Meals on Wheels

Discussion in 'National' started by DCnPhilly, Mar 17, 2017.

  1. DCnPhilly

    DCnPhilly Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2008
    Messages:
    5,781
    Likes Received:
    529
    White House budget director Mick Mulvaney claims Meals on Wheels is 'not showing any results.' Meals on Wheels says otherwise.

    What kinds of monsters go after Meals on Wheels? According to Mulvaney, the proposed budget slashes the program's funding because it hasn't provided any "appreciable benefits." Whether that's true or not - and only the alternative facts claim the program is a failure - in what world is a program that provides food for the elderly and disabled veterans a program intended to provide "appreciable benefits"?

    Federally funding charities isn't meant to turn a profit, it's meant to care for those unable to care for themselves. Expecting an "appreciate benefit" from an investment in the disabled and less fortunate is a disgusting way of viewing American citizens as cogs in a corporation. He might as well say that anyone unable to work or leave their home should be put down, and go Logan's Run on everyone over 65, disabled, or without a job.

    But here's the really sick part about the budget priorities. Only 3% of Meals on Wheels budget comes from the fed. Likewise, only $458 million of PBS's funding - another organization gutted by the proposed budget - comes from the fed. These programs aren't going anywhere, and with record donations likely pouring in, they'll probably be able to operate business as usual until the dust settles.

    But my point is, these already underfunded organizations aren't being defunded because of any realistic priority. It costs taxpayers $30m a month to protect Trump Tower and more than $3m for Trump to stay at Mar a Lago for the weekend. $458m and the 3% Meals on Wheels receives are literally nothing to the fed. The amount these organizations receive won't buy the windshield of an Air Force jet. These cuts are spite. President Trump Inc. is figuratively holding up a $1b bill, setting it on fire, and saying, "this is what you mean to me. $1b is nothing. You're nothing."

    The man has absolutely no conscience.
     
    MzzSpellcheck and wollstonecraft like this.
  2. Jayfar

    Jayfar I'm very old®

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2008
    Messages:
    8,803
    Likes Received:
    742
  3. DCnPhilly

    DCnPhilly Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2008
    Messages:
    5,781
    Likes Received:
    529
    I thought the number seemed high, and I'm sure it waxes and wanes depending on who's there. And the cost of securing the building isn't unique to Trump, it cost taxpayers anytime Obama or any former President traveled. It's still an unnecessary burden on the part of an administration that claims it's doing everything it can to cut costs. And whether it's $30m a month or $3m, it's still bloated in comparison to the funds given to cash strapped organizations that pinch pennies to stay afloat.
     
    wollstonecraft likes this.
  4. Big Irish

    Big Irish Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2010
    Messages:
    824
    Likes Received:
    207
    The Snopes article only addresses NY City's costs. It doesn't touch on the secret service costs at all. When you factor in the costs of city & federal security for her in NYC, for him in Florida, and for the kids & grandkids all over the world (Scotland, Dubai, etc) I'm sure it's exponentially higher than 2x the $148 mil in question.
     
    DCnPhilly and wollstonecraft like this.
  5. wollstonecraft

    wollstonecraft Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2009
    Messages:
    460
    Likes Received:
    26
    It isn't just him. It's the spineless politicians lining up behind him, enabling him. They're dead inside. They're greasy barbarians.
     
    DCnPhilly likes this.
  6. DCnPhilly

    DCnPhilly Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2008
    Messages:
    5,781
    Likes Received:
    529
    You're right, and it's a one-two punch. You've got politicians lining up behind him to push their own agendas, then - since they're dealing with Trump - they're terrified of displeasing him. It's a four year special season of The Apprentice.

    You can hear it in Mulvaney's voice and his rationalizations, you can hear it in Spicer. I've never heard people so blatantly refer to programs like Meals on Wheels and free school lunches as failures just because they fail to produce an appreciative return. They know that's not why these programs exist. They have to know how callous they sound and they have to know how poorly it plays with nearly everyone listening - Right or Left. But Mulvaney, Spicer, and the rest in Trump Co. aren't dealing with a President concerned with political popularity, they're dealing with someone who's used to being praised for being a hard ass because that's what public corporations look for in their leaders.

