Shodan, one agrees not to use food stamps to purchase ineligible items such as cigarettes, alcohol, firearms, ammunition, or cash. Does that count as “not wasting”, or do you require a more intrusive, big-brotherish definition of “waste”?
And it runs, again, into the same problem. I’ll use a specific, dear to my heart example.
Cauliflower is healthy for you. A bag of frozen cauliflower is anywhere from 1 to 2 dollars for a pound. Calories in a bag of cauliflower? In the neighborhood of 100 (I think it’s less than that, even).
So, we’ll say you spend 1 dollar on 100 calories. Cauliflower is an excellent food (and my favorite), but 100 calories isn’t very many. And if the estimates are right that food stamps only give about $.80 per person per meal, a bag of cauliflower is more than a person’s meal allowance. So, is it a “waste of money” to buy cauliflower?
Julie
Yes, that counts as “not wasting”. Whether or not we need further restrictions is pretty much what we are debating.
But, I think we have established the general principle that there should be restrictions.
If we do not impose any further restrictions, would you agree that we do not need to increase welfare benefits, since there are cost-effective ways to make the current amount go further - namely don’t buy junk food?
Regards,
Shodan
Does it include some kind of formal agreement similar to “I won’t waste this money on…”? If so, then we are already doing things similar to what the OP mentioned.
I can only speak for WV’s system, which has been revamped according to my bleeding heart social worker friend. You have to agree to either work or go to school. If you’re working you hafta have your boss sign this form every month saying you were at work, etc., and if you miss work you have to tell them why. If you’re in school, same thing, and you have to earn X number of hours per semester and make a certain GPA. If you don’t they start cutting your money and/or kick you out.
BTW if you work and earn like, more than $50 or so a week, you lose your medical card automatically – unless you are a single parent. If you’re married, tough shit.
Add in all the obligatory promises to not abuse what you’re given and that’s pretty much it.
From what my friend tells me, WV doesn’t make it worth the effort to work while on welfare, but it’s worth it if you go to school. Since there’s a 5 year lifetime limit, and you’re working the whole time, you’re receiving a lot less than you would if you just quit working and went to school full time. One of my friends who busts her ass at Wal-Mart full time making 6 bucks an hour, single mom with 2 kids, gets a whopping $140 in food stamps a month. So basically if you work while on welfare, you won’t be any better off in 5 years, but if you go to school, maybe you will be. Here, anyway.
Shodan, I think you will have trouble coming up with a definition of “junk food” that actually makes sense.
Or that will survive the political process. Food processors have larger margins on processed food products than they do on staples; any attempt to make processed food ineligible for food stamps will be met with very powerful lobbying by the food industry.
**
Welfare isn’t a “gift”, per se. It’s an umbrella term for social safety-net programs designed to be temporary. Yes, these programs are funded by tax dollars. But considering that these programs are intended to be temporary, eventually most (if not all) welfare recipients will be paying some taxes in the future.
**
Except that sometimes, it’s not. Food stamps aren’t a fixed benefit. The amount you get every month depends on how much income you get. If you’re working, you get less. And there are a lot of working poor out there. It’s possible to get maybe fifty bucks in food stamps a month for a family of three. If you’re only making minimum wage or not much more, and you’re working full-time, you’re only making maybe $181.28 per week, or $784.94 per month. (I’m assuming that 12% goes to taxes. I have no idea what the tax rate for that bracket is.) These people don’t get hundreds every month.
There may be a valid reason for the request for name brand products, I don’t know. My best guess is that they go faster than generic products, so the food bank’s stock is rotated more quickly.
However, not everyone lives in a house with a kitchen. Lots of working poor live in hotels, shelters, in cars, with other family members. A hot plate and cooking utensils can cost money the family doesn’t have. (This has been discussed already.) Even if there is a kitchen, who in the hell wants to cook after working for 8+ hours. And one more point. Processed foods are easier for kids to prepare, so they can prepare their own meals while Mom and Dad are at work.
