Depression

Next on the list for a ban. They came for my neighbors ID, and I said nothing, then they came for my neighbors VPN, and an I did nothing, and now they are coming for me on I2P, and there is no one left to speak for me…

The American Civil War was about “States Rights”

The Americas: Fuckin around and finding out Baby! YEEEEHAAAAAA!!!

TRANSLATION: Optimus is programmed to kill poor people…

It’s almost like there isn’t really a difference between most Republicans and most Democrats…Like some sorta, I dunno, bread and circus show or somethin. Weird

Very good points. I apologize for making assumptions. There’s a lot of anger out there, mine included, keeping people from being their best selves, and my assumption is symptomatic of that. No excuse; sometimes explaination is necessary, IMO.

I like to think of the “economy” as two economies, the real material economy, and the fiscal or money economy. The former doesn’t really seem to matter to economists, as they believe that enough money can solve any problem, hence they only reference the latter “economy”. So, to my way of thinking, as SNAP amounts about 8 billion $ a month and the US GDP as defined in the “fiscal economy” is around 2,542 billion $ a month, it’s a very small drop in a very large bucket, in those terms at least. I would imagine that with the stock market being so enamored with AI right now that there won’t be any appreciable reaction there to the slight change in Walmart’s bottom line. The General Merchandise side of such super-stores is vastly more important to profits than the grocery side due to very tight margins on groceries, so probably no perceptible change there. I think the biggest effect would be on those few small and local grocers, as they are more “real economy” based, so a decline in their sales would further exacerbate the “business as usual” of them being forced into insolvency by competition from big box stores. The biggest consequences I forsee from the lack of snap benefits os a speeding up of what is already a well established pattern. One more thing attributes to the opinion asked for in the original post that I am finally and at last getting around to; the top 10% of earners account for 50% of consumption. So with all that crap in mind, I think that until the people at the bottom are squeezed hard enough that they are forced to turn from single person shoplifting to organized group theft, looting I guess, that there will be no real change in grocery prices.

I was employed as Loss Prevention at a big box store once upon a time. It’s a big part of the training.

Very good points.

It is interesting that you seem to assume that your average person who will be unable to purchase food with SNAP will be stealing food. People also have the option of not paying other bills to afford food, or going to food banks. The majority of theft in the retail setting comes from employees. Also: Is it worse to steal to eat, or to steal to make your bottom line look better? Wage theft grossly outpaces losses from theft year after year. Maybe stop villanizing the disadvantaged folks in our society, and put that anger towards the people who have stolen so much from the majority that they put the disadvantaged in the position they are in.

Life is art, art is life something somethin. Go away, I’m Batein!!!

‘Slaps spaceship’ You can fit so many fascists in this bad boy…

Some people feel that an internal state conflict that results in more than 1000 deaths per year qualifies as a state of civil war. By that metric, the numbers of people in the USA killed by the police has meant that the USA has been in a state of civil war for many years now.

This is the Way.