Three free meals available daily for any New Yorker • Hacker News Board

Re: Three free meals available daily for any New Yorker

#371

Post by iamatworknow » Fri, Apr 03, 2020, 6:25 PM UTC

im3w1l wrote: post #339

crazygringo wrote: post #308

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's no different from lining up at the supermarket. In theory everyone's supposed to be lining up 6 feet apart. In practice... well, NYC grocery store aisles are some of the narrowest corridors you'll ever encounter in your life, and there often isn't even space to line up for a cashier. So social distancing in supermarkets is a total joke. But the alternative is starving to death, since the grocery delivery service…

Exposed every day picking up meals vs exposed every other week in the supermarket.

Hardly anyone in NYC grocery shops every other week in normal circumstances.

Re: Three free meals available daily for any New Yorker

#372

Post by jonfw » Fri, Apr 03, 2020, 6:27 PM UTC

MisterBastahrd wrote: post #242

asdfasgasdgasdg wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think SNAP is supposed to always cover 100% of food expenses. If you're near the cutoff point for benefits, you get some allowance, but you're expected to cover some of the food cost from your income. You would of course use your SNAP benefits first, since they are not fungible, so it is not surprising that you would run out before the end of the month. This does not mean that such households are unable to af…

Okay now try to eat like an actual human being and make it work for $500 over 30 days. The dollar amount itself is fine, but SNAP should be supplemented with basic commodities. Beans, rice, flour, sugar. The prices for these when purchased at the volume of the federal government drop to near nothing.

$16 a day is the minimum to eat like an actual human being?

You could eat a steak a day at that budget

Re: Three free meals available daily for any New Yorker

#373

Post by DonCopal » Fri, Apr 03, 2020, 6:27 PM UTC

How are they going to check that you don't go multiple times?

Also, how are you going to prove how many children you have? So a father goes first and says "give me meals for my 5 kids", then a mother goes a bit later and says "meals for my 7 kids, please" and then a mother-in-law if she lives with them can pick up some more.

Re: Three free meals available daily for any New Yorker

#374

Post by Footkerchief » Fri, Apr 03, 2020, 6:31 PM UTC

DonCopal wrote: post #373

How are they going to check that you don't go multiple times? Also, how are you going to prove how many children you have? So a father goes first and says "give me meals for my 5 kids", then a mother goes a bit later and says "meals for my 7 kids, please" and then a mother-in-law if she lives with them can pick up some more.

Why would someone go multiple times? Because they're still hungry? To resell it to someone who... can also get free food?

Re: Three free meals available daily for any New Yorker

#375

Post by bosie » Fri, Apr 03, 2020, 6:33 PM UTC

34679 wrote: post #356

gruez wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>At least in a lot of european countries, income tax isn't even the most lucrative tax for the government. Can you provide a few examples? What other revenue streams do those governments have?

Import/Export tariffs, excise tax (like VAT), payroll tax (also down), corporate tax. Though according to the following link, personal income tax is the largest chunk in the US. https://www.taxpolicycenter.org/briefing-book/what-are-sourc...

does the US actually have federal VAT?

Re: Three free meals available daily for any New Yorker

#376

Post by jshevek » Fri, Apr 03, 2020, 6:33 PM UTC

asdfasgasdgasdg wrote: post #342

jshevek wrote: post #322

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thank you for posting this. Long ago I investigated how cheaply I could eat. I researched nutritional needs, created a spreadsheet, priced items at the supermarket. It was easy to keep myself well fed at a cost far below standard assistance levels. When I encountered poor people complaining their money ran out, I discovered that some were hostile to the very ideas of thrift, self reliance, or any principals of stoici…

Many people were never taught this stuff and the world does not exactly go out of its way to make it obvious how to play the food game properly. All the advertising and all the media point you to inefficient purchases. And really, I guess most poor people are doing exactly what I talked about -- buying and eating efficiently. It's the counterexamples that make the news. Also FWIW I'm not saying it's easy to be poor.…

I agree regarding obviousness, marketing, difficulties of poverty, and doable challenges. I'm not convinced about "most poor people" and exceptions making the news. I've lived in several very poor communities in several parts of the US, and observed widespread cultural norms undermining the very ideas of cost efficiency and self restraint.