Processed foods also keep a LOT longer than non-processed foods. This is important to food banks, who may be in a climate-controlled but still open space. The food won’t rot on the shelves. Which would you rather have? A donation of processed food that’ll be used, or fresh food that’s going to sit and rot and never be used?
What I’m noticing is that the US prides itself on being an egalitarian society, yet we insist on putting controls on the poor because they’re poor.
Robin
Shodan, I wasn’t arguing that per se, but merely playing the Devil’s Advocate.
How does that count as not wasting? One dollar gone. Everyone still hungry.
I feel that we’re taking part in different debates. As my example showed, buying junk food is not the only way to “waste” money. Someone can buy four Little Debbie brownies for a dollar and get a lot more calories out of it. If you’re hungry, calories matter.
Julie
You have no idea the kind of crap people donate. Imagine getting home with your nice new food basket. Your excited about feeding your family Until you realize that it consists of: One box powdered milk. One five pound canister fried onion topping. Another canister of garlic flavored bread crumbs that looks about twenty years old. One can of very off-brand beef broth that smells really funny. One can of pickled brussle sprouts and a can of creamed corn. Of course you are going to be greatful to have food. But trying to put together meals (that won’t gross your kids out) out of the wierd stuff that people donate can be a challenge.
It’s not just generic store brands that people donate. It is wierd off brands. The kinds of things that make it to the clearence rack at those stores where they sell dented cans and overstock at a discount. Brands that have lables in three different languages from countries that arn’t even remotely near each other. Brands that take perfectly good food and cream them, add funky meat to them, or try to can stuff that was never meant to be canned. I’m sure you are happy with some store branded stuff. But I am sure there are plenty of cans you pass up because they look too disreputable.
And while generic is a great option for some items (cereal, canned veggies, pasta) I’m sure there are some generics that you wouldn’t touch. I know that when I shop I steer away from things like generic canned meats, generic yogurt, generic brownie mixes and stuff like that. When it comes to items that rely on the qualty of their ingredients or complex preperations where it matters if they take shortcuts, generics often can fall short- sometimes pretty tragically. Once again, it is good to be able to choose how to budget my money to buy as cheap as possible when it is warrented and when quality does, in fact, matter. I don’t see why the poor shouldn’t do the same within their own budget.
I’m gonna second what sven said.
When I was in grade school in the late '70s-early '80s, my school would have food drives at various times of the year. Classes would compete for prizes, such as a pizza party, on the basis of who donated the most. My family used that as an excuse to clean the cabinets of all the stuff that didn’t get eaten since the last drive. Beans that my father had intended for soup in January went to the Thanksgiving drive. The exotic soup my mom got six cans of because she thought it sounded good. (Mulligatawny is not good canned, IMO.) Stuff like that.
The sad thing of that is that parents got so wrapped up in the competitive aspect of the food drive that they bought cases of the cheapest and worst canned food they could find just so their kids’ classes would win, and their kids would be recognized for their “generosity”.
Finally, when I was in fourth or fifth grade, the note about the drive was very specific about what kinds of foods would be accepted – no open packages, no outdated food, no case lots without approval, and the organizers of the drive reserved the right to reject anything they considered inappropriate. Yay for them!
Robin
I was answering KellyM, who asked if restrictions on trading food stamps for “cigarettes, alcohol, firearms, ammunition, or cash” counted as “not wasting”.
Well, I have also worked at the food shelves in my area, and we do not have many homeless people. Most of the people who were there the days I served were from our local low-income apartment complexes, where (by law) all the apartments have kitchen facilities. So, at least in my area, the problem of not having access to an oven or stove to cook with is not significant.
Besides, perhaps I didn’t make it clear. The director of our local food shelf did not request no-cook foods, or canned goods only. What she wanted was the same sort of stuff, but name brand instead of store brands. The problem did not seem to be that the poor had no way to cook their food; simply that they were more picky about the brands they would accept than (in my opinion) they had any business being.
If someone is hungry and you give him an apple, and he eats it, you have done a good thing. If he throws it on the floor and says, “I don’t like apples - give me Twinkies instead”, he wasn’t hungry.
