President Trump Wants To Change SNAP Program

[Breccia]

Yep - and people like Orlong forget that even some teachers qualify for SNAP.

And two percent of active duty military plus 1.7 million veterans.

[Grapemask]

While I will agree with SNAP not being able to be used to buy chips, sodas, candy, etc. it shouldn't be replaced with other empty calories/carbs like pasta and breads.

I'm quoting Ransath here but really I could quote half the thread, even plenty of our lefties, because this idea is split across both sides - and while it pretends to mean well, this idea of controlling what people eat is kind of ridiculous. And I say that as a person that deeply hates the obese and the excuses they make for being so (and having once been such a person myself, before dropping the weight years ago).

Fundamentally the concept is flawed; everyone usually cites a spin on "if they're spending my money, I should get to pick what they eat." I assume, then, you also believe you get a choice in how roads are built, education is served, the military is run, and a million other things. But most don't believe that, because that's silly. We accept that it's up to those people that run those things to run their own show and that they make their own decisions. We grumble about the military, sure, but let me know the next time a politician even suggests it be run by civilian standards.

The fact is, people make their own choices. You don't like them, well, that's tough. That millionth of a penny of your taxes that ultimately goes into your food stamping neighbor's pocket doesn't give you any control of his life. If he chooses to buy $100 of Hershey bars, that sucks for him - but remember, he now has to live off of Hershey bars for the rest of the month, so it's a problem that will soon fix itself.

If you want to really fix that problem, fix it on a societal level. Crying about that neighbor eating a Hershey bar while your brother does the same, based entirely on what card was used to buy the Hershey bar, should embarrass anyone that has the thought.

[Kiri]

This sounds pretty stupid and inefficient to me. You have an automated system with some shortcomings, but which allows for a small stimulus to the economy and overall makes poor people less reliant on direct aid, gives them agency and has little friction. But this new system would throw almost all of that overboard, due to tall the negatives in the details.

The system is not really automated. Food has to be sent, either to distribution centers to be picked up or per mail, adding a human and an environmental element. I mean just consider the following downsides, if it is really distributed via mail:
1. Recipients fully rely on the ones delivering the packages to do their job properly. If one of those packages gets lost, the SNAP recipient will likely have to prove that or at least deal with protracted bureaucracy, just so they can eat.
2. Similarly, recipients would likely have to be at home in order to receive that package, which will naturally arrive at a work day. Those with low-paying jobs might run into trouble with that.
3. Recipients are even more reliant on the weather as well. If their town is snowed in, they might find themselves in trouble getting food even though nearby markets are still stocked. The US government does not exactly have a reputation for always organizing things well.
4. The packages have to be one size fits all. With food. Between food allergies and lactose intolerance, it will be almost impossible to do that right. The current system allows people to buy the food that they can process the best, but in the new one they would most likely have to somehow convince bureaucrats that they cannot eat specific things. Which will likely require a doctor's certificate or something. All of that creates extraneous bloat on the system that is completely unnecessary.
5. More food has to be driven around pointlessly, which is worse for roads, traffic and the environment.
6. Money is taken out of the economy. The only companies benefit from this move would be big producers that can deliver in large enough quantities to keep things cheap. Those will see their earnings increase at the cost of retail and smaller producers.
7. Something done by the recipients themselves, i.e. assembling their own 'box' is instead done by the government, creating friction and cost. Lower prices might be able to mitigate that, but that depends on the system being designed perfectly. If a shipment of say, cereals to a retailer is late, that creates little trouble. But if such a shipment to a box packing plant is late, it slows down the whole process.

And that is just the inefficiencies and issues that were apparent at first glance, without any specific details on the plan. And what for? To make the designated survivor happy? In the end, the savings that the USDA speaks of are less than 10%, unless that number is supposed to be annually - which would be even more unrealistic. Mind you, these 10% savings where still calculated by the current administration, which has not exactly proven itself great at this sort of thing.

