OT: Food Stamps

I'm in Australia, listening to ABC Radio Australia news last week I heard an article where they quoted 1 in 8 US people as being recipients of food stamps.

As per news reports they didn't really clarify if this was 1 in 8 overall or 1 in 8 households etc.

"

com

com

It's food assistance for the growing number of "underemployed" and probably lower income full time employed too if they have children or disabled fami ly member or elderly person in their household. I don't know how you would call it an income supplement when it is only used to buy food.

Fair point. The stores police that it's only being used for certain categories of items?

Best regards, Spehro Pefhany

--
"it's the network..."                          "The Journey is the reward" 
speff@interlog.com             Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com 
Embedded software/hardware/analog  Info for designers:  http://www.speff.com

What does a person who goes to a food bank look like?

My mother spent most of her career working for a non-profit social service agency; part of their business involved running a food bank and thrift store. As a kid I'd sometimes help out on the weekends.

There were all types of people that came to use the food bank. There were some of the really destitute on foot who looked I guess like "the sort of person who would use a food bank," there were the less poor-looking with beat-up vehicles, and there were people in office wear with late-model vehicles who you wouldn't expect "by the look of them" to be using a food bank.

Sure, some of the latter were most likely gaming the system (and of course these cases rankled my mom) but some of the latter could also have been people who were single providers with kids who had lost a job, and unemployment wasn't enough to cover all the bills.

In cases like this a food bank can still be a lifeline, as it frees up money to pay other bills, like the car payment. In most areas of the US you're pretty much sunk in a job search without a car, and it is a lot less expensive in terms of time and resources to KEEP someone out of poverty, versus pulling them out once they've arrived there.

Incidentally, the thift store at the agency had plenty of quite nice clothes that we hand-picked from donations - you could get a nice shirt an pair of slacks for about $8. So if you looked shabby going in, you didn't have to coming out.

How interesting - I had a quick look at the list and noticed that a lot of the items are fairly expensive slimming 'foods'. It occurs to me that if these were struck off the list you could save money and loose weight all at the same time.

I don't know if I should be cheered up or the opposite to see that US welfare has got just as barmy as it is here in the UK.

Apparently over here we are seeing a lot more use of food banks (charity not govt.) but at least I think they are giving out actual food.

Michael Kellett

The likely reason that most those items have been _specifically allowed_ is that there are many people with illnesses who receive food assistance that have special dietary requirements dictated by their medical condition: diabetes, inability to swallow solid food, food allergies, gastrointestinal disease, congenital heart disease, lactose intolerance, sodium-restricted diet, sugar-restricted diet, etc.

I assume that the decision to include or exclude many of those items was based on the advice of medical professionals who work with these populations, rather than to appease the whims of welfare-opponents.

Though bows and arrows is a little weird.

I see they let them buy fruit trees ( and alfalfa seed of all things, which is expensive ), which makes perfect sense for poor people who own or have access to land. I don't see they allow vegetable seed though, and that make s no sense, unless they can get that free from some other program.

Yes, they're certainly supposed to. It's supposed to be for food only. Tea baggers want it to be for sacks of beans only, so that people who have to work long hours will have to choose between failing to feed their children or dropping out of the workforce entirely, but it does cover TV dinners ho-hos, and other food in boxes.

--
Tim Wescott 
Control system and signal processing consulting 
www.wescottdesign.com

Right, well he was reasonably well dressed (as were his family members), had at least one real credit or debit card, had a vehicle, and had a wholesale club membership. I have yet to volunteer at a food bank, so I guess I don't really know. I imagined they would fit between the homeless and the working poor, but I guess the latter might overlap.

From googling, the limit is something like $130/month, so he spent his whole month's allowance that Saturday. It does act as a pure income supplement if you reliably spend more than $130/month on basic food. That's not difficult.

Even in relatively run-down areas like NFNY, there is so much wealth around that a little can go a long way. You can even look "cool" for a bit more by going to consignment and vintage shops. That assumes the person is together enough to do that, which may not be true.

I've never seen the mechanics of this before, it's interesting. I had the image of most such benefits getting spent in overpriced urban grocery shops rather than big-box stores (that might still be true).

Best regards, Spehro Pefhany

--
"it's the network..."                          "The Journey is the reward" 
speff@interlog.com             Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com 
Embedded software/hardware/analog  Info for designers:  http://www.speff.com

What a hellhole, at least now that industry is gone you don't have to hold your nose. "Approximately 60 percent of residents in Niagara Falls receive public assi stance such as food stamps, welfare, unemployment insurance and Medicaid.[7 ]"

1. formatting link

Also "The median income for a household in the city was $26,800, and the me dian income for a family was $34,377. Males had a median income of $31,672 versus $22,124 for females. 23% of the population was below the poverty lin e."

That's almost as bad as Detroit. Speaking of which the federal government j ust cut loose $300M to help Detroit with crime related blight: money to dem olish housing destroyed by vandalism and arson, money to beef up the fire d epartment to handle the excess loading due to arson, money to beef up polic e and security to handle the ever increasing crime rate. The city is so pat hetically bankrupt they can't even afford the $600/body to bury all the Joh n/Jane Doe's found there but the state government was able to find $500M to build a new hockey stadium complex.

Well, the answer to that is a well-worn cliche: "you or me".

You can also claim some of the *former* are "gaming the system" depending on your attitude towards "personal responsibility".

