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

(+) Yeah! (+)

ultimate reaver posted...

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.

This?
https://www.mediamatters.org/research/2011/07/22/fox-cites-ownership-of-appliances-to-downplay-h/148574

The whole point of that is that being poor in the US is way less awful than being poor somewhere else (give or take Scandinavia).

Uncle Choad posted...

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.

All of them?
---

Uncle Choad posted...

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.

goal isn't 'make them not broke'

goal is 'make their household have food each night so their kids don't suffer and find their way into a cycle of criminal behavior and future unstable households'
---

LordRazziel posted...

Uncle Choad posted...

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.

All of them?

It's America. Damn near everyone here is terrible with money.
The only meaningful difference is that some people don't have very much money to be terrible with.

Darkman124 posted...

Uncle Choad posted...

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.

goal isn't 'make them not broke'

goal is 'make their household have food each night so their kids don't suffer and find their way into a cycle of criminal behavior and future unstable households'

Don't bother explaining it to folks like him, he's still trying to have that fake silver spoon surgically removed from his ass - I told them that type of kinky shit can be dangerous.
---

Darkman124 posted...

Uncle Choad posted...

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.

goal isn't 'make them not broke'

goal is 'make their household have food each night so their kids don't suffer and find their way into a cycle of criminal behavior and future unstable households'

Until poverty becomes acceptable as grounds to remove a child from a household, this is just how it's going to be.

Can't they just limit food stamps to store brand stuff only

I feel like that would save a lot of money and people wouldn't even really be worse off since most store brand stuff tastes nearly identical to name brand these days.
---

littlebro07 posted...

Can't they just limit food stamps to store brand stuff only

That was pretty much the idea behind the WIC program, and that just backfired spectacularly.
https://www.cbpp.org/research/wic-only-stores-and-competitive-pricing-in-the-wic-program

There are so many free programs for people to get food and lunches and assistance.

This isn't taking food away from them it's helping them not waste money on no substance food by giving them supplies to eat more longer.
---

littlebro07 posted...

Can't they just limit food stamps to store brand stuff only

I feel like that would save a lot of money and people wouldn't even really be worse off since most store brand stuff tastes nearly identical to name brand these days.

How much money are you thinking it would save? How much do you think it would cost to implement?
---

M_Live posted...

you don't deserve any sort of happiness or rewards or even ice cream

Apparently you don't understand the difference between needs\wants or necessities\luxuries.
---

Questionmarktarius posted...

Until poverty becomes acceptable as grounds to remove a child from a household, this is just how it's going to be.

well, unless democrats take back all three houses of government now that it's established that you can pass hyper-partisan legislation via reconciliation at will

i expect that in 2020 we'll see the "Trump is a cuck" reconciliation bill passed which ends all of the tax cut legislation (except the standard deduction hike, which they'll leave to run out normally) and uses it to pay for "Obamacare 2.0: That time we hunted down Ben Nelson and injected cancer into his eyeballs." along with maybe some expansion of SNAP with a nonsensical justification that reductions in health costs will pay for everything
---

Questionmarktarius posted...

Darkman124 posted...

Uncle Choad posted...

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.

goal isn't 'make them not broke'

goal is 'make their household have food each night so their kids don't suffer and find their way into a cycle of criminal behavior and future unstable households'

Until poverty becomes acceptable as grounds to remove a child from a household, this is just how it's going to be.

Taking every child from households in poverty would cause many problems. We would still have to feed them, of course.
Giving them food is a much more sound solution.
---

M_Live posted...

This is why I can't fucking stand conservative loons. "If you're poor, fuck you, you don't deserve any sort of happiness or rewards or even ice cream." Jfc at the complete lack of empathy.

You can have ice cream, just not on my dime.
Regardless of, you know, that dime you spent on icecream being freed up by the dime I gave you to buy broccoli.

SNAP is meant to be supplemental. It's right there in the name.

emblem boy posted...

littlebro07 posted...

Can't they just limit food stamps to store brand stuff only

I feel like that would save a lot of money and people wouldn't even really be worse off since most store brand stuff tastes nearly identical to name brand these days.

How much money are you thinking it would save? How much do you think it would cost to implement?

I dunno.
---

LordRazziel posted...

Questionmarktarius posted...

Darkman124 posted...

Uncle Choad posted...

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.

goal isn't 'make them not broke'

goal is 'make their household have food each night so their kids don't suffer and find their way into a cycle of criminal behavior and future unstable households'

Until poverty becomes acceptable as grounds to remove a child from a household, this is just how it's going to be.

