have been meh; the incest jokes are just overused and now the recasting that's about to be done probably ensures it'll be over by season 10. \nIn the meantime, South Park is just coasting and virtually not there - hard to say if things will truly go back to normal for them. Family Guy is and has been a cesspool long overdue to be put out of its misery, and aside from a few good episodes here and there, the Simpsons is limping and probably ready to be retired. \nBob's Burgers is ok, but definitely requires a specific taste to enjoy and beyond that, there really isn't much of anything. A king of the hill reboot is apparently in the works, but I'm not super optimistic. I'm hopeful it'll be good, but it probably won't. It's beginning to sound like the Daria related series, now movie, Jodie may have been cancelled - and the concept sounded awful and the Beavis and Butthead reboot wasn't anything great.",
">\n\nIts a great show. Hilarious in fact. But you don't have to worry about it anymore, thry just fired justin roiland, the main voice actor for both characters Rick and Morty.",
">\n\nIt's fun.\nThey oversell nihilism which attracts a bunch of edgy vocal kids that hype the show too much though.",
">\n\nNobody exists on purpose. Nobody belongs anywhere. Everybody's going to die. Come watch TV.",
">\n\nWell I have good news for you, it’s more than likely gonna end.",
">\n\nThey have said they're continuing it without Justin Roiland, he's been fired. They said season 7 is continuing as normal otherwise. So I imagine casting for voice replacements coming soon?",
">\n\nHuh interesting. I was thinking they couldn’t possibly do it without Roiland but I suppose they’ll made do.",
">\n\nTHANK YOU omfg. Lump it in with family guy and american dad. laaaaaame 👎🏻👎🏻 Bring on the downvotes and defensive comments, 😁",
">\n\nWe’re you high? Cause otherwise you were doing it wrong.",
">\n\nYeah it definitely helps if you're high",
">\n\ni fuckin love that shit\nbut my mental age is probably 16 so im not gonna argue your point",
">\n\nRick and Morty is a cinematic masterpiece.",
">\n\nIt's honestly one of my favorite shows of all time. Tied with Ted Lasso. I can rewatch any episode multiple times and still enjoy it. There is so much truth in ever scene and every flippant side comment.",
">\n\nI always knew the creator of that cartoon was a sick creep just going off the subject matter.",
">\n\nSure you did. What other great predictions have you made?",
">\n\nThat you would reply all mad and butthurt I insulted your favourite show? Kek, too ez",
">\n\nOk boomer",
">\n\nok zoomer",
">\n\nOk Coomer",
">\n\nOk loomer (of yarn)",
">\n\nOkay doomer (idk, some member of a black metal band probably)",
">\n\nOk Amy Schumer",
">\n\nOkay who? 😜",
">\n\nAmen\nIt’s a psuedo-intellectual’s futurama but way edgier",
">\n\nThat sounds perfect tho",
">\n\nI stand by the first two seasons were really good.\nThe fandom made it a little embarrassing by the time the third season rolled out.",
">\n\nThis is a nice upvote bait thanks to recent news. The first 3 seasons rank among the finest sci-fi I've seen on screen. Every episode packs more imagination than entire movies. \nAnd Pickle Rick, by god..."
] |
>
Its just ran about twice as long as it should have already. When it came out, everyone loved it for being different and crazy. Now it is played out.
