What does that mean Bae? And what does that look like?Originally Posted by bae
What does that mean Bae? And what does that look like?
I have always felt there should be nutritional value set for the foods purchased. On my soap box, I remember never being able to buy chips, candy or any not dinner items when we lived on Min Wage in 1980. I had a friend who would buy one candy bar a week and cut it in 7 sections so each day had a treat. Than again when the postal carriers sent the list of items they would like to see this year for the donations on it was Olive Oil, we all joked in our neighborhood that it was not too long ago that was luxury item, so I just do not know anymore.
Once I remember we had a posting about this and I mentioned why Chips and Pop at food banks, I got slammed I think because these made the people feel less like they were in need and the kids felt good getting these items. SO I guess the coin can be flipped a few ways?
I completely agree.
"Do any human beings ever realize life while they live it--every, every minute?" Emily Webb, Our Town
www.silententry.wordpress.com
In the vain of a number of posts here - would the government tailor what the universal basic income can buy so people are forced to make the "right" choices?
No, of course not, for many reasons.
and if they buy steak and lobster the first week, and run out of money the rest of the month, so be it.
I have been assured again and again here and elsewhere that poor people will marshall their resources so as to feed their family, pay the rent, and buy the shoes. There will be no buying of street drugs or gambling with the unversal income, the children will be fed and clothed.
so now that we have solved that, its only the pesky details to work out such as how much to give each person. Oh, yeah, and whete that money comes from.
I think about this a lot too and don't know the answer. As long as the big food corps have lobbyists, sugary junk food will be allowed, right? I read that the number of people on SSI/disability has soared in recent years since welfare as it was known was downsized. There are parts of the country where the majority of people are receiving disability checks. In that way, the expense is shifted to the government rather than the state. What I always wonder is why there are so many unmotivated souls out there?
I'm very wary of making value judgments vis-a-vis food. What the government deems "nutritious"--like skim milk and corn flakes--is decidedly not, IMO. If sugary processed foods are prohibited, who's to say that butter and bacon won't be? (OMG, it's the death fats!) Poor people are presumably adults, and can make those decisions for themselves.
Some sort of universal income is an appealing thought. I can see some irresponsible parents squandering the income money on drugs, alcohol or other useless or harmful trivia at the expense of the children. Whether the existing social welfare programs provide more encouragement to use the benefits for health care, nutritional food, education, or other general welfare for children depending on their recipient parents could probably be up for debate.
Path of least resistance?
"Things should be made as simple as possible, but not one bit simpler." ~ Albert Einstein
You wonder why people are unmotivated to work endlessly at two or three Wal-Mart/Uber type jobs with few benefits, no union representation, and not a chance in hell of ever being able to get ahead or buy a house or pay for their medical care? It seems to me that for vast swaths of the working class, it's a miracle that there is any motivation at all.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote