What luxury looks like
Wanda Labrecque’s Jan. 6 Letter to the Editor argued that purchasing lobster with an EBT card was a prudent use of the government resource. While I can’t verify the nutritional value of a lobster drowned in dairy butter, I know luxury when I see it. It’s sort of like pornography in that respect; hard to define, but I know it when I see it.
Back in 1880, when lobster sold for a penny apiece, I suppose a lot of people on the immediate coast considered lobster a staple of their diet. But only if they had the money to pay for it, not through food stamps or a voucher from the town or any other form of assistance from their brethren.
So, the next time you see someone use food stamps (EBT card) to buy necessary staples such as lobster, congratulate them on their shopping savvy and ask them just how many nutritious meals they can expect to get out of that lobster.
Is there a nutritional, plentiful, nonseasonal, multipurpose, native, affordable and readily available food staple? I think I’ll go make myself a tuna fish sandwich.
Stan Brown
Corinna
Early education and security
I was heartened to read the recent OpEd column from two prominent Bangor business leaders, Bill Miller and Dan Tremble, about why high-quality early education is so important to improving our future work force and our economy. As a retired Air Force major general, I would like to add that high-quality early education is also important to our national security.
Shockingly, and sadly, 75 percent of young Americans today cannot join our armed services for three key reasons: they have dropped out of high school, they are physically unfit or they have a criminal record. This not only threatens our economic security, it also poses a real threat to our military preparedness.
One of the best ways to reverse this downward trend is high-quality early education like pre-kindergarten and Head Start. Early education is a proven way to improve later academic performance and increase graduation rates. It also helps youngsters develop curiosity, character and social skills, which are important to the development of self-discipline, motivation and the ability to be a team member. All of these skills are needed for military service, as well as success in many other careers.
Given these alarming figures, now is not the time to make further cuts in early education programs. It is my hope that our legislators will support early learning programs like Head Start and reject the proposed cuts in the supplemental budget so that our education crisis does not become a national security crisis.
Nelson Durgin
Bangor
Abortion numbers challenged
Guttmacher’s Cory Richards attempts to put to rest his own statistic, saying in his Dec. 30 Letter to the Editor, “there is a wealth of evidence demonstrating that effective contraceptive use dramatically reduces unplanned pregnancy and — thereby — recourse to abortion.” He uses the same circular argument that Guttmacher always uses — more contraception equals less abortion — which is not borne out in reality.
In addition to his senior post at Guttmacher, Cory Richards has held volunteer
positions with NARAL Pro-Choice America and the National Abortion Federation — hardly credentials that show the impartiality that should be demanded of an organization that purports to have the solution to reducing abortion rates.
Guttmacher Institute was founded by Planned Parenthood in 1968 as its research arm. Its namesake, Alan F. Guttmacher, served as vice president of the American Eugenics Society, headed Planned Parenthood Federation of America for more than a decade and was an integral part of the eugenicist birth control movement in the 1920s. He was the driving force in initiating federal funding for Planned Parenthood.
Guttmacher research has been relied on for decades to increase funding for Planned Parenthood. And Planned Parenthood’s abortion numbers have continued to increase almost lockstep with increases in government funding.
It’s time to stop the millions of taxpayer dollars that flow to Guttmacher, Planned Parenthood and Family Planning Association of Maine. These “nonprofits” work together to maintain a healthy profit margin while contributing to the grisly deaths of millions of innocent pre-born children.
Rita Diller
National Director
American Life League’s Stop Planned Parenthood International
LURC reform not balanced
The Legislature is now back in session and the Agriculture Committee will be considering the proposed legislation to “overhaul” the Land Use Regulation Commission.
There are aspects of these proposals which should be carefully considered and rejected.
I am referring specifically to increasing the number of members of LURC without review by the Legislature. The provision to allow counties to opt out opens the door to inefficiency and the creation of a patchwork system of regulations which are not in the best interest of Maine people.
I hope that Mainers who want to balance sane development of our great forests with the preservation of our environment and our heritage will talk with their legislators and make their concerns known.
David Wiggin
Rockport
Farms’ disappearing act
People interested in farming and food from across Maine gathered in Augusta this week for the agricultural trade show. Many trade groups and chemical companies could be found amidst the bustle.
What you won’t find are the thousands of disappeared farmers who gave up farming when they just couldn’t add one more hot water line into the barn, or the concrete floor under the bulk tank, or separate facilities dedicated to one enterprise. You won’t find the farmers who just didn’t have the land base, and couldn’t afford to buy the acreage to increase their production to pay for increasing equipment and building requirements.
You won’t find the crab pickers who stopped picking crabs and selling the meat from their homes to sell their husband’s bycatch when their work was made illegal by rule-making.
You won’t find the farmers who are trying to stay “under the radar” afraid to publicly sell food to their neighbors in the communities where they live, until they get caught farming without a license.
We need the Department of Agriculture to stand up for small farmers. Take time to understand small farms and what we are contributing to our communities. We shouldn’t have to “sneak around farming” afraid of succeeding and becoming visible because new rules have made our work illegitimate.
Don’t make farming criminal with the rules from the FDA and the USDA. Stop disappearing small farms with big rules.
Heather Retberg
Quill’s End Farm
Penobscot
“So, the next time you see someone use food stamps (EBT card) to buy necessary staples such as lobster, congratulate them on their shopping savvy”…excuse me? These people buying lobster or whatever else that you judge to be a “luxury” are doing nothing wrong. These people have been given X dollars to buy food, with very few restrictions as to what can not be bought.
Now, if you don’t like the rules as they are, talk to the people that are making the rules. What do you accomplish by giving a hard time to the people who are following the rules, for no other reason than that you don’t like the rules as they are?
I think the main gripe with such “luxury purchases” is if the rules also allow for purchasing cigarettes, booze, and other non-food items (or even large quantities of junk food).
I still think the best option is to have central EBT only stores operated by the State in conjunction with Hannaford Shaws and other major food retailers.
I think in a situation like that you could control the eligible items sold, the price the items are sold at, quality and quantity. (I saw an ebt card swiped on 5 frozen pizzas and a bunch of pre-package microwave meals and a gallon of milk last night)
And how much more money are these separate stores going to cost tax payers, all so a few people can play nanny to the poor and make certain they live their lives according to the nanny’s standards and whims?
