Current Events > Trump admin wants to partially replace food stamps with food deliveries

(+) Yeah! (+)

this seems like it would be much more expensive and wildly inefficient
---

gunplagirl posted...

Is that accounting for people who violate the terms of SNAP benefits by also gifting food to others outside their household?

gifts are not exchanges for cash. it also accounts for several other forms of fraud.
---

Why did they stop doing this in the first place? As I said, I remember being a kid and poor as fuck and having a nice man deliver all kinds of drinks and food to our house. It was like Christmas every time they delivered.
---

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IiGr5TOHW1Y
---

Not a bad idea but that is incurring more infrastructure to manage. Does kind of defy the system that the Republicans think weighs down the country.
---

Asherlee10 posted...

It is correct that you can't buy junk food with SNAP, right?

that is not correct.

https://www.fns.usda.gov/snap/eligible-food-items

The Food and Nutrition Act of 2008 (the Act) defines eligible food as any food or food product for home consumption and also includes seeds and plants which produce food for consumption by SNAP households. The Act precludes the following items from being purchased with SNAP benefits: alcoholic beverages, tobacco products, hot food and any food sold for on-premises consumption. Nonfood items such as pet foods, soaps, paper products, medicines and vitamins, household supplies, grooming items, and cosmetics, also are ineligible for purchase with SNAP benefits.

Soft drinks, candy, cookies, snack crackers, and ice cream are food items and are therefore eligible items
Seafood, steak, and bakery cakes are also food items and are therefore eligible items

---

Darkman124 posted...

gunplagirl posted...

Is that accounting for people who violate the terms of SNAP benefits by also gifting food to others outside their household?

gifts are not exchanges for cash. it also accounts for several other forms of fraud.

Hmm. I had SNAP for a few months and one of the things they stressed was that you aren't allowed to buy food for anyone else. But I do see how it probably is limited only to "in exchange for something else"
---

Asherlee10 posted...

It is correct that you can't buy junk food with SNAP, right?

Soda and chips are in the top ten most things bought
---

gunplagirl posted...

Darkman124 posted...

gunplagirl posted...

Is that accounting for people who violate the terms of SNAP benefits by also gifting food to others outside their household?

gifts are not exchanges for cash. it also accounts for several other forms of fraud.

Hmm. I had SNAP for a few months and one of the things they stressed was that you aren't allowed to buy food for anyone else. But I do see how it probably is limited only to "in exchange for something else"

most likely, the intent is that in providing food for someone else, you may prevent them from applying for their own SNAP benefit. which they would qualify for if they need gifts of food from an existing SNAP beneficiary.

basically they want you to eat what you get and anyone else who needs food to get it from them

but they are not gonna come after you for helping someone for free. charity is never illegal.
---

Asherlee10 posted...

It is correct that you can't buy junk food with SNAP, right?

IIRC you can't buy prepared food, which would include a lot of prepackaged stuff
---

Darkman124 posted...

gunplagirl posted...

Darkman124 posted...

gunplagirl posted...

Is that accounting for people who violate the terms of SNAP benefits by also gifting food to others outside their household?

gifts are not exchanges for cash. it also accounts for several other forms of fraud.

Hmm. I had SNAP for a few months and one of the things they stressed was that you aren't allowed to buy food for anyone else. But I do see how it probably is limited only to "in exchange for something else"

most likely, the intent is that in providing food for someone else, you may prevent them from applying for their own SNAP benefit. which they would qualify for if they need gifts of food from an existing SNAP beneficiary.

basically they want you to eat what you get and anyone else who needs food to get it from them

but they are not gonna come after you for helping someone for free. charity is never illegal.

Well, with exceptions like "you can't give food to homeless people without a permit and food handler's licenses" or "you can't give homeless people sleeping bags in the downtown area" because some cities are awful like that.
---

eston posted...

Asherlee10 posted...

It is correct that you can't buy junk food with SNAP, right?

IIRC you can't buy prepared food, which would include a lot of prepackaged stuff

If it is heated up, they can't sell you it and you can't heat it up in the store afterwards

So none of those nachos at 7/11 for instance

But slurpies? You can buy them with snap as long as the straw isn't opened and in it. Because in that case it would be ready to consume.
---

HypnoCoosh posted...

Asherlee10 posted...

It is correct that you can't buy junk food with SNAP, right?

