Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Thursday, June 25, 2026

More than 4.7 million people nationwide have lost their Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program benefits ...

More

Alternate links: Google News | Twitter

More than 4.7 million people nationwide have lost their Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program benefits, also known as food stamps, since Trump's signature tax and spending law took effect last July, according to data through March from the Department of Agriculture -- about 11% of participants.

[image or embed]

-- Reuters (@reuters.com) 10:29 PM · Jun 24, 2026

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

Most people on food stamps are people who work jobs that do not pay enough for them to live.

But hey, tax cuts for Trump were more important.

#1 | Posted by Nixon at 2026-06-24 12:10 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Hurting the poor is what conservatives vote for.

It brings joy to their miserable, worthless lives, to know they're the cause of others suffering.

#2 | Posted by ClownShack at 2026-06-24 12:12 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

Corporations paying a Living Wage is SO pre-Reagan.

Now, not only do Corporations get away with that, they also write their own Tax Laws, Workplace Laws, Environmental Laws... and the Laws that take money from the Workers they aren't paying enough to survive.

Good Times to be a Corporation.

#3 | Posted by Corky at 2026-06-24 12:42 PM | Reply

And America wastes billions and billions of dollars killing Muslims in the Middle East: Islamophobia is starving Americans and still no universal healthcare for us

I'm sure glad the 2024 Democratic Party didn't ignore the thousands of nationwide protests against Israel's genocidal campaign in Gaza, carefully listening to those tens of millions of vocal pacifists, antiwar Samaritans, and pro-Palestinian volunteers throughout all of 2024.

The antiwar bloc had so many progressive speakers at the 2024 DNC convention in Chicago that I couldn't keep track of them all.

The DNC taught a master class of how to enlarge the "Big Tent" to include the far left, securing the necessary bloc of 7,371,247 antiwar voters on Tuesday 5 Nov 2024 to maintain their incumbency.

Yes indeed, I'm sure glad the 2024 Democrats didn't repeat the strategic mistake of Hubert Humphrey and Ed Muskie when those 1968 Democrats vowed to continue supporting the murderous Saigon regime and sending our brave young men into harm's way in the jungles of Vietnam.

Just imagine how awful the country would be today if the 2024 Democrats hadn't listened to those tens of millions of antiwar Samaritans?


#4 | Posted by C0RI0LANUS at 2026-06-24 02:47 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

Trump probably thinks people were licking them for their nutritional value.

#5 | Posted by Dbt2 at 2026-06-24 07:39 PM | Reply

Such "compassion" for the helpless mustn't go unrewarded.

DNC and GOP fear voters indicated with every "compassionate" legislation passed.

Should we survive, this next election will be a killing field.

Polymarket chances their collapse happens sooner than later.

#6 | Posted by redlightrobot at 2026-06-25 10:51 AM | Reply

More than 4.7 million people nationwide have lost their Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program benefits

Let them eat screwworms.

~ Pedo 47 ~

#7 | Posted by reinheitsgebot at 2026-06-25 12:52 PM | Reply

oh my god oh my god...

people are dying and trump is killing them....

( that's sarcasm for you idiots in the room )

barf !!! from you barf smelling losers....

"SNAP overhaul "prioritizes American citizens, and implements reasonable cost-sharing measures with states to crack down on waste, fraud, and abuse,"

work requirement I"m sure is what makes some of you unhappy....the nerve...making people

work...what kind of welfare state is that ?

#8 | Posted by shrimptacodan at 2026-06-25 02:10 PM | Reply

More than 4.7 million people nationwide have lost their Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program benefits

#7 | Posted by reinheitsgebot

as always a lie by omission.....when NEURALINK gets up and running I"ll ask Elon

to take you first

#9 | Posted by shrimptacodan at 2026-06-25 02:11 PM | Reply

-------------, will neuralink help with your extra chromosomes?

#10 | Posted by reinheitsgebot at 2026-06-25 02:38 PM | Reply

More than 4.7 million people nationwide have lost their Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program benefits
#7 | Posted by reinheitsgebot
as always a lie by omission.....when NEURALINK gets up and running I"ll ask Elon
to take you first
#9 | Posted by shrimptacodan at 2026-06-25 02:11 PM

I would love to provide you a headstart.