Like I said…. the state in conjunction with Hannaford etc. Put it out to bid. Save a ton.
As for nanny to the poor…. Aren’t we doing that now?
In what world would creating a new chain of stores save a ton of money? Why not use the existing stores and save a ton of money by not creating a new layer of bureaucracy, then we could save further money by trusting people to make good decisions with the money we give them and buying the food that is appropriate for them and their families? Of course I am sure that is much too simple a solution and makes far too much sense.
Have the store run by Hannaford or someone that knows the business. By contract. have the state buy in bulk… redo contracts… Yes bureaucracy is a problem, but we have an ineffective one right now. With the number of people on food stamps you could save a bundle. Listen I might not have all the kinks worked out but I am not in the food business. But I do know you could monitor fraud, make sure the state and the ebt card holder and the taxpayer get the most for the money.
Good idea actually. The stores would not carry cigarettes, beer, booze, soft drinks, or prepared foods.
I don’t snoop over anyone’s shoulder to see whether they are swiping an EBT card, and I’m not nosey enough to pry into what the other person in line is buying. You want to stizmatize poor people, and have them buy more gas for the old car, or somehow find a bus to go farther to find a less convenient, less well-stocked, special bureaucratic store. You say that if a big multi-national corporation, like the one that owns Hannaford, gets a state contract, that it won’t be bureaucratic. Sure, right! It sounds like a money-loser for Hannaford’s parent company, unless it gets a state subsidy. And good luck for people who live in Vanceboro, Meddybemps, or Jackman, far away from your new bureaucratic stores.
Where do the people from Meddybemps go now?
Secondly you give up a certain amount of privacy when you become a state dependent.
Generally like you, I pay no attention to what people purchase. It takes something that happens a little bit out of the ordinary that draws attention. When it does I am likely to pay attention to other details as well. Do you go through your life unaware of whats happening around you? Or are you intentionally dense?
I prefer to be civil. I realize that you are rude and perfer to insult people. It’s very difficult to carry on a rational discussion with someone like yourself who simply wants to hurl insults.
So you insult and implication in your previous post was not aimed at me? You barb me I pop ya on the nose.
Hi Cheesey. I have been reading what you have been posting about special stores just for those with EBT cards. Are you suggesting that the State or Feds get into the food business? Even if the stores were run by a division of Shaw’s or Hanniford’s it would still have to be a quasi-government operation wouldn’t it? It wasn’t that long ago that the State of Maine was running liquor stores and even though they had a monopoly claimed that they couldn’t make the stores run at a profit (how when you are the only game in town, no make that only game in the state you can’t make a profit I will never know). I realize that the EBT program is far from perfect and that there are abuses to the program, but my goodness can you imagine the cluster (insert proper expletive) that would occur if Maine were to go into the grocery store business? What really surprises me about the comments on this subject is that names who normally are associated with less government are actually talking about expanding government. Do you really want DHHS who seems to be somewhat challenged when it comes to proper accounting procedures in the grocery business? Or would it be the Maine Grocery Authority?
Well with out going too far into the alcohol thing, the State tried to run the stores at a profit themselves… Am I right? As we all know the state doesn’t know how to do that.
That is not what I am advocating. (I admit I haven’t got this all worked out.)
But. Your points are well taken…. and I admit a certain queasiness in my stomach over it.
My idea is that private companies like Shaw’s or Hannaford run the actual day to day operations on a contractual basis. The feds negotiates prices in bulk for products just as say Wal-Mart does with its vendors. The military commissary model may work here. Food choices are more limited but cheaper to all concerned. The cardholder the government and the taxpayer.
Why would a private company run a competing business with lower profits than they already get with their current business model.
Since the SNAP program is a federal program you would most likely have multiple private companies running those stores in local areas or would you prefer the local money going to a large out of state business.
And yes, the money would leave the state. Right now if someone uses an EBT card in a local business the money stays local and provides jobs and income for local people. If you got the local businesses out of the SNAP program then you would see more jobs lost in Maine’s economy than would be created by centralized stores.
The town I live in currently has 1 supermarket and 3 convenience stores in it. Without the SNAP program I guarantee at least 1 and probably 2 of those convenience stores would close and the local supermarker would lose business and jobs.
They would because they would lose the business otherwise. Sort of the same thing the government does to hospitals with medicare. We will pay you this…… and wait five years to pay you even then.
Your concern for smaller stores is noted and reasonable but the taxpayer has a need as well. Compare the price on a box of macaroni at your convienece store and the price at a supermarket. There would be more value to the recipient if they went to the larger store. SNAP should focus on what it is supposed to do which is to keep people from going hungry at the lowest cost possible to the taxpayer.
Thanks for the convo.
“the State tried to run the stores at a profit themselves… Am I right?”As we all know the state doesn’t know how to do that.”
But cross the bridge into New Hampshire and the State is doing a bang up job of running the liquor monopoly. You and I both run businesses. Imagine being in a business where there was no competition and you could set the price at just about anything you wanted for goods or services, especially goods that a lot of people just have to have like liquor. As far as bulk purchasing is concerned I seriously doubt that the State of Maine would be a larger buyer then would either Hanniford or Shaw’s which are both owned by international companies which would have a lot more bulk buying power then just the State of Maine. In my opinion the answer to the problem isn’t to have government operated or “special ” stores it is a matter of setting more stringent rules on what can and can not be purchased with an EBT card. The subject of lobster being a luxury item was mentioned in this discussion. Let’s go to something most people do not consider a luxury, water. There have been several stories about people buying water in grocery stores just to dump it out and return the bottles for cash. Is store bought water any less a luxury then lobster? In order to conform to codes a dwelling unit has to have drinkable water. Perhaps the store bought water taste better then that from the tap, but does the store bought stuff have more nutritional value then the stuff from the faucet? I don’t think so. You and I are both old enough, based on previous posting by both us, to remember when the primary source of drinking water was the faucet in the kitchen sink or the drinking fountain in school. Why not place restrictions on what the card can purchase? How about limiting it to “store brand” products which while having the same nutritional equivalent to “name brands” sell for less. Let’s do away with allowing the purchase of “junk” food, people have actually been known to live without twinkies.How about stopping the purchase of soft drinks. The same can be said of them as can be said of twinkies. Of course the minute someone proposed limits such as these the lobbist would go ballistic. Which brings us back to what I think will cure a good many of our problems. Congressional term limits. While I am not a supporter of Rick Perry his idea of making congress a part time job is one I agree with and yesterday I read where a Congressman is going to file a bill to do just that next week. I think that is something we all should get behind and demand that our elected representatives support. Under the bill congress would be limited to 5 days a month or 60 days per year. Those limits may need to be adjusted somewhat but the idea has merit.
