Stretch Your Food Dollar: Are You Food Bank “Worthy?”
Today’s edition of Stretch Your Food Dollar is about to depart from the usual format. I’m not offering shopping tips or recipes this week. Instead, I want to ask our readers a question that was spurred by an IM conversation I was having yesterday with a friend. My friend is a grad student who is slaving away for less than pennies to finish up her dissertation. When I asked her how she was doing, she said “OK, just struggling to put food on the table.” She admitted that she went to the food bank earlier in the week to get groceries, but then said she felt there were people who were more deserving of the assistance. I told her she was a starving student who is woefully overworked and woefully underpaid. If she’s not one of the “deserving poor,” then who is?
Our culture is permeated with a Puritan work ethic that deems the poor to be “lazy” and “undeserving.” But here’s the rub – people are loosing their jobs by the thousands and home foreclosure rates continue to rise. Our homeless shelters are over capacity, and it’s not because people are on the street due to laziness. They’re full because people have lost their homes, despite their best efforts to keep a roof over their head. Anyone who has been following Alex’s Financial Implosion series probably has a good idea that a lot of people are on the brink of homelessness due to forces entirely out of their hands.
So here’s my question for Queercents’ readers. If you’re having a hard time stretching your food dollar, are you willing to go to the local food bank for assistance? Or do you feel like other people are more “deserving” of aid? How “poor” do you have to be in order to be “worthy” of a helping hand?
A most timely topic Serena.
I don’t think anyone in the US begrudges supplying food to those who need it.
The problem (and I ran into it personally a number of years ago) is Food Stamps allow you to buy ANYTHING…anything that is not precooked. My episode happened in the supermarket.
On the way home from work I stopped in to get something to cook for dinner…the store had a fish market in the back that would steam your selection if you requested it so all you had to do at home was plate it.
I thought even the $2.99 lb. for cod was too high so I went over to get a package of $.69 a lb. chicken….meanwhile a man and his wife with a loaded cart asked for 2 lobsters to be cooked…1 lb. maine lobsters were $4.99 a lb. then.
Somehow or other I ended up behind them in the cashiers line…and being me I jokingly asked where the butter was for the lobsters…wife laughed and said they had almost 15 lbs. at home in the freezer…just about the time husband told the clerk she had made a mistake…the cash portion of the bill was only $22 and change, not $32.
Clerk told him that the lobsters weren’t elegible to be bought with food stamps…he commenced to argue that they were food and were as I and several others in line are staring and quickly reaching a boiling point…their cart also had several large filet mignons and a huge pile of sirlion steaks in it…almost $300 worth of food being paid for with food stamps.
The man demanded to see the manager and the manager of the store quickly came over while another clerk opened a register nearby to get those of us in line away from the scene…(all but me anyway).
Store manager told him the lobsters weren’t elegible for food stamps because they were cooked…the man asked could live lobsters be bought the store manager said yes.
Man then asked if he could give the two cooked ones back and get two live ones…at this point not only did the manager say yes the manager himself hustled to the back of the store and came back with to live ones.
If they haden’t gotten out of the store quickly I think they’re would have been an nasty scene from those of us in the store who had seen this performance…and the fact that the food stamps were being used for what to most of us were luxury foods.
If you’re on food stamps YOU HAVE NO RIGHT FOR THE TAXPAYERS TO FEED YOU LOBSTER!!!
Call me mean, nasty, cruel, anything you want but I will stand by that till I die!
My own answer is: Beans and Grains provide everything you need to stay alive and in reasonably good health.
All stores should have to carry bags of dried beans and grains and anyone, no matter how rich or poor should be allowed to go into a store and pick up a couple of bags and just sign a chit and the government covers the cost.
No one goes hungry and with as cheap as raw beans and grains are every citizen could probably be fed for half of what is wasted on food stamps.
And yes we accomadate special diets if required…like milk for children…but too much is wasted and mis-spent on both ends.
