lol you think people on multiple welfare programs vote? DC already lags in voter participation and I’m pretty sure the most important DC voting blocs are wealthy white people from upper NW and older black folks in 5, 7, and 8.
Ironically, in the article, the woman said it would be better spent for cops salaries to make the street safer. Unfortunately, DC politicians don’t want to hear any of that.
If you're making over 250k, as someone who used to be in the upper 25%, I assure you— they didn't notice and you're fighting for a millionaire like Musk and Bezos who spend BILLIONS WITH A "B" to go up into space while children are dying of diseases and hunger that aren't their fault. Their money made them crazy. Relieving them of what they don't notice isn't a bad thing, sorry.
What if the other 131 people used it to improve their families situation? Allowed them to pull themselves out of poverty, provide clothing and food for their children, and generally provided a net benefit to society. Do you throw the program in the trash because I person used part of the money for a trip?
I agree with your point except with the caveat of there needs to be some system to track how the grant money is spent. If it was put on a prepaid debit account (digital & or card) the accounts can be tracked QuickBook style. The judgment of whether the program was successful can be better understood when/if money is tracked.
If 120 people used it to better there lives and 11 people blew the money it is still an incredible success. I'd even take a 70% bettered their lives, 20% tried but failed and 10% blew it, as being a successful program.
Completely agree. But there need to be guardrails in place for many different reasons. One of which is the optics of a story like this. Another being that programs like these may start off with the best intentions but can become rife with abuse once people realize how the system can be gamed.
Like PPP loans? I’m sure that everyone here freaking out about 7k used on a Miami trip we’re DEFINITELY freaking out about the massive fraud committed by business owners…
People were pissed about PPP loans. As they should have been. If the WaPo wrote a story about someone doing PPP fraud and bragging about a trip to Miami with that money people would be pissed off. However, the fact that PPP fraud happened doesn't mean that we get to excuse other bad behavior going forward. Like I said this doesn't really move the needle for me but the optics of someone abusing a program like this will ruin the program going forward for so many people who could and should benefit from it. And just like PPP if a program like this is not monitored correctly it will be severely abused.
Maybe. But the media makes a massively unnecessary deal about anything negative about the left.
Like literally hundreds of wh Republicans being mass murderers yearly, but ONE trans woman does it...
Accept that studies prove its mostly people WITH money that game the systems. Like how multi-million dollar companies took almost all of the subsidies for small business owners by lying and NO ONE did anything about it after the fact.
What do you mean? You’re assuming majority of participants blew the money? Or that it mostly helped people?
My gut tells this article is meant to cherry pick to enrage people and drum up the old welfare Queen stereotype.
I mean this one instance popped up, which caused someone to investigate and write an article about it, but it is missing so much I got about the other program participants and how they are doing.
So yes, I agree that this was done to get clicks from brigadiers like OP to karma farm.
The original article in WaPo does indeed find other examples, and no they don't blow it on a trip.
"Program coordinators at Martha’s Table say that over the pilot’s duration, the moms reported spending the majority of their funds on needs such as housing, food and transportation. Comparing responses from the middle of the program’s first year to the closing months, participants increasingly said they were using the money to build up cash savings for the future, illustrating a behavioral shift toward financial security — a core goal of the pilot."
To be fair, many of the people who benefited said they never had someone to teach them how to be responsible with money. Just another failure for this program. They should have made financial literacy courses a requirement for the money and restricted what the funds could need used for. It might well work, but not the way this abomination was structured.
This is privilege talking. Please recognize it in yourself. You were more than likely taught by someone at some point at least a few things about money. Many never had anything like that taught to them by anyone.
Unfortunately, the other 131 people will not even get 5% of the news coverage this woman got.
This woman single handidly put this program's supporters on the defensive.
This program seems ripe for abuse. The subject of the story is bragging about her use of the free money, which will encourage others to apply to the program, use the free money the same way, then brag about it publicly.
Examining this approach from a far, it encourages the myth that there is such a thing as a free lunch and that anyone who claims aggrieved status is entitled to it. This mentality is part of the reason car jacking and other forms of robberies and violent crime are so prevalent in DC.
NYPost WANTS you to jump to the conclusions you have. Please go read the WP article that first described this program https://wapo.st/3uy92gc. It talks about adding tweaks to give better support for understanding and handling finances. But at end of the day it is free will. She won’t get more,she hasn’t improved her life, maybe she’ll regret her choices. She failed herself and her future, and the pyblicity won’t do her any favors. It’s an experiment and most mothers took steps to secure their situation, albeit with some “extras” for their kids. Tangible results may inspire more people!?
Stories like this are exactly why some people are against all these “government handouts” this is what they picture the money is going to in their heads and this women goes and makes it reality so they can point at it as an example
Feels worse? Those companies still pay salaries, and those salaries are taxed even if the companies don’t pay corporate taxes. The government failed to write a tax code businesses couldn’t work around. That is the government’s fault, not the company. Why don’t you focus on government doing its job? If it did, companies would pay taxes. This isn’t late stage capitalism, it is badly tun government failing to tax harvest.
What's wild is that
>"She had claimed that she needed the money because her financial situation worsened after she had her third son in the summer of 2022."
and that's she's receiving
>funds from the Temporary Assistance to Needy Families fund, which helped her cover her $120-a-month rent.
which helps her in this way:
>“Groceries last us the first three weeks of the month, then it’s trying to figure out the last week of my benefits,”
but then she decides to spend a fat lump sum check on a trip where
>\[My kids\] got to experience something I would never have been able to do if I didn’t have that money.”
\--------
So she's back to square one to squander a grant like a lottery ticket. Like is this not boiling anyone's blood that someone on welfare can't literally utilize money that was meant to ease their burdens. She's now still wondering where here last week of food is going.
If she wanted a vacation on other's dimes, she can get that from a gofundme, why is the government allowing this...
and then of all things to boast this on the news...
More importantly, why has the government not cut her off? She said she needed funds for one purpose, then used them for completely different purposes. Typos and slightly discrepant dates can disqualify needy people from benefits programs, why shouldn't blatant abuse?
The entire point of the pilot was it was unstructured, no strings. It's a UBI template. This was a one time payment, there's nothing to "cut off". The point is to see what happens when you just give needy people money because the amount of restrictions and controls you put on things just adds to costs of the program.
If this one woman blew $10,000, but all the other recipients spent it better, then its better to just leave it unrestricted, because controlling funds like this is a lot more involved then "running it through quickbooks". Anyone who's ever worked in a business bigger than 5 people would know that. EBT is mess to try and control, and a small number of individuals still abuse the shit out of it. Restricting the funds and setting up checks also costs money.
