Please point out where I said a damn thing about homeless people.....and if you dont think freeloading is passed down like a family business you are seriously mistaken.

but you didn't address my main point which was pretty simple...whether its 29 dollars or 290 dollars it should NOT be a function of government to pass out these handouts. Its for churches and charitable organizations.

I have no problem with a VERY temporary government solution that REQUIRES community service. It should NEVER become a lifestyle as it has now.

how does it work with those slices?

I believe it works like this:

With EBT (food stamp card) you can buy certain "uncooked" foods. For example you can go to Papa Murphy's Pizza and buy a pizza since it wasn't cooked at that location and is therefore not considered a prepared food. Because of this there are certain deli foods that you can buy with an EBT card. Lunch meat and cheese would be good examples. These sleazy gas stations just ring the pizza up as a "deli" item which allows people to use their EBT card to pay for it. Of course it is illegal, but the odds of getting caught are pretty low.

Hmm, okay, but what is the benefit?
Lets say I have $7 in my EBT. I would better buy real food for $7, sell it to someone for $5 and buy the same slice for $3 at a normal price + have $2 left.
What I mean that margin is too high compared so simple scam when you cash out by selling your ebt money for real money.

You are over-thinking it. Many of these places won't have two prices for the pizza. They charge whatever they charge for it and that is the price. If you are in a gas station looking for food you likely aren't doing much price shopping.

But, assuming there were two different prices. I would then have to go to a store, buy $7 worth of food, try to find someone who will pay me $5 for that food then I travel to the gas station (or wherever I am buying it from) and buy the slice of pizza for $3. That is a hell of a lot of effort save myself $2.

LOL, I am not talking neither about 2 different prices, nor about literally doing 7>5>3>2 thing.

My point is that EBT dollars have real dollar value in the black market. So lets say going rate is 75%.
So when you have $7 in your ebt you actually have $5.25 of real money.
Lets say going rate for slice in normal gas station is $2 (random guess).
So you would be buying 2 pizza for 5.25.
Ok, lets say you are traveling so you would grab a slice if you really want it, but would you go for that slice for the second time? No.
While it sounds like people actually buy those slices on a constant basis, that what is not a smart way to cash out your ebt.
On the other hand - you can not expect all of ebt holders to be smart :)

In theory the EBT dollars have a real cash value to someone. But you need to know someone who will buy that food from you in order to get that cash value out of it. We are also talking about a reasonably small amount of money, and many of these places that allow people to buy pizza (or other non-EBT food) with their EBT card also often let them buy booze. So some guy is in the mood for a beer and pizza so he walks to the nearby store that will let him buy a 40 oz and a slice on his EBT card. He's not worried about the few real dollars he might have wasted. He is just happy to have his booze and slice.

you are thinking like a businessman, most people using ebt don't think like that... they think "I'm hungry, I want a pizza"... they go to a gas station pay $7 without even thinking for a second, they got the money for free so who gives a shit how much it costs, it could just as easily cost $17/slice and it would still sell well... :1orglaugh

the program is called "Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP)", it's not "government will feed me / free food program"... the whole point is to give poor families some $$ to "supplement" few bucks towards their food expenses... it's not supposed to cover 100% of their food expenses...

the fact that it could even be possible to live off food stamps proves there is something wrong with the whole setup.... as the whole point was to "supplement", not to cover 100%....

That is all? I thought that food is supposed to be cheap in US. Although vegetables are not usually that cheap and at least limes cost quite much in here. Beans, peas and rice, about 3 € per 0,5-1 kg bag. Let's make it 9 euros. Eggs another 3, it is now 12 euros. 17 euros left. Maybe she could have spent that portion more wisely.

There was article some time ago (about research in UK) that poor people have troubles to afford eat healtly, at least vegetable wise. If you buy much limes, chilis, etc. that is surely even harder. Similarly there was research about US hobos, and they are pretty much all fat. They eat chips, drink soda, etc. with much calories, but with little nuttrition value. Thus they are fat and poorly nuttritioned.

I was excited that I was at $21/day on my diet.

For those that have a "better idea," perverty wasn't invented yesterday. The world has tried all kinds of stuff, and we still have poor people. Try living in a country without the social safety net, it gets pretty grim pretty quick.

By the way - do any of you have your EBT guy?
You have a recurring deal with some crack head who sells you his food points and you get your groceries for way cheaper :1orglaugh

Excited that you managed to spend such a high amount?

