"no organic foods, no fresh vegetables, we were looking for the cheapest of everything," mcgovern said in an interview with the washington post at a washington supermarket. "we got spaghetti and hamburger meat that was high in fat—the fattiest meat on the shelf. i have high cholesterol and always try to get the leanest, but it's expensive. it's almost impossible to make healthy choices on a food stamp diet."
...
even for those people who are not seeing eroding benefits over time, the reality is “there are health consequences” to living on such a limited budget for more than a few days. people on food stamps are often forced to choose foods with higher fat, breads that are not whole grain and processed foods with unhealthy levels of sodium and sugar—a dangerous combination for people prone to diabetes, heart disease or other diet-related health problems. “living (on $21 a week) for a week is different from living on it for six months,” weill said.
...
that is why more people should demand to know why—in a year in which we are projected to give the wealthiest 1 percent of the nation some $56.5 billion in tax breaks, just to cite one example of the national priorities set by president bush—we can’t do better than an average of $21 a week to ensure that our fellow americans can have three decent meals a day.
public progams are quite effective at reducing poverty in the us. there are numerous posters on these forums who took advantage of the opportunity that these programs represent to work their way into the middle class.
public benefit programs reduced the number of poor americans by 27 million people in 2003, from 58 million to 31 million. the 27 million people removed from poverty included 14 million elderly people and nearly 5 million children. of this 27 million, nearly 11 million were lifted out of poverty by means-tested benefits alone.
public benefit programs markedly reduced the severity of poverty for those who remained poor, increasing their average disposable income in 2003 from 29 percent of the poverty line to 57 percent of the poverty line.
if we look at the elderly, public benefit programs reduced the number of seniors living in poverty in 2003 by 14 million — more than 80 percent — and lifted the disposable income of those remaining in poverty from an average of just 8 percent of the poverty line to 62 percent of the poverty line. in addition, medicare and medicaid combined to provide health insurance for virtually all of the 35 million americans age 65 and older.
if we look at children, public benefit programs lifted nearly one of every three otherwise-poor children above the poverty line in 2003.
public health insurance programs reduce the ranks of the uninsured by tens of millions.
however, most other western industrialized nations have more effective anti-poverty policies — and lower poverty rates — than the united states, especially for children. research shows that, due in large part to the relative weakness of u.s. benefit programs, the lowest-income children in the united states have lower incomes than their counterparts in other western industrialized nations such as canada, germany, belgium, and the netherlands. for example, the lowest-income 25 percent of children in the united states are poorer than the lowest-income 25 percent of children in canada.
in the 1960s, before the food stamp program was established as a nationwide program, various studies found severe hunger to be a significant problem in the united states. today, severe hunger has become relatively rare. rebecca blank, dean of the ford school of public policy at the university of michigan, has observed that “evidence of severe malnutrition-related health problems has almost disappeared in this country. the primary reason is food stamps.”
...
a large body of research has consistently found that wic contributes to healthier births, including a reduction in the incidence of low birthweight. infants born with low birthweight are more likely to have serious short- and long-term health problems.
a gao analysis estimated that each $1 spent on wic for pregnant women generated $2.89 in health care savings during the first year after the birth of the child and $3.50 in savings over 18 years.
children who participate in the school lunch program consume more protein, vitamin b12, riboflavin, calcium, magnesium, phosphorus, zinc, and fiber at lunch — and less added sugar — than children who do not eat school lunches.
eating breakfast has been shown to have a positive impact on a child’s cognitive development and academic performance. low-income children are more likely to eat a more adequate breakfast if the school breakfast program is available.
see http://www.stateofworkingamerica.org/news/swa06facts-income_mobility-final.pdf for a discussion of economic mobility in the us. as wage growth has slowed since 1980 this has in effect pushed more people into poverty. this does not reflect a failure of the safety net rather it reflects a deliberate low wage policy pursued by a series of conservative administrations. the minimum wage is at its lowest point in over 40 years.
while it is quite admirable that you had a lawn mower business as a teenager the reality is that you received direct benefit from a variety of social programs that helped set the stage for you working your way out of poverty. (public school system, financial aids for college, public funding of the college that you attended, are just a few examples off the top of my head.)
I'm not trying to bash people receiving food stamps, however, I live in an area where a disproportinate number of people are receiving government assistance. The grocery stores are mowed down the day people receive their food stamps. You can spot a food stamp buyer in our stores...they always have the overly filled carts, sometimes two.
These folks also make extremely poor choices. I see their carts filled with only the top brands of food, tons of frozen dinners, individual packages of chips instead of the cheaper large bags. They can also buy professionally decorated birthday cakes with food stamps for $30 in stamps rather than taking the time to make one for about $5. Tons of expensive, pre-prepared snack foods, instead of making your own.
I'm buying ground beef, they are buying steaks. The government website may say $80 per person, but I guarantee people are getting way more than that.
Specializes in Cardiac Surg, IR, Peds ICU, Emergency.
Public progams are quite effective at reducing poverty in the US. There are numerous posters on these forums who took advantage of the opportunity that these programs represent to work their way into the middle class.
See http://www.stateofworkingamerica.org/news/SWA06Facts-Income_Mobility-final.pdf for a discussion of economic mobility in the US. As wage growth has slowed since 1980 this has in effect pushed more people into poverty. This does not reflect a failure of the safety net rather it reflects a deliberate low wage policy pursued by a series of conservative administrations. The minimum wage is at its lowest point in over 40 years.
While it is quite admirable that you had a lawn mower business as a teenager the reality is that you received direct benefit from a variety of social programs that helped set the stage for you working your way out of poverty. (Public school system, Financial aids for college, Public funding of the college that you attended, are just a few examples off the top of my head.)
No argument, but I received ZERO in welfare and food stamps.
I thought you started this thread to talk about fresh veggies. No surprise that it morphs into a justification for useless social program by blending in academic money.
I also recieved zero financial aid for college; I made too much money as a student to qualify, and I preferred it that way. In hindsight, I would've preferred to complete my undergrad at a school like Grove City or Hillsdale which uses zero dollars of public money. Regardless, I never said that public funding of higher education was an improper handout; these people are working toward a higher goal...this is something to be supported.
Public education also requires our funds, but it has become bastardized by champions of worthless social ideas who then interfere with people's ability to CHOOSE to pull their kids from these overpriced and underproductive institutions to put them in schools that provide a good education.
It is interesting to read all of the commentary on this topic.
I live in NYC and you can't feed a family on $21.00 per week.
The whole purpose of these government programs is to demotivate people from the bonds of paternalism. If the programs were painless, everyone would be taking advantage of them. Because so many took advantage of them years back, they are now more painful and uncomfortable.
Many years ago, I was put in a position of raising my daughters alone. The Social Services agencies felt I was not poor enough to be entitled to any type of benefits, except $70.00 per month in food stamps. The time, energy and abuse required to obtain that $70.00 per month, compelled me to work 7 days a week because it was easier than the abuse of getting the $70.00 in food stamps. My food stamp experience lasted three months.
Despite working 7 days per week and having no health insurance (working poor), I had to find the time to cook, freeze, bake and shop at yard sales. It was exhausting. I was eligible for free financial aid for school. So I then worked 6 days a week and spent 4 years getting my first college degree, and still made quality time for my daughters. My kids got clinic health care services and I lived without health insurance for 14 years on God's good graces.
The suffering of constantly being broke motivated me to first get an Associate degree, then a Bachelors degree. I then moved to an entry level corporate job and they paid for my Masters Degree.
And now I am working on my RN degree because I have that choice. Self-empowerment comes from working towards a way out of economic oppression.
I would love legislation that gave people the groceries instead of the food stamp dollars. The whole concept of these programs is that they are "temporary assistance." All of these programs also come with opportunities to find a way to get job skills.
Education and job skills lead to financial freedom, along with the awareness of what is needed for good health.
no argument, but i received zero in welfare and food stamps.
i thought you started this thread to talk about fresh veggies. no surprise that it morphs into a justification for useless social program by blending in academic money.
i also recieved zero financial aid for college; i made too much money as a student to qualify, and i preferred it that way. in hindsight, i would've preferred to complete my undergrad at a school like grove city or hillsdale which uses zero dollars of public money. regardless, i never said that public funding of higher education was an improper handout; these people are working toward a higher goal...this is something to be supported.
public education also requires our funds, but it has become bastardized by champions of worthless social ideas who then interfere with people's ability to choose to pull their kids from these overpriced and underproductive institutions to put them in schools that provide a good education.
i would be willing to bet that there is not a single institution of higher learning in the us that does not receive at least some form of public money. (be it in the processing of research grants, pell grants, student loans or whatever.)
to bring this back around to the original point of discussion the assertion that the safety net (whether it is in the form of early childhood intervention, income supports, education or health care) as failures is factually incorrect with supportive data given.
from
day in the life of joe middle-class republican
he turns on a radio talk show, the host’s keeps saying that liberals are bad and conservatives are good. (he doesn’t tell joe that his beloved
republicans have fought against every protection and benefit joe enjoys throughout his day) joe agrees, “we don’t need those big government liberals ruining our lives; after all, i’m a self made man who believes everyone should take care of themselves, just like i have”.
