Food Stamps and Gourmet cooking......

[newg]

what are your thoughts on this article............??

http://www.salon.com/news/us_economy/index.html?story=/mwt/pinched/2010/03/15/hipsters_food_stamps_pinched?source=yahoo



me.......I'm kinda up in the air. I understand wanting to eat well and eat healthy and that you should be able to do that, even with food stamps. And I understand that things are still really bad in the job market............but I don't know. It still doesn't sit right with me. It sorta seems like they are abusing the system.

[Katigre]

If someone qualifies for foodstamps, I would rather they spend it on sustainable, high quality food than the corn-soy-subsidized garbage found in so many aisles of the grocery store. Likely them eating better quality food also reduces their medical costs (and if they qualify for food stamps they may also qualify for assistance with health insurance/bills).

I think I would feel differently if people were buying bags of groceries and then having collective bonfires to burn them and laugh in the goverment's face. But they're buying food to eat - what's wrong with that?

From what I understand, EBT cards give you a set amount of money each month to spend on groceries (cannot be used on warm foods, alchohol, or toiletries/toilet paper type products) and then that amount expires at the end of each month. The amount you get is based on the government calculations for reasonable grocery costs - you can find that table online from the 'thrifty food plan' to the more expensive spluring grocery budgets.

[mctlaw]

I get both sides and I'm not sure which side I fall on. It just seems like a different twist on what I regularly see in front of me in line at the grocery store, which is that the recipient has two piles, one for the food stamp food, one pile for the alcohol, bakery, and deli items to be paid for with their money. While it may rub me the wrong way, they are just as entitled to those items as me, I suppose.

[DrSally]

If someone qualifies for foodstamps, I would rather they spend it on sustainable, high quality food than the corn-soy-subsidized garbage found in so many aisles of the grocery store. Likely them eating better quality food also reduces their medical costs (and if they qualify for food stamps they may also qualify for assistance with health insurance/bills).


:yeahthat: They get a set amount of money and it's not for me to judge what they spend it on. I'd rather see people cooking healthy at home. People get criticized too for having a cart full of twinkies, white bread, and soda in their cart to buy with food stamps. I think the article was a bit sensationalistic in order to get people to read. Further into it, they do talk about the embarrassment involved, and the fact that it helps, but they're not living high off the hog.

[JElaineB]

I don't see how it is abusing the system to buy food that is healthy, that they like to cook and eat. If someone qualifies for food stamps and uses the food to make great meals, more power to them.

[KrisM]

If someone qualifies for foodstamps, I would rather they spend it on sustainable, high quality food than the corn-soy-subsidized garbage found in so many aisles of the grocery store.

I don't think that because someone qualifies for foodstamps, they must buy hamburger helper, processed cheese, and canned soup. No offense to anyone who does buy those :). They have a set amount to spend and they should be able to spend it as they choose.

[crl]

This doesn't bother me. They qualified for the program and they are spending the food stamps on approved items. Buying organic chicken is a lot healthier and probably not any more expensive than twinkies and potato chips.

Catherine

[KHF]

I worked in a grocery store throughout high school and the summers while in college. The thing that bothered me more? The people coming in with food stamps buying rib eyes, porterhouse steaks and other high-end cuts of meat while wearing their fur coats, designer clothes and dripping in diamonds. True story. And it wasn't just one or two of them.

Granted, this was 20 (ack) years ago, so I would hope that they've instituted better controls since then...but I'm not sure I really believe that. There are tons of people that these programs really help and are a true lifeline, but there are just as many who take advantage of the system.

[brgnmom]

There are tons of people that these programs really help and are a true lifeline, but there are just as many who take advantage of the system.

:yeahthat:

I know someone who says she'll apply for food stamps because she's pregnant again and they'll now qualify for the food stamps. Prior to applying for the food stamps, she's been able to shop at Whole Foods. I love Whole Foods but think that they are overpriced.

I think that the food stamp program is great for people who are genuinely in need of assistance... but it annoys me when I hear about people who try to take advantage of the system and change their status (have more kids, etc) to receive the assistance at the expense of others.

