Tag: poverty

NYC Gets a Free Grocery Store, but It’s a Slap in the Face for Mamdani

New York City got its first free grocery store on Thursday, and yet it does more to discredit self-proclaimed democratic socialist Mayor Zohran Mamdani than do him any favors. The store wasn’t launched by the city but by Polymarket, a private prediction market where users bet on world events. More than 400 New Yorkers lined up for free groceries, praising the store as a much-needed relief during challenging financial times.

“Times are hard. Things are very expensive, so this helps,” Tori Hall, who was second in line outside the store, said. “It goes a long way.”

The Polymarket “free” grocery store opened Thursday and will operate as a five-day pop-up through Sunday, with the final day dedicated to donations. They added in a statement that the company had donated $1 million to the Food Bank for NYC “to help fight food insecurity across all five boroughs.” 

The initiative follows a similar stunt earlier this month by Kalshi, another prediction-market platform, which offered New Yorkers $50 in free groceries.

Mamdani responded to the latter stunt, posting a headline on X that read: “Heartbreaking: The worst person you know just made a great point.”

Keep reading

The Arrogance of Migrants Is Something to Behold

There are few things more natural than people from different places and cultures being suspicious of one another. Human beings are tribal by nature, and tribes have always been exclusive. 

As human societies grew larger, the “tribe” to which we are loyal has expanded, and the characteristics we use to identify who belongs to it can shift beyond mere proximity and familiarity. We can even have allegiances to different tribes at the same time. Texans tend to see themselves as members of their local community, Texas, the “tribe” of their favorite sports teams, and as Americans. Sometimes the tribal allegiances overlap, and sometimes not. 

I guarantee you that Floridians and Texans worry about the influx of people from Blue states changing their politics, so imagine what happens when a person from a different country, culture, religion, and who behaves very differently from you, horns in and demands that you change for their benefit. 

And, by the way, demands that you pick up the tab for their new lives. 

Keep reading

Iran Secures Powerful Vice-Chair Role on Globalist U.N. Social Development Commission — Tehran Now Poised to Influence Global Policy on Poverty, Inequality, Jobs, and Welfare for 2027 Session

The Islamic Republic of Iran has been elected Vice-Chair of the United Nations Commission for Social Development for its 2027 session, a key leadership role on a body that helps set global policy on poverty reduction, employment, inequality, social protection, and welfare.

While the mullahs in Tehran are busy crushing the “Woman, Life, Freedom” movement and acting as the world’s leading state sponsor of terrorism, the U.N. thinks they are the perfect candidates to help lead global efforts on poverty, inequality, and social welfare.

On Tuesday, the Commission concluded its 64th session in New York by electing its new “Bureau” for 2027. Amid the usual bureaucratic back-patting, it was announced that Abbas Tajik, representing the Iranian regime, would serve as Vice-Chair.

According to the UN:

The Commission then concluded its sixty-fourth session and opened its sixty-fifth to elect its new office-bearers, in accordance with the principle of equitable geographical rotation among the five regional groups.  Stefano Guerra (Portugal) was elected as Chair, while Abbas Tajik (Iran) and Shahriyar Hajiyev (Azerbaijan) were elected as Vice-Chairs.  The Commission postponed the elections of the remaining members of the Bureau — from the Group of African States and the Group of Latin America and Caribbean States — to a later date.

Keep reading

The Democrats’ “Affordability” Ploy To Avoid Accountability

Imagine someone is walking through a museum filled with fragile antiquities. And they happen to be indiscriminately swinging a sledgehammer. And with every fragile antiquity they shatter, they pocket the price of the destroyed historical treasure.

When their selfish, remunerative spree of wanton destruction concludes, one might expect the culprit to drop their hammer and skedaddle from the scene of the crime. Nope. Instead, they stand around carping that the museum’s new curators are not cleaning up the mess you made fast enough. Why? Because they are hoping to get another shot with the sledgehammer at the remaining precious items still on display.

The fragile antiquities would be the American economy itself. They would be Democrats. The sledgehammer would be their trillion-dollar spending spree, which they would undertake while holding the congressional majority under the Biden administration. With every exorbitant spending bill they passed, their political cronies and ideological fellow travelers received taxpayer money, much of the largesse being funneled back into electing Democrats. The result was the Democrats’ inflation-driven economic carnage that harmed every taxpaying American’s pocketbook that the party had drained to do it in the first place.

Consequently, the best new museum curators would be the Trump administration. One can therefore understand the irritation of the president and Congressional Republicans with the Democrats’ disingenuous dithyrambs to “affordability.”

Hence, President Trump has called the Democrats’ laments regarding the “affordability” issue a “hoax” and a “scam”; however, in the context he describes, he is decrying the party’s disingenuous messaging ploy.

Keep reading

78% of Somali Immigrant Households Still on Welfare After a Decade, Congressman Gill Says, Citing State Welfare Stats

78 percent of Somali immigrant households remain on welfare even after a decade in the United States—a statistic that ignited a fierce debate on Capitol Hill and reopened the debate over immigration, welfare dependency, and political accountability. 