#11 | Posted by redlightrobot at 2026-06-25 02:48 PM | Reply

We all know what this is about. States milking the Federal Government on these assistance programs are going to be penalized.

We've already went through this line-for-line a couple weeks ago. But Corky intends to double down on stupid.

#12 | Posted by lfthndthrds at 2026-06-25 04:47 PM | Reply

A hungry man is an angry man ...
-Bob Marley

#13 | Posted by catdog at 2026-06-25 05:29 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

That's just the recipients. Local businesses, from corporate to mom-and-pop, are also losing that revenue.

#14 | Posted by RightisTrite at 2026-06-25 05:49 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

States milking the Federal Government on these assistance programs are going to be penalized.
#12 | Posted by lfthndthrds

You think the states are getting penalized?

The States, along with the SNAP beneficiaries, are simply pass-throughs for Federal dollars to end up in private business nightly deposits.

This is yet another move that reduces GDP and harms the economy. That's a price Republicans are happy to pay, if if harms the poor.

As with every policy you support, you support it because it kicks people when they are down!

SNAP cuts in the One Big Beautiful Bill Act will significantly impair recession response
www.brookings.edu

"USDA has estimated that each additional dollar spent on SNAP benefits causes total economic activity to increase by $1.40 to $1.50 in a general economic downturn."

"A recent study found that when a state receives federal assistance that allows it to avoid $1.00 in program cuts, at least $1.70 in additional economic activity results."

"Rigorous research evidence finds that SNAP work requirements do not increase employment, as we describe more fully in this primer and these proposals. Further, expanded work requirements will diminish SNAP as an automatic stabilizer and will penalize workers during recessions, as discussed below."

"even among low-wage service workers without minor children in the household who meet work requirements on an annual basis (i.e., who work an average of more than 80 hours per month over the year as a whole), 42 percent have at least one month with less than 80 work hours, and 25 percent have at least one month of unemployment. This was the case in 2022, when the economy was not in a recession and labor market conditions were improving."

"To be clear, SNAP's 10 percent unemployment rule under OBBBA stands out as an exceptionally high standard. At the national level, 10 percent unemployment was reached in only one month during the entire Great Recession. About 40 percent of the population lived in a county where county-level unemployment never reached 10 percent for even a single month during the Great Recession, the deepest and longest recession in recent decades."

#15 | Posted by snoofy at 2026-06-25 05:54 PM | Reply

The Economic Costs of Cutting SNAP:
Every $1 in SNAP Cuts to Families with Children Costs Society $14 to $20
povertycenter.columbia.edu

#16 | Posted by snoofy at 2026-06-25 05:55 PM | Reply

#15 | Posted by snoofy at 2026-06-25 05:54 PM | Reply | Flag:

The only states getting penalized are the ones who can't seem to get their budget balanced and stop milking the federal gov't for welfare funds... bUh tRuMp iS sTaRvInG bAbiEs!!!

You are retarded. Your momma dropped you, didn't she...

#17 | Posted by lfthndthrds at 2026-06-25 06:30 PM | Reply

"The only states getting penalized are the ones who can't seem to get their budget balanced"

So, poor children who can't vote don't deserve food because... their states suck?

You think hurting children balances the budget.

Got it.

#18 | Posted by snoofy at 2026-06-25 06:36 PM | Reply


"The only states getting penalized are the ones who can't seem to get their budget balanced"

So, poor children who can't vote don't deserve food because... their states suck?

Thats what sucking means... not their fault ... but perhaps their parents.

You think hurting children balances the budget.

If it doesn't there's something wrong with the people in that State.

#19 | Posted by oneironaut at 2026-06-25 06:39 PM | Reply

Your momma dropped you, didn't she...
#17 | POSTED BY LFTHNDTHRDS

That was the least of it..

#20 | Posted by oneironaut at 2026-06-25 06:40 PM | Reply

So, poor children who can't vote don't deserve food because... their states suck

#18 | Posted by snoofy at 2026-06-25 06:36 PM | Reply | Flag:

No, you fat bitch... The state is the reason they can't get funding. It's not the federal government's fault the states are milking them for up to 25% more than it takes to fund the program. I've already posted the stats by state. Grow up and donate your corporate-owned 401k to feed these children and make a difference.

