iluvpink
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 4,257
Location: Michigan
Jul 13, 2014 12:40:31 GMT
|
Post by iluvpink on Feb 14, 2018 18:45:32 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Mar 29, 2024 5:34:55 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 14, 2018 18:47:46 GMT
We are having a good discussion about this in the Conservative Catch-All thread. You don't have to be conservative to participate -- lots of folks chiming in
|
|
|
Post by littlemama on Feb 14, 2018 18:50:02 GMT
I think that poor people should get to decide what they like to eat the same as rich people. I think there should be some restrictions on expensive items, but in general I think this is demeaning. I also wonder what happens if someone steals the box from the porch, or an animal gets into it, or the recipient is away from home on the day the box is delivered.
|
|
iluvpink
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 4,257
Location: Michigan
Jul 13, 2014 12:40:31 GMT
|
Post by iluvpink on Feb 14, 2018 19:06:32 GMT
We are having a good discussion about this in the Conservative Catch-All thread. You don't have to be conservative to participate -- lots of folks chiming in Oh, thanks, I will check it out.
|
|
|
Post by busy on Feb 14, 2018 19:12:45 GMT
I have zero faith in the execution, especially after seeing what FEMA doled out in Puerto Rico.
Beyond that, there’s the very real issue of housing instability. A lot of people receiving SNAP benefits move a lot, live with friends/family, etc. I can see tremendous waste - and people having to go without - because of this.
Plus, I think it’s fundamentally degrading to remove choice about what to eat.
|
|
|
Post by annabella on Feb 14, 2018 19:20:58 GMT
And what if you don't eat shelf stable milk (what the hell is that?), cereal, pasta or peanut butter?
|
|
|
Post by jassy on Feb 14, 2018 19:28:09 GMT
It's a terrible idea. Many of the reasons why have been mentioned already - housing instability, lack of working appliances (can be a real issue needing to "cook" anything), food allergies, dietary needs (medical or religious), other medical issues (ex. elderly who might need a soft food diet) How would it get TO people? You can't say it would save money and then not consider the delivery costs - you can't expect people who might be very rural or lack transportation to pick up at a certain day or time.
I would also guess that there would be a lot of somebodies getting very rich off this plan - The free market system spreads SNAP dollars around to many different manufacturers. Who would get these VERY lucrative government contracts? Always, always follow the money.
|
|
|
Post by scrapsotime on Feb 14, 2018 19:34:25 GMT
If they insist on doing something like this I would prefer it be more like the WIC program. At least on that you can get fresh fruits, vegetables and yogurt. I personally, as a diabetic, think the box is too heavy on carbs, sugar and processed stuff.
|
|
LeaP
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 3,939
Location: Los Angeles, CA where 405 meets 101
Jun 26, 2014 23:17:22 GMT
|
Post by LeaP on Feb 14, 2018 19:42:38 GMT
From what I have seen in school lunches, it would be the cheapest of the cheap most dismal food.
Also, I subscribed to a local farmer's market box and was often annoyed at what they sent. Sometimes it had one orange, a couple of apples and broccoli. Seriously, why would I spend all that $$ on generic items in weird quantities? I wanted to get interesting stuff that I might overlook. Clearly, this is not what others wanted, so it is good I wasn't beholden to them for my family's food.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Mar 29, 2024 5:34:55 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 14, 2018 20:04:25 GMT
IMO it is not a good idea. I think food choice is a fundamental human dignity issue. Sure we don't have to provide top sirloin, lobster and high price luxury goods but free choice among basic modestly priced items should be allowed as it currently is.
As a nation we already have done the "give actual food" Way back in the 1960s my great grandmother got government "commodities" which was a box of generic unbranded food; a small bag of flour, peanut butter, powdered milk, a velveta type of cheese loaf and I don't know what if anything else was in the box- I think maybe some canned vegs and canned fruit. Most of it was stuff she either couldn't or wouldn't eat. My mom would trade groceries with granny so she would have stuff she could use. Otherwise it would have gone to waste and been of no help my granny.
eta: I remember the flour, powdered milk, and peanut butter because mom used those to make cookies for my sister and I. She would put the cheese in various casserole types of dishes. But granny was feeble. She didn't bake so a pound bag of flour was useless to her. She didn't grow up eating peanut butter or cheese so those were odd tastes/textures to her.
|
|
|
Post by mikklynn on Feb 14, 2018 20:12:56 GMT
It's ridiculous.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Mar 29, 2024 5:34:55 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 14, 2018 20:12:56 GMT
A couple of peas who have been there, have made so many good points.