[daisymommy]

I agree. I think you should eat as healthy as possible with your food stamps. But it's probably going overboard and a waste of your money to buy a totally organic meal, for every meal, if you are only getting $150 a month in stamps (the article's example)--as that is not going to go very far. Two weeks into the month you'd be broke and starving.

[DrSally]

I agree. I think you should eat as healthy as possible with your food stamps. But it's probably going overboard and a waste of your money to buy a totally organic meal, for every meal, if you are only getting $150 a month in stamps (the article's example)--as that is not going to go very far. Two weeks into the month you'd be broke and starving.

Yeah, I mean either they have a WF diet and aren't eating very much at each meal or planning really well (don't we all buy stuff that gets wasted) or they are using food stamps as a supplement to their food budget. Either way, it's up to them to budget for the month with what resources they have, so they don't run out towards the end of the month.

[MissyAg94]

Rice is cheap. Beans are cheap. Oats are cheap. Whole chickens are cheap. Frozen vegetables are cheap. Those are healthy foods. Let's save food stamps for the truly needy, which these people obviously are not. Shopping at WF's or the like is a luxury. The taxpayer shouldn't be providing luxuries to out-of-work artists.

[infomama]

I agree with MissyAg94 in general. I can not say they are not truly needy because how would I know what a person's true situation is by looking at where they shop. I do think that food stamps can be stretched further somewhere else. I don't even shop at WF.

[mommylamb]

This doesn't bother me. It would bother me a lot more if states were spending administrative resources policing the specific items food stamp recipients buy. If someone qualifies, they should be able to make choices when it comes to their food, knowing that they have a limited resource of $$ for the month.

FWIW, I spent 4 years working in a shelter for battered women in my early 20s, and nearly all of my clients were on food stamps. This was in the days before EBT cards, so they had the actual food stamps. I was often asked if I could pick up something for them when I went to the grocery store for my shop for the full house (the shelter covered one weekly shop per week for regular necessity items, but the women could buy there own thing to supplement), so I was a well dressed 20-something from a middle class background purchasing items at the grocery store with food stamps. Let me just tell you, I wanted to smack those nasty little brats at the cashier looking down their nose at me for using food stamps. I know what they thought, and they were wrong.

[poppy]

I think it's great if they choose healthier foods, rather than foods that are processed. If they qualify for the funds, then they should decide where they want to shop.

Healthier choices, that means lower costs in healthcare, most likely. As a taxpayer, I'd rather help fund healthier foods for people, than expensive healthcare costs b/c they make poor food choices.
Not everyone can stomach certain foods, even if they are healthy. It's still a democracy here, you qualify, you decide. If it bothered me, I'd take it up with legislators to have laws changed, not pass judgement on those that meet those gov't standards.

[KHF]

Yeah, never mind. Having a bad day and not taking the bait.

[TwinFoxes]

This article bugs me from a journalistic stand point. The couple "saunters" through the store. I'm sure they were just walking, but "sauntering" definitely paints a different picture, doesn't it? I'm also sure the ethnic markets are cheaper than regular markets (ethnic markets, at least in California, have really cheap produce because they buy the riper, cheaper stuff from vendors, rather than the less ripe stuff that big supermarkets buy), but instead of mentioning that, the writer concentrates on the fact that the market has Japanese eggplant, tumeric and chutney. I'm sure it had onions, salt and ketchup too, but why mention those? It was obviously written in a sensational way to get as many web hits as possible.

[sewarsh]

I don't see how it is abusing the system to buy food that is healthy, that they like to cook and eat. If someone qualifies for food stamps and uses the food to make great meals, more power to them.

:yeahthat:

[vonfirmath]

Sometimes the people the government says qualify for food stamps, could actually afford to buy food elsewise... it would just mean giving up something else. Going to movies, taking trips to Scotland, etc (I knew people on food stamps doing both of these until they got shamed into stopping taking food stamps)

For example, we qualify for food stamps. But we can afford to buy our own food, so we made the decision not to accept. If we got food stamps, the money we use for food right now could be used for other purposes -- perhaps saved up for a trip to Seaworld.

CORRECTION: We qualify for food stamps by income. We don't actually qualify because we have scrimped and saved instead of spent every cent that came into our house in the past. So we have too much money in savings to qualify.

