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.
Actually, that's incorrect. The highest poverty rate is in the inner cities:
well unless things have changed in two years you appear to be wrong.
Quote:
Since the 1970s, congressional leaders have placed food programs in the farm bill to attract votes from cities, where food stamp use was highest. The hope was that rural and urban lawmakers would come together to get the big bill passed.
But the SNAP map has shifted. U.S. Department of Agriculture data shows that since 2012, SNAP participation is highest among households in rural areas and small towns under 2,500 people.
“It wasn't shocking or surprising,” said Ellen Vollinger, legal director of the Food Research & Action Center, or FRAC, “when you think about the degree to which SNAP is related to people being poor.”
FRAC analyzed the USDA data and found that nationally, 16 percent of households in rural areas use SNAP versus 13 percent in urban areas. The population of older people is larger in rural areas, which Vollinger said is driving the increase.
“The data, if anything, probably suggests that there could be an even greater reach for SNAP in rural areas if it was doing a stronger job of reaching more of the elderly who are, in fact, eligible but not participating,” she said.
I think there should be a strict voucher program for food stamps, redeemable only for: hamburger, fish, chicken, vegetables, fruit, bread, milk, and eggs. That's it. And I don't want to hear from liberals that "you can't tell people what to buy!" YES WE CAN IF IT'S OUR MONEY they are using.
What difference does it make to the taxpayer if there is a package of Doritos and one of diet coke in my Mom's weekly grocery? To use her as an example. Not a fan of more than a bit of junk.
Actually, monetarily, there is no difference to taxpayers if people fill their whole cart with that. If the recipient spends $200 in health food or $200 in junk, it's still $200.
The way we do it is the simplest. Anything non-taxable can be bought. It creates some weird things like you can't buy a hot chicken from the deli, but the second they put the same chicken in the cold container, you can.
Yes, but what's the woman's other finances? The $16 is not intended to pay for her entire month of food; there was some calculation that she needs a small supplement of $16 because she has $300 or whatever available elsewhere (or should have, given her finances). And remember - other people get hundreds of dollars. So you can't just look at someone who qualifies for $16 and cry "not enough to eat"! Sounds like that woman is "borderline," given her financial situation, and likely is nearing the limit for not qualifying for anything.
My mother qualified for $16.They don't let you deduct for property taxes and home insurance the way people who rent can deduct rent. She had Medicaid along with Medicare, but if her sister sent her money for property taxes or dental work (not covered at all), it would knock her off Medicaid. She went to a food pantry and was able to afford enough food by putting everything she couldn't afford on credit cards.
She worked all her life. Her SS was so low because as her lung function decreased and other health problems increased, she took lower and lower paying jobs until she was down to part time income and filed for disability when that went to -0-after a major health event.
She'd have been better off if she'd fought for disability at a time when her past 5 years of earnings was higher. My mother is the sort that our safety net should be covering.
She did everything right and ended up where she did due to health.
But if they are getting food stamps already why are we providing any free meals for their kids then? Seems like double dipping to me.
It is, and there's a HUGE (pun intended) problem with that which the USDA has admitted: 59% of households that receive Food Stamps are double dipping (or more) by receiving other publicly funded food assistance, as well (such as free school breakfast, lunch, and sometimes even dinner, etc.). Subsequently, those who receive Food Stamps have a higher obesity rate than anyone else.
Quote:
"SNAP participants were more likely to be obese than income-eligible nonparticipants who were matched in economic and demographic characteristics ([overall], 46 percent versus 36 percent)."
well unless things have changed in two years you appear to be wrong.
No, I am not wrong. Population density statistic comparisons, alone, between inner cities and rural areas actually proves the point.
To recap:
Quote:
– Inner cities: 3 in 10 people live in poverty
– Suburbs: 1 in 10 people live in poverty
– Inner City Poverty Rate: 32%
– Rest of Central City Poverty Rate: 9.4%
– Rest of MSA Poverty Rate (i.e. suburbs): 9.7%
– Rest of USA Poverty Rate (i.e. rural areas): 15.7%:
I think there should be a strict voucher program for food stamps, redeemable only for: hamburger, fish, chicken, vegetables, fruit, bread, milk, and eggs. That's it. And I don't want to hear from liberals that "you can't tell people what to buy!" YES WE CAN IF IT'S OUR MONEY they are using.
That's silly, sounds like you just want to poor shame. It seems that it has become a fun pastime for some conservatives
lol that does not prove what you think it does, go read the link I provided.
Actually, what I've posted does indeed prove what I've said. Your mistake is that you're confusing "cities" as a substitute for "inner cities."
Read the stats and ask yourself which residential area has the higher population density: Inner city? Or Rural?
Quote:
– Inner cities: 3 in 10 people live in poverty
– Suburbs: 1 in 10 people live in poverty
– Inner City Poverty Rate: 32%
– Rest of Central City Poverty Rate: 9.4%
– Rest of MSA Poverty Rate (i.e. suburbs): 9.7%
– Rest of USA Poverty Rate (i.e. rural areas): 15.7%
Why not? Either Medicare D or Medicare Advantage covers prescriptions for seniors like your mom. So, where's the problem? It really sounds like you're just making up a fake outrage because you resent anyone who has earned/saved more money than you.
When did I say I was concerned about myself?? My mother had a ton of co-pays when she had an Advantsge plan. 3 weeks of rehab and her share of the bill was a couple of thousand. They wouldn’t cover the ambulance to the hospital at all, just that was almost $500. Whoever told you Advantage plans cover 100% of everything lied to you. If they did, no one would ever opt for traditional Medicare with $400 a month supplemental plans. I don’t appreciate being called a liar. My experiences come from 20+ years as a rehab OT and my patients experiences.
“Many retirees face big financial challenges on healthcare. A Gallup poll this year revealed the troubling news that around 7.5 million seniors in the U.S. can't cover the costs of a drug their doctor prescribed.”
When did I say I was concerned about myself?? My mother had a ton of co-pays when she had an Advantsge plan.
Medicare Advantage has prescription coverage. So does Medicare D, and Medicaid (if one is a needy senior).
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.
