• bingrazer@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    25
    ·
    1 day ago

    I think they’re asking about the government’s refusal to use the money for SNAP they were given in case of a shutdown. I believe it would just be sitting in a bank account somewhere.

      • 667@lemmy.radio
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        1 day ago

        In the era before the average net worth of a Congress person was in the tens of millions, it made sense because it prevented them from their wages being held hostage.

        • birdwing@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          21 hours ago

          Except it doesn’t make sense as even back then, they could still mooch profit off such a stop.

          Plus, if they wanted such a STOP to stop, they’d not feel the pressure themselves. Sure, on the other hand it makes them less prone to corruption in theory, but if they already are rich then why would we even need to make politicians even richer?

    • Artisian@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      1 day ago

      Thank you! In that case I’m moderately certain that the government needs to go into debt to cover it, and is prevented from gaining more debt during the shutdown.

      I am not sure that’s literally true for SNAP benefits, but I think this is true ‘overall’; this is the reason for stopping most the things they stop.

      Edit: I do want to emphasize that I don’t know for sure where the money in this case is.