Trump Administration Wants To Decide What Food SNAP Recipients Will Get

a reply to: SRPrime

There are not enough stipulations in MY (see the capital m followed by y?) opinion. Im not saying the box's are a good idea. What im saying (would've thought you'd have read it seeing as you quoted my the whole op)
"I do think it needs to have some stipulations put on what can be bought and what can't. But this plan is crazy. They are taking the the potential nutritional value from the program. But take away the or limit the amount of junk that can be bought and make the consequences hasher for those that sell them for money or other goods. Educate people on the importance of nutrition."

a reply to: Somethingsamiss

I do think it needs to have some stipulations put on what can be bought and what can't.

I don't think that the burden of deciding what can be bought with assistance can be put on the shoulders of groceries without creating unfair cost to the grocers. The commodities idea addresses these unfair policies and even grocers could be used to fullfill these boxes on a local level.

As far as addressing the specific needs of families with compounding nutritional guidelines can also be addressed with the boxes because each family member is allotted a certain set amount of assistance and can have multiple boxes or multiple orders in one box.

Also i think raman noodles should be free to everyone everywhere. lol

I think that many here are not thinking about the economic ramifications when millions of people will no longer be able to purchase their macaroni and cheese, chips, and various other foods that people like to eat.

This will cause a massive dive in production of foods and will affect the market value of such corporations, which in turn will cause massive layoffs. This in turn will cause more people to be forced to ask for help.

The system is reliant on the ability of people to consume goods. Once a large market share of such goods are no longer purchased share prices will tumble and start a chain reaction. It will take some time, but it will cause future economic problems.

There are not enough good jobs to employ everybody on welfare. Taco bell does not pay the bills.

Trump Administration Wants To Decide What Food SNAP Recipients Will Get

This will be challenged in federal court and not even Trump in all his radiant Orange glory can tell people what to eat.

In ny you can, here it’s called a benefits carda reply to: pavil

Since when has trump done anything that effected corporations negatively?

They will still be involved with the food production and making monies.

I wonder on what grounds does anyone believe this would be challenged.

I think the federal government has this one in the bag.

originally posted by: TrueBrit
a reply to: NthOther

Well, its pretty interesting to me that no fresh fruit or vegetables are part of this package.

Anyone who has any idea about nutrition, will tell you that canned fruit and vegetables are no where near as rich in nutrition as vegetables are, and I think its important to make the following distinction.

Good food:

Something that the body requires, regardless of ones financial status.

storage issues. these boxes could be prepackaged and mailed/shipped out every other week.
remainder of $nap money would enable recipient to go to store and get fresh veggies / meat.
more cost effective as Dept Ag could buy in huge bulk and cut out the middleman. probly cost more for delivery than the food itself.

Trump is offering to send food to poor/hungry people and somehow this is a bad thing to some people.

a reply to: Aazadan

Did you know these programs already exist on the state level, the feds are just taking that. They're also removing choice while doing so.

I know something similar used to exist here. it was effort-based, but easy to get approved for. All you needed was some proof you did something... charity work, caring for family or friends, just something. The food was exactly what people needed.

We don't know what the details are yet, btw. i don't see how you can state that choice is being taken away at this stage... you must be channeling Congressmen or something.

You just want to punish people with government cheese.

No. Please stop trying to read my mind. You're obviously terrible at it.

TheRedneck

Apparently, the age old saying "beggars can't be choosers" no longer applies to modern times.

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

originally posted by: Wardaddy454

originally posted by: tribal
the mocking tone and derisive attitude among some posters here is offensive and lacking in compassion. Either none of you have kids or you are just totally out of touch with reality.

I and my kids are on SNAP right now. Its the first time in my life ive been on welfare, and by god im damn thankful for it. And ill take it a step further: im glad my growing children dont have to subsist on crappy food boxes with crappier "food" inside of them. Canned food? For growing kids....what country is this again?

