The US Department of Agriculture has spent the past week notifying people that the country is (allegedly) overrun by individuals who are fraudulently claiming SNAP benefits, while (allegedly) driving luxury vehicles.

“In just ONE state, 14,000 individuals receiving SNAP benefits were driving LUXURY VEHICLES!” Secretary of Agriculture Brooke Rollins posted on X last week. The official USDA account made similar claims, which were then amplified by figures like Senator Ted Cruz and Senator Rand Paul.

Those numbers are questionable at best. For one thing, the report they come from doesn’t name the state where thousands of people are allegedly buying Ferraris while using government money to buy food. For another, that report doesn’t include any explanation of its methodology.

top 98 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 185 points 6 months ago* (28 children)

I'd rather a hundred people get benefits they "don't need" than have one person go without the support they require.

Not that it's even happening, but even if it were I really wouldn't care even a little bit. And furthermore, food stamp benefits are pathetic in the US.

  • source
  • hideshow 28 child comments
  • [–] 46 points 6 months ago (12 children)

    I remember some Republican chud or another saying they'd rather have innocent people imprisoned than let a single criminal walk free. Absolutely cannot fathom that mindset. Completely ghoulish.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] 23 points 6 months ago (8 children)

    I mean i can imagine it, it's just patently anti-American. Benjamin Franklin is widely quoted as saying "I'd rather let 100 guilty persons go, than imprison one innocent person."

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 19 points 6 months ago* (7 children)

    No, that was William Blackstone. Maybe Ben Franklin also quoted it, but he's not the one who was famous for it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 6 months ago (5 children)

    I feel like if someone quotes another person and then that quote becomes associated with them more thoroughly it would count as famously said. Doesn't stop the first person from being a thing just a matter of having less fame or relevance.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 6 months ago (4 children)

    In principle, maybe, but I'm fairly well-read and I have literally never heard of that quote being attributed to Ben Franklin until the earlier comment so I don't think that's the case here.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 6 months ago (2 children)

    Could be down to a bias of what you are exposed to, which can heavily influence what you hear. Anyways I think it was in one of his letters but I can't quite remember cause I just woke up.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 6 months ago (1 child)

    Apparently you're right: the other reply cites the letter.

    But still, Ben Franklin is famous for a ton of stuff, including actual published works full of quotable aphorisms like Poor Richard's Almanack (as opposed to some random private letter that was only published after-the-fact). Meanwhile, Blackstone is remembered mainly just for Commentaries on the Laws of England, of which the Blackstone's Ratio quote is part. Can't we let poor old Mr. Blackstone have this one thing?!

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago

    Frankly as a relatively well read Californian I hadn't heard of Mr. Blackstone. Probably a side effect of what I like to call the Atlantic Gap where American and European namely British cultures started to drift and also weirdly mirror each other up until about the 1860s or so. So the Brits can have their quote from Mr. Blackstone and those of us under the American Empire get Ben Franklin.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 6 months ago

    What they mean is innocent people who don't look like them. The moment there'd be any danger of them being locked up, they'd fine-tune their opinion to find a reason why it doesn't apply to their case.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 21 points 6 months ago

    They honestly waste more resources on gatekeeping and means testing than they would ever save, and it'd LITERALLY cost less to just provide the same baseline benefits to everyone

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 11 points 6 months ago (2 children)

    Yeah, why aren't we talking about all the fraud committed by billionaire oligarchs and trump and his inner circle?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 6 months ago (9 children)

    Like maybe 25 years back I remember a viral video of someone in Cali or something buying a lobster with his food stamps and everyone was freaking out. I dont know much of the american food stamps system but I'm pretty sure just blew his budget or something. Really its just proved some idiot was doing dumb stuff for likes before TikTok.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 6 months ago (8 children)

    Generally, any food product is going to be eligible. They give you a bank card that has your monthly funds on it. Prepared products such as from the delicatessen, alcohol, and cigarettes will be blocked but there's not much else to stop someone from letting their benefits add up and then wasting them on something like lobster.

    You don't want to make this entire thing onerous for everyone, so there will be some activity like this occassionally. It's not even something that would appear outside the statistical noise.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 17 points 6 months ago (7 children)

    I was on SNAP several years ago. We saved a small bit of the relatively meager amount every month for like 6 months, then had a really nice BBQ for my kids bday. In a vacuum, I'm sure someone would have lost their shit watching me spend like $150 on steaks and burgers and sides using my SNAP card.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 6 months ago

    The only reason thats any different than just saving your own regular money for it and blowing that on the exact same thing is the optics.

