Article - Our family will lose $44 in food stamps [Archive]

Miss Cellane

11-1-13, 5:14pm

It all depends on where you live. In some areas of the US, $800 doesn't go as far as it would in other places.

And while growing food is a good idea, it still costs money for the seeds and, if necessary, some fertilizer. As well as needing land on which to plant. And the length of the growing season affects how much food you can grow. Here in New England, the growing season is much shorter than in the south.

And then you have to be able to preserve some of the food, which requires equipment people might not have. And space to store the food.

If you own your house, growing food during the summer months is a good option. If you rent your house, you are dependent on your landlord's good will if you want to dig up the lawn for vegetables. If you live in an apartment, well, *if* you have a balcony or some outdoor space, you might be able to do a little container gardening, but it's not going to lower the food bill by all that much.

There's currently a three-year wait at my town's community gardens to get a plot. I have one more year to wait.

The real problem is that food stamps are supposed to supplement your food budget, not provide all the money necessary to buy all your family's food. But people are complaining because their food stamp budget is not enough for all their food for the month--it was never meant to be. So I don't have a lot of sympathy for people complaining that their food stamps aren't enough money. The program expects people to contribute some of their own money to purchasing their own food.

And in that article, the first family, the one with one daughter who just gave birth and another about to give birth? Surely those two women qualify for WIC, which would give them more food.

herbgeek

11-1-13, 5:43pm

And neither of the daughters can work, even though Grandma is home all day to babysit? Sorry, don't buy it. And where are the men?

ApatheticNoMore

11-1-13, 5:45pm

If you own your house, growing food during the summer months is a good option. If you rent your house, you are dependent on your landlord's good will if you want to dig up the lawn for vegetables. If you live in an apartment, well, *if* you have a balcony or some outdoor space, you might be able to do a little container gardening, but it's not going to lower the food bill by all that much.

Yea it's fairly desirable IMO for people who can grow food (mostly those who have land) to do so, but teaching people how to grow their food if they can't work is no kind of complete solution at all. Container gardening may not reduce the food bill at all. The only cheap way is probably: homemade compost plus soil (because potting soil costs too much), seeds especially if you can seed save heirlooms (because seedlings cost too much). Then you might acheive some minimal savings in a container garden. It seems unquestionable to me that land (property) here costs more than say doing 100% of one's shopping at Whole Paycheck, buying land to grow your own food is quite frankly the LEAST FRUGAL option imaginable to aquire food in places where the land will cost you! Of course if you already have land, you are just making use of what you already have (fixed costs again).

And the community garden options, yes there are waiting lists, there are also often entry costs to join it, plus it's not practical for those who DO work for a living. But how is it any less practical than growing on land you own? It's obvious, because land you own you commute home to everyday and are often there (you live there), a community garden unless it's close by you need to commute to! It doesn't fit with a busy schedule.

But perhaps something could be acheived if we had community gardens every few blocks (wouldn't it be cool if we did though?), or if everyone not making use of their land gladly shared it with the next door apartment building. Yea serious plans aim in that direction.

bae

11-1-13, 7:11pm

+1 to ANM's comments.

Growing food as a single family in an urban or dense suburban area is unlikely to be cost-effective. Works better as a broader-scale effort.

See:

http://monthlyreview.org/2013/03/01/cuban-urban-agriculture-as-a-strategy-for-food-sovereignty

That said, the photo of the lady standing in her nice patio garden leads me to wonder if she might be able to do "a bit more" on her own.

try2bfrugal

11-1-13, 7:12pm

I don't think most people do know how to live on a food stamp grocery budget. The grocery stores have about 10,000 items, and if you want to eat inexpensively and healthy, except for sales on loss leaders, you probably have to stick to about 300 of those - mostly single ingredient, unprocessed, whole foods like bulk rice, bulk beans, carrots, olive oil and chicken on sale.

I think using the 80/20 rule, the bulk of the savings on groceries comes not from growing your own food but shopping at places like Costco or ethnic markets, cooking from scratch, and not buying convenience foods.

We buy some convenience foods because we work, but if we had more time than money and were on a tighter budget, we could eat pretty well for around $3 - 4 per person per day.

Today we made 4 pounds of chicken on sale in the energy efficient convection oven with bulk rice (20 pounds for $10) made in the rice cooker. It took about 5 minutes of prep time. We put the chicken in a simmer sauce, bought with a coupon and stockpiled, along with organic green beans. If we were on a tighter budget we could have skipped the sauce or made something simple like lemon butter, and have a cheaper veg like carrots. I have a bag of apples I bought on sale for about 20 cents each for dessert.

I think that is a fairly healthy meal and it would only cost about $1.50 per person with a homemade sauce and carrots.

catherine

11-1-13, 7:54pm

Tradd

11-1-13, 9:21pm

Well, for the family where the mother doesn't work and two adult daughters don't work, they do have the time to cook.

I think a major reason stories like these make a number of people see red is because you've got someone who gets what's supposed to be supplemental food assistance griping when they can't make it with $800 a month, and working people of the same family size are making it on 2/3 or less of the same amount.

IL SNAP benefit amounts http://www.dhs.state.il.us/page.aspx?item=33412

The most a family of 4 can get in IL, as of today, is $632.

And something else to remember: those on food stamps are often eligible to receive free or reduced school lunch (and maybe breakfast) for school age kids. That would stretch the food budget, too.

try2bfrugal

11-1-13, 9:32pm

It's very complex...

To me, at first blush, it appears that $800 is a LOT of money for 5 people.

But I guess it depends on how much time someone in the family has to cook. Many times food stamp recipients are the working poor, and it's not easy to come home and cook meals from scratch.

On the other hand, I think that if you stick to the basics, you can eat cheaply, and for much less than $800, even if you don't grow your own food, and if you don't feel you're entitled to meat at every meal. My food budget for two people is $367. But I do work from home and can "sneak out" at 4pm to get dinner going. But back in the old days when my kids were small and I worked at [a large corporation in CT that I now can't believe I worked for except I needed the money for the family] I have been in a situation where my kids have burst out crying when I told them I had to cook their dinner because they were so hungry at that moment.

I agree it is hard for the working poor and especially those that do not have access to warehouse or equivalent store prices. But the people in the article seemed to have at least several people who weren't working and had time to cook.

Many of the food stamp challenge article people talk about going hungry yet they are buying canned food. Canned food in general is pretty expensive per calorie, especially when you are on a tight budget. Bulk rice and bean meals can be had for very little money so there is no need to ever go hungry on a food stamp budget if people really calculated what different food costs per calorie. Instead I have seen people in food stamp challenges buying cans of tuna and then complaining about being hungry. If they don't want to go hungry they have to have a baseline of bulk foods like potatoes, rice and beans and then they can fill that in with other carefully chosen foods, but not items like tuna which costs a $1 on sale for only 200 calories. Eating like that would cost $10 a day per person, or $300 per month per person or $1,500 a month for 5. You'd have to eat foods half as expensive as canned tuna on sale on average to feed 5 on $800 a month.

Tradd

11-1-13, 9:50pm

Even if someone didn't have much time to cook, a $20 crockpot from Walmart or Target - a thrift store one costs very little - will yield good meals with little effort.

All sorts of soups or stews and chicken meals are excellent in the crockpot. A cheap cut of meat turns out very well. Throw in some veggies (carrots, potatoes). Whole chickens are great, too. Nuke some frozen veggies on the side...

Eggs are cheap protein and filling. Pasta is so easy, add a bit of meat and a lot of veggies for a one bowl meal.

Eating well and reasonably healthy on a budget is not rocket science. However, people are used to their processed foods...

Miss Cellane

11-1-13, 11:03pm

My company hires a lot of temps for seasonal work. I work closely with these temps. They work at our place from either 8 am to 4 pm or 5:30 pm to 9:30 pm. While some are retirees looking for more money for the grandkids' Christmas presents, or to fund a vacation, a great many are the working poor.

They come to us in the evening after working a full shift elsewhere. They leave at 4 to head for their evening or night job. They are either single wage earners, or they have spouses with similar schedules. They may have two part-time jobs in addition to working for us.

Many of these people are working a 60 or more hour week--every week. Plus commuting time between jobs and to and from home.

One woman I know has a steady job at night in a call center. She works a 48 hour shift every weekend as a personal care attendant for a disabled person, living in her home--which means that she doesn't see her husband or her kids at all over the weekend. When she isn't working for us during the day, she does child care for a friend. Her husband is also working two jobs. They have three kids. They are not on assistance of any kind. But they are barely keeping above their heads above water.

It's not just a matter of putting food in the crockpot. It's a matter of having the time and energy to scan the ads and plan a menu and make a shopping list and get to the supermarket and buy the food, bring it home, put it away. Then remember to cook it--if you are home long enough to do so. If you get home and realize you've forgotten an ingredient--well, there may not be time to get to a store to buy it before you have to cook the food you have.

I used to be critical of people without a lot of money buying fast food or frozen dinners. I've come to realize that when you eat most of your meals at work, you need food that is easy to transport to work and easy to eat when you are there--frozen dinners are ideal for this if you don't have time to make sandwiches every day. Or you realize too late that your teenagers ate all the food you'd planned on for lunches that week and you have little choice but to grab something prepared on the way to work that day, or go hungry for several hours.

I've come to realize that they are tired. Exhausted. Many buy and eat prepared, processed food because it is quick and easy and doesn't take any more of their energy. They are eating in the car as they drive from one job to another. One of the things I have to do is gently wake up the people who have fallen asleep at their stations.

They get home so tired that they don't have the energy to clean and chop vegetables and wait for them to cook. They need something quick and easy and filling right away, so they can get to bed and get some sleep so they can get up in the morning to do it all over again. A crockpot meal might be great--but they might have left home 12 or 14 hours ago. And they might not have had time to prep the meal before leaving for work.

Now, the people in the linked article aren't working and therefore should have time to cook. But there are a great many working poor who would like to cook healthy meals, if only they could find the time and energy to do so.

Could some of these people make better choices about the food they eat? Sure. So could most of us. But it's a lot harder when there's not much money *and* there's not much time.

iris lilies

11-1-13, 11:37pm

It's very complex...

To me, at first blush, it appears that $800 is a LOT of money for 5 people.

No, it is a lot of money, period, no qualifying statement needed. And Tradd's point about school lunches is good--here kids are fed 2X daily plus snack.

But that said, I agree with Miss Celene's points about the working poor, I completing understand about that exhausting life. I lived it for a while as a student with work, school, study, work, school, study, but I was young and healthy. Had no children of course.

But here's the thing: fast, processed food that is fatty and sugary is now a staple. People eat it now because they practically don't know anything else. and frankly, they are not really hungry. That's why they buy the processed stuff.

catherine, for your kids who could not wait to eat: we can throw these at them, the classic fast foods of apples, oranges, peanut butter sandwiches--hungry people will eat those. Microwave a potato at work. Always have grapes in car. etc. This is a budget that can accommodate fresh foods even though people think that it will not.

People who are not really hungry go for the sexier stuff.

try2bfrugal

11-2-13, 12:49am

Now, the people in the linked article aren't working and therefore should have time to cook. But there are a great many working poor who would like to cook healthy meals, if only they could find the time and energy to do so.

I understand your point. They need some menu plans or some ideas to make simple whole foods as easy as convenience foods but less expensive.

That would make a good web site. I have been trying to figure out how to make healthy meals in 5 - 10 minutes of preparation time, plus additional time to cook. Tonight we had steak in the little turbo oven, an easy soup from the crock pot, salad and blackberries with yogurt. That would be too expensive for a food stamp budget but really it probably only took 10 minutes of prep time. The soup was made from prepared broth, frozen veggies and a can of beans.

A food stamp budget could be chicken legs and baked potatoes in the turbo oven, a cabbage and carrot salad with a simple home made oil and vinegar dressing, and seasonal fruit on sale. I think that could be made in 10 minutes or prep time.

I'll have to start actually timing myself and writing down how much each meal costs. That would be kind of a cool challenge to make a $5 meal in 5 minutes.

Tiam

11-2-13, 12:54am

http://money.cnn.com/2013/11/01/news/economy/food-stamps-families/index.html?iid=HP_LN
I am amazed that this family (five adults and one child) receive $800 a month. That seems like a very generous amount to me.
Maybe we should be teaching people how to grow some of their food if they can't work.