It looks from the multiple postings here today that people realize there is a problem.
Like I said my premise was basically just an idea. Something to consider. I like it that folks shot a lot of holes in that idea and came up with reasonable suggestions. Like yours.
Store Brands are a good idea, so is a voucher system like another poster mentioned in a comparison to WIC. The WIC idea is good because you can say… you spend so much on fruit & vegetables so much on dairy and cereals and so much on protein. We have the technology now to customize a bit depending on the client. Children in the family as opposed to single adults which have different needs, that sort of general thing.
Well at least people are talking.
I haven’t had a twinkie since 1970 I bet. The rest of the package may well be in that unopened packing box in the attic still as fresh as the day it came out of the oven.
Can you get the surplus lobster at a great price at your proposed commissary?
possibly
Lol…and what would Hannaford’s incentive be? They are a business…why would they foot part of the bill?
If I, (or the state in this case), am paying the bill then I get to say what is purchased with that money. If you want to buy something else then go earn the money to do so.
I would go back to the old system of directly distributing basic surplus food.
The state already limits what can be bought with Food stamps to just some food items, hot sandwiches or prepared foods are not allowed.
Are you suggesting that the SNAP program create a list of foods that you find acceptable that can be purchased with EBT cards?
Not a business in this country would stand for this. Can you imagine the time and costs necesary to determine if the store is in compliance.
The limits are too broad. When I say prepared foods I am including most frozen items. You know, the frozen prepared pizza or lasagna or other ready to cook items. Frozen vegies would of course be allowed. No meat costing over some arbitrary amount per pound. No need for people on the dole to be buying prime porterhouse steaks with state money.
I really don’t care if the stores didn’t like it.
Actually should be simple to implement. Everything has a bar code. Sams supplies a complete list of items every month bought on their credit card. Same could be done for EBT and any item not approved would simply not be paid for, store eats it. Just code items in the store computer as allowed or not. Shelf labels could be a different color if allowed so there would be no reason for someone to bring non allowed items to the register.
So for example I have a family of four and I want to have lasagna for dinner, a healthy nutritious meal by the way. I could buy a frozen one that will feed a family of four for $6 or I could cook one from scratch costing me (or rather the state if I am on SNAP) $10 or more. Or would you not allow noodles, hamburger, tomato paste, cheese etc to be purchased using EBT cards?
Or I want the family to have a pizza (maybe it is a special occasion) I could buy a frozen one that would feed a family of 4 for about $8 or I could make one from scratch that would cost me over $10. Or would you not allow pizza crust, sauce, toppings (hamburger, mushroom, green peppers etc.) and cheese to be bought with an EBT card?
None of the items listed for cooking from scratch are expensive nor extravagent and I for one don’t consider lasagna or pizza a luxury meal. It is just cheaper sometimes to buy premade meals.
If you can feed a family of 4 off a $6 frozen pizza then you are either all midgets or eat like birds. The lasagna i make with that same $6 of ingredients will be more nutritious than the fake cheese etc of the frozen one and I can make enough for 2 meals.
Yeah, but a meal of boiled lasagna with nothing on them is pretty tasteless, so naturally it lasts two meals. LMAO
That’s impressive! I too would like to make lasagna
from scratch, for 8 people (that’s for 4 people twice), for a total cost of $6. Would you please cost that out for me? I would love to know how you do it.
That’s impressive! I too would like to make lasagna from scratch, for 8 people (that’s for 4 people twice), for a total cost of $6. Would you please cost that out for me? I would love to know how you do it.
*************************************************
I can make it for $6.58
1 box lasagne noodles $1.25 (at Wal-Mart) the store brand at Hannaford is $1.39
1 jar store brand spaghetti sauce $1.00 (of course you could make your own sauce for 99 cents—the cost of a 28 oz. can of plum tomatoes or crushed tomatoes)
1-32 oz container ricotta cheese $3.00
1/3 package store brand mozzarella cheese $1.00 (again at Wal-Mart)
2 eggs 33 cents
If you want meat, add approx. $1.50
this will make a 9×13 pan layered to the top.
btw, you can’t get a frozen, pre-made family sized lasagne for $6.
Thanks! I’ll let you know how it comes out!
That’s the kind of intellectual consistency I have come to expect of modern conservatism. Government is the problem, so what we need is a new government bureaucracy to administer government commodities because people can’t be trusted to make their own decisions. Spectacular. Keep up the good work.
Indeed. Take it from the taxpayers and give it to the corporations.
Who exactly do you think benefits from the EBT card now? Shaws Walmart Hannaford…
Here’s a thought. Why don’t we bring back the camps, like the ones used to inter Japanese American citizens during WWII. We could build them like military barraks with a central chow hall to house and feed all the people who have fallen on hard times. That way we could ensure that everyone ate a healthy diet. We could better evaluate those who need further education in fields where employment is needed. Then provide them with transportation to and from the newly returned from Asia factories. There they can earn credits to pay back the costs of housing and clothing that they have incurred. A few of them should be able to learn enough to run the administration of the camps.
This way we could keep the rifraf from disturbing the tranquility of our shopping experiences. Maybe a few of the wealthy won’t find it neccessary to move into gated communities.
Nah, That is more of a Soviet or left wing- socialist type of thing. Generally re-education camps are the preserve of the left aimed at independent capable people who don’t agree with them. Not people who are dependent on others. Dependent people in the left wing mantra are easily pacified by government money and methadone clinics.
There is one thing though. The moment that you can no longer care for yourself or your family chooses not to care for you and puts you on the state aide a lot of personal freedom is taken from you. Immediately the government starts making choices for you. Do you really believe there are no strings attached to the governments largesse?
Don’t pick on FDR.
Don’t small markets also accept food stamps? There are more of those in this state than the corporate stores.
