What makes you say this?
You get food stamps if you don't make enough money. For example, being in the service industry and relying on tips to make ends meet. If you have to work 80 hours, why shouldn't you be able to get your groceries delivered?
> too lazy to even prepare a cheaper and - on average - more nutritious meal.
You do know that only certain food items are available on food stamps. Because of people like you, we need to make sure the poor can't have any pleasure in life.
1. Presumably food stamps don't cover all food, so if someone wants to use their own money to get takeaways they can.
2. Surely the aim of the govt should be to make sure the citizenship is fed healthily, especially when they're footing the bill.
I know in the UK they have a similar system for pregnant women and young kids and it is restricted to healthy things.
Ultimately if you're going to let people spend food stamps on fast food, why not just give them cash instead.
Edit: does Uber deliver from supermarkets in the US? If so that seems ok. In the UK it's synonymous with fast food delivery, all the supermarkets have their own delivery services.
So food stamps can only be spent on certain food items.
Bread, milk, eggs, etc. So they are doing what is being requested. This is literally why they are given stamps instead of cash, to restrict people.
Don't demonise people because they are so poor that they have to accept assistance to be able to eat bread.
And yes, in the US they don't have food delivery from all the supermarkets like in the UK. Uber is filling that gap.
All the items you can buy on food stamps are explicitly reviewed. That's the point.
People are bitching because poor people can buy anything on UberEats, and this is not true.
Or better yet, maybe mind your own business and say nothing at all. The idea that a poor child shouldn't be allowed to have a birthday cake or that people shouldn't be able to decide for themselves what they'll eat is gross.
I've spent a lot of money over the years in taxes, and I do it in part on the expectation that there will be a safety net for those who might someday need it including (should something terrible happen) myself. I'd be pissed off if I fell on hard times and on the day I went to collect the assistance I'm owed it came with a list of arbitrary restrictions by people who assume I don't deserve anything nice.
We give a set amount of money to people to help them buy food. What foods they chose to spend that money on is no one else's concern. An exception to this being programs like WIC which are explicitly about making sure pregnant mothers and babies are getting the nutrition they need
If someone were genuinely concerned for people's health rather than just wanting to punish them for the moral failing of not having a lot of money, it'd make far more sense to if they'd bother their representatives about subsidizing healthy foods instead of restricting unhealthy ones, or better yet the countless other issues that plague the healthcare system.
My suggestions for what was reasonable is what is already happening.
Too many people want the poor to suffer, because obviously being poor is self inflicted.
Too much avocado toast or something.
Fwiw, Personally I'd rather just give them the cash, rather than assuming they can't spend it. If you are going to have a system of food stamps though, it should be targeted to actually buying nutritious food.
LOL!
>Households CANNOT use SNAP benefits to buy:[0]
>Beer, wine, liquor, cigarettes, or tobacco
>Vitamins, medicines, and supplements. If an item has a Supplement Facts label, it is considered a supplement and is not eligible for SNAP purchase.
>Live animals (except shellfish, fish removed from water, and animals slaughtered prior to pick-up from the store).
>Foods that are hot at the point of sale
>Any nonfood items such as:
>Pet foods
>Cleaning supplies, paper products, and other household supplies.
>Hygiene items, cosmetics
>Because of people like you, we need to make sure the poor can't have any pleasure in life.
Execpt the pleasure of free food, housing and health care, right? Maybe we can add free tickets to the movies in the next social program.
Here you see a guy that never even got the taste of minimal wage jobs and working to have something to eat. The pure privilege oozing from your comment is pathetic. Please do yourself a favor and touch some grass. There are millions of people working so much more than 40 hours and still receiving food stamps or people who realistically can't (disabilities etc.) that also receive food stamps and you just flat out ignore them to reinforce your image of the lazy do nothing. Please do yourself a favor and work minimal wage for 2 months and see if you can live of of that.
My parents are working class, they lived on minimum wage or next to it all their life. Never, for once, they lived on welfare.
But that's the deal, they are working class. They worked their entire life, they used their money sparingly and without any luxuries for a big part of their life. Vacations, was going 2 weeks to the beach, by bus (later by car), coming and going every day, with a lot of bags, taking previously prepared food from home. Luxuries, was having a black and white TV, later a 2nd hand colour TV that lasted until I got into college and by the end was more than 20 years old. Eating out was a twice a year luxury for most of my infancy, and asking for food delivery? Are you joking me?
Weekend programs, was my father getting a side job to make more money installing and configuring electrical appliances in middle class people homes. And taking me along with him to help.
As hard-working and money saving people, they, of course, ended up building a better life for them and providing me an education within their means. Also, of course, they absolutely despise people that don't work and live on the state.
So, go burn yourself with your ridiculous virtue signalling high morals. It takes a lot of privilege and disconnect from reality, to think, and even say that out loud, that hard-working people are the ones living on the state.
And clearly no one else has ever, or will ever have a different experience than yours and if they ever do it's because they are worse people and deserve it right?
I'd be willing to bet there are a lot of people on food stamps who work harder than many high income earners myself included. If I suddenly had to spend hours on public transportation just to get to work where I'd spend all day doing the kinds of demanding jobs I pay others to do for me I'd envy my old life of sitting on my ass on the internet while in air conditioning all day.
Poor people often work their asses off because they have to just to get what little they're paid and keep what little they have.
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/11/19/walmart-and-mcdonalds-among-...
And you think that minimum wage in the 80s is the same as minimum wage today? If you have a minimum wage job in Mississippi and work 40 hours a week for a whole year you get 15000$ before taxes and roughly 12000$ after taxes.
According to https://www.mdhs.ms.gov/snap/ you are then eligible for food stamps with 1+ family members.
If you are a family of 4 and BOTH PARENTS work on minimum wage, you still get food stamps. Do you call parents with 2 children who both work 40 hours a week lazy? Should people with 4 children just work 60 hours? Oh they'd still get food stamps
Cmon give me the numbers instead of your feelings. My guess is you won't even reply because you already made up your mind.
It's must be easy to be you on discussions, when you just ride the Gish Gallop with your arguments and keep making up stuff for the others to rebuke.
[1] http://www.freeby50.com/2014/01/minimum-wage-history-adjuste...
> therefore ensuring its eternal permanence on democracy
I assume you would prefer a different system?
I most certainly don't approve a dictatorship of the majority.
The US certainly has enough money to feed everyone in the country (citizens or otherwise), it would be a tiny fraction of the current budget to do so. I'm curious to hear your ideas for better spending targets.
Reminds me of a similar example going on in my country, where unemployed people, get ahead of employed people, for getting a spot to put their children in the nursery.
Let that sink in: if you aren't working, you get a nursery to leave your children during the day. If you are working, you either pay private, ask the grandparents, or leave your job.
The State has basically transformed itself, on the anecdote of stealing from 1 to redistribute by 2, therefore ensuring its eternal permanence on democracy.