Summary: As a part of the Trump administration’s 2019 budget plan, participants of the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program(SNAP) who receive monthly cash benefits for food, would receive a box of food instead. The box would contain “nutritious” food, 100% grown in the U.S. and would be valued at about half of the SNAP recipient's monthly benefit. They would be given the remainder of their benefits on electronic benefit cards like before. This proposal is estimated to save $130 billion over ten years, although some believe the government won’t save that much due to the costs of purchasing and distributing the food. The Trump administration also hopes to improve the nutritional value of the program and reduce fraud. Some are concerned that families won’t have a choice in the food they receive or know what they’re receiving in advance. Moreover, it may be difficult for families to pick up the food boxes, especially if they don’t own a car.
Questions:
Do you think the administration's proposal to replace food stamps with food boxes is a good idea?
How do you think this proposal will affect participants of SNAP?
Link:
16 comments:
While I do understand the White House’s intent to provide nutritious cheap food to those who need it, I do feel like the program limits the family’s right to choose what foods they want to eat. A common criticism of subscription boxes is that they don’t fit to their dietary needs or they have food that you don’t like because you can’t pick your menu to your liking. I don’t think the government should be forcing people to limit themselves to a set amount of food, and should at least give them the liberty to choose what is in that box. I , personally, would hate to only eat the foods someone forced me to eat knowing that there are a world full of exotic foods I’d be missing out on. Furthermore, i think shipping the food would also be difficult because not everyone has access to transportation. Transportation would also become a chore if people lie far from the pick up location, and would distract from their daily schedule
I think that receiving a box of food for half of the SNAP recipient's monthly benefit is a really good idea. While I understand Shweta's concern about forcing people to eat certain foods, some of which they may not like, I think this is a good way to add more nutrition to the diet of these individuals. Oftentimes, because healthy options are way more expensive at grocery stores, people with limited money to use on food such as SNAP recipients, may have been opting for less expensive and less healthier foods. By giving them a box of food which is claimed to be nutritious, the government is helping these individuals become healthier. Furthermore, by allowing them to still have half of their money on the electronic benefit card, this program allows the beneficiaries to spend some money on the food items they like, that may not be in the box. When it comes to transporting the boxes, I think that local stores should have a stash of them, which can be redeemed by a SNAP recipient once a month.
i believee that the prposal is a good idea. the fact that they are saving that one extra step for those in need helps both the government and the people in need. Food stamps can be easily replaced due to the purpose if for the homeless and those in need to get food. By delivering it to them, they are allowing more assistance. the workers of snap could be egreatly benefiial due to the higher pay and savings.
While I can understand Emily's point on the importance of nutritious food, I actually don't think that the White House's intent to provide nutritious cheap foods in a box is a good idea. I think that rather than healthy options being more expensive, SNAP recipients and people who have a limited amount of money oftentimes buy unhealthy meals because they are more hearty and keeps them fuller for longer. Giving someone a salad won't keep someone satisfied as long as giving them a bunch of carbs in a hamburger or something. Another reason that I think that this delivery of food to the poor is not a good idea is because it takes away the freedom of choice. Giving people money to actually be able to go the the market themselves and pick out and buy their own groceries is a freedom that I believe should be upheld. By allowing people to do this is in a way protecting their dignity and freedom of choice. I also think that if they give people a box of food, a lot of food might be thrown away and wasted because you are unable to customize the box to your dietary needs and preferences. Additionally, lots of people work long hours and just don't have the time to cook all these wholesome foods, plus there are a lot of people who just don't like cooking or are bad at it. All in all, I don't believe that this "box of food idea" for SNAP participants is a good one.
I think this is a good idea. I do think there could be some easy improvements and solutions to the problems that were addressed. Maybe there could be a few choices of boxed meals to attend the needs and likings of everyone. Since it is being delivered to them, the issue of picking it up wouldn't be that big of a problem. If some really struggle to get their food, I am sure that both parties can find a better way to distribute and/or pick it up. If this saves a lot of money, it could be a great idea.
While I do understand the push for getting nutritional food in the hands of low-income families, the proposal is simply unrealistic because of the universal nature of it. In the case of a family with extreme dietary restrictions due to allergy or religion, this program would immediately be ineffective because they couldn't choose the food they are being provided with. In addition to this, the transportation of these "boxes" would not be cost effective at all, and if the families are picking up the boxes themselves, that extra responsibility in their daily lives would simply be a distraction from the work needed to get financially "back on their feet." And finally, what is also important to consider is that this program paints a negative picture of the US government by portraying them as unsympathetic rulers who want to simply group all of these low income families into one single entity.
I agree with Shweta and Julia in thinking that this program is probably not the best idea. To begin with, like both Christina and Shweta mentioned, people don't get to choose what they get in their boxes. Some people might be limited by dietary restrictions, allergies, or religious principles, so the food that they get might not be suited for them. Tailoring food to each specific family is probably too tedious and complicated for the government to do, and I doubt that the Trump administration would be willing to spend that much money or energy on welfare anyway. Furthermore, like Julia said, some families can't be concerned with the health of their food because their main priority is getting food on their plate first. The main reason why a lot of people can't buy healthy food is because it's too expensive and now that they're only getting half of their benefits in healthy food, that probably means they're not going to get very much food.