I'm a nursing student. I finish in August. I've been lurking here for a long time and surprisingly this is the first post that has actually moved me to register and post.
I did not go to the link posted but I did read what was originally posted here. I live in VA and that is not at all how the system works here. Your ability to receive foodstamps is based on your income and the amount of people in your household. For 2 adults and 1 child you can not make over 1700 dollars a month. Which is crazy because who can live off of that? Heh, I do until September. We receive 408 dollars a month in food stamps. That being said...we eat very well. I don't buy a lot of fresh but frozen veggies are just as great for you....at least they are better than canned. In order to eat well we avoid buying ANY junk/snack type food. We eat chicken breasts, rice or whole wheat pasta, and veggies every night for dinner. Not a lot of variety but it works. I want to add that I am all for food stamps. I really have no problem with them when they are being used the correct way. When people choose to misuse them it is def wrong. Using them for short amounts of time as needed is okay with me and I'll happily pay my taxes to support it. There are actually some states that have programs where they assist you in every way imaginable (school costs, food costs, medical, day care). You're allowed assistance for 2 years. Enough time to complete a technical school training program or get an associates degree. However, after you've finished it you are never eligible for that kind of assistance again. I like that idea. It supports breaking the poverty chain.
Also, I agree that the g.i. bill is a good thing. They've recently changed the way it works. Before you were only allowed 10,000 total. Now, it maxes out at 1,075 a month as long as you're in school. Mine runs out in 2012. Good stuff.
Specializes in Cardiac Surg, IR, Peds ICU, Emergency.
i would be willing to bet that there is not a single institution of higher learning in the us that does not receive at least some form of public money. (be it in the processing of research grants, pell grants, student loans or whatever.)
to bring this back around to the original point of discussion the assertion that the safety net (whether it is in the form of early childhood intervention, income supports, education or health care) as failures is factually incorrect with supportive data given.
1. i'll take you up on that bet (because i believe there are accredited reputable schools that don't take a dime of taxpayer money or assistance), the wager will be that you attach a quote by churchill or sowell to all your posts for one month if you lose; you get to choose one of the following quote: “one of the consequences of such notions as "entitlements" is that people who have contributed nothing to society feel that society owes them something, apparently just for being nice enough to grace us with their presence.” or “socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery.”
if i lose, i will attach one of two chosen quotes on socialism of your preference. should you suddenly decide to back out on your challenge, it will be a long time before i stop reminding you.
2. there is no support to your oft repeated cut-n-paste that "republicans" oppose every protection and benefit that joe enjoys, nor any truth to the implication that liberals realized those protections and benefits.
So, if you are against certain forms of government assistance what do you suggest we do instead? I agree the systems flawed. I think we can all agree that some people abuse the system while others rise out of poverty.
I like the garden idea. Gardens could work for some people, if they have a patio with some sunlight and a green thumb.
Drug tests??? Junk for of fast food tax???
I liked the idea of restricting junk food purchases with food stamps. Healthy school lunch programs maybe? ( I remember eating taco boats and pizza dipped in ranch dressing) I also remember using my entire $1.25 of lunch money to buy icecream cups, like five of them. That lunch lady should have reported me to the principal:lol2: They shouldn't even sell icecream at school.
Brainstorming. It's become a loss art, especially in politics. I would love to hear more constructive ideas on how we can improve these children's lives. For those of you who have had assistance... what work, what didn't.
HM2VikingRN, RN
4,700 Posts
http://www.cbpp.org/7-27-05acc.htm
see http://www.stateofworkingamerica.org/news/swa06facts-income_mobility-final.pdf for a discussion of economic mobility in the us. as wage growth has slowed since 1980 this has in effect pushed more people into poverty. this does not reflect a failure of the safety net rather it reflects a deliberate low wage policy pursued by a series of conservative administrations. the minimum wage is at its lowest point in over 40 years.
while it is quite admirable that you had a lawn mower business as a teenager the reality is that you received direct benefit from a variety of social programs that helped set the stage for you working your way out of poverty. (public school system, financial aids for college, public funding of the college that you attended, are just a few examples off the top of my head.)