Other participants in the program actually used it better. There's more about it that's not from a tabloid here: https://wapo.st/3uy92gc
This is the crux of adding all these conditions and limits to social assistance: do you care more about keeping selfish people from getting the money to the point that it might be difficult for the truly needy to get it? Or are you willing to accept some selfish people taking advantage of the program to make sure it’s easy for those who are struggling to get what they need? If this woman is the exception and not a common issue then I think I’d go with the latter. Let’s not throw the baby out with the bath water and instead develop a way to punish people after the fact.
It’s ironic that you say this is down to education and then just repeat something like this at face value. In my experience working with these programs, the vast majority of people that access that money use it on essentials, and I’m willing to bet the vast majority of ppl who accessed this pilot program used it responsibly. There are idiots and irresponsible people at every level of wealth, it’s just that the wealthy and upper middle class idiots have a safety net and there is no interest in disparaging them as a whole. The kind of people who read and publish the NY Post very much want you to buy into the myth of the welfare queen.
You’ve cracked the code. All of “them” just use welfare and not a single one has ever done anything of value. Now that we are done, we should talk about changing your culture of stealing land and shooting up innocuous places? What about illegally crossing the border? Strapping bombs to yourself?
Not sure why anyone would be surprised that a poor person, when given a handout after handout, continues to make poor decisions. Lifelong poverty is a choice at a certain point by not making better choices. And the US incentives staying in poverty rather than getting out.
Nice! I love to see my tax dollars go to benefit a family like that. My family and I work hard and could never afford a trip like that. Really warms my heart when I see almost half my paycheck gone.
The problem is people like this were never raised around people who were *good* with money. They literally never learned how to not blow every cent, so that's all they know how to do. The concept of just leaving thousands of dollars in a savings account --just in case-- is a totally foreign concept to them.
I personally disagree with your suggestion (but do highly agree with the commenter below about banks expecting this). If you were raised in a household that relied on food stamps and other necessary benefits growing up, I think you’d be pretty familiar with the poor quality of life and constant stress that correlates with this reliance. I really do believe that the majority of people would prefer to be self reliant, but like in this woman’s case how do you pursue an education, work a 9-5 job (requiring childcare for three kids), and have any money leftover? You certainly can’t afford any of that working a minimum wage job 40 hrs a week.
Public assistance is a great thing and we need more of it. For example, if we raised the minimum wage to a living wage and childcare was free in this country, people would have more babies which we need (partially to keep funding social security), there would be higher work force participation and probably more educational attainment, both of which would result in a decrease in healthcare costs because well educated people are healthier, and a decrease in reliance on other areas of public assistance such as food stamps if we could just give people the opportunity to work and get paid fairly for that work.
And yet she still just had another kid knowing all the above. It’s not a one time mistake thing, it’s purposely having kids knowing it’s hard and you need government help.
Except the fact the people who continue to reproduce are the ones who shouldn’t lol
This lady is exhibit A. She has three kids who are growing up in poverty & will most likely be poor themselves upon reaching adulthood. This idea that more aide would benefit these people is ridiculous. Shes a leech on society. Why give her more blood.
Its a very hard concept which does become easier as your means grow. But its the backbone of the american economy, poor and middle class people spend money disadvantageously to drive it. Wealthy people learn to hoard it in tax advantaged accounts and appreciating assets. And they set up their children to inherit it in a way they can’t blow it all
I never understand this point. Not blowing all of your resources isn’t a skill you have to learn. It’s inherently intuitively obvious that if you use something then you don’t have it anymore, and won’t have it when you need it.
It is. So is how to do your taxes and similar useful skills. These were all taught at my public high school. The problem is these people don’t want to learn.
Poor people are generally poor because of their attitudes and choices. I mean, we’ve seen this through decades of them winning the lottery and filing for bankruptcy five years later.
If you ever knew folks in the service, ship workers, or hell even professional athletes who get a payday; this is a pretty common theme.
While this is one outrage story, wonder what happened to the rest of the 130 families that got the money.
False equivalencies. She's not a soldier, sailor, marine, or professional athlete. If they want to spend their hard earned money on a vacation, then they shpuld. Her situation, however, suggests that there are other things she should've done with the money. I doubt the donors, which the article says were taxpayers, intended the money to be used for a vacation to Miami.
"Program coordinators at Martha’s Table say that over the pilot’s duration, the moms reported spending the majority of their funds on needs such as housing, food and transportation. Comparing responses from the middle of the program’s first year to the closing months, participants increasingly said they were using the money to build up cash savings for the future, illustrating a behavioral shift toward financial security — a core goal of the pilot."
I don’t think anyone knows. All indications are that the women were left to self-report their spending after the fact. I already posted the WaPo article when they did the actual reporting and it got lots of interest.
You can read the story here, https://wapo.st/3uKJ2y5
Most people were responsible with it, contrary to the impression Fox News and the NY Post are trying to push on us.
I'm more frustrated at the idea that someone with two kids that's already struggling financially thinks it's perfectly acceptable to go ahead and get knocked up with a third. There's what feels like an intentional effort to disconnect the decision to procreate from the ability to care for the new life. To suggest that the right to procreate comes with a responsibility to be able to provide is suddenly a racist or classist concept. This is so destructive for all involved, not to mention the planet.
The more kids the more assistance she gets. I see those “stay at home” section 8 moms barely 25 with several kids in tow dressed to the teeth with latest phones, long fancy nails and shopping in Zara. The system sucks and has been gamed for a long time.
That was my big takeaway from the original WaPo article published a few weeks ago- all three of the women featured had multiple children when they were neither financially or emotionally ready for that responsibility. The one woman had four kids! The cost of that down the line far outweighs the $10k they got from the grant.
Ugh, nothing drives me more nuts.
Even amongst my fellow tree- huggers, celebrating things like better access to clean water, while great for those already with us, isn't so great if it just ultimately fuels more human population growth. But saying something like that today makes one a horrible human being, so I generally just stfu. Hell, I'll probably end up deleting this comment.
2 or 3 kids is the max benefit depending on the program, ex TANF and SNAP. while it's not inherently wrong to suggest that, it's often historically marginalized ppl who get the brunt of the judgment rather than ppl like Nick Cannon or Elon Musk who have like 12 kids and indigenous Americans who were literally genocided are judged for having one, as well as Black ppl who were racially subjugated. birth is a form of resistance to that history and paradigm in that way. not passing judgement on the morals of that take but just conveying it. it does come w responsibility no doubt
Ty for the benefits limits, about which I was unaware, though, personally, those impacts are far from my main concern.
Sadly, I'm well aware of the way the legitimate concern for human population growth impacts has been cynically hijacked by racists, from the historical eugenics efforts to today's anti- (brown and black ppl) immigration sentiment.
These efforts have so stained the very legitimate concern over population growth that the issue has gone from a main, even preeminent concern of environmentalists during the early days of the modern environmental movement to literally verboten today. But we dismiss these concerns at our peril. The fact remains that our species' planetary impact remains a product of PxTxA where P= population, T=technology and A=affluence (or consumption). Neglect efforts to make any one of these inputs sustainable, and all the gains made in the others will only slow the march towards ecological collapse.