|
[
"As a fan of the show I completely agree. That’s why I watch it.",
">\n\nI loved it up until season 3. I haven’t been able to keep my interest up after that.",
">\n\nSame. By the time the third season rolled around, the fans made me embarrassed about watching it. Plus, it just wasn't as good.",
">\n\nSome of it can be annoying, mainly the way Morty talk sometimes. Still, I think it’s an alright show.",
">\n\nRick's stupid burping tic is worse than Morty's whine.",
">\n\nWeirdly enough it doesn’t bug me. Sometimes I don’t notice it.",
">\n\nI mean, I don’t think it’s exactly aimed at the mature and refined adult",
">\n\nIt's alright especially the first few seasons, but after that it just doesn't have the spark it used to",
">\n\nIts an okay show. Lost interest at season 3/4 i think as i just grew from the comedy",
">\n\nIt's a funny show (in a barren landscape of adult animation).",
">\n\nI agree with some of the comments where it just got a bit old after a few seasons. But what I loved is the underlying jokes. When you catch them, it’s quite funny",
">\n\nEh. I thought some concepts, like the citadel, were interesting and well used. However, the last couple seasons have been meh; the incest jokes are just overused and now the recasting that's about to be done probably ensures it'll be over by season 10. \nIn the meantime, South Park is just coasting and virtually not there - hard to say if things will truly go back to normal for them. Family Guy is and has been a cesspool long overdue to be put out of its misery, and aside from a few good episodes here and there, the Simpsons is limping and probably ready to be retired. \nBob's Burgers is ok, but definitely requires a specific taste to enjoy and beyond that, there really isn't much of anything. A king of the hill reboot is apparently in the works, but I'm not super optimistic. I'm hopeful it'll be good, but it probably won't. It's beginning to sound like the Daria related series, now movie, Jodie may have been cancelled - and the concept sounded awful and the Beavis and Butthead reboot wasn't anything great.",
">\n\nIts a great show. Hilarious in fact. But you don't have to worry about it anymore, thry just fired justin roiland, the main voice actor for both characters Rick and Morty.",
">\n\nIt's fun.\nThey oversell nihilism which attracts a bunch of edgy vocal kids that hype the show too much though.",
">\n\nNobody exists on purpose. Nobody belongs anywhere. Everybody's going to die. Come watch TV.",
">\n\nWell I have good news for you, it’s more than likely gonna end.",
">\n\nThey have said they're continuing it without Justin Roiland, he's been fired. They said season 7 is continuing as normal otherwise. So I imagine casting for voice replacements coming soon?",
">\n\nHuh interesting. I was thinking they couldn’t possibly do it without Roiland but I suppose they’ll made do.",
">\n\nTHANK YOU omfg. Lump it in with family guy and american dad. laaaaaame 👎🏻👎🏻 Bring on the downvotes and defensive comments, 😁",
">\n\nWe’re you high? Cause otherwise you were doing it wrong.",
">\n\nYeah it definitely helps if you're high",
">\n\ni fuckin love that shit\nbut my mental age is probably 16 so im not gonna argue your point",
">\n\nRick and Morty is a cinematic masterpiece.",
">\n\nIt's honestly one of my favorite shows of all time. Tied with Ted Lasso. I can rewatch any episode multiple times and still enjoy it. There is so much truth in ever scene and every flippant side comment.",
">\n\nI always knew the creator of that cartoon was a sick creep just going off the subject matter.",
">\n\nSure you did. What other great predictions have you made?",
">\n\nThat you would reply all mad and butthurt I insulted your favourite show? Kek, too ez",
">\n\nOk boomer",
">\n\nok zoomer",
">\n\nOk Coomer",
">\n\nOk loomer (of yarn)",
">\n\nOkay doomer (idk, some member of a black metal band probably)",
">\n\nOk Amy Schumer",
">\n\nOkay who? 😜",
">\n\nAmen\nIt’s a psuedo-intellectual’s futurama but way edgier",
">\n\nThat sounds perfect tho",
">\n\nI stand by the first two seasons were really good.\nThe fandom made it a little embarrassing by the time the third season rolled out.",
">\n\nThis is a nice upvote bait thanks to recent news. The first 3 seasons rank among the finest sci-fi I've seen on screen. Every episode packs more imagination than entire movies. \nAnd Pickle Rick, by god...",
">\n\nMany episodes are total shite and some are VERY GOOD."