Like I say.. Its just a concept. There are probably as many down sides as up sides.
On the other hand I have witnessed counter people at a convenience store show EBT card holders how to play the system.
The incident I had in mind: A customer with a card stops at a microwave with a frozen sandwich. The clerk, knowing the customer, shouts out, Joe!! don’t microwave that , you wont be able to use your EBT card. Pay for it first then use the microwave. Thats legal!!!
But is that “playing the system”? The rules are clear and it looked like they were following the rules. If the sandwich had been sold, hot, using an EBT card, then that would have been a problem. But what you describe looks like someone was just helping someone else follow the rules.
OK… Letter spirit conflict….I’ll accept your premise.
Yeah they do, even Irvings. One day I was getting gas and the lady in front of me bought nearly $20 worth of junk food with her EPT card: soda, chips, sweet cakes and candy. I bought two bananas, an apple, a package of sunflower seeds and a juice for $5 cash. Safe to say my food choices gave my the vitamins and nutrients that a human body needs. Those items curbed my appetite for many hours. While, it is safe to say that an hour after consuming those food products, they were hungry again.
Maybe if us tax payers took a moment from our busy schedule to inform these misguided souls that there food choices leave a lot to be desired, we could hepl society.
We should tell EVERYONE who buys this stuff! Don’t the taxpayers ultimately foot the bill when someone is sick? That’s what I always hear-people should smoke cuz the taxpayers will pay. People shouldn’t eat stuff because the taxpayer will have to pay.
Better nutrition information is a good idea. And every time Michelle Obama has made suggestions talk radio and its conservative followers start ranting about government control, taking away our individual freedom and other such idiocies.
Better nutrition information is a good idea. And every time Michelle Obama has made suggestions talk radio and its conservative followers start ranting about government control, taking away our individual freedom and other such idiocies.
****************************************************************
And every time a so-called conservative makes suggestions (such as Cheesecake1955 above) or brings to light the ways that unscrupulous recipients of taxpayer-funded SNAP/EBT cards scam the system, the bleeding-heart democrats and their “followers” start ranting about how the exposers are heartless pr!c+s who shouldn’t care about where their tax money goes and other such idiocies.
And hundreds of small, local convenience stores.
and hundreds of small locally owned independant stores in Maine
None of which was an ineligible food stamp puchase, just your personal perjudice and bias.
Ok thats the way it is now but Food stamps expenses are growing and we have to control the cost. SalArg has a good idea.
Except that changing what you can buy, will in no way effect the state budget because it’s all federal money. The only state money for food stamps is a small amount used for administration. Changing what people buy is also not going to save anything, they money would just be spent on different things which may or may not sit better with your judgement!!!
It will save us all the healthcare costs that come from eating foods that are unhealthy. Food stamps should be vouchers like WIC.
That is exactly right. If there was a good well done food program WIC is it.
The original Food Stamp Program more closely resembles WIC of today than the SNAP program.
**Sorry for agreeing with you.**
We are more alike than we are different.
The Feds are having problems with money also.
The number of unemployed, under employed have increased. The salaries of most wage workers have not kept up with inflation. Let’s attack the problem at it’s core not at the consequences end.
Address jobs and wages and you reduce food stamp problems
I have advocated that for a long time. Something like a PX on a military base. The EBT card is only good at a State operated store and to use that card you have to show an ID with a name that corresponds to that card. In that store there are healthy, nutrious food. There is as much nutrition in stew beef as is in ny strip loin. Want cookies? Buy Flour, Butter and such and make them, no oreos for sale in the store.
There you go. Perfect.
Wouldn’t it be easier to take these items off the list of allowable foods? No extra admin or new facilities involved. Work with the stores that currently accept EBT cards to modify their computer programs. Give them lead time to know what has to come off the list. Truly, from a programming perspective it’s little different than changing the list of taxable items except perhaps the volume of changes, thus the lead time to get it done.
Those things have been attempted. A dentist in Bangor several years ago said that he was treating many low income children who were receiving state assistance with food and other things. He noted that they all had massive amounts of tooth decay that was not normal. He made the connection to sugary drinks and advocated that they should not be an allowed purchase with food stamps.
People responded in BDN editorials with opinions that it was everything from nanny state tatics to a civil rights violation. One woman even wrote that if she couldnt buy soda on food stamps she would not be able to afford to serve soda as a special treat to her son on his birthday or to his friends at his party.
If anyone from State governemnt merely suggested that things like oreos, live lobster and soda would be coming off the items being able to be purchased with EBT cards there would be a howl against it. Most certainly if the governor proposed the idea himself.
Why should we hold the poor and the needy to a higher standard than we do the rest of society?
This plan of requiring those receiving assistance to make their own cookies instead of buying Oreos sounds judgmental. What’s to stop someone from buying these staples and making something with as much sugar and fat as oreos? I made a cookies that had an icing that was all butter and brown sugar-it was really good, but probably worse than an oreo. How would you stop such baking by those on assistance? And, really, why should you?
The food program specifically states it is a nutrition program. I dont believe Mountain Dew is nutritious but you can buy them on food stamps.
I know. Isn’t that bizarre? But the soda industry has our politicians under a spell. Our politicians care more about the kick backs that they get from these companies than the welfare of their constituents.
Then why take it up with the recipients? Have you written your legislators about this?
I have called several times.
Okay. That’s the way to do it, then.
I never take anything up with recipients. I am kind to all people.
Cool. Some people do and I think that’s rude and inappropriate.
Some of those people read these blogs and what you have been posting has not been kind.
At least to me it’s not about nutrition but about stretching the dollar. Generally speaking I can make cookies for much less $$ than I can if I buy a package of cookies. Again, I think you have an obligation to stretch those dollars.
If the people are fed, then what’s the point? X number of dollars are given and those dollars are used to buy food to feed the people of the family. Is it really useful to micromanage them?
Do they have time to just sit around and bake cookies? If they did, then someone would complain about how they should be looking for a job!
Anything sweet made at home without all of the additives, preservatives and chemicals is healthier than store bought sweet goods like Oreos.
Let’s just micromanage the recipients.
And when we’ve got that down, we can start micromanaging the lives of everyone else since we ALL benefit from the taxpayer’s money. It’s already happening in some institutions and government.