    Cutting free lunch for kids who aren't getting great grades isn't the same as suspending bonuses for employees who aren't producing, but that's exactly how they're treating it. And I think - spineless and heartless as his cohorts may be - they're doing it because they're afraid of the maniac in the office who will fire anyone who says, "you really shouldn't do that."

    It won't play well in his re-election, but we're not even two months into his term. Can you imagine where we'll be in four years? The possibilities are horrifying. Best case scenario it will be an even uglier replay of the 1970s: smog, poverty, rampant inner-city crime. Worst case scenario is something the United States has never experienced. Trump will lose the re-election, then claim he accomplished everything he "needed to" in four years.

    The truth is, regardless of how the Right likes to paint the welfare system, the current state is probably exactly where a savvy, albeit cruel, Right would want the underpaid, uninsured, and struggling. It's not great by any means, but it isn't so bad that they have nothing to lose. It's a weird, almost dystopian balance. Give people too much, they demand more. Give them less, they rebel. Give them just enough, and they don't want to rock the boat.

    Trump's lair is building a country where the poorest could see themselves with nothing to lose, and the underpaid and uninsured could too. Obama's administration was far from perfect, but it gave a lot of people a small taste of a slightly better life. Sending us back to the dark ages of corporate greed that treats citizens as corporate assets rather than people is going to put a lot of now-reasonable people in very desperate situations. Trump's a madman and the company he keeps has no soul, but nothing is scarier than someone with nothing to lose, and if he continues down this path he's going to create millions of them.

    If PhiladelphiaSpeaks survives the next four years, it will be really interesting to look back at these posts.
     
  7. mixiboi

    mixiboi Philly Remixed

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2009
    Messages:
    12,645
    Likes Received:
    309
    This explains he commercials. But to the point of losing federal funding isn't about the money, but about the clout. Losing DC intrest is always not a good thing.

    Tho, I am sure Planned Parenthood wish it could....
     
    DCnPhilly likes this.
  8. wollstonecraft

    wollstonecraft Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2009
    Messages:
    460
    Likes Received:
    26

    There's been so much that's been sickening, despicable, unconscionable, and cruel that it's impossible to point out the worst to come from them. But the recent tactic of their calling their attacks on expanded Medicaid, Meals on Wheels, and other programs as acts of "mercy" and "compassion" has to be the filthiest and the most vile.
     
    DCnPhilly likes this.
  9. hkp

    hkp Señor Member

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    Messages:
    2,044
    Likes Received:
    58
    Does it get more disgusting? Yes, it does! Trump also charges rent for secret service's housing whenever they stay at his properties to protect him and/or his family.
     
    DCnPhilly likes this.
  10. Hospitalitygirl

    Hospitalitygirl Resident Ornery Bitch

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2008
    Messages:
    15,969
    Likes Received:
    680
    Link?
     
  11. hkp

    hkp Señor Member

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    Messages:
    2,044
    Likes Received:
    58
  12. Hospitalitygirl

    Hospitalitygirl Resident Ornery Bitch

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2008
    Messages:
    15,969
    Likes Received:
    680
  13. Tartan69

    Tartan69 Pawn in game of life

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2009
    Messages:
    4,158
    Likes Received:
    587
    This is an area where Trump should walk the walk and not just talk the talk. Same with golfing. He's as bad as Señor Choom, if not worse.
     
    DCnPhilly and Hospitalitygirl like this.
  14. DCnPhilly

    DCnPhilly Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2008
    Messages:
    5,781
    Likes Received:
    529
    Donald Trump is Caligula...shameless, grossly decadent, knowingly indulgent at the expense of others. Can you imagine what kind of dictator he'd be if he were governing a different country?