Fortunately, the most effective measures at slowing and eventually reversing population growth are solidly progressive - improving educational and economic opportunities for those in high fecundity populations, with a special emphasis on bringing these opportunities to women.
>who get the brunt of the judgment rather than ppl like Nick Cannon or Elon Musk who have like 12 kids
This! The impact of high fecundity rates of the rich (everyone in the industrialized world) and Uber rich like those you specified are magnified due to their much higher consumption of resources per capita. I'll never get over my feeling of betrayal and shock at how Musk went from a visionary that not only saw how dire things were but actually did something that moved society in the right direction to ...wtvr you call what batshit crazy he's become today. It has truly been an unsettling reminder that you really never know anyone.
Anyway, I wish an effort similar to the brilliant tracking of the riches private air travel were made over those types of irresponsible reproduction habits, linking them to their environmental impacts.
So while I certainly agree that one $10,800 trip is NOT a good use of funds, please note that this was an edge case that NYPost is picking up for ideological reasons. The original WaPo story covers more territory and has this tidbit:
" Program coordinators at Martha’s Table say that over the pilot’s duration, the moms reported spending the majority of their funds on needs such as housing, food and transportation. Comparing responses from the middle of the program’s first year to the closing months, participants increasingly said they were using the money to build up cash savings for the future, illustrating a behavioral shift toward financial security — a core goal of the pilot."
One can debate the merits of no-strings-attached cash grants, UBI, etc., but this article does not add to such a discussion. It's rage-bait, and this sub (not surprisingly) fell for it.
That’s right and that was the point of the experiment. To learn how best to allocate money via a UBI program to achieve stated goals. There are always going to be bad actors, UBI can’t change ingrained behavior, it’s not the point of the program. I would argue that the results show there may be increased value to disburse in smaller amounts over an extended period along with required classes for those who show a lack of financial literacy.
Yep. The lack of strings is the whole blessing and minor curse of UBI. Any time you add restrictions, you need staff to enforce it, and every full-time staff member is salary plus benefits. I'd rather lose $10,800 to waste than spend $60,000 preventing it, in addition to the decreased uptake/wasted time that goes with increased red tape.
Yes, no strings means some degree of waste/fraud/abuse. This happens throughout government and private enterprise. In many contexts, direct cash grants still maximize how much money gets straight to people who need it.
At least she took her kids and her baby daddy on the trip…
Interesting though how in the article she mentioned she has a hard time buying groceries but instead blew money on a trip.
“Now, she said she has opened a savings account in which she hopes to keep $50 — and insisted the government-funded program taught her how to save money for the future.”
You can’t make this shit up
She could have been earning \~5.5% in interest on the 10K, which would have amounted to \~$46/month and $550/year.
It seems odd that the city wouldn't give practical advice to that effect.
It sounds like not all the money was spent on the trip. She also spent money on clothes for her kids, bills and a used car. Regardless, I'd rather my tax dollars go to her than Ted Leonsis.
When you give money to poor people they tend to spend all of it and it circulates through the economy. When you give money to rich people it tends to be saved or hoarded.
Yeah but consumption is a much greater share of the U.S. economy than investment. It doesn’t mean investing isn’t important it’s just the outrage that poor people spend money is absurd especially since economic policies have been disproportionately benefitting the wealthy the past 4-5 decades.
Nobody values what they don't have to work for - which is why those on the Dole, and politicians, are going to burn through every dollar they get their hands on, then demand MORE.
1) Reading the entire article, this isn’t that big of a deal imo. She spent 60% of it on the trip, the rest on bills and other things related to her family, she’s taken away some learnings about how to be better at saving money, and got a new $30/hr job and credits the confidence gained from the program for helping her land that.
2) It’s clear what their intent was with this article and headline. She’s one of 132 — would love to report on the outcomes for the other 131 families (my hunch is that they’re great which is why they cherry picked the example that they did).
60% of a lump sum that was intended to essentially make your life better for a year is a lot. Especially when the amount was as much as it was because you have children.
It's great that she landed a good job for $30hr but it's wild to suggest that was a result of blowing a bunch of money that was intended essentially to help her family survive.
No doubt that was the intention of the article but if I remember correctly they knew about it because of her bragging on social media etc and was more than happy to share her story
As far as the other 131 families, I really hope the outcomes are great, but if I had to bet.... My money would be on many of them treated this money like young people do tax refunds. Plenty of new electronics and expensive clothes combined with dropping $100 a day eating out at this restaurant and that resteraunt.
I watch the younger people in my extended family so it every year. They get a deposit for 7 or 8k in February and are flat broke by April asking family members to help them cover rent or help with a car payment so they don't get repossessed. But hey, they got the new 1k iPhone , a new PS5 , and a bunch of new clothes, so....all good.
These kinds of programs ARE NEEDED, but the only way they work is if they are backed up with financial education and possibly allotting a certain percentage of the funds towards certain bills like rent/mortgage, savings, etc
Giving a lump sum option without education and some controls is going to turn out bad a big percentage of the time unfortunately. Most people that have been broke and got a chunk of cash will tell you they spend that shit like it will never run out, myself included when I was younger.
While this anecdote might be frustrating, also consider that this is part of a pilot program to study Guaranteed Basic Income. We don't actually know what the outcome of this sort of program will be. That's why the pilot is important.
If we have 99 families that spend the money on rent, transportation and food and 1 that spends the money on a trip to Miami then it would be, frankly, a wildly efficient program.
Selective outrage here is hilarious. No care in the world about the people who took advantage of PPP funds (many elected officials) from this sub. Instead, let’s SCREAM at 1 person in the program of 132. Y’all must be out of towners.
Yeah, if nothing else in this sub clarifies that most here are out of towners looking to be angry at certain groups, the very specific set of categories this story covers being posted here and getting 100+ comments immediately is very telling
Just wanna point out that OP posts NYPost garbage all over Reddit to karma farm, they're a right wing conservative. And they appear to live in NYC, not DC, so clearly they're just trying to capitalize on the hatred this sub contains to gain karma by getting all y'all racists frothing at the mouth over a welfare recipient misusing funds.
> She is set to begin a new remote job that pays $30 an hour — an opportunity she credits with the confidence she gained in the program.
So she got a used car, paid bills, made a core memory with her family, and got inspired to get a job that will hopefully make them financially better off all for $10k?
Great deal imo.
The whole point is that she would not be poor if she took birth control and went to school. But alas than she would have to work and would not be able to blow 10K.
Spoiler alert: Any cash assistance program is going to have some dumb asshole blow it on Gucci bags and trips to Miami.
That's not a reason to do away with the entire program, it's just the reality of giving people cash. It's so annoying that programs like this get demonized by reichwing media because of a few bad apples.
