Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Trump plans on replacing portion of food stamps with food

Trump plans on replacing portion of food stamps with food

Social justice activists are already complaining about the “Trump Box”.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cTNbBuLDw7o

Obama may have wanted to be a transformative President, but Donald J. Trump appears well on his way to owning this title.

His administration is now proposing a food delivery program that would replace about half of food stamp benefits for households who qualify for the boxes. The program is referred to as “USDA America’s Harvest Box”.

The Trump administration is proposing replacing a portion of the federal food stamp program with actual boxes of food delivered to recipients’ front doors, putting the U.S. government directly in charge of what goes on the dinner plates of more than 16 million low-income households.

White House budget director Mick Mulvaney likened the model to that of the dominant meal-kit delivery service, Blue Apron, and called it one of the most “innovative” ideas in the president’s budget.

“I don’t want to steal somebody’s copyright,” Mulvaney told reporters Monday. “You actually receive the food instead of receive the cash.”

In a nutshell, the program would reduce government over-spending and mismanagement while ensuring people used the funds for their “Supplemental Nutritional Assistance Program” for foods that would truly supplement nutrition.

Under the proposal, which was announced Monday, low-income Americans who receive at least $90 a month — just over 80 percent of all SNAP recipients — would get about half of their benefits in the form of a “USDA Foods package.” The package was described in the budget as consisting of “shelf-stable milk, ready to eat cereals, pasta, peanut butter, beans and canned fruit and vegetables.” The boxes would not include fresh fruits or vegetables.

…The USDA believes that state governments will be able to deliver this food at much less cost than SNAP recipients currently pay for food at retail stores — thus reducing the overall cost of the SNAP program by $129 billion over the next 10 years.

This and other changes in the SNAP program, according to the Trump administration, will reduce the SNAP budget by $213 billion over those years — cutting the program by almost 30 percent.

Additionally, it would reduce the potential for fraud like seen in “Operation Meal Ticket”.

Of course, social justice activists are already outrageously outraged by the proposal.

“We view this as an unworkable solution in search of a problem,” said Matt Knott, president of Chicago-based Feeding America, a national network of food banks and pantries.

Knott and many other anti-hunger groups, such as the Greater Chicago Food Depository, say the existing program works exactly as it should, contracting and expanding to help Americans in times of need.

“We continue to see deep, pressing need every day, in every neighborhood of Chicago. The proposal to cut SNAP is deeply troubling,” said Kate Maehr, executive director of the Greater Chicago Food Depository, on Tuesday.

One of my favorite Youtube pundits is Uncle Hotep, an independent pundit who humorously analyzes the proposal and deems the food package the “Trump Box”. He clearly is supportive of the approach.

The “Trump Box” could make a great deal of difference in the lives of many low-income Americans while reducing the costs associated with a massive social program. It would be truly transformative.

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

1. Reduces overall costs….check.
2. Reduces fraud…………check.

No wonder the lefties hate it.

    maxmillion in reply to bear. | February 14, 2018 at 11:23 am

    Kinda like building a wall.

    notamemberofanyorganizedpolicital in reply to bear. | February 14, 2018 at 3:09 pm

    Excellent idea.

    I bet lots of farmers and food producers would be wiling to donate food for a charitable tax deduction!

      notamemberofanyorganizedpolicital in reply to notamemberofanyorganizedpolicital. | February 14, 2018 at 3:12 pm

      Why shouldn’t the government cut out the middle-men of wholesalers and retailers that take their mark-up for profit on all that food.

        We have a local tomato processing business here, Red Gold, who has bought up several other processing plants around the country.

        The owner will be all over this, if given the chance.

        And their wide variety of products are as good as it gets.

        What would lead you to believe that any government agency can buy, transport, store, and deliver food cheaper than a supermarket can sell it? This will be an expensive waste of money, and probably a waste of food, since many won’t eat what some government agency believes they should.

