There’s the unreliable and almost nonexistent public transit system.
Depending on weather and terrain, there’s the always popular walking uphill both ways in the rain/snow option.
This is Texas. In Summer. So it’s walk uphill both ways in 120 degree heat. Without a water break.
15 grand? So if you’re poor and need benefits, you are bound to drive a piece of shit? Why, it’s almost as if Texas Republicans are trying to keep poor people poor.
Three years ago I bought a new Chevy Equinox. This is not a Mercedes, not a Cadillac, not a Corvette. It is a run of the mill, middle of the road vehicle. It cost 40 grand, three years ago.
I’ve said it before, and as they keep demonstrating it, I’ll say it again:
Republicans are shitty people.
ETA: You know those Ford F150s that all those Texas Cowboys drive? They start at 42 grand. (The fancy ones start at well over a hundred grand.)
Well, it’s 22 grand now, but 15 grand in 2001 when the law was first passed.
I think the idea is probably more that they don’t really like the idea that people would be paying a car note, and applying for public assistance at the same time.
And I can’t say I disagree. If you’re in dire enough straits to need public assistance when you also have a car note, I don’t like the idea that my tax money would be subsidizing a nice ride for you, when you could drive a shittier car and pay more of your own share, and that money would be available for others who need it more.
The nominal dollar value is probably their threshold for identifying functional vs. frivolous in cars. Where they came up for that, I don’t know.
But dammit, this is FOOD assistance! It’s not like this is cash that they can use to buy booze and lotto cards! It’s freakin’ GROCERIES. Grrrrr. SCREW GREG ABBOTT-- and his ilk!
I see. It’s the whole “Why do they have smartphones if they’re so poor?”
(I’d bet that the benefits cannot be used to make a car payment.)
The entire point is to penalize poverty.
One: The car was certainly bought before the need for assistance occurred.
2: A shittier car will be more likely to break down and repairs won’t be affordable. It likely gets worse gas mileage thus driving up the monthly bill.
3. If you don’t like subsidizing a decent car for a poor person, then you should be up in arms about million/billionaires demanding and getting massive tax breaks and tax shelters that they sure as hell don’t need.
Emphasis added.
$22K, eh? You and I have vastly different ideas about what constitutes a nice ride.
This policy is “know your place” cruelty, period.
Re the title of this thread. No thank you.
But the assistance has nothing to do with the car! This is about FOOD STAMPS!
Story:
Texas lowers barrier for food stamps, but many still won’t qualify
Have you checked say… Carmax lately?
Within 75 miles of me, I could get a 2014 Ford Focus with 16k miles for 17k. Or a 2021 Nissan Sentra with 36k miles on it for $22k.
Either of those are perfectly adequate for anyone. And I really don’t see why the taxpayers need to subsidize something nicer for someone.
That’s the point- if someone gets a 27k car and applies for food stamps, the public is effectively subsidizing that car purchase., with the expectation that a cheaper car might make someone less reliant on public food assistance.
If anything it’s punitive toward making stupid decisions, and I don’t have a problem with that.
Having a car note only means that you took a loan for the vehicle. It says nothing about the quality of the vehicle itself.
Are you reading any of my posts? Taxpayers are not being asked to subsidize cars. This is about food stamps-- groceries.
That is really a stretch!
You think people are saying “hey, I’m going on food stamps, maybe I should buy a brand new car!” It’s the other way around - people buy a car when things are going well and then they’re stuck when it turns around.
“Whaddaya mean, stuck?” Well, what would you call it if you’re sitting on a car worth $30K with $40K left on the loan?
Too bad, so sad? Hey, just roll that $10K into that 2014 Ford Focus, so now you’re paying on a $27K loan for a car worth $17K, probably with a longer term and higher interest rate, given that the person now needs food aid. You’d be upside down on that car until the day it dies. I’d guess there are a lot of buy-here-pay-here car lots that are thrilled to have this provision in law.
Whoa, I take it back. Those are sweet, sweet rides. That’s, like, Hollywood-level wheels…
What I’m saying is that the state government is looking at it as a whole and saying that if you’ve got 500 for a car note, you should only be paying 350 and putting the other 150 toward your own food, and refusing to subsize that car to whatever the food stamps cost per month.
I sort of doubt that’s the main situation that is causing people to be over that threshold. And anyway, if you’re financially precarious enough that you might even consider food stamps when times are bad, financing a 40k+ car is irresponsible, and again not something I’m interested in subsidizing as a rule.
They’re perfectly fine for anyone. Certainly not shitty anyway.
You can be in quite a stable financial position, and then lose your job and, hey presto, you need food stamps whether you have a car loan or not. Does the food stamp formula even look at what loan payments (car/credit card/house) you might have?
I doubt it; I’m guessing the car value threshold is a very rough proxy for that. They do look at your assets though, minus your home. You can’t have more than $5000 in non-home assets to be eligible.
And a “2014 Ford Focus with 16k miles for 17k. Or a 2021 Nissan Sentra with 36k miles on it for $22k” would be above or below that limit?