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.
And we all know how govt. sucks at buying stuff. How much is that peanut butter going to cost?
You do realize that kids in schools have been fed Government food for years right? Peanut Butter, Cheese etc,etc. all bought and paid for by the USDA and Agg dept subsidies to farmers/producers to maintain prices.
Many will not want to go on public assistance if their food is chosen for them.. No soda , chips, or fancy cakes.
No, no, no. You're confusing two separate issues. The gay people want the cakes. We (SNAP recipients) just want to be able to buy our own groceries at the store like everyone else.
Eventually the abusers of the SNAP program will be vetted out. But, Its free food people. Maybe if we had stronger family values, and were able to live within our means, stay married etc, we wouldn't have these problems.
?????? Looks like a lot of canned/processed food to me. And if you think Frito won't be welcome to slip some chips into that box, you are probably in the market for a bridge. I'm quite sure that everyone working for the big processed food companies is quite excited by this idea.
In this state, you can use SNAP benefits to pay for fresh produce. I don't see that in the proposed program.
I suspect that the big processed food companies lobbied for this and would profit from it.
Too many people are starting to embrace a whole food model which means lots of losses for producers of all of that canned/prepared "stuff."
They have to protect their hegemony some how and how better than on the backs of the (working) poor.
And if it means more bribes, er, donations in the coffers, well, win-win for the people that really matter.
All sorts of common grocery store purchases will be rejected from being applied to a consumer's SNAP balance.
This includes but is not limited to paper products, diapers, alcohol, ready to eat prepared foods and so on.
The intel exists to disqualify foods with no nutritional value. Big Food and Big Grocer lobby Congress ctitters to make sure there products continue to qualify for SNAP. They will not take this proposal without a fight. Then it gets tangles with farm aid, which tends to benefit Big corporate growers more so than small farms.
Yes, it does. But IMO, SNAP is still the most cost-efficient way to deliver food assistance.
Quote:
Originally Posted by middle-aged mom
I don't have an issue with the food box concept. All contents could, in theory, meet the most common food sensitivities/ dietary restrictions.
Not by a long shot! For instance, both cows milk and soy products are on the list of the most common allergies, so both milks would have to be omitted from the box, as would cheese, butter, and soy-based butter replacements. This is a huge problem, especially for kids, since soy milk or a soy-based formula is the most commonly recommended nutritional replacement for kids allergic to cows milk. With the additional proviso that most specialty alternative milks are more expensive than either cow or soy milks. (For instance, the hemp seed milk I use runs around $4.00/quart.) And a further additional proviso that nut milks are also out. This generic one-size-fits-all box could also contain no wheat bread or pasta, no eggs or egg products nor peanut butter nor tree nut butters nor canned tuna. https://www.healthline.com/nutrition...rgies#section2
And this list of 8 are just the true allergies - histamine-mediated reactions. They don't take into account the many people who react badly to foods for non-histamine reasons, as I do. Therefore this generic box could contain no tomato or potato products, because many people can't tolerate nightshades.
Quote:
Originally Posted by middle-aged mom
Congress' acceptance of this portion or any portion of the budget, as proposed, is uncertain.
I'd say this specific proposal is DOA. For all the reasons we've come up with.
The most cost-efficient way to deliver food assistance is through SNAP. Let people put together their own food box according to their own needs. As I've said, I'm good with taking off the junk food.
Instead of giving a cash credit that a recipient could use to buy nutritious and healthy food, they would get packaged junk food. This would be a big boost to food distributors, who could clean out their warehouses of over-aged items and sell them to the program at a profit. You would see cans of fish, 3 or 4 years old and had turned to mush, going out to hungry people. Probably boxes of macaroni and cheese would be in every food bag. Also, the cheapest peanut spread, with added sugar, salt and cottonseed oil, instead of real peanut butter. I'd bet that everything provided, would be sub-standard and the primary beneficiaries, would be the big companies that were its sources. Of course, they would be contributors to the campaign funds of republicans and Trump.
It probably will be the grocers existing distribution centers. Or new distribution centers anything is possible. Doubt that the government will do it themselves I'm sure some companies are foaming at the mouth at the idea of picking up the contracts.
Oh, don't you know.
Walmart would likely scoop up the contract as they already exist in every town around. People could do their weekly shopping and pick up their box of canned goods and blocks of cheese.
Well that certainly would be the case if Trump placed someone in charge of the program who had no experience or sole experience was to fight against healthy foods. It is not as if Trump would appoint a lobbyist for the snack food industry.
Surely, Trump would appoint someone with a degree in nutrition and people would be able to tailor the box they received if they had allergies or intolerances to gluten, or lactose.
Status:
"Smartened up and walked away!"
(set 29 days ago)
11,799 posts, read 5,804,343 times
Reputation: 14224
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tigerlily87
What a lot of people are suggesting already exists. It’s called WIC. Why not just expand that instead?
Another govt program that needs to be scaled back. I was on that for a few months when my husband was laid off - there was no way we ever used the amt of food that those coupons provided. 20 years later while working - another woman would bring in her daughter's extras - juice, cereal ect and hand it out to everyone at work as there was no way her daughter's family could use it all before receiving another batch of coupons
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.
