President Trump Wants To Change SNAP Program

[Plutarch78]

This is what idiots come up with when they have no idea how a system works, but just really want to control other people's lives. This is just more evidence for "low effort thinking" linked to conservative ideology, because it only takes a couple more cycles of thought to realize why this is ridiculous.

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.

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.

So you're okay with people abusing food stamps to buy drugs, alcohol, cigarettes, slot machines cell phones or some other non-food items? Have you ever been in certain poor neighborhoods? The kind of places where people don't even bother trying to get ahead like go to school or look for job training programs. All they do is hang out all day, get drunk, get high or waste time on social media. If someone wants to live that life hey its America. But not on my tax payer dollars.

[Breccia]

Cheerios and wheaties still have a ton of sugar in them. 9 grams per serving

What?

[wunksta]

So you're okay with people abusing food stamps to buy drugs, alcohol, cigarettes, slot machines cell phones or some other non-food items?

How are they doing that?

[Plutarch78]

How are they doing that?

Go to a deli or some mom n' pop general store/bodega who are WIC/SNAP participants. The recipients cashes out their SNAP card for cash and then use it to buy whatever.

[wunksta]

Go to a deli or some mom n' pop general store/bodega who are WIC/SNAP participants. The recipients cashes out their SNAP card for cash and then use it to buy whatever.

Wouldn't it be easier to restrict that process than going through the process of manually sending food products?

In any case, SNAP seems like it helps more people than it's abused.

[Zan15]

Go to a deli or some mom n' pop general store/bodega who are WIC/SNAP participants. The recipients cashes out their SNAP card for cash and then use it to buy whatever.

and yet in 2013 they did a huge investigation and found such a small percentage of small stores do this. Less then 1% fraud rates in this investigation.

Are there some that do, yes. Many are caught, fined and prosecuted each year

Don't worry even with Trump's plan people will find a way to abuse it and there will be fraud.

[Edge-]

In any case, SNAP seems like it helps more people than it's abused.

This is true, last I recall they looked into it and it was almost a statistically irrelevant number of folks truly abusing the system. The vast majority were using it as intended.

It's the same kind of bogeyman as Reagan's "welfare queens".

[Draco-Onis]

and yet in 2013 they did a huge investigation and found such a small percentage of small stores do this. Less then 1% fraud rates in this investigation.

Are there some that do, yes. Many are caught, fined and prosecuted each year

Don't worry even with Trump's plan people will find a way to abuse it and there will be fraud.

You don't seem to understand fraud is only bad when poor people do it when it's equifax, Goldman Sachs or some other giant corporation it's good or something.

[Grapemask]

So you're okay with people abusing food stamps to buy drugs, alcohol, cigarettes, slot machines cell phones or some other non-food items? Have you ever been in certain poor neighborhoods? The kind of places where people don't even bother trying to get ahead like go to school or look for job training programs. All they do is hang out all day, get drunk, get high or waste time on social media. If someone wants to live that life hey its America. But not on my tax payer dollars.

I've been poor. You can buy none of those things with food stamps. You can trade your food stamps for money to buy those things - but guess what? That's against the rules of food stamps and against the law. You cannot trade them to anyone for any reason or for any item other than to buy food or you will be prosecuted. If we're going to be basing things off of illegal potentiality, the US needs to go ahead and become North Korea right now. I'll meet you in the death camps.

[Jastall]

The boxes will contain canned vegetables and shelf stable canned meat like Spam, potted meat, Vienna sausages, corned beef, etc... They will also still get some "credit" to supplement the boxes of food. Diapers should never be allowed to be purchased with food stamps. People can use their cash assistance for that.

So instead of pretzels, they will instead eat ''healthy''-looking food that is easily as salt-filled? Do you actually believe eating potted meat every day is a good thing? Don't get me started on pasta, especially the low quality ones.

This reeks of disinformation. Processed food is hardly better than the junk found at MacDonald's, sometimes it's worse.

Plus this kind of system will probably cost loads of money in management and supply costs, and impose a lifestyle on the people it affects. Yay for the party of fiscal responsibility and small government?

[Zan15]

Wouldn't it be easier to restrict that process than going through the process of manually sending food products?

In any case, SNAP seems like it helps more people than it's abused.