#21 | Posted by lfthndthrds at 2026-06-25 06:41 PM | Reply

"States milking the Federal Government"

So, all of them?

SNAP participation has dropped in every state, including by 5 percent or more in 42 states, and by 10 percent or more in 21 states.
www.cbpp.org

#22 | Posted by snoofy at 2026-06-25 06:44 PM | Reply

"It's not the federal government's fault the states are milking them for up to 25% more than it takes to fund the program."

That doesn't make much sense. Enrollment is down, sure. But how can you know the Feds still aren't being "milked" by the State through the remaining participants?

Are you saying those recipients were commiting some kind of fraud? The State was commiting some kind of fraud? Pretty sure that isn't it, because there would be Federal charges like Minnesota day care fraud.

"I've already posted the stats by state."

Not in this thread you didn't! It would probably embarrass you, so I get it.

#23 | Posted by snoofy at 2026-06-25 06:49 PM | Reply

Snoofy pumps his bath house buddies full of Taco Bell a few hours after he drinks 3 craft beers, lets his inhibitions drop and goes back door diving tongue first.

#24 | Posted by BellRinger at 2026-06-25 06:50 PM | Reply | Funny: 2

"It's not the federal government's fault the states are milking them for up to 25% more than it takes to fund the program."

But it's still hungry children who suffer, isn't it?

Or are you saying those kids have just as much to eat as before?

#25 | Posted by snoofy at 2026-06-25 06:51 PM | Reply

-But it's still hungry children who suffer, isn't it?

At the state's disposal, yes... no more extortion, you fat bitch.

#26 | Posted by lfthndthrds at 2026-06-25 06:55 PM | Reply

Or are you saying those kids have just as much to eat as before?

#25 | Posted by snoofy at 2026-06-25 06:51 PM | Reply | Flag

Are you saying we hetros need to remain silent and pay for you taking it raw in the turd cutter, even though you've been told to use protection? Same ----... How much has that -------- cost the average American to treat? You ------- loser...

#27 | Posted by lfthndthrds at 2026-06-25 06:57 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Work or don't eat the choice is yours.

#28 | Posted by fortfisher at 2026-06-25 07:00 PM | Reply

"no more extortion"

I'm sure this never happened because, like fraud, extortion is a crime that the Feds would prosecute.

You don't have any data to support your claims at all. The most you can do is turn up the volume and make your claims even more outlandish.

Any guesses on the cost of this "milking" vs the ROI from the milk? Do you even know if it was revenue positive? No, of course not. You're not interested in the economics.

#29 | Posted by snoofy at 2026-06-25 07:01 PM | Reply

Are you saying we hetros
#27 | Posted by lfthndthrds

^
False flag.

#30 | Posted by snoofy at 2026-06-25 07:03 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

Or are you saying those kids have just as much to eat as before?
#25 | Posted by snoofy at 2026-06-25 06:51 PM
Are you saying we hetros need to remain silent and pay for you taking it raw in the turd cutter, even though you've been told to use protection? Same ----... How much has that -------- cost the average American to treat? You ------- loser...
#27 | Posted by lfthndthrds at 2026-06-25 06:57 PM

WTF? Are you implying AIDS?

You obviously have ZERO understanding of what happened to gay people during the 80's.

EMT's would avoid assistance, allowing people to bleed out.
Rejected from schools, businesses and hospitals - not just Reagan and the MSM on tape laughing at people commiserating at the quilt.

Leaving children to starve is right on track with your traitorous, predatory party.

#31 | Posted by redlightrobot at 2026-06-25 07:05 PM | Reply

"WTF? Are you implying AIDS?"

It's one of his go-tos.
He's mad it's not a death sentence any more.
He's probably taking his PrEP right now.

#32 | Posted by snoofy at 2026-06-25 07:08 PM | Reply

#31 AHHH looks like bath house Bennie is offended.

#33 | Posted by fortfisher at 2026-06-25 07:11 PM | Reply

"How much has that -------- cost the average American to treat?"

