Here comes GOP

"Even as a supplement. You ain’t providing too many meals at $239.00 a month."

"She used the Thrifty food plan, the lowest plan that supposedly provides a nutritious diet, and since at the time people spent about 1/3 or their income on food, just tripled the number to get to the poverty threshold."

These two things are linked. The Thrifty plan includes poultry, dark leafy greens, and fruit and not much else. It is the least costly diet that gives you the FDA's recommended daily allowance of vitamins and minerals. And SNAP is only a supplement to get your budgeted food allowance to 1/3 of your income.

"The disability payment is from the Feds as a SSI payment."

But the $200, to a single person, is from the state, using pass through dollars from the Fed. That $239 average benefit includes all families, single person households on up. So, really, it is a generous payment. The disability payment is not.

Just a word about how they got to $239 a month.

The federal government has several food plans, 4 if IIRC. Thrifty, Low, Moderate, and Liberal.

When they started the war of poverty back in the 960s, and economist by the name of Molly Orshansky was tasked with coming up with the first measure of poverty, now called the poverty threshold.

She used the Thrifty food plan, the lowest plan that supposedly provides a nutritious diet, and since at the time people spent about 1/3 or their income on food, just tripled the number to get to the poverty threshold.

The current poverty threshold is about $26K for a family of four.

Using the Iowa Bill that is proposed as an example. The income threshold for assistance is almost comical. In Iowa they want to make the assets level for assistance low 2000’s for a single person and mid 4000’s for a couple.

Even a shitty old clunker of a car is worth a couple grand. And in most cases you need a vehicle in order to find employment.

Iowa is basically making it more difficult for eligibility. And not allowing sufficient food if you are eligible. They want to eliminate white rice for Christ sake. We ship rice all around the world to starving children because of the nutrition values and ease in preparing. But not Iowa?

On a personal note. I was not aware that the max benefit for SNAP was just $239.00 a month. Even as a supplement. You ain’t providing too many meals at $239.00 a month. That is ridiculous.

Some humans definitely suck.

I don't mind the paperwork necessarily.

What I am talking about is like the time I worked with a homeless 19 year old single mom with 1 year old twins. The worker told me that she had to have a signed statement from her mother that the mother refused to take her in. Blatantly lying to the poor woman.

Of the time I forgot my pen, and asked to borrow one that I could clearly see on the other side of the counter. The worker just looked at me with a blank face.

I get that the workers are low income too, because we don't value that work. But apply for public benefits is probably the most inhumane thing to do in this country...

I'm not surprised about purposely making it difficult to get.

"Also, because we hate poor people in this country, we make the paperwork really, really hard."

I have helped hundreds, if not thousands of people get public benefits. In my experience, there is much more fraud by the government, in the form of denied benefits than there is by the recipients.

@Molly

The disability payment is from the Feds as a SSI payment.

He lives in Florida.

He lives in a very generous state. And I'm not being sarcastic.

SNAP, because god forbid people enjoy their meals, is a supplement and folks are meant to take care of their own food needs, just with some assistance. It's not meant to purchase all their food. Now, how anyone can feed, clothe, and shelter themselves on $900 a month is a mystery to me, but this is reality for far too many people.

@Molly

I have a brother-in-law who has been designated as on permanent disability by the Federal Government. He gets a little more than $700 a month in disability payments. IIRC he gets almost $200 a month for food. If you do the math, assuming he is to get 3 square meals a day, that means ~90 meals a month. This means he can spend a little more than $2 a meal.

"You should also enlighten people on how much the benefits are. :)"

In Washington State, WIC is $100 per month for two people - so, mother and baby - and the national average for SNAP is $239 month per household. There are a lot of restrictions, everything from how long you can receive benefits (it was increased during the early part of COVID, as was the overall benefit), to whether you can even receive benefits if you aren't working (the PRWORA legislation tbr was talking about).

What you're paid is basically the difference between 30% of your household income and the minimum amount the government believes people should spend on food if they keep to a strict budget. But different states add additional barriers to entry.

@Molly

You should also enlighten people on how much the benefits are. :)

"Just looked at the salary of the CEO there. $324k."

That does sound high. I don't have time to do it now, but I could probably look at the 990 and tell you why though. But no, it's not a volunteer job for someone who runs a large, regional food bank. That requires a shit ton of paperwork, personnel management, managing deliveries to other food banks, food pantries, and meals programs, being on call 24/7, fundraising, legislative outreach, etc. It's a 60 hour a week job, even in the best run places.

"The guy selling the food was a pastor so I guess you can pray that money he got for it went to people in need but I'd bet it didn't."

And bodega owners could sell for less than if they'd bought at market rate. Or make a larger than expected profit. That's capitalism.

