President Trump Proposes Major Changes in Food Assistance Programs

[Johnnny5]

I understand the majority of you despise President Trump and will argue against anything that comes out of his administration. That said, his latest proposal appears to be worthy of consideration.

https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/t...133500122.html


I remember bringing this up on a thread in the old forum, so I was excited to see the issue of food benefits being tackled and would support some of these proposed changes [[Only if they end improving the quality of the goods/service of those that rely on food assistance AND lower the costs).

What does everyone else think? Is such a drastic change back to direct government supplied benefits worth considering? Good? Bad? What could be done to ensure that this isn't just a slashing of benefits for the cost savings alone ?

Some of the possible benefits I could think of.

1.The most obvious is the real possibility of reducing the high costs, waste and corruption that is prevalent in the current EBT based assistance programs. Ending the ridiculousness of $4 party store cans of beans and the horse trading of EBT benefits for cash/non permissible purchases.
2. Improvements in the nutritional value of the food being provided. Empty calories and other "Junk foods" could simply be excluded or at least limited.
3. Better access for those in food deserts such as struggling urban and rural areas.
4. Service for those that may be disabled, elderly or simply without transportation.
5. Slightly odd, but a lot more packages for the struggling United States Postal Service.

Possible downsides to returning to government provided food basics.

1.Major financial hit to existing retailers in areas with high food assistance rates.
2.Inability to provide fresh/perishable items [[Although I think that could be overcome eventually).
3.Issues for those on restricted diets if choices are limited.
4.Delivery issues. Lost/damaged/stolen are serious issues when one is relying on their meals to be delivered.

[Zacha341]

^^^ To 'edit' a Post title:

Go to 'Edit Post' just as you would for a typo in the body of the post, then go to 'Advanced' and then you can see the Post Title to change or edit it.

[Jimaz]

*** If someone could edit the typo in the title I would greatly appreciate it....

You can do that yourself by clicking "Edit Post," "Go Advanced," editing the "Title" field then clicking "Save Changes."

[Johnnny5]

^^^ Fixed. Thanks!

[Richard]

You can already order with EBT online for delivery,most states have already implemented those below the age of 54 must provide proof of either looking for work,working the minimum of 20 hours per week or performing 20 hours of community service.If one is able and not disabled etc.

Because of lack of mass transit some are forced to purchase from the convenience store at higher prices,but yes they are also buying a lot of junk food which should really not be allowed but is hard to track.

[Meddle]

Donnie T's a blithering idiot in every regard.

That said, if you look at the USDA site that outlines the program, you'll see why excluding certain items is impractical. They use the example of what some call 'luxury foods' and cite things like shrimp and lobster. They state that the costs involved for administration to the USDA, the states and even the stores would be too cumbersome.

Who is to decide what is a 'luxury food'?

Personally, I feel shrimp and lobster are better for a person than ground beef even if more expensive.

If you decide to limit high sugar items, does that include ice cream? Ice milk? Frozen yogurt? Sherbet?

[Richard]

I grew up in a family of six kids,we never had lobster,shrimp etc.

Ice cream was a treat,no soda [[pop),I see 8 yo kids handing over the card to buy chips and a soda,I had a roommate that used to brag about buying some kind of Italian meat at $30 a pound because it was free.

The old days it was a block of cheese and something else,the programs were not intended for a lifelong career.

[Zacha341]

This is how it is dem/repub - right/left aside:

When you're funding thru your taxes programs such as EBT shopping for your groceries, making good decisions about your purchase ala your budget and or health and you see someone making purchases that are exorbitant, you notice.

When you are using your own money, it's a different playing field.

As a rule, I avoid heavily based EBT Based Grocers. The food at these places if often 20%+ higher when the percent of EBT shopper ration is high. I'm not certain why. I just know I cannot afford those price per my budget per my own income. I've tried it, and it just doe not work for my income.

[Meddle]

As a rule I avoid heavily based EBT Based Grocers. The food at these places if often 20%+ higher when the percent of EBT shopper ration is high. I am not certain why.

Smaller neighborhood stores don't have the buying volume/power of the larger chain stores.

[Zacha341]

I mean many of the larger ones as well.

Smaller neighborhood stores don't have the buying volume/power of the larger chain stores.