Sly posted a great $20/week diet some time ago :thumbsup

Just killing poor people would solve this problem a lot easier

Nope. It should be. they don't do it out of kindness of their heart though.

the bare minimum to feed, or artificially keep the price of corn/rice low like a in developing countries (even mexico) is the only thing preventing jobless men stabbing you for a piece a bread. a hungry man will do anything. This protects the rich. Give the poor some bread and a tv, they will keep quiet. The government's function is to protect the population, protect the system, this does a better job of it than any police force.

This was mentioned, and my diet and food bill was debated. It is in part where I live. Downtown of a major city. Also his diet did not include beverages.

And personally, I see nothing wrong with this. The poor are happy and the less poor(me) are happy. Win/win.

Yes it did, water. If you really don't like water, you can get generic Kool-Aid or lemonade packets dirt cheap. Less than $.25 a packet, that would last a few days.

if you think a lifestyle that is based on gaming the system for $29/week for food is a quality passed on generation to generation then you should brush up on Darwin's theory.

you didn't mention homeless people and that was exactly my point.

and i did address your main point specifically. you stated


i fully addressed that. the problem with a $29/week SNAP card has nothing to do with rewarding people for having children. you seem to think $29 is a reward and getting $29 week off da man is some special family trait passed on like a gene. it ain't. that's the point of the challenge paltrow failed on. which you also missed.

I saw something about this on Reddit and the major gripe about what she showed off, was it's not sustainable as a diet. Sure maybe you could go a few weeks on it, but you would end up having problems as even though it looks health, there isn't enough vitamins or protean. Don't get too googoo eyes because she bought some green stuff..


Now my whole gripe with this kind of thing is food stamps aren't meant to fill someone's dinner table day after day, week after week or month after month. They are meant to supplement a persons grocery bill whom needs it, but not give it too them for free.

I don't really agree with the endless welfare system. I'm ok with it if a person is handicapped or elderly but in most other cases it needs to be seen as a temporary solution much like unemployment.

It looks like she also chose a lot of items that aren't really necessary. They taste good, they add a nice zest to a meal (onions, scallions, garlic, herbs) but they are unnecessary.

Gwyneth Paltrow in the never-ending attempt to prove that she is the "average" woman.

you make it sound like we don't have a homeless problem in USA. much opportunities.


we're talking about eating for a week on $29, it doesn't matter if your sleeping in a ditch, a van or on a couch or wherever. it doesn't matter if your a dope fiend or have 18 kids with 6 different mothers.

south seems to think the problems with a $29 SNAP food budget would be cured by stopping [certain] people from having [too many] children combined with passing on some sort of game the system gene, i replied to that.

I was trying to say the homeless can get other help besides the $29 for food.

I assume you would get extra money for each child you had. So having less children to be covered would mean more money for others. I have heard of people taking advantage of the system. Claiming their spouse lives somewhere else, not reporting cash income and stuff like that. I don't know anything about the gaming the system gene or having a bunch of kids just to get free money though.

:thumbsup
Too bad various lazies leach it as their regular "job".

my experience relating with people on food stamps/ebt is it's very difficult for them to break out of the cycle. i don't disagree that there are people places and things in place to help people get out of that cycle, nevertheless, based on what i've witnessed, people in that group struggle to get those opportunities. regardless of what the reason for the struggle is, booze, drugs, depression, hard times, bad luck, lazy, LAZY. that lack of motivation is a common denominator, again, regardless of the sitch, bad luck, dope fiend, hard times, alcohol, mental issues, there's always an element of lazy in there, in my experience.

not pointing my finger at lazy people, i think we'd accomplish more by looking at ways to motivate people to change their situation. to me, trying to address the problems from this way is better and more realistic that simply saying we need to sterilize certain people/not allow them to have children.

The problem with homeless people is different IMHO. Food stamps should be more to supplement people's needs whom have a income source. People whom work at Walmart for example or elderly people with just social security as an income.. The govt has to supplement many of those people's incomes because their income is too low to live on. We then need to look at why their income needs to be supplemented and then address that issue.

People whom are homeless or whom have 10 kids need to be in a different type of program and should not be on endless food stamps.

Homeless people for example, as you should know living how you do are often mentally ill, some whom are hit on with hard times and then also some whom really are lazy bums.

If you really wanted to tackle homelessness then you would have to identify those groups and deal with them case by case. Raising their food stamp limit for example isn't gonna help much of anything. It certainly wont get them off the streets and lets be fair, most homeless people tend to be fairly capable of getting food. I don't think we have a "starving homeless" people problem. They know where the soup kitchens are, they pan handle or dumpster dive. It might not be an attractive life style but I don't think it's an issue of them staving to death.

As for the welfare queen type of person. I don't really know how we deal with those kind of people. Any time there is a system in place certain people will figure out how to game that system. IMO anyone not disabled or elderly (ie not capable of working) should be placed on a temporary status with food stamps much like unemployment but you have to have actual interaction with these people.