If you serve hundreds of families, someone is going to make money from food they get from a food bank. I think if you could prove you weren't recording and promised not to tell, anyone who worked with or for a food bank would just shrug and say it was fine, so long as it was a small minority of folks doing it.

I'm way more concerned about corporate kleptocracy and tax evasion, something that happens on a much larger scale and involves billions of dollars rather than, what, a grand over a year?

Just looked at the salary of the CEO there. $324k. I'm synical I guess but that seems like an awful lot of money for that job which probably should be volunteer.

Some of the food we watched leave the food bank got sold about 100 yards away in a parking to bodegas and market owners. I guess it gets eaten but definitely not the purpose intended imo. The guy selling the food was a pastor so I guess you can pray that money he got for it went to people in need but I'd bet it didn't.

The worst thing someone can do with donated food or SNAP benefits is to sell to someone who needs food.

Compared to the worst thing people can do with a shit ton of other things, from cars to guns to money, it's not that bad, since food still gets to people who need it.

@molly, thanks. Had no idea about any of that tbh except the food bank. My old office was 2 bldgs away from one in New Jersey. While I do assume most of it goes to the right people (I hope) I know for a fact some doesn't. It was disgusting to watch at times. Growing up in northern NJ in the town I did. I never really knew kids were hungry elsewhere. Obviously I wasn't looking either. Politicians dropping the ball bigtime on something like that should be criminal

Also, quick primer on US agriculture: We have a surplus every year, even if we don't count the acreage the government pays to keep fallow. A lot of the surplus goes to US food banks run by NGOs of various sorts. Some of it is garbage - thinking about the pallet loads of unpitted plums in syrup sent out in 2020 - some of it is probably overpaid for by the government, not enough goes to family farms because it's a giant program and it's easier to deal with agribusiness, and someone should really overhaul it with an eye towards what people eat as well as to what errors some pencil pusher at Monsanto or that giant chicken producer or whatever came up with in regards to what they were going to produce.

Whatever. It's a good program in theory, lining up producers and consumers and getting rid of agricultural surplus.

You're not a dummy, but the conversation around food security, the state of agriculture, and poverty is toxic, misinformed, politicized, and overall full of garbage.

First is that it's a rare thing for people to misuse food. Ronald Reagan and his mythical welfare queens popping out babies so they could buy lobster while working families ate hot dogs notwithstanding.

Second, over 12% of families with children live in poverty and are food insecure. That's also true of more than 30% of single parent households. That represents a lot of children who don't get enough to eat without intervention. I'm still waiting for someone to give me a clear and understandable answer as to why any politician would advocate for not feeding those kids.

In good states, free and reduced lunches are available. In better states, it's free and reduced breakfasts and lunches. In the best states, every child gets fed and there is no stigma for being poor.

But kids still need to be fed during school breaks and on weekends, and that's where SNAP and WIC come in. These are both federally funded programs meant to feed people. SNAP is the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program and WIC is the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children. Not all foods are eligible, due to the persistence of the myth of the lobster eating welfare queens, and the programs themselves are often under attack by lawmakers who mutter shit about government waste or whatever, but the benefits available are not large, states don't fund the programs, other than some administration, and the upshot is that kids don't go to bed hungry every night. Just some nights.

Kids who aren't hungry learn better, are more apt to stick with their education, and are less likely to be trapped in generational poverty.

About 10% of the population over 65 is also food insecure and/or lives in poverty. Like kids, they can't work their way out of it unless they are healthy and can find a job, which isn't a given in many areas. There's no good argument for cutting food benefits to the elderly, any more than there is for cutting food assistance for kids. But lawmakers do it all the time.

As far as the rest of those in need of food assistance, most are already working and most of them are working full time jobs.

We have this notion that if you make good choices, you won't be poor, so if you're poor, it's your own damn fault. However, a lot of people in poverty have reached that state due to illness and medical debt, job loss due to the economy, or other catastrophes not of their own making. Do we want them to starve while they look for their bootstraps or do we want to feed them until things improve?

Also, because we hate poor people in this country, we make the paperwork really, really hard. I once sat in a room with 20 well educated people, none of whom could successfully apply for SNAP. And they didn't have to go through the dehumanizing process of asking for government assistance, which is pretty much set up to discourage people (because lobsters). That Rotary Club got religion that day.

"When my work focused on food security,"

i did a lot of public benefits work around the time of the PRWORA.

Had much the same experience.

@molly, "" but here we still are, trying to remind people that food assistance programs are a net good."" Mind explaining more for us dummies ?

Actually using TikTok? WTF lol

Isn’t Adam Schiff the most stupid politician you have ever seen . He gets kicked off the Intel. Committee then he goes on Tik Tok a platform that that is being investigated for security concerns. …He was out there begging for money ….This guy is a pure idiot . But what do you expect. ?