[AnnieW625]

If someone qualifies for foodstamps, I would rather they spend it on sustainable, high quality food than the corn-soy-subsidized garbage found in so many aisles of the grocery store. Likely them eating better quality food also reduces their medical costs (and if they qualify for food stamps they may also qualify for assistance with health insurance/bills).

I agree with this 100%! If a food stamp recipient wants to buy organic milk then let her, I am pretty sure since it's milk it's a WIC benefit (California program for low income and or single moms), as are Barbara's Puffins, Nancy's Cottage Cheese, and I also believe yogurt. I used to shop and write articles on budget cooking for my local coop in Northern California and I used to see people using food stamps there frequently. I always felt that when I saw someone buying either non organic or organic stuff that was healthy like a cart full of veggies or even a slab or free range meat and using their food stamps that there was nothing wrong with it.

As a single person I rarely spent over $200 a month on groceries. Now granted I am pretty frugal and I rarely bought wild salmon and I lived close to my parents so I'd eat the really good food there, but it was easy to spend a little more money on things like good dairy (my extravegance was organic milk in a bottle!) and veggies and still not be broke at the end of the month.

I loved that they followed the friends to an ethnic market, you can get soo many good deals there!




For example, we qualify for food stamps. But we can afford to buy our own food, so we made the decision not to accept. If we got food stamps, the money we use for food right now could be used for other purposes -- perhaps saved up for a trip to Seaworld.

My parents qualified for food stamps too while I was growing up too at a few different times, but my parents never felt it was right to get them and had they done it I still don't think it would've made a trip to Hawaii (or really somewhere out of CA) more of a possibility growing up; it wasn't and we survived.

[DrSally]

This article bugs me from a journalistic stand point. The couple "saunters" through the store. I'm sure they were just walking, but "sauntering" definitely paints a different picture, doesn't it? I'm also sure the ethnic markets are cheaper than regular markets (ethnic markets, at least in California, have really cheap produce because they buy the riper, cheaper stuff from vendors, rather than the less ripe stuff that big supermarkets buy), but instead of mentioning that, the writer concentrates on the fact that the market has Japanese eggplant, tumeric and chutney. I'm sure it had onions, salt and ketchup too, but why mention those? It was obviously written in a sensational way to get as many web hits as possible.

Yep. Like I said, I think the article is somewhat "sensationalistic" trying to get a rise out of people with the title and the portrayal. So what, Japanese eggplant, tumeric and chutney are not expensive items in and of themselves. But, it seems like the author was specifically trying to couch these people in a certain light to get a reaction out of readers.

[Jo..]

Huh?

$200 per month is $50 per week. If they are making meals with organic chicken, rabbit, other gourmet ingredients, that is like one meal per week. How are they feeding themselves the rest of the time? Obviously they have other sources of income, maybe off the books, and are working the system.

I would LOVE to feed my family fresh organic items, but the reality is that most of the time, I cannot. It REALLY makes me mad that our tax dollars are are going toward enabling people to live in the lap of luxury. Eating gourmet is not a RIGHT, for Pete's sake.

When I was in college my grocery budget was SEVEN DOLLARS per week. I worked my ASS off. I ate a lot of pasta.

If temporary circumstances require that people seek help, I get that. But no one should be living large on the sweat from another person's brow. It's not right.

[vonfirmath]

My parents qualified for food stamps too while I was growing up too at a few different times, but my parents never felt it was right to get them and had they done it I still don't think it would've made a trip to Hawaii (or really somewhere out of CA) more of a possibility growing up; it wasn't and we survived.

My friend on Food stamps DID go to Scotland (quite a bit of distance outside of WA). Had two cellphones, cable, cable Internet, etc. This is not a theoretical. This happened.

[ezcc]

I agree that the article is written to be controversial, and I also have no problem with what they are buying-that's up to them. I think there are probably Fathers all over the world who would love to say I told you so on the masters in poetry grad on food stamps. I also think it is likely this particular demographic is getting support from family allowing them to get the "extras" with their food stamps. Not sure how I feel about that, although I like to see small local stores and sustainably produced foods getting that $.

[AnnieW625]

Huh?

$200 per month is $50 per week. If they are making meals with organic chicken, rabbit, other gourmet ingredients, that is like one meal per week. How are they feeding themselves the rest of the time? Obviously they have other sources of income, maybe off the books, and are working the system.