I do not grudge folks their foodstamps. But I haven't had a raise in years. My paygrade topped out and now I get none. The COL continues to grow and it's harder to stretch each year. So, for losing some food stamps, I say: Welcome to my world.

Tiam

11-2-13, 1:02am

I agree it is hard for the working poor and especially those that do not have access to warehouse or equivalent store prices. But the people in the article seemed to have at least several people who weren't working and had time to cook.

Many of the food stamp challenge article people talk about going hungry yet they are buying canned food. Canned food in general is pretty expensive per calorie, especially when you are on a tight budget. Bulk rice and bean meals can be had for very little money so there is no need to ever go hungry on a food stamp budget if people really calculated what different food costs per calorie. Instead I have seen people in food stamp challenges buying cans of tuna and then complaining about being hungry. If they don't want to go hungry they have to have a baseline of bulk foods like potatoes, rice and beans and then they can fill that in with other carefully chosen foods, but not items like tuna which costs a $1 on sale for only 200 calories. Eating like that would cost $10 a day per person, or $300 per month per person or $1,500 a month for 5. You'd have to eat foods half as expensive as canned tuna on sale on average to feed 5 on $800 a month.

Well, I agree. Though I wonder about tuna where you are!! I love tuna. It's very economical and I keep it around. I can usually get it for .65 cents a can at a large chain discount store. I buy the store brand and find the meat to be of better quality than t he name brand. I consider tuna a pretty frugal buy. Maybe not in large quantities, but one can of tuna mixed with a hardboiled egg or two and mayo will make at least 3 sandwiches if not four for young children for a lunch. With bananas, or oranges or apples on the side? That would be about a 3 dollar lunch for 3 or four kids. That's not bad.

try2bfrugal

11-2-13, 1:18am

Well, I agree. Though I wonder about tuna where you are!! I love tuna. It's very economical and I keep it around. I can usually get it for .65 cents a can at a large chain discount store. I buy the store brand and find the meat to be of better quality than t he name brand. I consider tuna a pretty frugal buy. Maybe not in large quantities, but one can of tuna mixed with a hardboiled egg or two and mayo will make at least 3 sandwiches if not four for young children for a lunch. With bananas, or oranges or apples on the side? That would be about a 3 dollar lunch for 3 or four kids. That's not bad.

I don't mean to pick on tuna in particular. I just see a lot of these food stamp challenge budgets where people talk about going to bed hungry and on one they had canned tuna for dinner. If they don't have enough to eat on their food stamp challenge money then there are other foods to buy that are much cheaper per calorie than tuna for $1.40 a can. They didn't have to go hungry. A pound of bulk rice in my area costs 50 cents and has 1,616 calories and beans do not cost much more.

I would start with rice and beans and then add in other food items as the budget permitted.

Tiam

11-2-13, 1:38am

When we look at the rationing days of England during the second world war, we see that in retrospect the rationing days were the healthiest the people ever were.Fats, sugar, and meats were hard to get. People made do with more vegetables, and making do. They had less fat, were more fit and yet grew taller. The National restaurants made sure no one had to go hungry, in the cities. It was a system that allowed a fair form of food distribution and yet had positive results. Not that it was loved of course. Perhaps food stamps could use a revamping that didn't include subsidizing the corn industry?

ApatheticNoMore

11-2-13, 3:22am

If the only point is to avoid insufficient calories then maybe tuna isn't optimal, but if the point is actually good long term nutrition then isn't tuna a source of necessary nutrients that aren't generally available cheaply (mostly omega 3s - EPA, DHA etc.)?* Sure there are other sources, perhaps more sustainable and less polluted (salmon and sardines, grassfed beef, omega 3 eggs), but cheaper?

* at least if you believe whatever is the latest coming out of nutritionists. If not it certainly makes life easier.

goldensmom

11-2-13, 5:56am

We are a family of 2 and our food budget is $200.00/per month by choice. We eat simply basic food, nothing boxed or prepared. Wise shoppping and sale shopping keeps the cupboards and freezer full.

reader99

11-2-13, 6:51am

I'm one person spending $200, also with nothing boxed or prepared. The fact that I can't eat wheat products probably drives my costs up, and some of it could be local price differences

catherine

11-2-13, 7:07am

catherine, for your kids who could not wait to eat: we can throw these at them, the classic fast foods of apples, oranges, peanut butter sandwiches--hungry people will eat those. Microwave a potato at work. Always have grapes in car. etc. This is a budget that can accommodate fresh foods even though people think that it will not.

People who are not really hungry go for the sexier stuff.

That's true, but Miss Cellane's points were right on. What if I didn't have an apple or grapes because my budget couldn't afford it? I guess I could have done PB&J to shut the kids up while I cooked, but frankly, I was tired after getting up at 5:30am, dressing three kids and packing them in the car, driving my DH 20 minutes to the nearest train station, coming back home to feed the kids breakfast, dropping off kids at two different caregivers, driving 25 minutes to work, working 8 hours in a mind-numbing job, returning home to pick up the kids, and getting in the door and having to get them fed before I had to get them back in the car to drive back to the train station to pick up DH who often wasn't on that train (might have missed it and couldn't reach me because that was before cell phone days), and then get them home. Or it's soccer night and I have to drive 14 miles to soccer practice, wait for them, and then drive home. by now it's about 8-9pm, then I bathe them, then get them ready for bed.

Yeah, food has a hard time fitting in there. I know exactly the life that Miss Cellane is talking about. That being said, I'm not feeling sorry for the family in the artlcle losing $44 in food stamps. Someone has to teach them some menu planning and cooking skills.

Miss Cellane

11-2-13, 8:15am

I understand your point. They need some menu plans or some ideas to make simple whole foods as easy as convenience foods but less expensive.

That would make a good web site. I have been trying to figure out how to make healthy meals in 5 - 10 minutes of preparation time, plus additional time to cook. Tonight we had steak in the little turbo oven, an easy soup from the crock pot, salad and blackberries with yogurt. That would be too expensive for a food stamp budget but really it probably only took 10 minutes of prep time. The soup was made from prepared broth, frozen veggies and a can of beans.

A food stamp budget could be chicken legs and baked potatoes in the turbo oven, a cabbage and carrot salad with a simple home made oil and vinegar dressing, and seasonal fruit on sale. I think that could be made in 10 minutes or prep time.

I'll have to start actually timing myself and writing down how much each meal costs. That would be kind of a cool challenge to make a $5 meal in 5 minutes.

What also must be considered is that the cook may be at home for 10 hours a day, some of which need to be spent sleeping. That they will need to eat at least two meals away from home the following day, and they may have no way of refrigerating them or reheating them. That they might not have a free weekend day to shop for food or cook it.

I'm not saying eating fresh, wholesome food on a budget with severe time constraints can't be done. But it sure as heck isn't easy.

Many of the temps I work with get food stamps or WIC or go to food pantries. My thinking has changed from considering them to be squandering their money when they show up for work with a Lean Cuisine or can of soup for lunch, to a realization that, at this time, on this day, that's the best option for them for food.

I routinely pack extra fruit and crackers and cheese in my lunch for the temp workers who "forgot" their lunch at home that day. I'll bring in home baked cookies or brownies for my group. Especially on the first week of a project, there's always someone who can't afford lunch. Bringing extra sandwiches would be too obvious, but extra snacks are gladly received.

catherine

11-2-13, 8:36am

I routinely pack extra fruit and crackers and cheese in my lunch for the temp workers who "forgot" their lunch at home that day. I'll bring in home baked cookies or brownies for my group. Especially on the first week of a project, there's always someone who can't afford lunch. Bringing extra sandwiches would be too obvious, but extra snacks are gladly received.

What a compassionate co-worker you are!

pinkytoe

11-2-13, 9:40am

It's a complicated issue for sure. I also hold the food corporations and their lobbyists somewhat responsible for making and promoting the crap food they do. It also perpetuates the illnesses often seen among the poor.
Oatmeal with fruit and nuts for breakfast and beans and rice for dinner fill the tummy nicely.

SteveinMN

11-2-13, 1:02pm

I have been trying to figure out how to make healthy meals in 5 - 10 minutes of preparation time, plus additional time to cook. Tonight we had steak in the little turbo oven, an easy soup from the crock pot, salad and blackberries with yogurt. That would be too expensive for a food stamp budget but really it probably only took 10 minutes of prep time. The soup was made from prepared broth, frozen veggies and a can of beans.
Just to play devil's advocate a bit, it's not just the 5-10 minutes spent chopping/opening cans/whatever. It's procuring the ingredients, which can be difficult if you live in a food desert or if a chunk of it comes from the food shelf which almost requires a car (imagine hauling that box they give you on the bus?). It's remembering (or even being home) to thaw the meat, hoping that nobody made a snack out of the blackberries (where are those found inexpensively?) and that the salad hasn't turned itself to slime in the crisper. It's time needed to clean up the cooking utensils unless you can fob that task off on family. It's great to take leftovers to work, but storing it safely requires refrigeration (I worked a white-collar job in a building with several hundred other people and there was no refrigerator available. There's that smushy ice stuff, but that requires remembering to freeze it as often as you need it).

I don't mean to pick on you, try2bfrugal. But I've seen several posts on this topic here and elsewhere, and few people seem to account for the entire cost of the process. On one other site, someone was decrying the cost of school lunches, claiming that it didn't cost that much to put a slice or two of bologna on some bread for lunch. True. But where are the vegetables? Where's the fiber (it's not in the Wondrous bread)? Did they account for the cost of the mayo or mustard or lettuce on the sandwich (they didn't; they divided the cost of a package of cheapo bologna with a loaf of supermarket bread).

What if one's ethnicity or dietary preferences or requirements proscribe bologna sandwiches? Or eggs? Or gluten? What about the long-term effects on health of eating high-sodium high-fat low-fiber meals every day? Sure, rice may have more caloric bang for the buck than tuna, but white rice in particular is nutritionally empty beyond the calories. It's not always about the cost per calorie.

I agree that people should learn to cook. I was shocked to learn that home economics is no longer part of the school curriculum for most kids. I think more time needs to be spent on establishing food security (my feeling is that people who are hungry and wondering where the next meal is coming from aren't prepared to think about much else). But there's an entire infrastructure that stands in the way of the working poor establishing healthful economical eating habits. It's more than just ingredients.

try2bfrugal

11-2-13, 1:28pm

hoping that nobody made a snack out of the blackberries (where are those found inexpensively?)

I guess that would be the part where I said that is what we ate but it would be too expensive for a food stamp budget.

I am not sure what the point of your post is. That it is better for people to eat canned foods and go hungry than to even try to come up with positive ideas for quick and healthy meals that might provide enough calories to not be hungry, and help part of the issue for some people on food stamps?

The people in the article had at least three women at home, not working with more time than money who could shop and cook. Eight hundred a month for five people, not all adults even, is more than enough if they are eating whole foods and watching the cost per calorie.

Our kids take sandwiches or rice bowls in an insulated bag and an ice pack to school or work. It may take more time to cook if you are among the working poor, but you also can't afford a gardener or house cleaner, either. Buying convenience foods is like making minimum wage and then paying someone else to cook for you.

Saving $2 a day just for one person on lunch with a peanut butter sandwich and carrot sticks instead of a microwave meal could save $730 a year. That is a huge savings on just one meal for one person alone. In ten years there's a nice used car paid for. Multiply that times all the meals and all the household members and it might mean being able to lower the household work hours while eating healthier food.

Tradd

11-2-13, 1:55pm

I'm going to bluntly admit that my "compassion bone" is broken. If the media wants to play on emotions and make us feel sorry for people who are losing some of their SNAP benefits, well, they chose poorly in this article.

flowerseverywhere

11-2-13, 3:25pm

Tradd

11-2-13, 3:36pm

Not knowing all the circumstances I can't understand why two young women are having babies without the benefit of a partner to share in the support. Most people consciously limit their family size, and these kinds of articles are exactly why the tea party candidates gained such a foothold. Working people are tired of not being taxed, but watching their taxes being used poorly. Are they also on Medicaid? Why can't the two single mothers watch each others little ones and work opposite shifts? That is what DH and I did when my kids were little. $800 is a lot of money, I don't care what anyone says. Get your act together instead of complaining. The government does not give food stamps, working people pay taxes to do so.

