To be clear, I’m not sure I was even at poverty level. But I was for a few months at least at a level where gaming things out for the next 3-6 months, it was easy for me to see how I was one thing going wrong away from being in some dire straits, and I wanted to know what kinds of things I might be able to avail myself of in case of that worst-case scenario.
And honestly, though it’s weird to say it now, I’m glad all of that happened. You get a new appreciation for the value of saving and investing, and for how to stay within a budget and how to plan better for short-term and long-term good outcomes. And it’s an eye opener, too. Again, you don’t have to be fully hip-deep in that situation, but have it be close enough to consider it as a plausible eventuality, to suddenly “get” a whole lot of stuff. You’ll end up never begrudging the few scraps that people who do live every day in that situation manage to get from the government.
I am going to bow out of P&R because it brings out the worst in people (me included) and people are very emotional about a lot of topics (me included) and also that little new post indicator is too addictive under those circumstances. Bit before that, three things:
I’m sorry for anyone I offended, I was trying to argue from the side of the recipients, pretty much my point failed miserably. But still sorry.
I have been poor, I put myself through college without help and did the ramen thing for many years, during and after college. Single poor is way different than trying to raise a family poor, bit I’m not from wealth or anything. Growing up all my close friends lived in trailer parks.
Thanks for the compliment, jpinard, I appreciate it.
Yeah, and because they’re poor, they might just deal with it or not eat. SNAP is supposed to not just fill bellies with whatever food we have, it’s got actual goals to a healthy diet and a lifetime learning about what healthy food looks like. And they’re meeting their goals, today.
This box thing does not indicate they intend to change any goals, so the only thing they’re doing with it iss trying to cut costs… and while he throws this box idea out they’re discussing cutting SNAP regardless.
It can absolutely hurt people to be on a the wrong diet, and kill them if we provide them with food they cannot eat and no means to get it change. As if they’re suppose to wait weeks and not eat while some paperwork gets worked on to change their box, assuming they have even thought that far ahead.
I’ve been on SNAP, and I’ve gong periods of my life when I went one week on a dozen eggs and a bag of salad that turned brown by Friday. I was judged by people in both situations. And guess what, neither experience made me want to stay in that position.
Big fann of Amazon here, their prices on food are not good for the area. A poor person ordering from Amazon would wind up paying more for food from there, and it’s not even fresh.
I doubt Ducker hates poor people too. He’s just repeating a common misconception about poor people and SNAP. The story of the guy buying lobster and steak with foodstamps is an age old story. My Mom told the same story.
The thing is, it’s almost certainly not a real experience that he had. It’s an internalization of a story he heard someone else tell him. And that person was just telling a story that THEY had heard. And while that is itself dishonest, it’s a fairly common type of dishonesty, and not really meant maliciously.
As I mentioned upthread, I’d be totally on board with any reform of the Federal EBT program that included providing participants with food that has real nutritional value as well as educating people on how to prepare it and what to look for on their own to make healthy, cost-effective meals for their families. Doesn’t matter if this was done through boxes of food or just EBT debit cards combined with specific food items that ring up as “EBT-no cost” at the register (obviously limited to a specific quantity per benefit cycle). Whatever solution would work to give low income families both food and money, combined with access to assistance and education to help them eventually move up the socio-economic scale and no longer need said benefits.
The problem is, this program is not that. It’s not even feasible as written. The incentive according to the description is to save $130 billion over 10 years. That’s $13 billion per year. The EBT program currently costs around $75 billion per year. The current program is pretty much cash only through the use of EBT debit cards (though if WIC is considered part of the program, than they are providing specific food and care items, like milk, as well). The proposed program talks about boxes of nutritional food that will be provided to all participants.
Who is shouldering the cost of producing that food, collecting it, assembling the boxes for distribution, and then finally actually delivering said boxes, either to homes or to designated pickup locations such as the grocery store? Given the number of participants in EBT programs, I would be highly skeptical if the costs to do all that did not exceed the proposed $13 billion savings. It’s GOP math all over again. “We save $13 billion” actually means “We cut $13 billion from the program and force the states (or whomever) to cover the $20 billion cost of our harebrained reform!”.
Wow… just wow. you don’t know me… I don’t expect you to know me, nor my political affiliation, beliefs, if I’m a habitual liar or the most nicest most kind person the the world.
I’m not highly active at all in P&R. Yet you have no problem calling me a liar? What is this kinda bullshit? Some sort of “PIC or it didn’t happen?” I observed better from this forum through all my years here. Perhaps the “better” isn’t to be found in P&R.
I wonder if there would be an saving on the administrative side if we just gave SNAP to everyone. No means testing, but a basic amount per person. No questions asked.
A more limited version of a universal basic income.
While I’m sure you take offense, it wasn’t intended. But I also didn’t specifically bother trying to avoid offending you.
You related a story that tons of other people say, virtually verbatim. Usually goes along with something like, “this guy was buying steak while I was buying hamburger”. And for the reasons that other folks have already given, it’s really not likely that it could have happened the way you remember it. The idea of people on foodstamps buying awesome food and eating better than “normal working people” is a trope that has circulated among folks for decades, but it just isn’t born out by any evidence.
Maybe you saw something and didn’t fully grasp what was happening in the transaction. Or maybe you just subconsciously created or augmented a narrative. It happens. But what you believe happened almost certainly did not.
I am not saying you are lying maliciously. But I believe your recollection is mistaken.
I haven’t read or heard of any of these stories told/written by others.
The one factor that I can’t remember if it happened or not on this occasion is someone breaking out a wad of $20’s to supplement the cost for the food. That being said, It still boggles the brain that anyone who is totally strapped for funds is buying that type of food even partially with assisted funds.
Hell, I would love to have seafood and fish all the time… love fish… sadly, I can’t afford it every day. wish I could.
thanks for clarifying @Timex
Clearly a toxic individual in this community unable to carry on a conversation. I was going to reply to the previous statement, but you clearly would rather just be happy in your own little world. I will need to just step out of this forum similar to @guap.
Poor people are only allowed to eat cow tongue, and if they eat bacon and instead of pork chops there will be hell to pay. Don’t even get me started on soda and chips, only people who fork out 6 bucks for a single coffee are allowed to have those! And don’t they dare try hummus, that shit’s only for healthy employed people, they get Resser’s dip like everyone else!
I can only assume some people aren’t familiar with the “welfare queen” trope that was particularly popular among conservatives in the 80’s and 90’s. It was BS then, and it’s BS now.
Does that mean fraud doesn’t happen? Of course not. Fraud will always happens as long as there’s a benefit to committing it.
Does that mean people don’t make stupid personal decisions with their resources? Hell, no. I mean, look at how many people pre-order games.
But the disproportionate attention paid to these people paints an interesting picture, highlighting several possible reasons behind it.
Is it “hatred” of the poor? Maybe.
Is it a racist thing, because one imagines it’s more minorities doing it? Possibly.
Is it a discomfort with the notion that someone can be THAT down on their luck, that it’s easier to reconcile massive fraud going on than the number of people who actually need help? Could be.
Is it a story someone you trust told you, and casting doubt on it is personally offensive because it discredits them? I can see that.
The list of possibilities goes on and on, and it’s going to be different for each person. But the crucial thing to understand is that welfare fraud is a miniscule segment of the overall program. If we make massive and expensive overhauls for the express intent on “cleaning it up” then the odds are the overhaul is for another, unstated reason.