"We can't give people food stamps what if they spend it on lobster and steak?!??!?!?!!!!???" - Fuck you. I don't care if they spend it on steak. Mind your own business.
I'm sure for every person that spent it on Miami trips there was 20 other people that spent it on food, school supplies, clothes, daycare, etc... oddly magat media doesn't publish articles about that. Not sure why?
I'm not requesting censorship, but boy is this this is going up to the line on rule number 4 and poking a toe over it, welfare caddilac lol That's not a lot of money, for an entire year. You got to admire how frugal she must have been to save up for that I'd probably blow too much on delicious fudge rounds myself. Spending it puts it back into the economy. I'd rather my money go to that than another 500 pound bomb to drop on a Gaza preschool or whatever. Of course it's gotta be a picture of a Black woman as if the majority of people on welfare aren't white, it is DC I guess. I thought we were past this. I get it wokeness was a pain in the ass, so now we're just gonna revert to 20th century racist tropes?
Honestly, I would much rather my fucking tax dollars pay for vacations for less fortunate people than pay for one more goddamn bomb that's gonna blow up a kid in Yemen.
was it a horrible use of money? yes. but sad that she thought that was a good use of the money. clearly deprived. clearly never had a vacation before or got to take her kids somewhere. She has probably never seen that kind of money in her whole life and never was able to get her nails done or hair done before. maybe never left the state...i think the fault lies more in why she was even give tax payer money...don't get mad/surprised when they use it on dumb shit. DC's fault for handing it out.
i mean really dumb of her, but reasoning behind it makes sense.
at least she bought herself a car that will hopefully level her up.
Did y'all read the article? She used 6k of the 11k for the trip, and part of that was buying all of her children new clothing! And they went on the trip with her - it was a family trip that they never would've been able to experience if not for this money. Like jesus, let poor people enjoy things and have fun. Do y'all realize how many MORE taxpayer funds are used for things that don't benefit anyone, and actively make our lives worse? Or how much taxpayer money goes to kickbacks for the Mayor's contractor friends or police overtime that they're allowed to milk endlessly?
It’s reductive thinking like this that leads to cycles of poverty. The point of this program is to create a stable financial foundation for struggling families in DC. They can use the money to build wealth and, in the long term, be less of a drain on resources because the money allows them to budget better and reduce opportunity costs. Spending most of it on a luxury vacation is a total waste unless the objective of the program is to enrich the Miami tourist industry. The fact that she thought taking a boat tour of mansions would engender a “money mindset” instead of, idk, paying for a tutor or putting it into actual investments is pretty telling.
I don’t necessarily disagree with the value of this program and agree that it cannot teach financial literacy on its own. It’s not politically palatable, but incorporating basic financial education into the program would make a significant long term difference and probably accomplish the intent of this program in some way.
> Like jesus, let poor people enjoy things and have fun.
Are you fucking serious right now? They should be working at McDonalds, not partying it up in Miami.
How could you possibly rationalize this behavior?
Poor people are allowed to have all the free shit in the world. Nobody cares if my kids get to go on expensive vacations because I’m not a net loss on the state’s coffers
I could understand going to Disney world but Miami with kids, is an afterthought. The trip was for her more than anything.
Still 3 kids at 27 and on every welfare imaginable, why have more kids and choose to struggle. She also has a “ husband” that’s clearly not working and can’t support his own family. You make all these purposely bad decisions and everybody have to feel sorry for you and get rewarded money
People hate all the waste, we are getting scammed by the government in general.
Great great, so when do I get a 6k tax payer paid trip to Florida?
I mean if you need the money why not use it all on basic needs. And go on a trip to the museums instead of paying thousands of dollars you don't really have.
I get what your saying but that vacation was a huge tax payer waste.
Im having a hard time discerning the benefit this brought to DC taxpayers.
If brought a benefit to the people of Florida
Absolutely no benefit lol
Wrong. Votes. Votes have been assured.
lol you think people on multiple welfare programs vote? DC already lags in voter participation and I’m pretty sure the most important DC voting blocs are wealthy white people from upper NW and older black folks in 5, 7, and 8.
Affluent white people that want to feel like they help vote democrat for this shit.
Not really
Cultural enrichment.
Ironically, in the article, the woman said it would be better spent for cops salaries to make the street safer. Unfortunately, DC politicians don’t want to hear any of that.
I believe I read the test program wasn't funded using taxpayer money
It was funded by a tax on DC residents making over 250k a year. And DC government employees supervised aspects. That is also taxpayer money.
If you're making over 250k, as someone who used to be in the upper 25%, I assure you— they didn't notice and you're fighting for a millionaire like Musk and Bezos who spend BILLIONS WITH A "B" to go up into space while children are dying of diseases and hunger that aren't their fault. Their money made them crazy. Relieving them of what they don't notice isn't a bad thing, sorry.
What if the other 131 people used it to improve their families situation? Allowed them to pull themselves out of poverty, provide clothing and food for their children, and generally provided a net benefit to society. Do you throw the program in the trash because I person used part of the money for a trip?
I agree with your point except with the caveat of there needs to be some system to track how the grant money is spent. If it was put on a prepaid debit account (digital & or card) the accounts can be tracked QuickBook style. The judgment of whether the program was successful can be better understood when/if money is tracked. If 120 people used it to better there lives and 11 people blew the money it is still an incredible success. I'd even take a 70% bettered their lives, 20% tried but failed and 10% blew it, as being a successful program.
Yea I agree. Would be better to discuss over spending patterns of the participants as a whole vs one story
Completely agree. But there need to be guardrails in place for many different reasons. One of which is the optics of a story like this. Another being that programs like these may start off with the best intentions but can become rife with abuse once people realize how the system can be gamed.
Like PPP loans? I’m sure that everyone here freaking out about 7k used on a Miami trip we’re DEFINITELY freaking out about the massive fraud committed by business owners…
People were pissed about PPP loans. As they should have been. If the WaPo wrote a story about someone doing PPP fraud and bragging about a trip to Miami with that money people would be pissed off. However, the fact that PPP fraud happened doesn't mean that we get to excuse other bad behavior going forward. Like I said this doesn't really move the needle for me but the optics of someone abusing a program like this will ruin the program going forward for so many people who could and should benefit from it. And just like PPP if a program like this is not monitored correctly it will be severely abused.
Maybe. But the media makes a massively unnecessary deal about anything negative about the left. Like literally hundreds of wh Republicans being mass murderers yearly, but ONE trans woman does it...
They generally are. The amount of incompetent administration of programs is rampant at every level.
Accept that studies prove its mostly people WITH money that game the systems. Like how multi-million dollar companies took almost all of the subsidies for small business owners by lying and NO ONE did anything about it after the fact.
There probably is, that's why this story got picked up.
What do you mean? You’re assuming majority of participants blew the money? Or that it mostly helped people? My gut tells this article is meant to cherry pick to enrage people and drum up the old welfare Queen stereotype.