I am still against premade food ( hamburger helper, the blue box of mac&cheese , soups). But when you don't have a frig to store food.
Deli food, but when you have nowhere to cook.
Convenience stores and bodagas, but those are the only stores close to you. One of my son's classmates in elementary school would stop at the 7-11 everyday because she could buy 2 things for a dollar. One for her and one for her younger brother.
It frustrates me so much that we have much going to waste. And yet can't feed our poorest.
|
|
|
Post by compwalla on Feb 14, 2018 20:14:05 GMT
It's hateful, demeaning, impractical, and if you think you should get to dictate what people in need are allowed to eat, you're a special kind of a dick. I saw facebook comments like it will stop people "trading food stamps for liquor" which is not a thing one can do anymore since all the money is loaded onto the SNAP card and the register literally will not allow them to buy anything but food with it. You can't even get diapers or toilet paper with a SNAP card, let alone beer.
The disdain and disrespect the privileged are proud to show those in need is fucking shameful. And yes, I feel quite strongly about this. People who receive benefits already have limited privacy and now the party of "small government" wants to insert themselves into the kitchens of the poor and decide what they're allowed to eat for dinner. Fuck. That. Noise. Fuck it in the ass with a cactus.
|
|
mimima
Pearl Clutcher
Stay Gold, Ponyboy
Posts: 4,995
Jun 25, 2014 19:25:50 GMT
|
Post by mimima on Feb 14, 2018 20:26:09 GMT
I think that it belies a lack of understanding of the challenges faced by the poor.
|
|
pudgygroundhog
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 4,642
Location: The Grand Canyon
Jun 25, 2014 20:18:39 GMT
|
Post by pudgygroundhog on Feb 14, 2018 20:30:08 GMT
I don't like it.
1) I think people know their situation best and should be able to shop for what works for them. Plus, this is a free market idea - people can use coupons, shop the sales, comparison shop, and maximize their budgets in a way that works for them.
2) It will cost more money and add government bureaucracy and inefficiency. There will be additional program management requirements and how do you address everybody's individual situations? How are they going to tailor boxes to people's situations? How do they collect this information and how efficient is it? How much is it going to cost to manage the program, pack the boxes, etc. I would prefer to see that extra money go to actually feeding people.
When talking about budgets, SNAP is a relatively small portion, especially when you look at the 1.5 trillion we are adding to the deficit, doubling our borrowing, and adding to military spending, so I'm not sure why we are looking at limiting food to people in need as a way to remedy our budget woes.
|
|
schizo319
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 3,030
Jun 28, 2014 0:26:58 GMT
|
Post by schizo319 on Feb 14, 2018 20:30:29 GMT
(what the hell is that?), Powdered milk, evaporated milk, or milk that has been ultra pasteurized to be shelf stable until opening (very common in Europe). I actually don't have a problem with the idea in theory (especially if there's a way to get local farmers in on the action, whether supplying fresh produce, or growing vegetables that can be preserved to add to the boxes). ETA to clarify: I don't have a problem with food boxes that are a supplement, not replacing the existing benefits with "government food" entirely. That said, we used to have a government food box program (remember "government cheese"?) - if it were reasonable, cost effective and feasible, then why was it ever stopped to begin with? Quite frankly, I think the amount of money spent on SNAP is relatively low when we compare it to other government spending, meaning that the "waste" that comes about from people "taking advantage of the system" is negligible by comparison. It's just a hot button topic for conservatives who are frothing at the mouth about "welfare queens" and people "selling food stamps for drugs".
|
|
pudgygroundhog
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 4,642
Location: The Grand Canyon
Jun 25, 2014 20:18:39 GMT
|
Post by pudgygroundhog on Feb 14, 2018 20:30:46 GMT
We are having a good discussion about this in the Conservative Catch-All thread. You don't have to be conservative to participate -- lots of folks chiming in I have to be honest - after looking at the thread, in no way do I feel welcome over there.
|
|
|
Post by tracyarts on Feb 14, 2018 20:34:13 GMT
It feels (to me) like a form of punishment.