I also think the more unexpected costs of production need to be considered. Boxes typically aren't that expensive, but when you need to buy them for 45 million people living under the poverty line in the US, the costs add up. Transportation is also an issue because while cars are probably a really good long term investment, many families can't afford to make that investment. The healthy food in the boxes are probably also perishable; a family can't really store leftovers for very long if they wanted to, so letting them use their own money to buy food with longer shelf life in bulk (bc its cheaper) is probably better for them.
Although I see what they are trying to attempt, I don't really think this idea will work as well as they thought. They cannot be handing the same box of food to everyone because everyone has different needs. Some people have allergies which could be an issue, while others need specific nutrients that the box might lack. This box strips the freedom away from people of being able to choose their own food. I think with food stamps it gives people the freedom to buy the food they need according to the types of nutrients they need. They can't really take advantage of food stamps because it's not like they can buy whatever they want with that card.
I agree with the others that it is a thoughtful attempt to promote healthy eating for everyone, but I do believe that it will be frustrating for many families to be given a certain meal to eat. I'm sure many families would like the flexibility to choose what they would like to eat. However, to guide them to make nutritional choices, I think it would be a great idea to send them information about ways to make nutritional choices with a low budget. It is difficult to tailor a generic box to each person's wants and needs, so I think it is important to allow them the independence and freedom to choose their meals, but still offer some guidance.
The pricing seems quite flawed, even from the summary provided. Part of the efficiency of an electronic benefit card is the government does not need to worry about the food. They simply provide the means for people to go buy food themselves. Purchasing and distributing the foods will have costs, both financially and in terms of labor diverted. Either costs will be extremely high for distribution, or participants in the program will have a great level of difficulty getting food boxes themselves.
Honestly, I believe that this is a positive change although we will not see the impacts for a couple of years. From prior reading I am aware of how uncommon it is to see food stamps or EBT cards being used for healthy food items and know that the most common item bought with this government credit is a bottle of soda. While eliminating the ability for people on the poorer end of the spectrum is quite unfortunate, unlike Christina and Shweta, I believe that the government can no longer trust these people to make the right nutritional choices with their credits and were never getting the right proportions of items in the first place.
Additionally, I believe that the box argument that Caroline makes above is invalid because it is not about the poor people themselves making an investment but more so that the government is utilizing existing agricultural infrastructure. I have been volunteering at a boxed produce handout since I was in the 5th grade and have never seen people who we help have trouble with the storage of the perishable items because they often cook them and freeze/ refrigerate them for weeks so that they remain edible. Keep in mind that this is not a replacement for the entirety of their SNAP food stamp card value.
Overall, I believe that this change is reverting more responsibility to those receiving help and encouraging them to become independent from federal assistance (as it should be).
I think that this seems like a really good idea. It would make receiving the food much simpler for families who need it and the estimates that state how much money we would save- if they are to believed- are also clearly positive. Also, this ensures that the food provided by the government will be healthy. An additional benefit of this system would be that it could create or strengthen jobs in the mail delivery business, an industry that has been decline due to the rise of instant messaging.
While delivering a box of food to those in need would be good idea, I believe it to be highly infeasible. This is because different people usually have different allergies. It would take a lot of time for the government to collect data on each individual family's health backgrounds to determine what to send. I also believe this would limit the choice of food that these families have on what they are eating, which might result in public backlash. The delivery of these foods would probably cost a lot as well, and if the families are picking it up themselves, I could see inconvenience to schedules and transportation happening. So all in all, I do not think the administration's proposal to replace food stamps with food boxes is a good idea.
I see both pros and cons to this idea. On one hand, it seems really nice that families will be getting more nutritious food, all while saving the state money. Additionally, this could help the economy by creating more jobs in the delivery of the boxes. On the other hand though, this really restricts the freedom of the families. Dietary restrictions and allergies will be a problem for many families since they do not choose what they will be receiving. Furthermore, the delivery of the food may make it so that there is only a tiny bit of money saved. Because of these reasons, I think that this idea should not be implemented. Although there are some clear benefits, I think that the fact that families don't have the freedom to choose what they want to eat is too big of a problem. I think it could be impractical for a lot of families with dietary restrictions and allergies, and therefore think that this isn't the best idea.
I don't think this would such a smart idea; it's nice that more families will be getting healthier food and save money, but what about food allergies or intolerances? People have to pick and choose what they eat and Food Stamps gives them that benefit. While the delivery aspect of this idea will generate more jobs, it will also cause cuts in time and money. I doubt the white house will save enough money to put this in effect, so it will probably just stay as a bad idea.
I think the overall idea of SNAP providing a box of more nutritious foods per month would help save the government some money, however it really limits the families who are trying to eat vegan or are vegetarian or even those who have allergies. The idea of promoting a more nutritional lifestyle is important, however in reality it's only restricting families in their diet. If they receive a box, but can't eat half of it that wouldn't benefit them at all. Families should be flexible in having the ability to be free to choose what they want to eat, so that the government doesn't have to worry about dietary restrictions. It is just not practical for the government to personally design a box of food for each family's specific needs.
Post a Comment