          JusticeDelivered in reply to Bisley. | February 14, 2018 at 5:48 pm

          One of my children is impaired and will likely be on aid for life. I have made a point of teaching the child how to sew, cook, start plants, raise a garden, and can. I have taught the child to raise rabbits and chicken, and to slaughter and process them.
          I have long been concerned about waste with EBT, people buying highly processed foods with low nutrition, fraud and the unreasonableness of commercial interests profiting on taxpayers.
          I think that EBT recipients who are able bodied should be forced to produce and process much of their own food. Declining cities have lots of vacant land which could be used for this.
          Add to that that most ghetto dwellers have minimal access to stores, in large part because they murder owners and staff, and periodically riot and destroy stores. Once they destroy a store, owners rarely rebuild. This change would make the goods provided available regardless location.

    Would be nice. It always galls me standing in line behind someone paying for lobster or high end steak to see they are using an EBT card.

    MattMusson in reply to bear. | February 15, 2018 at 8:38 am

    Addresses the issue of “Food Deserts” that has been a problem put forward by Urban advocates. They say that healthy food is not available in poor areas where supermarkets do not exist. So, Trump wants to send them boxes of healthy food.

It isn’t about food, it is about power. Cut their money and you cut their power, simple.

I have mixed feelings about this.

First, I think it will work well for the general case, but what about people with food allergies, or who keep kosher, or who are on a medical elimination diet (We don’t know what’s wrong, but if we eliminate all artificial ingredients, Little Suzie’s severe asthma clears up. For now you should feed her 100% clean food; when she’s five years old, we’ll try reintroducing foods and try to pin down exactly what is the problem. That sort of thing.)

Second, I don’t think it will work if the state agencies aren’t cooperating.

Make it opt-out for the states, where opting out cuts the federal matching some but not too severely (especially not too severely the first couple years; “wait and see” is screamingly reasonable.) And let caseworkers exempt up to 10% of their clients.

    forksdad in reply to ecreegan. | February 14, 2018 at 1:07 pm

    States can always add money to their programs if they’re concerned about food allergies. Although having a standard, vegan, kosher, etc. box would be trivial.

    If you’re on food stamps you cannot afford to be on a food elimination diet. You’re on a Mac and cheese, rice and beans with the favorite ramen diet.

    I’ve seen food stamps used for everything from cigarettes to booze to gas to traded for cash. This will eliminate a ton of that.

    Was it humiliating for a kid to get some of his food out of a box from the county back in the sixties? Sure but it saved the county money and made sure none of those kids grew up looking forward to an Apple box full of flour, rice, corn meal and some canned milk.

      Subotai Bahadur in reply to forksdad. | February 14, 2018 at 2:16 pm

      Long ago when the world was new and I was in my first marriage, I was supporting a wife and two children in Denver. I worked two jobs, and we still qualified for food aid. Part of it was what they called “commodities” which was USDA surplus food similar to these food boxes being talked about. 1) we were grateful. 2) we did not like the food, but my kids were not hungry. The powdered milk could only be used reasonably in cooking, and the canned whole chicken took more that a little bit of ingenuity to make edible, but my kids were fed. Using PART of the benefits for this, while leaving the rest for fresh food is a good thing.

        ugottabekiddinme in reply to Subotai Bahadur. | February 14, 2018 at 6:11 pm

        I can relate. Early in my married life we adventurously and foolishly set out from the East Coast to Oregon mid-1970, no plans, no jobs, or contacts, just a desire to check it out (Ken Kesey’s work was a major impetus). When the money ran out and we were left unable to find even the most lowly work to support ourselves, we qualified for the food program then available, called “Abundant Foods”.

        I remember there’d be a big box of stuff, including a container of oatmeal, a three-pound loaf of cheddar cheese, a large can of cooked boneless turkey in gravy (we liked it), a can called “ground meat” (inedible but which we fed to the cats); cooking oil, flour, peanut butter, and various other items I do not specifically recall.

        The food sustained us, but it sure as heck also encouraged us to get our act together or move on down the road. It definitely was not going to become a way of life.