] |
>
agree, should be cancelled
|
[
"As a fan of the show I completely agree. That’s why I watch it.",
">\n\nI loved it up until season 3. I haven’t been able to keep my interest up after that.",
">\n\nSame. By the time the third season rolled around, the fans made me embarrassed about watching it. Plus, it just wasn't as good.",
">\n\nSome of it can be annoying, mainly the way Morty talk sometimes. Still, I think it’s an alright show.",
">\n\nRick's stupid burping tic is worse than Morty's whine.",
">\n\nWeirdly enough it doesn’t bug me. Sometimes I don’t notice it.",
">\n\nI mean, I don’t think it’s exactly aimed at the mature and refined adult",
">\n\nIt's alright especially the first few seasons, but after that it just doesn't have the spark it used to",
">\n\nIts an okay show. Lost interest at season 3/4 i think as i just grew from the comedy",
">\n\nIt's a funny show (in a barren landscape of adult animation).",
">\n\nI agree with some of the comments where it just got a bit old after a few seasons. But what I loved is the underlying jokes. When you catch them, it’s quite funny",
">\n\nEh. I thought some concepts, like the citadel, were interesting and well used. However, the last couple seasons have been meh; the incest jokes are just overused and now the recasting that's about to be done probably ensures it'll be over by season 10. \nIn the meantime, South Park is just coasting and virtually not there - hard to say if things will truly go back to normal for them. Family Guy is and has been a cesspool long overdue to be put out of its misery, and aside from a few good episodes here and there, the Simpsons is limping and probably ready to be retired. \nBob's Burgers is ok, but definitely requires a specific taste to enjoy and beyond that, there really isn't much of anything. A king of the hill reboot is apparently in the works, but I'm not super optimistic. I'm hopeful it'll be good, but it probably won't. It's beginning to sound like the Daria related series, now movie, Jodie may have been cancelled - and the concept sounded awful and the Beavis and Butthead reboot wasn't anything great.",
">\n\nIts a great show. Hilarious in fact. But you don't have to worry about it anymore, thry just fired justin roiland, the main voice actor for both characters Rick and Morty.",
">\n\nIt's fun.\nThey oversell nihilism which attracts a bunch of edgy vocal kids that hype the show too much though.",
">\n\nNobody exists on purpose. Nobody belongs anywhere. Everybody's going to die. Come watch TV.",
">\n\nWell I have good news for you, it’s more than likely gonna end.",
">\n\nThey have said they're continuing it without Justin Roiland, he's been fired. They said season 7 is continuing as normal otherwise. So I imagine casting for voice replacements coming soon?",
">\n\nHuh interesting. I was thinking they couldn’t possibly do it without Roiland but I suppose they’ll made do.",
">\n\nTHANK YOU omfg. Lump it in with family guy and american dad. laaaaaame 👎🏻👎🏻 Bring on the downvotes and defensive comments, 😁",
">\n\nWe’re you high? Cause otherwise you were doing it wrong.",
">\n\nYeah it definitely helps if you're high",
">\n\ni fuckin love that shit\nbut my mental age is probably 16 so im not gonna argue your point",
">\n\nRick and Morty is a cinematic masterpiece.",
">\n\nIt's honestly one of my favorite shows of all time. Tied with Ted Lasso. I can rewatch any episode multiple times and still enjoy it. There is so much truth in ever scene and every flippant side comment.",
">\n\nI always knew the creator of that cartoon was a sick creep just going off the subject matter.",
">\n\nSure you did. What other great predictions have you made?",
">\n\nThat you would reply all mad and butthurt I insulted your favourite show? Kek, too ez",
">\n\nOk boomer",
">\n\nok zoomer",
">\n\nOk Coomer",
">\n\nOk loomer (of yarn)",
">\n\nOkay doomer (idk, some member of a black metal band probably)",
">\n\nOk Amy Schumer",
">\n\nOkay who? 😜",
">\n\nAmen\nIt’s a psuedo-intellectual’s futurama but way edgier",
">\n\nThat sounds perfect tho",
">\n\nI stand by the first two seasons were really good.\nThe fandom made it a little embarrassing by the time the third season rolled out.",
">\n\nThis is a nice upvote bait thanks to recent news. The first 3 seasons rank among the finest sci-fi I've seen on screen. Every episode packs more imagination than entire movies. \nAnd Pickle Rick, by god...",
">\n\nMany episodes are total shite and some are VERY GOOD.",
">\n\nIts just ran about twice as long as it should have already. When it came out, everyone loved it for being different and crazy. Now it is played out."
