So, it's ok to put money in a Roth IRA and let it grow tax-free until retirement age, denying the IRS of many thousands of dollars it "could" have received. But get a few hundred a month for a bit in food stamps, and you're evil?
If a billionaire moves some funds around and saves $50 million, he/she's very savvy with finances. But if you decide to reduce your retirement income by $5/mo so you'll qualify for a few hundred dollars worth of benefits (food stamps, free lunches, ACA subsidy, whatever)...you're morally bankrupt?
Hello??!!
If I qualify for a program, I'll have no moral issue with taking advantage of it. Even if I have to do some juggling of finances to qualify (i.e. I want a $5k cushion but food stamps has a limit of $2k in assets...dump just over $3k in a Roth IRA that I can easily withdraw the principle from, and boom, I qualify!). I only see it as morally wrong if you're lying to get benefits (this would include having $10k in cash that you don't report, getting paid "under the table", etc.).
So, I'll have no problem taking advantage of such programs in retirement. What I (hope I) won't do is depend on any program (except maybe ACA), or lie to get enrolled.
I also think they should drop the asset test, or at least make it a bit more reasonable. Keeping the asset limit low discourages saving (I've got $1,900 in the bank, just got paid $500, if my liquid assets go over $2,000 I'll lose $300+/mo in food stamps...hello $1,500 3D LED television!). Now, if someone has $750,000 in retirement accounts and has a 4% SWR of $30,000/yr...ok, maybe they don't need food stamps. So I may not have the answer...but I'm pretty sure it's somewhere between $2k and $750k in assets :)