[Orlong]

Perhaps the foundational point here is the conservative mythology that people are on food stamps because they want to be. This is false. It's so false you should be ashamed to ever think it. People get food stamps because they need them - and most on them feel ashamed for it. They don't need your boot on their forehead or your kick to the groin on top of it.

Most of them do not use the food stamps responsibly though, and a majority use them for things that provide no nutrition. Food stamps are issued under the Supplemental NUTRTION Assistance Program, not the Supplemental Junk Food Assistance Program, nor the Supplemental Fancy and Tasty Food Assistance Program.

How many people using food stamps use coupons to get more food for their food stamps? Ive never seen a single one use a coupon, and I always look at what people pay with while I'm waiting in line. In fact, a large majority buy name brand foods as well, when they could be buying generic and getting a lot more food.

- - - Updated - - -

Ignoring that poor people aren't prisoners, ignoring that if they choose to spend their money on something you personally don't approve of nutritionally they are not given more money to buy something else with, it is simply infeasible to do anything else. Not everyone can eat everything. Giving them a box of food doesn't address needs. What if they can't eat X food in it? What if they dislike it? Among a million other ridiculous points.

Except it ISNT their money. Its money that is confiscated from me and millions of other hard working Americans and given to them so they can buy giant bags of Doritos and Red Bull. We should absolutely have a say in what it gets spent on, and giving them the food directly instead of letting them waste their food stamps on food that isn't nutritious is a good start

[cubby]

Most of them do not use the food stamps responsibly though, and a majority use them for things that provide no nutrition. Food stamps are issued under the Supplemental NUTRTION Assistance Program, not the Supplemental Junk Food Assistance Program, nor the Supplemental Fancy and Tasty Food Assistance Program.

How do you know that? Where is your data? What do you mean by "responsible"?

Why are you lying?

How many people using food stamps use coupons to get more food for their food stamps? Ive never seen a single one use a coupon, and I always look at what people pay with while I'm waiting in line. In fact, a large majority buy name brand foods as well, when they could be buying generic and getting a lot more food.

What's your data set for that?

Are you seriously advocating for a national program based solely on your personal experience? That's adorable. You are going to be SO pissed when the DNC takes back control and idiot program changes like this Cheeto proposal get burned.

Except it ISNT their money. Its money that is confiscated from me and millions of other hard working Americans and given to them so they can buy giant bags of Doritos and Red Bull. We should absolutely have a say in what it gets spent on, and giving them the food directly instead of letting them waste their food stamps on food that isn't nutritious is a good start

It is their money. And they are also hard working Americans.

Why do you hate military veterans so much?

[Dontrike]

Trump is trying to fix a problem that quite literally doesn't exist and trying to solve it in the worst way possible. How exactly is delivering tens of millions of boxes ANY easier than just putting money on what is essentially a debit card? How is this going to reduce costs in any way? What about those with special health needs, like allergies or diabetes? How is shipping so many boxes, essentially hiring people to drive them, the trucks needed, the maintenance, and all of the usual overhead going to be cheaper than just putting money on a card?

Trump can barely do more than golf, I can't imagine him succeeding on this front in any way, even if he gets this to work. Not one thing he has done has been successful in any way, not even increasing his golf score, so why would anyone think this would be a good idea?

Agreed. Poor people should not be nutritionally short changed. In fact, quite the opposite.

While I will agree with SNAP not being able to be used to buy chips, sodas, candy, etc. it shouldn't be replaced with other empty calories/carbs like pasta and breads. Kids need GOOD nutrition - it not only grows their bodies but their minds as well.

Also, there is so much food in the USA, no person - not a single one - should ever have to go to bed hungry.

Woah, are you okay? You're saying what Trump is proposing is wrong? Sh-should we call a doctor? You may have contracted Trump Derangement Syndrome, see your closest Infowars for more info on this debilitating disease.