] |
>
The subjects are pretty adult. You can appreciate the different layers of exposure. Childish and terrible can't be used for the show. What show would be mature and great then?
|
[
"As a fan of the show I completely agree. That’s why I watch it.",
">\n\nI loved it up until season 3. I haven’t been able to keep my interest up after that.",
">\n\nSame. By the time the third season rolled around, the fans made me embarrassed about watching it. Plus, it just wasn't as good.",
">\n\nSome of it can be annoying, mainly the way Morty talk sometimes. Still, I think it’s an alright show.",
">\n\nRick's stupid burping tic is worse than Morty's whine.",
">\n\nWeirdly enough it doesn’t bug me. Sometimes I don’t notice it.",
">\n\nI mean, I don’t think it’s exactly aimed at the mature and refined adult",
">\n\nIt's alright especially the first few seasons, but after that it just doesn't have the spark it used to",
">\n\nIts an okay show. Lost interest at season 3/4 i think as i just grew from the comedy",
">\n\nIt's a funny show (in a barren landscape of adult animation).",
">\n\nI agree with some of the comments where it just got a bit old after a few seasons. But what I loved is the underlying jokes. When you catch them, it’s quite funny",
">\n\nEh. I thought some concepts, like the citadel, were interesting and well used. However, the last couple seasons have been meh; the incest jokes are just overused and now the recasting that's about to be done probably ensures it'll be over by season 10. \nIn the meantime, South Park is just coasting and virtually not there - hard to say if things will truly go back to normal for them. Family Guy is and has been a cesspool long overdue to be put out of its misery, and aside from a few good episodes here and there, the Simpsons is limping and probably ready to be retired. \nBob's Burgers is ok, but definitely requires a specific taste to enjoy and beyond that, there really isn't much of anything. A king of the hill reboot is apparently in the works, but I'm not super optimistic. I'm hopeful it'll be good, but it probably won't. It's beginning to sound like the Daria related series, now movie, Jodie may have been cancelled - and the concept sounded awful and the Beavis and Butthead reboot wasn't anything great.",
">\n\nIts a great show. Hilarious in fact. But you don't have to worry about it anymore, thry just fired justin roiland, the main voice actor for both characters Rick and Morty.",
">\n\nIt's fun.\nThey oversell nihilism which attracts a bunch of edgy vocal kids that hype the show too much though.",
">\n\nNobody exists on purpose. Nobody belongs anywhere. Everybody's going to die. Come watch TV.",
">\n\nWell I have good news for you, it’s more than likely gonna end.",
">\n\nThey have said they're continuing it without Justin Roiland, he's been fired. They said season 7 is continuing as normal otherwise. So I imagine casting for voice replacements coming soon?",
">\n\nHuh interesting. I was thinking they couldn’t possibly do it without Roiland but I suppose they’ll made do.",
">\n\nTHANK YOU omfg. Lump it in with family guy and american dad. laaaaaame 👎🏻👎🏻 Bring on the downvotes and defensive comments, 😁",
">\n\nWe’re you high? Cause otherwise you were doing it wrong.",
">\n\nYeah it definitely helps if you're high",
">\n\ni fuckin love that shit\nbut my mental age is probably 16 so im not gonna argue your point",
">\n\nRick and Morty is a cinematic masterpiece.",
">\n\nIt's honestly one of my favorite shows of all time. Tied with Ted Lasso. I can rewatch any episode multiple times and still enjoy it. There is so much truth in ever scene and every flippant side comment.",
">\n\nI always knew the creator of that cartoon was a sick creep just going off the subject matter.",
">\n\nSure you did. What other great predictions have you made?",
">\n\nThat you would reply all mad and butthurt I insulted your favourite show? Kek, too ez",
">\n\nOk boomer",
">\n\nok zoomer",
">\n\nOk Coomer",
">\n\nOk loomer (of yarn)",
">\n\nOkay doomer (idk, some member of a black metal band probably)",
">\n\nOk Amy Schumer",
">\n\nOkay who? 😜",
">\n\nAmen\nIt’s a psuedo-intellectual’s futurama but way edgier",
">\n\nThat sounds perfect tho",
">\n\nI stand by the first two seasons were really good.\nThe fandom made it a little embarrassing by the time the third season rolled out.",
">\n\nThis is a nice upvote bait thanks to recent news. The first 3 seasons rank among the finest sci-fi I've seen on screen. Every episode packs more imagination than entire movies. \nAnd Pickle Rick, by god...",
">\n\nMany episodes are total shite and some are VERY GOOD.",
">\n\nIts just ran about twice as long as it should have already. When it came out, everyone loved it for being different and crazy. Now it is played out.",
">\n\nagree, should be cancelled"
] |