Soda and chips are in the top ten most things bought

yeah, the food buying habits of SNAP recipients mirror the general populace almost exactly
---

gunplagirl posted...

Well, with exceptions like "you can't give food to homeless people without a permit and food handler's licenses" or "you can't give homeless people sleeping bags in the downtown area" because some cities are awful like that.

this sounds like a local government issue.
---

Seems like a horrible idea. If the government shut down do people starve? How will they decide what rations are "enough"? Is any of this food going to be good to eat? It seem like a plan that nobody asked for designed to hurt those that doesn't bother or affect anyone. At best, it would be a subpar replacement to a current system that only works to make the people on food stamps less happy, as there is like zero chance of anything nice coming up for them anymore. Birthday's? Holidays? Bye bye to that, eat bullshit canned peaches for dinner.

At worst, people starve to death. Only a moron could've conceived such a plan, and only the heartless and misguided can think this is a good one. I hope it passes so congressman and women will finally start getting kicked out. You make people this unhappy, they will respond in tow.

On one hand that's going to make the bureaucracy problem way worse.

On the other hand, liberals have been complaining about how underprivileged areas are food deserts and this is definitely a potential solution to that problem.
---

TheMikh posted...

On one hand that's going to make the bureaucracy problem way worse.

On the other hand, liberals have been complaining about how underprivileged areas are food deserts and this is definitely a potential solution to that problem.

Both correct. I would want to see the details of this program, how the bidding process will work, and how quality will be maintained, and the cost of such a program.

Balrog0 posted...

yeah, the food buying habits of SNAP recipients mirror the general populace almost exactly

If you're getting free money because you "can't afford to eat" you should not be using those funds to buy soda and Doritos.

I spend a lot of money on luxuries because I can afford it.

Necessities > wants\luxuries ALWAYS.
---

Asherlee10 posted...

Okay, so then the added benefit of this new food delivery idea is that we know we are getting them healthy food, which pays off in the long run when it comes to healthcare, right?

depends on exactly what is in the packages, whether the recipients continue to spend the same % of their now-smaller EBT cards on junk food or increase that % to maintain their same overall diet, and whether the increased cost of shipping this supposedly 'healthier' food to them outstrips the reduction in medicaid payouts associated with a healthier diet among medicaid participants.

most likely, it will not pay off in the long term, mainly for the second reason: the most probable outcome is these people simply buy more junk food with their remaining benefits in order to maintain their existing standard of living, essentially taking the box-o-food out of their normal expenditures. which would make the entire program a complete waste of federal money.
---

Asherlee10 posted...

Darkman124 posted...

Asherlee10 posted...

It is correct that you can't buy junk food with SNAP, right?

that is not correct.

https://www.fns.usda.gov/snap/eligible-food-items

The Food and Nutrition Act of 2008 (the Act) defines eligible food as any food or food product for home consumption and also includes seeds and plants which produce food for consumption by SNAP households. The Act precludes the following items from being purchased with SNAP benefits: alcoholic beverages, tobacco products, hot food and any food sold for on-premises consumption. Nonfood items such as pet foods, soaps, paper products, medicines and vitamins, household supplies, grooming items, and cosmetics, also are ineligible for purchase with SNAP benefits.

Soft drinks, candy, cookies, snack crackers, and ice cream are food items and are therefore eligible items
Seafood, steak, and bakery cakes are also food items and are therefore eligible items

Okay, so then the added benefit of this new food delivery idea is that we know we are getting them healthy food, which pays off in the long run when it comes to healthcare, right?

No. Canned food isn't healthy really, and mostly just bleh. It doesn't take much to buy some chicken breasts, vegetables, fruits and other healthy stuff from like Aldi's and live comfortably. The problem with the food delivery idea is that it doesn't address anything at all, and really only serve to make them less happy. If you want proper nutrition you have to change the American diet, and that means removing bread and high calories fatteners like sugar and greasy food. Those three alone would significantly help American diets.

HypnoCoosh posted...

If you're getting free money because you "can't afford to eat" you should not be using those funds to buy soda and Doritos.

I spend a lot of money on luxuries because I can afford it.

Necessities > wants\luxuries ALWAYS.