Some of you laugh at blocks of cheese and peanut butter like its a right of passage. I wonder what other kinds of human suffering you find entertaining. Yeah, i remember being a poor ass kid on welfare in the 80s. I put water on off brand cold cereal because we ran out of the dry milk. Oh yeah, gooooood times. I wonder if you had a child and watched them do that if you would find it funny....and would you justify it by saying idiotic crap like "well you COULD be starving to death in africa".

Yeah, or i could have just been killed before i was born to spare myself the nonsensical clanging noise coming from something that calls itself a human being.


we are in America. The best country in the world.....right? I'm fresh from Germany where they dont have homeless people because they made it a priority as a first world nation to make sure vulnerable people are taken care of, no matter what it takes. I'm not even a democrat or an SJW but somehow i just dont feel good about myself or my country if we can allow people to not be taken care of. Its not a human right, but it IS the right thing to do. For all the money our country has spent on unjust wars and the untold suffering it has inflicted on millions of innocents around the world i think we can handle doling out some money to our own people to make sure the gov at least made an attempt to do the right thing. If the people abuse it then so be it. When you give a present or help you dont get to choose how its used, otherwise dont even bother, youll just look like a jerk.

Yeah Germany is SO great because it can rely on the US for military protection and not have to spend but a couple % GDP on its military.

One question though. If people abuse it (so be it right?) what's their motivation to do better? At some point you just give free license to abuse the system.

That's was a giant leap of logic wasn't it....

...

So you're arguing the U. S can't afford to help homeless people because of the military budget....

The most homeless reside in California, New York, Florida, and Massachusetts. Seattle Busses the homeless out to other areas. Hmm what do they all have in common??

Has anyone found real statistics that show how many Americans go hungry annually? I can find statistics that reference poverty, although even those use household income as their focus point which is a skewed measurement. If anyone knows where I could find statistics for malnourishment or something along those lines I'd really appreciate it.

I think that this is a perfect time to try out that new Soylent Green program that's been in the works for some time now. Although obviously these days we just can't offer Soylent Green, but also Wild Cherry Soylent Red, Soylent Sriracha, and Lo-Cal Organic Gluten-Free Soylent Green.

a reply to: StoutBroux

It is no longer about making sure the hungry are fed. It has moved way beyond that. It's difficult to reign in the system as it has now become. There will be complaints all around.

That much is becoming obvious.

I don't think anyone on this forum complaining has ever gone hungry. I don't mean "It's time to eat but I don't have anything to eat." I mean "I haven't ate in three days. I wish my paycheck would hurry up and get in." That's a whole 'nother color horse right there. I know because I have experienced it when I was younger. If you're hungry... really hungry... it don't matter what the picture on the can looks like or what kind of bean it is. It's food; you eat it.

I swear, after reading some of the responses on this subject, I'm actually wondering if we shouldn't just stop SNAP altogether... let a few people actually go hungry, so they can understand what hunger is and appreciate what is given them freely. It is painfully obvious that too many today don't appreciate anything.

There is no denial of choice... it is painfully obvious that not everyone can have peanut butter, or nuts, or cheese. There will by necessity be allowances for this. And no one is saying cut out all the money. The cards will still stay, just a portion of that money will be taken and a greater amount of food provided directly. The home delivery would be a great help for the disabled and elderly/infirm because they won't have to fight the traffic and crowds. The reduced demand on the grocery chains will create lower prices for everyone else, which will then translate over time to lower prices for the food delivered.

And the bottom line is the poor will not go hungry. I thought that was the point of food stamps. Was I wrong?

TheRedneck

a reply to: Somethingsamiss

Good. It's about time. People get on SNAP, and fill their carts full as can be with snack cakes and soda and candy and top of the line meat products. Dang, I like this plan from Trump. Half of it may not include fresh fruits and veggies, so insteqd of buying zebra cakes they'll have yo use the other half for fresh meat and veggies.

originally posted by: Anathros
Apparently, the age old saying "beggars can't be choosers" no longer applies to modern times.

