A small trip to the grocery...

[loosecannon]

It isn't silly, it is sensible.

It would deliver far more benefit for a far smaller expense.

So what is you angle?

BTW, who said anything about vouchers? A friend of mine calculated that it would cost less to give ALL Americans free food courtesy of the USDA who acquired said food at subsidized commodity prices than it would to continue the food stamp program. A simple pallet of rice, beans etc in front of every grocery store, all free.

The only caveat was that folks would use this free food to feed livestock if there were no safeguards.

 

[Luissa]

You have been watching Zombieland too much.

 

[antagon]

c'mon, you didn't take a guess.

my angle is that we're a capitalist country, and having tried all what you've suggested, the government realized that maybe the ol' wealth of nations would benefit more efficiently from the invisible hand.

you've got to pay closer attention at present and to history if you think entitlements are just about the subsistence of the entitled, cannon. look at the width of the poor in this country. do you think this is about starvation and nutrition, buddy?

 

[xotoxi]

Turned out to be just that. A small trip.

I bought some twinkies and shit, opened up a 20oz soda that I got out of the cooler because I was thirsty, paid for my items, minded my own fucking business and didn't give a fuck about what anyone else was doing, and went home.

I thought some people might care though, so I started a thread about it.

I need more information.

1. What kind of soda?
2. Did you consider anything else besides a Twinkie...specifically a Ho-Ho?
3. Why did you buy shit? Did you actually pay money for feces?

 

[Luissa]

And it is not soda, it is POP! sheesh

 

[xotoxi]

And it is not soda, it is POP! sheesh

No. It's a carbonated liquid treat.

 

[loosecannon]

c'mon, you didn't take a guess.

my angle is that we're a capitalist country, and having tried all what you've suggested, the government realized that maybe the ol' wealth of nations would benefit more efficiently from the invisible hand.

you've got to pay closer attention at present and to history if you think entitlements are just about the subsistence of the entitled, cannon. look at the width of the poor in this country. do you think this is about starvation and nutrition, buddy?

look at the width of the poor in this country

Priceless! Kudos.

Capitalism can't provide food subsidies to the poor as efficiently as a government that is already subsidizing agriculture can.


Even in Mexico tortillas and subway are both subsidized and cheaper than dirt.

Poor people gotta eat, either make it so for 1/10th the costs of food stamps or just eliminate the program and make em starve.

Stop making the program a subsidy whose main beneficiary is the food processing/junk food industry.

 

[Dr.House]

Many people are curious about Paulie's storecapades....

 

[xotoxi]

Many people are curious about Paulie's storecapades....

That is the main reason that I log into USMB daily.

Unfortunately, he does not post much about his quests to the store as he holds them close to his heart.

When he shares, it really makes my day special.

 

[antagon]

c'mon, you didn't take a guess.

my angle is that we're a capitalist country, and having tried all what you've suggested, the government realized that maybe the ol' wealth of nations would benefit more efficiently from the invisible hand.

you've got to pay closer attention at present and to history if you think entitlements are just about the subsistence of the entitled, cannon. look at the width of the poor in this country. do you think this is about starvation and nutrition, buddy?

look at the width of the poor in this country

Priceless! Kudos.

Capitalism can't provide food subsidies to the poor as efficiently as a government that is already subsidizing agriculture can.


Even in Mexico tortillas and subway are both subsidized and cheaper than dirt.

Poor people gotta eat, either make it so for 1/10th the costs of food stamps or just eliminate the program and make em starve.

Stop making the program a subsidy whose main beneficiary is the food processing/junk food industry.

no, cannon. deflation of foodstuffs is not the goal either. racking up reasons why mexico is a shithole should inform that there is something to learn from rather than criticize. the US wrote a masterclass on creating a consumer economy through a variety of demand-bolstering policies. have a seat and study the curriculum.

all of this cost which you are obsessed with is spent in the US economy, and trickles up through our job market and into the hands of tax-paying junk-food (and not so junk-food) industrialists and grocery merchandisers. plenty to find fault about this, but i'll ride my money on it over communism to which you attribute efficiency.