        If the policy goal is to prevent malnutrition while giving people an incentive not to remain on the program any longer than necessary, boxes of actual food is the way to go.

I’m all for reducing the overall cost of the food stamp program, especially the rampant fraud aspect of it.

But color me skeptical that the government is going to start a food delivery service that is somehow going to be efficient.

    forksdad in reply to Paul. | February 14, 2018 at 1:15 pm

    It will take a lot more people than loading ebt cards. On the other hand, you can save some warehousing and packing costs by having participating grocery stores store, pack, and distribute the boxes on site or by delivery if they do that.

    Some of it I just can’t see happening. How will you deliver millions of boxes to dangerous neighborhoods where grocers have security cameras and bulletproof glass checkout?

    I agree. I’m of the mindset that since the economy is improving, the program should be scaled down. Force people off the teat. But apparently the concept that grown adults should feed themselves is contentiously passe’, so I’ll settle for the most efficient means of distribution. And by all measures, the private sector does a much better job of that

    Even if DJT set up the most efficient system on the planet, he only gets to run it for a few short years.

buckeyeminuteman | February 14, 2018 at 12:06 pm

If delivery and timeliness are anything like the US Postal Service, I’d be highly skeptical. But nutrition would certainly be improved.

I do think food stamps should only be used for milk, chicken, eggs, fresh veggies & fruits and pasta. It’s ridiculous we are paying for people to eat chips, cookies and pop.

For reasons of simplicity and cost-efficiency, I would prefer to have severe restrictions imposed on what welfare recipients can purchase with their benefit cards. Either that, or, bring back the use of actual stamps, and, see how fast the welfare roles decline when people have to actually display in public that they are the beneficiaries of taxpayer largesse.

    GuyJ, human nature being what it is, scammers will find a way around any generalized system (such as trading food for drugs), although what kind of drug dealer would want bread and beans for dope is beyond me.

    I agree with you that making freebies more “inconvenient” is a good step.

What’s not to like about free food delivery? Sure, the exact foods may not be to your liking, but swapping goes on a lot anyway. And the other 50% can be used as before to buy things for special dietary requirements.

In all truthfulness I am not sure if this is a “better” plan than what is done today, i.e. EBT card -> food box + EBT card. I do think that this is a great start at ratiocinating a change to the EBT program and it would be “classic” Trump to start with this idea knowing it will not survive. I could see the negotiation going like this:

– Change EBT only to food box + EBT. Left HATES it!
– OK, How about instead of food box, we modify the EBT program such that it does NOT support all of these things that Dem mayors are against? No soda, no candy, no snacks or cookies, only un-prepared foods or locally created grocery store meals?

Cleans up the waste in the current program, tightens up the allowable, and gets [we hope] healthier food on to the table of recipients. Want the “extras”? Earn more money.

The left forgets this program was not meant as the sole source of food for a target family, for EVER. It is meant to help sustain a family until their lot improves. They should WANT to get off and they may need to be made to want to get off.

    forksdad in reply to onlyabill. | February 14, 2018 at 1:20 pm

    This probably is an opening position. Some food programs do distribute commodities instead of money but I see a ton of waste. The food through a commodities program can be ok, great, or more often barely acceptable depending on who’s running it.

“The USDA believes that state governments will be able to deliver this food at much less cost than SNAP recipients currently pay for food at retail stores…”

BWAHaHAHAHAHAHA

In which multiverse has this EVUH happened?

And, of course, package theft from porches or delivery boxes has never ocurred any where on this planet, either. Then there’s the gluten aversion, peanut allergy, salt intolerant, diabetic SNAFUS which are – wait for it – never going to happen with a gub’mint program.

Yup. Civil liberty and liability lawyers are gonna LUV this deal.

I’m micxed about this.

It sounds like a good idea, but …

It may eliminate fraud on the users, but create fraud in the departments used to deliver food.

Already we one person who says the only meat people should get is chicken. Really? Compared to hamburger for example. What about bread? Suddenly you have the Atkins cuckoos chiming in. Then milk. Say what, or will people only be allowed to have skim milk. What about tea and coffee?