I am of the opinion that when you ask for and accept government help you should also expect the government to set certain conditions and limits in regards to that assistance. Listen to PSA about food stamp programs and the words healthy and nutritious always are in them.
The government is spending money to provide food to people. Some of those people in turn are using that money to buy things that are not healthy and create other problems like tooth decay, obesity and diabetes. This in turn at times results in the government also spending money to provide dental and medical treatment to the same people that they are already providing food assistance for. Those government funds come from you and I and our neighbors and I believe we should all have a right to offer opinions and ideas about how our money is spent.
The above is my opinion. It may not be yours or anyone elses. If you buy the food you consume with your own money then by all means eat what you like.
I buy my food with my money that I make, not money that is giving to me by taxpayer supported programs. If I choose to eat jelly doughnuts and drink mountain dew and drive myself into diabetes that is my choice and not one penny from your pocket or my neighbors will be spent on what I eat or medical treatement that I may need.
The processed foods industry makes $billions off of the food stamp program, therefore the food industry lobbyists will never allow any of their products to be omitted. It is naive to think food stamp recipients ever would be permitted only to purchase government-approved foods. Besides, that would be socialism, wouldn’t it?
I’m not sure it is socialism. The early food stamps program had limitations far stricter than today. The sixties.
Source please.
Personal recollection from my teenage years.
Look it up.
I remember our food choices were limited. There was no EBT card. There was a booklet and on the back panel were descriptions of foods that could be purchased with the coupons. This was circa 1967-68 maybe 69. Anyway If I remember correctly, this is all memory now, so blast me if I’m wrong, You had to BUY your food stamps from the government.
Why would you buy food stamps from the government that limited your food choices? I would think it would make more sense to buy the food you wanted with the money you used to buy food stamps with.
In the sixties a food stamp recipient could buy (pardon me if my numbers are not exact its been a few decades) $50 worth of food stamps for $20, otherwise you just didn’t get Food Stamps. You could only purchase certain items with the stamps. Milk Cheese Bread Meat that sort of thing. It changed in the early seventies I think to all stamps free to the recipient and as time marched on what you could buy with them widened. My weak recollection is that under Reagan it changed to say you could buy anything edible. (Catsup is a vegetable)
My recollection of the 1960s is the same as yours here. A person who qualified could purchase a book of food stamps at a discounted rate, and use them as “money” in the supermarket. I remember that people could not buy imported foods. So our local supermarket got their meat for hamburger from South America, and that was prohibited for food stamp recipients. But they could buy good cuts of steak, because that came from U.S. cattle.
You added a few details to my recollection. Thanks.
cheesecake is correct. My parents have told me that ¨buying foodstamps¨ was still in use in the 1970s and early 80s.
Socialism is already happening as we taxpayers are providing for the common good of other citizens. I know what I advocate, the state run food stores and government approved purchases only has nearly zero chance of ever happening.
Your writings about the processed food industry is true. That is part of the trouble. If perhaps the federal government would turn total control of this program over to the states a bit of that problem could go away.
When I lived in Vermont I actually was a volunteer for a state program that taught people on food stamps how to get the most out of the money they had by buying good, nutritious food items at reasonable prices. I worked mostly as a professional chef back then. Each week I would give an example of what could be bought for twenty dollars and how it could be used to create a meal for four people.
I am not aware if Maine has that type of program available for folks on food assistance. Do you know if they do?
I don’t know if Maine does, but today I read about a Federal government pilot program called the Healthy Incentives Pilot which is designed to give discounts on healthy foods to food stamps recipients. You can read more about it here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Food_stamps#Healthy_Incentives_Pilot
I eat frozen pizza for dinner on occasion. I’m not using an EBT card as I have never been on welfare of any kind. It’s not that bad of a meal and if there are left overs it makes a decent breakfast. What’s wrong with milk?
Not a thing wrong with milk. That was the only thing he had in his cart I would spend money on.
Good luck with the colon long term. :)
Did ever enter your thought pattern that the person buying the frozen meals lived in an efficiency and possibly lost all their pots and pans in a divorce or anyother reason. Maybe they only have one of those little toaster ovens or a cheap microwave to cook on.
No, It never occurred to me. I more imagined a scene from “Hoarders.”.
Goodwill stores have those items for pennies and during the warmer months there are unlimited yard sales that have these items.
Meh…they should have bought a lobster
Why does anyone care if someone bought those items with an EBT card? Did you monitor the purchases of those who used credit cards from banks we bailed out? Or the purchases of those who work for the state and are paid with taxpayer money?
Having major supermarket corporations be a part of the food stamp program is a bad idea; it’ll hurt small mom-and-pop stores.
Great idea. I’m sure all the other stores would be fine with the state forcing them to forfeit 15-20% of their customers. Who needs small businesses anyway.
I don’t snoop over anyone’s shoulder to see whether they are swiping an ebt card, and I’m not nosey enough to pry into what the other person in line is buying. But horrors that anyone should buy pizza, tv dinners, or milk with an ebt card!
You want to create a new system of state-sponsored stores, and give the contract to a multi-national corporation, like the one that owns Hannaford. You want poor people to drive farther to find a less convenient special bureaucratic store. You say that if a big multi-national corporation gets the state contract, that it won’t be bureaucratic. Sure, right! Good luck with that. And good luck for those who live in Meddybemps or Jackman.
I generally don’t snoop either. When something draws my attention, like most people, I start paying attention to other details. I imagine there are folks that go through life unaware of what goes on around them but I choose not to be one of them. Good luck crossing the street.
I look both ways crossing the street. The details of traffic concern my immediate well being. What someone is buying for their dinner, doesn’t. Nor should it concern you.
Are you making money off this social welfare state?
I’m thinking one would have to make a concerted study and look very hard at what the person in front of one was doing to be able to detect the difference between a credit card and an EBT card.
Not when they are talking about it.
I quote:
Cheesecake1955 23 hours ago in reply to Gopher40I still think the best option is to have central EBT only stores operated by the State in conjunction with Hannaford Shaws and other major food retailers. I think in a situation like that you could control the eligible items sold, the price the items are sold at, quality and quantity. (I saw an ebt card swiped on 5 frozen pizzas and a bunch of pre-package microwave meals and a gallon of milk last night)
And how far did you have to lean over your grocery cart in order to identify the EBT card???????
onedoes not have to “lean over into another customer’s cart” to ID an EBT card. The cashier asks th customer “Debit, credit or EBT?” The cashier must input something into the register in order to complete the transaction. This is something new that has been implemented at Shaw’s.
And you would have these ‘central EBT only stores’ in every town, both big and small in terh state or would you have tehm in centralized locations?
I can imagaine all the complaints if the state was forced to build an ‘EBT’ store in every town because of teh costs involved.
And if teh stores were centralized, how would the peopel who can’t afford to get there going to get there. WOuld you recommend a travel reimbursement for those people?
How do the people afford to get to Hannaford now?
What is wrong with frozen pizza, microwavable dinners or milk. What do you suggest be allowed to purchase with EBT cards.
Lets see 1 frozen pizza costs between $5 to $10, when I buy the ingredients to make a homemade pizza (Pepperoni and Mushroom) it cost me between $8 to $12. Microwave dinners are around $4 to $6 per meal again cooking from scratch those same meals costs me more than that.
So they probably cost the state less than they would have if they cooked from scratch.
It doesn’t cost the state less either way. Families are given a monthly amount based on income and the size of the family, not based on what that family has been buying for food. They are not given a debit card that they can just freely spend with-there is a pre-determined amount of foodstamps put on the card.
Why don’t you use your superb business skills and great knowledge of economics and accounting to figure out the cost of special state run grocery stores at which only the poor could shop.
My fuzzy headed liberal brain that can’t handle real business numbers, is guessing the cost would make every Republican go into cardiac arrest.
Do the math. Then think of it this way: the EBT card is actually keeping you from having to spend more of your hard-earned money on worthless poor people.
I still think the best option is to have central EBT only stores operated by the State in conjunction with Hannaford Shaws and other major food retailers. I think in a situation like that you could control the eligible items sold, the price the items are sold at, quality and quantity. (I saw an ebt card swiped on 5 frozen pizzas and a bunch of pre-package microwave meals and a gallon of milk last night)
*************************************************************
if the purpose is to control the eligible items able to be purchased with SNAP/EBT, then “special stores” isn’t the way to go. However, if it was set up like WIC, where you get “X” amount of dairy, meat, vegetables, fats/oils, grains…then I think it would work. Also, not every retailer has to accept EBT. It costs the retailer $1.00 each time an EBT card is passed through their register. If the profit margin on at item sold is 50 cents, the retailer not only doesn’t make any profit, he/she LOSES money. If the retailer loses too much money, he/she goes out of business. Of course, the retailer could raise pries to make up for this loss on EBT sales—so the taxpayers get the shaft once again.
When you bring non-food items into the mix, you’re looking at an entirely different program. While for many, their main experience with the EBT card is for food stamps, it is also used to distribute cash benefits through the TANF program(and possibly others, I really don’t know). In this case, people who receive cash benefits are even allowed to go to an ATM to take cash out directly, for things such as rent, fuel(both heat and car), and other utility bills. When you introduce that level of flexibility into the system, essentially giving cash out with no control over what it is used for, you will definitely see some purchases of alcohol, etc.
The thing to keep in mind in this case is that for many, that TANF cash benefit is the closest thing to a paycheck that they receive. And while I am sure that there are some that abuse the system, there are others who are on it because they have no other option. I know of one case in particular where there is a single mom with 3 kids on TANF only because she had to leave work over a year ago due to a disability. Every doctor she has seen in regards to her condition agrees that she can not work, however, she is still fighting with Social Security to receive disability benefits from them.
You cannot buy cigerettes, alcohol or other non food items with food stamps. period.
Now some people get a cash stipend to spend on what ever they need but that is not food stamps or more correctly SNAP
Yes, in Maine, lobster is not a luxury item. It is a local staple, often cheaper than meat from the deli counter.
I don’t know where in Maine you live, but where I live its a luxury. Depending on the time of year it takes about five one pound lobsters to get an actual pound of meat. At $8 per pound for a live lobster were looking at $40 per pound for meat. If I work and can’t afford it neither should the one using MY money that isn’t working. Its time you change deli’s.
I could not agree more, although I am not a fan of lobster, very rarely will I spend the money for a good ribeye steak, but I guess thats because I work 60 hrs a week for what I have and know how to prioritize my expenses
Overtaxed Under Bush But Undertaxed Under Obama, in a previous post you boasted of your wealth. Now it appears that you can’t afford a filet mignon. If you post your address I will gladly send you the money to treat yourself to a fine filet. Charity begins at home and I am happy to help you out.
can afford just about what ever I like within reason but that doesnt mean you should spend your money recklessly. Some people like to put their money on display to try and impress others, I choose to live simple and comfortable and pretty much worry free, A little common sense goes a long way. I would prefer you spend your money on furthering your education I believe we would all benefit from that much more than an un needed cut of expensive steak. Maybe you would then understand the problems with socialism and liberalism but thanks for the offer anyway
They have socialism in North Korea and Cuba, but not in Europe, and certainly not anywhere in North America. Socialism is the collective, often governmental, ownership of the means of production. it is the opposite of capitalism, the private ownership of the means of production. Even the Chinese “Communists” are now promoting capitalism.
I don’t know any socialists in this country, although I’m old enough to remember when we still had a few real socialists. Of course, right-wingers today like to throw around the word “socialism” as an all-purpose insult, as if the word didn’t actually mean anything.
Social democratic political parties around the world, such as the British Labour Party, the Socialist Party of France, and the Spanish Socialist Workers’ Party, are joined in an international federation called the Socialist International (SI).
Cheesecake, take out any dictionary and look up the meaning of the word “socialism.” The label any party chooses is a matter of history, not current ideology. At one time, the British Labor Party and the French Socialist Party believed in nationalized industries. However, each party abandoned those beliefs decades ago. Some of the old Communist regimes had parties that used the word “democratic” in their title. That did not make those parties believers in democracy. Words have defined meanings.
I could make a claim that the excessive religiosity, militarism, and corporate dominance of the Republican Party in the USA makes it fascist, in the sense of Mussolini and Franco. I have too much respect for the English language to do that. To date, the Republicans have not cancelled elections or maintained power by military force. Were they to do that, fascist would be the appropriate term.