>
|
[
"As a fan of the show I completely agree. That’s why I watch it.",
">\n\nI loved it up until season 3. I haven’t been able to keep my interest up after that.",
">\n\nSame. By the time the third season rolled around, the fans made me embarrassed about watching it. Plus, it just wasn't as good.",
">\n\nSome of it can be annoying, mainly the way Morty talk sometimes. Still, I think it’s an alright show.",
">\n\nRick's stupid burping tic is worse than Morty's whine.",
">\n\nWeirdly enough it doesn’t bug me. Sometimes I don’t notice it.",
">\n\nI mean, I don’t think it’s exactly aimed at the mature and refined adult",
">\n\nIt's alright especially the first few seasons, but after that it just doesn't have the spark it used to",
">\n\nIts an okay show. Lost interest at season 3/4 i think as i just grew from the comedy",
">\n\nIt's a funny show (in a barren landscape of adult animation).",
">\n\nI agree with some of the comments where it just got a bit old after a few seasons. But what I loved is the underlying jokes. When you catch them, it’s quite funny",
">\n\nEh. I thought some concepts, like the citadel, were interesting and well used. However, the last couple seasons have been meh; the incest jokes are just overused and now the recasting that's about to be done probably ensures it'll be over by season 10. \nIn the meantime, South Park is just coasting and virtually not there - hard to say if things will truly go back to normal for them. Family Guy is and has been a cesspool long overdue to be put out of its misery, and aside from a few good episodes here and there, the Simpsons is limping and probably ready to be retired. \nBob's Burgers is ok, but definitely requires a specific taste to enjoy and beyond that, there really isn't much of anything. A king of the hill reboot is apparently in the works, but I'm not super optimistic. I'm hopeful it'll be good, but it probably won't. It's beginning to sound like the Daria related series, now movie, Jodie may have been cancelled - and the concept sounded awful and the Beavis and Butthead reboot wasn't anything great.",
">\n\nIts a great show. Hilarious in fact. But you don't have to worry about it anymore, thry just fired justin roiland, the main voice actor for both characters Rick and Morty.",
">\n\nIt's fun.\nThey oversell nihilism which attracts a bunch of edgy vocal kids that hype the show too much though.",
">\n\nNobody exists on purpose. Nobody belongs anywhere. Everybody's going to die. Come watch TV.",
">\n\nWell I have good news for you, it’s more than likely gonna end.",
">\n\nThey have said they're continuing it without Justin Roiland, he's been fired. They said season 7 is continuing as normal otherwise. So I imagine casting for voice replacements coming soon?",
">\n\nHuh interesting. I was thinking they couldn’t possibly do it without Roiland but I suppose they’ll made do.",
">\n\nTHANK YOU omfg. Lump it in with family guy and american dad. laaaaaame 👎🏻👎🏻 Bring on the downvotes and defensive comments, 😁",
">\n\nWe’re you high? Cause otherwise you were doing it wrong.",
">\n\nYeah it definitely helps if you're high",
">\n\ni fuckin love that shit\nbut my mental age is probably 16 so im not gonna argue your point",
">\n\nRick and Morty is a cinematic masterpiece.",
">\n\nIt's honestly one of my favorite shows of all time. Tied with Ted Lasso. I can rewatch any episode multiple times and still enjoy it. There is so much truth in ever scene and every flippant side comment.",
">\n\nI always knew the creator of that cartoon was a sick creep just going off the subject matter.",
">\n\nSure you did. What other great predictions have you made?",
">\n\nThat you would reply all mad and butthurt I insulted your favourite show? Kek, too ez",
">\n\nOk boomer",
">\n\nok zoomer",
">\n\nOk Coomer",
">\n\nOk loomer (of yarn)",
">\n\nOkay doomer (idk, some member of a black metal band probably)",
">\n\nOk Amy Schumer",
">\n\nOkay who? 😜",
">\n\nAmen\nIt’s a psuedo-intellectual’s futurama but way edgier",
">\n\nThat sounds perfect tho",
">\n\nI stand by the first two seasons were really good.\nThe fandom made it a little embarrassing by the time the third season rolled out.",
">\n\nThis is a nice upvote bait thanks to recent news. The first 3 seasons rank among the finest sci-fi I've seen on screen. Every episode packs more imagination than entire movies. \nAnd Pickle Rick, by god...",
">\n\nMany episodes are total shite and some are VERY GOOD.",
">\n\nIts just ran about twice as long as it should have already. When it came out, everyone loved it for being different and crazy. Now it is played out.",
">\n\nagree, should be cancelled",
">\n\nThe subjects are pretty adult. You can appreciate the different layers of exposure. Childish and terrible can't be used for the show. What show would be mature and great then?"
