Then you admit that you are indifferent to plenty of abuses of public funds, and just hate poor people?
Cost efficient nutrition.
My premise is completely valid, and it exists right across the street from me.
Again, What abuse are you referring too? I haven’t supported any bailout in this discussion. I was perfectly happy to let GM declare bankruptcy on it’s own without government support. We’re going to be on the hook for the retirement funds that was the true anchor dragging down the company.
Except there are actually, factually, 120,000 people who used the New York City homeless shelter system in 2009. That’s unique individuals, not person-days, and it included 43,000 children. It doesn’t concern you how a population just about equal to the entire population of a small city like New Haven, CT (pop. 123,000) can feed themselves?
He doesn’t care. They’re poor, so they should suffer as much as possible.
Well, of course it does, because according to Magiver:
Because every time someone using EBT buys something that’s not “nutritional and cost efficient”, they’re somehow taking money away from others.
And they’re surviving on potato chips and twinkies? they were brought down into total destitution in 1 day? They have no pots and pans? Can’t afford a used grill?
No, they’re buying lobsters and truffles from the grocery store with the EBT they stole from their neighbors. :rolleyes:
Yes. That is an accurate statement. As the economy implodes more cuts will be made and if it isn’t spent wisely than people will starve.
There’s a reason we send rice to starving nations and not potato chips.
Who the fuck said anything about potato chips or twinkies? They eat potted meat and crackers, cold canned soup, peanut butter sandwiches and canned soft drinks. Their house is clean. They have a kerosene heater for winter. Their kids do homework on the front porch in the afternoon. I’m sure they have pots and pans, and I’m sure they can’t afford a grill.
And do they feed the people in shelters potato chips and twinkies?
So they wouldn’t be affected in any way by what I’ve proposed. And I call bullshit on the used grill. You can buy them new for $10.
Good luck, Guin. I asked that exact question a page ago, and Magiver has not answered it. What if the steak is marked down because it’s nearing expiration, and is actually cheaper than ground beef? Oh, yeah, I forgot. There’s never an excuse for people to buy steak on EBT. Last I checked, Sargento, a common supermarket brand of cheese that goes on sale every six weeks or so (to the point where it’s cheaper than Kraft), is advertised as “aged”, so according to Magiver, the folks on EBT need to buy Kraft, not Sargento, even though it’s cheaper, because there’s never an excuse for people to buy aged cheese on EBT. :rolleyes:
I’d like to point out that in Detroit the Eastern Market (a HUGE food emporium from basic local produce to imported exotics has worked out a way to use food stamps AND promote purchase of local fresh fruit and vegetables with them, which is especially good in that much of Detroit is a “food desert” and in the entire city there is not a single real grocery store left, just corner stores and liquor stores. So people are trying to implement such ideas.
Also - you are allowed to purchase vegetable seeds with the EBT benefit. This is beneficial to any food stamp recipient with access to a garden area and ability to garden and certainly can help promote good health while helping to support community gardens.
While I actually do agree with much of your position, what I disagree most with is your apparent inflexibility. Want to limit cost per pound of certain types of food such as meat? OK - but set the bar above just the minimum and be sure it goes up to account for inflation over the years. Some of the cheapest meat is also some of the worst, nutrition wise.
And I actually CAN think of a time when expensive/luxury items should be allowed - when there are clearance sales, for example, so a cut of meat is greatly reduced in price (well, your per-pound limit might well take care of that issue). Another time is when this food would otherwise be thrown out. The Greater Chicago Food Depository some years back acquired refrigerated trucks and other equipment that allowed them to collect perishable foods and safely transport them to homeless shelters, soup kitchens, and similar venues. Most commonly, this food is collected from catering companies (such as well someone cancels their order at the last minute, when the food is already prepared) and restaurants (maybe very few people ordered the Tuesday special). In addition to feeding the hungry and promoting a social good, the donating companies can also write it off as a charitable contribution. Win-win, you’d think. And as a result, some very poor folks got some very nice dinners. Well, word “got out” that some homeless shelter wound up with lobster bisque or crab cakes or some such luxury item and my god the screaming was incredible! What? Poor people eating lobster? Yeah, lobster some rich asshole ordered and decided not to pick up, and yeah, the organization that made it possible for that food to be put to use does take some government money (in addition to private donations). This is a problem… how? I suppose some people would be happier if the food was thrown in a dumpster and allowed to rot for a day before the poor folks were allowed to eat it or something. :rolleyes:
Magiver, I’m going to assume you’re the sort who really is concerned with how money is spent and not someone who would vindictively snatch food that would otherwise go to waste from the most deprived members of society. I mean, if lobster or crab or steak can be obtained cheaply (and under that program it is - basically, just the cost of transporting it as the Food Depository doesn’t buy the food, it’s donated) why not have the poor eat it? If high quality food would otherwise be thrown away I’m assuming you’d have no objection to letting the poor have access to it. If somebody orders truffles and aged cheese for a wedding called off at the last minute is there really grounds to object if the caterer donates the goodies to a charity that puts that food into the hands and mouths of homeless people later that evening?