In all seriousness though, good on you for not accepting 110% of Trump trying to solve a problem that doesn't exist. At least you can see why this is a dumbass idea of his. Can't wait for this smidgen of respect to be dashed though.

[Orlong]

> Complains vociferously about regulations to discourage people from buying unhealthy food
> Cheers when regulations to prohibit people from buying unhealthy food are proposed

You forgot to note that the major difference is in the first instance I'm complaining about regulations that "discourage (force)" people from buying unhealthy food WITH THEIR OWN MONEY and in the second example I am for regulations prohibiting people from buying unhealthy food with TAXPAYER money. 2 totally different things

[Lenonis]

Most of them do not use the food stamps responsibly though, and a majority use them for things that provide no nutrition.

Citation required

[Kiri]

Most of them do not use the food stamps responsibly though, and a majority use them for things that provide no nutrition. Food stamps are issued under the Supplemental NUTRTION Assistance Program, not the Supplemental Junk Food Assistance Program, nor the Supplemental Fancy and Tasty Food Assistance Program.

How many people using food stamps use coupons to get more food for their food stamps? Ive never seen a single one use a coupon, and I always look at what people pay with while I'm waiting in line. In fact, a large majority buy name brand foods as well, when they could be buying generic and getting a lot more food.

- - - Updated - - -



Except it ISNT their money. Its money that is confiscated from me and millions of other hard working Americans and given to them so they can buy giant bags of Doritos and Red Bull. We should absolutely have a say in what it gets spent on, and giving them the food directly instead of letting them waste their food stamps on food that isn't nutritious is a good start

The thing is though that the SNAP program could be modified to not work for Doritos and Red Bull. Overhauling the whole system just to create one with problems of its own does not seem like the efficient response to your problem.

[Orlong]

> Complains vociferously about regulations to discourage people from buying unhealthy food
> Cheers when regulations to prohibit people from buying unhealthy food are proposed

Totally not contradictory or self-serving at all.

I'd like to point out that, regardless of the costs, the food being offered in these care packages isn't fresh; it's likely to be highly processed, canned, or generally nonperishable stuff.

- - - Updated - - -



I suppose you think tampons or toilet paper shouldn't be purchasable with assistance either.

Cash assistance (TANF) yes, Food Stamps (SNAP) no. I also had previously said they can buy diapers with cash assistance, but should not be able to with food stamps. Of course if they are truly poor they should consider cloth diapers and wash rags for toilet paper. Easily washed and can be reused (and for the tree huggers, its environmentally conscious). When I was a baby, disposable diapers either didn't exist or were new and expensive because my mother never used them on me nor my brother. Then they could use their Cash assistance for other things such as clothing or rent

[cubby]

Agreed. Poor people should not be nutritionally short changed. In fact, quite the opposite.

While I will agree with SNAP not being able to be used to buy chips, sodas, candy, etc. it shouldn't be replaced with other empty calories/carbs like pasta and breads. Kids need GOOD nutrition - it not only grows their bodies but their minds as well.

Also, there is so much food in the USA, no person - not a single one - should ever have to go to bed hungry.

I . . . I don't . . . what the HOLY FUCK.

Totally agree. Well said.

[Elegiac]

Most of them do not use the food stamps responsibly though

False; food stamp abuse amounts to less than a percent of the total budget allotted to SNAP.

and a majority use them for things that provide no nutrition. Food stamps are issued under the Supplemental NUTRTION Assistance Program, not the Supplemental Junk Food Assistance Program, nor the Supplemental Fancy and Tasty Food Assistance Program.

You can have cheap food, or you can have healthy food. Take your pick.

How many people using food stamps use coupons to get more food for their food stamps? Ive never seen a single one use a coupon, and I always look at what people pay with while I'm waiting in line.

This is incredibly creepy behaviour.

In fact, a large majority buy name brand foods as well, when they could be buying generic and getting a lot more food.

