No...It isn't another Republican c/p'ing an Onion article again. It's the
real thing.
I refuse to believe that this is real, and that someone is actually arguing this as a serious proposal, and that said proposal was deemed serious enough for publication by a secondary party, but it seems too earnestly argued to be parody, and nowhere is it identified as such.
A columnist at the Daily Caller writes today that people receiving food stamps should be forced to shop at government-owned stores selling sub-standard food so that they can feel the "humiliation and pain in receiving government assistance."
Oh, and they should "lose the privilege of voting."
Quote:
My reform measures might seem draconian to some (and the antithesis of the free market), but they would hopefully have the desired result of reducing food stamp rolls so we could eventually eliminate the program and let the states handle the issue. Before accepting food stamps, people would have to carefully consider whether they want to face the loss of voting privileges, the humiliation of shopping at government stores and using government food, the inability to smoke or do drugs and the added inconvenience of having to make two or three stops for their groceries should they choose to buy snacks with their own money. Plus, tax producers would no longer have to knowingly be face to face with people at the check-out who are on government assistance but have nicer cell phones and accessories than they do.
I gotta ask. Since when is it so fashionable to hate the poor? Aside from the obvious racist undertones of this nincompoop's prose, aren't the poor "humiliated" enough? Do we really need to stick the knife in them and twist it a little more?
I don't know anything about the author (although I'm sure he's well admired by lilMike), one Brion McClanahan but he strikes me as one of the 1%ers who view everyone who's not privileged and white (really,
Brion?) with the disdain of Gordon Gecko.
On behalf of the 99%, I'd like to kick him in his gilded balls.