The statistic, cited by Rep. Brandon Gill, during a heated Oversight Committee hearing, has become a flashpoint in a broader reckoning over Minnesota’s sprawling welfare system and recent revelations of large-scale fraud.

The exchange unfolded as Rep. Gill pressed state officials and witnesses on disparities in welfare usage. He contrasted the figures he cited for Somali-headed households with far lower rates among native-born Minnesota households, arguing that the gap raised serious questions about policy outcomes.

When challenged, Democratic witnesses attempted to blur the distinction, insisting that many Somali Minnesotans are American-born and culturally integrated. Gill rejected that framing, returning repeatedly to the numbers and arguing that outcomes—not intentions—are what ought to matter in public policy.

The congressman went further, stating that more than 80 percent of Somali-headed households receive some form of welfare assistance. Even after ten years of residency, he said, nearly four in five remain dependent on government support—a figure he argued is incompatible with claims of successful integration.

These remarks landed amid a cascade of corruption investigations in Minnesota that have shaken public confidence. State and federal authorities have uncovered what they describe as one of the largest fraud scandals in recent US history, involving alleged abuse of childcare subsidies, food assistance programs, and healthcare funding.

Investigators estimate that as much as $9 billion may have been siphoned off through fake nonprofits and shell organizations. According to prosecutors, many of these operations inflated enrollment numbers or fabricated services while collecting taxpayer dollars.

Keep reading

Trump Admin’s New Nutrition Guidelines Aim To End Corporate Profiteering On Americans’ Poor Health

he Trump administration announced new dietary guidelines aimed at ending “corporate-driven” preferences for ultra-processed foods, added sugar, and refined carbohydrates on Wednesday.

The Make America Healthy Again-oriented changes to the food pyramid, nutrition education, and government programs’ methods for procurement and approval of food represent the “most significant reset of federal nutrition policy in history,” Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. said at a White House press briefing.

“For decades, Americans have grown sicker while health care costs have soared. The reason is clear: The hard truth is that our government has been lying to us to protect corporate profit-taking, telling us that these food-like substances were beneficial to public health,” Kennedy said. “Federal policy promoted and subsidized highly processed foods and refined carbohydrates, and turned a blind eye to the disastrous consequences. Today, the lies stop.”

“My message is clear: Eat real food,” he added.

Federal dietary guidelines shape many federal programs, as well as the groceries eligible under the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), school lunches, the food procured by government agencies, including the Pentagon, Veterans Affairs hospitals, and more. They also guide how Americans are educated about food and nutrition.

“Common purchases” for the 42 million Americans on SNAP are products that include added sugars and chips, Kennedy said, noting that 78 percent of those on SNAP are also enrolled in Medicaid.

Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins said her department is working to finalize a “rule that will mandate” that all 250,000 retailers that accept SNAP benefits in the United States “double the type of staple foods” they provide to SNAP recipients.

Keep reading

Junk Food Bans For SNAP Users In Some States Starting 2026: What To Know

Americans using Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits to purchase groceries may need to adjust their shopping habits in 2026 as some states will prohibit the use of SNAP funds to purchase certain “junk foods.”

Also starting next year, states will have to shoulder a larger portion of the cost of running the program. In addition, states could lose funds if their payment error rate is too high.

Here is what to know about the overhaul of America’s largest nutrition program.

Restrictions on Purchases in Some States

Eighteen states will restrict the purchase of certain foods lacking in nutritional value next year. The changes are being made under the banner of the Make America Healthy Again initiative launched by the Department of Health and Human Services. To institute the changes, the states had to submit and have approved a waiver of federal rules from the Department of Agriculture, which oversees the nutrition program.

The starting dates for the restrictions and the foods prohibited vary by state.

Indiana, Iowa, Nebraska, Utah, and West Virginia will implement purchase restrictions on Jan. 1, 2026. Idaho, Oklahoma, Louisiana, Colorado, Texas, Virginia, and Florida have starting dates from February to April. Arkansas, Tennessee, Hawaii, South Carolina, North Dakota, and Missouri will begin their bans between July and October.

Most of these states have removed candy, soda, and energy drinks from the list of SNAP-eligible items.

In Tennessee and Iowa, SNAP beneficiaries cannot use the funds to purchase processed foods. Tennessee defines a processed food as one that has been changed in any way from its natural state.

Prepared desserts, such as cakes and cookies, are restricted in Florida and Missouri.

In Iowa, foods that are prepared for consumption or come with eating utensils may not be purchased with SNAP funds. Cold, unpackaged foods without utensils, such as bread, fruit, or canned goods, are still permitted.

Keep reading

Almost 150,000 children were living in jobless households this Christmas as number of homes without an income hits 11-year high

Almost 150,000 more children spent Christmas in a home without an income this year after the number of jobless households hit an 11-year high under Labour, official figures show.

There were 1.52 million youngsters living in a house where not a single adult family member is employed as of September, according to data from the Office for National Statistics.

Last year, 1.37 million children were in a workless household in October to December 2024, meaning an extra 146,000 children spent Christmas in a home without an income this year.

The figures also reveal that the number of children in workless households is at its highest level for 11 years. The last time there were more children in a house where no adult family member is employed was in October to December 2014, when the total was 1.54 million.

