Reply With Quote
Unless you are including the low-cost Gulf Coast, and the "coasts" of the Great Lakes in that figure, I call BS.
I tried to figure if this was enough food and came up about 3.5 to 5 meals short. It would be interesting to see if anyone could actually live on this.
This also includes only two or three servings of vegetables, and NO fruit.
Scurvy anyone?
Heh.
Unless you are including the low-cost Gulf Coast, and the "coasts" of the Great Lakes in that figure, I call BS.
I don't think those baby carrots are enough to offset the hypertension from the excess sodium you'd get from that diet.
Gee, how about just getting a job. Employment rate at a
historical all time low. And if we get rid of the ILLEGALS wages
will rise so everyone can have a chicken in the oven......
Gee, now that's an idea, ILLEGALS are depressing wages and
taxpayers have to give foodstamps that wont cover the cost of
food......hmmmmmmm. What is wrong with this picture.
I don't think it's short of seven days of food. 12 chicken breasts and 3 cans of tuna gives you 15 meals right there - there's only 14 lunch/dinners in a week. Throw in a head of lettuce, some broccoli and a bag of apples and you are still under budget at about $32 for a week. (Multiply that by 4.33 and you stilll good to go).
Illegals are the root of all of America's problems.
Well said, old timer!
Yeah, let's force kids to work and cut a program that is actually helping people get off welfare...
BuzzflashFour members of Congress are completing the weeklong "Food Stamp Challenge" Monday by eating on the average federal assistance provided to food stamp recipients: $21 per week, which works out to $3 a day or $1 a meal.
Reps. Jim McGovern (D-Mass.), Jo Ann Emerson (D-Mo.), Tim Ryan (D-Ohio), and Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill.) - all members of the House Hunger Caucus - were trying to raise awareness after the introduction of the Feeding America's Families Act, which would add $4 billion to the annual food stamp budget. Oregon Gov. Ted Kulongoski, also a Democrat, took the challenge last month.
Talk about putting your money where your mouth is.
On their blogs, the participating members of Congress seemed genuinely humbled and moved by experiencing the plight faced by too many Americans, even if only for a week. About 26 million of us get food stamps, and the demographic breakdown from a 2005 government study may surprise you. Half of recipients are children and 8% are 60 or older. Many recipients have jobs: 40% of participating individuals worked or at least lived in a household with earnings.
The study also suggests that the food stamp program is helping people get off welfare and into the workforce: "In 1990, 42 percent of all food stamp households received cash welfare benefits and only 19 percent had earnings. In 2005, only 15 percent received cash welfare, while 29 percent had earnings."
From what I read, this "challenge" will only go on for one week. Not nearly long enough to get any sense of what it is like to live on a poverty budget. Wait until they have a toothache that there is no money to attend to, and you just learn to live with it, year after year. Some of the phony replies on whether or not it was "easy" to live on this or that extremely small budget, all suffered from the same lack of comprehension, like those globalists who believe that if you raise the price of gas at the pumps to price-gouging level, that people will "drive less." This only works for rich people, who are using their vehicles when they don't have to. Poor people who already only use them for work, with longer and longer commutes nowadays as the trend of business-district-consolidation-away-from-neighborhoods continues, can't reduce their driving any more, unless they don't go to work. There is some of the same kind of lack of comprehension, as some people appear to be unaware of how much money is actually needed to live on.
I heard Representative Jim McGovern on the Floor of the House on C-SPAN, talking about how "cranky" they got from the lack of food for the week, and knew then that these rich people understood nothing. "Cranky" is so cute; about as cute as the stupid rich people who claim to live on a dollar a meal in threads like this. If you read some of these posts, the impression I get--besides the unending, insufferable rich people posture that they are such clever shoppers, so good with money and bargains, know where to shop, blah, blah, blah--is that they are actually taking their SUVs far beyind where poor people could walk to, buying hundreds of dollars of bulk purchases, far more than $1 a meal, then falsely averaging the total result downward to a mythical single-meal figure, cutting out reference to any purchases they don't want to bother remembering. They are really on budgets of hundreds of dollars, oblivious, yet always lecturing. When you can go to a store and buy a few condiments, spending $20 or $30, having bought no actual food yet, and when $200 does not fill up a cart anymore as it used to, when coupons are more and more manipulatively written so that you have to buy 5 of an item, where you only wanted one, or have to waste a stamp you don't have to send it in for a rebate rather than just getting the money back at your convenience, not theirs--making all these coupons worthless--and when you only have one store selection in your neighborhood because the car is not running right or you were trying to save the gas for work again, then all of this "I am the superior shopper" is completely worthless blather.