Something I do is buy sugar-free “coffee” syrups to add to water to get a little flavor. Would those be banned?

Who will be the people to decide? Hint, they will be bureaucrats who can be described by a word begining with “lef” and ending in “ties”.

    amwick in reply to RodFC. | February 14, 2018 at 12:44 pm

    So, good points, but the box replaces about half the benefits, the remaining are still up to the recipients to determine. That being said, issues notwithstanding, it is a step in the right direction. I have heard that those snap cards can be used at betting venues for pete’s sake… If it were up to me all welfare would be stopped and done over from scratch.. Not possible, but sometimes it seems that is the reset that is required.

      forksdad in reply to amwick. | February 14, 2018 at 1:33 pm

      That’s the important point. There’s nothing saying a state can’t add their own funds to the box system. Potentially they could replace all the money portion on their own.

They should do away with the food too and deliver powdered nutrition like Soylent.

https://www.soylent.com/product/powder/

Rule #1 of government—there is no conceivable way that any government program will reduce waste. Or, for that matter, any other cost. The only way to lower costs of anything is to get government out of it entirely. That condition isn’t sufficient, but it’s necessary.

Even without Rule #1, anything like this will set off the farm support types, and they’ll have a professional duty to see that somehow all the money will go to some horribly wasteful program to shovel subsidies to dairy farmers.

This is just more Trumpian chopped fish. The dancing seals need a steady diet or they get out of practice.

I think it has great possibilities. Especially if they have a web based ordering system that allows some customization of the boxes in regards to the contents for people who want beets and squash instead of corn and beans, Wheaties instead of Cherrios, etc.

It would be even better if they had a corporate donation program that allowed food companies to donate new product samples and coupons for advertising purposes. Basically a mystery gift in every box.

But this is probably just a negotiating tactic and the real goal is restricting SNAP benefits in the same manner as WIC, restricting the types or categories of foods that can be purchased.

The left will have a very hard time arguing with that because of the high obesity and diabetes rates in this population especially the children. Just as a matter of public health the fedgov should not be subsidizing the purchase of sugar-laden snack foods.

When I was in the Army in Germany in the mid 60’s there were buildings full of WW2 C rations. We used to go get them for camping trips around Europe and for the cigarettes (yes, each package had 5 cigarettes included.)

It is possible to feed large numbers of people from boxed meals.

I really liked the lima beans and ham. Still do, but I make my own.

In a perfect world this might be a great idea, but administering such a program with folks that have been known to pay $600 for a hammer pretty much puts us on a path to $150 boxes of corn flakes. Same corruption following a slightly different path.

And think of all the plastic bags this will save.

Give them all MRE’s. If it’s good enough for a grunt making under $20K a year it’s good enough for any other American. Stop making the population fat and lazy and maybe we won’t be giving so many handouts?

This is an absolutely ABOMINABLE idea – one that I will fight tooth and nail. Because I am elderly and like about half of social security recipients, low income, I already receive one of these boxes from my state Food Bank every month.

Let me also clarify that I have been involved in one way or another with the Food Stamp program for decades – running a food pantry, helping others access food stamps and utilizing them myself when times were tough.

Food stamps were not ever intended to provide a family’s full nutritional needs. Currently the max that an elderly person can receive is $196 a month, so about $6.50 a day. Note that hamburger is currently $5 a pound and eggs are going for $3 a dozen.

I’ll pick up my monthly box tomorrow morning. It will have 2 boxes of cereal, 3 or 4 liter boxes of shelf stable milk, 2 cans of meat (canned tuna, salmon or beef, varies by the month), a box or two of random pasta, about a dozen cans of miscellaneous fruit and veg – half fruit in heavy syrup, half random canned vegetables. There will be a bag of dry beans &/or a jar of peanut butter. No staples. There will also be a bar of fat free “cheese food” that does not melt and is utterly useless for cooking. I have never once received a box that had anything approaching the makings of even a single meal other than cereal and shelf stable milk – something I find acceptable only for cooking. Also note that this is not a “healthy” box in any way – almost entirely carbs.