The food described doesn't sound appetizing or healthy. I can't imagine the boxes including premium processed foods that are nutritionally balanced. It sounds like a bunch of canned and boxed sugar, soy additives, and sodium. There is so much talk about diet related health issues, and the government wants to hand out crap that only contributes to the problem. It also serves to "other" people in need. Somebody will make a fortune off of the contracts, it'll probably be more money going straight to big agriculture and factory food giants. There is no concern for dietary needs and preferences. Culturally diverse ways of eating aren't taken into account. The whole idea is gross and shameful. It implies that needy people deserve less and other.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Mar 29, 2024 5:34:55 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 14, 2018 20:34:46 GMT
I think, based on what I have read, some folks don’t know who actually receives benefits but instead have a stereotype of who they think receives the benefits.
And because of this stereotype person who receives assistance whether it’s SNAP or other assistance it is felt by some these folks can be treated like 2nd class citizens.
Taking away folks ability to chose what they can eat and instead replace it with a box of food is treating these folks like second class citizens.
The folks getting SNAP consists of seniors, the working poor with kids, folks with disabilities, kids working their way through college on their own, and some military families.
Maybe it’s just me but I don’t think anyone should be treated as a 2nd class citizen because they need some help. And replacing the SNAP card with a box is doing just that.
|
|
schizo319
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 3,030
Jun 28, 2014 0:26:58 GMT
|
Post by schizo319 on Feb 14, 2018 20:35:57 GMT
Plus, this is a free market idea That's a really excellent point. They scream from the roof tops about free market and how EVIL anything that remotely looks like socialism is, but let's make socialist boxes of government food to distribute...
|
|
pudgygroundhog
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 4,642
Location: The Grand Canyon
Jun 25, 2014 20:18:39 GMT
|
Post by pudgygroundhog on Feb 14, 2018 20:38:15 GMT
Plus, this is a free market idea That's a really excellent point. They scream from the roof tops about free market and how EVIL anything that remotely looks like socialism is, but let's make socialist boxes of government food to distribute... Apparently the "free market" is a solution to healthcare, but not food insecurity.
|
|
|
Post by wholarmor on Feb 14, 2018 20:38:19 GMT
We got commodities in the 80s. I remember standing in line for our government cheese. I was old enough to be embarrassed to have to go stand in line for these things.
Don't delude yourself that people are going to get fresh veggies and all sorts of good food. It will probably be the basics- flour, cheese, powdered milk, canned meat and other canned goods. It's demoralizing and demeaning, and don't fool yourself into thinking that people deserve this treatment. A lot of people receiving food benefits are employed, they are often military members, and for every person you know cheating the system(you can turn them in, btw), I know of many others frugally living on what little help they are given.
|
|
|
Post by wholarmor on Feb 14, 2018 20:41:45 GMT
It's hateful, demeaning, impractical, and if you think you should get to dictate what people in need are allowed to eat, you're a special kind of a dick. I saw facebook comments like it will stop people "trading food stamps for liquor" which is not a thing one can do anymore since all the money is loaded onto the SNAP card and the register literally will not allow them to buy anything but food with it. You can't even get diapers or toilet paper with a SNAP card, let alone beer. The disdain and disrespect the privileged are proud to show those in need is fucking shameful. And yes, I feel quite strongly about this. People who receive benefits already have limited privacy and now the party of "small government" wants to insert themselves into the kitchens of the poor and decide what they're allowed to eat for dinner. Fuck. That. Noise. Fuck it in the ass with a cactus. bears repeating
|
|
Sarah*H
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 3,967
Jun 25, 2014 20:07:06 GMT
|
Post by Sarah*H on Feb 14, 2018 20:43:46 GMT
I think we shouldn't dehumanize or infantilize adults by telling them what they must eat just because they are poor.