] |
/u/SenlinDescends (OP) has awarded 1 delta(s) in this post.
All comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed here, in /r/DeltaLog.
Please note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.
^Delta System Explained ^| ^Deltaboards
|
[] |
>
I may be wrong but isn’t the purpose of cash bail (at least officially) to provide a disincentive to the person not showing up to their court date? In other words you get the money back if you come when summoned after release.
|
[
"/u/SenlinDescends (OP) has awarded 1 delta(s) in this post.\nAll comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed here, in /r/DeltaLog.\nPlease note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.\n^Delta System Explained ^| ^Deltaboards"
] |
>
The incentives are a bit more complex. Most people have to use a bail bondsman. Such bondsmans are paid 10% of your bail by you, and they pay your bail. In the event you show up, the bondsman gets his money back. You do not. Thus, eliminating the incentive you pointed out.
Further, those who believe themselves likely to be found guilty must weigh the cost of potentially years of their freedom vs the bail, even if they could pony the whole amount.
Misdemeanors often have bond in the thousands. It doesn't matter if you would get it back if you don't have it to pay in the first place. So you take the 10% option above, and there is suddenly little incentive for you to show up.
And now, you're out hundreds or even thousands to the gears of 'justice', and will never see it again, even if you are completely innocent.
Source: I have used a bail bondsman for this exact reason, on charges that were later dismissed by the prosecution for lack of evidence. My bond was $500, which I had to borrow from three people to get. I never saw that again.
|
[
"/u/SenlinDescends (OP) has awarded 1 delta(s) in this post.\nAll comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed here, in /r/DeltaLog.\nPlease note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.\n^Delta System Explained ^| ^Deltaboards",
">\n\nI may be wrong but isn’t the purpose of cash bail (at least officially) to provide a disincentive to the person not showing up to their court date? In other words you get the money back if you come when summoned after release."
] |
>
The vast majority of the people who are charged, are guilty though. The thought of letting every criminal out on the street again after they've committed a crime is an atrocious thought. Even the small amount who do end up being released end up continuing to cause a ton of crime, because it most often the case that a mjaority of the crime is committed by a small minority of individuals.
"Catch and release," policies colloquially refer to criminals getting off easy, are already proving to be responsible for allowing a lot of seriois criminal offenders to offend again. Eliminating the need to remand people until an investigation is done, would be an absolute disaster.
|
[
"/u/SenlinDescends (OP) has awarded 1 delta(s) in this post.\nAll comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed here, in /r/DeltaLog.\nPlease note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.\n^Delta System Explained ^| ^Deltaboards",
">\n\nI may be wrong but isn’t the purpose of cash bail (at least officially) to provide a disincentive to the person not showing up to their court date? In other words you get the money back if you come when summoned after release.",
">\n\nThe incentives are a bit more complex. Most people have to use a bail bondsman. Such bondsmans are paid 10% of your bail by you, and they pay your bail. In the event you show up, the bondsman gets his money back. You do not. Thus, eliminating the incentive you pointed out.\nFurther, those who believe themselves likely to be found guilty must weigh the cost of potentially years of their freedom vs the bail, even if they could pony the whole amount.\nMisdemeanors often have bond in the thousands. It doesn't matter if you would get it back if you don't have it to pay in the first place. So you take the 10% option above, and there is suddenly little incentive for you to show up.\nAnd now, you're out hundreds or even thousands to the gears of 'justice', and will never see it again, even if you are completely innocent.\nSource: I have used a bail bondsman for this exact reason, on charges that were later dismissed by the prosecution for lack of evidence. My bond was $500, which I had to borrow from three people to get. I never saw that again."
