Trump official says funds will be released ‘only when states prove they are being spent legitimately’
The changes to US childcare services as part of a response to a viral video, made by a self-described “independent journalist” and rightwing influencer, that purported to discover massive fraud at daycare centers operated by Somali Americans in Minneapolis.
However, other news outlets have not been able to verify the claims made in the video. Allegations of exploitation of Minnesota’s social safety net have also been extensively covered by local and national news media over the past several years, and prosecutors brought charges over one allegedly massive scheme during the Biden administration.
In recent weeks, Trump has intensified his xenophobic attacks on Somali Americans, including his long-running nemesis Ilhan Omar, a representative from Minnesota who is Somali American and came to the US as a refugee. He has said that Omar is “garbage” and said Somalia is “no good for a reason”.
When he’s not fucking kids one way, he’s fucking them another.
Jeez
As long as Elon can afford his 50th yacht and fund a robot army for himself, that’s the most important thing.
And he doesnt care for his own children so why would he care about anyone elses
Daycare is woke. Just another obvious win for the average American and MAGA voter.
/s
misread “average American and MAGA voter” as “average American anal MAGA voter”
makes sense because they are being fucked
So, the dog whistle here is: “Because of the BROWN people from SHITHOLE countries who are here ILLEGALLY anyway, no one can have nice things!”
Why are they allowed to do this
Are they even?
I was wondering why tiktok algorithm starting spewing tons of self proclaimed journalists confronting Somali daycare centers proving some kind of fraud. Felt very propagandish
Maybe people should think about how they will afford a child before having it…
You can work a forty hour work week, live responsibly, pay all your bills and taxes on time, etc, and still be below the poverty line in America. You can have kids while financially stable and get hurt or sick. You could have kids and your spouse could die.
This is a foolish, uneducated comment.
Isn’t foolish, it’s just common sense… if you can’t afford kids why will you have them in the first place?
I mean it’s 2026 isn’t like birth control was invented yesterday.
Ah, so you can’t read. You are uneducated.
You paid absolutely ZERO attention to the comment Ach made.
Your situation today is NOT guaranteed to be your situation tomorrow. You can afford kids today and get hit by a bus tomorrow, and now you can’t. Don’t pretend to be so thick you don’t understand how circumstances can change beyond one’s control.
I want to refine my comment.
He is a foolish, uneducated person.
Anyone else notice his instance name? It all makes sense.
Right. Except that half of pregnancies are unplanned… Not sure where that takes your reasoning.
What about the people who thought about it, budgeted the payments into those plans but now can’t afford the children because of the unforeseeable changes?
I don’t think the person you are responding to has nearly enough brain cells to comprehend such an obvious follow up question.
I mean yes they’re on a ‘men going their own way’ instance of Lemmy so you’re probably not wrong.
If people were to say that people shouldnt have kids because of most other unchosen life circumstances (for example, “you shouldnt have kids because you belong to a cultural/ethnic group that we dont like”), that sentiment would be seen as prejudice. If one was to go further and suggest that government policy should reflect this, that policy would be seen as an injustice. But if people say “you shouldnt have kids because you’re poor”, that’s somehow seen as wisdom, and advocating that government policy reflect this by cutting off support systems is somehow seen as an acceptable position to hold. Given that people dont exactly choose to be poor, I find this inconsistent.
In any case, kids are not merely some expensive luxury. They are both something that any society needs a certain number of to sustainably function (since obviously, a society simply cant exist without people, and people dont live forever), and which represent a significant amount of generally unpaid labor to raise. Not everyone needs to have them, and some people just arent good with them or dont want them, but when your society’s birthrate is below what is sustainable in the long run, telling some of the people that actually do want to have kids not to, because you expect those people to pay for everything themselves without help from the society that eventually needs those people, is a stupid policy, and not exactly fair. Why should everyone else get to avoid the consequences of an aging and declining society, but expect only those that choose to be parents to pay for that?
I’m not saying people shouldn’t have children, what I’m saying is people should think if they are capable of affording children before having them. Also, I’m not saying people’s lives don’t change so people shouldn’t have kids. IDK why here people put words in my mouth I never said.
Do you think people who can’t afford kids should have them? Just say that and that’s it.
Affordability changes can be swift. It’s entirely possible to face financial issues only after a baby arrives.
I think that everyone should afford to have kids, and if they cant, they need to be provided the resources do so.
Trump will literally starve children, to distract the American people, from the fact that he raped children. And that, is fucking wild
Gotta pay for the tax cuts for billionaires somehow.
Because that’s what a total asshole would do.
Anyway…all sorts of meat products have vegan food smeared all over them… Like ketchup! In your face everyone! You guys thought you were being funny. In reality we vegans have been trolling your ass the entire time! So don’t worry, you’re not as big an asshole as the guy taking childcare services away.
