Administration priorities are full’a poop

Diaper gap?
Diaper. frikkin’. gap ?!!!!

An official White House email alerts the public that while diapers “are basic necessities … nearly one in three families struggle to afford them for their babies.” These families, the email says, are forced to choose among food, heat and diapers. “That’s a choice no family should have to make.”

The email directed recipients to a White House Web page — whitehouse.gov/diapergap* — wherein Cecilia Munoz, director of the White House Domestic Policy Council, laments that while the lucky few can buy diapers by the truckload at Costco or order them for cheap on Amazon, “the benefits of the new economy aren’t available to all Americans.”

And, shock and horror, there is “no federal assistance for purchasing diapers.” [story]

Surely, surely this program deserves a clever name of its own.
Any ideas?
(What? Nah, schitzstaffel is tooo icky.)

Bernie's waaay ahead on this, though (BTF): »

(I don’t use the word gratuitously, but this isn’t my word, and it isn’t gratuitous.)
_________
* Oh, yeah, it’s a real US Gov’t link.
Cultural ref


^ …forced to choose among food, heat and diapers.

Food’s more expensive due to the gov’t ethanol requirement.
Heat’s more expensive due to gov’t environmental regulations.
Hey, I have an idea how to make diapers easier to afford.

16 Comments!

  1. Fawkes News (Choose Cruz or Lose)
    Posted March 11, 2016 at 12:24 pm |

    Soooooo… that’s free college, free weed, free tampons… and free diapers.

    Anything else?

  2. MikeG
    Posted March 11, 2016 at 12:32 pm |

    How many of these parents who claim to be unable to afford diapers have cell phones? Oh, right. those are free too now.

  3. Daemon
    Posted March 11, 2016 at 1:30 pm |

    This is one instance where socialism would actually have a chance. An opt-in program, provided at cost, would deliver a cloth diaper pick-up and delivery service (proven to be much more affordable than disposables) which reduces the cost to parents and vastly reduces the landfill waste.

    There would be an increase in sewage, of course (without hard numbers, I’d give a ballpark figure of +10%). But the biggest obstacle is Procter & Gamble, maker of both Luvs and Pampers. They would stand to lose a lot. Their lobbyists will make sure that nothing like this ever happens, and that anyone who dares suggest it is derided as a socialist crank.

  4. Posted March 11, 2016 at 1:41 pm |

    ^ Why can’t these people wash their own diapers?

  5. DougM (quiet, keeps to himself, kind of a loner, nobody thought he’d do anything like this)
    Posted March 11, 2016 at 2:13 pm |

    forced to choose among food, heat and diapers

    Food’s more expensive due to the gov’t ethanol requirement.
    Heat’s more expensive due to gov’t environmental regulations.
    Hey, I have an idea how to make diapers easier to afford.

    (What? Yeah, I should’a made that comment up top. Mebbe I will. Yeah, I will.)

  6. Daemon
    Posted March 11, 2016 at 3:04 pm |

    ^ bo1921:

    1. Lack of opportunities for buy-in. Where does one buy cloth diapers nowadays? Not the grocery store– there’s much more money in disposables.

    2. Convenience. People are lazy. And diapers smell. No way people are going to put up with that for a couple of days until there’s enough laundry for a load. And before you say “Hamper, dude!” I’ll say nobody likes to smell shit twice. Especially two-day-old shit.

  7. PeggyU
    Posted March 11, 2016 at 4:46 pm |

    Hey wait. I thought we were paying for free birth control. What gives?

  8. ZZMike
    Posted March 11, 2016 at 4:58 pm |

    DougM #5 hits another bullseye.

    Looking at it from another angle: “Oh no! There’s something people can’t afford! ! ! We have to do something about it.”

  9. Posted March 11, 2016 at 5:28 pm |

    ^6 Daemon
    Sorry. Lazy people deserve to smell shit – Hamper or not.

  10. accipiterNW
    Posted March 11, 2016 at 6:05 pm |

    If they are Administration approved diapers*, maybe some of the parent(s) might read them.

    * (diapers with copies of the Constitution printed on them)

  11. dick, not quite dead white guy
    Posted March 11, 2016 at 6:44 pm |

    Do while (food, heat and diapers too expensive)
    1. keep yer knees closed, yer dick in yer pants, until you marry.
    2. Once married, don’t squirt out so many babies.
    3. One of you stay home & potty train the kids. You won’t need so many diapers.
    4. Stinky diapers – If you’re careful, you can wash diaper out in toilet without stopping up the toilet. Then do laundry more often.
    5. Or don’t have so many kids.
    If (too many stinky diapers or can’t afford diapers) goto 1

  12. Ol Crank
    Posted March 11, 2016 at 7:58 pm |

    food, heat and diapers

    but ya do have a big screen TV or 3, x-box, cellphone iPhone, hi-dollar sneakers and name-brand jogging suits…

  13. SondraK, Queen of SondraKistan
    Posted March 11, 2016 at 10:09 pm |

    If you can’t afford to feed and shelter your children that you choose to have then you shouldn’t have to worry about affording fucking diapers because you shouldn’t be having a child in the first place.

  14. mojo
    Posted March 11, 2016 at 10:59 pm |

    Your lack of ability to scrounge rags is not my problem, pal.

  15. PeggyU
    Posted March 11, 2016 at 11:58 pm |

    Cheaper to provide chastity belts.

  16. TheOldMan
    Posted March 13, 2016 at 8:45 pm |

    My better 98.2% and I used both: cloth around the house, disposables when traveling. Dunk the cloth one in the toilet and put it in the hamper. We did cheat by using a service. It never occurred to us that “someone” else was supposed to pay for this. OTOH we do not have cable tv, fancy cellphones, $200 sneakers, and the average age of our cars is 19 yrs with avg mileage of 150k.