] |
>
The vast majority of the people who are charged, are guilty though.
This is so patently and provably false, through absolutely the bare minimum of research, that I'm genuinely not sure whether you're parodying this position or actually hold it. Never mind the fact that even if it was true - or even if literally every single person charged was truly guilty exactly and fully as charged - a person's freedom shouldn't be conditional on their wealth.
|
[
"/u/SenlinDescends (OP) has awarded 1 delta(s) in this post.\nAll comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed here, in /r/DeltaLog.\nPlease note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.\n^Delta System Explained ^| ^Deltaboards",
">\n\nI may be wrong but isn’t the purpose of cash bail (at least officially) to provide a disincentive to the person not showing up to their court date? In other words you get the money back if you come when summoned after release.",
">\n\nThe incentives are a bit more complex. Most people have to use a bail bondsman. Such bondsmans are paid 10% of your bail by you, and they pay your bail. In the event you show up, the bondsman gets his money back. You do not. Thus, eliminating the incentive you pointed out.\nFurther, those who believe themselves likely to be found guilty must weigh the cost of potentially years of their freedom vs the bail, even if they could pony the whole amount.\nMisdemeanors often have bond in the thousands. It doesn't matter if you would get it back if you don't have it to pay in the first place. So you take the 10% option above, and there is suddenly little incentive for you to show up.\nAnd now, you're out hundreds or even thousands to the gears of 'justice', and will never see it again, even if you are completely innocent.\nSource: I have used a bail bondsman for this exact reason, on charges that were later dismissed by the prosecution for lack of evidence. My bond was $500, which I had to borrow from three people to get. I never saw that again.",
">\n\nThe vast majority of the people who are charged, are guilty though. The thought of letting every criminal out on the street again after they've committed a crime is an atrocious thought. Even the small amount who do end up being released end up continuing to cause a ton of crime, because it most often the case that a mjaority of the crime is committed by a small minority of individuals.\n\"Catch and release,\" policies colloquially refer to criminals getting off easy, are already proving to be responsible for allowing a lot of seriois criminal offenders to offend again. Eliminating the need to remand people until an investigation is done, would be an absolute disaster."
] |
>
No it isn't false. 90% of defendants who go to trial enter a guilty plea. Fewer than 1/2 of 1% of criminal defendants were acquitted. That constitutes the vast majority of cases. Where a defendant weren't found guilty of some sort of criminal liability.
Also, a person's freedom is conditional on whether, or not, there is reasonable doubt to their innocence of a crime that has been committed, serious enough to warrant being held in custody longer than 24 hours. Evidence that a person committed a crime is often substantiative enough to tip the scale against their innocence. You can be reasonably guilty enough to denied bail.
