Anonymous #1 6d

You’re telling me that this shutdown (during Trump’s presidency) is because of Joe Biden (who is not president?)

28

Anonymous #2 6d

Biden derangement syndrome

15

Anonymous #3 6d

Can we figure out how to add an M to the end of the acronym so then it’ll be BDSM instead of BDS

3

Anonymous #2 6d

Yes because all the problems causing the shutdown are due to him or a precedent he set while he was in office. If the previous owner of a car drove it like complete shit for 4 years. Then gives it to you. You start taking care of it but then the car breaks down a few months after you get it. Whose fault is it ????

-2

Anonymous #1 6d

So it was Biden’s fault the first time too? Is it just always someone else’s fault?

3

Anonymous #1 6d

What are the specific problems that Biden caused?

5

Anonymous #4 6d

What do you mean? Biden inherited an all time high economy. That was all trump

-5

Anonymous #1 6d

The last shutdown was under Trump as well, he’s doing a damn good job at not making our government run

18

Anonymous #1 6d

Both times Trumps been president there’s been a shutdown lol.

7

Anonymous #5 6d

Because trump actually gives a fuck about the country and economy. Shit is completely broken and we shouldn’t open until we start fixing

-3

Anonymous #1 6d

Oh okay so suddenly shutting down the government is a good thing lol. Goalpost moved

11

Anonymous #4 6d

If your car has a flat tire would you keep driving in the flat tire or turn it off, fix it and put air then keep driving? Silly that I have to make analogies for y’all to understand this is a good thing

-2

Anonymous #1 6d

So shutting down the government and not paying federal workers including letting food programs run out is good, to you?

4

Anonymous #4 6d

If you drive with the flat tire you run the risk of ruining your rims, alignment and other parts of the car.

-1

Anonymous #1 6d

That wasn’t an answer

5

Anonymous #4 6d

All will be well.

-1

Anonymous #4 6d

The government isn’t a car. This analogy doesn’t work.

9

Anonymous #2 6d

That’s how analogies work. The thing being compared is always something else

-2

Anonymous #1 6d

I didn’t ask if all will be well. Struggling to read?

6

Anonymous #4 6d

How are you personally affected by the government shutdowns?

-2

Anonymous #1 6d

That’s also not an answer. Hurry up.

2

Anonymous #4 6d

Answer my question first. How are you affected by the government shutdown?

-2

Anonymous #1 6d

I asked my question first so you go ahead and answer that first and I’ll answer yours. Be an adult and do things in the order that they happened

5

Anonymous #4 6d

Those people will be paid. Those food programs haven’t completely ran out and will replenish in due time

-1

Anonymous #1 6d

I didn’t ask if things will happen. I asked a yes, or no question. Try again maybe you’ll actually answer this time. Is it good?

4

Anonymous #4 6d

It’s a neutral thing. It can be bad or good depending on how you look at things

-1

Anonymous #1 6d

So it’s neutral to withhold money from hard working employees who are working and it’s neutral to allow food programs to stop being able to feed hungry americans?

4

Anonymous #4 6d

Federal employees know the risk when they work for the government. That’s why they get big pensions and easy jobs. The government isn’t supposed to be your personal chef or financier. If you will die because the government didn’t give you food stamps then you need to reevaluate your life

-1

Anonymous #4 6d

Do you know how many Americans sell their food stamps so they can use the funds for nails hair and in some cases drugs and alcohol

-1

Anonymous #1 6d

That’s also not what I asked. It’s really hard for you to answer a question that offends you directly

3

Anonymous #1 6d

Do you know I didn’t ask for your feelings on people who sell benefits or your opinion of life reevaluation?

2

Anonymous #1 6d

Do you know how many Americans eat the food that they buy with their food stamps because they and their children would go hungry otherwise?

12

Anonymous #4 6d

Food stamps were never supposed completely subsidize anybody’s food bro. It was originally invented to help farmers sell more crops

-1

Anonymous #1 6d

I didn’t ask for his history lesson. Hurry up

10

Anonymous #4 6d

I answered already. It’s neutral. Neither good or bad

-1

Anonymous #1 6d

Okay, and now it completely subsidizes some people’s food because otherwise they wouldn’t eat.