Less than obesity, less than alcohol, less than cigarettes. Less than Trump's tax cuts for the rich. Less than Trump's Iran War. The $300,000,000,000 Trump is gifting Iran would cover our cost of HIV spending for five or ten years.

But none of this is relevant.

Because SNAP puts more money into the economy than it takes out.

"The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) generates significant economic activity, with each dollar in federally funded benefits producing $1.79 in economic activity."
frac.org

Now go get your shine box.

#34 | Posted by snoofy at 2026-06-25 07:15 PM | Reply

The whole "multiplier effect" has been proven to be such BS. If it really worked like that a centrally run economy would like be the most prosperous ever yet when it's been implemented the result has always been human tragedy.

#35 | Posted by BellRinger at 2026-06-25 07:33 PM | Reply

The whole "multiplier effect" has been proven to be such BS.
#35 | Posted by BellRinger

Not by you.
Not in this thread.

#36 | Posted by snoofy at 2026-06-25 07:46 PM | Reply

People who can eat and feed their children can werk, people who can't don't.

This is like Abstract Algebra to rwingers.

#37 | Posted by Corky at 2026-06-25 08:27 PM | Reply

You're not required to post if you have nada.

#38 | Posted by eberly at 2026-06-25 08:33 PM | Reply

If it multiplies then states should be throwing more money into it on their own.

#39 | Posted by eberly at 2026-06-25 08:35 PM | Reply

If it multiplies then states should be throwing more money into it on their own.
#39 | Posted by eberly

^
Not actually an argument for cutting Federal funding, but likes to masquerade as one.

#40 | Posted by snoofy at 2026-06-25 08:53 PM | Reply

To be clear, I don't think folks who support food stamps do so because it multiplies.

It's about taking care of folks. And that's a good enough reason so I'm not asking anyone to defend the multiply argument.

#41 | Posted by eberly at 2026-06-25 08:59 PM | Reply

what about the federal income, state income, property, and sales tax I pay? what's the multiplier effect of that?
What about the $1 I pay at the store? same multiplier?

#42 | Posted by eberly at 2026-06-25 09:03 PM | Reply

do you think drug dealers support food stamps?

#43 | Posted by eberly at 2026-06-25 09:04 PM | Reply

#41

To be clear, I don't think folks who opppse food stamps do so because it multiplies.

It's about hurting folks. And that's a good enough reason so I'm not asking anyone to debunk the multiply argument.

#44 | Posted by snoofy at 2026-06-25 09:09 PM | Reply

Ah, Beverly Butthurt from previous Comments... jajaja!

#45 | Posted by Corky at 2026-06-25 09:16 PM | Reply

"what about the federal income, state income, property, and sales tax I pay?"

Those aren't outlays.

Depending on how your government spends your taxes, is when it multiplies, or doesn't.

There's a million economic papers supporting this.

How Government Payments to the Vulnerable can Multiply to Create Economic Growth for Everyone
unu.edu

#46 | Posted by snoofy at 2026-06-25 09:19 PM | Reply

-Beverly Butthurt from previous Comments

Yeah...and the beverly thing...really burns me.

Free lunches.....I'm always buying. Same as free healthcare, on me.

#47 | Posted by eberly at 2026-06-25 09:29 PM | Reply

35.

Run government like a business.
--GOP, 1970s to forever

Economies of scale for the government? Communist.
Same

Why invest in crumbling infrastructure in the US in the 2000s and 2010s at historically low interest rates when we could be building military cities in Iraq?
Same

#48 | Posted by Dbt2 at 2026-06-25 09:35 PM | Reply

4 | Posted by C0RI0LANUS

Dude, give it a f*&^ing rest. This thread has nothing to do with Israel or Gaza.

#49 | Posted by jpw at 2026-06-26 02:25 AM | Reply

Snoofy pumps his bath house buddies full of Taco Bell a few hours after he drinks 3 craft beers, lets his inhibitions drop and goes back door diving tongue first.

#24 | Posted by BellRinger

Pedoringer and the other closet cases are just sad.

