Food stamp foodies

March 25, 2010Jon Brooks Comments Off

Found on The Awl:

Salon readers respond to an article Hipsters on food stamps, subtitled “They’re young, they’re broke, and they pay for organic salmon with government subsidies. Got a problem with that? ”

Think of it as the effect of a grinding recession crossed with the epicurean tastes of young people as obsessed with food as previous generations were with music and sex. Faced with lingering unemployment, 20- and 30-somethings with college degrees and foodie standards are shaking off old taboos about who should get government assistance and discovering that government benefits can indeed be used for just about anything edible, including wild-caught fish, organic asparagus and triple-crème cheese.

Comments:

I have no problem with anyone who needs assistance, but come on… Those grocery stores already charge a premium for everyday items compares to the local A&P/Publix/Etc. Have some common sense to try to save some money…. Especially if it isn’t your money.

——————————————————————————————————

At one time I was working so doesn’t that mean my taxes went to pay for government subsidies too? And now that I’m down can’t I get some help? And enjoy my organic conflict free coffee beans while i’m at it? I’ll be back on the neverending hamster wheel of working life again …

——————————————————————————————————

Don’t these people have families? One of them is from Westchester. Almost all of them managed to, somehow, finance a post-graduate education. They live in “artsy,” “hip” (read: expensive) parts of town (are they on Section-8?). Yet, somehow, they can’t manage to feed themselves?

Of course people are going to be pissed that they’re busting their asses every day in real jobs so that some douchebag can satisfy his “flexitarian” gourmet diet. Did it ever cross their minds to look for a second job – say at McDonald’s or Home Depot or in janitorial services – so they could afford to satisfy their gourmet palate, instead of relying on government? Or do they seriously expect to be able to afford that kind of lifestyle working in the art/poetry world?

Of course, its entirely possible this is all some grand attempt at irony.

——————————————————————————————————

I’m an AmeriCorps volunteer for 2010. I’m get 200/month in food stamps. I’m also in low income housing. Because of where I’m living (small, rural town) I don’t have the option of buying all my food at a specialty or high-end store. But at the local Safeway I’m buying the organic, free-range, all natural options whenever I can. I’m doing this because I believe that way of growing and producing goods is better for everyone. I also happen to have “foodie” tastes and I’ll buy the wedge of triple-cream over the brick of velveeta every time and I don’t see why anybody gives a sh*t.

It seems to me that there are way more important arguments over the use of tax dollars than what I’m eating.

——————————————————————————————————

Having just finished teaching underprivileged elementary kids the difference between “wants” and “needs”, I am now wondering if my lesson was administered to the wrong demographic.

——————————————————————————————————

I am a native Floridian. I am 62. I was laid off from a job, can’t find work, and now my unemployment has run out. My car is dead, and mass transit in my city is almost non-existent. I am barely making it, and in a couple of months I may not have enough “savings” left to pay my rent, utilities, and bills.

My food stamp (EBT debit card) allotment is keeping me alive – it is the only thing (aside from the non-expired unemployment) that I qualify for. As long as I don’t go over my EBT allotment for food, I will buy whatever I am allowed to buy.

Every four months, I am asked to “re-qualify” for the program whereupon I must fill out the same forms, submit my financial records, including name of bank AND account number, and wait to see if they will allow me to eat for another four months.

So, no, I don’t have a problem with what people choose to buy with their food stamp allotment. Rules are in place. And if you haven’t noticed, ALL food is expensive these days.

——————————————————————————————————

Your tax dollars are already subsidizing massive industrial corn farms, meat factories, soy farms, and so on, that use the least environmentally friendly, least consumer friendly methods possible.

Why should anyone get their panties in a bundle that these people are being subsidized by the government to eat food that is locally and organically grown by small-scale, family-run farms that don’t need to hire armies of illegal migrant workers to keep prices down?

I am currently in a volunteer corps that is similar to Americorps, and we get about $100 for groceries each month. My housemates and I buy local and organic and we are still operating with a budget surplus. The idea that buying real food is somehow inherently more expensive is BS in my experience.