The USDA has had a commodity foods program for more than 50 years and it has always provided things like beans, powdered milk and canned meats along with flour, cornmeal and the like. It is intended as a supplement to food stamps. (At one time it even provided a small amount of butter and real cheese – not fat free plastic – but that is long gone.)

Is that box worth half my already minimal food stamps? Not hardly. It wouldn’t be of value even if I got one of those boxes every single week.

As someone else has mentioned, there is no allowance for food allergies, various food tastes, or special dietary needs. And then there is the issue of directing half of the funds spent on food stamps (because this doesn’t decrease the amount spent) to specifically chosen companies. Under the current system manufacturers gets a fairly even shot at the pot.

Currently Food Stamps come on a card similar to an ATM card in every state in the country. All those stories about people trading their food stamps for drugs are malarkey. Can’t be done. If you see somebody buying beer with their food stamps (in most states you cannot tell whether they are actually using their food stamps or cash from their bank account) then it is the fault of the STORE that allows this in violation of the law. Under the new program, somebody is going to get paid to deliver those boxes to people’s doorsteps . . . and that is going to cost a pretty penny, far more than delivering them to an ATM style card once a month.

One final thought. When you get all outraged because you see somebody buy steak or lobster with their food stamps, let me remind you that today in the town I live in I can buy a lobster for $4.99 a pound or hamburg for $5.49. Steak can be had for $2.99 a pound – less if you buy it in the markdown bin for things going out of date. Which would YOU buy?

    Granny in reply to Granny. | February 14, 2018 at 1:58 pm

    And one other thing while you’re being all outraged at people standing in line with an overflowing grocery cart and then paying with food stamps. If you spend all of your food stamps at one go then you can maximize what you get. If you dribble them out a couple of meals at a time, you’ll starve half the month. That overflowing grocery cart represents the entire food supply for a family for the month and means nobody is going to go hungry. Don’t knock smart shopping!

    Barry in reply to Granny. | February 14, 2018 at 2:33 pm

    Granny, since I am paying for your food, I can put conditions on that.

    I can easily eat on less than $6.50 a day. I do it all the time when I go to the coast without my wife. I was there last week for 10 days. Total food bill was 52 bucks. That does not include splurging on dinner one night with my neighbor at a local restaurant which cost me about $20 with the tip.

      Granny in reply to Barry. | February 14, 2018 at 3:00 pm

      You are not paying for my food. I have worked every day of my life since the day I turned 14. I’ve paid my taxes. I’ve put up with seeing the money that I was forced to pay to Social Security rather than any other retirement plan confiscated for other purposes. I’ve put up with the contract under which I was forced to pay Social Security – that I would receive benefits at 65 – arbitrarily changed. And while federal employees get thousands of dollar in bonuses, the elderly got a big fat whopping 3% Cost of Living Increase this year – and every single dime was taken back in increased Medicare costs.

      Meanwhile, I STILL pay taxes. I pay property taxes and water bills and school taxes just like everyone else. I pay to maintain the roads that you drive on every time I put gas in the car. For that matter, I paid to BUILD those roads in the first place. Do I have a right to tell you where you can or cannot drive because I contributed to building the interstates way back when?

      As far as you and your wife easily eating on $6.50 a day, I would LOVE to see receipts for that. $52 for 10 days? HAHAHAHAHA. SURE you did. I can squeeze blood from a rock when it comes to stretching a food dollar and even I couldn’t do that – at least not without using a fair bit of my pantry stash.

        AsuraYakou in reply to Granny. | February 14, 2018 at 3:36 pm

        I’ve been on food stamps myself, and at less than what you’re stating, for that matter. While I was on food stamps, I could, with a fair amount of ease, stretch that money to cover a month, to include purchasing useless foods at gas stations and support my caffeine habit, which at the time cost me 45 dollars a month – That’s right, I spent 45 bucks a month on soda, and -still- ate well every night on SNAP alone, without a food box from any food bank or USDA service.