People like to have sex, and who knows if they used any type of birth control or used it incorrectly. I've read for years that women having babies outside of marriage (we can add outside of a stable relationship, if we want to be PC) is the strongest indicator for a woman to be in poverty. So young women need to either keep their legs together, which isn't likely, or make sure they use whatever form of birth control correctly.

Heck, the grandmother can watch the grandkids, since grandmother isn't working.

catherine

11-2-13, 3:38pm

$800 is a lot of money, I don't care what anyone says. Get your act together instead of complaining. The government does not give food stamps, working people pay taxes to do so.

I believe people fall on hard times, but I also believe in personal responsibility. One of my favorite songs is "God Bless the Child that's Got His Own." It's a shame that some people have such a strong feeling of entitlement and ruin it for those who simply need a hand up.

try2bfrugal

11-2-13, 4:21pm

I believe people fall on hard times, but I also believe in personal responsibility. One of my favorite songs is "God Bless the Child that's Got His Own." It's a shame that some people have such a strong feeling of entitlement and ruin it for those who simply need a hand up.

+1. I am in favor of strong social safety nets, but these unfortunately this family could be used for Tea Party poster children. I try to spend no more than $800 a month for food for four adults, and we eat really well in a very high COL area and buy some convenience foods because we all work, go to school or do both. If I wasn't working and had two extra helpers for cooking I'd be watching all the sales, growing food on the patio and cooking everything from scratch.

ApatheticNoMore

11-2-13, 4:47pm

I just wonder if a diet that shuns tuna and other super nutritious foods over the long term is really good. Rice and beans for a month as a challenge or to pay for a big expense or something, meh, it is my understanding lenten fasts often have periods of that much veganism, followed by feasts, and Catholic Mediterranean countries have better health than we do! So such breaks might even be net positive for the body (course if one is diabetic or pre-diabetic the carb load might not).

But the real long term, what is sustainable for short periods is not what is sustainable long term, you can run machinery to the point of wear and tear short term, you can go without sleep to cram for finals short term, you can deplete the soil short term, and you can feed the body insufficient nutrients short term. Long term it may not work. Triage "theory" (hypothesis really) says that you will definitely pay long term for nutritional deficiencies.
http://www.nutraingredients.com/Research/Bruce-Ames-Vitamin-insufficiency-boosting-age-related-diseases

This hypothesis may be true and it may be false that long term nutritional insufficiency causes disease in old age. It's certainly true that you can develop nutritional deficiencies over time, is generous omega 3 a nutritional requirement? If you think of how many recipes there are to stretch just plain old canned tuna, tuna casserole obviously, I've seen similar variants with rice rather than noodles, tuna with legumes, I've never heard of tuna and egg salad before but it sounds VERY nutritious if kinda weird! :) Clearly making maximum use of nutritious foods like tuna is a problem that has been thought of before.

I don't have some set dollar figures, food stamps ought to pay x and that's what they should pay, yes sir ree. Just wondering if human thriving is the actual goal or just short term survival where nutrition is concerned. And just hoping anyone who actually needs to reduce the food budget isn't quite so simplistic in their approach, at least not long term.

try2bfrugal

11-2-13, 4:50pm

Aqua Blue

11-2-13, 5:36pm

That is probably why they were chosen for the article. If they chose someone, like most of the poor/food stamp recipients I have know, it wouldn't be an attention getting article. Choosing them makes us outraged that such things go on and it sells more papers or whatever.
+1. I am in favor of strong social safety nets, but these unfortunately this family could be used for Tea Party poster children. I try to spend no more than $800 a month for food for four adults, and we eat really well in a very high COL area and buy some convenience foods because we all work, go to school or do both. If I wasn't working and had two extra helpers for cooking I'd be watching all the sales, growing food on the patio and cooking everything from scratch.

flowerseverywhere

11-2-13, 7:50pm

iris lilies

11-2-13, 9:15pm

Actually, what would have been nice was if the message of the article was "thank goodness we live in a country where our fellow citizens help us with so much generosity that we have $800 each month to help us while we work on solutions to this problem"

Yes! That would be so nice to read for a change.

The theme of this newspaper article is "aw, ain't it too bad that mean old politicians are taking away benefits." The constant drumbeat from the left is: it's not enough, it's not enough, it is never enough that taxpayers are giving. Not ever, never.

I tire of the message and the victims even when I know that many people are really hurting and DO need help.

Tiam

11-2-13, 9:59pm

If you are on a tight budget, there are cheaper super nutritional foods than tuna if the alternative is to eat tuna and go hungry.

People are arguing that I posted not to eat tuna ever or to eat just rice and beans. I never posted any of those statements.

My point in the rice and beans is with that as a baseline, you don't need to ever be hungry on a food stamp budget. In the food stamp budget articles, many of the writers post about going to bed hungry. If they are going to bed hungry they aren't doing their math correctly in calculating costs per calorie. Or they are just buying random stuff, including expensive convenience foods.

If course you can eat much more than rice and beans on a food stamp budget. The people in the article were getting $800 a month. We eat foods like steak and fresh blackberries on that kind of budget with 4 adults, including three with very high calorie requirements.

I'm not. What I'm wondering is why you consider tuna such an expensive option? Not only are your prices of tuna very inflated for shopping on the bottom row, but actually it is a decent, cheap source of pure protein. (I'm not on food stamps and I would never spend even a dollar a can on tuna) Eggs are cheaper.
However I know that none of that is your point, and your point h\ as gotten lost in the fray. Steak would have been a better example. You are right. people in the articles do post about not having enough. And they are really trying to live as poor as they can. But truth be told, I find fresh fruits and veggies MUCH more expensive than something like tuna. In fact they can be prohibitive. But a huge problem is that many, many people don't have any idea how to cook real food from scratch.

Tiam

11-2-13, 10:03pm

I think we should create a challenge thread of a weeks worth of menus that they think would be most appropriate for a food stamp like budget. Not to be snarky, but rather I'm sure we have lots of great resources here!

try2bfrugal

11-2-13, 10:19pm

I'm not. What I'm wondering is why you consider tuna such an expensive option? Not only are your prices of tuna very inflated for shopping on the bottom row

I have had a project to try to see if I could get all the government recommended calories, vitamins and minerals in a day for $2. It is hard, but a couple of years ago I could do it. I have not tried it in the last year or so. But I couldn't do 2,000 calories for $2 if I paid $1 for 200 calories of tuna, that would have been half my budget for only 10% of the calories.

I live where everything is expensive and cans of tuna cost $1.40 at the local stores, maybe $1 on sale for 5 ounces.

bae

11-2-13, 10:30pm

Tradd

11-2-13, 10:38pm

Frozen veggies are pretty affordable. A regular sized bag of green peas was $.92 today at Target.

I was in a debate on another discussion forum with someone about healthy, frugal eating, and someone ripped me apart for daring to suggest frozen veggies, adamantly saying they have no nutrition at all. I simply rolled my eyes.

This is a link to a USDA recipe booklet from the 1990s.

http://www.cnpp.usda.gov/Publications/FoodPlans/Miscpubs/FoodPlansRecipeBook.pdf

It has some good recipes, and includes tips for frugal grocery shopping and food safety.

I'm amazed by how many people I run into, say at work or church, who say they'd like to spend less on groceries, but when I give suggestions, like soups in colder weather, they just look at me cross-eyed. I've offered to give people cooking lessons! But it seems people just want to complain and not take any action.

Soups and pasta are a great budget stretcher.

I like making pasta and peas, but pretty much any frozen veggies would work. It's a one pot meal, too! Boil as much pasta as you need for a meal (or include extras for lunch/dinner the next day). Halfway through the pasta cooking time, add frozen veggies. I always make this with green peas and spaghetti noodles. Drain the pasta/veggies. Toss with butter, margarine, oil. Season with salt & pepper to taste. Maybe add a bit of Parmesan cheese.

My three can Quick Black Bean soup is cheap, and easy, too. Take one can each of black beans, cream-style or whole kernel corn, and diced tomatoes. Do not drain. Add contents of all cans to a medium pot. Heat. Eat. Sauteing a bit of garlic and onion in oil before adding the beans, tomatoes, and corn really adds flavor. As does adding some Mexican-style spices, such as cumin or chili/cayenne powder.

Eggs are cheap, and breakfast for dinner is something I do often. Pancakes are cheap, too.

There's always spaghetti and tomato sauce. Take a jar of cheap store brand pasta (tomato) sauce, add some cooked ground beef (even a 1/4 lb would add flavor and some substance), and maybe a few more veggies, such as onion, garlic, green pepper sauteed with the meat. Make a basic salad and some garlic bread.

Making egg salad sandwiches or tuna salad (aka "tuna fish") sandwiches for lunch are cheap. Add something to munch on (maybe pretzels), and a piece of fruit (apple, orange, banana), or some applesauce, and it's a decent lunch that doesn't break the bank. Can't forget PB&J or even PB & B (banana).

My mom made something I loved as a kid. Open-face beef sandwiches. Brown ground beef. Drain off fat. Add brown gravy (gravy made from the packet of dry mix would be cheaper) to meat and heat until gravy bubbles. Pour over two slices of bread overlapped on a plate. Serve veggies on the side (green peas - you can see I have a thing for green peas!). It's hearty, filling, and hot. Good in the cold months. The ground beef in the frozen tubes is often the cheapest I've found.

There's always the whole chicken done in a crockpot. First night have chicken with mashed potatoes and veggies. Strip the leftover chicken meat into bite-sized pieces and turn it into a soup with onion, celery, carrot, a bit of parsley. Use canned chicken broth/broth cubes and water for the stock. Doing it this way greatly reduces cooking time. Maybe even take a bit of the chicken the second day and make chicken salad for lunch sandwiches.

SnakeBlitz33

11-2-13, 11:15pm

Lets see... 800 a month for five people.. that's $160 per person per month or $40 a week. If they don't shop at a gas station, they should be able to make that last. I'm with ya'll... it's supposed to be supplemental, not be able to buy everything they want or need. I hate it when I see someone buying ribs, steaks, and pork loins with an EBT card. Them people eat better then I do most of the time, and my wife and I work hard to have what we do.

Miss Cellane

11-3-13, 1:27am

Well, you get about 200 pounds of boned meat from your average elk, it's elk season now, and a cartridge costs ~$1.00.

A six pound sockeye salmon gets you about 6000 calories.

You get about 10 pounds of meat out of a raccoon, and they are pretty nutritious, about 12,000 calories in that.

The only wildlife around here is squirrels, pigeons and bats. Besides which, it's illegal to fire a weapon within city limits. And while we do have a salmon ladder right in the center of town, you aren't allowed to fish for them there.

The ironic thing is that 100 years ago, people used to catch lobster and throw it away as a junk fish. It was considered poor people's food.

try2bfrugal

11-3-13, 12:04pm

Food prices obviously depend a lot of where you live and what is in season. The cheapest foods I could come up with are produce from the ethnic stores - usually potatoes, bok choy, onion, carrots and cabbage are often on sale for 30 cents a pound or less. Chicken leg quarters used to be 59 cents a pound but I think now 99 cents a pound is more realistic. Some of the stores sell bananas for 19 cents each. Bulk rice is 50 cents a pound. Bulk or on sale split peas / beans / lentils can be had for .50 - $1.

Other foods that are inexpensive per calorie -

Bulk popcorn, flour, corn meal, grits
Warehouse powdered milk and shredded cheese
Peanuts
Sunflower seeds
Tea
Olive oil, vinegar (dressings for salads)
Sesame seeds

That is enough of an assortment to eat healthier than most Americans probably do for $2 - $3 dollar a day total, at least based on my local prices. On a food stamp budget I could eat like a king. But if you buy a can of soup with 200 calories for $2.50, or a can of tuna for $1 for 200 calories, game over.

I do get that many food stamp people do not have access to these kinds of foods, prices or stores and that time is an issue. But this is how I would eat if I had to be on a really tight budget.

You could make stock with the chicken bones and vegetable trimmings, then use that to make a variety of soups, with roasted onions and potatoes drizzled with olive oil, and raisins or a banana for dessert.

Or stir fry chicken, carrots, onions, bok choy and cabbage in olive oil served over rice.

Miss Cellane

11-3-13, 12:26pm

The types of stores available to people is also a factor. I hadn't considered that before try2befrugal's post.