 

[CrimsonWhite]

And it is not soda, it is POP! sheesh

No, it is not pop. It is coke.

 

[loosecannon]

c'mon, you didn't take a guess.

my angle is that we're a capitalist country, and having tried all what you've suggested, the government realized that maybe the ol' wealth of nations would benefit more efficiently from the invisible hand.

you've got to pay closer attention at present and to history if you think entitlements are just about the subsistence of the entitled, cannon. look at the width of the poor in this country. do you think this is about starvation and nutrition, buddy?

look at the width of the poor in this country

Priceless! Kudos.

Capitalism can't provide food subsidies to the poor as efficiently as a government that is already subsidizing agriculture can.


Even in Mexico tortillas and subway are both subsidized and cheaper than dirt.

Poor people gotta eat, either make it so for 1/10th the costs of food stamps or just eliminate the program and make em starve.

Stop making the program a subsidy whose main beneficiary is the food processing/junk food industry.

no, cannon. deflation of foodstuffs is not the goal either. racking up reasons why mexico is a shithole should inform that there is something to learn from rather than criticize. the US wrote a masterclass on creating a consumer economy through a variety of demand-bolstering policies. have a seat and study the curriculum.

all of this cost which you are obsessed with is spent in the US economy, and trickles up through our job market and into the hands of tax-paying junk-food (and not so junk-food) industrialists and grocery merchandisers. plenty to find fault about this, but i'll ride my money on it over communism to which you attribute efficiency.

LMAO! Cool, Comrade.

But I prefer to get the biggest bang for my tax buck and fuck the food denourishing industry that wants a free subsidy for (less than) nothing.

If it costs less and provides more to give away free food rather than food stamps, DO IT!

Next!

Not trying to grind your ass but if past policy is any basis for predicting future results than we should avoid past policy at all costs!

 

[antagon]

cannon, what would make you want to emulate the failed and lessor efficient economies on the planet whose obsession with public finance overruled the performance of the wider economy? this should work the other way around. empirically, this does work the other way around. when you say costs less, provides more, what do you mean by 'provides more'? more food?

again, if you believe that welfare, social housing, social security, unemployment benefits, public pensions, progressive taxation, labor standards and foodstamps are acts of charity, then you haven't been paying attention in school and to how the world's noteworthy economies function.

do you realize that you have proposed 'past policy' yourself?

 

[Sunshine]

Which is all well and good, because you paid for it with your money. You didn't buy it with someone else's money.

Personally, I think twinkies are for twinkies. YMMV. I prefer Cliff Bars.

I'm not exactly the biggest proponent of the food stamp program, but you do realize that a great many people who receive them have also paid their fair share of taxes as well, and as such, the money they receive in food stamp funds can be considered THEIR money as well?

I don't agree with MOST of what my tax dollars go to these days. If I can get some of that back in the form of food money to feed my family, I wouldn't feel all that fucking bad about it.

The problem in a nutshell is the food stamp program itself. It allows you to buy value added, nutrition reduced processed food with stamps and is there fore cataclysmically inefficient.

It would be far cheaper and far more effective to just distribute actual food, like rice, beans, flour etc. Even cheese, bacon and steak would give a bigger bang for the buck.

The government already subsidizes agriculture. Just restructure the subsidy so the government gets agricultural goods at real commodity prices and then distributes it on an industrial scale.

Rather than pay farmers not to grow crops and all.

But Americans never do things sensibly.

Commodities once were distributed to the poor. (I'm guessing most on here are not old enough to remember that as I am.) That program was determined to be grossly inefficient. Enter the food stamp program.

 

[Paulie]

And it is not soda, it is POP! sheesh

No, it is not pop. It is coke.

Mountain Dew, Sprite, Grape Soda, Tahitian Treat...it's all coke

@ Tox - 'and shit' was just a generic filler to mention that there were in fact other items along with the twinkies that were purchased, but not important enough to be named. No ho-ho's, but I suppose I can mention the Moon Pies I did buy. Those are breakfast, lunch, and dinner for the family.

But since I didn't buy it on food stamps, it's ok.