I would LOVE to feed my family fresh organic items, but the reality is that most of the time, I cannot. It REALLY makes me mad that our tax dollars are are going toward enabling people to live in the lap of luxury. Eating gourmet is not a RIGHT, for Pete's sake.

When I was in college my grocery budget was SEVEN DOLLARS per week. I worked my ASS off. I ate a lot of pasta.

If temporary circumstances require that people seek help, I get that. But no one should be living large on the sweat from another person's brow. It's not right.

I do have to say that for $7 at Trader Joe's you can get almost a pound of organic or at least free range chicken breasts. When I was single if I wanted to buy free range or organic chicken breasts one cut in half breast would last me one dinner and one lunch. I would freeze the remaining two chicken breasts in the freezer for use at another time. A package of organic pasta costs $2, as well as the organic pasta sauce. Cheese is another $3-$5 depending on what you buy and lasts at least week.

Now as a family of almost four I do not buy organic most (my chicken is frozen, and 2lbs is $7.50!) of the time because it's also not in my budget as I chose to work, so we pay for daycare, I want a safe car to drive so we have a car payment, we have a house payment as we want the tax benefits of home ownership, but if I was willing to give up any of those things so I could eat organically then I believe it can be done. It's really all about priorities. Now if the article had been about a family of four who was trying to live off of $200 a month and eating all organic then yes there would be something wrong. These people are single they can be a bit more care free with shopping than say you or I because they aren't attached. They just happen to have crummy paying jobs; lots people do.


My friend on Food stamps DID go to Scotland (quite a bit of distance outside of WA). Had two cellphones, cable, cable Internet, etc. This is not a theoretical. This happened.

Now that's stupid and would make me a little mad. When I lived in Davis, CA (a very crunchy community) I lived across the field from a very nice and well maintained Section 8 apartment complex (yes nice and Sec. 8 could be used in the same sentence) and while I was thankful for how nice and clean it was I still shook my head in disbelief that 80% of the occupants all had at least one, but probably two DirecTV or Dish satellites attached to the structure. I had basic cable, and that was the extent of my necessities.

[MissyAg94]

The point is that if they can afford to eat expensive foods, then they don't NEED food assistance. We should not be supporting a LIFESTYLE for able-bodied 20 or 30 somethings. It's just not sustainable and it's wrong! I have an idea. Let's take that money from them and give it to the single mom of three so she can buy more healthy food for her family.

BTW, if these folks are receiving monetary help from family members to maintain their foodie lifestyle then they shouldn't be on public assistance. This entitlement mentality is infuriating.

[Jo..]

The point is that if they can afford to eat expensive foods, then they don't NEED food assistance. We should not be supporting a LIFESTYLE for able-bodied 20 or 30 somethings. It's just not sustainable and it's wrong! I have an idea. Let's take that money from them and give it to the single mom of three so she can buy more healthy food for her family.

BTW, if these folks are receiving monetary help from family members to maintain their foodie lifestyle then they shouldn't be on public assistance. This entitlement mentality is infuriating.


RIGHT ON!!! :yeahthat:

[srhs]

Healthier food doesn't bother me, ie organic ground beef if the person is convinced organic is healthier. Extravagant or luxurious expensive food bothers me a lot--steaks and lobster.

I also don't think being a fulltime student (with no kids) should qualify you, but that's a different story. If you can qualify for food stamps, you probably already get tuition assistance. If you don't have enough to live on, you need to put a break on school, get a job (one that's even beneath you), and save up to go back. Higher education has become such an entitlement issue, when I see it as a luxury. I don't think it's welfare's job to put a person through graduate art school, as lovely as an endeavor as that may be. It's to feed hungry kids.

[Jo..]

These people are single they can be a bit more care free with shopping than say you or I because they aren't attached. They just happen to have crummy paying jobs; lots people do.


They should not be carefree on tax dollars. They should have to scrimp and save to get by. Public assistance should not be a free ride to the good life, it should be for those who TRULY need it to LIVE.

[crl]

You know I haven't tried to do it, but if one is very careful with choices and not being wasteful, I think it is likely possible to do mostly organic on $200 a month for one person.