The problem is those kind of people use the kids as a crutch and they know they can do that. They know you wont stop giving them money because the kids would be the ones you hurt. This is why it's difficult to deal with welfare leeches, because it's not the kids fault their parents suck. I don't know really how you deal with this..

IMO Food stamps are just used as an easy out by states rather than actually trying to solve the issue. They tend to be a band-aid that states can use and claim they did something, while never having to address the actual cause or problems.

and by lazy i mean there's a lot of hopelessness. people with no hope don't have much motivation and in turn end up becoming lazy/looking like they are lazy.

if these people can grab on to some hope, i believe many of them can then grab on to opportunities to change their sitch.

I've posted here before about a local gas station and seeing EBT purchases of sliced pizza and energy drinks but was told it couldn't be true. But there it is everyday.

If i wasn't traveling right now I would try the $29. challenge myself. I think it would be interesting to see how well I could eat. Or not eat .......

i don't disagree with any of this, i also don't necessarily agree with it all. i agree it's a comlex problem though and that was my point in replying to south, i fully disagree the problem with poverty and hunger won't be solved by picking who can have how many children. i can guarantee that won't solve shit, not to mention it's beyond draconian.

you can buy a pound of loose leaf green tea for like $10, which should last you for months... tastes pretty good and is healthy too... :2 cents:

In Kentucky there is a farmers market every Saturday morning from 7 to noon at the Courthouse. Being a late sleeper I would always get there near closing and farmers would be practically giving away stuff instead of taking it home. I always wondered why I never saw low income people taking advantage of this. Instead it was yuppies with their golden retrievers with scarfs on their necks. Then again farmers don't take bet.

This is why I say you have to determine what kind of situation the person is in, specially with homelessness. We have no state or federal mental heath system anymore so those whom have mental illness and don't have family to take care of them, end up on the streets.

Those people are pretty much "disposable" as far as the state & federal govt is concerned. There is no help for them, they will never get the meds they need or the treatments.

As for those whom fell on bad times, those are really the only ones you can help with much of any success. These are people forced into the situation be it their own fault like drug addiction or perhaps loss of job. These are the ones whom don't really want to be there. These are the only ones you can really hope to ever get off the streets and that's where the focus should be.

We should have programs specifically tailored to these people if they want the help. However much like mental illness treatment, these people are also treated like disposable people. It's really up to them to pull their selves out of the gutter. Some do and some don't and that's the way it is sadly.

As for the other group which I called lazy bums. Well I don't know if they are lazy but lets just say they don't want to live like normal people. Many people actually do choose to live on the streets. It's a fairly big sub culture in many cities. Many people are just not interested in conforming to society and there is a certain freedom to be experienced by being homeless.

In the olden days these people might of been called mountain men or hermits for example but there has always been a small amount of people whom don't want to live the social norm of their day. Many homeless do fit that bill and I have zero issue with that, but I do get irritated when I see these types standing on street corners begging for money.

I have no issue if someone chooses that life style but I do find it annoying when they expect others to pay their way.

I wouldn't agree with anything about number of kids people can have either, but I just used the baby making welfare queens as an example of part of the problem which is very hard to solve.

There's no way I could eat Gwyneth Paltrow for $29 a day.

Poor people lack transportation.

Any idea how to find the thread? Any unique word in it?

"What's in the box?!"

The idea of getting $29 a week in food stamps might not be a generational trait, but living on the system is. It is called the cycle of poverty for a reason. Not everyone ends up in it and some people are even motivated to work hard by growing up poor, but there are a lot of people who are raised with the idea that living off the system and living as their parents do (meaning welfare, food stamps, housing assistance etc) is a fine and normal activity. They are much more likely to repeat that behavior than someone who was raised in a typical middle class life and taught to work for what you want.

A lot would depend on how well you take advantage of the grocery sale flyers and coupons, too. My wife spends time looking at all the grocery flyers and waits until items are at really good sale prices before stocking up (especially orange juice and cheese slices). She's a rather thrifty shopper...rarely pays full price for anything. Often times we'll just do without something until it goes on sale price - no hardship.

Some friends and I did a version of the $29 a week challenge several months ago. I think $29 a week is the average of what people get. We looked it up and found out that the most a single person could get is $190 a month. So we decided to try to live on just that. We also lived with the restrictions of that meaning we wouldn't buy anything you can't buy with the food stamp card.

I came close. I ran out of money with about 4-5 days left in the month. My two friends that tried it with me didn't do as well. One just gave up after about 2 weeks and the other ran out of money with about 10 days left.

It was interesting and certain gave me some perspective on just how much we spend on food.