#50 | Posted by jpw at 2026-06-26 02:29 AM | Reply

#27 | Posted by lfthndthrds

Like this sad, pathetic cuck.

#51 | Posted by jpw at 2026-06-26 02:30 AM | Reply

Work or don't eat the choice is yours.

#28 | Posted by fortfisher

Of course, this stupid f*&^ shows up to ----- this demonstrably false nonsense.

#52 | Posted by jpw at 2026-06-26 02:31 AM | Reply

The whole "multiplier effect" has been proven to be such BS. If it really worked like that a centrally run economy would like be the most prosperous ever yet when it's been implemented the result has always been human tragedy.

#35 | Posted by BellRinger

You're absolutely right, pedoringer, there's the US or the USSR. Nothing exists in the middle economically.

Idiot.

#53 | Posted by jpw at 2026-06-26 02:32 AM | Reply

" The whole "multiplier effect" has been proven to be such BS."

When?

I've been studying economics for over 50 years. I've yet to see the multiplier effect disproven.

Please link to your research.

Or is this one of those times you're just using "hyperbole"?

#54 | Posted by Danforth at 2026-06-26 03:06 AM | Reply

AI Overview Millions of individuals have been removed from the SNAP program (food stamps) following the enactment of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (H.R. 1), a massive tax and spending cut bill. Nationwide, participation plummeted as the legislation imposed stricter work requirements, altered non-citizen eligibility, and penalized states heavily for payment errors.The primary factors driving these program drops include:Expanded Work Requirements: Able-bodied adults without dependents (ABAWDs) are now subject to stricter 20-hour-per-week work rules. The age limit for these requirements was expanded from 54 to 64, and other vulnerable groups (including the homeless and some veterans) had their exemptions removed.Stricter State Penalties: The federal government shifted more administrative and program costs onto states, threatening them with severe financial penalties if their payment error rates exceed the 6% threshold. To avoid fines, states have rapidly clamped down on eligibility and recertification processes.

#55 | Posted by MSgt at 2026-06-26 11:13 AM | Reply

#55

the missing part of that post:

"Contested Causes: The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) attributes a significant portion of these removals to the removal of ineligible individuals and fraud reduction.

However, nonpartisan researchers and policy experts contend that tougher documentation requirements and understaffed state agencies are causing eligible households to fall through the cracks.

Impact on Families: Recent investigations indicate that a large share"nearly half"of those removed from the rolls in states reporting age demographics are children."

www.google.com

But hey, people who put a Convicted Fraud in the WH are willing to believe whatever that Convicted Fraud's USDA tells them over what non-partisan experts say.

#56 | Posted by Corky at 2026-06-26 11:29 AM | Reply

Re 55

It's good for you to gather your thoughts. Make sure you remember all that to tell that to Saint Peter at the pearly gates.

I'm sure He will be very understanding. As he sends you straight to hell.

#57 | Posted by donnerboy at 2026-06-26 11:56 AM | Reply

Conservatives cheering on letting poor people go hungry so billionaires can have tax cuts it's about as Christ like as one could expect from American Christians.

#58 | Posted by ClownShack at 2026-06-26 11:58 AM | Reply

Conservatives cheering on letting poor people go hungry so billionaires can have tax cuts it's about as Christ like as one could expect from American Christians.

#58 | Posted by ClownShack at 2026-06-26 11:58 AM | Reply | Flag:
(Choose)

Liberals crying because another one of their fraud schemes is being exposed. And btw, they are the ones crying, not the ones losing the benefits who know they should not have received them in the first place but took them anyway.

#59 | Posted by fishpaw at 2026-06-26 12:13 PM | Reply

Hilarious!

Trumpers calling out someone else's Fraud Schemes?

Their Cult Leader is the Scammer in Chief!

#60 | Posted by Corky at 2026-06-26 12:30 PM | Reply

Liberals crying because another one of their fraud schemes is being exposed.

Fraud schemes?

You support Trump. That guy is nothing but one fraud scheme after another.

Meanwhile.

SNAP helped feed hungry, poor Americans.

It's okay to admit you hate America.

The rest of us already know you do.