Wow, Roland. I really don’t know what to say, except that this seems to be you week for stepping in it.
Yeah Serena, It may be my week for steppin in it…but maybe I’m showing my age or just in a curmudgeonly mood today.
Everyone should have the right to both Health Care and Food…as wealthy as the United States is there should be no questions.
But the constant idea that you can Tax a small portion of the citizens to pay for everyone is not fair….look what its done to California.
EVERYONE has to pay a share…some more than others but everyone has to contribute. That’s why a national sales tax would be the fairest way to fund everything.
If everyone paid a share they would think twice before demanding more services that the government cannot afford.
But back to Food….Too many people who are given food stamps are either not given enough or like my experience indulge in luxury foods….or mostly expensive convenience foods.
Perhaps like the WIC program it should be limited to certain foods…but I can here the howls now…”It’s bad for their self esteem and pride to limit what they can get”.
To that I will give a quote from a Deep Space Nine episode from Quark the Ferengi:
“Pride in an Empty Sack is an Empty Sack”
Roland, despite what you may have experienced one time, and despite what you may have heard from former Senator Patrick Moynahan and his ilk, the majority of welfare recipients are not “welfare queens,” they are children. In fact, 75% of welfare recipients are children under the age of 5. The image of a woman wearing furs driving a Cadillac is a great media image, but it’s myth.
The fact is that there are major abuses of taxpayer money. Those corporate CEOs from the auto and banking industry who received government bailouts – they’re the real “welfare queens.” The Blackwater executives driving Escalades in Iraq that were purchased with government money – they’re the real “welfare queens.”
The whole point of my post was that there is a stigma associated with accepting assistance – whether you’re talking about food stamps, food banks, or your local church’s soup kitchen. That stigma comes from the attitude that people who need assistance are somehow undeserving. Your one experience witnessing someone abuse the welfare system is not representative of the system as a whole. Since we’re drawing upon personal experience, I’ll share my own. My family was on welfare for a good portion of my childhood. Both of my parents worked hard, but there was never enough money for groceries. We did our “grocery shopping” at the food bank. Most people on welfare are in similar shoes. They work hard, but there’s never enough money to go around.
If you don’t want your tax dollars to support your neighbors, stop paying taxes. Problem solved.
Roland-
I would have been appalled by lobster too- but like Serena said, most programs (government or private) can be abused. Trying to weed them out while not harming those who are really playing by the rules would be incredibly difficult, and expensive, to administer. We could practically eliminate the $300B+ tax gap between what’s paid and what’s owed, but imagine auditing every filer!
To your point on eating more expensive convenience foods- the Washington Post recently did an article (which I believe a writer on this blog highlighted) about the cost of being poor- one of which was that the lack of transportation options led to eating more food bought at the corner convenience store. I live in Delaware where most buses only run once or twice an hour and go to a hub in Wilmington where you catch the next bus. If you do not live near Wilmington, there’s a good chance you’re traveling 30 minutes in, waiting maybe 30 minutes for the bus to the store, shopping, then repeating the process to get home- by then, kiss your perishables good-bye. And if you’re working multiple jobs, which plenty of people receiving food assistance are, convenience food lets you spend that limited time with your family.
Most lower-income people do pay a share along with everyone else. They pay wage taxes in the cities they live or work in (yes, most lower-income people and people on assistance work), sales taxes (regressive because everyone pays the same percent regardless of ability to pay), they pay FICA at a higher percentage than wealthier people even though they statistically will have shorter life expectancies, they pay co-pays on Medicaid. And in states without an EITC, they pay state income tax, which funds at least a portion of most assistance programs.
I have to comment on this post because I have been to the food bank and received food stamps. As a college educated – stabily employed tax payer, I never expected to get on food stamps. There are a lot of people who never expected to be in that situation and are now going through it for the first time- I send prayers out for them. You probably think you won’t ever have to go through it…but you never know.