I live in a city in New Hampshire. Not the largest, not the smallest. But much better off than many of the smaller towns which might not have even a supermarket within the town limits. And the more rural you get, the higher the prices seem to be.

The nearest Costco is 45 miles away, about an hour's drive. The closest ethnic food store I know of is an hour away, in the opposite direction. There are three supermarket chain stores in town, plus Target and Walmart. Fortunately, all of them on are the bus line for our limited public transportation. We have a lovely higher-end chain, Hannafords, a middle of the road chain, Shaws, and a lower price chain, Demoulas. Some of Demoulas regular prices are lower than Walmarts regular prices. Target can have good sales on certain items.

Trader Joes is a 15 minute drive away. Whole Foods does not appear to have any stores in the state. There is a small fruit and vegetable store in town that has great prices on certain things, and really high prices on others.

But the key factor is that to get the best prices, you have to shop in several stores. Again, this takes time and energy.

We do have several CSAs in the area, but most require that you have a car to be able to drive to their pick-ups spots, which are usually only at the farm itself, and there are very limited hours for pick-up, sometimes only two hours a week.

There's a farmer's market in my city, every Wednesday from 2-6 pm from June to October. They do take food stamps, but the limited hours for someone with a job make it difficult to get to. And parking is a nightmare, because they hold the market in the large public parking lot in the center of town.

And people living in large cities can have it even worse. There are a great many cities that are the food deserts SteveinMN mentioned. Many large supermarket chains have abandoned some cities, and there are neighborhoods where convenience stores are the only nearby place to get food.

SteveinMN

11-3-13, 1:27pm

I guess that would be the part where I said that is what we ate but it would be too expensive for a food stamp budget.

I am not sure what the point of your post is. That it is better for people to eat canned foods and go hungry than to even try to come up with positive ideas for quick and healthy meals that might provide enough calories to not be hungry, and help part of the issue for some people on food stamps?
My point is that there are many bumps in the road to that kind of food self-sufficiency:
- accessibility of inexpensive healthful options (both their presence, as Miss Cellane pointed out, and the ability to get there and back with one's purchases);
- education on how to cook (those beans take either specialized cooking equipment or time to prepare -- or a can opener);
- personal preferences or biological contraindications (not everyone likes to eat everything and some people cannot live on meals of rice and beans or spaghetti no matter how cheap they are);
- infrastructure (how much time there is to prepare meals, when they are eaten, who watches the kids during shopping, etc.);...

You stated yourself that your grocery budget includes convenience foods. If convenience food was all you knew and you had to get a meal on the table quickly, you'd buy convenience foods. Maybe you don't have to buy Stoffer's frozen entrées (though they're cheaper at the local supermarket than I can cook an equivalent entrée myself). But even "basic" items like spaghetti sauce and chicken stock were once "convenience" foods. And there's something to be said for purchases that will hold for a long time under less-than-ideal conditions which are available immediately. Chicken thighs won't hold in the refrigerator or freezer forever and they have to be cooked to be edible. Tuna? Open the can -- whenever you open it -- and you're there.

It's not all about the calories. Even if they're poor, they're still human beings. The family referred to in the original link is, as others have stated, a great case study for how not to do it. They have the time to prepare their own food -- better cheaper food than chips and case-ready pork tenderloins. Maybe a better use of that food-stamp money would be to teach them how to cook and give them some reasons why doing so is better for their family and to educate them on food stamps being an aid, not the entire budget. Maybe that's the proverbial lipstick on a pig. That's a completely separate conversation. But blanket proscriptions on how people should trade time for money or should know how to do things ... There are many reasons why things are the way they are. I just know too many of the working poor to think it's just a matter of "eat this, not that". Without addressing those reasons, the situation will persist.

flowerseverywhere

11-3-13, 2:10pm

. Maybe a better use of that food-stamp money would be to teach them how to cook and give them some reasons why doing so is better for their family and to educate them on food stamps being an aid, not the entire budget. Maybe that's the proverbial lipstick on a pig. That's a completely separate conversation. But blanket proscriptions on how people should trade time for money or should know how to do things ... There are many reasons why things are the way they are. I just know too many of the working poor to think it's just a matter of "eat this, not that". Without addressing those reasons, the situation will persist.
Well, restrictions on what you could buy would go over like a lead balloon. But choosing between a bag of potato chips and a bag of potatoes is a good choice. You do know you can buy soda and even red bull as well. When I moved I had a big bag of stuff I bought to my local food bank. There was a bunch of stuff I wanted to donate, like several bags of brown rice, dried beans etc. which they would not take. Surely there were some patrons who would have taken them for free. If not, it is a sad state of affairs. I know when restrictions have been discussed in the past people get very upset. What, welfare/food stamp recipients can't have a treat? No. This is food other people have paid for. I wish there was a list of non eligible items.
and I feel strongly about this because I came from nothing. Foster care to a full time job while going to school to further my education and I never ate one mouthful of government or charity supplied food once I was of age. I know what it is like to have canned beans and cheap day old bread for dinner more than one night in a row. Great incentive in my case to work hard. There is a fine line between charity while people get back on their feet and fostering dependency for some people.

ApatheticNoMore

11-3-13, 3:30pm

Well, restrictions on what you could buy would go over like a lead balloon. But choosing between a bag of potato chips and a bag of potatoes is a good choice. You do know you can buy soda and even red bull as well.

I don't' know I suspect there already are restrictions on what you can buy (although I may be confusing it with WIC if they provide food assistance - which might have stronger restrictions). Anyway, I've seen people using such assistance have the healthiest carts in the market! The carts are so full of barely processed staples that they STAND OUT and you can't help but notice, because it's NOT your average shopping cart. Milk, and bread, and fruits and veggies and so on. It may not meet someone's idea of a healthy diet (all organic and sustainable or paleo or whatever, but it is real basic staple foodstuffs). In fact I've seen people using assistance use cash to buy some cream type "alfredo" pasta sauce, which I may not think is the healthiest (transfats and chemicals), but it wasn't covered.

bae

11-3-13, 3:32pm

Peter Menzel's "Hungry Planet" is worth paging through:

USA, $341.98 for 1 week (2007 prices):

http://timeglobalspin.files.wordpress.com/2013/09/usnc04_0001_xxf1rw1.jpg?w=720

Cairo, $68.53:

http://timeglobalspin.files.wordpress.com/2013/09/egy03_0001a_xxf11.jpg?w=720

Bhutan, $5.03:

http://timeglobalspin.files.wordpress.com/2013/09/bhu01_0001_xxf1s1.jpg?w=720

Chad, $1.23:

http://timeglobalspin.files.wordpress.com/2013/09/cha104_0001_xxf1rw1.jpg?w=720

Miss Cellane

11-3-13, 3:45pm

try2bfrugal

11-3-13, 3:50pm

It's not all about the calories. Even if they're poor, they're still human beings..... I just know too many of the working poor to think it's just a matter of "eat this, not that". Without addressing those reasons, the situation will persist.

So I guess that would be the parts of my posts on, "They need some menu plans or some ideas to make simple whole foods as easy as convenience foods but less expensive.....That would make a good web site. I have been trying to figure out how to make healthy meals in 5 - 10 minutes of preparation time, plus additional time to cook. A food stamp budget could be chicken legs and baked potatoes in the turbo oven, a cabbage and carrot salad with a simple home made oil and vinegar dressing, and seasonal fruit on sale. I think that could be made in 10 minutes or prep time."

I never said it was only cost per calorie that counted, although that is a prerequisite to buying food on a tight budget. Otherwise access to stores and having simple recipes doesn't matter if you are still spending more than your budget allows.

Tiam

11-3-13, 4:36pm

I find it surprising that there are no restrictions on what you can buy with food stamps. I think there used to be, but I'm not sure.

With the WIC program, there are only certain foods that can be purchased, and the program is very specific as to type, even brand and flavor/variety. There were some women at work who get assistance from WIC and they were commenting that because one cereal company has changed the boxes the cereal comes in, the name of the cereal doesn't match the WIC list exactly, and they can no longer buy it. But WIC seems to be very focused on certain aspects of nutrition and all the foods allowed fit into a narrow range.

Bulk oatmeal isn't allowed, but cream of wheat cereal is; white potatoes aren't allowed, but sweet potatoes are.

That's because WIC is focusing on specific nutrients to be supplements where as food stamps are just for "food" which is pretty broad. The focus for WIC is vitamin C, folic acid, iron,, protein and other vitamins and minerals. Cream of wheat is "enriched" with iron and vitamins, so it fits the bill. The sweet potatoes have more vitamins than white. WIC foods are always specifically identified for nutrient value. Food Stamps is just anything consumable including soda, ice cream, candy, chips, etc. Not that WIC program doesn't have it's issues.

lac

11-3-13, 7:28pm

And neither of the daughters can work, even though Grandma is home all day to babysit? Sorry, don't buy it. And where are the men?

Exactly! I'm getting tired of these people.

jp1

11-3-13, 9:15pm

It may take more time to cook if you are among the working poor, but you also can't afford a gardener or house cleaner, either. Buying convenience foods is like making minimum wage and then paying someone else to cook for you.

The difference is that most people like to eat every day. Regardless of how grueling their life is. Cleaning and gardening are rarely Got To Do It Now activities.

JaneV2.0

11-3-13, 9:54pm

...
Yeah, food has a hard time fitting in there. I know exactly the life that Miss Cellane is talking about. That being said, I'm not feeling sorry for the family in the artlcle losing $44 in food stamps. Someone has to teach them some menu planning and cooking skills.

And family planning as well. Unless there are critical details left out of the original story, these people seem to have more problems than $44 can fix.

try2bfrugal

11-3-13, 10:04pm

The difference is that most people like to eat every day. Regardless of how grueling their life is. Cleaning and gardening are rarely Got To Do It Now activities.

It doesn't change the math. Buying convenience foods is literally paying someone else to do your cooking for you whether you make $100k a year or minimum wage.

jp1

11-3-13, 10:24pm

It doesn't change the math. Buying convenience foods is literally paying someone else to do your cooking for you whether you make $100k a year or minimum wage.

And the math doesn't change the crazy long, grueling schedules that many working poor people live, as plenty of other posters have mentioned.

Rather than begrudging people for being too tired to cook from scratch I would personally rather begrudge the reality that wages are falling, safety nets are shrinking and yet the federal reserve is printing up $85 billion per month out of thin air and giving it to Wall Street banks. Talk about people getting money who don't deserve it. It just amazes me how much time people spend worrying about every little nickel and dime that someone gets and whether they deserve it, yet our government blows a trillion per year on the military industrial complex and countless billions more in support are given to Wall Street yet that isn't what we're talking about. In fiscal 2012 the food stamp budget was $74.6 billion. Less than one month of what is given to the banks month after month after effing month.

try2bfrugal

11-3-13, 11:03pm

SteveinMN

11-4-13, 12:14am

And the math doesn't change the crazy long, grueling schedules that many working poor people live, as plenty of other posters have mentioned.

Rather than begrudging people for being too tired to cook from scratch I would personally rather begrudge the reality that wages are falling, safety nets are shrinking and yet the federal reserve is printing up $85 billion per month out of thin air and giving it to Wall Street banks. Talk about people getting money who don't deserve it. It just amazes me how much time people spend worrying about every little nickel and dime that someone gets and whether they deserve it, yet our government blows a trillion per year on the military industrial complex and countless billions more in support are given to Wall Street yet that isn't what we're talking about. In fiscal 2012 the food stamp budget was $74.6 billion. Less than one month of what is given to the banks month after month after effing month.
^^^ THIS.

I don't dispute that there is fraud in social programs. I don't dispute that many people could use the money they're given more efficiently. I know from experience (DW's job) that fraud that is identified is dealt with promptly; I also know that governments in charge of such distributions have had their workforces chipped away as much as they have been in the corporate world so they're super-busy, too. But I don't think anyone can dispute that billions have been provided to the "job creators" and that, after years of that kind of "help", about 99% of us have very little to show for it. I'm less concerned with the pennies we toss at poor people and more concerned with the Benjamins we stuff in the pockets of people who have demonstrated malfeasance with much larger sums of money.

If you are low income and working two jobs, you can't work any more so the only other thing you are able to do is cut expenses.
Or work three jobs. Or better jobs. Work, education, prejudice, and the job market permitting, of course.

