Narrowing down.

wtg

An alternative strategy is to focus resources differently. To wit:

Subsidies

Pretty much everyone knows that we all need to eat more fresh fruits and vegetables. But less than 1% of farm subsidies today support the research, production, or marketing of these healthy foods. What foods and what crops, then, are we subsidizing? Primarily, the mass production of gargantuan amounts of corn, soy, and wheat.

These highly subsidized crops have two primary uses in the modern diet: as animal feed in factory farms, which brings down the price of industrial meat; and as ingredients in highly processed and nutrient-poor junk foods. This brings down the price of food-like products that are nutritionally horrendous, contributing to skyrocketing medical costs.

Food subsidies are the primary reason why, over the last four decades, the price of processed foods and industrial meat has gone down 20-30%, while the price of fruits and vegetables has increased 40%.

When we build a society in which cycles of intergenerational poverty persist, and then we subsidize junk food, we create a marketplace discrepancy that essentially condemns the poor to nutritional disasters. And when a vastly disproportionate share of those who struggle financially are people of color, we’ve created one of the conditions that, in effect, perpetuates racial health inequality.

I love this program, that helps further the same objective:

Wholesome Wave

Driven by the conviction that people in poverty want to feed their families well, Wholesome Wave was designed to use private funds to demonstrate what might happen if public funds were spent differently. Users shop with SNAP (food stamp) dollars as they normally would. But when buying fruits and vegetables, they get their purchasing power doubled in the form of tokens or coupons called “nutrition incentives.” The program has been found to be highly effective, reaching 500,000 people in nearly every state, and unlocking many millions of dollars worth of fruits and vegetables annually. This not only helps the poor and the elderly to buy more fresh, locally grown, organic produce, but it also helps the farmers to sell more of their harvests.

Because SNAP recipients spend close to $100 billion per year on food, the implications for food systems change are considerable. Today, SNAP households spend about 10% of their food dollars on the cheap calories provided by sugary drinks. Programs like Wholesome Wave can change that, helping low-income families to have access to and afford far healthier food.

Already, Wholesome Wave has successfully lobbied to get $250 million included in the US Farm Bill, earmarked for expanding affordable access to fruits and vegetables for low-income Americans.

https://foodrevolution.org/blog/food-deserts-food-oasis-healthy-food-access/

wtg

I never knew the origin of food stamps. They were designed to be used to allow people to use up surplus crops.

https://www.fooducate.com/community/post/Soda-Surplus-and-Food-Stamps-A-Short-History/57A334F1-19CB-2A00-44E7-A8B8742520BB

Mik

Food stamps were essentially currency. Right after high school I was young and poor, and I'd buy them at fifty cents on the dollar from folks who wanted cigarette and pop money.

Cindy makes a good point, but there should be some middle ground. People can't be living on sugary drinks alone.

ShiroKuro

@Mik said in Narrowing down.:

Cindy makes a good point, but there should be some middle ground. People can't be living on sugary drinks alone.

No, but we need to provide the alternatives first, find the middle ground first, before we start putting more restrictions on what can be purchased with food stamps. Not the other way around.

Mik

The government can't provide healthy grocery stores in food desert locations. What we might look at is subsidizing grocery delivery for online shopping. Local stores already provide a SNAP-eligible set of products in their systems.

It would even be quite easy to provide suggested periodic delivery sets, taking into account individual likes and dislikes, along with recipes.

wtg

@Mik I thought the same thing about deliveries. After COVID especially, getting anything delivered locally got a lot easier.

Mik

The dividend in reduced healthcare over time would offset any expense.

wtg

@Mik - a deep dive into the availability of delivery services across the country. 2022 Brookings report.

https://www.brookings.edu/articles/delivering-to-deserts-new-data-reveals-the-geography-of-digital-access-to-food-in-the-us/

ShiroKuro

Those are great ideas, @Mik

I'm sure the new administration is not going to be interested in them. -_-

Daniel

Cindy +1

People on SNAP do not have adequate transportation generally nor enough money even if they did to access healthy food let alone for an entire month.

Anything leading to more autonomy would be better and likewise anything leading to less autonomy would be worse, imo.

SNAP at least for an individual is not enough money to feed one person. Add to that the fact there are limited ways to buy food.

You are not talking about a population generally who can hop in a car and drive to any store they choose at any time they like on any day of the week.