    Like if you get the bennies, its not like people know that every single time you buy stuff, only when you use that specific payment method

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 6 months ago (2 children)

    My ex and I were on food stamps at one point so I hope that my message didn’t come across as spam on those who use them. I was trying to explain to who I thought was a non US person who was not familiar with how it works.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 6 months ago

    I think its really cool it rolls over like that. My old boss losses his crap if he sees the old save on food to splurge later. "If the peasants can survive on less than they should" mentality. Bloke also said ppl should feel more shame on the system and the cards was bypassing that shame. Can really feel the privilege from that guy. Ugh

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 6 months ago

    Fuck it. I'd rather give free meals to everyone than pay one fucking penny towards the missiles we hurled into an elementary school. People gotta get their fucking priorities straight.

    Enjoy that BBQ, I hope you have long lasting happy and guilt-free memories about that day. Money well spent in my mind.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 7 points 6 months ago

    Yeah, nobody commits that level of petty fraud if their life is going well.

    If you want food stamps badly enough to jump through the hoops required, then that should qualify you by default.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 35 points 6 months ago (4 children)

    Dude, it seems everything the GOP claims lacks evidence.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
    [–] 30 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (3 children)

    I know someone on SNAP benefits. She drives a 25 year old Buick Lesabre with over 200,000 miles on it . Technically it’s a “luxury car,” which she got for $800.

    Their stats are bullshit, spun in such a way as to churn up resentment towards the poorest , so the wealthiest can bilk more money from the middle.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 6 months ago (2 children)

    I drove a '98 Lasabre for most of the 2010s. Absolutely loved it: parts were ready to find, could repair it myself at home, and the dashboard had so many weird sliders and knobs that it felt like piloting a TARDIS.

    Anyone enjoying that kind of luxury should be starving to death. It's just not fair for someone to have both a beautiful, faux-wood paneled dashboard and three meals per day.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 6 months ago (1 child)

    A Buick LeSabre was my first car. It was the 1989 model. Red "velvet" interior. That thing was sexy af

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 4 points 6 months ago

    Same, we called it the boat and referred to the backseat as the couch. It was defeated by a young sapling in a low-speed head-on collision unfortunately. I wish theyd make something like that again but its probably past its time.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 59 points 6 months ago* (13 children)

    luxury vehicles

    What do you want to bet they’re talking about poorly maintained 15+ year old lexuses and 30+ year old bmws? Just kidding, it’s most likely entirely unfounded.

  • source
  • hideshow 13 child comments
  • [–] 25 points 6 months ago* (3 children)

    They're trying to bring back Welfare Queens. I'm sure almost everyone's forgotten, but this was the kind of accusation that led to Welfare being viewed so negatively and eventually being renamed entirely.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 6 months ago (1 child)

    Ironically, it's middle-class suburban homeowners who are the real welfare queens. They may not get the actual government program called "welfare," but they get so many other kinds of subsidies for their lifestyle that the stereotypical urban renter single mom is probably subsidizing them instead of the other way around!

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 4 points 6 months ago*

    I think Walmart takes the cake. They purposely dont give a lot of hours or benefits so their employees end up on SNAP who then use SNAP at Walmart.

    The government is essentially paying their employees wages to then be spent at Walmart.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 42 points 6 months ago (8 children)

    I'd go even further and say that they are classifying vehicles themselves as a luxury, not even the make or model.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 35 points 6 months ago (2 children)

    The good old “oh you’re poor? How come you have a phone then?”

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 child)

    Yeah that argument is so ridiculous.

    You can buy lightly used phones on Swappa for a large discount even when we are talking about flagship phones. There are also situations where someone could be poor but have enough credit to get a phone financed with monthly payments that they can afford.

    There are pre paid MVNOs in the US where you can get unlimited talk, text, and on device data, that also includes unlimited hotspot at fairly decent speeds (plus there are ways of bypassing hotspot speed caps, TetherFuseNet is an example open source app) for less than 30$ a month taxes and fees included. For about 30$ a month or so plans exist with QCI priority that are the same priority as premium post paid plans. I have known people who have used their unlimited hotspot as their only internet at home.

    Just because some of these people making these types of comments may have a high cell phone bill does not mean everyone else does.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 6 months ago

    I think it’s because a lot of people are like Mother Theresa. They’re of the belief that if you’re poor, you should suffer, because not doing so would be a moral failing. Being poor makes you a bad person.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 6 months ago (3 children)

    You want more than ONE door on your car?!?!

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 81 points 6 months ago (2 children)

    This is literally just the '80s "welfare queen" lie.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 6 months ago

    We need to get rid of means testing. The largest money line for any government programs is the army of people making sure Americans need the program. People that don't need government programs usually don't use them. So hiring someone to make sure a wealthy person doesn't cash in $150 worth of food stamps.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 25 points 6 months ago (1 child)

    “In just ONE state, 14,000 individuals receiving SNAP benefits were driving LUXURY VEHICLES!” Secretary of Agriculture Brooke Rollins posted on X last week

    It should be noted that in some states (most? No idea), the value of your car and house don’t count against your application for food stamps. Which makes perfect sense when you consider that you would have to be a fucking moron to sell your home or car to eat, since after you eat you either have nowhere to sleep or no way to get to work independently. A “high value” (read: not a shitcan) car can also be more dependable than a junker, may vary by brand of course.

