With unemployment low and wages rising, the struggle for basic necessities like food should be easing. But those on the front lines of feeding the hungry say they are seeing the opposite.
    • girlfreddy@lemmy.world
      373·
      9 months ago

      And still Congress didn’t pass a wealth tax, or close at least some tax loopholes only the rich can access.

      It’s the same damn thing in Canada as well. And it sucks.

      Unless gov’ts get off their asses and DO the things that need to be done, revolution will come … and they won’t like the outcome at all.

      • Skyrmir@lemmy.worldEnglish
        20·
        9 months ago

        No one will like the outcome. Revolution almost never results in a better living standard in the lifetime of those involved.

        That’s not to say it’s the worst course of action, just recognizing the down sides.

      • cmbabul@lemmy.world
        11·
        9 months ago

        I’m convinced the only reason one hasn’t already started is because revolutions, while often very necessary agents of change and herald a lot of good for the future, are both risky and dangerous for everyone involved and in the back of our heads keep hoping things will change for the better without violence. Unfortunately it’s become increasingly and maddeningly obvious that will not ever happen.

        • treefrog@lemm.ee
          9·
          9 months ago

          It hasn’t happened because the people in power have learned the lessons of history and have been manipulating the masses for a very long time.

      • protist@mander.xyzEnglish
        9·
        9 months ago

        The US Congress will never pass a wealth tax without a Democratic majority in both chambers, and enough of a buffer to make Senators like Manchin and Sinema not matter

  • tsonfeir@lemm.ee
    1517·
    9 months ago

    monthly grocery bill that now tops $2,400 for her family of seven

    I’m not saying the article is wrong, but if you have seven children, you did this to yourself

    • cybervseas@lemmy.worldEnglish
      221·
      9 months ago

      With so many states cutting off access to abortion, family planning is getting even more difficult.

    • protist@mander.xyzEnglish
      171·
      9 months ago

      A family of 7 implies five six children

      Edit: It says her husband was deported to Mexico and she’s now a single mom

    • Cocodapuf@lemmy.world
      41·
      9 months ago

      So it said “family of seven”, which probably means 5 children and 2 adults, or just as likely, 4 children, 2 adults and 1 elderly parent.

      The really weird thing about this is that even without making any sort of moral judgement, the numbers still don’t add up. For example, I have a family of 6 (and only 2 of those are my kids), and our grocery bill is between $150 and $200 a week (about $700 a month). How do you get to $2400 a month? What are you feeding them? Are you ordering takeout ever day? Because that would be stupid.

      • girlfreddy@lemmy.world
        2·
        9 months ago

        If you read the article it states that her husband was deported back to Mexico, so it’s her and 6 kids.

        You also don’t know if she lives in a food desert where a single grocery store could charge whatever prices it wants because there’s no competition.