E.g., I (personally) know one fellow who has no desire to work and feels no shame/remorse about bumming meals, rides, clothes, etc. from anyone who will give them to him. He also feels there is nothing wrong with his continuing to drive (when he can afford gas) *without* insurance: "Hey, *you* already have insurance for uninsured and underinsured motorists so why should *I* worry?!"

Of course, I also personally know a "pillar of the community" with VERY deep pockets who has no problem driving on a suspended license. The rules don't apply to him -- much the same as this "freeloading" other chap. (Did I mention he's a drunk? A shame that the kid he may someday run over won't be one of his *own*...)

I know another guy who can barely make rent -- yet has no problem coming up with money for smokes and liquor.

At the other end of the "low income"/responsibility spectrum, I know a young single mother who's just lost her vehicle through no fault of her own: someone slammed into her, injuring her and her kids. Of course, it wasn't an "expensive" vehicle so the bar was pretty low for it to be considered "totalled". Now, how does she get to work?

I.e., coming to conclusions about people because of their income levels, where they live, etc. reveals far more about *you* than it does about *them*!

Yup. Unfortunately, if you approach this with "moral indignation" and an attitude that these people are "getting" what they "deserve", then it's easy to turn your head the other way and NOT feel bad (about your indifference). "Gee, if they have *more*, *I* will have *less*!"

One of the non-profits at which I volunteered, donated clothes were sorted (the things some folks would "donate" weren't worth keeping as RAGS! Yet, they'd want a receipt for tax purposes :-/ ) and sized (solely by their labels) and resold. Typically $1 per item. Particularly satisfying to see some little kid grinning ear-to-ear over a "cool shirt" he found -- even if it was a wee bit too large!

2014 I've decided to volunteer at the local food bank. Though the cynic in me suspects I may become disillusioned: it is one of the biggest "draws", here -- there are always "drives" on for food donations (at the public library, in schools, businesses, post office, etc.). The Cynic in me wonders if there isn't a bit of a scam lurking behind all this activity (e.g., they claim they can feed a person -- one meal -- for *9* cents. While I know I probably "eat better" than these folks, its still hard to imagine I could "live" on a food budget of $98/year!)

Public libraries, here, "lend" seed. (though I don't believe there is any *requirement* that it -- or "in kind" -- be returned).

There are a lot of programs/agencies to help those in need. But, it also takes a lot of *time* to avail oneself of these programs. If you're spending an hour to two hours *daily* on a bus just getting to and from work ("in town"), how much more time do you have to spend to go to agency to pick up some food; agency to get free/subsidized medical care; agency to get clothing, etc.

It could be true-ish with matching funds, volunteer labor and donations.

I've generally come away from fundraising etc. with the feeling it would be more efficient to just write out a check to them. There are intangibles such as raising awareness though.

Best regards, Spehro Pefhany

--
"it's the network..."                          "The Journey is the reward" 
speff@interlog.com             Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com 
Embedded software/hardware/analog  Info for designers:  http://www.speff.com

Den søndag den 13. oktober 2013 22.01.05 UTC+2 skrev Spehro Pefhany:

it's it Joe Arpaio that brags it cost only 90cents a day to feed an inmate in his tent city?

but you don't get that smug "I do good things" (and other people have seen it) feeling

-Lasse

Quite a number of those are very expensive, such as the "protein" glorifed candy bars--oats, soy isolate, and high-fructose corn syrup. Besides being diabetes-fodder, they're an order of magnitude too expensive for my taste But, I 'spose expense is not a consideration when you're spending someone else's money.

In fact, their EBT eligibility probably explains the high prices, and the strategic location in the checkout aisle. I always wondered about that, as in "Who'd pay that much, for that cr@p?"

EBT is the OPM of the masses.

It's not 1 in 8 (up thread), but 1 in 6 Americans receiving food stamps (48 million out of 315 million population).

For every 'new' job under the Barreich, we've put two on food stamps.

In the wake of Dear Golfer's Five-Year Plan, we've got fewer people working, the most able-bodied ever on food stamps, and many more who've quit entirely and gone on disability for various excuses.

Why do you think that's a likely explanation?

That's possibly the one, best thing on the list--that's giving a man a fishing pole, instead of a fish.

Cheers, James Arthur

Since I personally have lived from sacks of beans and the like for over twenty years, I don't see the difficulty in others doing it, nor the justice in me supporting them at five times my own standard.

Cheers, James Arthur

Then shame on them for this distortion! If what you really mean to say is, "For every dollar you give our PAID EXECUTIVES, they will coerce VOLUNTEERS to distribute 11 meals of DONATED FOOD to needy recipients", then say so!

(Ah, but then who would *give*?

We look at it the exact opposite way. Cash is too readily abused in organizations. Donated goods and services can't be used by "staff" to pay their mortgages!

I've noticed that a fair number of folks involved in "paid" positions at charities have very little concern over the charity's stated "mission". But, rather, see it as a way to get paid without having to "work for someone". :-(

When you spend time (instead of money) at these places, you get to see how the "donations" (time and money) *really* get used. Worth doing, IMO, before leaving your estate to any of them! :-(

[Of course, if you come in for The Tour, you never see what's really happening behind the curtain]

Who are you trying to impress -- The Homeless, The Needy, etc.?

You don't really think you'll see The Pillars of The Community, The Powers that Be or The Movers and Shakers giving their *time* (to *notice* you giving yours).

If you aim to impress The Homeless, etc. just give someone standing on a street corner $10 and you can feel good about yourself (if you are that easily deluded).