    Anyway, anyone who has ever wanted to police food stamps is going to hell.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 23 points 6 months ago (2 children)

    Watch they are going to fight to increase restrictions on SNAP benefit "handouts", but a ton of rich people fraudulently took out COVID loans, actually bought cars, never paid them back, and there is legit evidence but they were never prosecuted.

    The new slogan for America should be: Protect the fellow rich, beat the poor down into dust.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 22 points 6 months ago (2 children)

    It also doesn’t define “LUXURY VEHICLE”

    The banged up crossover SUV that came with CarPlay and OnStar so your insurance and the government can track your every move could be considered a LUXURY because CONNECTIVITY

    Guys, poor people are forced to buy the only things we’ll sell to them. How come they never try not being poor? Lazy!

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 20 points 6 months ago

    I got a call from the food bank thanking me for donating. She said the demand is shocking now. They don't have enough. She was all "don't worry we're just calling to thank you, not to ask for more, just keeping you updated." I shudder to think how much worse it will get by the time these gouls are through. I'll keep donating while I can, I suggest everyone else do the same. Donating money goes the farthest because the banks have deals with supermarkets and stuff.

  • source
  • [–] 19 points 6 months ago (6 children)

    I would rather 5 people abuse it than 1 person go hungry, but maybe I'm just civilized?

    Either way we should attempt to curtail abuse, but with credit+debit+tax returns we could effectively combat egregious cases of abuse.

  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 6 months ago (5 children)

    Either way we should attempt to curtail abuse

    Should we? Sometimes it seems like the bureaucracy needed to do that costs more than the "waste" it saves. Frankly, I'm inclined to just ditch the means-testing entirely, declare that it isn't "wrong" for people who aren't poor to also use it, and (as you alluded to) make it up on the back end via income taxes.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 6 months ago

    this could also massively boost overall public health because if everyone automatically got SNAP, they'd have no incentive to try to save money by buying shitty cheap convenience food

    a lot of people would be able to spend the extra few dollars to get the frozen dinner with more vegetables, the fresh (cold) deli sandwich, the whole grain higher fiber options, etc.

    and since you can't use it on takeout/restaurants, a bunch of people are now more motivated to cook at home with their free food money (even if the cooking is just heating up prepared stuff that's often healthier than fast food)

    after 10 years or so we'd probably save billions in public health costs alone

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 0 points 6 months ago (3 children)

    I think you would have to be a moron to not advocate for the curtailing of obvious abuse, or utilizing resources from other departments to assist with enforcement, or just have thorough screening that blocks abuse before it occurs.

    I stand by my statement.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago (2 children)

    So let me get this straight: you think spending more money overall to provide aid to fewer people is A-OK, and yet I'm somehow the moron for wanting to save money and help more people?

    That's some hateful fucking bullshit on your part. You should be ashamed of yourself.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago (1 child)

    I'm sorry I called you a moron via the transitive property, I meant that more like its obvious, I realize that was a mistake.

    You're making a lot of choices for me and putting words in my mouth, and I don't think our conversation will be productive from this point because you are not even considering my statements.

    I hope you have an excellent day.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago*

    There are lots of things that seem "obvious," but are actually wrong. The idea that you have to means-test aid to avoid "abuse" (according to some presupposed definition of "abuse" that ought to itself be debatable, BTW) may or may not be one of them, but what is definitive is that you'd have to be a moron to not even be willing to think about it first.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 18 points 6 months ago

    Go after the real welfare queens. The Walton family, Elon Musk, the oil and gas industry. Big corporate farming. Ending subsidies for oil and gas alone would pay for Medicare for all

  • source
  • [–] 18 points 6 months ago (1 child)

    I feel like "luxury vehicles" is the same buzzword as "assault weapons." A meaningless buzzword to evoke emotion.

    What's a "luxury vehicle?" What's the cutoff? Are they in a nicer Honda or a Lotus? Seeing as how this country's citizens are famously one illness or ouchie away from financial ruin, did they purchase this vehicle before or after needing assistance? Are they still making payments or is it paid off?

    Facts and hard criteria or GTFO with this nonsense.

    It's literally just trying to goad the struggling to pull the rug from the destitute, while the rich pop their champaign and laugh. It's class warfare rhetoric to take the heat off the Epstein class, and anybody falling for it is a damned fool.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 17 points 6 months ago* (1 child)

    The Tax Evasion and Avoidance of billionaires is many times the entire budget of this kind of thing.