All of us here understand that cutting expenses is a series of tradeoffs, some of which we have to make and some of which we choose to make. I get (to be colloquial) that beggars can't be choosers -- sometimes I'm a beggar myself. But a little more dignity doesn't hurt anyone.

iris lilies

11-4-13, 12:15am

...I would hope part of that would be teaching people how to make quick and healthy meals.... .

Why do you think those programs do not now exist? And if the working poor are juggling two jobs and etc, how do they have time to attend?

There are food banks over that employ nutritionists to teach these things. I took a class, for instance, on bean recipes and it was taught by a nutritionist who was employed in another capacity by a food outreach program.

The suggestion for food education always comes up on these threads. It exists now. The government spends craploads at the federal, state, and local level to promote healthy eating, in employes legions of workers to write and disseminate information, to teach, to educate. COmmunity gardens are the rage all over and many organizations exist to show people how to grow and use fresh vegetables. I am personally in "community garden" overload in how and where it is pushed these days,, I'm just sick of it. But that is my problem, of course gardening is a fine thing.

As always, it's not enough, it's never enough, not matter what the taxpayers spend, it will never be enough.

Tiam

11-4-13, 12:52am

Tiam

11-4-13, 12:58am

Why do you think those programs do not now exist? And if the working poor are juggling two jobs and etc, how do they have time to attend?

There are food banks over that employ nutritionists to teach these things. I took a class, for instance, on bean recipes and it was taught by a nutritionist who was employed in another capacity by a food outreach program.

The suggestion for food education always comes up on these threads. It exists now. The government spends craploads at the federal, state, and local level to promote healthy eating, in employes legions of workers to write and disseminate information, to teach, to educate. COmmunity gardens are the rage all over and many organizations exist to show people how to grow and use fresh vegetables. I am personally in "community garden" overload in how and where it is pushed these days,, I'm just sick of it. But that is my problem, of course gardening is a fine thing.

As always, it's not enough, it's never enough, not matter what the taxpayers spend, it will never be enough.

I'm not so sure. I had times in my life when I was on food stamps and on WIC and never attended a cooking class.

But I'll toss this out. There was a point in my life when I had two children under the age of 5. I was homeless. I lived in a campground and had to move every week in order to not be squatting. But I worked. 40 hours a week at a minimum wage job. I actually declined food stamps at that time and paid for everything myself. But there were times when it was ALL pretty sketchy. Who would watch my kids when I worked? Where would we bathe? How could I keep them warm and healthy, let alone, think of cheap nutritious meals that were do-able and cook-able on a food stamp budget, over a fire in the forest. The moral of this story being, you never the know the circumstances of a person receiving aid. You may think you do, because you've seen some egregious abuses, but does it make someone an expert on it?

jp1

11-4-13, 1:10am

The moral of this story being, you never the know the circumstances of a person receiving aid. You may think you do, because you've seen some egregious abuses, but does it make someone an expert on it?

Ronald Reagan was great at selling the myth of the welfare queen living high on the hog at government expense, even though it's not at all true in most cases. Republicans in Florida (and I think several other states) made a tactical mistake when they instituted drug testing for welfare recipients a year or two ago. Instead of having a myth that couldn't easily be disproven they now had hard proof that at least in this one instance (the perception that lots of welfare recipients are lazy drug addicts) they were wrong. It turned out that so few welfare recipients were using drugs that the state had spent significantly more on drug tests than they saved from denying benefits to drug users.

gimmethesimplelife

11-4-13, 1:18am

I see the food stamps issue both ways. It is easier to stretch food dollars here in Phoenix than it is in many other places as Phoenix is one of the most competitive markets for grocery stores in the US AND we are so close to Nogales, where tons of produce from Mexico pass through the border - along with other things not so legal but that's not my point here. The Hispanic markets here in Phoenix always have loss leaders and one can fix a menu around beans and rice and the loss leaders and survive quite well on food stamps, especially if they kiss meat goodbye.

I have been on food stamps personally once in my life in 2010 and they were a blessing.....that being said, I did not put seafood or soda or meat into my cart. I was extremely stretched to come up with my half of the mortgage and various other bills so I made it into a game - how far can we stretch this benefit and how much can be left on the card at the end of the month?

In the neighborhood I live in I'd guesstimate around 60% of folks are on food stamps, and I see unwise food choices and non-economical food choices in food carts with people paying on EBT almost every time I do the grocery shopping. I'm sure there is abuse in the system and there seems to be a lack of knowledge in this segment of the population overall in wise AND economical food choices. However, I also have to say I did not abuse or game the system and as soon as I found a seasonal job and started working again the Summer of 2010, I called DES in Phoenix and got myself off of food stamps as due to my income I no longer qualified. And during this time of extreme stress in my life, I was very grateful for the EBT card and for the AHCCCS card (the latter being Medicaid in Arizona). Not everyone out there is abusing the system and/or using it to subsidize unwise choices.

Rob

ApatheticNoMore

11-4-13, 3:12am

The thing is I can relate to being bone tired at the end of the day and relying on *some* convenience foods (of course any convenience foods I choose are pretty healthy because that's how I roll). And I work a 40 hour week with *occasional* overtime and that really is occasional, it's not happening every week (though it could be getting worse soon). I have an hour commute each way. And so it isn't that hard of a stretch for me to understand that deep fatigue at the end of the day and that's working 1 job. I often push past the fatigue, doing real cooking and I do seriously cook, but again I work one job, I'm not raising kids, I'm not usually working weekends (except that occasional overtime business) etc. and I still come home pretty exhausted at the end of the day. The fatigue of working a schedule worse than mine is easy for me to imagine. My actual motive to cook is for health more than finances. And I find that motive plenty motivating to put in some effort.

Rather than begrudging people for being too tired to cook from scratch I would personally rather begrudge the reality that wages are falling, safety nets are shrinking and yet the federal reserve is printing up $85 billion per month out of thin air and giving it to Wall Street banks. Talk about people getting money who don't deserve it. It just amazes me how much time people spend worrying about every little nickel and dime that someone gets and whether they deserve it, yet our government blows a trillion per year on the military industrial complex and countless billions more in support are given to Wall Street yet that isn't what we're talking about. In fiscal 2012 the food stamp budget was $74.6 billion. Less than one month of what is given to the banks month after month after effing month.

+1000. Yes this!!! Sure the bank stuff is more complex, but a theory, call it ANM's law: when the rich and powerful try to defraud you it will be by much more subtle, complex, and difficult to understand means then when the poor and powerless do (by say abusing foodstamps). Why? Because they have the means in every sense.

I am personally in "community garden" overload in how and where it is pushed these days

I think the community gardens around here charge like $100 a plot. Now whether one sees that as a lot of money or not rather depends, but it could easily be prohibitive to food stamp recipients, and not that easy to break even with your yield either. That community garden is pitched to yuppies in apartments probably (me if I had time :laff: ), but there's a real scarcity of cheap community gardens.

I believe people fall on hard times, but I also believe in personal responsibility.

I'm not sure I believe in any politicized notion of personal responsibility, personal responsibility as a weapon in some economic or class war. There are notions of responsibility I believe in, and many I am sympathetic to though struggle with (most inner psychological personal responsibility stuff being quite difficult to grasp and apply), but they are all way too subtle to score political points with.

catherine

11-4-13, 4:08am

I'm not sure I believe in any politicized notion of personal responsibility, personal responsibility as a weapon in some economic or class war. There are notions of responsibility I believe in, and many I am sympathetic to though struggle with (most inner psychological personal responsibility stuff being quite difficult to grasp and apply), but they are all way too subtle to score political points with.

The notion of personal responsibility is a political one, in one sense anyway--and not for me as part of an economic or class war. It's a political question of how to manage and account for..I'm searching for the right word, but the only word that comes to me is "sin"--as in the tendency for SOME humans on any level of the economic spectrum, to be greedy, egotistical, and/or lazy. Does politics enable that with some policies--either food stamps or large corporate subsidies? Yes, but we allow that so that people who can legitimately benefit from those policies have access to them. Some people fall and land in a safety net. Others may decide to abandon the tight rope of life and use the safety net as a hammock. That's just human nature.

There's a push-me/pull-you effect in politics... Some are more than willing to take whatever one gives--whether on a personal level or on a political level. Then there are people like Tiam who refuse help and goes as far as she can on her own through her own strength and merit. An example of that push-me/pull-you was exhibited in Denmark when they offered unemployment benefits for six months. They saw that people tended to find employment in 5 months. So they shortened unemployment benefits to 6 weeks. And the same proportion of people found work in 5 weeks. (Something like that--I can't remember the exact timeframe, but the point is the same).

I'm a bit sensitive to this issue because on a personal level, I am amazed at how people around me (family members) are more than willing to take advantage with no conscience. I have one family member who once asked me for $100. I told him no. He said how about $75? I said no again. I explained to him that I was going through a really rough spell, that I couldn't pay my health insurance that month, that I had no money for any extras except food basics and that the well was dry.

All he said was "then how about $50?" That is just one example of how people can operate with NO sense of "other." Just as an aside, this family member would have been dead by now without VA benefits and SSI, and I'm happy that he's been able to get them. I begrudge the attitude, not the benefits.

Whether it's someone on food stamps or someone on Wall Street, that attitude does not serve a society well. I do think the character of the country is summed up by the character of the individuals, and that's what politicizes it--whether it's a corporation accepting money from the government for activities that are not in the best interest of the citizens or the families upset because the government has to cut their food budget to $756.

ApatheticNoMore

11-4-13, 5:31am

The notion of personal responsibility is a political one, in one sense anyway--and not for me as part of an economic or class war. It's a political question of how to manage and account for..I'm searching for the right word, but the only word that comes to me is "sin"--as in the tendency for SOME humans on any level of the economic spectrum, to be greedy, egotistical, and/or lazy. Does politics enable that with some policies--either food stamps or large corporate subsidies? Yes, but we allow that so that people who can legitimately benefit from those policies have access to them.

Whether it's someone on food stamps or someone on Wall Street, that attitude does not serve a society well. I do think the character of the country is summed up by the character of the individuals, and that's what politicizes it--whether it's a corporation accepting money from the government for activities that are not in the best interest of the citizens or the families upset because the government has to cut their food budget to $756.

Ok let's go to the "someone on Wall Street" discussion. Well first off I'm not just going to level vague hate at Wall Street because it's popular to hate. Some criticize the corruption, I'm not an expert on that, but it may be fair (blame my intellectual laziness for not being an expert on that). When jp1 talked about bankers getting money it was a discussion of very specific programs to create money out of thin air (at least as far as I can tell) for banks. A very specific criticism.

Now one can say they are equally against those banks getting money created out of thin air for them and those on food stamps getting too much money, but the political system has no intent of cutting aid to the former. So why should anyone play along or play any part in that rigged rhetorical game anyway? One can declare in principle that they are equally against both aid to banks and food stamp recipients, against bad behavior at any level of the economic system, but it really doesn't matter one iota! It's meaningless politically when the political system only cuts aid to the poor. And that's why yes it is in practice class war against the poor, because that's what actually happens existentially in the real world. And really if a political system were to err in one direction in should be the complete opposite of this, right?

I'm a bit sensitive to this issue because on a personal level, I am amazed at how people around me (family members) are more than willing to take advantage with no conscience. I have one family member who once asked me for $100. I told him no. He said how about $75? I said no again. I explained to him that I was going through a really rough spell, that I couldn't pay my health insurance that month, that I had no money for any extras except food basics and that the well was dry.

All he said was "then how about $50?" That is just one example of how people can operate with NO sense of "other."

I have annoying irresponsible family members too. Why should I generalize from them to most people on aid whose lives and experiences I don't even know? It's not even valid as a generalization (anecdotes make poor statistics). At best all such counter examples can prove is
"some people take advantage of other people". Which is useful if you held an absolutist position to the contrary like: "ALL people are basically good", as one counterexample refutes an "ALL". But what if you don't hold any such position anyway, and are willing to give struggling people in this society the benefit of the doubt? Food stamps afterall aren't even an expensive program.

flowerseverywhere

11-4-13, 6:11am

Many excellent points have been made here. Maybe food stamps strike such a nerve with ordinary people because it goes back to being in kindergarten. If someone gets a bigger cookie the other kids get mad. The perception that someone is getting more, (with your tax money to boot), while you may be struggling and making sacrifices is difficult to settle in someone"s head.

