Think you could live on a few pennies over $1 per meal every day?
Try this: take the Food Stamp challenge now being offered up in Texas by the Center for Public Policy Priorities (CPPP).
Proposed in Austin, Texas as a part of CPPP's campaign to see the Food Stamp program fully funded and Texas fully enrolled, the exercise is designed to demonstrate how hard is it to afford a healthy diet on Food Stamps.
U. S. Representative Lloyd Doggett and the Capital Area Food Bank are leading the way throughout this week (May 15 - Monday, May 21) by eating and drinking only what $21 will buy.
Why $21?
Because that is the average weekly Food Stamp benefit for Texans who qualify.
One dollar for each meal.
Yep, those "welfare recipients" are flat getting rich on the dole, huh?
Nationally, U.S. Representatives James McGovern and Jo Ann Emerson have posed the same challenge to all U.S. House members and citizens across the country.
The Food Stamp Challenge is part of a push to increase the value of the Food Stamp benefit as part of the 2007 Farm Bill, which Congress will begin debating at the end of this month. The Food Stamp program serves working families who simply don't earn enough to sustain themselves and their children.
To sign up for the challenge, visit http://srv.ezinedirector.net/?n=1704368&s=56544953.
See how you manage on just $1 a meal.
Where will you go to purchase your meals?
What will you buy? What will you eat?
Will you gain or lose weight?
How will you feel?
Try this: take the Food Stamp challenge now being offered up in Texas by the Center for Public Policy Priorities (CPPP).
Proposed in Austin, Texas as a part of CPPP's campaign to see the Food Stamp program fully funded and Texas fully enrolled, the exercise is designed to demonstrate how hard is it to afford a healthy diet on Food Stamps.
U. S. Representative Lloyd Doggett and the Capital Area Food Bank are leading the way throughout this week (May 15 - Monday, May 21) by eating and drinking only what $21 will buy.
Why $21?
Because that is the average weekly Food Stamp benefit for Texans who qualify.
One dollar for each meal.Yep, those "welfare recipients" are flat getting rich on the dole, huh?
Nationally, U.S. Representatives James McGovern and Jo Ann Emerson have posed the same challenge to all U.S. House members and citizens across the country.
The Food Stamp Challenge is part of a push to increase the value of the Food Stamp benefit as part of the 2007 Farm Bill, which Congress will begin debating at the end of this month. The Food Stamp program serves working families who simply don't earn enough to sustain themselves and their children.
To sign up for the challenge, visit http://srv.ezinedirector.net/?n=1704368&s=56544953.
See how you manage on just $1 a meal.
Where will you go to purchase your meals?
What will you buy? What will you eat?
Will you gain or lose weight?
How will you feel?
For millions of Americans food insecurity is a major challenge. As a nation, we should be doing better and we should be doing more to improve the life situation of our neighbors.
For more information about the Farm Bill and Food Stamps, visit http://srv.ezinedirector.net/?n=1704369&s=56544953.
15 comments:
I was under the impression that food stamps were merely a supplement and never intended to be the only source of the food budget, much in the same way as social security was never meant to be the sole income of seniors.
Someone can correct me if I'm wrong, but to reply to your comment, Chris, I believe that if you make any kind of money, you lose your food stamps. If that's the case, it *can't* be supplemental...because when you make a little money you aren't allowed to have the "supplemental" food. So it's either some food with no income or no food with some income.
I believe it's the same with Social Security. You can only make up to a certain amount before they withdraw it...but it only pays about $500/month...which doesn't even pay for a month's rent. On the other hand, if you're saying seniors should have saved their money over the years so that social security is only a supplement, you once again have to go back to the fact that many people are just surviving on low-paying jobs. They are not making near enough to put back in savings for a hefty retirement with a nice social security supplement...but they are working.
I have a question about this- if it is $21 per person per week, then a mom with three kids would get $84 per week for groceries right? I spend about that much per week on groceries for me, my husband, and our two children, and we eat pretty well. We rarely eat out, so that money is spent to feed us at home for the week. $21 per week sounds like so little, but it seems that the more people in the household, it adds together to make a good sum of money to spend on groceries. What am I missing?
It also depends where you live. There is only one major grocery store in all of South Dallas. $21 does not go too far when you are at a gas station or the local Food Mart.
Janet,
I will do more research on this but I believe you are allowed some income and still get food stamps.
As to social security,it depends on your work history. For any kind of decent salary over a lifetime, one should draw about $1400-1700 per month. It's more if you wait until 65. That is not the max. either. For higher incomes it is more.
Also, they cannot withdraw it above a certain income. Even wealthy people can draw SS if they paid into the system.
Here's some more info on food stamps. According to CPPP:
Families must have income below 130% of the federal poverty level to qualify ($1,799 per month for a family of three in 2007).
Roughly 2.3 million Texans (more than the entire population of Houston) rely on Food Stamps to help them purchase a nutritionally adequate diet.
Statewide, 25% of Texas children receive food stamps. Nationally, roughly half of all Americans between the ages of 20 and 65 will use Food Stamps at some point in their lives when they fall on hard times.
More info at:
http://www.cppp.org/research.php?aid=671
and
http://www.cppp.org/research.php?aid=674
Thanks for the posts. Several questions. The allocation of Food Stamps is adjusted for assets--the more you have, the smaller your alotment.
It is intended to be a supplemental food program. The point of this campaign is to point out that the US government is giving just a little help and more is needed.
Becky, if you can feed your family of 4 on $4.00 a meal, you need to publish a cookbook! Just kidding--but we would like to see your meal plans!