9

Anonymous #1 6d

Make an argument as to why it’s good not to pay someone for over 36 days of work The Trump administration is talking about not paying the workers after the government reopens. Make an argument as to why it’s good not to pay people who work for you

3

Anonymous #2 6d

Obviously excluding people with severe disabilities that literally can’t work: Why does the government need to provide food stamps to a healthy adult who can speak English?

-1

Anonymous #1 6d

The people with severe disabilities also cannot use food programs at the moment. Why is it good to let them go hungry?

6

Anonymous #2 6d

There’s Mexicans and Haitians that come from their countries and can’t speak English but work hard and don’t need food stamps

-1

Anonymous #4 6d

I said excluding them

-1

Anonymous #1 6d

A single mom with kids too young for school. Someone who’s mentally ill and can’t work 40hr/week. Someone who makes minimum wage and they’re paying all of it for rent.

6

Anonymous #1 6d

So you do have an opinion on how restricting food programs is a bad thing. But only to certain groups. Those groups are being affected right now, you can’t exclude them in reality. Why is it good to not pay people for 36 days while they work?

1

Anonymous #2 6d

A mom; single or not gets tax credits during tax season for every child. If she’s working and receives those’d tax credits and still can’t afford to feed her kids then she’s living way above her means and that’s on her

-1

Anonymous #2 6d

There’s immigrants that come to this country and don’t speak English or have family and they make above minimum wage. If u are American and getting paid minimum wage it means you aren’t using your full potential. Try harder

-1

Anonymous #2 6d

There are homes and places for people who are mentally ill

-1

Anonymous #1 6d

She has four kids from an abusive relationship, she just lost her job and is looking for a new one. Shouldn’t she and her kids be able to eat while she looks?

4

Anonymous #1 6d

Answer the question

1

Anonymous #1 6d

Not someone who’s severely schizophrenic, just someone with bad ocd. They can function in society, they can work, they have loved ones. They just struggle to work 40 hours a week. Other than that they live a relatively ordinary life. Don’t they deserve to keep having their own autonomy AND eating food?

2

Anonymous #2 6d

Since we are just making up wild hypothetical situations at this point what if she spends her last dollar on the lottery and win 1 million dollars. Problem solved

-1

Anonymous #1 6d

No, bud. Some jobs are just minimum wage jobs. Do people in minimum wage jobs not deserve to eat?

5

Anonymous #2 6d

The jobs I worked at when I was in High school didn’t even pay minimum wage. Paid more. There’s no reason you should be working a minimum wage job if you speak English and are able bodied. You simply aren’t applying yourself and have to reevaluate your life

-2

Anonymous #1 6d

I’m not making up wild hypotheticals. I’m presenting you with situations that people in America could be in. I’m presenting you with people’s realities. The job of America’s government is to tend to all of its people. That means, no matter what “wild hypothetical” I make up, the government needs to be ready. Because there are mothers with four kids. There are mentally ill people. There are people making minimum wage. None of these are wild.

3

Anonymous #2 6d

That’s the severely mentally ill. Not even close. And it’s their life they can get medication or go to school and get an education. University, Community college, trade school, the United States give so many opportunity to succeed

-1

Anonymous #1 6d

That’s for the secherentphrenif ^

-1

Anonymous #1 6d

I work in an agriculture lab. Our money comes from grants. I do incredibly important work and am paid minimum wage because science labs are not very profitable. We get our profits from grants, and the grants are what make it possible to pay us at all. You need to accept that people have minimum wage jobs.

7

Anonymous #2 6d

But that’s your conscience decision. You decided you’d rather work minimum wage doing something you love and making a difference than making money. Humble of you but that’s your choice

-1

Anonymous #1 6d

No, it’s the only available job currently. I spend the majority of my time applying for jobs. The point is, I’m not asking you to explain or solve someone’s life if they’re unhoused or poor or making minimum wage. I’m asking you if they deserve to eat. Does a person who can’t afford food deserve to eat?

13

Anonymous #1 6d

you said it could be good that people are not getting paid for their work and now you’re saying it is a personal choice not to make money?

13

Anonymous #2 6d

More “wild hypotheticals” that food assistance solves: a student who can’t work full time but need to eat. someone who’s just been laid off and is job hunting but it’s hard. someone who’s sick and all of their money goes towards medicine and healthcare. someone in a financially abusive relationship.

12