this post was submitted on 27 Aug 2023
146 points (100.0% liked)

Politics

10256 readers
1 users here now

In-depth political discussion from around the world; if it's a political happening, you can post it here.


Guidelines for submissions:

These guidelines will be enforced on a know-it-when-I-see-it basis.


Subcommunities on Beehaw:


This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 15 points 2 years ago (2 children)

I don't have an issue with the fact that the church decides whom they help.

But that the state has so little in the way of social security that they instead have to forward people to a church instead, that's crazy.

3rd world country.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 2 years ago (1 children)

The LDS essentially owns the state of Utah, this issue is by design

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 years ago

Agreed - working as intended, and it's not just LDS. I'm in FL and churches here have been opposing publicly funded safety nets for my whole life, in favor of voluntary, often church-led, donations.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 2 years ago (1 children)

They appear to have set it up that way on purpose.

A single mother of one here is eligible for $399 a month in state assistance, and only if she has a net income of $456 a month or less.

Utah doesn’t do more for those in need in part because a contingent of its lawmakers, the overwhelming majority of whom are Latter-day Saints themselves, assume the church is handling the poverty issue; they also are loath to raise taxes to do the state’s share, a review of Utah’s legislative history demonstrates.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 years ago

us$10k/year

I doubt there is anywhere in the US where that is an adequate amount to pay for food and shelter. That is monstrous.