Box of Food in Lieu of SNAP

↑ jkl

Tue, Feb 13 2018, 3:51 pm

mommmmmmmmmmy wrote:

To those of you bashing food stamps. I wouldn't survive without it and most ppl I know too. That you know ppl buying luxuries?! they must have extra money to spare and are cheating the system. For most it barely covers necessity.

I don't want to be rude, but the sustainability of the Jewish lifestyle, nor the cost of Kosher food does not have much relevance to the discussion on hand.

If you would create a spin-off, I would be more than happy to share my thoughts about it.

↑ little neshamala ↓

Tue, Feb 13 2018, 4:05 pm

mommmmmmmmmmy wrote:

Its not people I know personally, its people ive observed on line.
Absolutely a fact. In both Jewish stores, and among non Jews in shoprite.

Why is it ok for people using the card to buy sodas, expensive spices (such as safron-yes a luxury!), high end meats, food coloring and cake decorating ingredients such as fondant, sprinkles, canned frosting and icing etc...why should the government fund this?

↑ watergirl ↓

Tue, Feb 13 2018, 4:15 pm

mommmmmmmmmmy wrote:

I dont see anyone bashing food stamps here. Discussing what they believe it should be spent on - yes. Bashing? No.

Fwiw I was on FS for about a year and a half. I used that time to work part time and go to school to finish my long paused degree. I needed it as a stop gap - which is how it was initially intended to be used.

Fox ↓

Tue, Feb 13 2018, 5:59 pm

If you read the details, this isn't nearly as crazy as it sounds, and it could even be a huge boon for kosher recipients. States would be allowed to determine how to distribute food directly, and they would presumably work with existing community infrastructure. In Brooklyn, this would mean the various Community Councils and chesed organizations already involved in food distribution.

This would allow Jewish agencies to negotiate better prices on behalf of poor Jewish consumers, serve kehillas requiring various hechshers, and arrange special distributions around holidays.

So kosher consumers could potentially get more food for the money, and 50 percent of their benefits would still be available for birthday cake ingredients.

Of course, whether this would save money is a different question altogether. I can't imagine the savings would be great; my guess is that it would simply move the money around a little. Instead of grocery stores reaping the benefits, the distributing agencies would be adding staff.

As far as better nutrition goes, I suspect such an initiative would go the way of Michelle Obama's lunches. You can lead people to veggies but you can't make them eat.

↑ 33055 ↓

Tue, Feb 13 2018, 6:08 pm

SixOfWands wrote:

I never have. I've seen one or two items, and people focusing on them.

But if I saw a person with a grocery cart with cake mix, sprinkles, fondant, and soda, I'd assume that they had a kid with a birthday coming up.

Or do you think that poor kids aren't allowed to have a birthday cake. Didn't you mention that you were on SNAP or WIC? Did you tell your kids "happy birthday, pumpkin! Sorry, no gifts, no cake, no party, we're poor."

Government benefits are not there to pay for Pumkin’s gifts, cake and party. It is absolutely ridiculous to expect the government to be pay for this. The program is to provide food for the poor.

My tax dollars should not be spent providing the 20 million children on snap with birthday parties. The goal of snap is adequate nutrition for poor people - not birthday parties.

Why stop there?

↑ 33055 ↓

Tue, Feb 13 2018, 6:30 pm

little neshamala wrote:

Many people treat food stamps as a bonus. They and their children are well dressed with the requisite expensive stroller when they take out their benefit card. They are not relying on food stamps just as they are not relying on Section 8 to pay their whole rent even though not doing so is fraud.

I have been on line numerous times in Monsey behind one person who will give benefit card after benefit card for many people to purchase food.

Immigrants are shipping food like beans in containers back to their country purchased on snap. Giving them healthy perishable foods would solve half the problem of snap paying for food that is not even being consumed in this country.

There are legitimate poor people who need snap. But way too many who don't. When the government subsidizes your necessities, it frees up luxury money putting further pressure on legit citizens.

↑ little neshamala

Tue, Feb 13 2018, 6:33 pm

Squishy wrote:

This exactly. Thank you.

HappyGoLucky1 ↓

Tue, Feb 13 2018, 6:57 pm

You guys are missing something. If someone gets say $500 a month on food stamps and buys fancy steaks, they're not getting any more money from food stamps. It's not "free food" Once they spend their limit they're done for the month. Who cares if they spend it on steaks or candy or ice cream or organic food... Part of the responsibility of running a home is being responsible with your food choices. But if the person wants ice cream once in a while why should they only have to eat poor man's food?

That being said I'm 99.9% sure this box thing won't go through. It's a joke, there are waaaayyyyyy too many inconsistencies for it to be practical.

creditcards ↓

Tue, Feb 13 2018, 7:00 pm

little neshamala wrote:

Youre right.
Use my other examples of seeing people buy cake mix, sprinkles, fondant, and an entire wagon full of assorted soda bottles.

Ive seen things like this multiple times.

May be one of the kids had a birthday party?
I know people who would order a cake for much more expensive than make themselves. Soda is the cheapest drink. Healthy drinks are expensive. Maybe she needed to invite the whole class of the birthday kid because that's what all her friends did and bought the cheapest drink for them....people need to stop being so judgmental.
My daughter had to bring a drink for a party in school. Guess what I purchased the cheapest one. And it's the junkiest in the store.

nylon ↓

Tue, Feb 13 2018, 7:04 pm

This is not actually going to pass. States don't want to set up a whole new distribution network. And the CEO of Walmart does not want to lose his customers. There's a reason we don't give out government cheese anymore.