——————————————————————————————————

Since last summer, I’ve been on food stamps… Food assistance is supposed to accomplish two goals, allow people of lower income to purchase food (and I have been grateful to not have to worry about that), and to put money back into the local community. For that reason, I try to spend at least some of it at the grocery chain that has committed to the local inner city, and almost none of it at Walmart, even if I might get more food at the latter. But however people spend their allotment, they get the amount the standards say they qualify for. So if someone spends it all on the fixings for one big dinner at the fancy overpriced market, I guess that’s irritating, but then they have to figure out how to feed themselves for the rest of the month. They don’t get more just because they have pricier tastes.

——————————————————————————————————

The purpose of welfare should be to maintain life, not support a lifestyle. If you can buy twice as much food at Safeway or Kroger than at Whole Foods, you need to go to Safeway. Don’t throw out this bull about “oh, we spend more money on x-and-x”. It’s the mentality of the hipster freeloader perpetuated across all generations that symbolizes how our society got here. And if you can’t afford grad school without food stamps, maybe you shouldn’t be in grad school.

——————————————————————————————————

Let me get this straight. It’s wasteful and elitist to spend your food stamps on organic salmon and raw honey… but it’s OK to spend it on Pepsi, Little Debbie snack cakes, and Lay’s potato chips?

——————————————————————————————————

Let me get this straight. It’s wasteful and elitist to spend your food stamps on organic salmon and raw honey… but it’s OK to spend it on Pepsi, Little Debbie snack cakes, and Lay’s potato chips?

Total strawman argument. If you think those are the only options, either junk or gourmet, you have a very distorted, polarized view. You don’t have to buy trendy, upscale, gourmet ingredients in order to eat healthy.

The real question is whether the state should subsidize people like this. It kind of seems like self-imposed poverty to me. If you’re capable of getting a Masters or PhD in art or poetry then you’re smart enough to know that its probably going to be very hard to find actual work in either of those fields. And if you do find such work, chances are its not going to be able to fund a lavish “foodie” lifestyle. These are able-bodied 20/30-somethings with education. Granted, the job market is extremely weak but I have a hard time believing these people truly exhausted their options. Did they look into fast-food, janitorial services, retail? Those types of jobs have lots of turnover, so there’s almost always something available. Did they look into picking up a trade? I would say the chances are No – these type of jobs don’t fit into their self-image as an artist or whatever. So, even though this is a situation of their own making – they’re expecting the government to subsidize their lifestyle. And its all being paid for by people who actually bite the bullet and work at jobs they don’t necessarily love do what they do in order to support themselves and their families and not be a burden to society. Yeah, its pretty appalling.

——————————————————————————————————

These well educated young people who are used to affluence do not yet realize that poverty might be a lifelong condition. You can’t blame them for being young and naive; they’ve grown up being fed a fantasy about the American dream, perpetuated by rightwing lies about who deserves to be rich, and how the United States is the best nation on Earth. Like older unemployed Americans, many of these kids are faced with a bleak future for decades to come. Given that, they must learn to live like poor people and make their dollars stretch. No more wild caught salmon or triple cream organic Ben & Jerry’s. They need to learn how to cook dried beans and grains and root vegetables and greens. If they eat meat, they need to learn how to cook the offal that is usually tossed away or disdained by the wealthy. This is how poor people have always eaten. Call it peasant food or call it soul food, but accept it for what it is.

——————————————————————————————————

Lost in the article is that many of these food choices are not expensive. I am not on food stamps, but am just about to start a new job after over a year of unemployment. We have been on a very tight budget. Food is also one of our greatest joys (as an aside – god I hate the term “foodie”). We’ve found that fresh local produce, certain local meats, local seafoods that are in season at the time are all pretty darn inexpensive. We care about what we eat, stay within our budget and eat well.

——————————————————————————————————

I belong to the generation if not demographic that this article talks about and think that we have for so long been taught that in our beloved free enterprise you should take whatever you can get it.

My generation has grown up in an era where every faceless corporation is spending millions upon millions in research on how to manipulate, brainwash, and dominate us that we feel it’s only natural to try to get what you can out of government or whatever.

Therefore it’s not morally reprehensible but rather a smart capitalistic choice; it’s simply cutting costs.

Comments are closed.