Trump Budget Would Swap Food Stamps for ‘100% American’ Food Packages
57 replies, posted
[QUOTE=Alice3173;53127967]You say that as if bottled water wasn't massively overpriced garbage to begin with.[/QUOTE]
Yes, but for some people, it's their only source of drinking water.
I'd never drink the tap water in this state even if my life depended on it because of the ultra metallic taste it always has, no matter where I get a drink of it from.
[QUOTE=RaraKnight;53128292]Yes, but for some people, it's their only source of drinking water.
I'd never drink the tap water in this state even if my life depended on it because of the ultra metallic taste it always has, no matter where I get a drink of it from.[/QUOTE]
Out of curiosity, would something like a filtration system for the house or maybe stuff like Brita jugs not be more economical in the long run than going through that much plastic waste?
They are basically getting evaporated milk and boxed food, no fruits or vegetables, no food choice and the food isnt shipped to their house so many of these people won't have an easy way to obtain it.
If implemented with the people in mind I could see this being a not so terrible thing, but the way it is proposed would do so much damage.
[QUOTE=snookypookums;53128378]Out of curiosity, would something like a filtration system for the house or maybe stuff like Brita jugs not be more economical in the long run than going through that much plastic waste?[/QUOTE]
Ultimately, the best route is to get a cooler and a 3-5 gallon jug of whatever local purified water you can buy. Some cities even have refill stations where you refill 5 gallons for like $3 or something, as opposed to even buying the $0.89 gallon jugs of purified water at Wal-Mart.
Loot boxes but for whether you'll live or die today or not. Also not taking into account if you're allergic.
Some dude on Twitter mentioned that when you're poor one of the most efficient sources of calories is cake mix because it's like 4000 cals for < $1 and also chips and pop do a good job too. You only have $100 of stamps for the month and then you get fucking fat and malnourished because a head of cabbage is only like 300 cals.
Also you can't get shampoo or tp with food stamps so that's probably why they get lobsters and sell them.
Somehow with my military pay and benefits I was eligible to apply for WIC when I lived in Japan and my wife was pregnant. I do think food stamp programs like SNAP and WIC need a huge revamp, not because they're bad to begin with but that they're so horribly, unevenly run from state to state. However I don't think shipping people shitty, homeless shelter-esqe food packages with powdered milk is a good solution.
[QUOTE=Ta16;53129783]Somehow with my military pay and benefits I was eligible to apply for WIC when I lived in Japan and my wife was pregnant. I do think food stamp programs like SNAP and WIC need a huge revamp, not because they're bad to begin with but that they're so horribly, unevenly run from state to state. However I don't think shipping people shitty, homeless shelter-esqe food packages with powdered milk is a good solution.[/QUOTE]
Don't worry, they'll probably be sent Trump Steak, Trump Bottled Water, etc. instead.
[QUOTE=BlindSniper17;53129787]Don't worry, they'll probably be sent Trump Steak, Trump Bottled Water, etc. instead.[/QUOTE]
And my favorite item in this food package:
[IMG]http://media.breitbart.com/media/2016/12/unnamed-640x480.png[/IMG]
I've heard a few people refer to this as "Trumps Blue Apron"
I do not understand how people have faith like that.
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;53129817]I've heard a few people refer to this as "Trumps Blue Apron"
I do not understand how people have faith like that.[/QUOTE]
Other than the fact that foods are combined in package nothing about that comparison makes sense.
There's a part of me that feels like he'll ship off MRE's to everyone and then use the argument of "What, you think you deserve better food than what our brave soldiers are eating, you spoilt little shits?"
I mean, it's just the sort of argument that they'd use to back such an idea - get rid of MRE's, make money for the contractors involved in these things.
:why:
Even if you wanted to make the comparison are people really going to stand there and say that a service like Blue Apron, with all of its overhead, is going to be less expensive than simply giving people EBT?
[QUOTE=Raidyr;53129837]Even if you wanted to make the comparison are people really going to stand there and say that a service like Blue Apron, with all of its overhead, is going to be less expensive than simply giving people EBT?[/QUOTE]
I wish I knew but it's just dumb people commenting on things and saying genuinely baffling things
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;53129844]I wish I knew but it's just dumb people commenting on things and saying genuinely baffling things[/QUOTE]
I think its quite naive to have faith in the people who are making deep cuts to welfare to have a genuine interest in caring for the dietary needs of those in poverty.
[QUOTE=Raidyr;53129852]I think its quite naive to have faith in the people who are making deep cuts to welfare to have a genuine interest in caring for the dietary needs of those in poverty.[/QUOTE]
I wouldn't trust anyone who lies about crowd sizes.
The problem with getting rid of Supermarket middle-men is that you also lose the entire infrastructure they already have to distrubte large amounts of varied food across huge geograhpic distances. Most Food Stamp recipients live in rural areas which would be a nightmare to deliever to if the government has to make their own delievery infrastructure.
This proposal will not save the public any money. It will take more dignity away from the poor. It won't solve anything but create a bunch more problems.
Studies have shown people using EMT actually buy items at nearly exactly the same rate as regular people, an example would be EMT's spend 2.1% of the money on candy whereas regular people send 2.2% of their money on candy. It's a sterotype that people on stamps can't make food choices for themselves and the few that do make bad choices do it because of poverty forcing them to do so and this program won't solve that for them but make their lifes even more complicated.