Of course, but there is no need for details or investigation or studies to prove there is a food stamp problem...his base just believes it anyway even though his base is the majority of people getting those very services.

This is a dead proposal just to rally up his base, nothing more, nothing serious, nothing realistic.

the cost of delivery alone will cost more than the entire program does now.

48 million people
packages say 1 time a week.
Weighing about 25-50 lbs.

You are looking at 14 dollars to start.

14 x 48m = 672 million x 52 = 34.9 billion dollars in shipping min on a program that spends 73 billion.


50 lbs package of food 1 time a week = lowest zone 1 28 bucks highest zone 9 147 dollars commerical rate

so lets say 20% discount for volume.

22-117

Average cost will be closer to 22 than 117. so lets say 35 a week cost per participant.


35 x 48 million deliveries a week = 1.7 billion x 52 = 87.3 billion. 10.3 billion more than the total cost of the program.



All napkin math but really....

- - - Updated - - -

BTW what the hell happened to keeping the fed govt out of managing our lives.

no to healthcare but yes to food production, distribution and delivery?


Very socialist of Trump to propose this plan

[NED funded]

I have conflicted opinion on this.On one hand, I have my doubts about it being cheaper. On the other hand, poor people seriously need to eat healthier.

[Edge-]

I have conflicted opinion on this.On one hand, I have my doubts about it being cheaper. On the other hand, poor people seriously need to eat healthier.

That would speak more to the need for accessible, low-cost healthy foods, especially in urban and rural areas where it's the hardest to find things like fresh fruits and vegetables (especially affordably). But that would open up a whole host of other issues that folks, and especially the Trump administration and Congress, doesn't want to deal with now.

[Blur4stuff]

I appreciate some of the points being made here, but I don't think it has anything to do with what's really going on.

This is just another way to funnel taxpayer money to specific companies/individuals. I'm sure a lot of SNAP money is spent at walmart, but it's also spent at a multitude of other places. I guarantee you there are some fat cats looking at those billions and wanting to have it all to themselves.

This is the perfect time to try this since we know Trump/republicans are all too happy to give anything and everything to those at the top.

[NED funded]

That would speak more to the need for accessible, low-cost healthy foods, especially in urban and rural areas where it's the hardest to find things like fresh fruits and vegetables (especially affordably). But that would open up a whole host of other issues that folks, and especially the Trump administration and Congress, doesn't want to deal with now.

The problem isn't lack of accessibility (in price and location).

http://www.slate.com/articles/life/f...y.single.html#


Relevant quote:

Unfortunately, more fresh food closer to home likely does nothing for folks at the bottom of the socioeconomic ladder. Obesity levels don’t drop when low-income city neighbourhoods have or get grocery stores. A 2011 study published in the Archives of Internal Medicine showed no connection between access to grocery stores and more healthful diets using 15 years’ worth of data from more than 5,000 people in five cities. One 2012 study showed that the local food environment did not influence the diet of middle-school children in California. Another 2012 study, published inSocial Science and Medicine, used national data on store availability and a multiyear study of grade-schoolers to show no connection between food environment and diet. And this month, a study in Health Affairs examined one of the Philadelphia grocery stores that opened with help from the Fresh Food Financing Initiative. The authors found that the store had no significant impact on reducing obesity or increasing daily fruit and vegetable consumption in the four years since it opened.

Poor people just like to eat junk food and soft drinks.

[Edge-]

The problem isn't lack of accessibility (in price and location).

http://www.slate.com/articles/life/f...y.single.html#


Relevant quote:



Poor people just like to eat junk food and soft drinks.

Interesting, thanks for sharing!

[Mormolyce]

Good thing you guys are tearing down that blasted nanny state. Kek.

I guess you didn't want to get rid of it, you wanted to make the "nanny" part literal.

[draynay]

Regulations are bad - lets regulate what people are allowed to eat.

[Breccia]

BTW what the hell happened to keeping the fed govt out of managing our lives.

The same thing that happened to "deficits are bad".

[Deleted]

As much I am a proponent of getting people to eat healthier, programs like that, are like shit to the flies that are low tier, inferior product dumping companies, and we have plenty of those around that you don't need to expand to get more of them.