Nebraska’s governor is standing firm on his plans to reject $18 million in federal funding to help feed children who might otherwise go hungry while school is out.
I would love for us to be able to do that without harming people who are not responsible for the governor’s actions and are stuck in Nebraska (which seems like punishment enough).
Me too. I think the solution is to take whatever funds Nebraska would have gotten and provide them directly to the Nebraskans in need. This would remove the conservative Nebraskan government’s ability to misapropriate those funds. We can solve a lot of problems at once by removing conservatives from the equation.
Sure, some of the funds would need to be spent developing distribution infrastructure, but at least the money wouldn’t be stolen by the local conservatives. It would actually go to the Nebraskans in need.
Conservatives are going to terrorize any time they don’t get their way. Whenever any resistance is offered to their attempts to oppress others, they will respond with violence or threats of violence. That’s just who conservatives are at their core.
We should never, ever let conservative violence dissuade us from resisting.
Other states could offer relocation benefits to Nebraskans who are only there because moving is expensive. Let those states take a piece of the federal aid that would have gone to Nebraska proportional to the number of its residents they’ve taken in that year. Maybe for a number of years after too but it’d take someone more math/economics inclined than me to say how much or how long. Let them have the decrepit, backwards, rotting Republican utopia they dream of without the hostages.
It won’t happen and there are tons of flaws with the idea. Still, I enjoy the thought of a world where this would have consequences on somebody other than the people directly harmed by these bad policies and decisions.
Does this mean we can finally end the ridiculous ethanol subsidies? Both Iowa and Nebraska have come out as anti-welfare so it’s the only logical next step.
The governor doesn’t believe in welfare, so Nebraska is just going to let those kids starve.
Excellent. Then, we can stop sending federal aid to Nebraska now.
I would love for us to be able to do that without harming people who are not responsible for the governor’s actions and are stuck in Nebraska (which seems like punishment enough).
Me too. I think the solution is to take whatever funds Nebraska would have gotten and provide them directly to the Nebraskans in need. This would remove the conservative Nebraskan government’s ability to misapropriate those funds. We can solve a lot of problems at once by removing conservatives from the equation.
Sure, some of the funds would need to be spent developing distribution infrastructure, but at least the money wouldn’t be stolen by the local conservatives. It would actually go to the Nebraskans in need.
I think we’d see a lot of domestic terrorism if that happened.
Conservatives are going to terrorize any time they don’t get their way. Whenever any resistance is offered to their attempts to oppress others, they will respond with violence or threats of violence. That’s just who conservatives are at their core.
We should never, ever let conservative violence dissuade us from resisting.
Other states could offer relocation benefits to Nebraskans who are only there because moving is expensive. Let those states take a piece of the federal aid that would have gone to Nebraska proportional to the number of its residents they’ve taken in that year. Maybe for a number of years after too but it’d take someone more math/economics inclined than me to say how much or how long. Let them have the decrepit, backwards, rotting Republican utopia they dream of without the hostages.
It won’t happen and there are tons of flaws with the idea. Still, I enjoy the thought of a world where this would have consequences on somebody other than the people directly harmed by these bad policies and decisions.
Does this mean we can finally end the ridiculous ethanol subsidies? Both Iowa and Nebraska have come out as anti-welfare so it’s the only logical next step.
You mean ethanol welfare, a subsidy is just welfare for a business…
Yeah that’s why I conflated the two.
Plus, creating ethanol from corn uses ridiculous amounts of energy and groundwater.