 

[Ravi]

Which is all well and good, because you paid for it with your money. You didn't buy it with someone else's money.

Personally, I think twinkies are for twinkies. YMMV. I prefer Cliff Bars.

I'm not exactly the biggest proponent of the food stamp program, but you do realize that a great many people who receive them have also paid their fair share of taxes as well, and as such, the money they receive in food stamp funds can be considered THEIR money as well?

I don't agree with MOST of what my tax dollars go to these days. If I can get some of that back in the form of food money to feed my family, I wouldn't feel all that fucking bad about it.

The problem in a nutshell is the food stamp program itself. It allows you to buy value added, nutrition reduced processed food with stamps and is there fore cataclysmically inefficient.

It would be far cheaper and far more effective to just distribute actual food, like rice, beans, flour etc. Even cheese, bacon and steak would give a bigger bang for the buck.

The government already subsidizes agriculture. Just restructure the subsidy so the government gets agricultural goods at real commodity prices and then distributes it on an industrial scale.

Rather than pay farmers not to grow crops and all.

But Americans never do things sensibly.

My thought exactly. And along with distributing healthy food, enroll people in cooking and budgeting classes.

 

[Paulie]

I'm not exactly the biggest proponent of the food stamp program, but you do realize that a great many people who receive them have also paid their fair share of taxes as well, and as such, the money they receive in food stamp funds can be considered THEIR money as well?

I don't agree with MOST of what my tax dollars go to these days. If I can get some of that back in the form of food money to feed my family, I wouldn't feel all that fucking bad about it.

The problem in a nutshell is the food stamp program itself. It allows you to buy value added, nutrition reduced processed food with stamps and is there fore cataclysmically inefficient.

It would be far cheaper and far more effective to just distribute actual food, like rice, beans, flour etc. Even cheese, bacon and steak would give a bigger bang for the buck.

The government already subsidizes agriculture. Just restructure the subsidy so the government gets agricultural goods at real commodity prices and then distributes it on an industrial scale.

Rather than pay farmers not to grow crops and all.

But Americans never do things sensibly.

My thought exactly. And along with distributing healthy food, enroll people in cooking and budgeting classes.

And along with enrolling people in cooking and budgeting classes, send government officials out to everyone's home for mandatory monthly inspections of how the progress is going with the cooking and budgeting.

If cholesterol levels, body weights, etc, aren't getting up to strictly set standards, and the personal balance sheets aren't improving, I recommend a harsh fine in the thousands for the first offense.

 

[Ravi]

I wouldn't take it to that extreme. If the food assistance program is meant to help people, why not actually make it help them?

You don't like that idea...how about something like meals on wheels instead?

 

[Paulie]

I wouldn't take it to that extreme. If the food assistance program is meant to help people, why not actually make it help them?

You don't like that idea...how about something like meals on wheels instead?

I was just being sarcastic, really. You know I'd never actually advocate government officials coming to people's houses to inspect behavior.

 

[antagon]

The problem in a nutshell is the food stamp program itself. It allows you to buy value added, nutrition reduced processed food with stamps and is there fore cataclysmically inefficient.

It would be far cheaper and far more effective to just distribute actual food, like rice, beans, flour etc. Even cheese, bacon and steak would give a bigger bang for the buck.

The government already subsidizes agriculture. Just restructure the subsidy so the government gets agricultural goods at real commodity prices and then distributes it on an industrial scale.

Rather than pay farmers not to grow crops and all.

But Americans never do things sensibly.

My thought exactly. And along with distributing healthy food, enroll people in cooking and budgeting classes.

And along with enrolling people in cooking and budgeting classes, send government officials out to everyone's home for mandatory monthly inspections of how the progress is going with the cooking and budgeting.

If cholesterol levels, body weights, etc, aren't getting up to strictly set standards, and the personal balance sheets aren't improving, I recommend a harsh fine in the thousands for the first offense.

clearly the solution is just rounding everyone up who can't prove they're not poor and sending them off to prison work camps. think of the efficiency! all you'll have to feed them is water and cream-o-wheat with vitamins crushed up in it. maybe throw in some beef or chicken stock cubes on sundays.