Buy a whole organic chicken--it's usually about the same per pound as non-organic boneless, skinless chicken breasts, isn't it? Roast it with vegetables--potatoes and onions are cheap. Then pull the leftover chicken, that's 3 or 4 more meals. Use the carcass and chicken scraps plus your leftover vegetables and peelings and such to make stock. And so on.

Grassfed hamburger is probably no more expensive than regular steak. Stretch it by making meatloaf or meatballs.

Eat several meals vegetarian.

Honestly, I do some of this, but not nearly as much as I should and there's a lot of food waste in many households. There are lots of ways to cut food costs and if someone on public assistance wants to put in the effort to cook from scratch and plan carefully so they can eat organic, I'm just not at all bothered by it.

I saw nothing in the article to suggest that the people profiled were cheating the system (undeclared income, etc). If they were, that would be an entirely different discussion for me.

Catherine

[Jo..]

You know I haven't tried to do it, but if one is very careful with choices and not being wasteful, I think it is likely possible to do mostly organic on $200 a month for one person.

Buy a whole organic chicken--it's usually about the same per pound as non-organic boneless, skinless chicken breasts, isn't it? Roast it with vegetables--potatoes and onions are cheap. Then pull the leftover chicken, that's 3 or 4 more meals. Use the carcass and chicken scraps plus your leftover vegetables and peelings and such to make stock. And so on.

Grassfed hamburger is probably no more expensive than regular steak. Stretch it by making meatloaf or meatballs.

Eat several meals vegetarian.

Honestly, I do some of this, but not nearly as much as I should and there's a lot of food waste in many households. There are lots of ways to cut food costs and if someone on public assistance wants to put in the effort to cook from scratch and plan carefully so they can eat organic, I'm just not at all bothered by it.

I saw nothing in the article to suggest that the people profiled were cheating the system (undeclared income, etc). If they were, that would be an entirely different discussion for me.

Catherine

No. Boneless skinless chicken breast is $2 per pound on sale. Organic chicken runs $4 per pound and up, and some of that is bone. The point is, people on food stamps shouldn't be able to afford grassfed beef OR steak..,this is supposed to be an intervention between them and starvation, not a supplement to a luxurious lifestyle!


hen she's used her $150 in monthly benefits for things like fresh produce, raw honey and fresh-squeezed juices from markets near her house in the neighborhood of Hampden, and soy meat alternatives and gourmet ice cream from a Whole Foods a few miles away..

Gourmet ice cream from WF doesn't qualify as cheating the system? My family, with DH working 50-60 hours per week, would consider this a rare, rare treat.

[crl]

No. Boneless skinless chicken breast is $2 per pound on sale. Organic chicken runs $4 per pound and up, and some of that is bone.

But now you are comparing the sale price of conventional to the regular price of organic. That's not a fair comparision. And if you make stock, the bone is still useful! You can get a lot of stock out of one chicken carcass and vegetable left-overs/peelings.

It seems to me like food-stamp recipients ought to be able to spend their foodstamp money as they see fit within the rules of the program. If you think they are buying luxuries, then maybe the answer is that the benefit amount should be cut. But I'm sure not in favor of telling people they have to buy hamburger helper instead of an organic whole chicken.

Catherine

[arivecchi]

I am very laissez-faire most of the time. I am all for food stamps for people who would otherwise not eat/do not have enough to feed their family, but food stamps for people who do not make a good enough living because they are in a "creative" industry? That is abuse IMHO. I work and I do not buy many organic things because they are too expensive. OTOH, I also get annoyed when you see people buying really crappy foods with food stamp money. I know this is extremely hard to regulate when you need hard and fast rules as to who is eligible for food stamps, but this does seem like abuse to me.

[Jo..]

When chicken is on sale, I buy it. I cannot afford to pay full price.

The reason it is okay for me to tell foodstamp recipients how to spend "their money" is that...it's NOT THEIR MONEY. IT'S MINE.

They should buy staples, and nothing else. The lowest priced meat, cheese, bread, pasta. If they can afford more, then they do NOT need FOODSTAMPS and are CHEATING the taxpayers.