Taking every child from households in poverty would cause many problems. We would still have to feed them, of course.
Giving them food is a much more sound solution.

Or stop trying to illegalize abortion, but that is just my solution

littlebro07 posted...

emblem boy posted...

littlebro07 posted...

Can't they just limit food stamps to store brand stuff only

I feel like that would save a lot of money and people wouldn't even really be worse off since most store brand stuff tastes nearly identical to name brand these days.

How much money are you thinking it would save? How much do you think it would cost to implement?

I dunno.

Of course, ConAgra, Ralston, General Mills, Pepsi, etc., etc. would lobby any such proposal right into the ground.

HypnoCoosh posted...

There are so many free programs for people to get food and lunches and assistance.

This isn't taking food away from them it's helping them not waste money on no substance food by giving them supplies to eat more longer.

Name a few outside the norm, I'll wait.

The GOP is attempting to cut them ALL and here you come with this garbage.
---

Teddytalks posted...

Or stop trying to illegalize abortion, but that is just my solution

So if a person has proven to use abortion as a means for birth control say 3-4 times they get sterilized for life? How does that make you feel?
---

Questionmarktarius posted...

M_Live posted...

This is why I can't fucking stand conservative loons. "If you're poor, fuck you, you don't deserve any sort of happiness or rewards or even ice cream." Jfc at the complete lack of empathy.

You can have ice cream, just not on my dime.
Regardless of, you know, that dime you spent on icecream being freed up by the dime I gave you to buy broccoli.

SNAP is meant to be supplemental. It's right there in the name.

Posts like this tell me exactly who give to orgs that help the down-trodden and those who simply say "tell those homeless to git a jerb/stop makin baabies!" while they then complain about immigrants takin jerbs they would NEVER be willing to do themselves.
---

HypnoCoosh posted...

Teddytalks posted...

Or stop trying to illegalize abortion, but that is just my solution

So if a person has proven to use abortion as a means for birth control say 3-4 times they get sterilized for life? How does that make you feel?

It needs to be the other way around, really. Contraceptives or temporary sterilization as a condition and/or component of public assistance, with an abortion as a 'strike' that eventually ends eligibility until permanent sterilization happens.

This doesn't have to apply to just women either:
https://newatlas.com/risug-male-contraception/18824/

Questionmarktarius posted...

littlebro07 posted...

emblem boy posted...

littlebro07 posted...

Can't they just limit food stamps to store brand stuff only

I feel like that would save a lot of money and people wouldn't even really be worse off since most store brand stuff tastes nearly identical to name brand these days.

How much money are you thinking it would save? How much do you think it would cost to implement?

I dunno.

Of course, ConAgra, Ralston, General Mills, Pepsi, etc., etc. would lobby any such proposal right into the ground.

True
---

Questionmarktarius posted...

HypnoCoosh posted...

Teddytalks posted...

Or stop trying to illegalize abortion, but that is just my solution

So if a person has proven to use abortion as a means for birth control say 3-4 times they get sterilized for life? How does that make you feel?

It needs to be the other way around, really. Contraceptives or temporary sterilization as a condition and/or component of public assistance, with an abortion as a 'strike' that eventually ends eligibility until permanent sterilization happens.

This doesn't have to apply to just women either:
https://newatlas.com/risug-male-contraception/18824/

your position is much too far, but public access to reversible long-term birth control is an excellent way to limit both poverty in general, and the net payout of poverty-reducing programs, both at once

given how unintrusive and cheap vasalgel (the US variation of RISUG, different polymer but same result) is going to be, i do think it ought to be marketed wide by the govt and made available to everyone
---

Darkman124 posted...

your position is much too far, but public access to reversible long-term birth control is an excellent way to limit both poverty in general, and the net payout of poverty-reducing programs, both at once

I could live with that, yeah.

Comparing it to Blue Apron is hilarious when we all know it would be a box of cereal and some Spam

Also by the time you ship and deliver this shit wouldn't you be spending more money rather than just giving them the balance
---

JACKBUTTMOMMY posted...

GeneralZhao posted...

People really have no understanding of nutrition. Canned fruits and veggies do jack for you.

Please try not to generalize. They are obviously beneficial. Just avoid fruits with syrups. They might not be as nutritious as fresh, but it's still worlds better thank junk or fast food.

If it's a can with just one ingredient and water, it's still going to be fairly healthy.

DezDroppedFreak posted...

Comparing it to Blue Apron is hilarious when we all know it would be a box of cereal and some Spam

I wouldn't be at all surprised if there's greater value in smelting sodium out of the food, than the value of the food itself.