The vast majority of snap benefits are working poor, the elderly, and children - explain to me how they are beggars?

originally posted by: filthyphilanthropist
a reply to: Somethingsamiss

Good. It's about time. People get on SNAP, and fill their carts full as can be with snack cakes and soda and candy and top of the line meat products. Dang, I like this plan from Trump. Half of it may not include fresh fruits and veggies, so insteqd of buying zebra cakes they'll have yo use the other half for fresh meat and veggies.

Those are the few and far in between who are scamming it. And plain hamburger isnt top of the line meat. water is as exspensive as soda these days in stores. So where is the savings? In trumps mind thats where.

a reply to: TheRedneck

I f you bought fast food with Stamps Someone is in need of being reported to the FEDS,because in SC we are specifically told we cannot get hot food with them.

a reply to: yuppa

I meant I had already clarified that point, not that I did it. No hot food on SNAP.

TheRedneck

originally posted by: Wardaddy454

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

originally posted by: Wardaddy454

originally posted by: tribal
the mocking tone and derisive attitude among some posters here is offensive and lacking in compassion. Either none of you have kids or you are just totally out of touch with reality.

I and my kids are on SNAP right now. Its the first time in my life ive been on welfare, and by god im damn thankful for it. And ill take it a step further: im glad my growing children dont have to subsist on crappy food boxes with crappier "food" inside of them. Canned food? For growing kids....what country is this again?

Some of you laugh at blocks of cheese and peanut butter like its a right of passage. I wonder what other kinds of human suffering you find entertaining. Yeah, i remember being a poor ass kid on welfare in the 80s. I put water on off brand cold cereal because we ran out of the dry milk. Oh yeah, gooooood times. I wonder if you had a child and watched them do that if you would find it funny....and would you justify it by saying idiotic crap like "well you COULD be starving to death in africa".

Yeah, or i could have just been killed before i was born to spare myself the nonsensical clanging noise coming from something that calls itself a human being.


we are in America. The best country in the world.....right? I'm fresh from Germany where they dont have homeless people because they made it a priority as a first world nation to make sure vulnerable people are taken care of, no matter what it takes. I'm not even a democrat or an SJW but somehow i just dont feel good about myself or my country if we can allow people to not be taken care of. Its not a human right, but it IS the right thing to do. For all the money our country has spent on unjust wars and the untold suffering it has inflicted on millions of innocents around the world i think we can handle doling out some money to our own people to make sure the gov at least made an attempt to do the right thing. If the people abuse it then so be it. When you give a present or help you dont get to choose how its used, otherwise dont even bother, youll just look like a jerk.

Yeah Germany is SO great because it can rely on the US for military protection and not have to spend but a couple % GDP on its military.

One question though. If people abuse it (so be it right?) what's their motivation to do better? At some point you just give free license to abuse the system.

That's was a giant leap of logic wasn't it....

...

So you're arguing the U. S can't afford to help homeless people because of the military budget....

The most homeless reside in California, New York, Florida, and Massachusetts. Seattle Busses the homeless out to other areas. Hmm what do they all have in common??

Dont know but if I had to guess I would say military veterans.

a reply to: Somethingsamiss

Agreed, there absolutely need to be stipulations and conditions to prevent excessive purchase of bon-bons and other tasty treats. That said, preventing the purchase of fresh fruits and veggies does not make very much sense.

I think one condition should be not being able to own a brand new expensive iPhone when you need to take assistance from the government. Nothing wrong with that, as they say "it" happens. But buying a bunch of electronic junk and whatnot while taking other people's money is not right. Neither is letting our citizens starve to death or become malnourished.

Surely we can all use our common sense and reach a workable solution that sees the great points on all sides of the "safety net" debate incorporated.

Next, can we start giving the people who throw away ~40% of their food a hard time? Because that is an example of the other end of the spectrum: greed and wastefulness. Not to mention that disposed of food would be enough to feed those lacking food in this country.