[egoldber]

Here are the eligibility requirements for the program:

http://www.fns.usda.gov/FSP/applicant_recipients/eligibility.htm#Resources

Household resources must be < $2,000 in countable resources, such as a bank account and a net monthly income of less than $900 a month. They get a $200 allotment for food.

And there are employment requirements:


Generally ABAWDS (able-bodied adults without dependents )between 18 and 50 who do not have any dependent children can get SNAP benefits only for 3 months in a 36-month period if they do not work or participate in a workfare or employment and training program other than job search. This requirement is waived in some locations.

With some exceptions, able-bodied adults between 16 and 60 must register for work, accept suitable employment, and take part in an employment and training program to which they are referred by the local office. Failure to comply with these requirements can result in disqualification from the Program.

[crl]

When chicken is on sale, I buy it. I cannot afford to pay full price.

The reason it is okay for me to tell foodstamp recipients how to spend "their money" is that...it's NOT THEIR MONEY. IT'S MINE.

They should buy staples, and nothing else. The lowest priced meat, cheese, bread, pasta. If they can afford more, then they do NOT need FOODSTAMPS and are CHEATING the taxpayers.

So if someone eats beans and rice 5 days a week so they can "afford" organic chicken the other 2 because that's their preference, they are cheating the taxpayers? But would it be cheating the taxpayers if they bought conventional chicken on sale for every meal and it cost the same?

Catherine

[AnnieW625]

Healthier food doesn't bother me, ie organic ground beef if the person is convinced organic is healthier. Extravagant or luxurious expensive food bothers me a lot--steaks and lobster.

I also don't think being a fulltime student (with no kids) should qualify you, but that's a different story. If you can qualify for food stamps, you probably already get tuition assistance. If you don't have enough to live on, you need to put a break on school, get a job (one that's even beneath you), and save up to go back. Higher education has become such an entitlement issue, when I see it as a luxury. I don't think it's welfare's job to put a person through graduate art school, as lovely as an endeavor as that may be. It's to feed hungry kids.
I do agree with that, but what's the difference between graduate school and undergraduate school, besides grad. school being more expensive? College in my state is slowly becoming a luxury and it's sad. I got grants every semester in college to pay for about 80% of my tuition at my state university (my parents were a one income family), does that make me worse than the less than middle class student of a single parent? I don't think so, there is something called equal opportunity. Had I gone to grad school, which I didn't because I chose to work I never would've even thought to apply for food stamps as I too most likely would've had very little income and high student loans.


You know I haven't tried to do it, but if one is very careful with choices and not being wasteful, I think it is likely possible to do mostly organic on $200 a month for one person.

Buy a whole organic chicken--it's usually about the same per pound as non-organic boneless, skinless chicken breasts, isn't it? Roast it with vegetables--potatoes and onions are cheap. Then pull the leftover chicken, that's 3 or 4 more meals. Use the carcass and chicken scraps plus your leftover vegetables and peelings and such to make stock. And so on.

Grassfed hamburger is probably no more expensive than regular steak. Stretch it by making meatloaf or meatballs.

Eat several meals vegetarian.

Honestly, I do some of this, but not nearly as much as I should and there's a lot of food waste in many households. There are lots of ways to cut food costs and if someone on public assistance wants to put in the effort to cook from scratch and plan carefully so they can eat organic, I'm just not at all bothered by it.

I saw nothing in the article to suggest that the people profiled were cheating the system (undeclared income, etc). If they were, that would be an entirely different discussion for me.

Catherine
Agree with this too.


No. Boneless skinless chicken breast is $2 per pound on sale. Organic chicken runs $4 per pound and up, and some of that is bone. The point is, people on food stamps shouldn't be able to afford grassfed beef OR steak..,this is supposed to be an intervention between them and starvation, not a supplement to a luxurious lifestyle!

Gourmet ice cream from WF doesn't qualify as cheating the system? My family, with DH working 50-60 hours per week, would consider this a rare, rare treat.

Why shouldn't they have that opportunity? Why should someone on food stamps be relegated to the corner 7-11 or HFCS filled big box store to buy their food when if they want to eat healthy and know how to do it? It should be their choice. Ethnic markets are usually very reasonably priced too. And what's wrong with a splurge of some $6 a gallon ice cream every so often? It's not that much more than the 1/3/4 quart size of Dryers/Bryers/Edy's, etc. you get at the regular store. With the new size of ice cream cartons it's probably actually a better deal.