I made decent money and saved money. They actually told us we couldn’t get food stamps until we no longer had a 401K, unemployment benefits, etc. Mind you that unemployment check barely covered utilities and household bills let alone groceries for a house of 3. And I still made too much money to get food stamps. It’s ludicrous. So yes, after those sources were depleted I was able to receive assistance from the government. One of my friends was even told to sell her car after she got laid off. Does that even make sense? How can she look for another job if she doesn’t have a car? Basically, all assets have to be depleted to get assistance. It’s the biggest farce in the land.
If you haven’t been through it, you really don’t know. It sounds good to say have grains and beans available. But, really, who would want to eat ONLY beans and grains? I don’t! And as long as I have worked and taxes have been paid on April 15th, if I need assistance– I should be able to get it!
Anyway, it’s not like someone can buy lobsters every week with food stamps. Food stamps for a family of 4 is less than $500 in a month. Think about a gallon of milk. We can’t buy that for $1.97 anymore. Food stamps barely covers the necessities. My biggest complaint with food stamps was that I couldn’t use it at the farmers market–where I could stretch my food dollar.
Furthermore, how is buying lobster abusing the system? Are lobster only for people in a certain income bracket? You never know, it may have been a special occassion. If in that situation, would you want ONLY beans and grains? Keep in mind, I have no problem with beans and grains. I make great black bean burgers, curried (kidney) bean burgers, etc.
On to the food banks— Even they require you to give income information. You can’t just say, “I’m hungry. Please feed me.” Furthermore, it’s not even the best quality food. It’s not like companies are dropping off fresh food daily. A lot of it is expired or just about to be. When you donate canned foods at Christmas that stuff isn’t always fresh. I often see people donate stuff they don’t even want to eat.
But to answer your question Serena, I’ve been and I will go again if needed. I’ll be darned if I go hungry! I think the services should be expanded. You shouldn’t have to be dirt broke to get assistance.
Services should be available so no one goes hungry in this country. I think WIC is an excellent example of a program that works very well (and in case some of you don’t know, it does not pay for lobster). Does WIC limit choices to healthier food, yes. Do foodstamps, no. Foodstamps contribute to the health problems of the poor by not limiting choices. I used to be a cashier for a local city grocery store. I was jealous of the foodstamp folks. They got to waste them eating all kinds of luxury unhealthy foods that I could only dream about. Now I recognize that a lot of their choices were probably due to a lack of knowledge about how to make better choices but until that changes, limting the purchasing power to healthier selections like WIC would not be a horrible thing. I of course by working and not having any children was not eligible for assistance. I can understand the original posters frustration watching someone spend tax dollars on lobster. I didn’t get to eat lobster but foodstamp folks can. That’s hard to watch. Alas, going back to my own experiences, I know you all would like to think it was a special occasion or an isolated thing but from what I saw every month, it was not. . .
Working people, even without kids, can get foodstamps, but only if they are earning below poverty level. For example, Americorps VISTA members, whose stipends are paid by the federal gov’t, generally qualify.
One of the biggest improvements I think this country could make in public assistance would be to graduate it more and ease the transition off so it’s not so all or nothing- so that people on assistance don’t have to be afraid that working even low paying jobs will mean losing food, child care, and health insurance in one fell swoop.
Excellent article; lots to think about. I’ve always felt that – in our country, with all its resources – NO ONE should be going hungry, no one should be without BASIC clothing, heat, clean water, etc. And I’m more than willing to pay taxes to provide those BASIC goods and services to those who are TRULY in need.
However, I hate to say it, but the “Lobster Example” that FrugalZen described is FAR from a rare occurance. I worked in a low-income, economically depressed area as a grocery clerk for several years before I got married. Food stamps being used to purchase “luxury foods” was a common occurance, and food stamps being used to purchase junk/convenience foods was even more commonplace.