Considering that 75% of US population lives within 50 miles of the coastline, that excludes an awful lot of people.
That does include the Gulf coast.
I will have to find the link then. I may be off a bit on the actual percentage (it was about 2/3 or 3/4), but the premise still holds.
So, you can use food stamps at McDonalds and fast food joints?
that pisses me off. I bust my ass working and guess what? I don't even allow myself to buy the foods i want. Shove some calories in your piehole. Most ing people DON'T buy fresh fruit, produce and organic yak milk as much as needed.
Shut the up and eat whatever you can get.
Sweat it off and throw some bannanas in the mix.
Quit being a bunch of whiny liberals.
take away the mayo, and the beer and buy ham and cheese and a cheap loaf, and that gives you another 8 meals.
or just take away the beer and buy twenty packs of ramen.
How much of a crock do liberals get.
Bag of Rice=1.50
Bag of Beans= 1.00
Salsa = 1.89
50 ct tortillas = 3.00
eggs = 1.00
5 1bs of Ground beef = 5.00
20 ramen noodles @ 2.5
Romain lettuce = 1.25
Cottage cheese =1.5
Cherry tomatoes = 2.00
Red onions = 2/1.00
1/2 gallon of soy milk = 2.00
Bologna = 1.00
Weenies =.89
Bread = 1
1 can of Spinach= .50
I bag of mixed veggies = 1
total........................ 28.03
Those coastal Mississippi's and Alabama markets are sure high these days.
They dont have walmarts in those coastal towns like Houston, and New orleans.
Breakfast is the most important meal of the day.
I could live off the money easy.
2 boxes of Cheerios or any nutritional cereal: $8.00
1 quart of 2% milk: $3.00
Bam, 18 meals for $11.00
If you don't want to develop strange diseases from vitamin and mineral loss, then choose your solution:
fruit bars: 6 for $4.00
100 multi-vitamins: $13.00
Chicken meat is cheap and easy to cook if you want to mix it up week-to-week. Canned tuna is cheap and doesn't even need to be cooked.
I pretty much already live off cheerios, raisin bran, bananas, chicken and water. I rarely consume vegetables (extreme dislike aside from corn and celery) and I'm not riddled with disease.
Bunch of hype over nothing.
I'm a troll.
We are talking about healthy food right?
no, We're just talking about poor urban people appreciating flaxseed chimichangas, fiji water, and wheatbran tofu ricebowls.
I included plenty of cereal, milk, eggs, toast, fruit for breakfast.
Bottom frickin line is that you guys shouldn't sit here and worry about the nutritional value. You can definitely eat healthy enough on $155 per month. And guess what? It isn't supposed to be your life long diet. You need to find a job - you aren't supposed live on food stamps forever. So who cares if you are only get 72% of your required Vitamin B12 or whatever the for a few months.
Hey, i wanno rabbit food yo, give me a whopper biotch.
yey yey.
I do think about $155 is reasonable for one person for a month and provides a good balance of foods, never said it wasn't. :p
Kory is exactly right, that it shouldn't be permanent, and missing out on a little bit of any particular vitamin will not be fatal, but good nutrition helps to keep people healthy, which keeps them able to work.
The other thing one needs to consider is neo-natal development when it comes to pregnant and nursing women. That is one of the reasons for the excellent WIC program.
Truth is, if you give a raise of 25 dollars, all they're gonna do is go out and buy a brisket slab and a pack of Corona.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions