sofiechan home

How to buy fent with EBT in San Francisco

anon_qobo said in #5340 5d ago: received

Pablo Peniche and the SF10x boys have blown the whistle on SF's huge SNAP-to-cash fraud problem by which fent addicts get their dope paid for by the government. Basically it works like this:

> fent-walk down to the local farmer's market (heart of the city farmer's market) with your EBT card
> old chinatown ladies in masks and dark glasses approach
> "you sell you sell get in line"
> you stand in line to swipe your EBT card for up to 3x the value paper vouchers redeemable for "vegetables"
> thanks to Market Match (tm) and other sponsors
> go back to asian ladies and sell your 3x coupons for 50c on the dollar
> mission accomplished. go get your fix "yeah I buy dope, man"
> meanwhile the canto ladies sneak their coupons back into the system somewhere
> some highly profitable farm stand cashes them in for a fat check
> just another hard day at work for Gavin Newsom

Congrats to everyone involved.

https://x.com/PabloPeniche/status/2051401704395227410

Pablo Peniche and th received

anon_gija said in #5341 4d ago: received

Let's look at this from an NRx perspective. All of the above has long been well-known to San Francisco's Democratic establishment, and the San Francisco electorate is indifferent to it, as it is to fentanyl use and the homelessness industrial complex more generally. (Perhaps "indifferent" is imprecise: more like mildly supportive because something something social justice.) In other words, these things are viewed in San Francisco not as "scams" or "theft" but as the system working as it should.

In this concrete local context, exactly what is this sort of "exposing what we, but not they, consider bad things" supposed to accomplish? What energy does it generate for subsequent action? And what will be the locus of agency for that subsequent action?

referenced by: >>5342

Let's look at this f received

anon_twpy said in #5342 4d ago: received

>>5341

The DA was recalled, the 'progressive' majority in the BoD was replaced with a 'moderate' majority. We have a new 'moderate' mayor. Crime and disorder markedly decreased since hitting rock bottom post-covid, even though it's still unacceptably high. It's simply not true that the electorate is mildly supportive of SNAP fraud. 3/4 candidates for mayor ran on being moderates, and against disorder and crime. The electorate is supportive of social justice in the abstract, but don't often like how it is operationalized by the progressive clique. Frustratingly, they fall in line too easily, or otherwise vote for faux-change. The 'moderates' and 'abundance' libs don't confront the progressive clients. So there's plenty to criticize but your characterization of SF politics is just wrong.

referenced by: >>5344

The DA was recalled, received

anon_gija said in #5344 3d ago: received

>>5342
> ... but your characterization of SF politics ...

My characterization of SF politics is stated with rhetorical exaggeration to press a key point. I know all about the "moderates" in SF. The question is, how do they actually work out in practice? But more importantly, what are the possibilities for subsequent action on our part, in the wake of these exposures? Who will do what, to what end?

My characterization received

You must login to post.