Would it have made any difference if they showed what we perceive as a less well to do overweight single woman in her 40s of either white, Black, or hispanic descent from the wrong part of town shopping at WF with food stamps? I think yes it would've been different and we'd all be happy that she was taking control of her life and eating healthier. She'd be the poster "adult" for eating healthy, using food stamps, and she'd also be the spokesperson for reducing the risk of Type 2 diabetes because she is eating less processed foods and such. But however people are outraged because they chose to follow 20 something with low paying artsy fartsy careers and grad school educations because we all assume they came from great families who will never or never did have the need for food stamps. These kids could've come from one income families too (and known the value of what food stamps can get them in difficult times).


But now you are comparing the sale price of conventional to the regular price of organic. That's not a fair comparision. And if you make stock, the bone is still useful! You can get a lot of stock out of one chicken carcass and vegetable left-overs/peelings.

It seems to me like food-stamp recipients ought to be able to spend their foodstamp money as they see fit within the rules of the program. If you think they are buying luxuries, then maybe the answer is that the benefit amount should be cut. But I'm sure not in favor of telling people they have to buy hamburger helper instead of an organic whole chicken.

Catherine

Catherine is right comparing the price of sale priced chicken to organic, which is often double is not fair. Both can be bought using food stamps, and yes you can buy about 8-9 lbs of non organic fresh hormone free chicken breasts at a warehouse store for $24 (I just did this the other day at Costco) vs. probably $50 for the organic variety, but those 8 lbs of chicken breasts are most likely going to last a month and the luxury or the $50 chicken breasts is going to be made up other places.

[kransden]

I have been reading Ann Landers or Dear Abby for over 30 years. Boy, am I dating myself. :) This question has ALWAYS come up over and over again, and it always will. Usually it is people complaining about buying soda and chips on food stamps. People will buy what they buy, and really it is none of our business. You can't cure stupid, if that's what they are being. If they are not, I don't care what they eat.

I was a cashier at a grocery store in high school. The vast majority people didn't squander their food stamps on high end or junky items. I am also going to therorize that if you do it in today's economy you will starve. The food banks and churches don't have much to give. So the people will either learn, or they have made economies elsewhere.

[mommylamb]

According to what Beth posted $200 a month is the maximum for a household of one. This thread prompted me to do some poking around on food stamps (not a program I'm super familiar with), and the average is only $133 a month. Now, there will always be people gaming the system, no matter what system you think that is. But the vast majority of people on programs like this are genuinely in need. I agree with some of the previous posters that this article is very slanted and intended to raise the anger threshold of readers. I don't know the specifics of these people's lives and whether they're gaming the system or not. But, I do know that it would cost a hell of a lot of taxpayer dollars to truly prevent people from buying things that others deam as extravagent. I'd rather have my tax dollars going to help people in need than the administrative cluster that would create.

There are lots of places where tax payer $$ is wasted, yet the social programs always get fingered and the poor get demonized.

[DrSally]

There are lots of places where tax payer $$ is wasted, yet the social programs always get fingered and the poor get demonized.

:yeahthat: I totally agree with this.

[Jo..]

So if someone eats beans and rice 5 days a week so they can "afford" organic chicken the other 2 because that's their preference, they are cheating the taxpayers? But would it be cheating the taxpayers if they bought conventional chicken on sale for every meal and it cost the same?

Catherine

Yes. I will repeat myself. People on food stamps should have to economize 100% of the time. There should be NO ROOM, NONE, for luxuries. That is MY money. Eat beans and rice 7 days per week. Eat organic chicken when you get a job.

Why should my children not eat organic foods, but you, an able bodied 20 something to whom it's not nearly as important, can? AGAIN, Food stamps are a desperate measure between people and STARVATION, There should NOT be wiggle room for fresh herbs and rabbit.