SNAP benefits aren't enough for almost anyone on the program to survive on them exclusively. So even if you're right (hard to say, soda is pretty cheap, chips aren't) the issue is that people will still buy those things with their actual money... or in the case of this program, their real money and their remaining SNAP benefits

if you want to help with healthcare costs, then you need to ban sugar sweetened beverages from SNAP AND tax them. if you just want to cut SNAP beneifts to people you consider unworthy, just cut SNAP by limiting eligibility. this program is dumb.
---

Balrog0 posted...

if you want to help with healthcare costs, then you need to ban sugar sweetened beverages from SNAP AND tax them

yep. i would endorse such a plan.
---

Teddytalks posted...

The problem with the food delivery idea is that it doesn't address anything at all, and really only serve to make them less happy.

The public safety net should never be a hammock.

Questionmarktarius posted...

Teddytalks posted...

The problem with the food delivery idea is that it doesn't address anything at all, and really only serve to make them less happy.

The public safety net should never be a hammock.

lucky ducky comic goes here
---

Darkman124 posted...

gunplagirl posted...

Darkman124 posted...

gunplagirl posted...

Is that accounting for people who violate the terms of SNAP benefits by also gifting food to others outside their household?

gifts are not exchanges for cash. it also accounts for several other forms of fraud.

Hmm. I had SNAP for a few months and one of the things they stressed was that you aren't allowed to buy food for anyone else. But I do see how it probably is limited only to "in exchange for something else"

most likely, the intent is that in providing food for someone else, you may prevent them from applying for their own SNAP benefit. which they would qualify for if they need gifts of food from an existing SNAP beneficiary.

basically they want you to eat what you get and anyone else who needs food to get it from them

but they are not gonna come after you for helping someone for free. charity is never illegal.

People also ask you to buy them things like cigarettes and in exchange, they will put your food on their SNAP card. Happens all the time at convenience stores.
---

Darkman124 posted...

Balrog0 posted...

if you want to help with healthcare costs, then you need to ban sugar sweetened beverages from SNAP AND tax them

yep. i would endorse such a plan.

I would extend that to sugar sweets like cakes and such as well. Carbs like that and sugars alike are just junk food that should be removed.

Questionmarktarius posted...

Teddytalks posted...

The problem with the food delivery idea is that it doesn't address anything at all, and really only serve to make them less happy.

The public safety net should never be a hammock.

people on SNAP already need to meet work requirements after 3 months. if they do not, they have to wait 3 years to re-enroll

to be fair, this only applies to 'able bodied adults without dependents' but as I am always telling you conservatives you go and tell people that oldies and kids need to work for their bread
---

LordRazziel posted...

People also ask you to buy them things like cigarettes and in exchange, they will put your food on their SNAP card. Happens all the time at convenience stores.

'all the time' is not quantifiable and is thus useless conjecture that should be ignored in public discourse.

'1% of all SNAP dollars spent' is quantifiable and indicates that such abuse is irrelevant
---

Questionmarktarius posted...

Teddytalks posted...

The problem with the food delivery idea is that it doesn't address anything at all, and really only serve to make them less happy.

The public safety net should never be a hammock.

It never was. If you ever spoke to people on such programs, they aren't happy with their situations. I doubt you do know such a thing if you consider it to ever be a hammock, and I am focusing moreso on the kids, as the people who qualify for these things almost all ways have kids.

I just want to point out that almost everyone in this thread has a fortunate enough life where they don't seem to have to use any of these benefits from the government. God bless.
---

Teddytalks posted...

as the people who qualify for these things almost all ways have kids.

mmm hmm.

Household Size Gross monthly income
1 $1,307

2 $1,760

3 $2,213

4 $2,665
---

Balrog0 posted...

oldies and kids need to work for their bread

I always thought the government food was good if you knew how to cook lol

I don't think anyone is saying take away food from people who need it. Just saying tune up what they can and can't get.

If you're that poor and hungry you would want actual meals and not garbage food with no substance.
---

Asherlee10 posted...

But I may have been wrongly assuming that these food deliveries would be fresh produce and healthy proteins.

yes, most definitely. blue apron does that. a single serving meal from them costs $10.
---

Uncle Choad posted...

I just want to point out that almost everyone in this thread has a fortunate enough life where they don't seem to have to use any of these benefits from the government. God bless.

If anything, this shouldn't even be means-tested. No direct-disbursement of commodities should.

Asherlee10 posted...