        Granted, it was much easier to do when I had electricity, but even after the power got shut off, I still managed, though I had to give up on my slow-cooked pork shoulders and home made pastrami.

        Buy in bulk, buy at bargain prices, and don’t buy prepared.

          What it costs to eat depends on where you are for starters. Food is a LOT more expensive in New England than it is in the South. And of course food prices have risen fairly dramatically in the last few years. I do buy in bulk. I buy on sale. I have a freezer. I bake all of my own bread. I would do just fine without the monthly box, though I do appreciate some of the contents. I get it because I am elderly. (A full half of all Social Security recipients qualify for Food Stamps.)

          I brought up the box in order to point out what it is that actually comes in these. The POINT I was trying to make is that this is not a substitute for half of anyone’s food stamps because these are odds & ends, not meals.

          AsuraYakou in reply to AsuraYakou. | February 14, 2018 at 3:51 pm

          What comes in the boxes you receive.

          We don’t actually know what would come in the Trump Boxes because all we have a generalities and a ‘Hey, wouldn’t it be cool if’ thought process.

          On the face of it, it can be a good idea.

          Like everything, poor execution of a good idea makes it terrible.

          If it’s executed well, it would work.

          Though, admittedly, based on historical evidence, it will not be executed well.

        Milhouse in reply to Granny. | February 14, 2018 at 4:54 pm

        I’ve put up with the contract under which I was forced to pay Social Security – that I would receive benefits at 65 – arbitrarily changed.

        There was never any contract, and you knew that, or ought to have known, especially if your working life started after 1960, when the Supreme Court pointed this fact out to everyone. The government never represented to you that there was a contract.

        Barry in reply to Granny. | February 14, 2018 at 8:25 pm

        ” HAHAHAHAHA. SURE you did.”

        First, learn to read. I clearly stated that was without my wife. I’d give you the list of the $52 worth of groceries but it would be a waste of time.

        Second, you are on SS and receive the benefits of what you paid in. Food is an extra and taxpayers are paying for it. Period.

        If you can’t figure out how a single person can eat on $5.20 a day, go read. A little study is all that is required. It can be done for less in fact. I eat pretty well on that.

          murkyv in reply to Barry. | February 14, 2018 at 9:49 pm

          I recently made some 13 bean soup. Half a bag of beans, half pound of ham, canned tomatoes and spices.

          total cost – about that $5.20 you mentioned.

          Had 4 meals from it and froze 3-4 more meals worth

          Ever since I had health issues in 2015 and lost 70 pounds, I only eat once a day now and it seems to all I need, considering recent checkups and tests all giving me the thumbs up. And I’m out working everyday.

    Granny,

    You should not be able to go to 7-11 and use federal food stamps to buy hot dogs.

    You should not be able to go to Subway using federal food stamps to chow down on potato chips and meatball sandwiches and Coke.

    You should not be able to use federal food stamps to dine in restaurants:

    Best Ebt in Los Angeles, CA:
    https://www.yelp.com/search?find_desc=Ebt&find_loc=Los+Angeles%2C+CA

    California Restaurant Meals Program:
    http://www.ebtproject.ca.gov/clientinformation/calfreshrmp.shtml

    If states want to pay for it, go right ahead.

    murkyv in reply to Granny. | February 14, 2018 at 4:49 pm

    Thanks, Granny, for you informative and reasoned comment from someone who knows the program.

    I hope some good can come of actually bringing all of this out in the open.

    the good AND the bad

    forksdad in reply to Granny. | February 14, 2018 at 5:50 pm

    Ebt benefits get traded for booze, drugs, cash all the time. They get used to buy gas, cigarettes, beer, etc. All the time. I’ve seen it first hand.

    It is extremely common. It is the fault of the ebt card holder for breaking the law just as much as the merchant. They are both defrauding the state.

    When people trade their card to someone else for a percentage on the dollar who then uses their cash to buy booze or drugs both are defrauding the state.