I do think there are some elements of this idea that are workable and maybe even a good idea for people who CHOOSE to opt into if it fits their individual circumstance. For example, I think it's a great idea to allow for home delivery of staple items as long as they have some choice about what those items are.
|
|
pudgygroundhog
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 4,642
Location: The Grand Canyon
Jun 25, 2014 20:18:39 GMT
|
Post by pudgygroundhog on Feb 14, 2018 20:55:00 GMT
I think we shouldn't dehumanize or infantilize adults by telling them what they must eat just because they are poor. I do think there are some elements of this idea that are workable and maybe even a good idea for people who CHOOSE to opt into if it fits their individual circumstance. For example, I think it's a great idea to allow for home delivery of staple items as long as they have some choice about what those items are. I thought about it too with a pilot program on a small scale for people who might want to opt in (thinking about elderly people who might prefer a home delivery service versus going to the store), but I still would have a lot of questions about how it would be managed and executed efficiently without a lot of additional cost. It might be better to work with grocery stores that already have a home delivery program set up.
|
|
Country Ham
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 3,313
Jun 25, 2014 19:32:08 GMT
|
Post by Country Ham on Feb 14, 2018 20:56:15 GMT
This would strongly impact our business and I am surprised my husband didn't say anything. We operate a group home and we receive no grant or government money. We are able to feed everyone in the home off of their food stamps alone. My husband is amazing at making those go a long way. We are talking real food as well. Chicken, roasts, pork etc. They really dislike things like powdered milk, powdered potatoes etc. This will be interesting for sure.
|
|
|
Post by gmcwife1 on Feb 14, 2018 21:01:48 GMT
(what the hell is that?), Powdered milk, evaporated milk, or milk that has been ultra pasteurized to be shelf stable until opening (very common in Europe). I actually don't have a problem with the idea in theory (especially if there's a way to get local farmers in on the action, whether supplying fresh produce, or growing vegetables that can be preserved to add to the boxes). ETA to clarify: I don't have a problem with food boxes that are a supplement, not replacing the existing benefits with "government food" entirely. That said, we used to have a government food box program (remember "government cheese"?) - if it were reasonable, cost effective and feasible, then why was it ever stopped to begin with? Quite frankly, I think the amount of money spent on SNAP is relatively low when we compare it to other government spending, meaning that the "waste" that comes about from people "taking advantage of the system" is negligible by comparison. I t's just a hot button topic for conservatives who are frothing at the mouth about "welfare queens" and people "selling food stamps for drugs". I was going to like this and agree with you until the last sentence
|
|
schizo319
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 3,030
Jun 28, 2014 0:26:58 GMT
|
Post by schizo319 on Feb 14, 2018 21:06:30 GMT
I was going to like this and agree with you until the last sentence I'm sorry, I thought it was pretty clear that I used quotes around those terms to point out the ridiculousness of them. I didn't intend to imply anything other than *some* conservatives are super judgmental and throw those terms around as justification for their hate. I honestly did not intend to cause any offense.
|
|
|
Post by revirdsuba99 on Feb 14, 2018 21:07:55 GMT
And what if you don't eat shelf stable milk (what the hell is that?), cereal, pasta or peanut butter? Add in CANNED meats, chicken, fish or cannot remember right now with the canned fruits(sugar syrup) and vegetables...A whole months worth. Big box... or may be not! Real healthy. I stated on the other thread that I doubt very strongly that any items will come from local farms. More likely expansive operations with large packing facilities. Big business doing it.
|
|
|
Post by revirdsuba99 on Feb 14, 2018 21:11:06 GMT
I thought about it too with a pilot program on a small scale for people who might want to opt in (thinking about elderly people who might prefer a home delivery service versus going to the store), but I still would have a lot of questions about how it would be managed and executed efficiently without a lot of additional cost. It might be better to work with grocery stores that already have a home delivery program set up. That might be a good idea to think about.
|
|