However, by your standards, it would seem I could call your party fascist. I won’t, but your twisting of the language has an Orwellian bent.
These political parties have a history of seeking greater control over industries. The conservative parties in their countries over the same period have resisted it. They still call themselves socialists and even as they have left their authoritarian desires on the back burner until a better time politically, those desires still exist.
This is how wiki defines them: The Labour Party is a centre-left social democratic and democratic socialist party in the United Kingdom.
As for their membership in the Socialist International here are the other members:
Here is their website. http://socialistinternational.org/
Here are a few of the names of their member parties.
The Socialist Party of France
The Party of Democratic Revolution Mexico
Pakistan Peoples Party
Nigerian Party for Democracy and Socialism
Fatah Palestine
Sandanista National Liberation Front Nicaragua
Well you probably get my point. (maybe)
Of note The US is represented by Democratic Socialists of America.
If there is any language twisting it is being done by you.
Judging by our competing posts, one of us is in need of further education and it is not I. If you don’t want a good cut of meat, may I offer you lessons in grammar, punctuation, and the actual tax rates to which you are subject?
Hannaford’s price for a 1 1/4 pound soft shell last night was $4.99/lb. That would serve one person. For that same $4.99/pound I can get several decent cuts of beef or pork, or perhaps 2 pounds of boneless chicken, all feeding more than one person. If I go with your $8/lb (hard shell) then I can upgrade my purchase to haddock or salmon (or a myriad of other types of seafood) which again, will feed several people. While I don’t agree that lobster is a real luxury for most Mainers, when money is so tight that you must depend on aid to make ends meet you have a moral obligation to stretch those dollars as far as possible. Lobster just doesn’t fit that equation.
Maybe they could afford the lobster because their children are in school and get fed by the schools breakfast and lunch, sometimes after school snacks.
Out of 1.5 pound lobster, how much actual meat is there (8oz) and then lets calculate the price per pound and compare.
Lobster meat averages around $40 per pound……not quite a staple item……
A chick lobster is roughly one and one eight of a pound. You buy it shell and all. Cook it and pick the meat you get roughly ounces of meat. So you have lost a bit more than 11 ounces of what you bought is essentially throw away, unless you know how to make lobster bisque.
The above applies to hard shell lobster. Soft shell the yield on meat is less. Picked Lobster meat from a business like Maine Shellfish will run you around 30 dollars or so a pound, fresh picked.
I guess I cannot understand your response to my comment…..obviously, the shell of the lobster can and does determine the yield of meat, but in the end a pound of lobster meat is just that….in doing a quick search this am for prices, the discovery was pricing from $35, $38.95, $40, $41.95, and $49.75 per pound of lobster meat…..which from this simple search shows today’s average price for lobster meat at an average of $41.13 per pound…..IMHO, not a staple item that folks should be purchasing with their assistance cards…..
The point is that buying one lobster that weighs a pound does not yield a pound of meat, it yields less than that and while the lobster itself may have cost only 7 dollars(and therefore not a concern that food stamps bought it) the meat costs well more than that.
You point this out, in a manner a bit different than I did. I think overall we both agree that buying lobsters with food stamps is not a proper use of the program. Buy the time you spend the 41 dollars or so to get a pound of lobster meat from live lobsters you could have bought quite a bit of other food items that would provide much more extended benefit.
At least crab meat would be better, I buy that for 15 bucks a pound and just as good if not better…
Crabmeat, or maine shrimp, cooked even, provides more consumable food product per dollar spent.
Isn’t lobster meat (and crab meat) very nutritious? Isn’t it better than buying a bunch of frozen pizzas?
It seems that some people want to institute a very complex set of rules that involve nutrition, value, and, most importantly, what they THINK people should and should not buy.
Basically you get more bang for the buck buying crab meat over lobstah..
I can see that. I like crab a LOT better, anyway. Lobster is overrated in my opinion. Especially since I saw that PBS program about the life of the American lobster. Bleck! (Of course, I guess crabs aren’t much better, but I never saw such a detailed program about them, so it’s easier to be in denial about the crab).
Maryland crabs??
MD crabs sux, Maine crabs are cleaner and sweet..
penzance, please tell us where you live where lobster is cheaper than meat! It may be cheaper by the pound, but the amount you get from a pound of lobster and a pound of chicken is a big difference!
A pound of sandwhich meat will feed kids lunch for a week. 1 lobster at the same price will feed their greedy parent for a day.
While that may be true, your statement sounds rather judgmental and filled with hyperbole.
Well of course it’s not even remotely true. Not even one individual could survive on only one pound of meat per week, or even per day. I have to wonder why a person would publish such a ludicrous statement. (Must be a blog warrior.) There are roughly 1,000 calories in a pound of meat, depending on the meat. An average family of two adults and two children requires roughly 14,000 calories per day, based on an average nutritional requirement of 3,500 calories per person. So one pound of meat would not even satisfy the nutritional requirements of one single person in a single day.
Absolutely no hyperbole. I supported a family of 5 on 17,000. I went to the mall and would buy a scoop of tunafish rom the salad place and 3 rolls and make sandwiches. I fed three little girls a healthy lunch for what it costs for that lobster. I am saying that a pound of sandwhich meat and a loaf of bread will give lunches for a week . you all know exactly what I meant. and luvGSD..buy turkey and shut up.
I know what you meant by using the word “greedy” instead of just simply stating facts.
Now you’re saying “one loaf of bread will give lunches for a week.” Seeing as how there are 16 slices in a typical loaf of bread, just how many days are in your week? Are you still feeding three little girls? Do they get one slice of bread or two per sandwich?
I am saying that a pound of sandwhich meat and a loaf of bread will give lunches for a week
this is what I wrote. You can buy a loaf of sandwhich bread that has many more than 16 slices. I work with teenagers like you. I know you. I dont want to argue with you and other like you who believe people have a some kind of entitlement without earning it. The facts are if you cant afford it dont buy it. If you have to borrow it use it wisely. Have a wonderful life and I will pray for you.
Yes please do, and while you’re praying for me I will pray that world hunger can be solved by one pound of lunch meat and one loaf of bread per person per week. Teenager indeed.
