Good point. I’ve read news stories that claim Americans have a low, and at times even a negative, savings rate, but I don’t think I’ve ever read a detailed account about it.
This story claims about a third of Americans have less than $1,000 saved for retirement.
This link says the average family has $3,800 in the bank. So the cushion is greater than I thought.
But still small. Less than a pay check for the median household.
A neighbor of mine is something of an urban farmer - he has chickens and a few years ago got a grant that allowed him the funds to plant vegetable gardens in empty lots, while paying local kids a little over minimum wage over the summer to help him maintain the vegetable gardens, sell at the big farmers market and deliver produce to local restaurants and stores. He distributed leaflets to houses all over the city and set up a FB page to let people know they could help themselves to the produce - what was going to be left over would go to the farmers market or to the restaurants and markets. That was the plan, anyway. This is a poor region with a high percentage of residents reliant on their Bridge cards.
That program died from lack of interest after two years. He had acres of produce: corn, bell peppers, chard, okra, broccoli, tomatoes, squash, basil, beans, cucumbers, you name it. The kids worked their hearts out.
They rotted. Totally. Nobody, absolutely nobody, took advantage of those lots full of free vegetables.
You’re missing the forest for the trees.
The point is not individual taxes, the point is we all benefit form government programs and services. All of us. Why distinguish poor people as having extra conditions and restrictions irrelevant to the aim of the program except that you’re treating poverty as something to be punished and the poor as lesser citizens?
I can’t say for sure, but I know the average American in poverty isn’t at that point. As has been pointed out, there’s plenty of people in the US who live in poverty and eat nutritious food.
That sucks. But I’m not defending the system, I’m arguing food deserts are bunk.
Again, I agree the system is dysfunctional. And again, I’ll restate my conviction that if my financial situation was moving in a direction that meant I’d have to exit the system, I know what choice I would make.
There is no government intervention in selling specifically healthy food to poor people. It’s ludicrous to claim otherwise.
Yes, there’s zoning laws and laws regarding food safety. Those laws apply to Taco Bell just as much as it applies to a bodega that sells tons of tomatoes and beans.
They were trained by their culture to eat shitty foods. I’ve been saying that throughout. People have the choice not to eat the food their culture taught them to eat.
I think a taste for salty, fatty and sweet foods are hardwired into people. It makes sense from an evolutionary standpoint. But, the hardwiring isn’t a death sentence.
As I’ve said, I’m not looking for an answer to obesity. I’m saying food deserts are nonsense.
The vending machines have candy bars because people want candy bars. If people were craving carrots and celery on the regular, there would be somebody who would meet that demand.
It is the same. Note what I said about proportionality.
Obesity, baring a legit medical condition, is a moral failing for anybody, regardless of income.
Middle class people making bad decisions and losing money is harmful. But if it’s their money, it’s not impacting tax payers. If you live off the public dole, your bad decisions impact tax payers. That’s not a hand wave. It’s a valid point.
I’m not demanding anybody of any income level eat any particular food. I’m saying poor people could eat well if they wanted to.
Poor people have fewer resources, no doubt. But it’s not a double standard.
First, I haven’t ignored anything. Read this thread dispassionately and you’ll see that.
You’ve not answered any of the points I raised. I’ll specify again so we can sort this out.
What keeps somebody from selling fruit and veggies in a poor neighborhood, but not alcohol, fast food, etc.?
From this link.
This supports the demand argument.
From this link.
Grocery stores are as common in poor as in more affluent neighborhoods.
From this link.
This supports the idea that it isn’t lack of availability that keeps poor people from eating healthy.
But the point is that it never was a food desert. It was an area where people would rather eat fast food.
It’s about proportionality. Everybody benefits from government functions, but it’s only reasonable to expect that the more you rely on the government, the more the government has a say in what you do with the resources they provide you.
Sure, we’re driven towards sweet, salt, and fat… but those occur in natural, healthy foods as well as engineered fast foods and snacks.
It’s also a hell of a lot easier to build a vending machine to sell non-perishables like candy bars than fresh food requiring specific temperature controls and limits on how long the foods can be there before requiring replacement. It’s cheaper and less labor intensive to offer candy rather than fruits and vegetables.
Except middle class people making bad decisions DOES affect everyone else - it affects them if they go bankrupt, if they lose their houses due to foreclosure, if they make bad food choices and burden the health system, if they suffer chronic diseases that could have been prevented.
I disagree.
I agree with what you’re saying here. But, I’m not ridiculing anybody. I have empathy for poor. It’s just seems to me that it’s demeaning to deny somebody has volition or personal responsibility because they’re poor.
But that being said, I appreciate we can discuss this without recriminations. Thanks for the mental workout.
That’s sad, but God bless your neighbor. That has to be very demoralizing.
I think it is also demeaning to deny the role of luck or stress on a person’s circumstances. There’s personal responsibility, and then there’s blaming the victim. What is really needed a happy medium.
But if people don’t even know WTF to do with the produce of course there is little interest.
Shit I’m the most adventurous eater I know or have ever met, and I don’t even know what I could do with chard? There is probably also a kind of social awkwardness with taking advantage of a program like this, I don’t care if you’re giving it away for free people probably feel like there must be some string attached or an expectation you’ll do some work or give back or…
No wonder people just choose to go grab some shit from the dollar menu at McDonalds.
Again I’m not endorsing it, but I understand why people make these poor decisions. A lot of people also have weird taboos about charity, if everyone you have ever known has used food stamps or government assistance that is different and impersonal. Asking for free veggies from an urban hippie farmer probably feels awkward.
True, but the level of difference is amazing. I’ve read Fast Food Nation, and it describes an incredible amount of adulteration that fast and prepackaged foods go through to enhance the sweet, salty, and fatty elements.
Maybe. Doesn’t change the underlying fact. Businesses sale what people want.
Yes, bankruptcy is a bad thing. But wasting your own money, however bad, is not the same as wasting money given to you.
Then we can agree to disagree on this point.
I’ve not denied the role of luck nor the stress of a person’s circumstances. I’m all with you on the happy medium.
Nutrition is taught in public schools. The federal government has programs like Lets Move and others that stress the importance of produce. State level welfare programs often provide nutritional information to recipients.
It’s not esoteric knowledge. Granted, if you grew up in a household where produce was a staple of the diet, you’ll have an easier time eating healthy than somebody without that benefit. But, that’s not a lack of knowledge, but a lack of habit.
There isn’t strings attached to food stamps and other programs?
I think we actually agree here. I get why people eat the way they do. My point is it’s a choice, not something foisted on them.
So it’s hardly surprising that such foods are as tempting as cocaine, right?
The problem is that wasting your own money can result in you needing public money.
That, and if we don’t allow people to make mistakes they won’t ever learn to make their own decisions. One mistake I’ve seen people make their first month on food stamps is making poor choices in food - not necessarily poor nutritional choices but poor choices from a standpoint of frugality. You can NOT purchase organic foods on food stamps and expect to have enough money for the month as just one example. People generally make that mistake only the first month, after which they go “oh, wait - maybe I should buy the less expensive house brand of this stuff.”
It didn’t used to be. That’s a relatively recent change - and one I applaud. But lack of such instruction can explain part of the problem.
Really? I’m unaware of any such in my state.
There are some.
The first three months are basically a free ride, assuming you meet qualifications (low income, under asset limit). After that, you have to be employed or the parent of a minor child to keep them (why non-parents who aren’t employed are expected to starve I have no clue whatsoever). In Indiana there’s a program where you either are looking for work under controlled and tracked circumstances or going to school to keep your benefits. I don’t know if all states have such a program. Having been in that program for a bit I have some issues with the practice, even if not the theory, and I don’t want to sidetrack too much into that unless there’s a real call for it.
My spouse, being disabled, is not required to meet work requirements to receive food stamps although he does manage to bring in some money from time to time. He wants to work, but his limitations get in the way.
Another requirement of receiving food stamps is that you NOT have a drug conviction. Again, I don’t know why former felons are expected to starve, this makes no sense to me. It just makes them more likely to engage in crime again because they get hungry just like everyone else. This is an example of a requirement that seems to have no connection to the program’s goals and seems counter-productive to the interests of society as a whole.
My point is that choices can be influenced. If we really want to help people and maximize the number who climb out of poverty we need to be sure we make incentives for good choices, not bad ones.
I’m imagining a mother setting a plateful of okra and broccoli and chard in front of her kids…kids who only know boxed mac and cheese and tater tots.
Maybe the mother doesn’t mind coaxing her kids to eat these strange and exotic foods if she had a normal, typical day for a middle-class person. But if her day has been chaotic and stressful, as it is for many poor people, then she probably doesn’t feel like doing the “just one bite” dance at the dinner table. And if she has any caring in her, it will break her heart too. Because her kids don’t have any luxuries. Their lives are just as stressful and chaotic as hers. Everything about their lives sucks…but it used to be they’d get a respite at the dinner table. At least at dinner time the kids could enjoy their hot dogs, tater tots, orange soda, and mac-n-cheese and experience pleasure. But a dinner of strange and exotic vegetables denies them this simple thing.
A poor mother is always telling her kids “NO!” I can see how a poor mother would want dinner time to be that one moment of the day when she can say, “Yes, baby. Whatever you want.”
Confession time: Today I went to the grocery store to pick up some chicken thighs for dinner. I just wanted the 4-pack. But they only had this ginormous value pack with twice the amount that I wanted. I was mad. Not only did the value pack cost more (overall…per unit it was cheaper) than the 4-pack, but I had to buy some freezer bags so I could freeze the portion I didn’t want.
Then it dawned on me that I could go over to the deli and buy some fried chicken thighs. I had planned on baking the chicken, but fried is good too. And not only would the fried chicken be more delicious than whatever I managed to pull out of my oven, but it was cheaper than the mega value pack. AND I wouldn’t have to cook a damn thing or wash a greasy pan. WIN WIN WIN.
I caught myself almost making a “poor decision” and ended up getting the mega value chicken thighs. But I kind of had to shame myself to do it.
Not surprising at all. But paupers and princes are the end result of the same evolution. Poor folks can eat well if they want to. Many poor folks do.
True, and once you start getting public money, the need not to be foolish with money increases.
According to this link, the USDA has been educating people about nutrition since 1894.
Sleuthing around, I found this. That’s federal.
Found this for Indiana.
Doesn’t seem like asking too much for people receiving benefits not to be on drugs.
I don’t disagree.
Then why did you say that you’re subsidizing middle class homeowners, when it’s clear that you are not?
Use it like spinach, bok choy, or nappa cabbage.
Yes, that might well be part of it. Fear of being accused of theft as well.
Maybe if they charged nickel or a quarter to harvest from those lots people would be more likely to do that? I know it sounds crazy, but sometimes people attached a vastly different value to things that require even a token payment. If it’s free what’s wrong with it that they’re giving it away? Oh, but there’s a charge? Well, it must be worth something, then! Not entirely logical but people do think like that.