It got to the point where I could pull some customers’ baskets up to my checkstand and immediately by looking in the cart tell that it was going to be a food stamp order. Right up at the front of the grocery cart would be a pile of expensive meats: lobster, king crab legs, jumbo shrimp, scallops, filet mignon, porterhouse steaks, and expensive roasts. The customer would tell me “Get my meat first, please”. The rest of the cart would invariably be loaded down with sodas, pre-packaged treats, cheap boxes of Mac & Cheese and Ramen noodles (the latter two for the kiddies, I presume).
The grocery store I worked at required a customer to make a $25 minimum purchase to cash their welfare check for them. My store did not sell alcohol, but was in a little shopping center that had a liquor store right across from the grocery store. So the customer would use her food stamps to purchase luxury meats and convenience/junk foods, buy a carton of cigarettes to cover the $25 minimum purchase required to cash their welfare check – then head over to the liquor store to purchase alcohol with the cash from the welfare check. It was obvious that the food stamps and welfare check were NOT the only source of income in those households, since the food they bought was not enough to last a whole month.
Even in cases where there were no cigarettes or alcohol purchased, the “luxury meat/convenience/junk food” scenario was a frequent occurance in my store. One other thing I noticed as a supermarket clerk is that food stamp recipients rarely ever used coupons. This was back in the days of very generous double coupon policies by the supermarkets, and with very little work a person could check the food ads, cut out coupons, and get many, many items for free or for pennies on the dollar – which would have made their food stamps and welfare check money go much farther. But the food stamp customers who used coupons were a very small percentage, compared to the “lower middle-class”, retired, and “working poor” customers who were not being handed food stamps and a check every month.
I agree with those above, who mentioned WIC being an excellent program; it assures that the taxpayers’ dollars will be spent on wholesome, nutritious and reasonably priced foods – and no junk food. Of course, I understand that people get tired of eating “beans and rice”, and I’m not suggesting only providing “government commodities” types of foods (oats, rice, beans, margarine, oil, etc.). But I did find myself deeply resenting watching customers come in and load up their baskets with “Surf and Turf” luxury meats for their dinners, when I was going home to eat Ramen, a protein bar and 8oz. of milk.
I honestly cannot believe that anyone would think that it is the taxpayers’ responsibility to pay for lobster tail and filet mignon for others, when they cannot afford to do the same for themselves. Yes, I do understand that people on food stamps also have special occasions that call for special meals. But that really should NOT be the taxpayers’ problem.
My girlfriend was on food stamps and WIC for a time when her daughter was a baby, and she and I have talked about that time. I worked as a grocery store clerk for a few years about 15-20 years ago, and have witnessed lots of “luxury” food purchases on food stamps, but I have to say it didn’t and doesn’t bother me. Here are my thoughts:
When you’re poor and on food stamps, sometimes food is the only luxury item you can get. My girlfriend couldn’t afford a babysitter, couldn’t go to the movies, couldn’t afford nice clothes, couldn’t afford cable tv, couldn’t afford to get her car repaired if it broke down, couldn’t afford any number of things she wanted and needed – but she could afford some nice cuts of meat. I don’t see that as a terrible thing.
Part of the reason she could afford nice cuts of meat is that the amount she received in food stamps was a number arrived at by averages – enough for someone living in a downtown urban core without good access to transportation to be able to afford to buy food (where it is most expensive). It was more than she needed, living as she did in a smaller town with access to less expensive grocery stores.
Trying to fix that disparity to make it more fair by tailoring amounts given would likely cost more money than giving “too much” to some people. Even people living within 10 miles of each other can have very different levels of access to grocery stores, so it isn’t like you could set broad rules about who gets what in various locations.
I would rather give “too much” to some people than have people who most need help come up short – or to spend even more money on policing and administering the program just to keep ribeye steaks out of the hands of poor people.
Finally, my gf was on support (food stamps and WIC) for about two years. That was fifteen years ago; she is now a college graduate with a good-paying job. I’m glad those programs were there to help her, and are there to help other people now.
Thanks for sharing your points of view, everyone. This topic has really stirred some lively conversation.