And I am with IrisLilly on this one. It is never enough, like in the original article it is written like people are outraged it can be taken away from them instead of being grateful.

In order for a house to be strong, each wall has to be strong. If a supporting wall does not function the house will fall. The strong walls in our house (as well as much of European) are struggling under the strain of supporting the others

catherine

11-4-13, 7:55am

But what if you don't hold any such position anyway, and are willing to give struggling people in this society the benefit of the doubt?

I am. I vote Democrat, I'm a "bleeding heart liberal" in many ways. I'm more than happy my clueless family member has been a recipient of government programs and I'm willing to support those programs with my tax dollar. Not only that, if you remember, I'm in favor of the gift economy, where everything is accessible without money at all. So I'm not "keeping score." But in the context of trying to manage programs that are meant for those in need, in the context of the political and economic system we've got, it helps when individuals have a sharing mentality vs. a "gimme" mentality (and it saves everyone a ton of money). Perhaps this goes directly to Eisenstein's thesis--that in a scarcity mindset, which is where we are now, people are naturally going to be more self-interested and self-protective to the point of ignoring the greater good. In an abundance mindset, where people give and receive freely, the instinct for self-preservation breaks down, so there would be no fear, no hoarding, no taking advantage.

So maybe it is a political question in the highest sense.

Florence

11-4-13, 9:59am

I have a niece and her children and their children who have been on food stamps for decades. They smoke, they eat junk, and they think it is so unfair that they are sick and can't work. I gave up on them years ago. Things are never their fault.

Aqua Blue

11-4-13, 10:04am

Anyone remember commodities? They provided food, but very much basics, perhaps that would be the way to go.

iris lilies

11-4-13, 11:10am

Anyone remember commodities? They provided food, but very much basics, perhaps that would be the way to go.

No, too many people can't eat cheese or won't eat it or it's not in their culture, etc.

I am in favor of keeping the program the way it is, EBT for everyone and WIC to guide those who really need to pay attention to nutrition for their children. But don't ask me for more.

SteveinMN

11-4-13, 11:28am

And I am with IrisLilly on this one. It is never enough, like in the original article it is written like people are outraged it can be taken away from them instead of being grateful.

In order for a house to be strong, each wall has to be strong. If a supporting wall does not function the house will fall. The strong walls in our house (as well as much of European) are struggling under the strain of supporting the others

Perhaps this goes directly to Eisenstein's thesis--that in a scarcity mindset, which is where we are now, people are naturally going to be more self-interested and self-protective to the point of ignoring the greater good. In an abundance mindset, where people give and receive freely, the instinct for self-preservation breaks down, so there would be no fear, no hoarding, no taking advantage.

So maybe it is a political question in the highest sense.
I honestly and truly believe America's current era was ushered in with the election of Ronald Reagan. He and his henchmen managed to paint a picture of scarcity and pitted organized groups against each other, and it's been downhill since -- right down to the Koch brothers today manipulating the gullible dressed up in straw boaters with tea bags hanging from the brims. There's a sleight-of-hand game being played in which the future is portrayed as infinitely expanding (more world citizens, more business overseas, no limits on natural resources) while today is painted in terms of a shrinking pie. Which is it??

As a result, we've had a generation or two of people who have been trained to look out for their own interests because there's someone else further up the ladder who is out to take it away. It happens to poor people as they lose food stamp dollars. It happens to middle-class people as they see a vanishing job market, especially for less-educated workers. It happens to rich people as they see more and more tax dollars spent on families which just aren't making it -- ironically, quite often as a result of policies that benefit the rich.

But I've seen the U.S. move from a society in which smoking cigarettes was cool to a society that has made pariahs of smokers. People accept the role of being the designated driver among their friends; driving drunk isn't acceptable anymore. We could choose to believe that there is enough for everyone -- like we used to. We seem to have lost the belief in the collective, which does come with the understanding that no one will be totally unencumbered by society but that that's a better thing for all of us.

I am not quite sure how we get there. Throwing money at the problem certainly does not seem to be the answer. But "tough love" (if we don't help people of course they'll surmount their own obstacles) doesn't, either. So what's next?

Alan

11-4-13, 11:36am

I honestly and truly believe America's current era was ushered in with the election of Ronald Reagan.
An interesting observation. In all honesty, I believe the current era was ushered in by LBJ, leaving Reagan's implied nefariousness as a popular response.

ApatheticNoMore

11-4-13, 11:47am

I am. I vote Democrat, I'm a "bleeding heart liberal" in many ways. Not only that, if you remember, I'm in favor of the gift economy, where everything is accessible without money at all. So I'm not "keeping score." But in the context of trying to manage programs that are meant for those in need, in the context of the political and economic system we've got, it helps when individuals have a sharing mentality vs. a "gimme" mentality (and it saves everyone a ton of money). Perhaps this goes directly to Eisenstein's thesis--that in a scarcity mindset, which is where we are now, people are naturally going to be more self-interested and self-protective to the point of ignoring the greater good. In an abundance mindset, where people give and receive freely, the instinct for self-preservation breaks down, so there would be no fear, no hoarding, no taking advantage.

Yea probably. I'm not sure I have a scarcity mentality to the point of being super jealous of food stamps, frankly there are mostly just bigger problems in the world to worry about. And I've always earned more than that. I'd like not to work if the food stamps recipients are not working :). But cutting food stamps isn't going to allow me to quit my job, that's just not reality in any sense. As for if food stamp recipients have a scarcity mentality: perhaps, they've never lived in a world that convinced them otherwise afterall, few have. And I don't expect them to have an even better mentality that everyone else including those much better off. Besides what would any food stamp recipient even imagine they have to share that this world would want? Yea they can look for work.

iris lilies

11-4-13, 11:55am

I honestly and truly believe America's current era was ushered in with the election of Ronald Reagan. He and his henchmen managed to paint a picture of scarcity ...

right, so the US' deficit spending problem is just a fantasy. There's no "lack" here! I don't have to worry about it, trala tralaaaa.
What a relief.

jp1

11-4-13, 12:04pm

Iris, I think you're spot on. Our deficit spending is indeed a problem. And lets not forget the first big deficit spender in chief, Ronald Raegan. Under his watch the deficit ballooned. Or what about Nixon, who took us off the Bretton Woods gold standard and ushered in the ability to deficit spend. There's plenty of blame to go around on the deficit count.

The only question is what spending matters. I think that food stamps and aid programs are good spending. And they're small potatoes compared to things like the military and prisons, and deliiver far more good to society.

pinkytoe

11-4-13, 12:51pm

bae

11-4-13, 1:05pm

An interesting observation. In all honesty, I believe the current era was ushered in by LBJ, leaving Reagan's implied nefariousness as a popular response.

I blame FDR.

Alan

11-4-13, 1:25pm

I blame FDR.
Good call. I almost started there myself but got hung up on my own personal definition of "current era".

catherine

11-4-13, 1:28pm

What about the psychological perspective of receiving aid or not? One of the things that mystifies me - and is somewhat related to living a simple life - is the role of ambition in our lives. Why are some people OK with receiving long-term aid and others motivated to excel (whatever that means)? Why are some of us OK with a "paycheck" job and others want a full blown professional career? Why isn't health more important than convenience? Are some people just not able to connect the dots between their choices and outcomes? I am always trying to figure out why people make the decisions (sometimes very dumb ones) and how we could fix that....

Great questions.

I just read an article that was consistent with some psychologists like Maslow. It said that the two main drivers of human behavior are a need for dignity and a need for recognition. If you feel you have those two things, you have more potential for self-actualization.

One of the things they referenced was the famous study of the town in PA, Roseto, where everyone had very high indices of health and well-being, and it was all tied to social cohesion (lack of isolation and distrust). When they compared the well-being of the one town to that of another nearby town, they found that the more social and geographic mobility, the worse off the people were.

I think if you have a tight community unit, if one of your parents cannot or does not provide you with dignity, there are plenty of surrogates around who may fill that void. If you grow up without such emotional support, maybe the wind is out of your sails. Who knows.

Alan

11-4-13, 1:31pm

..... Are some people just not able to connect the dots between their choices and outcomes? I am always trying to figure out why people make the decisions (sometimes very dumb ones) and how we could fix that....
And therein lies the rub. Personally, I'd rather not live in a society which feels empowered to "fix" whatever perceived faults I may entertain. Choosing instead a society where the link between "choices and outcomes" is obvious enough to the individual that they feel compelled to "fix" themselves.

The root difference being that the former is oppressive and the later provides dignity.

catherine

11-4-13, 1:43pm

http://www.opednews.com/populum/uploadnic/2a-jpg_79840_20131101-217.jpg

Here's an interesting article (http://www.opednews.com/articles/The-Mind-of-the-Poor-by-Lawrence-Davidson-Economic_Inequality_Issues_Mind-Body-Heart-Spirit-131101-764.html) that just popped up on my FB news feed

Most of the poverty in the United States is artificially manufactured. It is poverty created in the pursuit of "free market ideals," expressed in recent times by the imposition of neoliberal economic policies -- the sort of policies that cut taxes on the wealthy, do away with fiscal and other business regulations, undermine the social safety net and erode middle-class stability -- all while singing the praises of self-reliance and individual responsibility. As a result we have done very well in making the rich richer and the poor both poorer and more numerous.

Do our politicians understand any of this? Seems not. Just this week Congress cut the Food Stamp program by some $40 billion. That is neoliberal economics in action and proof positive that ideology and prejudice are stronger than scientific research when it comes to policy formulation. Is there a way to reverse this stupidity? Yes, but it will take mass action. It is time to consider replaying the 1960s and force the politicians to act responsibly despite themselves.

pinkytoe

11-4-13, 2:36pm

a society where the link between "choices and outcomes" is obvious enough to the individual
So do we just ignore those who haven't figured it out and continue on with survival of the fittest?

JaneV2.0

11-4-13, 2:49pm

Catherine, thank you for bringing up Roseto. I often reference it with respect to health. People there ate hearty meals with family, smoked and did many of the things that modern-day "experts" would say are harmful, but they led long, healthy lives because they formed strong family and community bonds and took care of each other. Just the opposite of the constantly striving "driven" individual template. I don't care if people are ambitious, as long as I'm not expected to worship their petty striving. It's all a wash in the end.

Spartana

11-4-13, 3:00pm

JaneV2.0

11-4-13, 3:40pm

My mother was a lifelong Republican until Ronald Reagan came along. She was so appalled by him she switched her party affiliation. He was a man who espoused whatever he was told to, as long as he profited.

ApatheticNoMore

11-4-13, 3:53pm

That era was a pretty brutal era to grow up in.

gimmethesimplelife

11-4-13, 4:09pm

I just had a thought about food stamps.....How would you'all feel if more restrictions were placed on what food stamps could actually purchase? Instead of high end cuts of meat and soda and candy and just generally expensive and unhealthy things? I personally would be OK with that, and this is coming from a self proclaimed liberal. Just curious how others feel about this.....

A few posts ago someone, I think it was Steve, stated that this era we are in now basically started with Reagan and I couldn't agree more.....that was when things started slowly sliding on down.....

Rob

gimmethesimplelife

11-4-13, 4:14pm

I saw another issue in this thread I wanted to address - personal responsibility. I have always had a hard time with that concept - at least the American definition of it - as I was raised to believe - and chose to keep this belief - in the importance of the communal whole. I certainly believe those who can work should be contributing to society in order to get the goodies that high tax countries dole out with no guilt placed on the recipients.....So in a way I buy into it, I just don't believe in how EXTREME Americans take this concept. To put it kindly, I find it very dehumanizing but not completely without some merit. As I said, this one has always been a struggle for me.

Rob

pinkytoe

11-4-13, 4:22pm

I just don't believe in how EXTREME Americans take this concept.
I think by nature, humans have needed each other to survive so I too wonder about the rugged individualism stuff.

JaneV2.0

11-4-13, 4:23pm

I don't like other people telling me what is "healthy." I'd rather decide that for myself. Who decides? Vegans? Food manufacturers? Low-fat proponents? From my perspective, I'd limit it to whole foods, but that wouldn't be fair to those who needed the convenience of canned soup or jarred tomato sauce. I think it's fine the way it is.