SNAP gives you so much a month. You learn to budget it. This proposal is about saying that poor people can't be trusted to manage their own grocery budget, and that they should be embarrassed to have it. SNAP doesn't get you a birthday party, and technically you're not supposed to use it to buy food for others. You can purchase the ingredients for a cake. That's it. And why are we policing what spices people buy?? Why do we need to micromanage people like this?

As for nutrition, you have to be able to purchase the items; they have to fit into your budget (vegetables give you fewer calories per dollar than pasta and rice) and you need to have the time, equipment, and knowledge to cook it. I know people on skimpy budgets. Even the nutrition conscious ones don't spend a ton on produce. The money goes further if they buy chicken legs to go with the rice or pasta rather than salad. Programs like matching your money at the farmers market work, if they can get to such a market.

chaylizi ↓

Tue, Feb 13 2018, 7:10 pm

Squishy wrote:

Immigrants are shipping food like beans in containers back to their country purchased on snap. Giving them healthy perishable foods would solve half the problem of snap paying for food that is not even being consumed in this country.

There are legitimate poor people who need snap. But way too many who don't. When the government subsidizes your necessities, it frees up luxury money putting further pressure on legit citizens.

These new food boxes would be able to be sent out of the country intact then. Everything in these proposed boxes are supposed to be shelf stable- even shelf stable milk. Taking away the ability to get fresh fruit and vegetables and fresh milk benefits nobody, birthday cakes notwithstanding.

↑ creditcards ↓

Tue, Feb 13 2018, 7:10 pm

jkl wrote:

This is the quandary I have.

Should a poor person have equal access to 'extras' pertaining to food, compared to the middle class of society?

Of course poor kids should have a birthday cake (or some sort of recognition). And poor families should be able to buy the necessary foods. But being on another person's dole, does require some restraint. The lower middle class people are forced to restrain themselves on a weekly basis and very often the child gets a birthday cupcake instead of a cake, because money doesn't allow it. And even if Yom Tov does call for better meals, very often the lower middle class makes do with chicken instead of any sort of beef. If you'll compare the groceries from the lower middle class to the people on the SNAP program, you'll often find that the better (or tastier) selection of food is in the cart of the one with the benefit card.

Is it really wrong to have poor people restrain themselves when it comes to the extras related to food (I.e. cake, Yom Tov specialties, chocolate and junk). Should the ones on receiving aid from others be better off than the next rank of lower middle class? I don't see why limiting what foods can be purchased on SNAP is a negative thing. The poor will have all the healthy necessities they need and their restraint will be limited to the extras. Is it really wrong to have them juggle the need for their extras, instead of placing their need for extras (birthday cakes, etc.) on the largesse of society?

Receiving aid is not supposed to be a very pleasant situation. If anything, perhaps some discomfort will encourage people to try to better their lives instead of staying stuck in the system.

Yes, I know, there are some people so poor that this is literally the only form of income they have or the bulk of it. But that doesn't negate the argument for the rest. A line has to be drawn somewhere, especially when the costs of such programs are becoming a very heavy societal burden.

I think it would make more sense to have the middle class receive some assistance too. They should also receive snap but not as much. It shouldn't just be stopped at a certain income, just become less and less.

↑ SixOfWands ↓

Tue, Feb 13 2018, 7:11 pm

HappyGoLucky1 wrote:

Indeed.

But there are people who want to micromanage food stamp recipients. Only the foods they approve of. Nothing that smacks of luxury or, indeed, of being anything but essentials (since I cannot fathom anyone considering a Duncan Hines mix as a luxury). If you're poor, you'd better look and act it.

↑ SixOfWands ↓

Tue, Feb 13 2018, 7:13 pm

creditcards wrote:

That's actually how SNAP works. There's a maximum benefit that decreases as income increases, until the point where it disappears entirely. We can debate where it ends, but that is how it works.

↑ 33055 ↓

Tue, Feb 13 2018, 7:22 pm

HappyGoLucky1 wrote:

The government is NOT there to provide fancy steaks. SNAP is there as a safety net to provide adequate nutrition. Adequate nutrition has nothing to do with subsidizing feel good food.

Tax payers should never have to pay for fancy steaks. The policy goals of the program is not to purchase rich man's food.

↑ 33055 ↓

Tue, Feb 13 2018, 7:34 pm

chaylizi wrote:

They save up months to fill the containers and purchase bulk food. The containers take months to reach their destination. Unless they can take advantage of the cheap shipping and free food, the plan doesn't work.

↑ HappyGoLucky1 ↓

Tue, Feb 13 2018, 7:42 pm

$500 is $500. If you spend $35 on fancy steaks you're paying for it out of pocket once that $500 is up. SNAP is there to provide food for people who can't afford it. WIC is there for healthy nutrition which is why you can only buy what they say.
You may not like it, and you may want to be judgey about it, but the fact remains that's $500 is $500 whether you stock up on Beans or frivolously waste it on steaks. It's nobody's place to manage someone else's food bill. A monthly SNAP balance is not enough to fit the entire food bill for the month. And no matter how you slice it $500 is $500.