Posts: 204201
From: I hold a Juris Doctorate (J.D.) and a Legum Magister (LL.M.)!
Registered: Apr 2009

posted May 19, 2025 01:22 PM            

---

With $1.5 trillion in savings. It is expected to pass by Memorial Day.

And no, it does not cut Medicaid. It ensured that only those that truly qualify for Medicaid get it—such as uninsured children. However, I do have serious issues with the bill. First, it keeps in place many of the green new scam subsidies that helped no one but were just gifts to left-wing organizations. WTF is that doing in a Republican bill? Cut out all that BS! Second, it changes the work requirement age exemption for SNAP from 54 to 64 and eliminates the exemption for parents with children once they reach the age of 7. Do not children who turn 7 still need parenting? To expect the elderly to continue working till 65 in order to receive food benefits is crazy. Many will have already retired. Lastly, it ends the Graduate and Parent Plus student loan programs. That means medical schools, law schools, and other professional programs will no longer be funded. We will have a national shortage of doctors. This is a stupid idea in every way.

IP: Logged

Posts: 435
From:
Registered: Jan 2025

posted May 19, 2025 02:15 PM            

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Randall:

However, I do have serious issues with the bill.
...

Second, it changes the work requirement age exemption for SNAP from 54 to 64 and eliminates the exemption for parents with children once they reach the age of 7. Do not children who turn 7 still need parenting? To expect the elderly to continue working till 65 in order to receive food benefits is crazy. Many will have already retired.

---

hm, I don't agree. Most working and middle class people who are not on SNAP do work till the age of 65 and sometimes beyond because they want to maximize the return on their social security benefits and other retirement supports. If they retire earlier than 65, they lose a substantial amount on those benefits so they lug in work hours at least until 65. I think the people on SNAP can also do the same, they should not be held to a lower standard.

As for the exemption for parents until the child reaches age of 7, I think it is fair. By that age, the child is already enrolled in school, so the parent does not have to be at home tending to the child. HOWEVER, I do believe low income working people should get childcare support because childcare or afterschool care for children can take a big chunk of a low income salary.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Randall:
[B]it ends the Graduate and Parent Plus student loan programs. That means medical schools, law schools, and other professional programs will no longer be funded. We will have a national shortage of doctors. This is a stupid idea in every way.

---

That indeed is stupid. Is there anyway this can be changed? This is not a good look and does not benefit anyone! The base should let the admin know!

IP: Logged

Posts: 204201
From: I hold a Juris Doctorate (J.D.) and a Legum Magister (LL.M.)!
Registered: Apr 2009

posted May 19, 2025 02:29 PM            

---

Good point about the age of 7. Many retirees do continue to work to supplement their Social Security, but I don’t think those who do choose to retire early should have to lose SNAP. Seniors are food insecure. The Grad Plus loans have very low default rates because they are credit based. It makes absolutely no sense to eliminate them. Without them, many universities will have to eliminate their Master’s programs. And many professional programs will cease to exist. That means a nationwide shortage of doctors and pharmacists, who as a group, do repay their student loans.

IP: Logged

Posts: 30923
From: Here
Registered: Apr 2009

posted May 19, 2025 02:29 PM            

---

So, you agree that it shouldn’t have passed, because it didn’t cut enough. Republicons hate poor people.

IP: Logged

Posts: 435
From:
Registered: Jan 2025

posted May 19, 2025 03:09 PM            

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Randall:
Good point about the age of 7. Many retirees do continue to work to supplement their Social Security, but I don’t think those who do choose to retire early should have to lose Snap. Seniors are food insecure.

---

Okay, I can agree with that, but perhaps they could push the age from current 54 to 60 instead of 64. To choose to retire 10 years before the general population and expect to keep SNAP food benefits to me is a little unfair to the rest of us who may hate our jobs, yet force ourselves to come to work to make it to that 65 age limit.

IP: Logged

Posts: 204201
From: I hold a Juris Doctorate (J.D.) and a Legum Magister (LL.M.)!
Registered: Apr 2009

posted May 19, 2025 04:18 PM            

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by teasel:
So, you agree that it shouldn’t have passed, because it didn’t cut enough. Republicons hate poor people.

---

No, I did not say that. I often wonder if you can interpret what you read outside of your partisan filter. And if you are talking about Belage, my same criticism applies. No one here is against poor people. If you hate being poor so badly, contribute something to society to make yourself financially independent or maybe even wealthy, but stop projecting your internalized disdain for the poor onto those who create jobs.

IP: Logged