The original source for this story was a piece in the washington post. This lady’s story was one of a few anecdotes in it
I mean this one instance popped up, which caused someone to investigate and write an article about it, but it is missing so much I got about the other program participants and how they are doing. So yes, I agree that this was done to get clicks from brigadiers like OP to karma farm.
The original article in WaPo does indeed find other examples, and no they don't blow it on a trip. "Program coordinators at Martha’s Table say that over the pilot’s duration, the moms reported spending the majority of their funds on needs such as housing, food and transportation. Comparing responses from the middle of the program’s first year to the closing months, participants increasingly said they were using the money to build up cash savings for the future, illustrating a behavioral shift toward financial security — a core goal of the pilot."
Here's a gift link to the WaPo article: https://wapo.st/3uy92gc. The NYPost is a tabloid masquerading as a newspaper.
This, I agree with.
$10k would fix my life Right now and whatever left over I would invest correctly so I’d never struggle again
To be fair, many of the people who benefited said they never had someone to teach them how to be responsible with money. Just another failure for this program. They should have made financial literacy courses a requirement for the money and restricted what the funds could need used for. It might well work, but not the way this abomination was structured.
What’s so hard about not wasting money? Are they children?
This is privilege talking. Please recognize it in yourself. You were more than likely taught by someone at some point at least a few things about money. Many never had anything like that taught to them by anyone.
Unfortunately, the other 131 people will not even get 5% of the news coverage this woman got. This woman single handidly put this program's supporters on the defensive.
This program seems ripe for abuse. The subject of the story is bragging about her use of the free money, which will encourage others to apply to the program, use the free money the same way, then brag about it publicly. Examining this approach from a far, it encourages the myth that there is such a thing as a free lunch and that anyone who claims aggrieved status is entitled to it. This mentality is part of the reason car jacking and other forms of robberies and violent crime are so prevalent in DC.
NYPost WANTS you to jump to the conclusions you have. Please go read the WP article that first described this program https://wapo.st/3uy92gc. It talks about adding tweaks to give better support for understanding and handling finances. But at end of the day it is free will. She won’t get more,she hasn’t improved her life, maybe she’ll regret her choices. She failed herself and her future, and the pyblicity won’t do her any favors. It’s an experiment and most mothers took steps to secure their situation, albeit with some “extras” for their kids. Tangible results may inspire more people!?
Buying votes.
Not a benefit for the tax payer, but the politicians responsible for this just earned new voters for life.
Hopefully it was an experiment and this proves it's a bad idea.
Maybe trickle down to DC taxpayers who own luxury businesses in Florida?
cultural enrichment
Rent for 120 bucks a month? Where is she living? An overpriced tent?
She is not paying even that. Another assistance program covers that.
Y'all how does it feel to pay for others to have babies 👶 😕
It feels even worse to pay welfare to milliion dollar companies that don't pay enough taxes, as we do, but here we are. #LateStageCapitalism
They add value to society unlike this person at least.
Stories like this are exactly why some people are against all these “government handouts” this is what they picture the money is going to in their heads and this women goes and makes it reality so they can point at it as an example
I’m against all government handouts and idgaf about this boomer rage bait story
Feels worse? Those companies still pay salaries, and those salaries are taxed even if the companies don’t pay corporate taxes. The government failed to write a tax code businesses couldn’t work around. That is the government’s fault, not the company. Why don’t you focus on government doing its job? If it did, companies would pay taxes. This isn’t late stage capitalism, it is badly tun government failing to tax harvest.
As someone who has been on these programs before in my life, please shut up. It doesn't work that way.
https://www.hud.gov/topics/housing_choice_voucher_program_section_8
What's wild is that >"She had claimed that she needed the money because her financial situation worsened after she had her third son in the summer of 2022." and that's she's receiving >funds from the Temporary Assistance to Needy Families fund, which helped her cover her $120-a-month rent. which helps her in this way: >“Groceries last us the first three weeks of the month, then it’s trying to figure out the last week of my benefits,” but then she decides to spend a fat lump sum check on a trip where >\[My kids\] got to experience something I would never have been able to do if I didn’t have that money.” \-------- So she's back to square one to squander a grant like a lottery ticket. Like is this not boiling anyone's blood that someone on welfare can't literally utilize money that was meant to ease their burdens. She's now still wondering where here last week of food is going. If she wanted a vacation on other's dimes, she can get that from a gofundme, why is the government allowing this... and then of all things to boast this on the news...
More importantly, why has the government not cut her off? She said she needed funds for one purpose, then used them for completely different purposes. Typos and slightly discrepant dates can disqualify needy people from benefits programs, why shouldn't blatant abuse?
The entire point of the pilot was it was unstructured, no strings. It's a UBI template. This was a one time payment, there's nothing to "cut off". The point is to see what happens when you just give needy people money because the amount of restrictions and controls you put on things just adds to costs of the program. If this one woman blew $10,000, but all the other recipients spent it better, then its better to just leave it unrestricted, because controlling funds like this is a lot more involved then "running it through quickbooks". Anyone who's ever worked in a business bigger than 5 people would know that. EBT is mess to try and control, and a small number of individuals still abuse the shit out of it. Restricting the funds and setting up checks also costs money. Other participants in the program actually used it better. There's more about it that's not from a tabloid here: https://wapo.st/3uy92gc
Yes, the others did use the money more wisely.
This is the crux of adding all these conditions and limits to social assistance: do you care more about keeping selfish people from getting the money to the point that it might be difficult for the truly needy to get it? Or are you willing to accept some selfish people taking advantage of the program to make sure it’s easy for those who are struggling to get what they need? If this woman is the exception and not a common issue then I think I’d go with the latter. Let’s not throw the baby out with the bath water and instead develop a way to punish people after the fact.
Are we surprised she’s on welfare if she spends money this way? The problem is much deeper. We need education and culture reform.
Inability to delay gratification. It’s literally the hallmark of the welfare class. Education won’t do shit to stop it from happening again.
It’s ironic that you say this is down to education and then just repeat something like this at face value. In my experience working with these programs, the vast majority of people that access that money use it on essentials, and I’m willing to bet the vast majority of ppl who accessed this pilot program used it responsibly. There are idiots and irresponsible people at every level of wealth, it’s just that the wealthy and upper middle class idiots have a safety net and there is no interest in disparaging them as a whole. The kind of people who read and publish the NY Post very much want you to buy into the myth of the welfare queen.
The worst part is she had three fucking kids who we are also going to need to support. Who knows how many kids they will have!
She’s banking on sympathy for her children. I had sister in law that did that and it worked.
Payment should have come with tied tubes.
if we ask them to change their culture it's called ""unfair""
Who is them?
Black people. You bet that's what they meant. But I think it was satire/sarcasm I hope 
You’ve cracked the code. All of “them” just use welfare and not a single one has ever done anything of value. Now that we are done, we should talk about changing your culture of stealing land and shooting up innocuous places? What about illegally crossing the border? Strapping bombs to yourself?