    I’ve had people try to trade ebt benefits for money they owed me knowing I had been a police officer and was working for dshs at the time. They figured everyone else had accepted their offer how could I refuse?

    The commodity boxes are not great. We had to fish and hunt for our meat, go berrying and mushroom picking for other stuff, we traded for eggs plus we had a small truck patch and orchard. Was it hard for two pre teen boys with a sick grandfather and grandmother who was waiting for his pension to kick in? Sure. I’m sure it’s no picnic for you. But if you depend on other people for your food you take what you get. Or don’t.

    JusticeDelivered in reply to Granny. | February 14, 2018 at 6:19 pm

    Not too long ago there was a huge bust of stores, all owned by peaceful “:)” a long list of middle eastern immigrants, who were buying EBT cards for half or less of their face value, and then using those cards to buy inventory from bigger stores for their little slum store.

    There is widespread fraud.

There is some merit to this idea but it’s not likely to work out.

In the ideal, people would accept food brought right to their door with gratitude. In the real world they will complain that the food is low quality, or that they don’t like it, or that the time of day that it arrives is inconvenient.

Their neighbors will complain that, “Their box is bigger than ours!” Or, “They threw half the food away! What a waste of my tax dollars!” Or the person doing deliveries will get mugged and then people will be required to come in to the warehouse to pick up their food box and they’ll complain about that.

Meanwhile, some conspiracy nut will start circulating the idea that the food is secretly laced with infertility drugs or something and people will actually believe it!

And the next time there’s a democrat in the White House, the whole thing will be scrapped – with or without legal authority, and it will go down in history as another example of Republican heartlessness.

Just not seeing a win with this one.

pablo panadero | February 14, 2018 at 2:57 pm

As part of Boy Scouts, our troop volunteered at a food bank in an affluent suburb of Columbus Ohio. The story there is immigrants (legal and otherwise) would sell their EBT cards on the black market, send that money to the home country, and pick up free food at the food bank.

I am all for giving people food rather than ebt cards.

    And how would you feel, Pablo, if YOU were the one eating what others chose for you to eat rather than choosing your own food and buying with an EBT card?

    As far as the story you heard at your volunteer afternoon at a food bank, there are always cheaters. For every low income food stamp recipient that cheats you can bet your boots there are a dozen wealthy individuals cheating on their taxes.

    Back when I ran a food bank we always had a few who would come to pick up their food, use what they wanted and deliver the rest to the dump rather than passing it on to someone who could use it. That isn’t the fault of the program. It is the individual.

    If you don’t want immigrants, legal or illegal (illegals are not supposed to receive food stamps) selling their ebt cards then it is very easy to include a photo id as part of the card or to require a photo id to use the card. Problem solved.

      Barry in reply to Granny. | February 14, 2018 at 8:29 pm

      “And how would you feel, Pablo, if YOU were the one eating what others chose for you to eat rather than choosing your own food and buying with an EBT card?”

      Granny translation: I’m going to eat what I want and you’re going to pay for it.

        Victoria in reply to Barry. | February 15, 2018 at 11:00 am

        Barry, don’t act like you personally write Granny a check each month for food. She presents her case well, but instead of addressing the core of her arguments, you try to belittle her personally to score (imaginary) points.

At my last physical, the “nurse” asked me a bunch of “social” questions. One of them was “Do you have enough to eat?” I just laughed and pointed to my belly. I did ask her if anybody ever responded in the negative to that question. She said, “Yes, quite a few.” I was shocked, but asked her, “Are they mostly old or young?” Her answer was, “Both”. I let it drop at that point, but still wonder how hunger is possible in this day and age.

    Granny in reply to snopercod. | February 14, 2018 at 3:29 pm

    Being overweight is often an indication of poor nutrition rather than overeating and it is very common among the poor who don’t know how to cook, know little about nutrition, may live in an area where fresh foods are hard to come by and simply don’t have enough $$$ for food, so they rely on pasta and carbs rather than broccoli and beef.

      willow in reply to Granny. | February 14, 2018 at 4:58 pm

      I appreciate all of your comments, Granny. I am not going back to see who said he was paying for your food, but you nailed it in your response.