The point here is that lots of people are struggling with food issues and our current obesity epidemic is affected by the dietary plight of many low-income persons.
well, there are several factors regarding my ability to feed the family on only $85 (approx) a week. First of all I have access to a really good grocery store. I use the sale ad AND lots of coupons when I plan my meals for the week. Also, when you think about it, my kids can eat off an entire package of bagels for a week's worth of breakfast. If the bagels cost $3 then all the other mornings that they eat from that package, the $2 per meal for breakfast actually can be applied to lunch or dinner. That is one example of how thinking in terms of $4 per meal can be slightly misleading. Of course, my kids are only 4 and 2 (I didn't count the baby since he doesn't eat purchased food yet.) If my kids were older and ate larger amounts, I would have trouble staying within that budget. Larry- thanks for taking time to address our questions. I am not trying to dispute the fact that it would be very difficult to live using food stamps. Although I try to keep my grocery bill low, I DO have the luxury of it not really mattering to us financially if I go over at any point and time. I can't imagine the pressure of having a small set amount week after week that makes meal times a real anxiety and difficulty.
Becky, thanks for the insights!
This was discussed this morning on CNN. A member of the House of Representatives was telling what he had purchased with his $21. Dairy and produce had been omitted. They also discussed the lack of protein in his purchases. He pointed out that we also need to remember that normally the people that use food stamps don't have the luxury of being able to shop at discount stores likes Sam's or Costco because they can't afford the membership fees. (They can't usually purchase in bulk either.) Just something else to think about on this subject.
This post reminded me of several trips to the grocery where the person in front of me paid with food stamps while their clothes were significantly more expensive than mine.
I imagine, though I can't say for sure, that if you qualify for food stamps, you also qualify for section 8 or public housing, as well as welfare and government health care.
Not saying its not hard being poor, but the government spends a LOT of money on entitlements. Should they just pay for everything for everyone? I mean, at some point, this does become socialism. And what happens when those paying all the taxes decide they are sick of it? Tyranny.
imusthatethepoor, thanks for your post. I must say I don't like your username much.
Isolated, random antecdotal illustrations don't help much. Sort of like the urban myth of Ronald Reagan's "welfare queen and Cadillac." Come down to my shop sometime and you'll see the statistical reality in full view.
As to the US being in danger of socialism, I must say that is a real laugher.
So Larry, what would you say if ceos and business leaders slowly retired from production, when taxes became such a burden that they it was no longer worth their time to continue operating? They will be able to provide for themselves, but those of us who aren't really wealthy will be screwed.
I understand your desire to get aid where it needs to go. Its a noble one. But government's main goal is not to provide food clothing and shelter for everyone in the country. Or anyone for that matter. Government exists so that we can be the Kingdom of God. Government is part of the fallen powers and it is not redeemable. Can we try and make it more Christian? Sure. But Jesus never took from some to give to others. He encouraged people to give what they have. Giving and taking aren't the same thing.
And by the way, just because something is antedotal doesn't mean there isn't truth involved. And you didn't even address the earnings of people combined welfare, medical coverage, food stamps, etc. Could you do a little math for us and let us know how much people get with those services combined?
imusthatethepoor, thanks for your post.
Next week, when I am back at my office, I will gladly run some numbers for you that reflect real life, majority scenarios. You will be surprised.
For one thing, since the 1980s, and then again in 1996, the federal government's commitment to providing for the poor has diminished greatly. But, I'll get to that when I share some numbers with you. No one is getting rich or doing so well on government assistance--but then, they never have.
You mention the "kingdom of God." Interesting. Tomorrow when you go to church, listen and ask some questions. As many poor people as there are in the nation--with the numbers growing--I assume you will hear a lot about the poor and the church's responsibility to engage and relieve their plight. After all, your post implies that the church is to take care of these problems. Listen to see if the poor or even mentioned.
Ask how much your church has budgeted for engaging the poor to help them out of poverty. I'll be interested in what you find out.
Your politics are obviously libertarian to the extreme. You assume that everyone agrees with your understanding of the role of government. I can assure they don't. Our government can be whatever we make it.
As to corporations going out of business, I am smiling given the growing gap betweeen rich and poor and in view of Wall Street and the current all-time high of the stock market. Disagree with me all you want, but don't distort the facts of life in America today.
I never said that people are getting rich off of government aid. That's definitely putting words in my mouth.
What I was trying to point out was that food stamps are not the only thing people get from the government. There is a lot of aid paid out to people, and a portion of that is handed out fraudulently. That is also a fact that cannot be denied.
I think your approach here hurts your case rather than helps it. While Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, et al talk about welfare queens and people ripping off the government, and make the case that these people are lazy and live off the governments dole, which is of course hyperbole, you exaggerate (or mislead) in order to push your point of view as well. Just like Becky said, 21 dollars a week per person is doable. Its tougher in the inner city when you don't have access to a wal mart super center, but by just pointing out that the person gets one dollar per meal, and not pointing out that a family of four gets 84 dollars a week to eat and that they get welfare payments, and housing, and health care, you hurt your cause. Exaggeration works for a bit, but when people realize that they aren't being presented a completely accurate picture, they are likely to reject much of what you have to say. Whether they should do that or not is another topic.
I really would like to see the numbers that you pull up.
I think my biggest problem with the welfare system is not the system in and of itself, but that its used by politicians to ensure their re election. Whether its Democrats trying to get more money for their constituents in poor communities or Republicans trying to get corporate welfare to keep business in their community. The reason I think this type of government spending is bad is because I think it will end with the ultimate demise of our country. Granted, the Kingdom of God will continue as it has for the last two thousand years, and sometimes I wonder if we'd end up getting off our behinds and being true disciples of Christ when we don't live in such a cushy environment. That being said, I would prefer that my family live in a free society.
Sorry I've rambled a little bit.
Post a Comment