"Personal responsibility" is just a dog-whistle for the holier-than-thou crowd.

Miss Cellane

11-4-13, 5:49pm

Many - most? - fast food places here in Calif accept EBT/SNAP (and I'm at a McDonald right now with a huge sign posted saying just that). So maybe this family is spending much of it's $800/month food bill on fast food. Personally I find that number outrageous since I'm living on about a $100/month food bill myself - and I eat several thousand calories a day because I'm a distance runner. Some serious changes need to be made to the program to make sure people are using their food stamp money wisely.

I had thought that restaurant food was not eligible, then I found this on the USDA site:

n some areas, restaurants can be authorized to accept SNAP benefits from qualified homeless, elderly, or disabled people in exchange for low-cost meals.

and

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.

It appears from what I can find online that California allows the homeless, elderly and disabled to use the SNAP cards in restaurants to get hot food.

Now, how "homeless, elderly and disabled" is defined for these purposes, I don't know.

In New Hampshire, you can't buy hot prepared food, so I don't think recipients can use the SNAP benefits at restaurants.

gimmethesimplelife

11-4-13, 7:09pm

I think by nature, humans have needed each other to survive so I too wonder about the rugged individualism stuff.+1 Rob

gimmethesimplelife

11-4-13, 7:10pm

early morning

11-4-13, 8:44pm

In New Hampshire, you can't buy hot prepared food, so I don't think recipients can use the SNAP benefits at restaurants.
How do you eat then, if you're homeless?? I have a cognitively disabled, drug-addicted homeless adopted cousin, and the only hot meals she generally gets are from fast food and sandwich shops. She has nowhere she can even heat up a can of soup, let alone try to actually cook something...

jp1

11-4-13, 9:44pm

Everyone who is in favor of limiting food stamps to 'real' ingredients so that people can make wholesome food instead of buying more expensive prepacked processed foods need to realize that it's not going to happen anytime soon. All one has to do is follow the money. The broccoli and carrot lobbies and nutritionist educator's lobby don't have anywhere near the amount of money to give to politicians that the big biz food manufacturers have. As long as that's the case billions of taxpayer dollars, in the form of foodstamps, will continue to be used to buy prepackaged foods.

gimmethesimplelife

11-5-13, 4:57am

How do you eat then, if you're homeless?? I have a cognitively disabled, drug-addicted homeless adopted cousin, and the only hot meals she generally gets are from fast food and sandwich shops. She has nowhere she can even heat up a can of soup, let alone try to actually cook something...Very good point you raise here and I'm a little embarrassed that I didn't think of this myself. Of course even at my lowest points economically when I was worth about a dollar fifty and I was couch surfing in my early twenties, I always had access to a kitchen of some kind and to a bathroom/shower - even when I was living in a tent in someone's backyard at one point. So a. I need to be a little more grateful, and b. getting to the point here, not everyone has had or has continuous access to basic kitchen resources. This sure makes everyday living a challenge I myself can't comprehend. Blessings and best of wishes to your cousin, BTW.....Rob

goldensmom

11-5-13, 6:17am

How do you eat then, if you're homeless?? .
We have community supported 'soup kitchens' (goes by various names, not soup kitchen) that will give a free, daily hot meal to anyone, no questions asked. Soup kitchens may not be available everywhere but is common where I live so that is one way homeless can eat. The laundromats are open 24 hrs and although stated as not allowed, owners will not kick our a homeless person at night or stop them from using the bathroom facilities to clean up.

sweetana3

11-5-13, 7:41am

reader99

11-5-13, 8:05am

catherine

11-5-13, 8:41am

Those who are interested in this issue should go and talk to people who run food pantries and such to learn the realities of the issue. Got and volunteer and talk to the people on both sides. It was eye opening and my opinions of the whole issue changed.

Please do not let your opinions be created by anecdotes and media reports.

In what way did your opinions of the issue change, sweetana? Just curious.

I work at a food pantry and distrubute food once a month. Very gratifying work. Not sure my opinions were formed there, or changed there--what I did learn was that a) it's wonderful to be able to provide food and services to people who desperately need them, and b) you need a very strong manager (which is not me, let me tell you) to make sure some people don't take advantage at the expense of the other clients.

And that attitude is not restricted to the clients--the county distribution center had to put new rules in effect to keep the hosting organizations (local food pantries, churches, etc) from taking too much--it went from being a nice, sharing environment where people would come and leave with several boxes of food to fit in a regular car, and grew to where one group would come with trucks and arrive at 8am and take as much as they could. People who arrived at 11am got nothing. Again--the scarcity mentality at work.

flowerseverywhere

11-5-13, 8:56am

Here's something to ponder. If food stamps were reduced every year by 10% what would happen?

SteveinMN

11-5-13, 1:15pm

So do we just ignore those who haven't figured it out and continue on with survival of the fittest?
Yes. Too bad that hokey global warming is killing the ice fields. It would be so much easier to pack up those nasty lazy poor people and the old and the handicapped and ship them off on ice floes so they, too, can enjoy the dignity and accomplishment of living on their own.

Maybe it's just tiny circles I run in, but everyone I know of the "survival of the fittest" variety is white, not handicapped (physically, anyway), middle-/upper-class, and educated. None of them seems to have a real answer to what we as a society do about citizens who are not as well-off physically/emotionally or financially. Ironically, most of these folks are one or two events away from needing help themselves (severe accident, job loss, sick child/relative). I'd love to meet more than one poor person of color who believes his or her fellow citizens should not get a leg up when they need it. That there is a desireable dignity in scraping by in multiple low-paid jobs every day. That people who have mental issues (but not issues severe enough to jail them) can somehow decide they want that corner office job and just go for it.

There is a problem with deficit spending in the U.S. We don't take in enough revenue to balance what we spend. But where is the "survival" crowd when it comes to corporate welfare? To propping up expensive weapons systems that even the armed forces say they don't need? Where was that crowd when huge losses like GM's and the Too Big To Fail banks resulted in all taxpayers bailing them out (so much for the almighty "free market"; it hasn't existed in the U.S. in decades -- if ever)? It's not like people were going to stop buying cars, writing checks, and getting mortgages. We'd get them from somewhere else, right? Why is this crowd surprised that millions of Americans are on some amount of public funding after quarterly results from years ago drove good manufacturing jobs and even a lot of service jobs off-shore? Where are all the noble private foundations which can help these waifs learn life skills and be productive citizens? Or should we just invest in ice floes?

Maybe if we got rid of stupid government spending like tobacco subsidies and anti-smoking campaigns we could talk about the few bucks we throw at people who might be able to use it better. But I don't see that part of the conversation. It's all about those inconvenient poor people chowing away at the public trough. But all that, to paraphrase JaneV2.0, is a dog whistle to people who still believe we live in a free-market economy and that all of us are good-looking and above average.

JaneV2.0

11-5-13, 1:24pm

Excellent post, Steve. We're running a deficit because federal taxes have been cut to the bone over the years. If we raise them back to a reasonable level (President Eisenhower, anyone?) and concurrently raise rates for the top 1% or 2%, we'd go a long way toward solving the problem. That and some solid job creation and improvements in wages. Presumably then, far fewer people would need SNAP.

Simone

11-8-13, 7:05pm

Greenway

11-8-13, 8:41pm

So what about this ... one person, oh, say ... me ... does the footwork to figure out the best deals and loss leaders in my city, plus sheet with fast easy recipes using these ingredients. A few different options for those who won't or can't eat some of the more prevalent "bad" foods. And then say 10 other people each spend two hours shopping for those ingredients for, say, 10 people each. And they get reimbursed for the food, plus minimum wage. At which point 100 people can come in and purchase both the food and the instructions on what to do with it, for what it cost to procure the food plus extremely low overhead.

Could this be a happy medium between food banks and standard grocery shopping that could help nearly anyone in need of some simple assistance, providing food that is both simple, nutritious, inexpensive and significantly more convenient than each person doing multiple shops?

Aside: FDR? Woodrow Wilson should be strung up by his ... Spaghetti-Ohs for signing the Federal Reserve Act, if there's one political decision that has financially hogtied the last 100 years, that's got to be the one.

Miss Cellane

11-8-13, 9:19pm

Precisely my thoughts the entire time I have been reading this thread. Feels like a deliberate manipulation to me.

Not just manipulation, but very, very poor reporting. A few decades ago, I took journalism classes in college. It was one of my majors. Checking your facts was stressed. You checked, you double-checked and you triple-checked.

This reporter:

1. Does not understand how the SNAP program works.
2. Deliberately chose to report on people who were overly dependent on the SNAP program.
3. Wrote a piece of "journalism" that is not factual and would be better on the editorial page, where opinions, rather than facts, rule.

Did anyone else notice the other person interviewed? The guy who asked that his wages be reduced to $9/hr instead of $12/hr? Because at $9, he qualified for government aid. At $12, he lost the aid, and the $3 extra per hour was not enough to make up the difference in the extra that the aid provides.

I really wish the government would realize this and develop plan to gradually reduce aid, instead of the current all or nothing approach. I have friends who are on disability, not because they can't hold down a job, but their disabilities require certain things that cost money--wheelchairs, specialized computer software and the like--that they can get free from government aid if they are considered "disabled," but which they cannot afford on a normal salary. They would love to work, to have a job, to contribute more to society, but the financial realities of their lives preclude this. Reducing benefits when a person gets employment, instead of eliminating them, would go a long way to helping a lot of people.

ApatheticNoMore

11-8-13, 9:46pm

So what about this ... one person, oh, say ... me ... does the footwork to figure out the best deals and loss leaders in my city, plus sheet with fast easy recipes using these ingredients. A few different options for those who won't or can't eat some of the more prevalent "bad" foods. And then say 10 other people each spend two hours shopping for those ingredients for, say, 10 people each. And they get reimbursed for the food, plus minimum wage. At which point 100 people can come in and purchase both the food and the instructions on what to do with it, for what it cost to procure the food plus extremely low overhead.

Could this be a happy medium between food banks and standard grocery shopping that could help nearly anyone in need of some simple assistance, providing food that is both simple, nutritious, inexpensive and significantly more convenient than each person doing multiple shops?

That a business proposal? I suggest you also figure in paying yourself for doing the footwork then, because that much unpaid labor is burn-out city. There's have to be lots of such distribution centers if it's to be more practical than going to the nearby store.

Greenway

11-9-13, 12:36am

Oh, I don't know. I'm already doing it for myself, and I'm not trying to change the whole world, just the whole neighborhood. ;)

creaker

11-9-13, 10:14am

Here's something to ponder. If food stamps were reduced every year by 10% what would happen?

For one, there eventually would be a lot of workers unionizing and striking for better wages. SNAP subsidizes low wages.

A lot of the union movement a century ago was driven by people who could not feed their families on the wages they were getting.

pinkytoe

11-9-13, 10:38am

catherine

11-9-13, 10:52am

This past week has been an eye-opener for me on being among the poor. First, I was chosen to serve as a juror on a personal injury trial where a very successful high wage-earner was "using the system" and suing for damages and lost wages after a very questionable injury. To get to the courthouse, I had to take a cross-city bus every morning and evening among folks who were obviously from a different world. On a lunch break, I walked to the library nearby and while perusing the new books section, one literally fell off the shelf - The Book of the Poor. It portrayed everyday accounts of the "underprivileged" among us and how they get by. I recall specifically a woman saying she had noodles with onions every day just to stretch her dollars. I think if we were truthful we would all admit regardless of our stature in life, that we all look for "opportunities". I too am sorry the media chose this family for the story just to raise ire. By the end of this week, I felt extremely grateful for all that I have and more compassionate for those that don't.

Yes, while I was touting the "personal responsibility" side of the coin and sharing frustration with those who game the system, my biggest frustration is that so many people come from a perspective of ignorance, never having walked the walk of those in need. I am very, very blessed to have been able to more than quintuple my income in a short amount of time--about six years. Prior to doing so, I had the experience of having to walk 3 miles to catch a ride to work with a neighbor who had a car, having my kids thank me PROFUSELY in the check out line for a bag of tube socks I was buying them, flicking on the switches upon entering the house after work to see if the electric company had shut us off, having the embarrassment of having my son's friend's mother come to the house to see if my son could play because our phone was disconnected, and digging between the couch cushions to find change for milk for the kids.