[Richard]

Wally World is odd for that around me,the super center located in the nicer part persay sells the product in smaller packages verses the other one that is more ebt orientated,8 o'clock beans 16 oz $11 in the other one ebt,32 oz $12.

It used to be really noticeable with the 20% over in lower income ereas,maybe for loss prevention but a stink was raised so I am thinking that was the answer,the non ebt dependent stores use smaller packaging at the same price to make up for the loss,so who is actually paying for the loss prevention.

There used to be a large supermarket by me and people used to brag how you could stuff 5 steaks down your pants or grab a 12 pack and walk.They closed it down.

In fairness they have been cracking down on the c stores and fraud big time but if you know the owner you can still buy cigs and beer on ebt,maybe 20% of the market at best,which is not bad considering.

I do not think the fraud is near what it was before and it is going to expected considering how many the program serves,so a lot of the ruckus is a bit political.

With technology and lack of transportation in a lot of ereas I can see Internet ordering and delivery,I shop once a month I cannot deal with the people that like to block the isle while having a conversation and it really makes no sense to make 15 trips a month for vittles.

[Bigb23]

Who is to decide what is a 'luxury food'?

Personally, I feel shrimp and lobster are better for a person than ground beef even if more expensive.

If you decide to limit high sugar items, does that include ice cream? Ice milk? Frozen yogurt? Sherbet?

This comes up every few years or so, where SOMEBODY ahead of you in line paid for Lobster, Prime Rib, etc. with a bridge card and left into their brand new Cadillac wearing furs. Read/Google about the original welfare queen on Salon.com
One professional smeared an entire generation

[Meddle]

^^^ Fixed. Thanks!

You spelled Ignorant Hateful Buffoon wrong at the beginning of the thread title.

[Zacha341]

The person making the grocery purchase SHOULD know the difference between luxury and proper purchase management. They should know often the EBT amount is not enough, and there are 30-31 days in a month.

Yeah, of course the 'welfare' queen replete with Cadillac and fur is a bit of a caricature. Got that! But when you're in NEED of assistance [[as defined by applying for and receiving a Bridge EBT card), it's only wise to spend in a manner that allows you to spread the said funds effectively.

Lower priced 'multiple' food items instead of costly select items such as shrimp, crab, high end meats etc. help the EBT allotment stretch further over the month. Why's this so complex?

I have a friend who was disabled for a time. He had to plan, shop and cook as he could to make his EBT card amount last across the ENTIRE month, not just for a few high end meals over a weekend!

That's good stewardship.

[Meddle]

^^ Thing is, if you manage it right [[just like any budget), you can afford to splurge once a year or so for a special meal/treat and have some shrimp or crab for New Years or an Anniversary.

[Zacha341]

^^^ Of course, but that's not the crucial issue at large.

Talk to any K12 teacher or those who treat patients, etc in the larger urban settings. They see the kids that are not eating well. Particularly towards the middle and end of the month.

[Richard]

^^ Thing is, if you manage it right [[just like any budget), you can afford to splurge once a year or so for a special meal/treat and have some shrimp or crab for New Years or an Anniversary.

When the Chicago school system shut down for a snow emergency they said 75% of the children relied on the school lunch program for their only meals.

I prepare and cook my meals and it costs me $2.50 a meal [[dinner)
my last red lobster meal which did not include lobster cost $45 that was 18 days of meals.

Its almost as bad when people tell me,you have restaurants,you can go eat there for free,like as if everybody donates ingredients.

Do you feel it is prudent to be buying steak while your child's meal is provided by the school?

I would bet if the headline read Hilliary cancels the ebt program and beats children when they arrive for school it would be all roses.

It is funny how the previous presidents wife introduced healthy meals or her version of,into the school lunch program it was considered a class act,but when the currant president mentions It the resistance claims it to be a ignorant hateful buffoon move.

So once again the people are just pawns on the chess board.

Stop trying to buy people for votes,a hand up and not a hand out,try giving them a reason not to need ebt,the socialist programs do not work in any country.

But that is the alt dem way,keep people down so when you throw them a bone they are grateful.

Ever watch the show " The last ship" where people were loaded into boxcars and shipped to the factory for a 16 hour shift for a meal.

Lol you can call him a buffoon all you want but at the end of the day he is the president of the United States and your not.