The Conservatives blamed the rise on Labour’s £25billion raid on employer National Insurance contributions and minimum wage hikes, which have driven up the cost of taking on workers.

They claim that with firms scaling back and jobs disappearing, more families are being pushed out of the workforce entirely, leaving children to bear the consequences.

Helen Whately, Tory spokesman on work and pensions, said: ‘Too many parents are being priced out of work by Labour’s Jobs Tax and Unemployment Rights Bill.

‘It’s a tough Christmas for people who have been made redundant and can’t find new work, and for those still in jobs seeing their taxes go up to pay for more benefits. Labour is offering more and more handouts to people on benefits, making welfare the rational choice rather than work.

Keep reading

Chicago’s Guaranteed Income Guarantees Less Opportunity

There have been more than 150 guaranteed income pilot programs implemented across the country, but only one has made its program permanent – Cook County, Illinois.

The county, which includes Chicago, became the first place in America to commit to a taxpayer-funded program indefinitely, serving as the nucleus for expanding the scope of these programs nationally. Taxpayers and recipients beware.

A guaranteed income program is simple: Give low-income people a monthly amount of money to use as they see fit. These payments are in addition to other welfare benefits they receive, and don’t come with any requirements to work, to learn better money management, or to get job training.

The idea is to promote equity and help the poor and disadvantaged, a noble goal, but in practice it can harm families by reducing work, income, and opportunity.

They’re extremely expensive, too, and threaten to wreck the finances of any city or state that implements them with ever-higher taxes.

Cook County used $42 million in funds from the American Rescue Plan to run a two-year pilot program that provided 3,250 low- to moderate-income participants with $500 per month.

The results? One firm committed to “equitable economic development” found four apparent benefits.

Their modeling estimated that households directly spent 55.8% of the money received. The $42 million investment generated only $8.3 million annually for local businesses and a $5.4 million increase in annual economic output in Cook County. Generating $286,000 in tax revenue, $44,000 of which stayed in Cook County.

One concern with these findings is that no results from a control group were reported. There’s no way of knowing if the increases were a result of these 3,250 recipients or if it was simply a post-pandemic boon.

The county is continuing the program in 2026 at a cost of $7.5 million to local taxpayers.

Another study of a more rigorous Chicago-area pilot program with a control group found that the program discouraged participants from working and reduced their earned income.

Taking part in the pilot actually lowered participants’ earned income by $1800, excluding program payments. Recipients’ workforce participation dropped by 3.9 percentage points. 

Participants and, surprisingly, others in the recipient’s household, ended up reducing their hours worked per week. Children who grow up around full-time working adults are more likely to climb the economic ladder, so this reduction in work threatens the future of participants’ children.

Still, the appetite for guaranteed income programs is rapidly expanding in Illinois and nationally. Illinois allocated $827,272 in its 2026 budget to fund a pilot.

In October, Rep. Bonnie Watson Coleman (D-NJ) reintroduced the Guaranteed Income Pilot Act, with the stated goal of lifting people out of poverty. The federal program would select 20,000 participants.

Of them, 10,000 would receive “a cash payment each month equal to the fair market rent for a 2-bedroom home in the ZIP Code in which the eligible individual resides, or a substantially similar amount.” In Chicago, the payment would increase to $2,670 per month. In New York, it’d be $2910. A control group would contain 10,000 people.

A final report on the program would explicitly be required to study the feasibility of expanding the program. The goal of these programs – sometimes explicitly stated – is to cover more people.  

Keep reading

Justice Department Quietly Reverses Clinton-Era Rule On Immigrant Welfare Benefits

For almost 30 years, a key part of America’s 1996 welfare reform laws has existed mostly on paper after the Clinton DOJ effectively nullified it with a loophole. Now, the Trump DOJ says it’s time to enforce those laws as Congress originally wrote them.

Earlier this week, the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel quietly reversed a Clinton-era legal opinion that had sharply limited when immigrants could be denied federal welfare benefits. The earlier interpretation narrowed the law so much, critics say, that it allowed many immigrants – including some who were not lawfully eligible – to continue receiving benefits Congress intended to restrict.

The new DOJ opinion restores a broader reading of the law, potentially expanding waiting periods for benefits, strengthening sponsor repayment requirements, and closing loopholes that have existed since the late 1990s.

What Congress Intended in 1996

In 1996, Congress passed the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act (PRWORA) along with major immigration reforms. The message was straightforward: immigrants should be self-sufficient, public benefits should not encourage immigration, and American taxpayers should not be responsible for supporting new arrivals.

To enforce those goals, Congress created several rules:

  • Most lawful permanent residents were barred from receiving “means-tested” federal benefits during their first five years in the U.S.
  • Family members who sponsored immigrants had to sign legally binding affidavits promising to support them.
  • If a sponsored immigrant received certain benefits, the government could seek reimbursement from the sponsor.
  • When agencies evaluated eligibility for benefits, they were required to count the sponsor’s income as part of the immigrant’s resources.

Congress defined “federal public benefit” broadly but never formally defined the term “federal means-tested public benefit.” That gap would become critical.

Keep reading