JACKBUTTMOMMY posted...

GeneralZhao posted...

People really have no understanding of nutrition. Canned fruits and veggies do jack for you.

Please try not to generalize. They are obviously beneficial. Just avoid fruits with syrups. They might not be as nutritious as fresh, but it's still worlds better thank junk or fast food.

Yup they also have the low or no sugar canned fruits.
---

Questionmarktarius posted...

I wouldn't be at all surprised if there's greater value in smelting sodium out of the food, than the value of the food itself.

and yet, it'd still likely cost more than letting people buy it on their own. 1/3 of the operating cost of blue apron is shipping.

and "government is inefficient" or something
---

Darkman124 posted...

Questionmarktarius posted...

I wouldn't be at all surprised if there's greater value in smelting sodium out of the food, than the value of the food itself.

and yet, it'd still likely cost more than letting people buy it on their own. 1/3 of the operating cost of blue apron is shipping.

and "government is inefficient" or something

There's a very, very simple way to end poverty immediately, but it's still socially unthinkable and probably financially unsustainable: Just mail everyone a check for exactly the poverty line.

Questionmarktarius posted...

Darkman124 posted...

Questionmarktarius posted...

I wouldn't be at all surprised if there's greater value in smelting sodium out of the food, than the value of the food itself.

and yet, it'd still likely cost more than letting people buy it on their own. 1/3 of the operating cost of blue apron is shipping.

and "government is inefficient" or something

There's a very, very simple way to end poverty immediately, but it's still socially unthinkable and probably financially unsustainable: Just mail everyone a check for exactly the poverty line.

What kind of point are you trying to make, here?
I'm lost.
---

As someone who went through Irma/Maria and got food stamps (DSNAP cards) from it, trust me when I say you don't want this. I was lucky enough to have my job, and house throughout the storms and was able to buy my own food no problem. But for the people who had to live off of MREs and other canned and preserved meals, they had it rough because of how salty the food was. So people who previously had medical problems like diabetes under control were much worse off after eating that food. I can't trust the government to deliver large quantities of food of good quality on a routine basis.

With food stamps, you can buy from your own super market at your own convenience with the added bonus of the "money" supporting the super markets in the community. This proposed plan sounds like a ploy for someone else to make money off.
---

NinjaBreakfast posted...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rVza_AnhQ3E

Smdh ungrateful liberals not appreciating their cost effective, nutritious food box!

It's funny because that's from UK. But, I guess you can find many reasons to hate on Trump.
---

LordRazziel posted...

Questionmarktarius posted...

Darkman124 posted...

Questionmarktarius posted...

I wouldn't be at all surprised if there's greater value in smelting sodium out of the food, than the value of the food itself.

and yet, it'd still likely cost more than letting people buy it on their own. 1/3 of the operating cost of blue apron is shipping.

and "government is inefficient" or something

There's a very, very simple way to end poverty immediately, but it's still socially unthinkable and probably financially unsustainable: Just mail everyone a check for exactly the poverty line.

What kind of point are you trying to make, here?
I'm lost.

Basic Income isn't too terrible an idea, in theory at least.
There's countless scenarios where it'll get badly screwed up, though.

Antifar posted...

r4X0r posted...

The plan will only be opposed because it's Trump proposing it.

I can't imagine why Trump specifically would provoke doubt regarding a food distribution plan
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/06/us/fema-contract-puerto-rico.html

Three different US Army Generals said it literally was PR's fault.
---

darkjedilink posted...

Three different US Army Generals said it literally was PR's fault.

Did you read the article, or just see Puerto Rico and have a kneejerk response to what you thought the article would be about?
---

Questionmarktarius posted...

Darkman124 posted...

Questionmarktarius posted...

I wouldn't be at all surprised if there's greater value in smelting sodium out of the food, than the value of the food itself.

and yet, it'd still likely cost more than letting people buy it on their own. 1/3 of the operating cost of blue apron is shipping.

and "government is inefficient" or something

There's a very, very simple way to end poverty immediately, but it's still socially unthinkable and probably financially unsustainable: Just mail everyone a check for exactly the poverty line.

LOL Are you being serious bro? Cause that has been done before. And you know what? It worked.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/17/magazine/switzerlands-proposal-to-pay-people-for-being-alive.html?pagewanted=all
---

This is such a brilliant plan in every way. The only reason there's backlash is because it's coming from Trump (obviously) and because welfare recipients have been cheating the system and think they're entitled to it. This solves all the problems in one motion.