|
[
"/u/SenlinDescends (OP) has awarded 1 delta(s) in this post.\nAll comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed here, in /r/DeltaLog.\nPlease note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.\n^Delta System Explained ^| ^Deltaboards",
">\n\nI may be wrong but isn’t the purpose of cash bail (at least officially) to provide a disincentive to the person not showing up to their court date? In other words you get the money back if you come when summoned after release.",
">\n\nThe incentives are a bit more complex. Most people have to use a bail bondsman. Such bondsmans are paid 10% of your bail by you, and they pay your bail. In the event you show up, the bondsman gets his money back. You do not. Thus, eliminating the incentive you pointed out.\nFurther, those who believe themselves likely to be found guilty must weigh the cost of potentially years of their freedom vs the bail, even if they could pony the whole amount.\nMisdemeanors often have bond in the thousands. It doesn't matter if you would get it back if you don't have it to pay in the first place. So you take the 10% option above, and there is suddenly little incentive for you to show up.\nAnd now, you're out hundreds or even thousands to the gears of 'justice', and will never see it again, even if you are completely innocent.\nSource: I have used a bail bondsman for this exact reason, on charges that were later dismissed by the prosecution for lack of evidence. My bond was $500, which I had to borrow from three people to get. I never saw that again.",
">\n\nThe vast majority of the people who are charged, are guilty though. The thought of letting every criminal out on the street again after they've committed a crime is an atrocious thought. Even the small amount who do end up being released end up continuing to cause a ton of crime, because it most often the case that a mjaority of the crime is committed by a small minority of individuals.\n\"Catch and release,\" policies colloquially refer to criminals getting off easy, are already proving to be responsible for allowing a lot of seriois criminal offenders to offend again. Eliminating the need to remand people until an investigation is done, would be an absolute disaster.",
">\n\n\nThe vast majority of the people who are charged, are guilty though.\n\nThis is so patently and provably false, through absolutely the bare minimum of research, that I'm genuinely not sure whether you're parodying this position or actually hold it. Never mind the fact that even if it was true - or even if literally every single person charged was truly guilty exactly and fully as charged - a person's freedom shouldn't be conditional on their wealth."
] |
>
Pleading guilty is not equal to being guilty at all.
|
[
"/u/SenlinDescends (OP) has awarded 1 delta(s) in this post.\nAll comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed here, in /r/DeltaLog.\nPlease note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.\n^Delta System Explained ^| ^Deltaboards",
">\n\nI may be wrong but isn’t the purpose of cash bail (at least officially) to provide a disincentive to the person not showing up to their court date? In other words you get the money back if you come when summoned after release.",
">\n\nThe incentives are a bit more complex. Most people have to use a bail bondsman. Such bondsmans are paid 10% of your bail by you, and they pay your bail. In the event you show up, the bondsman gets his money back. You do not. Thus, eliminating the incentive you pointed out.\nFurther, those who believe themselves likely to be found guilty must weigh the cost of potentially years of their freedom vs the bail, even if they could pony the whole amount.\nMisdemeanors often have bond in the thousands. It doesn't matter if you would get it back if you don't have it to pay in the first place. So you take the 10% option above, and there is suddenly little incentive for you to show up.\nAnd now, you're out hundreds or even thousands to the gears of 'justice', and will never see it again, even if you are completely innocent.\nSource: I have used a bail bondsman for this exact reason, on charges that were later dismissed by the prosecution for lack of evidence. My bond was $500, which I had to borrow from three people to get. I never saw that again.",
">\n\nThe vast majority of the people who are charged, are guilty though. The thought of letting every criminal out on the street again after they've committed a crime is an atrocious thought. Even the small amount who do end up being released end up continuing to cause a ton of crime, because it most often the case that a mjaority of the crime is committed by a small minority of individuals.\n\"Catch and release,\" policies colloquially refer to criminals getting off easy, are already proving to be responsible for allowing a lot of seriois criminal offenders to offend again. Eliminating the need to remand people until an investigation is done, would be an absolute disaster.",
">\n\n\nThe vast majority of the people who are charged, are guilty though.\n\nThis is so patently and provably false, through absolutely the bare minimum of research, that I'm genuinely not sure whether you're parodying this position or actually hold it. Never mind the fact that even if it was true - or even if literally every single person charged was truly guilty exactly and fully as charged - a person's freedom shouldn't be conditional on their wealth.",
">\n\nNo it isn't false. 90% of defendants who go to trial enter a guilty plea. Fewer than 1/2 of 1% of criminal defendants were acquitted. That constitutes the vast majority of cases. Where a defendant weren't found guilty of some sort of criminal liability.\nAlso, a person's freedom is conditional on whether, or not, there is reasonable doubt to their innocence of a crime that has been committed, serious enough to warrant being held in custody longer than 24 hours. Evidence that a person committed a crime is often substantiative enough to tip the scale against their innocence. You can be reasonably guilty enough to denied bail."
] |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.