Starve the poor
Yeah great, let’s throw all those unemployed little kids off school lunch programs.
CNN’s Pamela Brown asks Rep. Rich McCormick (R-GA) about President Trump’s administration pausing aid for federal grants and loans that could affect millions of Americans. McCormick defended President Trump’s move and argues that aid programs, including ones that help vulnerable students eat lunch at school, should be evaluated.
And in order to “evaluate” the programs it’s necessary to snatch them away first, because poor people, especially children, must be punished.
Surely you’re not suggesting we should punish the rich instead by, oh maybe making them pay tax or preventing them from buying Presidents. That would be a step too far.
Actually, this won’t have any negative consequences for the poor. Consider the following:
– If children from low-income families have less access to decent nutrition, then they will not succeed as much at school.
– If children from low-income families do not succeed as much at school, then they will get lower-paying jobs later on.
– If the poor have less money, then the rich will have more, both relatively and absolutely.
– Since Ronald Reagan, we’ve known that trickle-down economics work really well. Thus, if the rich have more money, the poor will get plenty of money too, and will be able to afford good lunches for their children.
– Therefore, if children from low-income families have less access to decent nutrition, they will have increased access to decent nutrition AND the government will be spending less money. It’s a win-win situation!