#61 | Posted by ClownShack at 2026-06-26 12:35 PM | Reply

And btw, they are the ones crying, not the ones losing the benefits who know they should not have received them in the first place but took them anyway.

#59 | POSTED BY FISHPAW

Federal data found that 41,476 individuals were disqualified from SNAP specifically for fraud, which includes misreporting info or trading benefits.

What about the other 5 million people? A million of whom are children.

Fug em?

#62 | Posted by donnerboy at 2026-06-26 12:37 PM | Reply

Here's the thing about the multiplier effect, it assumes that every dollar taxed goes straight to a recipient. The whole bureaucratic apparatus eats up much of that taxed dollar and only a fraction makes its way to a recipient. That's where the math falls apart. And I support the safety net. I support SNAP. I just don't lie about it and act like it's some kind oof f economic boon when it isn't.

#63 | Posted by BellRinger at 2026-06-26 12:49 PM | Reply

Conservatives can't abide a program that feeds millions of hungry, poor Americans.

Because one person might be taking advantage of it.

There's no worse people in society than conservatives.

#64 | Posted by ClownShack at 2026-06-26 12:56 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Here's the thing about the multiplier effect, it assumes that every dollar taxed goes straight to a recipient.

Pretty sure that's not a surprise to anyone but you.

...

I just don't lie about it and act like it's some kind oof f economic boon when it isn't.

#63 | POSTED BY BELLRINGER

You just lied about it.

Around 6% of all Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) funding goes to state administrative costs, while less than 1% covers federal administrative costs. The remaining 93% to 94% is spent directly on food benefits for households.

That means more than a "fraction" gets to the recipients.

You and Trumpy apparently cannot open your pie holes without lying.

#65 | Posted by donnerboy at 2026-06-26 12:59 PM | Reply

If you earn $100 and the government takes 33% (Fed, state, local), you have $67 left.

That $67 is for you.

But, $67 isn't enough because as you spend that $67, let's say $10 of that $67 is more taxes and fees for things you need.

So, $57 is directly for you.

However, can't live with that. Pull out the credit card for $200 more.

Out of that $200, there will be taxes and fees, so borrowing isn't 100% for the recipient.

It sucks.

Now, govt taxation creates an account to spend. But all that money isn't directly going to recipients. There will be costs to distribute. So all that money taken away is reduced before coming back.

The govt doesn't just return a portion of what they took. They're borrowing too, and in much larger amounts.

So the individual has less after earning. Spending causes more attrition. The govt gives part back, but loses along the way. The govt borrows and never pays it back.

If individuals don't pay their debts through using credit, it's downhill fast. The govt isn't going downhill as fast, but it's goimg downhill nonetheless.

The crash at the bottom will hurt.

#66 | Posted by Petrous at 2026-06-26 01:09 PM | Reply

The govt borrows and never pays it back....

Not the principle, but certainly the interest is being paid back ..

The govt isn't going downhill as fast,

Oh but it is ... these interest payments are the size of the DoD, and growing ... last I heard.

Which is incredible it isn't talked about more.

My take on all this is, Lumpers can't see beyond first order effects (emotions). This is why taking all of Musk's money appeals to them. They can't fathom the long term detriment to nickle and diming the people working, making things work. The US should support people making Trillions, it means they are doing something people value.

If you don't like it, then tell the government to,stop spending money on rockets.

Not saying taxation is bad, but this guy Laffer makes a good point, you never know where the point is, but you know when you've passed it.

#67 | Posted by oneironaut at 2026-06-26 01:18 PM | Reply

Oh but it is ... these interest payments are the size of the DoD, and growing ... last I heard.

Which is incredible it isn't talked about more.

#67 | Posted by oneironaut

You and musk support the man who added over a quarter of the nations debt in under 6 years.

#68 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2026-06-26 01:20 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

And I support the safety net. I support SNAP.

#63 | Posted by BellRinger

your voting record says otherwise.

#69 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2026-06-26 01:21 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

And I support the safety net. I support SNAP.

#63 | Posted by BellRinger

You also lie a lot.

So another lie?

Hard to say.