I did go to Social Services once to apply for food stamps, and I was denied because I was a homeowner. Of course, I was losing that home to foreclosure, but that didn't matter.

The experience is definitely psychologically damaging, but to be honest, if I didn't have it, I wouldn't be able to be HAPPY and grateful to pay bills--that is, to have the means to pay them. And my kids are STILL grateful for simple things.

Spartana

11-12-13, 4:04pm

I had thought that restaurant food was not eligible, then I found this on the USDA site:

and

It appears from what I can find online that California allows the homeless, elderly and disabled to use the SNAP cards in restaurants to get hot food.

Now, how "homeless, elderly and disabled" is defined for these purposes, I don't know.

In New Hampshire, you can't buy hot prepared food, so I don't think recipients can use the SNAP benefits at restaurants.
apparently Calif and a lot if other states do. This is a little blurbs from an older Wikipedia article. You can google a list of places, including fast food restaurants, that take food stamps.

"The number of businesses - including convenience and discount stores, gas stations and pharmacies - that have been approved to accept food stamps has increased by a third over the course of three years from 2005 to 2010,USA Today reports, and fast-food chains are working hard to get a cut of the federal dollars in Florida, California, Arizona and Michigan.
The funds allocated to the food stamp program have increased exponentially, from $28.5 billion to $64.7 billion in that same time frame, according to USA Today, and at a time when people have less money to spend, the bump in federal dollars can mean a lot to the fast-industry.
Yum! Brands, based in Louisville, Ky., which operates a string of restaurants that includes Taco Bell, KFC, Long John Silver's and Pizza Hut, are among those applying for inclusion in the food stamp program."

Here's some more info about Michican. Apparently it's only for selected people:

"Michigan DHS has a program which allows EBT (Bridge Card) users to buy food from restaurants with their food stamps. 105 restaurants, mostly fast food, accept food stamps (now called SNAP, or Supplemental Nutritional Assistance Program, benefits).The Restaurant Meals Program is growing to match Michigan’s overall increase in food stamp usage. 57 percent more people use food stamps and Michigan’s EBT budget increased 127 percent from 2006 to 2010. Currently, Michigan spends $2.8 billion annually on SNAP benefits annually.
Since 1996, restaurants were eligible to participate in the food assistance benefits program. At first, few participated. Now the program is booming. Not all food stamps users can buy restaurant food with their EBT Card, only those that are blind, homeless, handicapped and receiving SSI (Supplemental Social Security Income) or over age 60"

creaker

11-12-13, 6:14pm

apparently Calif and a lot if other states do. This is a little blurbs from an older Wikipedia article. You can google a list of places, including fast food restaurants, that take food stamps.

"The number of businesses - including convenience and discount stores, gas stations and pharmacies - that have been approved to accept food stamps has increased by a third over the course of three years from 2005 to 2010,USA Today reports, and fast-food chains are working hard to get a cut of the federal dollars in Florida, California, Arizona and Michigan.
The funds allocated to the food stamp program have increased exponentially, from $28.5 billion to $64.7 billion in that same time frame, according to USA Today, and at a time when people have less money to spend, the bump in federal dollars can mean a lot to the fast-industry.
Yum! Brands, based in Louisville, Ky., which operates a string of restaurants that includes Taco Bell, KFC, Long John Silver's and Pizza Hut, are among those applying for inclusion in the food stamp program."

Here's some more info about Michican. Apparently it's only for selected people:

"Michigan DHS has a program which allows EBT (Bridge Card) users to buy food from restaurants with their food stamps. 105 restaurants, mostly fast food, accept food stamps (now called SNAP, or Supplemental Nutritional Assistance Program, benefits).The Restaurant Meals Program is growing to match Michigan’s overall increase in food stamp usage. 57 percent more people use food stamps and Michigan’s EBT budget increased 127 percent from 2006 to 2010. Currently, Michigan spends $2.8 billion annually on SNAP benefits annually.
Since 1996, restaurants were eligible to participate in the food assistance benefits program. At first, few participated. Now the program is booming. Not all food stamps users can buy restaurant food with their EBT Card, only those that are blind, homeless, handicapped and receiving SSI (Supplemental Social Security Income) or over age 60"

You have to question who the SNAP program is really for these days - the people receiving food stamps? Or the businesses they give them to? If I had to guess based on lobbying power in federal and state governments, I would guess the latter - and many of those businesses employees use food stamps to supplement the low wages they receive, as well.

Spartana

11-13-13, 3:46pm

Miss Cellane

11-13-13, 6:59pm

You have to question who the SNAP program is really for these days - the people receiving food stamps? Or the businesses they give them to? If I had to guess based on lobbying power in federal and state governments, I would guess the latter - and many of those businesses employees use food stamps to supplement the low wages they receive, as well.

I've been doing a little research into the current SNAP program and how we arrived at it, and I tend to agree. It's pretty clear that there was some major lobbying on the part of processed food manufacturers to include their products in the benefits. Which is why just about any food or food product is now available to SNAP users.

In some ways, I don't mind. If you are using SNAP to buy a cake mix so your 6 year old can have a birthday cake, well, it's not healthy, but I do think it is important sometimes for kids to have what all the other kids have. So, yes, to a birthday cake from a mix. Maybe no to the $30 cake from the store bakery. And yes to the occasional candy bar treat, but no to chocolate 24/7.

But trying to police that would be a nightmare. I suspect the program has enough trouble just sorting out who is eligible and who isn't.

reader99

11-14-13, 6:55am

That how it seems. I also read an article that said that in Calif you can get cash from an ATM with a certain type of food stamp card. I guess there are 2 cards - SNAP and EBT - and one of them lets you use the ATM for cash.

Cash Assistance is a separate program from SNAP, but they are loaded onto the same debit card. The store's or ATM's computer knows one from the other. The amount for SNAP benefit can only be used for food, while the cash assistance amount can be drawn out in cash. The casual observer can't tell what's happening since they are both in the same physical card, at least in FL.

Joyous_5

11-15-13, 5:51pm

Joyous_5

11-15-13, 5:58pm

My older sister (my fellow frugal-soul-sister) and I were talking about this last weekend. We determined that the average FS budget in our state (Vermont) was $500 for a family of three. We each have one child and eat well below that amount on our income. She and her husband both work full-time; I'm home part-time with our preschooler and my husband works full-time. It's hard at times, but definitely not impossible. AND my own family eats at least 60%+ organic foods!

I feel both a little proud of us (yay for frugal people everywhere!) and I'm embarassed to say, a little irritated that others get more without having to work for it. But I don't think that's the norm with folks who use FS's--I worked as an eligibility specialist in the past and there were definitely some hard working people who just couldn't make ends meet, or had suffered some sort of catastrophe.

catherine

11-15-13, 6:28pm

Here is another perspective. Not really 100% on topic: this is a mother addressing the organic food elitists in a pretty powerful way.

http://thehumbledhomemaker.com/2013/10/dear-mom-who-cant-afford-organic-food.html

ApatheticNoMore

11-15-13, 7:40pm

Here is another perspective. Not really 100% on topic: this is a mother addressing the organic food elitists in a pretty powerful way.

whomever those are. I think most people who eat organic food argue no such thing as it's affordable to everyone always (although sure one can get organic beans and rice :)). We merely follow Pollan's advice that those who CAN eat better quality food SHOULD (without the implication that everyone can if they only try - that's pretty unrelated to the organic food movement). Should eat better quality food rather than numerous other things one could spend their money on (none of which are ever called elitist for some reason).

Those who do challenges (such as those to try to spend less money on food) mostly do them for themselves. It's not all about others, or solving poverty (at least not for most people it isn't). It's about a personal challenge.

And yea with cutting food stamps it's my suspicion that junkier and junkier food might be resorted to as well (although it's true it does make fast food pizza less affordable also). I think anyone who is arguing for sustainability accepts the need for some safety net, because keeping so many people in this level of poverty is only sustainable at all by destroying the earth (yea industrial food is cheap, but cheap food is not sustainable, if an economy has to put so many people in a position to have to buy cheap unsustainably produced food, then it's not sustainable either!).

Tiam

12-28-13, 3:55am

Well, I'm thinking the food stamp benefit for one, here where I am, is about 200 or so, give or take a few with the current cut backs. Now I don't get food stamps, but could I live on 50 dollars a week, for just myself for just food for a month? I'm sure if I tried. What's hard is being disciplined. What's hard is cooking from scratch if you are already working full time and or plus going to school. That still doesn't make it impossible. But people have changed in the last generations. There was a time when maybe you would do all that and still cook from scratch, because that was what you knew to do. Now, lots of people don't know what to cook from scratch.

But, at 50 dollars a week, for just me I'm sure I could manage.I'd be tough. I would imagine that something I would already have like some salt and oil and baking powder and such.

I might buy a rotisserie chicken (honestly it's cheaper and better made than my own store bought roasted chicken. In fact I even saved on the energy trying to cook it) and strip it into two different meals and boil up the carcass for bone broth.
I can buy corn tortillas, two dozen for less than two dollars. Eggs= cheap, high quality protein. I can buy some cheese, Some veggies which would include cabbage, peppers, onions, mushrooms, celery and carrots, kale, salad and fresh. and also frozen. In my neck of the woods, the usually price friendly fresh broccoli and caulifower are sky high, so, sometimes frozen is the answer. Some canned tins of tomatoes, beans and rice and pasta and eggs and low end bacon or hocks for flavoring the beans and legumes. Some tea or coffee and sugar and milk and oatmeal and bread.

Now I've got =Chicken tacos with cabbage and chiles and pinto beans./ cheese Quesadillas and pinto beans, /Chicken noodle soup. with cheesey biscuits. /Fried rice with eggs and vegetables.
Cauliflower./grilled cheese sandwiches with left over soup. Beans and Rice Mexican style with left over tortillas and shredded cabbage and peppers. A minestrone from leftover beans and vegetables perhaps using a stray buillion cube or something. Lunches and breakfasts could include
Bread and brocoli and cheese strata. fried egg ssandwiches or egg salad sandwiches with half an apple sliced. oatmeal with half an apple, oatmeal cookies, rice pudding. Apple pancakes using half an apple..

All these dishes have left over potential, plus there is extra eggs for eating, or baking or including somewhere else. Breakfast can be toast and tea with half an apple slice or oatmeal with half an apple slice.

chicken $5.00
cheese $5.00
bread $4.00
eggs $3.00
small pack of bacon $3.00

(veggies
kale, 2 apples onion. garlic
potatoes,peppers salad
cabbage carrots)=$10.00
Plus the frozen veg $.4.00
1 lb each of rice, beans
and pasta and oatmeal$5.00 total
tea or coffee and sugar.$6.00 total
1 lb of flour for $2.00

That would be my weekly. I'd have to figure out the portion prices separately.

reader99

12-28-13, 4:42pm

Rotisserie chicken...... FYI, No matter how many jobs, school and kids you're juggling, EBT won't pay for hot food, you have to bake your own chicken.

SteveinMN

12-28-13, 5:06pm

Rotisserie chicken...... FYI, No matter how many jobs, school and kids you're juggling, EBT won't pay for hot food, you have to bake your own chicken.
I always see rotisserie chickens sold at a price per pound lower than raw chickens in the meat department. Warehouse supermarket, co-op; makes no difference. I do not know how they do that (unless it's a loss leader). I'm not sure why EBT will not subsidize hot food in light of the many prepared food items they will subsidize, but it seems that letting people buy rotisserie chickens saves them some $ and provides a reasonably-whole food ready to eat. A win all around.

Spartana

12-28-13, 5:54pm

Rotisserie chicken...... FYI, No matter how many jobs, school and kids you're juggling, EBT won't pay for hot food, you have to bake your own chicken.

In some states - like Calif - EBT/SNAP does pay for hot food for certain groups of people. Here it's called the "Restaurant Meals Program". It's for people who are disabled, or 60, or homeless and may not be able to cook or prepare meals for themselves. For instance in my local 7-11 mini market you can use your EBT/SNAP card to buy a large pizza (cooked, hot and ready to eat) and some of their chicken-ish :-) things they sold. Also many of the fast food places allow you buy hot food as well as other restaurants. I think earlier in this thread I posted some info about that. However, here in Calif, you can also use your EBT card at ATM machines to get cash and buy your food that way.