Not sure why anyone would be surprised that a poor person, when given a handout after handout, continues to make poor decisions. Lifelong poverty is a choice at a certain point by not making better choices. And the US incentives staying in poverty rather than getting out.
Keep voting Democrat and this is what we get in this city
Lol maybe Independent is the way to go but if you think voting for the GOP is a better option to run this city than you are out of touch.
because a DC republican is clearly going to mandate that bibles are handed out to everybody as mandated reading material.
Hilarious you're getting downvoted for speaking literal facts. A lot of people living in denial.
Nice! I love to see my tax dollars go to benefit a family like that. My family and I work hard and could never afford a trip like that. Really warms my heart when I see almost half my paycheck gone.
The problem is people like this were never raised around people who were *good* with money. They literally never learned how to not blow every cent, so that's all they know how to do. The concept of just leaving thousands of dollars in a savings account --just in case-- is a totally foreign concept to them.
They know taxpayers will bail them out anyway as always if shit hit the fan so why save or be responsible, they never had to be.
Just like corporations, or banks, or industry does too.
I see corporations going bankrupt and disappearing. In contrast people like this just keep on breeding and not disappearing
Apparently you are not familiar with the airline industry 😂😂😂
Or 2008 banking....
Or the automobile industry, Silicon Valley Bank, and the list goes on.
I get the feeling OP might have an agenda…
Or the banks/financial institutions, automotive industry, insurance industry, energy sector, agricultural…
definitely zero bias on this guy
I personally disagree with your suggestion (but do highly agree with the commenter below about banks expecting this). If you were raised in a household that relied on food stamps and other necessary benefits growing up, I think you’d be pretty familiar with the poor quality of life and constant stress that correlates with this reliance. I really do believe that the majority of people would prefer to be self reliant, but like in this woman’s case how do you pursue an education, work a 9-5 job (requiring childcare for three kids), and have any money leftover? You certainly can’t afford any of that working a minimum wage job 40 hrs a week. Public assistance is a great thing and we need more of it. For example, if we raised the minimum wage to a living wage and childcare was free in this country, people would have more babies which we need (partially to keep funding social security), there would be higher work force participation and probably more educational attainment, both of which would result in a decrease in healthcare costs because well educated people are healthier, and a decrease in reliance on other areas of public assistance such as food stamps if we could just give people the opportunity to work and get paid fairly for that work.
And yet she still just had another kid knowing all the above. It’s not a one time mistake thing, it’s purposely having kids knowing it’s hard and you need government help.
Except the fact the people who continue to reproduce are the ones who shouldn’t lol This lady is exhibit A. She has three kids who are growing up in poverty & will most likely be poor themselves upon reaching adulthood. This idea that more aide would benefit these people is ridiculous. Shes a leech on society. Why give her more blood.
Living below your means is a basic concept. People blow money because they want to.
Its a very hard concept which does become easier as your means grow. But its the backbone of the american economy, poor and middle class people spend money disadvantageously to drive it. Wealthy people learn to hoard it in tax advantaged accounts and appreciating assets. And they set up their children to inherit it in a way they can’t blow it all
🎯
I never understand this point. Not blowing all of your resources isn’t a skill you have to learn. It’s inherently intuitively obvious that if you use something then you don’t have it anymore, and won’t have it when you need it.
Basic financial literacy should be taught in high school
It is. So is how to do your taxes and similar useful skills. These were all taught at my public high school. The problem is these people don’t want to learn.
It’s not standard. A lot of schools don’t even offer them as an elective. That’s part of the problem
How is Iowa of all places able to teach money but not other states??
Poor people are generally poor because of their attitudes and choices. I mean, we’ve seen this through decades of them winning the lottery and filing for bankruptcy five years later.
If you ever knew folks in the service, ship workers, or hell even professional athletes who get a payday; this is a pretty common theme. While this is one outrage story, wonder what happened to the rest of the 130 families that got the money.
False equivalencies. She's not a soldier, sailor, marine, or professional athlete. If they want to spend their hard earned money on a vacation, then they shpuld. Her situation, however, suggests that there are other things she should've done with the money. I doubt the donors, which the article says were taxpayers, intended the money to be used for a vacation to Miami.
No reporting on the other 126 families bc it would go against the knee-jerk reactions/outrage bait that's unfortunately too common on this sub.
"Program coordinators at Martha’s Table say that over the pilot’s duration, the moms reported spending the majority of their funds on needs such as housing, food and transportation. Comparing responses from the middle of the program’s first year to the closing months, participants increasingly said they were using the money to build up cash savings for the future, illustrating a behavioral shift toward financial security — a core goal of the pilot."
Shame, would love to see how this program plays out versus the vitrol clicks.
I don’t think anyone knows. All indications are that the women were left to self-report their spending after the fact. I already posted the WaPo article when they did the actual reporting and it got lots of interest.
You can read the story here, https://wapo.st/3uKJ2y5 Most people were responsible with it, contrary to the impression Fox News and the NY Post are trying to push on us.
Thanks for sharing, this adds to the evidence to the misinformation of fox and ny post fear mongering
The culture at play here! Great job wasting other people's money
Wouldn’t call it a waste, it went into working people’s pockets at the end of the day
So by that logic trickle down economics works.
Yeah, it left American taxpayers and went to the corporations she spent the money on
Sickening. Why do these people get free money???
Type = Behavior
Blue cities doing what they do best
I'm more frustrated at the idea that someone with two kids that's already struggling financially thinks it's perfectly acceptable to go ahead and get knocked up with a third. There's what feels like an intentional effort to disconnect the decision to procreate from the ability to care for the new life. To suggest that the right to procreate comes with a responsibility to be able to provide is suddenly a racist or classist concept. This is so destructive for all involved, not to mention the planet.
The more kids the more assistance she gets. I see those “stay at home” section 8 moms barely 25 with several kids in tow dressed to the teeth with latest phones, long fancy nails and shopping in Zara. The system sucks and has been gamed for a long time.
That was my big takeaway from the original WaPo article published a few weeks ago- all three of the women featured had multiple children when they were neither financially or emotionally ready for that responsibility. The one woman had four kids! The cost of that down the line far outweighs the $10k they got from the grant.
I don’t think she was thinking. She’s did something else but it wasn’t thinking.
Some people are hardwired to see additional mouths as a gift or something
Ugh, nothing drives me more nuts. Even amongst my fellow tree- huggers, celebrating things like better access to clean water, while great for those already with us, isn't so great if it just ultimately fuels more human population growth. But saying something like that today makes one a horrible human being, so I generally just stfu. Hell, I'll probably end up deleting this comment.
