It would take a heart of stone not to laugh
/TikTok Filled With Videos of People Threatening to Loot Grocery Stores
David Strom:
It would be easier to empathize with these people if they were not a bunch of entitled jerks who view looting as a natural part of life.
Instead, what we are learning is that among the 40 million people who get SNAP benefits through EBT cards, a whole lot of them are worthless, entitled people who need to get off their asses and go to work.
TikTok is filled with videos of SNAP "beneficiaries," most of whom are obese, explaining how they intend to loot grocery stores to stock up on junk food for the month of November because the government isn't going to fill their EBT cards in the month of November.
Man says people need to get their ski masks ready and start coordinating how they are going to loot places like Walmart. pic.twitter.com/wnbwRVi4Uc
— EBT of TikTok (@EBTofTikTok) October 28, 2025
Woman asks “what did you think was gonna happen “ when food stamps get cut off in cities like Philadelphia.
— EBT of TikTok (@EBTofTikTok) October 28, 2025
“Play with me.” pic.twitter.com/36PwwuDh0U
This woman is confused why people are mad over people getting EBT, says it’s “It's basically like free money. It's like imaginary money because the money was never printed in the first place.”
— EBT of TikTok (@EBTofTikTok) October 28, 2025
“Digital air money… hypothetical money makes you upset?” pic.twitter.com/920jc1MqbH
This lady get's millions of views bragging about how easily she steals since her EBT got canceled.
— Gunther Eagleman™ (@GuntherEagleman) October 28, 2025
It wasn't even due to the Schumer Shutdown.
They're making it clear that theft is acceptable when they do it, no matter the status of EBT and SNAP.pic.twitter.com/80He2cdO7A
Strom offers many more examples at the link, but these are sufficient to make his point. Which is:
SNAP is sold to Americans as providing essential nutrition to struggling families, ensuring that nobody, especially children, is forced to go hungry when they hit a rough patch. A program that fills that genuinely necessary social purpose is one that most of us could easily support. One mark of civilization is ensuring that nobody starves in the streets, unless it's in San Francisco or Portland.
But let's face it: SNAP, for the most part, doesn't serve that purpose at all. Sure, it provides aid to people in need, but when 40 million people are grabbing government benefits, many of whom are able-bodied and capable of working, the program's purpose has been hijacked.
The argument that millions of people are going hungry in America, and the only thing that stands between mass starvation and a socialist utopia is the willingness of people to shovel money at the poors is, frankly, a lie. Instead, what we have managed to create is an underclass that has contempt for the people who work hard to support them.
Decent people who can do so should help those genuinely in need, but "need" and "want" are two different things. Food, clothing, housing, goods, and services are the products of labor, and just expecting others to do labor so that you don't have to is immoral.
Not only immoral, but dignity-destroying. And as you can see from these videos, dignity is not something the entitled exude.
Social insurance systems, like most societal functions, only work well when there is a basic level of social trust. The Nordic countries were seen as a model, but they were always the exception to the rule because these societies, until recently, were essentially homogeneous, and the expectation was that over one's lifetime, everybody contributed more than they took out. Social trust was through the roof.
But in societies where social insurance programs are seen as a good scam by many, they no longer serve a purpose people are willing to pay for. Nobody likes being taken advantage of, nor should they.
…. Liberals tell us that this is the price we pay to ensure that people who truly are deserving of our aid and compassion get the help they need, or that putting in place checks and balances to ensure that people on welfare aren't unnecessarily shamed. Both of those are lies. If welfare were restricted to people in real need, few people would object or look down on the recipients.