#70 | Posted by donnerboy at 2026-06-26 01:25 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

-Lumpers can't see beyond first order effects (emotions)

Repubs and dems have been haggling over these items for as long as they've been in existence

It'll never stop. Ebb and flow, budget constraints, campaigning, etc ... ..and what fuels it is the ignorance of the public.

#71 | Posted by eberly at 2026-06-26 01:42 PM | Reply

That's a lot people who put down their food stamps but don't remember where they put them.

#72 | Posted by THEBULL at 2026-06-26 01:49 PM | Reply

The other side of the coin was brought up by Petrous. Every dollar taxed is money taken out of the economy. Ostensibly, ALL monies spent in the economy have a multiplier effect. So by taxing and redistributing we have administrative costs along with money taken out of the economy to try and be pumped back in.

#73 | Posted by BellRinger at 2026-06-26 02:04 PM | Reply

The other side of the coin was brought up by Petrous. Every dollar taxed is money taken out of the economy. Ostensibly, ALL monies spent in the economy have a multiplier effect. So by taxing and redistributing we have administrative costs along with money taken out of the economy to try and be pumped back in.

#73 | Posted by BellRinger

Money put into the hands of the rich is taken out of the economy.

Money put into the working class goes right back into the economy.

#74 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2026-06-26 02:12 PM | Reply

#73 | POSTED BY BELLRINGER

Are you ------- retarded?

Serious question, I hope you'll answer.

Poor people spend their money in their local communities because they shop local, they live local, they think local.

Millionaires and billionaires spend their money globally and the money they don't spend they hoard in offshore bank accounts so they can hide their wealth.

Trickle down voodoo economics was --------.

What's killing America isn't giving poor people money. What's killing America is giving rich people money.

#75 | Posted by ClownShack at 2026-06-26 02:15 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

- Trickle down voodoo economics was --------.

"The Empirical Evidence Rising Inequality:

A major study by economists at the London School of Economics evaluated 50 years of data across 18 industrialized nations and concluded that tax cuts for the wealthy consistently drive up income inequality without providing a meaningful boost to GDP or employment.

Stagnant Wages:

Critics point to the fact that while corporate profits and wealth at the top tiers have surged since the 1980s, real wages for the majority of workers have often failed to keep pace with the overall cost of living."

Fiscal Deficits:

Proponents originally claimed that tax cuts would pay for themselves by stimulating enough economic activity to balance budgets; however, supply-side tax policies historically result in significantly wider budget deficits.

Modern Consensus

Today, many economists and policy analysts argue that wealth generally remains concentrated in the hands of the top 1 percent rather than "trickling" down to the broader population.

The consensus leans increasingly toward demand-side or "middle-out" economics"the idea that broad-based middle-class prosperity drives sustainable growth."

www.google.com

#76 | Posted by Corky at 2026-06-26 02:23 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"Key figures like Bruce Bartlett and David Stockman"both primary architects of the Reagan administration's economic policies"did ultimately conclude that original "pure" supply-side economics did not work as intended.

Specifically, they argued that tax cuts failed to generate enough revenue to pay for themselves.

The Core Flaws: Why the Architects Doubted the Theory (more)

www.google.com

Of course, Trump Cultists are still sure they are going to be Tinkled Down on Someday... which is why they love their Billionaire President and his Trillionaire Co-Clown.

#77 | Posted by Corky at 2026-06-26 02:28 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

" Ostensibly, ALL monies spent in the economy have a multiplier effect."

Just different multipliers. A dollar of tax cuts to the top produces less than a dollar of economic activity. Meanwhile, a dollar to the folks at the bottom produces well over a dollar of economic activity.

You enable the lesser multiplier.

#78 | Posted by Danforth at 2026-06-26 03:20 PM | Reply

" Every dollar taxed is money taken out of the economy."

Only if you believe there's no such thing as the multiplier effect ... something you've admitted exists.

#79 | Posted by Danforth at 2026-06-26 04:00 PM | Reply

The following HTML tags are allowed in comments: a href, b, i, p, br, ul, ol, li and blockquote. Others will be stripped out. Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

Anyone can join this site and make comments. To post this comment, you must sign it with your Drudge Retort username. If you can't remember your username or password, use the lost password form to request it.
Username:
Password:

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy

Drudge Retort