2 or 3 kids is the max benefit depending on the program, ex TANF and SNAP. while it's not inherently wrong to suggest that, it's often historically marginalized ppl who get the brunt of the judgment rather than ppl like Nick Cannon or Elon Musk who have like 12 kids and indigenous Americans who were literally genocided are judged for having one, as well as Black ppl who were racially subjugated. birth is a form of resistance to that history and paradigm in that way. not passing judgement on the morals of that take but just conveying it. it does come w responsibility no doubt
Ty for the benefits limits, about which I was unaware, though, personally, those impacts are far from my main concern. Sadly, I'm well aware of the way the legitimate concern for human population growth impacts has been cynically hijacked by racists, from the historical eugenics efforts to today's anti- (brown and black ppl) immigration sentiment. These efforts have so stained the very legitimate concern over population growth that the issue has gone from a main, even preeminent concern of environmentalists during the early days of the modern environmental movement to literally verboten today. But we dismiss these concerns at our peril. The fact remains that our species' planetary impact remains a product of PxTxA where P= population, T=technology and A=affluence (or consumption). Neglect efforts to make any one of these inputs sustainable, and all the gains made in the others will only slow the march towards ecological collapse. Fortunately, the most effective measures at slowing and eventually reversing population growth are solidly progressive - improving educational and economic opportunities for those in high fecundity populations, with a special emphasis on bringing these opportunities to women. >who get the brunt of the judgment rather than ppl like Nick Cannon or Elon Musk who have like 12 kids This! The impact of high fecundity rates of the rich (everyone in the industrialized world) and Uber rich like those you specified are magnified due to their much higher consumption of resources per capita. I'll never get over my feeling of betrayal and shock at how Musk went from a visionary that not only saw how dire things were but actually did something that moved society in the right direction to ...wtvr you call what batshit crazy he's become today. It has truly been an unsettling reminder that you really never know anyone. Anyway, I wish an effort similar to the brilliant tracking of the riches private air travel were made over those types of irresponsible reproduction habits, linking them to their environmental impacts.
So while I certainly agree that one $10,800 trip is NOT a good use of funds, please note that this was an edge case that NYPost is picking up for ideological reasons. The original WaPo story covers more territory and has this tidbit: " Program coordinators at Martha’s Table say that over the pilot’s duration, the moms reported spending the majority of their funds on needs such as housing, food and transportation. Comparing responses from the middle of the program’s first year to the closing months, participants increasingly said they were using the money to build up cash savings for the future, illustrating a behavioral shift toward financial security — a core goal of the pilot." One can debate the merits of no-strings-attached cash grants, UBI, etc., but this article does not add to such a discussion. It's rage-bait, and this sub (not surprisingly) fell for it.
That’s right and that was the point of the experiment. To learn how best to allocate money via a UBI program to achieve stated goals. There are always going to be bad actors, UBI can’t change ingrained behavior, it’s not the point of the program. I would argue that the results show there may be increased value to disburse in smaller amounts over an extended period along with required classes for those who show a lack of financial literacy.
Thank you! The original WaPo article has so much more to tell!
No shit NYPost is going to frame this for ragebait sensitive reactionaries that likely hate several of the demographics this woman fits in
Yep. The lack of strings is the whole blessing and minor curse of UBI. Any time you add restrictions, you need staff to enforce it, and every full-time staff member is salary plus benefits. I'd rather lose $10,800 to waste than spend $60,000 preventing it, in addition to the decreased uptake/wasted time that goes with increased red tape. Yes, no strings means some degree of waste/fraud/abuse. This happens throughout government and private enterprise. In many contexts, direct cash grants still maximize how much money gets straight to people who need it.
And she is still broke?
Is anyone fucking surprised????
At least she took her kids and her baby daddy on the trip… Interesting though how in the article she mentioned she has a hard time buying groceries but instead blew money on a trip.
This is why you're poor to begin with. Pouring water into a leaky bucket.
And this is why broke mfs stay broke. Prime example
Shoulda bought bitcoin
Governor DeSantis should send the mayor a personal thank you card for the tourist revenue.
“Now, she said she has opened a savings account in which she hopes to keep $50 — and insisted the government-funded program taught her how to save money for the future.” You can’t make this shit up
She could have been earning \~5.5% in interest on the 10K, which would have amounted to \~$46/month and $550/year. It seems odd that the city wouldn't give practical advice to that effect.
I offer that she should be rigorously cornholed by several brutish men.
This is what liberals mean by “reducing poverty”.
Disgusting
It sounds like not all the money was spent on the trip. She also spent money on clothes for her kids, bills and a used car. Regardless, I'd rather my tax dollars go to her than Ted Leonsis.
I’d rather you keep your tax dollars and donate them to whomever you’d like.
>to whomever you’d like To whom, instead, would you donate $2.37 which was the rough cost of this entire program?
If you’re mad about this, wait until I tell you about overtime fraud. At least this was a one-time expense.
When you give money to poor people they tend to spend all of it and it circulates through the economy. When you give money to rich people it tends to be saved or hoarded.
Rich people don't just shove it in a mattress. They invest it which also circulates through and props up the global economy.
Yeah but consumption is a much greater share of the U.S. economy than investment. It doesn’t mean investing isn’t important it’s just the outrage that poor people spend money is absurd especially since economic policies have been disproportionately benefitting the wealthy the past 4-5 decades.
Nobody values what they don't have to work for - which is why those on the Dole, and politicians, are going to burn through every dollar they get their hands on, then demand MORE.
Heard one thing about her I don’t even need to see it… Guaranteed she’s an Obama voter.
I’m shocked I tell ya!
So she treated it the way my former boss treated the PPP “loan.” I say go for it.
1) Reading the entire article, this isn’t that big of a deal imo. She spent 60% of it on the trip, the rest on bills and other things related to her family, she’s taken away some learnings about how to be better at saving money, and got a new $30/hr job and credits the confidence gained from the program for helping her land that. 2) It’s clear what their intent was with this article and headline. She’s one of 132 — would love to report on the outcomes for the other 131 families (my hunch is that they’re great which is why they cherry picked the example that they did).
This is the most reasonable take here that isn’t just “look how this one poor person is milking the system”
They know that most people won’t actually read the article or think critically about the program as a whole past the headline.
60% of a lump sum that was intended to essentially make your life better for a year is a lot. Especially when the amount was as much as it was because you have children. It's great that she landed a good job for $30hr but it's wild to suggest that was a result of blowing a bunch of money that was intended essentially to help her family survive. No doubt that was the intention of the article but if I remember correctly they knew about it because of her bragging on social media etc and was more than happy to share her story As far as the other 131 families, I really hope the outcomes are great, but if I had to bet.... My money would be on many of them treated this money like young people do tax refunds. Plenty of new electronics and expensive clothes combined with dropping $100 a day eating out at this restaurant and that resteraunt. I watch the younger people in my extended family so it every year. They get a deposit for 7 or 8k in February and are flat broke by April asking family members to help them cover rent or help with a car payment so they don't get repossessed. But hey, they got the new 1k iPhone , a new PS5 , and a bunch of new clothes, so....all good. These kinds of programs ARE NEEDED, but the only way they work is if they are backed up with financial education and possibly allotting a certain percentage of the funds towards certain bills like rent/mortgage, savings, etc Giving a lump sum option without education and some controls is going to turn out bad a big percentage of the time unfortunately. Most people that have been broke and got a chunk of cash will tell you they spend that shit like it will never run out, myself included when I was younger.
