NJ Mayor Booker: I'll Live on Food Stamps

:butthead: ya, kiss it.

 

This is going to get very lively once tdk returns

Put on your waist high boots people

 

​

 

Yes without going into detail Ive been really poor before and compared to my peers I still am. By me saying 60 dollars a week for gas could very well be less costly than the bus when you have a family factors in the time variable. The more time you take can cost you a lot more than the 60 dollars for gas.
And seriouy enough with the insults I didnt insult you. So if you want to roll around in the gutter like common ghetto trash youll be doing it alone my friend.

By the way the 200 dollar a month evaluation is based on a family of four not a single person. So in that case it is chump change. So unless you can school me on how 12.50 a week per person per week Jesus(you gotta be multiplying loaves and fishes) I dont get howit can work.

 

:smt025

 

He never disappoints.

 

Listen it was typo, ok, it was either 'you eat out a lot, eat take out or eat junk food'. Now accept it.
You want to get suckered in by your cheerleading boyfriends, by all means, "be insulted" SMFH.

Please go back and re-read - I said $200 for an UNEMPLOYED INDIVIDUAL. Where are you getting the 'family of four' evaluation from?? So it's NOT $12.50 pp, per week. It's bad enough you got $5.00 a day out of $200 when it's actually closer to $7 per day ($210)...but this new fuzzy math of yours is ridiculous.

You couldn't possibly have been "really poor" because NO really poor person would have the audacity to declare 200 free dollars a month to eat...as "chump-change". Ever.

 

I lived in inner city Bosotn until recently. NONE of those stores you mentioned were in walking distance.

 

If you say so. Post 18 says something different but ok. My 5 dollar a day calculation was based on the bet of 35 dollars a week that the mayor agreed to. The 200 dollars is based on tje family of four because thats the guideline set to recieve between 150 and 250 a month. Did you actually read thearticle? Im not trying to be rude but I cant continue the conversation if you havent.

 

Yes, that's why i said walking or or bus distance a SAVE-A-LOT, Thriftway, or Bottom Dollar discount type supermarket and or Dollar Store.

Where in Boston poor Inner city area were you?

 

Dorchester....not the porrest part for sure and there were plenty of stores in walking distant, but not the sort you mentioned the CLOSEST discount supermarket is in Roxbury, which is two train ides away. As I am not in those econmic circumstances, I did not have to worry about the issue. I just happen to agree with orejon that prices are marked up and fresh produce etc is a LOT harder to come by in the inner city than in the burds. A single apple or orange at my former corner store was a buck.

 

I doubt people think of it as chump change too. Some people really do appreciate the help when adversity strikes.

 

Many moons ago there was another thread which has dropped off is as not searchable now and I had posted a link about food deserts. It said poor urban families many times don't eat right because the food is just not available to their location. That is the crime. We have people in THIS country that don't have access to basic healthcare and decent food and people whine about being without a phone or if their taxes might go up. Until we treat our poor and elderly right we should shut our mouths.

 

Ok...firstly no unemployed adult is going to get 200$ a month on snap.
I knew a guy who was making close to 800 in part time pay plus full time under the table pay doing tours and he was getting at least 550 a month in snap bennies.

Secondly..they DO factor in necessaries such as rent.

If I was to go down and get snap right now they would count that my rent is more than 75% of my total income..
HOWEVER...that math never works because for the 550 I do pay in rent..I would get an additional 40 dollars in snap benefits.

Having lived on government assistance I can tell you that even with deductions it doesn't equal being able to comfortably survive.
Our system is not meant to foster survival on it and to get completely off of it is next to impossible.

And anyway:
“Of all the preposterous assumptions of humanity over humanity, nothing exceeds most of the criticisms made on the habits of the poor by the well-housed, well- warmed, and well-fed.”
? Herman Melville

 

Um ok, post #18 reiterated/said: Sorry, I wasn't saying that at all, it was a typo -- I meant "eat out a lot", not "eat a lot" :toimonster:
I was serious in my question and NOT taking shot, ok?


Of course I read the article :shock: - I posted it too, just so you know.

I knew you didn't read it correctly - the $150 and $250 a month is if you bring in an income of $3,447 per month (in her county). NOT unemployed.
Therefore you are SUPPLEMENTING your food bill and are never living on $12.50 pp a week of food, ok? You must account for the three and half thousand dollars which is WHY they get ONLY $150-250 to supplement. I knew you ignored it with your fuzzy math, but it's something I shouldn't have to tell you. It's there in b & w.

What I will proffer you is an UNEMPLOYED family of four receives a maximum of $670 food benefits per month, and that figure is 2 yrs old which has since been adjusted for inflation. (SNAP's statistical assumption is that an average family spends 30% of its net income on food, and it will supplement a family to that extent.)


There is also NO $200 in the article - the $200 is based on WHAT I TOLD YOU, because that is a factual SNAP amount for an unemployed individual.

Booker's $35 limit amount is an "average" that the private 'SNAP Challenge' Organization choose to apply. They sometimes use $31.50. It's not a Govt challenge nor is it an official $ amount, and anyone can do the experiment/take the 'Snap Challenge'.
So please do not confuse their amount with the $200 figure I provided you, which is an actual SNAP INDIVIDUAL benefit amount.

 

Cheer leading boyfriends

He's right....its not worth going to your level

 

Mine too. It still is.
But I find and go to the stores where its NOT a dollar an orange. No excuses...I've stayed in the projects in Brooklyn, the Southside of Chicago, and live in the inner city of Philly and there are cheap supermarkets (in fact in Brooklyn I walked to the supermarket), there is no way in hell these people could eat if they shopped at the corner mart for their main food, which is why they don't. The corner mart is the equivalent of 7-11's in reg neighborhoods.

 

Because 2 dollars a day means the difference between whether you eat saimin or a more heathy salad.

I love how she says 200 isn't chump change but the difference between 5 and seven is a huge deal that makes all the difference.

The bottom line is:
Being an individual on welfare, whether you are unemployed or employed and whether you have a family or no family is not enough.
That's why they do these challenges.

It's interesting that people like to emphasize the nutritional value when anyone with enough brain cells could tell you nutrition means squat when you're getting by on 12.50$ a WEEK for food.

Because yes.. You absolutely are expected to spend your own money on food.

But in the cases where that's not possible because in most circumstances the whole reason a person or family ends up on assistance in the first place is because there is too much month and not enough money and when they both run out (as they are apt to do..it's fixed income) it still means that there isn't enough.

 

They absolutely do appreciate it. This is why I don't get the criticism that our Government "can and should do more!" It's like an auto-pilot catch-cry. For him to call it "chump-change" is an insult to the SNAP benefit that feeds millions and millions of people.

 

Keep your bromances on Skype without your shirts on boyz.