It creates more jobs for the drivers to deliver the food. It creates more jobs in the creation of the food. It keeps welfare types out of the stores so I don't have to deal with them. It gives them what they need to live, which is what welfare is meant to do and hasn't actually been in quite a long time.
---

Sad_Face posted...

As someone who went through Irma/Maria and got food stamps (DSNAP cards) from it, trust me when I say you don't want this. I was lucky enough to have my job, and house throughout the storms and was able to buy my own food no problem. But for the people who had to live off of MREs and other canned and preserved meals, they had it rough because of how salty the food was. So people who previously had medical problems like diabetes under control were much worse off after eating that food. I can't trust the government to deliver large quantities of food of good quality on a routine basis.

With food stamps, you can buy from your own super market at your own convenience with the added bonus of the "money" supporting the super markets in the community. This proposed plan sounds like a ploy for someone else to make money off.

More perspective that will be ignored, but bootstraps, etc.
---

KazumaKiryu posted...

It creates more jobs for the drivers to deliver the food. It creates more jobs in the creation of the food. It keeps welfare types out of the stores so I don't have to deal with them. It gives them what they need to live, which is what welfare is meant to do and hasn't actually been in quite a long time.

You should be a rep for the GOP
---

KazumaKiryu posted...

This is such a brilliant plan in every way. The only reason there's backlash is because it's coming from Trump (obviously) and because welfare recipients have been cheating the system and think they're entitled to it. This solves all the problems in one motion.

It creates more jobs for the drivers to deliver the food. It creates more jobs in the creation of the food. It keeps welfare types out of the stores so I don't have to deal with them. It gives them what they need to live, which is what welfare is meant to do and hasn't actually been in quite a long time.

Good point reducing people need for bus fair or other travel costs.
---

KazumaKiryu posted...

This is such a brilliant plan in every way. The only reason there's backlash is because it's coming from Trump (obviously) and because welfare recipients have been cheating the system and think they're entitled to it. This solves all the problems in one motion.

It creates more jobs for the drivers to deliver the food. It creates more jobs in the creation of the food. It keeps welfare types out of the stores so I don't have to deal with them. It gives them what they need to live, which is what welfare is meant to do and hasn't actually been in quite a long time.

Well said.
---

Questionmarktarius posted...

LordRazziel posted...

Questionmarktarius posted...

Darkman124 posted...

Questionmarktarius posted...

I wouldn't be at all surprised if there's greater value in smelting sodium out of the food, than the value of the food itself.

and yet, it'd still likely cost more than letting people buy it on their own. 1/3 of the operating cost of blue apron is shipping.

and "government is inefficient" or something

There's a very, very simple way to end poverty immediately, but it's still socially unthinkable and probably financially unsustainable: Just mail everyone a check for exactly the poverty line.

What kind of point are you trying to make, here?
I'm lost.

Basic Income isn't too terrible an idea, in theory at least.
There's countless scenarios where it'll get badly screwed up, though.

Gotcha.
I couldn't begin to comment on effective implementation, but there would obviously be some issues that would need ironing out.
---

It's very sad to see Americans want other Americans to go hungry. They make up lies about their fellow Americans to justify their positions. Very anti American. Very sad.

How does someone go hungry when he's been mailed a box of food?

Questionmarktarius posted...

How does someone go hungry when he's been mailed a box of food?

Jokes on you, pal they'll be mailed a box of deplorables.
---

Darkman124 posted...

Questionmarktarius posted...

Until poverty becomes acceptable as grounds to remove a child from a household, this is just how it's going to be.

well, unless democrats take back all three houses of government now that it's established that you can pass hyper-partisan legislation via reconciliation at will

i expect that in 2020 we'll see the "Trump is a cuck" reconciliation bill passed which ends all of the tax cut legislation (except the standard deduction hike, which they'll leave to run out normally) and uses it to pay for "Obamacare 2.0: That time we hunted down Ben Nelson and injected cancer into his eyeballs." along with maybe some expansion of SNAP with a nonsensical justification that reductions in health costs will pay for everything

---

Questionmarktarius posted...

How does someone go hungry when he's been mailed a box of food?

I just think it costs more money in the end, and we both know the food sent would be like spam, Vienna, and some canned cream corn

I'd rather they just get their full balance and have the chance to get actual food. It's not like you can just get whatever you want
---

byrone posted...

It's very sad to see Americans want other Americans to go hungry

Ummmmm it's almost like you haven't read the thread at all.

People are still getting food and if anything food that has more nutritional value than garbage they buy at the store and they get it delivered right to their door step.
---