It's likely this program would result in less people getting food and more despair and poverty throughout the nation.
[QUOTE=Thom12255;53129936]The problem with getting rid of Supermarket middle-men is that you also lose the entire infrastructure they already have to distrubte large amounts of varied food across huge geograhpic distances. Most Food Stamp recipients live in rural areas which would be a nightmare to deliever to if the government has to make their own delievery infrastructure.
This proposal will not save the public any money. It will take more dignity away from the poor. It won't solve anything but create a bunch more problems.
Studies have shown people using EMT actually buy items at nearly exactly the same rate as regular people, an example would be EMT's spend 2.1% of the money on candy whereas regular people send 2.2% of their money on candy. It's a sterotype that people on stamps can't make food choices for themselves and the few that do make bad choices do it because of poverty forcing them to do so and this program won't solve that for them but make their lifes even more complicated.
It's likely this program would result in less people getting food and more despair and poverty throughout the nation.[/QUOTE]
Grocery stores generally operate on very tight margins. While they do have a markup on the product they get in, there is also the issue of spoilage to consider. Having worked in produce at a larger store, we'd often in the course of a day throw out four to five large garbage bins of compost (some was inedible parts like peels, but most was formally edible food). It's kinda silly to think that a government would be able to provide distribution and handling of spoilage better than places which operate an entire business on it.
Then, as someone already mentioned having a fixed "package" would really screw with people with allergies. Allergic to gluten? Well, there goes all the cereal and pasta.
If they really wanted to go down the route of "making sure people eat healthy", I would think it would make more sense to set guidelines and prices (stamps) for packages featuring a number of items (such as "at least 500g of canned black beans"), and let grocery stores assemble the packages. The government would refund the cost of the discount for each package sold. Amount of stamps given out remains unchanged, and the people are the ones who decide if they should get it. But I doubt they really have the best intentions at heart.
(Disclaimer, am Canadian, have no idea if such a thing is feasible or exactly what the food stamp program entails)
[QUOTE=ForgottenKane;53127760]This is such a hilariously communist idea that it's bizarre that it's coming from a Republican administration
I guess anything goes when fucking the poor lmao[/QUOTE]
It would be very interesting if the government forced the peasants to get the majority of their calories from legumes and grains like hordearii gladiators. :freakout:
I smell the beginnings of another hyper-inflated money sink. Can't wait for when the government decides that $5/ea for apples is simply the best way to spend your tax dollars, no fuckery going on here.
I always hear the argument that you shouldn't vote for left wing parties because they will destroy the economy, spending loads of your money attempting to help people who are worse off.
but in practice, the right seems to spend just as much of your money on the poor- only they are trying to make life harder and less dignified for those people.
[QUOTE=fulgrim;53130130]I always hear the argument that you shouldn't vote for left wing parties because they will destroy the economy, spending loads of your money attempting to help people who are worse off.
but in practice, the right seems to spend just as much of your money on the poor- only they are trying to make life harder and less dignified for those people.[/QUOTE]
To be honest I don't really see the right supporting this other than its because Trump wants it. The ideal conservative position is getting rid of entitlements altogether and having people rely exclusively on charities.
[QUOTE=RichyZ;53130172]to be fair
[url]https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2017/08/14/63-million-americans-exposed-unsafe-drinking-water/564278001/[/url][/QUOTE]
That doesn't really negate it being overpriced garbage though. It just reflects impressively poorly on our government for being the richest nation in the world yet somehow being incapable of providing adequately clean water to an enormous chunk of our populace. Bottled water is no higher quality than what our tap water actually should be. And in far too many cases is still actually worse. For the price they charge for it you get totally ripped off.
Edit:
[QUOTE=snookypookums;53128378]Out of curiosity, would something like a filtration system for the house or maybe stuff like Brita jugs not be more economical in the long run than going through that much plastic waste?[/QUOTE]
It would be far more economical but most people aren't willing to bother putting out the required effort.
[QUOTE=Raidyr;53130165]To be honest I don't really see the right supporting this other than its because Trump wants it. The ideal conservative position is getting rid of entitlements altogether and having people rely exclusively on charities.[/QUOTE]
Usually, getting rid of all those entitlements is a process that will actually cost money though, and I wasn't just basing my opinion on Trump and Trump alone.
The conservative government in my country spends a fortune attempting to deny disability benefits to those eligible, for example.
They also spend several times the amount of taxpayer money lost to benefit fraud on draconian measures they claim to be implementing to prevent losing money to benefit fraud.
The only real effects that this seems to have is haemorrhaging money, and making poor people miserable.
[url]http://money.cnn.com/2018/02/12/news/economy/food-stamps-box-blue-apron/index.html[/url]
Oh so it wasn't some random internet poster calling it Blue Apron for the poors
[B]it was Mick fucking Mulvaney[/B]
[QUOTE=snookypookums;53129836]There's a part of me that feels like he'll ship off MRE's to everyone and then use the argument of "What, you think you deserve better food than what our brave soldiers are eating, you spoilt little shits?"
I mean, it's just the sort of argument that they'd use to back such an idea - get rid of MRE's, make money for the contractors involved in these things.
:why:[/QUOTE]
MRE's are expensive to manufacture. They won't be handed out.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.