I realize I'm too ignorant to confidently propose systemic solutions, but on the education front I do wonder if it would help to offer government financed courses in shopping and budgeting (along with nutrition) bundled with SNAP benefits.

Re: Three free meals available daily for any New Yorker

#377

Post by organsnyder » Fri, Apr 03, 2020, 6:33 PM UTC

umvi wrote: post #366

blunte wrote: post #252

I find it fascinating that it seems so many people are against (sometimes vehemently) against others getting free food and shelter. There is no excuse for a modern civilization to not ensure that everyone has basic human needs met. Sure, we can argue some details like, "Is Netflix really a basic human need?"... joking aside, we as humans should endeavor to ensure that all people have their Maslow pyramid filled in.

If people are getting free food and shelter during a crisis, it's one thing. But if they are getting it 24/7/365 year after year, it's a red flag that they aren't self-reliant. The solution is not to pour more money into ensuring their needs are met but to examine why they are not able to sustain themselves. Maybe they have no skills because they dropped out of high school. Maybe they are in and out of prison and can…

The way our welfare system is structured in the United States, maintaining access to food and shelter is a huge amount of work and stress. Developing skills and gaining employment is difficult in the best of times—yet we insist on making it even harder.

Re: Three free meals available daily for any New Yorker

#378

Post by jshevek » Fri, Apr 03, 2020, 6:34 PM UTC

folmar wrote: post #304

jshevek wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know how many people have a valid medical need to avoid gluten, but I do know that in certain subcultures it is popular to imagine one has a gluten intolerance. Edit: Just discovered spurious accusations of racism in this thread so let me clarify that the "certain subcultures" are not ethnic nor religious. I'm talking about the kind of people who believe in astrology, homeopathy, and acupuncture, who talk abo…

Wikipedia put it around 1% for celiac disease.

Thank you

Re: Three free meals available daily for any New Yorker

#379

Post by pje » Fri, Apr 03, 2020, 6:34 PM UTC

impostergc wrote: post #102

tren-hard wrote: post #18

One of those things I wish could out last this virus. We'd be so much better off as a society if we could at least keep our people fed. The comments in here seem a little negative currently but this is great news. Think of all the people in NYC who didn't have access to clean and regular food before the virus.

Feeding people was solved in the 20th century, perhaps almost too easily. See correlation between poverty and obesity in the 21st century, vs the 19th century.

https://www.google.com/search?q=how+many+people+died+of+star...

Re: Three free meals available daily for any New Yorker

#380

Post by derefr » Fri, Apr 03, 2020, 6:34 PM UTC

leetcrew wrote: post #354

derefr wrote: post #349

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> if the tax bracket adjustments had any bite, you would end up with poor families owing more tax than they earned income. I mean... they'd be told that that would happen in advance. Wouldn't that then serve as an incentive to avoid making a pattern of taking home the more-expensive food? (They could still do it rarely, though. A one-time $50 bump in spending isn't going to affect your taxes.)

if you're really willing to allow that outcome, then your proposal is just an implicit benefit limit that's a bit harder to calculate. how is that different from / better than saying "here's $xxx to feed your family this month; budget appropriately"?

Again, because if you give someone $xxx, they feel compelled to use it, and therefore to put $xxx less of their own money into the economy.

Here, people don't have any money or food stamps "burning a hole in their pocket." They just have their own money, and an unlimited line of credit for grocery stores that would "come due" in the form of taxes at the end of the year (but which would only end up costing them anything-at-all if they tried to live beyond their means.)

The only real presumption I'm making here, IMHO, is that people would be too ashamed to buy the "below your means" items (e.g. rice and beans) on this credit, if they didn't have to. Just like people are usually too ashamed to go to food banks if they don't have to.