Teddytalks posted...

Asherlee10 posted...

Darkman124 posted...

Asherlee10 posted...

It is correct that you can't buy junk food with SNAP, right?

that is not correct.

https://www.fns.usda.gov/snap/eligible-food-items

The Food and Nutrition Act of 2008 (the Act) defines eligible food as any food or food product for home consumption and also includes seeds and plants which produce food for consumption by SNAP households. The Act precludes the following items from being purchased with SNAP benefits: alcoholic beverages, tobacco products, hot food and any food sold for on-premises consumption. Nonfood items such as pet foods, soaps, paper products, medicines and vitamins, household supplies, grooming items, and cosmetics, also are ineligible for purchase with SNAP benefits.

Soft drinks, candy, cookies, snack crackers, and ice cream are food items and are therefore eligible items
Seafood, steak, and bakery cakes are also food items and are therefore eligible items

Okay, so then the added benefit of this new food delivery idea is that we know we are getting them healthy food, which pays off in the long run when it comes to healthcare, right?

No. Canned food isn't healthy really, and mostly just bleh. It doesn't take much to buy some chicken breasts, vegetables, fruits and other healthy stuff from like Aldi's and live comfortably. The problem with the food delivery idea is that it doesn't address anything at all, and really only serve to make them less happy. If you want proper nutrition you have to change the American diet, and that means removing bread and high calories fatteners like sugar and greasy food. Those three alone would significantly help American diets.

I don't disagree that this is definitely a problem within the middle class, too.

But I may have been wrongly assuming that these food deliveries would be fresh produce and healthy proteins.

They can't even get food to Miami, a natural disaster victim that did nothing wrong. Why would they successfully delivered anything decent to American favorite whipping child, the poor? The more it is thought on, the more this idea looks downright terrible.

People who hate poor people enough that they get pissed off that they're getting a 99 cent bag of great value doritos and a two liter for their kids or for themselves or whatever are pretty awful. Having to get food stamps doesn't preclude you or your family from enjoying snacks like everyone else, and them purchasing them doesn't affect you any more than them getting any other type of food. It reminds me of that Fox News segment from years back that was acting appalled that most people below the poverty line owned a fridge.

Not only that, but if this happens it might go over well with detatched ironic tough guys on the internet but it's going to make a lot of poor southern republican voters pretty unhappy
---

Teddytalks posted...

They can't even get food to Miami, a natural disaster victim that did nothing wrong. Why would they successfully delivered anything decent to American favorite whipping child, the poor? The more it is thought on, the more this idea looks downright terrible.

Ship it via the post office, so it can arrive five days late... to the wrong address.

ultimate reaver posted...

Having to get food stamps doesn't preclude you or your family from enjoying snacks like everyone else, and them purchasing them doesn't affect you any more than them getting any other type of food. It reminds me of that Fox News segment from years back that was acting appalled that most people below the poverty line owned a fridge.

---

Darkman124 posted...

LordRazziel posted...

People also ask you to buy them things like cigarettes and in exchange, they will put your food on their SNAP card. Happens all the time at convenience stores.

'all the time' is not quantifiable and is thus useless conjecture that should be ignored in public discourse.

'1% of all SNAP dollars spent' is quantifiable and indicates that such abuse is irrelevant

I wasn't saying that it should be used for any sort of decision making.
Just sharing, man.
---

Teddytalks posted...

American favorite whipping child, the poor

Oh for Christs sake please. Stop it with this nonsense.
---

Asherlee10 posted...

Slightly related, each time I go to the grocery store I buy several of these "Five-Dollar-Bags" that include fresh produce and protein in them. They are handed out to those in need via the Food Bank. They seem to be working really well in our area.

Can I get more info on this please?

Why don't we just have a nationwide ATM where people can take free money out when they need it?

Maybe one day. Bernie2020
---

r4X0r posted...

Lol not really, just the facts.

Facts are lost on you - don't bastardize the word.
---

Uncle Choad posted...

Why don't we just have a nationwide ATM where people can take free money out when they need it?

Maybe one day. Bernie2020

Really, though, why not?

Just hand out no-strings cash to the poor, and it's their own damn fault if they starve anyway.

Threads like this should (but they don't) remind people that there will always be the problem of "these people suck with money".

Give them as many handouts as you want, but they'll still end up being broke at the end of the month.
---