Likewise, during my first trip through poverty, as a college student (who, by the way, was making too much money to qualify for food stamps) I would visit food distribution sites and would occasionally have access to salvaged goods. These usually weren’t spectacular foodstuffs, but once in awhile you’d get something pretty nice. Again, edible food that was recovered and still wholesome but otherwise would be thrown out. Why NOT put it to use?
Currently, there are a very limited number of soup kitchen type situations where those who are genuinely homeless can use food stamps to obtain hot, prepared foods. I am not conversant with the details, as I did not qualify for that program (thank Og!) but it’s an instance where people who genuinely qualify as being in dire need can have some basic human needs fulfilled.
I’m not opposed to good and effective regulation, but I have concerns about cost and inflexibility. It’s important to allow flexibility so local communities can come up with solutions to social problems (such as New York and Detroit coming up with systems to use food stamps in farmers’ markets, or Chicago’s Food Depository finding a way to utilize high quality food that would otherwise go to waste).
Of course, emotions do run hot in this discussions, from both ends of the socio-economic spectrum.
Actually, it’s based on income, age, dependents, housing & utility costs, and a few other things. A single person making minimum wage and nothing else today full-time in California (where the COLA is comparatively high), who pays about half of that on housing, gets about $25 a month in EBT. I think the idea is that anyone who goes below about 120% of the poverty level starts to get it.
Actually, you could qualify for EBT while working 9 hours a night - it depends on how many dependents you have, and that doesn’t necessarily mean children. Elderly or disabled adults can be dependents, too.
As has already be rehashed multiple times, MANY people on food stamps also work - they just don’t earn enough to support themselves, often because they can’t find a job that gives them full time hours. While on the program they are REQUIRED to look for work, or more work, which takes time away from cooking.
Oh, and I mentioned the disabled - my husband, for example, is disabled and because he has no feeling in his hands he is very prone to injury such as slicing his fingers while preparing food, or burning himself severely. It’s not safe for him to cook outside of a microwave often (and there’s still a danger of burns with hot food from that - he might not notice the burn until the skin sloughs off days later, by which time it’s usually infected.) So, with myself working and forced to look for more work I sometimes had little time to cook for us and for him cooking can be dangerous - gee sucks to be us, doesn’t it? (Of course, if he wasn’t disabled maybe we’d both be working and the household able to support itself, but that’s not reality).
As a nod to situations like this, disabled people on EBT are allotted more per month than the able-bodied. If my husband has to fend for himself he has to purchase foods that he can safely prepare by himself, and that means more pre-prepared and yes, processed foods. Frozen dinners aren’t the greatest nutrition but they’ll keep you alive and they’re far preferable to third degree burns from a cooking accident (which scars, by the way, he does have from before it really go through his head that no, cooking is NOT a safe activity for him). (I also had a lower hour requirement for work/searching for work as a concession to the fact that I do, in fact, need to spend some of my time cooking and caring for him. Mind you, those are minimum hours - if I could take care of him AND work full time or better that was great, but I had to do at least that much to continue getting benefits).
Of course, that’s an anecdote. But poverty is much greater among the disabled than the able-bodied, so it does come up. The fact that there are *so many[/] situations is why, at least in my area, you don’t simply fill out a form and get handed a card - you have to talk to someone about your situation, and in our case we had to document my income (and lack of it), our assets (or lack of them), and his disability. The idea, I guess, is that social services are tailoring your benefit to your actual needs, ideally giving you neither too much or too little.
Back when I had some money of my own, one of my favorite charities was a homeless shelter. I was talking to a woman who cooked for the shelter on November as she lamented what she had to work with. It seems that a LOT of people around the holidays donate cakes and cookies and what not to such shelters, but very little in the way of solid protein or even vegetables. So some nights all the people who stayed there had to eat was essentially bread, cake, and cookies.
So yes, apparently some people do think that’s an appropriate diet for the homeless, because that’s what they were donating.
I asked what the shelter could really use at that point. The cook thought it over for a few minutes, then said “potatoes”. Because, you see, you can top a baked potato with a lot of stuff, and that was back when the government was still handing out free cheese, which the shelter could get easily. You can also bake them and, yes, fry them. And they were soft enough so the shelter folks with very bad teeth, or those who lacked them, could still eat them.
I started donating 50 lb bags of potatoes to the shelter. And the occasional canned ham or flat of canned tuna or chicken or vienna sausages because, frankly, some of those people had outright protein deficiencies. (The shelter managed to keep scurvy at bay because you can get cheap stuff with vitamin C in it, although every now and then someone would turn up with scurvy anyway).
There’s a problem in cutting social service budgets to the bone because the cheapest foods are basically junk calories. Healthy food really does have a certain base cost. It doesn’t have to be a HIGH cost, but there is some money involved, particularly for protein which always seems to cost twice as much as carbs per unit of weight.
Broomstick, not to hijack the thread (though that’s what I’m about to do; so sue me), I’m glad you posted this about the homeless shelters.
I think that people who donate the cookies and cakes around the holidays do so with the best of intentions. They probably think that the people who eat there don’t get many treats, and they are just trying to spread a little holiday cheer.
However, when I donate to food banks, etc. I try hard to donate protein that doesn’t need refrigeration or cooking, like peanut butter, canned tuna, canned chicken, shelf-stable milk, etc.
I didn’t know about the potatoes, though. I’ll definitely keep it in mind for the future!