Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
An extra $254 a person, not bad, cash job on the side, free rent, healthcare not all that bad, just don't add the old man or you'll blow the whole scam, lol. (clue-its often not the best) clue-its the worse of the worse OBAMA could dream up that a lot of us working folks now have. Kinda thought bout splitin up and giving it a try before, not a whole lot to loose.
Where did you get the $254 per person figure? That is incorrect. It is approximately $6.00 per person per day.
Looks like they'd have $90 a month for meat ugga. I buy groceries for a family of 4, and that's about what I spend on meat in a month. And for all those people out there who will inevitably cry foul over this proposal, I simply say this. Beggars can't be choosers. As long as these needy people are still being provided with food to sustain them then I don't see the problem here. This would also solve the problem of people trading their SNAP money for cash. Yes, this still goes on, the cards did not stop the trading. I have personally been offered the opportunity to trade at a rate of .50 on the dollar. And I have 2 employees who make it no secret that they regularly trade half their monthly SNAP allotment for extra cash every month. So this sort of program would stop that sort of clandestine activity and insure that those who meet the standards to receive food assistance would actually be getting food instead of extra money to do w/e they want on the tax payers dime.
PS. I wanted to edit this to address the laughable issue I saw from a user about food allergies. Specifically, someone mentioned peanut butter. My best friend of 25 years has an extreme peanut allergy. If he ingests peanuts or any sort of peanut products, he could literally die. Almost has twice. But guess what. He has kids and they get to enjoy peanut butter w/e they want. Because peanut butter is in a freaking jar. He doesn't handle it, his wife does. And she's very careful as far as not letting it come anywhere near my friend. So far, after 12 years of marriage, he hasn't had a single accident with peanut butter in his house. It's called being responsible.
Not the issue. At all. Trust me, you really don't have a clue on this. You're lucky, I sincerely hope you never have reason to know, I didn't understand either until it happened to me.
The box will be for a fixed amount of dollar value. An item in the box that the recipient(s) cannot eat is a de facto reduction in food benefits.
For a person with multiple sensitivities - and it's common to be sensitive to more than one thing, especially wheat and dairy - this could lead to receiving a lot of food that can't be used. Do you know how many food products contain milk derivatives? A trace amount of milk protein - often appearing on labels as whey or casein - can make the entire item inedible for a recipient.
I imagine a lot of these inedible items will get traded, don't you?
An extra $254 a person, not bad, cash job on the side, free rent, healthcare not all that bad, just don't add the old man or you'll blow the whole scam, lol. (clue-its often not the best) clue-its the worse of the worse OBAMA could dream up that a lot of us working folks now have. Kinda thought bout splitin up and giving it a try before, not a whole lot to loose.
Source, please? I know you didn't make this up. There must be documentation for it somewhere. Please provide.
I'm not sure if it can or cannot. i tend to favor converting the SNAP program to something resembling the WIC model. I'm amazed at all the people who have no problem whatsoever with the billions of dollars worth of food the USDA provides to the national school lunch program, but recall in horror and rage at the thought of that same food going to someone in a box
• Under the USDA America’s Harvest Box proposal, all Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP)
participating households receiving $90 per month or more in benefits will receive a package of nutritious,
100-percent U.S. grown and produced food. Approximately 16.4 million households, or about 81 percent of
SNAP households would be impacted by this proposal.
• The amount of food received per household would be scaled to the overall size of the household’s SNAP
allotment, ultimately representing about half of their benefits. SNAP participants would receive
domestically-sourced and produced food in lieu of a portion of their SNAP benefits.
• USDA would utilize a model similar to that currently used to distribute USDA Foods to other nutrition
assistance programs to provide staple, shelf-stable foods (such as shelf-stable milk, juice, grains, ready-to-eat cereals,
pasta, peanut butter, beans, canned meat, poultry or fish, and canned fruits and vegetables) to SNAP households at approximately half the retail cost.
• This proposal creates a new approach to nutrition assistance that combines retail-based SNAP benefits with
delivery of USDA America’s Harvest Boxes supporting the President’s leadership on Buy American. This
proposal is cost-effective, enhances the integrity of SNAP, and provides for states’ flexibility in
administration of the program.
• The remainder of the household’s benefits will still be provided via the current Electronic Benefit Transfer
card.
• This proposal would save $129.2 billion over the ten-year period between Fiscal Year (FY) 2019 and FY
2028. This estimate accounts for about $2.5 billion annually in additional administrative funds for states.
I would have to see the detailed cost benefit analysis to support this.
But, on the surface, if I read it correctly it seems people collecting these benefits would actually end up with more food.
In any case, I doubt it matters, because I think its a safe bet the grocery lobby will find a way to kill this.
Well sure, that could be done. Could it be done for half the retail price though? Because there are costs associated with that kind of customization. Remember, we're talking millions of individual orders that must be processed, packed and delivered. As opposed to electronically transferring funds to a plastic card, and leaving the customization and delivery to the individual. Retail grocery is low-wage, low-commodity-price, low-margin business, I don't see where the 50% savings are coming from.
At least on real food. A lot of packaged, processed food, you would probably be able to save 50% on. But then we're back to taxpayers paying for junk food to feed poor people with.
Well...there is some data from WIC where they get massive discounts on products.
For even more fun, run the coverage period out to the max...
(For the link impaired among us, it IPO'd at $9.34. It's sitting as of today at $3.35)
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Never did fact check it thou.