    You could literally make up for 100% fraud in things like food stamp by making somebody like Elon Musk or Jeff Bezos pay the same effective tax rate as everybody else.

    Even if these claims from the far-right of widespread fraud and abuses in social security were true, they would still be like distracting people from a raging forest fire by waving a sparkler.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 16 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

    Businesses not paying workers fair wages like Walmart forcing 1.6 million by themselves to take public assistance like food support is going to effect a ton of people and be a huge draw on the system compared to any other fraud on the system.

    26.8% of 41.7 million is 11 million people. How much do you want to bet they can't find 11 hundred people committing fraud against the system like employers are.

    https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2025/11/14/what-the-data-says-about-food-stamps-in-the-us/

    Tax payers subsidizing corporations to further exploit tax payers

  • source
  • [–] 16 points 6 months ago

    The Gang of Pedos has never let something as trivial as evidence guide their world view. Also not big fans of consent.

  • source
  • [–] 15 points 6 months ago

    Even if you had 14,000 SNAP recipients driving “luxury vehicles” in every state that is still less than 2% of all beneficiaries nation wide.

    Food assistance keeps people productive. Even a capitalist should advocate for it.

  • source
  • [–] 15 points 6 months ago

    The real welfare queens are projecting again.

  • source
  • [–] 14 points 6 months ago

    Someone driving a hand me down 90s Lincoln worth $2500 isn't exactly what I'd call luxurious.

  • source
  • [–] 13 points 6 months ago

    Better give the orange dotard regime an extra $600mil they don’t need nor even requested for the ballroom bunker, just to show the peasants where our true priorities lie.

  • source
  • [–] 13 points 6 months ago* (2 children)

    An old friend from college is now trying to live on $1800 a month from Social Security--in Southern California. She just found out, she will get $24 a month in SNAP, and she had to wade through bureaucracy even for that.

    Keep the poors poor, working shit jobs or kill them off if they can't work. That's a Christian Nation, puh-raise JEE-zuz-ah!

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 6 months ago

    she qualifies for MEDI-CAL, so it would be free healthcare for her. since shes making less the maximum for medi-caid in california. shes pretty close though, i assume shes aiming for that 1800 in order to stay with medi-cal.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 13 points 6 months ago (1 child)

    Republicans claim a lot of things without proof, and the illiterate masses eat it up.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 6 points 6 months ago

    There is a blatant AI post going around of a MAGA dad standing in front of a bathroom and refusing to let a caricature of a trans person in, so he can “protect his daughter”. It is very obviously AI, people in the background have melting faces, and a baby stroller is levitating off the ground with extra wheels.

    Nevertheless, conservatives are rallying behind this “brave father” who doesn’t exist, praising him for keeping out the “trans person”, who also doesn’t exist.

    When it is pointed out to them that the photo is AI generated and that none of it actually happened, I’ve seen several make the argument that since they believed it is real, that’s enough proof that it did happen.

    So, we’re at a point now where making up a story and clearly lying is somehow evidence in and of itself.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 12 points 6 months ago (1 child)

    There's also no knowing what folks had when the floor fell out from under them. That Escalade might have been half paid off when they lost their source of income. Conservatives've been on this same bullshit for decades.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 4 points 6 months ago

    "He obviously took advantage of the system or did something illegal like selling drugs. Everyone knows it's systematically impossible for a minority to get ahead on their own"

    Maybe a little too on the nose, but all their arguments are some variation of that.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 12 points 6 months ago (2 children)

    And if there is widespread food stamp fraud I am willing to bet 1k that it comes from Republicans.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 6 months ago*

    A decade back I had a coworker tell me about her white upper middle class brother in law serving time in prison for benefit fraud. I literally cannot stress to you enough how many of these people think it's ok to lie on government forms to get more money.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 12 points 6 months ago

    When I lived in a poor area I saw a ton of luxury vehicles but they were a decade older than most non-luxury cars and were beat to shit. I'd believe the numbers but I don't think they say what this idiot is implying.

    Its demoralizing that this type of messaging resonates with such a large portion of Americans, honestly.

  • source
  • [–] 12 points 6 months ago

    It's a fucking excuse to make fuck-you-got-mine policies.

  • source
  • [–] 32 points 6 months ago*

    The "fraud" they're talking about is Black people being allowed to access food.

  • source
  • [–] 11 points 6 months ago

    Musk is not a problem for them or the other 88 companies dodging taxes last year right.

  • source
  • [–] 11 points 6 months ago

    Republicans claim widespread food stamp fraud. What's missing? Evidence Food stamp fraud.

    I fixed the headline.

  • source
  • load more comments
    view more: next ›