        Victoria in reply to willow. | February 15, 2018 at 11:07 am

        I’m surprised at the vitriol directed at Granny and her intelligent comments. (But then again, self-righteous people are everywhere. The Leftists have’t cornered market on it.)

          forksdad in reply to Victoria. | February 15, 2018 at 4:55 pm

          I feel for granny. If indeed she is an elderly woman on a fixed income. Nobody should be so forgotten by their family they have to live on charity of strangers for the rest of their life.

          If you’re going to make angry and false claims here expect someone to call you on it. She’s not going to get any different treatment here.

      snopercod in reply to Granny. | February 14, 2018 at 5:08 pm

      Where I live, eggs are $1.35 per dozen, milk is $2.50 per gallon, bread is $1 per loaf (at Wal-Mart), tuna is 75c a can (on sale), and we can buy 10 lbs. of potatoes for $3. I have no sympathy for those too stupid or lazy to cook a pot of beans or find their way to the nearest food bank.

How awesome is it that we live in a nation so affluent that we can debate the best ways to feed our poor? A significant portion of the planet has no options to debate. No jobs/can’t work/won’t work means you don’t eat and you perish. We get to argue about the best methods to satisfy the fattest poor people on the planet. Ain’t America great?

As I noted on a more recent thread, this is Trumps way of having one of those “national discussions” about a topic nobody want to talk about. Good comments above!

And social media and comment sections are exploding with people on both sides of the issue. You know…a “national discussion”

It’s obvious there needs to an overhaul of the current system, starting with separating the program from the Farm Bill.

John Boehner got Marlin Stutzman kicked off the Ag committee for trying to force a vote for a separate bill in Congress for the Food Stamp program alone.

Mitch McConnell and the Chamber of Commerce then spent millions here in IN to keep Stutzman off the Senate Republican ticket

Make it like WIC. If you’re dependent on the government taking money by force from strangers to give you free food, you should get vouchers that only allow you to receive specific products each month.

Feds need to abolish SNAP in its entirety.

Block grant the $$ to the States with sunset provisions that will scale down the funding and terminate it. Let the States create their own programs, fund them themselves, and run them.

Federal Govt has zero authority to redistribute wealth like this, and from a policy perspective it is just terribly stupid to try and run a one size fits all policy at a national level.

Let the States experiment on their own with ways of dealing with the issue – those that work will gradually be emulated by all except the most insane blue state governments.

I have been in retail grocery and convenience store business for over 30 years and I can tell you from personal experience the fraud in the food stamp (SNAP) program is rampant. Instead of food delivery I recommend making FS like WIC. Have a list of items that can be purchased and restrict price per pound on meat items. Do not allow items like candy, soda, bakery goods, frozen meals and chips. Basic food items that need to be prepared in the kitchen. I am sure the liberals would complain about depriving children of these items. I think they should be deprived and parents forced to explain they are on FS and the people of America that are working are paying for their food. This will teach them that working has benefits. Finally no cash benefits. I have seen people get cash from the ATM and buy beer, cigarettes and blunts (to put dope in). Finally people caught selling or misusing FS should be cut off from ALL government benefits for life. Those caught buying them one day in jail for every dollar that can be proven and if over 25K death penalty.

    forksdad in reply to Kevin. | February 15, 2018 at 5:05 pm

    My only concern is many folks on food stamps don’t have any place to store or prepare food. I’m not sure what we’d do with the guy sleeping under the on ramp or living in a hobo jungle.

They could, although they won’t, use this as a way to train and prepare for disasters and emergencies. It would be an excellent way to develop, test, and implement a system that could scale up in a disaster.

National guard units could rotate in once in a while to keep in practice. Local authorities could combine it with an earthquake or tsunami drill that kind of thing.

But that’s all pie-in-the-sky anyway. This is just some opening position and in a few months we’ll see his real goal. Likely tighter controls and wic like restrictions.

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend