Congressmen taking the 1 week Food Stamp Challenge

RBM

RBM

CAGiversary!
Lawmakers Find $21 a Week Doesn't Buy a Lot of Groceries

By Lyndsey Layton
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, May 16, 2007; Page A13

Rep. Tim Ryan (D-Ohio) stood before the refrigerated section of the Safeway on Capitol Hill yesterday and looked longingly at the eggs. At $1.29 for a half-dozen, he couldn't afford them.

Ryan and three other members of Congress have pledged to live for one week on $21 worth of food, the amount the average food stamp recipient receives in federal assistance. That's $3 a day or $1 a meal. They started yesterday.

Rep. Jim McGovern (D-Mass.) and Rep. Jo Ann Emerson (R-Mo.), co-chairmen of the House Hunger Caucus, called on lawmakers to take the "Food Stamp Challenge" to raise awareness of hunger and what they say are inadequate benefits for food stamp recipients. Only two others, Ryan and Janice Schakowsky (D-Ill.), took them up on it.

"We're trying to get this debate going," McGovern said. "There are more working people today getting food stamps than six years ago. . . . There's not a member of Congress that doesn't have hunger in their district."

"No organic foods, no fresh vegetables, we were looking for the cheapest of everything," McGovern said. "We got spaghetti and hamburger meat that was high in fat -- the fattiest meat on the shelf. I have high cholesterol and always try to get the leanest, but it's expensive. It's almost impossible to make healthy choices on a food stamp diet."

* * * * *
Skipping over the obvious temptation to write this off as a PR stunt, there are some things which a person just doesn't understand until he experiences them first-hand.

While I am not an apologist for fat people, I am glad that McGovern has already noticed that foods perceived as being healthier occupy a market niche, which command higher prices. He exempted his kids from the challenge, but it would have been interesting to see what sort of food he would've given them on a sharply limited budget.

The blogs of both Congressmen partaking in this challenge:
Rep Tim Ryan
Rep Jim McGovern
 
I think every politician should have to do something like this before they can take office. It never hurts to gain a little perspective.
 
Vegetables are pretty cheap. You can get a whole head of lettuce for a buck, and then a bottle of dressing for a buck. You could probably squeeze two meals out of that, for $1 a meal.

You're not going to be eating fillet mignon, but you can survive.
 
I am a little surprised that macaroni and cheese has not assumed a prominent role in either of their blogs. Or ramen, bean burritos, or potstickers (although you'd have to know how to prepare those from scratch, to make them economical.)
 
Better headline:

"People who get by on forced handouts from working individuals don't get to be picky about what they eat"

Too long?
 
[quote name='evilmax17']Vegetables are pretty cheap. You can get a whole head of lettuce for a buck, and then a bottle of dressing for a buck. You could probably squeeze two meals out of that, for $1 a meal.

You're not going to be eating fillet mignon, but you can survive.[/QUOTE]


You are talking about iceberg lettuce which has the nutritional value (and fills you up as much) as a few glasses of water.
 
[quote name='UncleBob']Better headline:

"People who get by on forced handouts from working individuals don't get to be picky about what they eat"

Too long?[/QUOTE]

Imagine what they couldn't eat if your bullshit "fairtax" passed!

I know what these guys are talking about, especially with regards to fatty foods. The grocery that I shop at (Kroger, mostly) has a line of underpriced products - "FMV - For Maximum Value." It's the highest fat/biggest filler/worst animal parts lunchmeats, chemically-charged slices of cheese...it's the poorest quality of everything.

Of course, in your eyes, absolutely everybody who is on public assistance is a lazy "welfare queen," to dig up Reagan's old stereotype. You know nothing about welfare "lifers," you know nothing about the average length of time people are on public assistance, you seem to feel as if making a person in a bad situation's life even worse via the kinds of things they can afford is perfectly fine, and you seem to think that failing to adequately provide for people looking for help, so they can move into your hardworking class is perfectly fine, even when it is, ironically, a failure in the end. Show me one piece of data, show me one bit of research that you know of with regard to welfare. I'll mail you a cookie via UPS.

Now, let's talk about what $21 can buy you in veggies.

Celery is about $1
Iceberg lettuce is about $1/head
Green bell peppers are around $0.70
Navel oranges are around $0.50/pc
Apples can be around $4/lb.

Of course, we can't just eat veggies. They're good for us, sure, but people need protein.

Eggs are $1/dozen (I'm glad I don't shop at a Safeway where they're $1.30 for 6!)
Peanut Butter is about $3/jar
Tunafish can be around $0.70/can (unless you only buy albacore, but we can't be picky on $21/week)

I think $21 can be used for healthy meals, but they're gonna be pretty scant. I'd love to see ol' UncleBob try it. Apparently, he doesn't like welfare at all; he'd rather have his $17 a month extra (which is precisely what you pay into welfare every month, as an average of per-household contributions), and deal with the resultant crime increase due to even greater diminished opportunities for the poorest in our society.

Of course, since our government can't spend within its means despite the vast amount of money they get from us, they're more likely to end welfare, keep your $17/month and reappropriate it to something they don't have money allocated for (like that one fucking war we're in that was supposed to cost $1-2 Billion, but is now over $450 Billion). So, you still lose your money, but you get all the crime that will happen when poor people can't feed themselves. I'm sure ol' Bob lives in a gated community, though, far away from the poor folks, so he won't have to worry about it at all.

You can't help but love those prats that bluster about government waste, when they never seem to bring up a half-TRILLION dollar war that was sold to the public as $1-2 Billion. fuckers. :lol:
 
[quote name='mykevermin']You must be a heart doctor, and looking for clientèle. :lol:[/QUOTE]

Close... a neurologist looking for stroke patients :) .
 
Don't forget beans - about 60 cents a can.

Cook them up, mix in some olive oil, salt and pepper to taste, and it's about the cheapest meal you can get that will fill you up without all that nasty fat.

Plus - eating meat is a luxury. Beef is only a staple of the American diet because it is heavily subsidized by the govt.
 
[quote name='mykevermin'][...trim...]public assistance[...trim...][/QUOTE]

You said the key phrase. In spite of all your other various arguements and points, "Food Stamps" are meant to *assist* those who need some help. They were not meant to be a total replacement for a individual or family's complete food budget.

Additionally, I have absolutly no problem with helping those who are 'down on their luck'. However, who I choose to give my (hard earned) money to and how much of my (hard earned) money I choose to give should be 100% my choice.

Dear Uncle Sam:

It's not charity when you're giving away someone else's money. Thanks.
 
*sigh*

So you've clumsily waltzed around the fact that we've overspent half a trillion dollars on a war to continue to feign outrage about welfare.

As for "giving someone else's money" away, if you can find me a single dollar the government spends that can NOT be tabbed as "giving someone else's money away," then I'll send you TWO cookies via USPS (not counting the one I won't send you because you couldn't cite a single bit of data on the current state of US welfare and family aid). ALL government spending is "giving someone else's money away." You just want to act outraged about the spending you don't care for as that, when the folly of your argument is that you can't identify anything that doesn't fit your criteria.

And, as for the "I have no problem helping the down on their luck," that's bullshit and you know it. You start with the assumption that nobody deserves public assistance, and that everyone is looking to bulk the system for $21/week in food stamps. You're, I'm sure, the kind of person who would chide a single mother for being on food stamps and not getting work - and the moment she gets work, you'll chide her for not being a good mother.
 
Actually, I'd probably more more likely to chide her for being a single mother. ;)

And yes, I am upset with the way our government spends our money in pretty much every aspect. However, this thread is dealing with welfare - thus I posted in reply to that. I could go on and on about our War 'Budget' (doesn't 'budget' usually imply some kind of spending plan? Perhaps that's not the right word to use), but we're talking about welfare in this thread, right?

And no, it's not "bullshit". Thank you. I could list my charitable contributions over the last year, but, quite frankly it's none of your damn business. One doesn't give to charity for bragging rights.
 
No, it's "bullshit" because you are dealing with phony contingencies - you don't mind helping the poor, but on your terms? What differences are there between your TANF dollar and your Christian Children's Fund (or some domestic equivalent) dollar? What are the differences between the recipients on each end?

It's an absurd thing to be simultaneously philanthropic with your money, feeling good about assisting those in need, and also outraged that such undeserving folks are on the government dole. You tell me that you can spend your donation-dollar better than the government, but where is your proof? How do you know that welfare is failed in the US? How do you know it doesn't work? How do you know what you donate does?
 
The difference between me donating a dollar and the government "donating" my dollar is, for better or worse, I get to make the choice where my money goes. If I donate to some scam-artist rip off organization, then that is *my* mistake that *I* made with *my* hard earned money.

However, if the goverment "donates" to some scam-artist rip off organization, then *their* mistake wastes *my* hard earned money.

Additionally, the type of charity that my money goes to should be my choice. Example:

A couple hasn't been able to have childern. So they try fertility meds and treatments. As sometimes happens on these meds, they end up with a "litter" of childern (let's say, five). Well, as happened in this case, the family simply couldn't afford five childern, nor would they choose to terminate any of the "babies". It's a sad story, but, IMHO, this couple made some pretty stupid mistakes that got them in the place that they are and I don't feel that they're a good choice for my money to go to.

However, the government does - and thus they now get assistance.
 
[quote name='UncleBob']A couple hasn't been able to have childern. So they try fertility meds and treatments. As sometimes happens on these meds, they end up with a "litter" of childern (let's say, five). Well, as happened in this case, the family simply couldn't afford five childern, nor would they choose to terminate any of the "babies". It's a sad story, but, IMHO, this couple made some pretty stupid mistakes that got them in the place that they are and I don't feel that they're a good choice for my money to go to.[/QUOTE]
So you're okay with depriving the children because the parents made "mistakes"? How exactly does that help anybody? Would you donate to orphanges to handle the "excess" children?

I'd feel more sympathy for you paying for welfare you don't agree with if I could stop my tax dollars from going to ill-conceived wars and abstinence-only programs that don't work.
 
I worked in a grocery store for over 2 years, and RARELY did I see people buying the bare necessities on Food Stamps (or EBT as it's called here in MA).

Lobster and other fine seafood items were much more common.

Or even better, if they had EBT-Cash, which allows them to buy taxed goods (regular does not), it generally went to Cigarettes.
 
[quote name='UncleBob']However, if the goverment "donates" to some scam-artist rip off organization, then *their* mistake wastes *my* hard earned money.[/QUOTE]

Again, you're crying over what amounts to a minimal contribution per month - on the subject of wasted government money, this is a drop in the bucket compared to, say...everything else the government wastes money on.

Now, I somewhat see your point, but you've just changed your argument from "I can spend my money better than the government" to "we both can make mistakes in our spending." Which is it?
 
If the government is there to bail out everyone anytime they make mistakes, then how the heck is anyone going to learn from their mistakes?

Additionally, why the heck should "my childern" be deprived because of the mistakes of the parents of other childern?

And, again, as I said before, I agree with the concerns about government spending overseas, etc., etc... But this topic is about welfare.
 
[quote name='UncleBob']If the government is there to bail out everyone anytime[/QUOTE]

You've yet again displayed that you lack the most basic understanding of public aid programs.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']Now, I somewhat see your point, but you've just changed your argument from "I can spend my money better than the government" to "we both can make mistakes in our spending." Which is it?[/QUOTE]

Ummm... both? Those two things don't have to be mutually exclusive.
 
[quote name='lordwow']I worked in a grocery store for over 2 years, and RARELY did I see people buying the bare necessities on Food Stamps (or EBT as it's called here in MA).

Lobster and other fine seafood items were much more common.

Or even better, if they had EBT-Cash, which allows them to buy taxed goods (regular does not), it generally went to Cigarettes.[/quote]

I've heard alot of anecdotal stories that went like this.

My mom said that back in the day, while she was getting by on hamburgers and potatoes, they would see people coming in and buying hand-picked crab and champagne with foodstamps.

My doctor was telling me the other day how his office actually loses money on medicaid patients, because of the copious paperwork and the reduced govt coverage payment. The part of it that really got to him was that he had to delay a med exam because a medicaid patient insisted on taking a phone call - and it was one of the fanciest, expensive cell phones on the market today. Need it be said that this guy never paid his part of the bill.
 
[quote name='camoor']I've heard alot of anecdotal stories that went like this.

My mom said that back in the day, while she was getting by on hamburgers and potatoes, they would see people coming in and buying hand-picked crab and champagne with foodstamps.

My doctor was telling me the other day how his office actually loses money on medicaid patients, because of the copious paperwork and the reduced govt coverage payment. The part of it that really got to him was that he had to delay a med exam because a medicaid patient insisted on taking a phone call - and it was one of the fanciest, expensive cell phones on the market today. Need it be said that this guy never paid his part of the bill.[/QUOTE]

I'm saying that over 50% of the people that used Food Stamps/EBT were not using them for "necessities" but rather unnecessary expenses. Is my "research" scientific? No. But when you work 30-40 hours a week for 2 years, you start noticing some common trends, and this was one of them.
 
[quote name='lordwow']I'm saying that over 50% of the people that used Food Stamps/EBT were not using them for "necessities" but rather unnecessary expenses. Is my "research" scientific? No. But when you work 30-40 hours a week for 2 years, you start noticing some common trends, and this was one of them.[/QUOTE]

I work at a supermarket as well (working through college) and the only time I have seen them spent on shellfish was imitation crabmeat salad.

Not that I haven't seen abuses it just is kind of rare and IMHO gets blown out of proportion.
 
[quote name='UncleBob']Dear Uncle Sam:

It's not charity when you're giving away someone else's money. Thanks.[/QUOTE]


According to the dictionary it is still charity.
 
So is it charity if I break into your house, steal all your stuff and give it away to those I think are "in need"?

Is it charity if I kill a small child, cook the body and feed it to hobos?

(to the extreme!)
 
[quote name='UncleBob']So is it charity if I break into your house, steal all your stuff and give it away to those in need?[/QUOTE]

Yes.
 
[quote name='evanft']Man, UncleBob is really fucking retarded. Ignored.[/QUOTE]

Okay, I'm 'retarded' because I don't feel that forced income redistrbution by the government is a good idea. Wow.

Being ignored by you would be an honor, sir.
 
[quote name='UncleBob']Okay, I'm 'retarded' because I don't feel that forced income redistrbution by the government is a good idea. Wow.

Being ignored by you would be an honor, sir.[/QUOTE]

There are many other reasons why someone could call you retarded. Don't sell yourself short.
 
I had a lot of trouble getting along with my family, so I moved out when I was 18. I paid my first month of rent, which made me broke. My first month of living I had two jobs-- Monday-Friday, I'd wake up at 5:30 to get ready for work. I'd leave at three to my second job which ended at 8:00. I'd sleep and repeat for about a month and a half.
While I was saving money, I'd buy ramen noodles and eggs-- cook up the ramen noodles and drop an egg in it. Tasted just like egg drop soup and it's actually something I wouldn't mind eating now. I also bought the store brand of Malt-O-Meal. Cereal in a bag. The food was cheap and sometimes I ate cereal without milk.
Month and a half later I had a lot of money saved up and I returned to the lifestyle I was used to previously. It's a scary thing moving out and this Welfare Queen may of had to resort to the "handouts" to survive if something had gone wrong, such as my 1972 Malibu breaking down on me or if I had medical problems (I had no insurance at the moment). Some people on Welfare deserve to be blamed, but the large majority have circumstances which brought them to that point. Don't hate them until you've lived their life. I came close to it. I commend the politicians for doing this.
 
See - what people don't know is, in fact, I did live their life (sorta, I was around 10-12 at the time). Which is why I do make my own contributions to programs that I feel use the money wisely as I have the spare cash.

The fact is, my mother worked her ass off to get us off government assistance and never once blamed the government for not giving us enough hand outs.

I don't hate people who need a little help now and then - but I do hate when the government says that it should be on the sholders of hard working individuals to support them more and more. Let's make some of these politicians take some pay cuts (and, in the case of some of them, let's make them actually pay some taxes too) - and let's cut spending in a ton of other areas.

Meanwhile, it worries me that so many people don't seem to have a problem with our government's forced income redistribution programs.
 
[quote name='UncleBob']See - what people don't know is, in fact, I did live their life (sorta, I was around 10-12 at the time). Which is why I do make my own contributions to programs that I feel use the money wisely as I have the spare cash.

The fact is, my mother worked her ass off to get us off government assistance and never once blamed the government for not giving us enough hand outs.

I don't hate people who need a little help now and then - but I do hate when the government says that it should be on the sholders of hard working individuals to support them more and more. Let's make some of these politicians take some pay cuts (and, in the case of some of them, let's make them actually pay some taxes too) - and let's cut spending in a ton of other areas.

Meanwhile, it worries me that so many people don't seem to have a problem with our government's forced income redistribution programs.[/QUOTE]


So UncleBob isn't a man who pulled himself up by his bootstraps so much as he
is a a man wants to pull up the ladder behind him.
 
[quote name='UncleBob']A blind and ignorant statement.[/QUOTE]

First off your whole entire position on the matter (and the of all the thought and reason you have put into it) is MINE~!

Your mother and by extension you took government handouts.

Yet you wish for others not to have that same safety net, you deserve to be ridiculed.
 
I do not wish for there to be no government handouts.

I wish for those who receive handouts from the government to not be whiny with what they get. (Beggars can't be choosers, you know?)

I wish for government idiots to not take part in stupid publicity stunts where they show an individual cannot life off of $21 of food stamps/week when no one expects individuals to live only off of $21 worth of food stamps/week

I wish for other individuals to stop thinking that the "haves" should be *forced* to give up what they've got to the "have nots" (no matter their circumstance).

I wish I had more (perferably, but not realistically complete) control over where the money that I work hard 5-6 days a week for goes.

I wish we could have a smaller government that would focus on protecting our borders and solving legal disputes - as outlined by the Constitution.

(edit: what the heck is a porder? ;))
 
[quote name='Friend of Sonic']I wish we had a government that didn't spend billions on less worthy causes.[/QUOTE]

Repost:

[quote name='UncleBob']I wish we could have a smaller government that would focus on protecting our borders and solving legal disputes - as outlined by the Constitution.[/QUOTE]

:)
 
[quote name='UncleBob']I do not wish for there to be no government handouts.

I wish for those who receive handouts from the government to not be whiny with what they get. (Beggars can't be choosers, you know?)[/QUOTE]

Talk about a strawman.

The point is they are not getting enough food and what they are getting is not nutritious at all.

It is not whining to point those things out.

If you are going to post nonsense don't be upset when people make fun of you and put you on ignore.
 
[quote name='Msut77']Talk about a strawman.

The point is they are not getting enough food and what they are getting is not nutritious at all.

It is not whining to point those things out.

If you are going to post nonsense don't be upset when people make fun of you and put you on ignore.[/QUOTE]

No, their point is that they aren't getting enough nutritious food because they're not getting enough handouts. If it was simply about the amount/quality of the food, they wouldn't be so focused on only spending "$21 worth of food stamps per week".
 
[quote name='UncleBob']No, their point is that they aren't getting enough nutritious food because they're not getting enough handouts. If it was simply about the amount/quality of the food, they wouldn't be so focused on only spending "$21 worth of food stamps per week".[/QUOTE]

I have read what you wrote three times and you seem to think there is a difference where there is no distinction to be made.

I am trying to be polite but WTF?

They are not getting decent food because they are allocated about a dollar a meal.

It has been pointed out, you can get:

Iceberg lettuce which has about as much food value as water

Ramen which contain tons of salt and fat (they are dehydrated by being fried in palm oil which is about the worse thing in the world for you)

"Cheese" not made out of milk

"Juice" made of sugar water and food dye

The only sensible thing posted in this thread was the idea of eating beans (rice and beans form a complete protein) but then the idea of adding olive oil (price it lately?) made me laugh.

The sensible (healthy and relatively cheap) foods are priced just outside of their range, a modest increase could let them purchase at least tuna or soy products.

P.s. Multi-Vitamin tablets cost about 10 bucks.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top