Even if it were true that the majority of the poor in my area had no stove or oven, I find it difficult to believe that large numbers of poor people can never scrape together $5 at a time to purchase a hot plate second-hand. Our church has the area’s largest rummage sale every September, and you can grab all sorts of appliances for very little. Assuming you can save 20 cents a day by cooking your own food, it does not take long to recoup that investment.
Again, something that sticks in my craw (no offense). TO put it bluntly, who in the hell told them they had a choice? I tend to work 8 hours (or more) per day, and somehow or other I manage to scrape together the energy to cook dinner.
If you are low on money (and people on welfare are), and you can save money by cooking for yourself (and you can), and people are offering you food to cook, for free, simply whining “I don’t feel like cooking” is not an excuse designed to arouse large amounts of sympathy in Shodan’s flinty heart.
Probably true, and a valid point. Although, in my experience, it tends to be while Mom is at work. Nobody seems to know where Dad is.
Actually, I do. The food shelf director mentioned that after Thanksgiving, they were always neck-deep in canned sweet potatoes for months. So what she said was that they would use cash donations to get fresh foods, and dole out the non-perishables as part of the food baskets you mentioned. Which made sense, as far as it goes.
Therefore, as I said, I donate diapers. Something she said was always in demand, that would not spoil or go bad, and something that goes directly to those most in need.
Of course, the day they reject my diaper donation and say that they want Pampers instead is the day I find another charity in the area to support.
Regards,
Shodan
I agree with you about the diapers. When I get formula for Aaron, I usually get a coupon for free or very cheap Carnation Good Start. Since we don’t use Good Start, I redeem the coupons anyway and donate the formula to the local shelter. It’s my small way of making sure Nestle/Carnation gives back to the community. 
Robin
Well actually, the three or four extra dollars for Pampers (or Luvs or Huggies) would save the recipient twice as much in laundry costs as cheap diapers , since the low cost brands leak bad. Those times we use cheapo diapers, we have to change the babys bedsheets every morning, and lets not even talk about a healthy poop and cheap diapers.
Jon
Sometimes, Shodan, generic stuff is worth it, and sometimes, it’s not. Generic pet food, for example, is mostly ash and fillers. Sometimes, the name brand is better QUALITY.
Well actually, the three or four extra dollars for Pampers (or Luvs or Huggies) would save the recipient twice as much in laundry costs as cheap diapers , since the low cost brands leak bad. Those times we use cheapo diapers, we have to change the babys bedsheets every morning, and lets not even talk about a healthy poop and cheap diapers.
Depends on the kid, Jon. We’ve always used Dri-Bottoms (not the cheapest but certainly close to it) and have never had any problems.
Now White Cloud diapers, on the other hand, are cheap but they suck, royally.
Wow Snoopyfan, White cloud are my favorites! Pampers made her always smell like pee and huggies always shed the lining and it would be stuck to her bum in little white tufts after changing and luvs would leak. I’ve never had a problem with white cloud… too bad they don’t have a size 7 though 
We’re about to be stuck for diapers. The dri-bottoms I saw in the store didn’t have velcro and velcro is important when changing a wriggling 2 year old. Guess its all in what works for you.
Having diapered my share of smelly little butts, it is my considered judgement that cheap diapers are more cost-effective.
I should state for the record that we tried cloth diapers on my son. Not a good idea, and if I ever said that poor people should be required to use cloth diapers, I abjectly apologize and grovel excessively.
When it comes to baby poop, convenience rules, and to heck with the environment.
A good friend of mine is an engineer who designed the tapes that hold diapers on. I actually saw some of the research he did on the competition, and the cheap ones work just as well as the expensive ones. Over a test of thousands, obviously. YMMV.
Regards,
Shodan
My milk nazi friend used cloth diapers on her son. They were made outta some kinda lambskin or wool thingy and were $12 a pop. I guess it’s cheaper in the long run but sheesh.
Let someone else’s parents save Mother Earth. I’m all about disposables.
Well, note I said SOME generics-not all.
Generic Fritos? YUCK!
Generic Cola? Great!