    Trump doesn't even try to rationalize what he does because he sees no reason to. His people rationalize for him, they scramble to. But they have to, because Trump is truly inhuman. That's what's so frustrating about him. It's impossible to make sense of his logic and motivations. Entitled? That usually stems from something. Narcissistic? Maybe. A petulant child? Kind of, but he's 70.

    He's so infuriating because he can't be bucketed into one specific pathology. He's all of the above and nothing specific. He's clearly got brain problems. Even the worst monsters attempt to rationalize their decisions because it's human to try to excuse monstrous acts. Trump is more like a gorilla that vaguely learned how to speak, but a few steps lower on the evolutionary ladder. A gibbon maybe. He eats, f*cks, poops, and likes shiny things. Full stop.

    Even the worst people are faced with some level of empathy, whether they choose to do anything with it or not. Clearly from Trump's Tweets and off-the-cuff remarks, he doesn't have this problem. His brain is broken and missing the piece that says other people are people too. I wouldn't even call him selfish, because for a person to recognize the 'self,' they need to understand that others exist, and I don't think he does.

    He behaves like he's on the most maniacal episode of the Truman Show. He doesn't recognize reality for what it is, it all exists in his head. To him, he's a god lording over the world's largest game of SimCity. Like I said, he's Caligula.
     
    MzzSpellcheck and Jayfar like this.
  15. DCnPhilly

    DCnPhilly Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2008
    Messages:
    5,781
    Likes Received:
    529
    I was talking about this with a friend the other night, and we noted that plenty of philanthropists in the U.S. could easily plug these funding gaps. But if they did, and the reason these organizations probably don't want millions from Oprah or Bill Gates, is because replacing federal funds with private donations would set a precedent that all public organizations could be privately funded. And they could be, but we'd be asking willing philanthropists to essentially pay a higher tax on behalf of billionaires more reluctant to pay, and that's not how public programs work. The federal funding these organizations receive is a pittance for the largest groups, but it legitimizes them and brings in the larger donations that fund their operations. And for a lot of those groups, those donations and even the limited federal funds trickle down into much smaller regional groups that manage to operate on a very thin budget.
     
    MzzSpellcheck and wollstonecraft like this.
  16. DMMPhilPA

    DMMPhilPA Member

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2014
    Messages:
    24
    Likes Received:
    7
    They also like the idea of liberals diverting their time and money to these causes and not political ones.
     
  17. DCnPhilly

    DCnPhilly Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2008
    Messages:
    5,781
    Likes Received:
    529
    They really shot themselves in the foot going after PBS and Meals on Wheels. The money they get from the federal budget is so minimal to their operating costs, and they're mostly (especially Meals on Wheels) apolitical. The GOP is trying to make one statement by cutting their funding but making a different one, essentially showing just how cold they can really be.

    Now, more and more, any charitable organization is seen as "liberal." Trump's cohorts and the GOP congress are being very blatant that they don't want to subsidize anyone but the rich or anything but profit-driven organizations. Activists keep pointing out how cruel those motives are, but I think the more troubling fact is that they know they're being cruel, they're normalizing it, and they don't care. Liberals aren't catching onto the fact that the GOP isn't just cutting funding and diverting it to military spending and the wealthy, they're changing their political narrative to one in which they're celebrated for not caring about the bottom rung or social problems. Liberals are playing defense while the GOP is on an entirely different court playing a completely different game.

    I read a really great article recently discussing how secularization within the GOP is having the opposite effect that liberals had hoped. Conservatives don't have to cater to the religious the way they used to because conservatives are leaving the church and many who are still religious tend to focus more on the notion of God rather than the charitable teachings, and view the United States as the promised land for the worthy, not the tired and weak. All of this enables the GOP to completely eradicate social funding, focus on big business, the military, and isolationism without political consequence. I'm not religious at all, but at least traditional Christianity required its followers to exercise some level of restraint and have some sense of conscience.
     

Share This Page