Rango's Dog House

Unless you’re a stone-hearted Republican or a heartless Libertarian, there is some consensus that in US society we must take care of those who cannot take care of themselves. There’s always going to be a number. I find 42 million people on SNAP benefits in a country of 350 million to be a surprisingly high number, but I have no frame of reference from other countries.

It just seems high.

That’s 1 in 8 Americans who cannot afford food, and with less than $3000 in assets total. The mind-boggling question is how do we reduce that number? Even if we do, will the benefits of that ever surface to the 7 of 8 Americans that are self-sufficient? I don’t think they will, but that shouldn’t stop us from trying to reduce the number.

People are quick to argue that we must have work requirements in place to receive SNAP benefits. They fail to realize that 50% of recipients already work full-time, and 70% have some kind of job. If there is a crime to be had, that is it. Companies like Walmart pay their employees less than living wages, which are subsidized by the taxpayer in the form of SNAP benefits and other entitlements.

Note this is primarily a problem in Republican states. On average they face less favorable economic conditions in general, and consume more benefits per capita than Democratic states. This is not a coincidence, as it speaks to the perceived lack of compassion in Republican politics. Conservative luminary Charlie Kirk famously quipped about empathy as New Age nonsense that does a lot of harm. It seems that he speaks for many Republicans.

The simple solution for 1/2 of the American SNAP recipients working a full-time job without a living wage is for the government to require it. The federal minimum wage hasn’t changed since 2007. Walmart can afford to pay $20 an hour to every employee and still be a hugely profitable business. Companies in California and Washington already do so. That change alone would account for 20 million people raising their standard of living enough to disqualify them from benefits.

Once again, it is Republicans that oppose any change to the minimum wage status quo, and it is their states that suffer the most from poverty.

Just as there is always a percentage of the population that can’t feed themselves, there is also a segment of the population who are unemployable. They lack skills or initiative, or have strikes on their record that makes getting lucrative, legal work next to impossible. We must find a way to reach these people, expand their skills and see their own potential. This is a much harder problem to solve, but once again, raising the minimum wage will be enough to motivate many people who see no point in working for $7.50 an hour. Government sponsored incentives for trade school or college tuition would help as well.

The intersection of the Venn diagram of these two population segments is the heart of our problem. That’s what makes it a difficult problem to solve. The objective of any reforms must be to shrink both segments of the population so that the intersection of the two groups is nominal. We need to help people help themselves.

There will always be a number. It’s in everyone’s best interest, from Democrat to Republican, to make sure that number is as small as possible. Any solution that doesn’t address the root causes is just another distraction. Given the government shutdown, that’s about all we can expect right now.