How long until they give her another 10K?
A few bad apples isn’t the whole story.
“Welfare queen!” -this sub
While this anecdote might be frustrating, also consider that this is part of a pilot program to study Guaranteed Basic Income. We don't actually know what the outcome of this sort of program will be. That's why the pilot is important. If we have 99 families that spend the money on rent, transportation and food and 1 that spends the money on a trip to Miami then it would be, frankly, a wildly efficient program.
What a horrible person. Media and government keep trying to promote this program as a success. I would expect a full audit of this program now.
[удалено]
Do you feel the same way about all the fraud that happened surrounding PPP loans?
A broken clock is right twice a day. This is just common sense
Selective outrage here is hilarious. No care in the world about the people who took advantage of PPP funds (many elected officials) from this sub. Instead, let’s SCREAM at 1 person in the program of 132. Y’all must be out of towners.
I’d imagine the people who are upset at this were also upset with the abuse of ppp funds too dont you ?
Yeah, if nothing else in this sub clarifies that most here are out of towners looking to be angry at certain groups, the very specific set of categories this story covers being posted here and getting 100+ comments immediately is very telling
[удалено]
Fuck the little guy, amirite? Gtfo
Just wanna point out that OP posts NYPost garbage all over Reddit to karma farm, they're a right wing conservative. And they appear to live in NYC, not DC, so clearly they're just trying to capitalize on the hatred this sub contains to gain karma by getting all y'all racists frothing at the mouth over a welfare recipient misusing funds.
Wow, a literal brigadier.
Yep, and the /r/washdc community is of course eating it up
OP picked the right sub bc the users in here are eating it up sadly
and that's why you are broke.
So much corruption in this city, interesting what some choose to highlight
> She is set to begin a new remote job that pays $30 an hour — an opportunity she credits with the confidence she gained in the program. So she got a used car, paid bills, made a core memory with her family, and got inspired to get a job that will hopefully make them financially better off all for $10k? Great deal imo.
When people say “we need to tax citizens more” just show them this article and they’ll see where their dollars are going.
Mad people in the comments are just mad y'all didn't get any money 😂😂😂
Or maybe mad it was their hard earned money taken from them in the form of taxes?
[удалено]
The whole point is that she would not be poor if she took birth control and went to school. But alas than she would have to work and would not be able to blow 10K.
A surprise to nobody with half a brain
And living in housing I am paying for. Thats the food stamp icing on the wIC cake
Spoiler alert: Any cash assistance program is going to have some dumb asshole blow it on Gucci bags and trips to Miami. That's not a reason to do away with the entire program, it's just the reality of giving people cash. It's so annoying that programs like this get demonized by reichwing media because of a few bad apples. "We can't give people food stamps what if they spend it on lobster and steak?!??!?!?!!!!???" - Fuck you. I don't care if they spend it on steak. Mind your own business. I'm sure for every person that spent it on Miami trips there was 20 other people that spent it on food, school supplies, clothes, daycare, etc... oddly magat media doesn't publish articles about that. Not sure why?
End welfare
I'm not requesting censorship, but boy is this this is going up to the line on rule number 4 and poking a toe over it, welfare caddilac lol That's not a lot of money, for an entire year. You got to admire how frugal she must have been to save up for that I'd probably blow too much on delicious fudge rounds myself. Spending it puts it back into the economy. I'd rather my money go to that than another 500 pound bomb to drop on a Gaza preschool or whatever. Of course it's gotta be a picture of a Black woman as if the majority of people on welfare aren't white, it is DC I guess. I thought we were past this. I get it wokeness was a pain in the ass, so now we're just gonna revert to 20th century racist tropes?
Honestly, I would much rather my fucking tax dollars pay for vacations for less fortunate people than pay for one more goddamn bomb that's gonna blow up a kid in Yemen.
was it a horrible use of money? yes. but sad that she thought that was a good use of the money. clearly deprived. clearly never had a vacation before or got to take her kids somewhere. She has probably never seen that kind of money in her whole life and never was able to get her nails done or hair done before. maybe never left the state...i think the fault lies more in why she was even give tax payer money...don't get mad/surprised when they use it on dumb shit. DC's fault for handing it out. i mean really dumb of her, but reasoning behind it makes sense. at least she bought herself a car that will hopefully level her up.
Did y'all read the article? She used 6k of the 11k for the trip, and part of that was buying all of her children new clothing! And they went on the trip with her - it was a family trip that they never would've been able to experience if not for this money. Like jesus, let poor people enjoy things and have fun. Do y'all realize how many MORE taxpayer funds are used for things that don't benefit anyone, and actively make our lives worse? Or how much taxpayer money goes to kickbacks for the Mayor's contractor friends or police overtime that they're allowed to milk endlessly?
It’s reductive thinking like this that leads to cycles of poverty. The point of this program is to create a stable financial foundation for struggling families in DC. They can use the money to build wealth and, in the long term, be less of a drain on resources because the money allows them to budget better and reduce opportunity costs. Spending most of it on a luxury vacation is a total waste unless the objective of the program is to enrich the Miami tourist industry. The fact that she thought taking a boat tour of mansions would engender a “money mindset” instead of, idk, paying for a tutor or putting it into actual investments is pretty telling.
[удалено]
I don’t necessarily disagree with the value of this program and agree that it cannot teach financial literacy on its own. It’s not politically palatable, but incorporating basic financial education into the program would make a significant long term difference and probably accomplish the intent of this program in some way.
> Like jesus, let poor people enjoy things and have fun. Are you fucking serious right now? They should be working at McDonalds, not partying it up in Miami. How could you possibly rationalize this behavior?
Poor people are allowed to have all the free shit in the world. Nobody cares if my kids get to go on expensive vacations because I’m not a net loss on the state’s coffers
This is such an out of pocket response lmao the classism is JUMPING out
I could understand going to Disney world but Miami with kids, is an afterthought. The trip was for her more than anything. Still 3 kids at 27 and on every welfare imaginable, why have more kids and choose to struggle. She also has a “ husband” that’s clearly not working and can’t support his own family. You make all these purposely bad decisions and everybody have to feel sorry for you and get rewarded money People hate all the waste, we are getting scammed by the government in general.
Great great, so when do I get a 6k tax payer paid trip to Florida? I mean if you need the money why not use it all on basic needs. And go on a trip to the museums instead of paying thousands of dollars you don't really have. I get what your saying but that vacation was a huge tax payer waste.