And you could be doing something better with your time than stalking people to see what they use to pay with.

[Redwyrm]

What about MRE's. Those things last forever and were scientifically designed for our military personnel. Just throwing it out there.

[Elegiac]

Cash assistance (TANF) yes, Food Stamps (SNAP) no. I also had previously said they can buy diapers with cash assistance, but should not be able to with food stamps

You're aware both of these are distributed via the same mechanism, that being EBT, yeah?

So you seeing them use EBT to pay for diapers doesn't mean they are using their SNAP allocation.

- - - Updated - - -

What about MRE's. Those things last forever and were scientifically designed for our military personnel. Just throwing it out there.

MREs are highly calorific and not designed for regular consumption by mostly sedentary people.

[cubby]

MREs are highly calorific and not designed for regular consumption by mostly sedentary people.

I'm curious too - are they insanely high in calories, because that would be a problem long term. Could they be split up, divided in a meal? Would that even make sense?

[Deleted]

The fact is, people make their own choices. You don't like them, well, that's tough.

The analogies you try to make with the military or road building are specious at best.

Sorry, this is nutrition we are talking about. Nutrition has a direct impact on physical and mental development. If someone is going to buy Hershey bars, they can get a fucking job and pay for it their damn self.

If we, as taxpayers, are going to fund SNAP then there is NOTHING wrong with forcing the benefit to be used ONLY on nutritious, healthy food. In fact, that should be the major requirement because it will get more people started on the correct nutritional path.

Hey, want your mind really blown? I supported Michelle Obama's lunch program 100%! In my opinion, nutrition is one of the leading causes of mental health problems as well as physical problems (immunity and susceptibility to diseases.) I applauded her for trying to move the needle back to real food as opposed to "pizza" every day for lunch. I think ALL schools should remove any vending machines that sell candy/sodas and offer nothing but GOOD food for breakfast/lunch. The days of chicken mcnuggets and mac&cheese as a "meal" need to be long gone.

Sorry, but no - I am not willing to accept your "the fact is, people make their own choices. You don't like them, well, that's tough." - that is nothing but a defeatist attitude. They can make their own choice between broccoli or green beans, not broccoli or a Twix bar.

[Elegiac]

I'm curious too - are they insanely high in calories, because that would be a problem long term. Could they be split up, divided in a meal? Would that even make sense?

Not really. MREs are field rations and are specialized to accommodate the function of sustaining an active individual in a situation where regular sources of nourishment are unavailable. There's an alternative version designed for relief of disaster victims and refugees, but again they aren't intended for long term use.

As I said before, SNAP or any alternative cannot reconcile cost effectiveness with nutrition. You can have people eat cheaply, or you can have them eat well.

[Cheze]

the government largely stopped providing this kind of direct food aid (in favor of pure currency subsidy like SNAP) because it turns out to be super inefficient, introducing a ton of unnecessary waste and overhead (ex: government cheese.)

we have pretty developed systems for distributing food to the population already, but I guess republicans are happy to abandon market-based solutions as soon as they have a chance to stick it to poor people

[zenkai]

Regardless of your political beliefs I think we all can agree that government assisted food should be nutritious food that helps your body, and it should be enough to sustain a person, it should never be used for junk food or anything that isn't food.

I have a friend who has been on SNAP since 2002, he was 400lbs, now he is almost 800lbs because he spends all his food stamps on junk food. Does it sound like he doesn't get enough food to live on?

[Elegiac]

Regardless of your political beliefs I think we all can agree that government assisted food should be nutritious food that helps your body, and it should be enough to sustain a person, it should never be used for junk food or anything that isn't food.

I have a friend who has been on SNAP since 2002, he was 400lbs, now he is almost 800lbs because he spends all his food stamps on junk food. Does it sound like he doesn't get enough food to live on?

Nah, it just sounds like you're making shit up.

On the off chance it is true; who cares? Most SNAP recipients use it as it is intended.