[DrSally]

FWIW, I think with the WIC rules (maybe old rules), they tried to regulate what could and couldn't be bought with the limited WIC money given to moms/kids. Sorry, I'm not really that familiar with it to give examples, but it ended up being frustrating for moms b/c there was a very limited number of items they could buy. I understand the impulse to make "rules" for WIC so parents wouldn't go use money for beer instead of milk, bread, and eggs, etc. But, it became so specific that it was nonsensical and left the moms/kids with big gaping holes in their diets. Not sure if it's like this anymore.
My point is, that when you get down to specifics, it's very hard to regulate how people use the money that's given to them from public assistance programs. I personally don't think it's my place to dictate what a person can and can't eat b/c the don't have money for their own food. It seems demeaning/paternalistic to me. They make their own choices, and part of that may involve learning that if you spend X amount one week, there won't be enough left for the remaining weeks of the month.

ETA: I found some examples, but this is not verified. On WIC, you can't buy soymilk, but you can buy chocolate cow's milk, you can buy formula, but not low formula iron, calcium fortefied OJ not OK, but other types of OJ are ok, you can buy peanut butter with HFCS, but not natural PB, no yogurt, but you can buy cheese. Oh, and no organic dairy, battery eggs only, and highly processed (but vitamin-fortified) cereals are ok. There is something that says veggies are not ok, but I don't know if this is true.

ETA again: I guess my point with the examples is that when you try to get really specific with what a person can/can't buy, first, not everyone is going to agree with what's ok/not ok. If we didn't have soymilk for my DS who was anaphalactic to cow's milk for the first 2 years of his life, that would be a problem (he drank it as a toddler, of course). And, why is it not ok for a poor child to be able to eat yogurt, and only get to eat PB and cereal with HFCS? If you, as a parent, thought it was *very* important for your developing toddler to have organic milk and were willing to scrimp elsewhere, why wouldn't this be an option? In any case, I could see where this could get very cumbersome and humiliating at the cash register as well.

[MissyAg94]

Why in the world do people think that it has to be a choice between hamburger helper and all organic? As I stated earlier, there are ways to eat healthy food that don't cost a fortune.

You do NOT have a right to eat organic food at someone else's expense. Organic chicken is a luxury. Those who think otherwise live in a very different world that most of the country. And yes, it is our business how food stamps are used. It's taxpayer dollars that they are spending.

And if you want to talk about other ways that the government wastes our tax dollars, I'll gladly engage. But this article isn't really talking about the poor, is it?

[arivecchi]

While I do agree that this one case discussed in the article is borderline abuse IMO, I do not think we can always expect to agree with how our taxpayer monies are spent. If that were so, none of my money would have been used to invade Iraq.

[MissyAg94]

Of course we won't always agree with how taxpayer dollars are spent. But it is our business and if you thought that the govt invading Iraq was a waste, I would expect for you to say that. If no one ever says anything, nothing ever changes.

Make your opinions known at the ballot box! Write your senators and congressman!

[Ceepa]

The shopping pals in this article are pathetic. The government does not print up an endless supply of money. Every dollar doled out is from someone else's pocket, arguably a dollar that could be used for someone in greater need than these people. A life without discomfort is not a guarantee in this nation or any other.

And I second pp's suggestion to contact your legislator if you're disgruntled. Goodness knows my congressman and senator have heard from me. ;)

[vludmilla]

I don't see how it is abusing the system to buy food that is healthy, that they like to cook and eat. If someone qualifies for food stamps and uses the food to make great meals, more power to them.

I agree. I didn't read the article but if someone can make gourmet meals with food stamps, good for them!

[ChefGirl]

what are your thoughts on this article............??

http://www.salon.com/news/us_economy/index.html?story=/mwt/pinched/2010/03/15/hipsters_food_stamps_pinched?source=yahoo



me.......I'm kinda up in the air. I understand wanting to eat well and eat healthy and that you should be able to do that, even with food stamps. And I understand that things are still really bad in the job market............but I don't know. It still doesn't sit right with me. It sorta seems like they are abusing the system.

How funny! I was in line at Whole Foods with my 2 year old yesterday. The ladies in front of me got a lot of electrolyte enhanced bottled waters....I was just curious b/c I just never seen those water before..anyway, the cashier at the end says that she still owes $5.xx... I'm like oh, that must be a gift card or someting. I looked up the screen and said "electronic foodstamp"....hum, interesting I thought to myself...that, I saw this topic posted....interesting indeed.