Hacker News Reader

Comment by happymellon | Hacker News Reader

> Workers, are now being forced to give part of their work compensation, to people that are not only don't work, but that are too lazy to even prepare a cheaper and - on average - more nutritious meal.

What makes you say this?

You get food stamps if you don't make enough money. For example, being in the service industry and relying on tips to make ends meet. If you have to work 80 hours, why shouldn't you be able to get your groceries delivered?

> too lazy to even prepare a cheaper and - on average - more nutritious meal.

You do know that only certain food items are available on food stamps. Because of people like you, we need to make sure the poor can't have any pleasure in life.

View on HN

I wouldn't put it like the op. And I don't know how us food stamps work but:

1. Presumably food stamps don't cover all food, so if someone wants to use their own money to get takeaways they can.

2. Surely the aim of the govt should be to make sure the citizenship is fed healthily, especially when they're footing the bill.

I know in the UK they have a similar system for pregnant women and young kids and it is restricted to healthy things.

Ultimately if you're going to let people spend food stamps on fast food, why not just give them cash instead.

Edit: does Uber deliver from supermarkets in the US? If so that seems ok. In the UK it's synonymous with fast food delivery, all the supermarkets have their own delivery services.

> I don't know how us food stamps work but [snip]

So food stamps can only be spent on certain food items.

Bread, milk, eggs, etc. So they are doing what is being requested. This is literally why they are given stamps instead of cash, to restrict people.

Don't demonise people because they are so poor that they have to accept assistance to be able to eat bread.

And yes, in the US they don't have food delivery from all the supermarkets like in the UK. Uber is filling that gap.

See for yourself on Amazon. You can get big bags of candy on EBT

If there are items you don't believe poor people should be allowed to eat then speak to your legislative representatives.

All the items you can buy on food stamps are explicitly reviewed. That's the point.

People are bitching because poor people can buy anything on UberEats, and this is not true.

> If there are items you don't believe poor people should be allowed to eat then speak to your legislative representatives.

Or better yet, maybe mind your own business and say nothing at all. The idea that a poor child shouldn't be allowed to have a birthday cake or that people shouldn't be able to decide for themselves what they'll eat is gross.

I've spent a lot of money over the years in taxes, and I do it in part on the expectation that there will be a safety net for those who might someday need it including (should something terrible happen) myself. I'd be pissed off if I fell on hard times and on the day I went to collect the assistance I'm owed it came with a list of arbitrary restrictions by people who assume I don't deserve anything nice.

We give a set amount of money to people to help them buy food. What foods they chose to spend that money on is no one else's concern. An exception to this being programs like WIC which are explicitly about making sure pregnant mothers and babies are getting the nutrition they need

If someone were genuinely concerned for people's health rather than just wanting to punish them for the moral failing of not having a lot of money, it'd make far more sense to bother their representatives about subsidizing healthy foods instead of restricting unhealthy ones, or fixing the countless issues that plague the healthcare system.

Which I completely agree with, the message was more that they are already restricted on what they can purchase, and people searching for cigarettes as an allowed purchase does not stop the main point that their spending is already managed.

I'm not demonising people because they're poor.

My suggestions for what was reasonable is what is already happening.

Sorry, a bit of a knee jerk reaction there.

Too many people want the poor to suffer, because obviously being poor is self inflicted.

Too much avocado toast or something.

No. I did get the wrong end of the stick, because Uber just means fast food to me.

Fwiw, Personally I'd rather just give them the cash, rather than assuming they can't spend it. If you are going to have a system of food stamps though, it should be targeted to actually buying nutritious food.

>You do know that only certain food items are available on food stamps.

LOL!

>Households CANNOT use SNAP benefits to buy:[0]

    >Beer, wine, liquor, cigarettes, or tobacco
    >Vitamins, medicines, and supplements. If an item has a Supplement Facts label, it is considered a supplement and is not eligible for SNAP purchase.
    >Live animals (except shellfish, fish removed from water, and animals slaughtered prior to pick-up from the store).
    >Foods that are hot at the point of sale
    >Any nonfood items such as:
    >Pet foods
    >Cleaning supplies, paper products, and other household supplies.
    >Hygiene items, cosmetics

I guess you a technically correct here. But "only certain foods" includes almost the whole store, with no limit on junk food at all.

>Because of people like you, we need to make sure the poor can't have any pleasure in life.

Execpt the pleasure of free food, housing and health care, right? Maybe we can add free tickets to the movies in the next social program.

[0]https://www.fns.usda.gov/snap/eligible-food-items

Reply on news.ycombinator.com