You can’t solve world hunger.. If we did we would suffer from (ATS) …The A^% would beTired and Sore from all that work….Just sayin’ Praying wont help either.
They are doing nothing wrong legally. That is true. I think most people get upset when they see people buying things they cannot buy or dont buy as it is too expensive for them. Particularly when they are buying it with money that comes from other peoples pockets.
I know, people who have EBT cards have likely paid income tax too. They are US citizens, human beings and entitled to eat. But I admit it irks me to see people buying expensive items or just junk with money that is not there own. Maybe that makes me less of a person but it is how I feel about the issue.
I live in Argentina half the year and see the same things occur here with the food program cards as what occurs when I am back in the States. And the people here feel the same way about it as many do in the US.
Next time I am in the check out lane, I’ll mind my own business like I always do.
I agree, the rules are clear and if some guy is buying something with an EBT card that I don’t think he should, it’s more productive to complain to the state, not the customer. That is, of course, ignoring the outrageously rude display of confronting a stranger in public like that.
Mind your own business.
They have been given X amount of MY money to pay for enough food to sustain them not to eat better than me. if someone has enough money to buy a lobster then we are giving them too much money. They should have just enough to survive until they can get on their feet.
YOUR money? I’m sure the actual amount from you is miniscule.
*I* don’t care if they buy lobster with “my” money.
So if you have a friend and that friend asks you for money and then, instead of taking care of his family he buys soda or lobster and then asks for more money to buy more food do you just keep giving?
Stan Brown, Nelson Durgin: good letters.
Rita Diller–I’m speculating here, but are you by any chance one of those republicans who think government is too big and has too many regulations and should get out of our lives so we can take some personal responsibility? If so, then your anti choice stance is hypocrisy of the highest degree.
HUH? The government gets its money from me the taxpayer. You want to kill a baby do it on your own dime.
Stan and Heather,
Two of many reasons that can help explain why the U.S. and our society in general is broken. No reward for hard work, and absurd regulations that make it a nuisance to conduct business.
The reward for hard work is hard work. The issue is that people want a freakin reward for doing what they are supposed to do in the first place. Hard work is what this country needs.
Rita Diller is stating facts, and if anyone is prone to finding the truth, just look up the beginnings of the Guttmacher Institute–she is right on target with her remarks. She is obviously pro-life–that is, for saving our unborn children from the deaths that these organizations are known for providing. Over 54 million candidates for president, senator and congress, school teachers, maintenance workers, fast food workers, WalMart, Target, Sears, Penney’s, K-Mart, Starbucks, Best Buy, Staples, etc. employees, car salesmen, self-employed grocery store owners, EMT’s, doctors, lawyers, government employees, CEO’s, accountants, and the list goes on, have been killed in the womb just since 1973; and schools have closed, because the students that would have attended are no longer here. Do not question Rita Diller’s position. Be grateful that your mother allowed your birth so you are here to be cognizant of what Mrs. Diller is talking about.
Msallyjones–obviously, you do not agree with pro-lifers, but your mother must have agreed that you should have your life and that is a blessing for you, as it is for others who piously contend that other babies should be killed in the womb, but do not seem to stop and think that they are in the here and now to enjoy or negate whatever life has to offer.
Pbmann– a person’s life is valuable from conception to the natural ending of it at death. Killing that life in the womb is what “aborticide” is all about. Now, it happens even more often as parents decide they do not want the baby whose ultrasound might show him/her to be “defective,” or of a gender they do not want.
You forgot to add welfare recipients and criminals because almost 100% of those children would have grown up in homes where they at best were not wanted and at worst hated by their parent.
The lucky babies, white and healthy, may have had a chance of getting adopted but the minority babies and unhealthy babies would have grown up in foster homes. If you look up the facts about children who have been raised in foster homes and to some extent adopted children you will find out that they do not do as well in life as children raised in loving families by their parent(s).
Of all the dopey statements the anti-abortion numbskulls make to wrap their cause in counterfeit emotionalism, the one about being “grateful that your mother allowed your birth so you are here” is the dumbest, most illogical, most utterly addlebrained of them all.
out being rude are we?
Heather,
I can certainly sympathize. The left is driven to regulate every minutae of business to make certain that horrible capitlism never escapes and exceeds the leftists boundaries.
Good luck and please support local farms
Sorry Diller, even if it is a circular, unsubstantiated argument, I’m going with Richards on the reduction of unwanted children.
The divine utopian society that you seek where all children are wanted by their parents, and they the parents have the personal responsibility and economic means to take care of them without help from the state, will never exist – no matter how often and to whom which god one prays to.
I also find it fascinating that the same groups of people that want to outlaw abortion are the same ones that want to do away with foodstamps and welfare; alot of times the economic means to take care of the unwanted children.
These people are not pro-life they are pro-birth and then to h*ll with the children after they are born.
I believe their motto is pro-fetus/anti child.
they should have road kill, day old, store reject pantries where people using welfare cards can get thier food. Stores should be for regularly paying people only
David Wiggin
It’s not “our great forests”.
It is land owned by private enterprises that use it like any other farm to sustainably grow and harvest wood and fiber for the wood products manufacturing industry,all, while providing the opportunity for recreation on their lands, free, or nearly free of charge.
The communities in and around the UTs have seen a precipitious decline since the establishment of LURC back in the seventies.
LURC’s reason for being WAS to serve as the planning board for the UT’s, but has been hijacked by the environmental industry to change our industrial forest into a wilderness preserve similar to the concept Roxanne Quimby now is trying to sell to the people of the Katahdin area.
The basic template for the UTs planning board should be aligned with what is available in every other town and city in the state.
A LOCAL board to oversee development in the UTs.
Not one stacked with environmentalists and Augusta insiders.
C’mon, Stan. That’s really a steak sandwich from the leftover prime rib, isn’t it?
Let’s just for a moment believe that lone food stamp customer who had the audacity to buy lobster was NOT a criminal wasting the money of upstanding, always thrifty, hard working taxpayers.
Let’s believe that lobster purchaser had scrimped and saved up stamps and money for months in order to give their family a very special one time treat. How sinister, how evil, how wasteful, is that?
Or would it make all you ever so indignant and accusing taxpayers happier to have a ruling that the poor shall always be denied a treat even when they have saved for it?
But they saved MY money for their greed!!!!!