Not sure I understand the background here, but I was reading a thread on r/vegan and there was a buffet of food, with a portion of it marked “vegan”. It was mostly untouched, because there are lots of idiots that think “vegan? gross!”
The label was removed - not clear if that was intentional or accidental - and it got cleared out. Because it was just completely innocuous stuff, actually, but people have been programmed to think vegan is some kind of foreign concept. Labeling something that has not been tainted with animal products as “vegan”, even if it’s, say, a bunch of apple slices, causes people to steer clear.
Is that how the law was written for disbursements?
Rich people doing the math and trying to decide if literal slavery will be cheaper than Bread and Circuses
Project 2025. So that women will have to stay home.
Ain’t gonna go like they think it will.
Why won’t it? Because I think it will. Americans are complacent.
Women are not having babies anymore. And more and more of us are taking a very firm stand on this.
I dunno about that. Even if being a minor is a crime punishable by summary execution, people will still pop out more humans anyway. Nothing but complete infertility of the human race can stop that.
The statistics show that you’re mostly wrong. Yes of course some births will continue, but the birth rate has dropped and will continue to do so. Just look at Japan or South Korea to see how it looks.
But Generation Beta in the US will still be large enough to exceed Minimum Viable Population. And as a last resort, more young people can be shipped in.
But they aren’t …
Birth rate is lowest in history.
You do know that worldwide birthrates have dropped dramatically in the last few years, right? For example it is estimated that by 2050 China will have about 600 million people. There are still babies being made but not to the extent there should be this is why the birthrate is declining.
What do you mean by “should be”
Looks like “at replacement rate”, which is a little over 2 for humans overall since we’re a near-even split on sex and not every human born will have children.
China’s per-uterus replacement rate is probably substantially higher than other countries, due to an unintended effect of their “one child” policy.
They’ve known that their population is too huge for decades, and if they manage to drop down to USA-equivalent levels for their habitable size without become a failed state it’ll be the single greatest achievement of a communist state towards world peace.
Of course I do. But they haven’t fallen enough.
According to a recent research, the world’s population could reach 8.5 billion by 2050 before declining to 7 billion by 2100. By 2050, population growth might come to a halt.
2050? A shame I’ll probably be dead by then.
We should start feeding all the dead bodies to sharks.
The oceans would have so many sharks.
Sharks, as far as the eye can see. Ah. What a world that would be.
Hammerhead sharks. Nurse sharks. Great white sharks. Reef sharks. So many sharks.
Edit:
SHARKS!
Sharks?
Where?
They’re over here and over there, in fact they’re everywhere!
They’re in the rivers in the sea, why there’s sharks! Sharks! As far as the eye can so. Oh what a world that would be.
But Fred, I don’t see any sharks around, this might be in your head. Are confused? Are you concussed? Have you been fooled? Is this a ruse? Fred? Fred!?
They haven’t been born yet Mark, but look around this lovely park, it’s full of old ones, covered in gold bond, they’re not long for this earth, and then what is their worth?
Mark, mark, just think about the people in this park, their walkers gone without a song to sing with mouths or hearts. Should we bury them in stinking earth or burn them in Fort Worth?
There’s one solution that I see, it’s sharks, and mankind’s future’s there in shimmering seas.
When it’s my time to depart this earth, my body’s lost its only worth, so wait until the night is dark and throw me to the sharks.
The sharks, the sharks, they’ll feed on human flesh and breed and choke the rivers and the seas, this I ask my dearest Fred, that you do when I’m dead, the shark, the sharks, that’s the burial for me.
Honestly, I don’t wonder if the cons hope for this exact thing.
Meaning, they hope the tradwife types/the Quiverfull Movement, etc., will be popping out lots of (white) babies, while all of those other - and here, sub in whatever - feminists, liberals, LGBTQ, etc. - people will be convinced not to do so.
I still don’t think it will work out the way they think it would - first of all, it’s not like liberals don’t come from conservative backgrounds. Same for feminists and LGBTQ. Also, I just don’t think there are enough people that are going to take up fringe movements like tradwife and Quiverfull stuff to really counterbalance birth rates at a national level.
How would it? Just because they have an insane idea doesn’t mean A actually does lead to B.
This will definitely encourage more people to have kids.
OK but they were having the wrong KIND of kids
The US is just speed running Japan in the 90s so they can have a couple of lost decades and lose all significance in the world.
This is more than lost decades. America isn’t rec9vering from this.
y’all aren’t thinking depraved enough: when these families can’t afford to take care of their children, a soldier is born.
By design.
Ooh! Can we get the deflation too??
Deflation to wages? Sure.
Everything else will stay expensive.