[Zacha341]

Reform [[of some kind) was coming and it's perfect *sarcasm* that it occur under the repubs so we can focus on how they always take things away [[and the dems give things) instead of the core problem.

Food in boxes delivered to the door though? What mail carrier will do that well? What bloated bureaucracy will that create??

[Meddle]

What bloated bureaucracy will that create??

One that directly benefits companies owned by King Don and his cronies. Crooked as sin, through to the core.

[Richard]

The previous administration toyed with the idea of turning over government logistics to Wal-Mart,but as of now you can already order home delivery and pay with ebt.

I think what is being suggested is leaning towards exempting things from the program like soda and patato chips or junk food related.

In relation to the school lunch aspect,a dem congressman is proposing to pay an additional $150 a month in cash to parents in the off school months,we know how well that would work.

[Dumpling]

Per se, shipping a fraction of EBT groceries by box COULD be
an improved situation for some EBT cardholders. For example,
some persons do have special dietary needs and their special
foods may be costly, limited, or unavailable at stores that are
near them. Economies of scale can apply. One can think Trader
Joe's or Aldi's though a bit less upscale. In fact this project
could be done in cooperation with Trader Joe's or Aldi's or
similar.

However, here are some previous experiences with government
food assistance: it can be basic farina and beans, which is what
the Focus: HOPE food warehouses were stocking. It was survival
rations, not what consumers with choices tend to buy in grocery
stores. It can be government cheese. Being a Generous Motors
family we did not get this...however my father in [[common) law
rented a family house out and did receive government cheese
in lieu of cash rent. It was served at a meal at which I was
a guest. Can I put ? Government cheese is not funny, it was
a HUGE brick of Velveeta-like cheese but not as tasty as Velveeta,
but being served it at the in-laws was funny.

Then there is the whole matter of privatized food service food
served at schools and prisons - it could include processed meat
products from remnant scraps or lower quality items or agricultural
surplus. The focus is taking advantage of a captive market
and keeping food provision costs at their lowest, not what
would be best for the recipients in terms of their health and
enjoyment.

[Zacha341]

I remember talk of government cheese and the like. This whole food 'prescription' style change isn't going to be met with joy.

Especially with a republican president at the helm, especially Trump.

If the dems were in charge it could be said they were 'acting' like repub/ right-wingers at least.

But as I said some kind of reform was coming.

[Jimaz]

...
Then there is the whole matter of privatized food service food
served at schools and prisons - it could include processed meat
products from remnant scraps or lower quality items or agricultural surplus. The focus is taking advantage of a captive market and keeping food provision costs at their lowest, not what would be best for the recipients in terms of their health and enjoyment.

Incidentally, there was a recent story saying that Michigan is abandoning their experiment with privatized food for prisons. The change even had Snyder's blessing. He said something like it just wasn't cost effective after all the problems were accounted for.

I'll tip my hat to Snyder for that one but I'll give a much deeper bow to those who knew it wouldn't work in the first place.

[Johnnny5]

Incidentally, there was a recent story saying that Michigan is abandoning their experiment with privatized food for prisons. The change even had Snyder's blessing. He said something like it just wasn't cost effective after all the problems were accounted for.

I'll tip my hat to Snyder for that one but I'll give a much deeper bow to those who knew it wouldn't work in the first place.

So, should we do the same thing for the general food assistance program? After all, the move from the government directly supplying food to those in need to our current EBT based program was also privatization.

[Johnnny5]

Donnie T's a blithering idiot in every regard.

That said, if you look at the USDA site that outlines the program, you'll see why excluding certain items is impractical. They use the example of what some call 'luxury foods' and cite things like shrimp and lobster. They state that the costs involved for administration to the USDA, the states and even the stores would be too cumbersome.

Who is to decide what is a 'luxury food'?

Personally, I feel shrimp and lobster are better for a person than ground beef even if more expensive.

If you decide to limit high sugar items, does that include ice cream? Ice milk? Frozen yogurt? Sherbet?

Luxury items such as ice cream, lobster, frozen yogurt and sherbet should NOT even be an option to purchase with an EBT card. I'm not by any means opposed to those with low incomes getting to enjoy foods like that, but it's not appropriate to be buying them with taxpayer dollars. These programs were meant to fulfill basic nutritional needs, not desires.