More than 50 million Americans short of food
 

More than 50 million Americans couldn't afford to buy food at some point in 2011, according to federal data.

http://money.cnn.com/2012/09/05/news...html?hpt=hp_t3

As long as there are people like the first two replies who try to suck everyone back into the left right paradigm more will starve and more will die.

Jesus Christ!

http://www.teenobesity.net/wordpress...ds/Obesity.jpg

It's Bush's or Obama's fault they eat too much!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

slim girls , he-he. :)))

What? No food? That "child" is way over weight and 2 bags of chips is not health food, and I see 4 pots on the stove..

I am not American, but I too, am short of food.

No matter how much food I put in the fridge, the fridge is always empty when I wake up !

you can afford fridge?

So......you're moonwalking! :winkwink:

I've just come back from America, you're all still way fatter than us in Europe

the comments are classic again lmao


:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

If they were a little bit fatter the whole country would collapse under it's heavy mass and implode leaving a black hole between Mexico and Canada

They should try eating freedom.

Yes He Did!

Sounds like they found a solution to the obesity problem.

there is no reason for anyone to starve in north america. we have plenty of programs that can ensure just about everyone can eat. the only thing is you've got to know where to go and not be too proud to go. if you are blowing your money on booze and smokes and then complain you can't afford food, thats your own fault. if you don't eat because you'd rather not be seen at the food bank, thats your own fault.

RIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIGHT.

The most obese nation on the planet is clearly starving to death.

That point being immediately after paying for their double Big Mac, fries and Diet Coke, but not being able to afford a pie to wash it all down with.

Fixed...

I can feed myself well for $20 a week. Healthy, filling, tasty food.

Cheap foods: rice, beans, grains, chicken, eggs, seasonal fruits and vegetables.

Don't know how to cook? Internet at the library is free.

We must stop pandering to those that are not willing to help themselves. Resources are there. It's up to them to use them.

Alot of people fall in the cracks, you lost your job and in 6 months blew thru your savings. Your last income tax return shows too much to collect anything.
Or you are working two full time shitty jobs, someone gets sick or the car breaks down.You are busting your ass to keep your head above water. Its pay the rent or eat.

$20 a week, I would like to see that.

All of your sad pro-union, workers of the world unite posts are quite moving but ignore the simple fact that we live in a nation of clueless idiots with an ever-growing sense of entitlement and ever declining work ethic and an insatiable need for instant gratification in everything.

A lot of people are ALSO busy running up credit card debt like idiots, buying 24" wheels, designer jeans and expensive phones, cashing their checks at check cashing places, buying gold grills and pumping out babies ... all to impress similar losers, to think about how they are going to eat next.

BTW... if you're working 2 jobs, you have no real reason to not be able to afford food.

Poor people in this country still have flat screen tv's, cars, nice clothes, the latest phones and so on. Those also represent the bulk of people in the study.

Well, at least you are involved in a few wars. So that makes up for it.

Ok... $40.00 a week. Big fucking deal. If you are a human being that can't afford to feed yourself and aren't the victim of a recent act of God, then you need to be eliminated from the gene pool for the greater good.

Poor people are largely poor due to the compounding consequences of an endless string of shitty decisions and actions.

Why can't we as a society say "we need to help others.. but a lot of you fucking idiots need to get your shit together"

Because that's not a fucking society, idiot.

$20 a week for all the above? Umm I don't think so

No problem!

Note: I eat actual serving sizes. Not the make-believe serving sizes that so many Americans do with their giant bowls and plates.

Breakfast: lets be simple and say oatmeal with raisins.
Oatmeal: http://www.samsclub.com/sams/quaker-....ip?navAction= $7.58, over 100 servings. Less than $0.075 per serving.
Raisins: http://www.samsclub.com/sams/sun-mai....ip?navAction= $7.98, 60 ounces. We'll add an ounce to our oatmeal. $0.13 per serving.
I like my oatmeal with water, not milk. But feel free to splash a little milk in. Maybe have a glass of milk as well. Let's add $.50 for your milk usage.
Breakfast total for the week: $4.94

Lunch: continuing on with simplicity, we'll say grilled chicken, rice, vegetables and water.
Chicken: http://www.samsclub.com/sams/daily-c....ip?navAction= $10.98, 24 servings. $0.46 per serving.
Vegetable, we'll do canned because it's more universal, but if you stay seasonal you can get good deals on fresh vegetables: http://www.samsclub.com/sams/del-mon....ip?navAction= $8.38, roughly 30 servings. $0.28 per serving
Rice: http://www.samsclub.com/sams/kraft-m...navAction=push $5.38 (you can get cheaper than this), 72 ounces, 36 servings. $0.15 per serving.
Lunch total for the week: $6.23

Money left for dinner: $8.83

Dinner: tilapia, bread, vegetable, fruit, water
Tilapia: http://www.samsclub.com/sams/treasur....ip?navAction= $12.98, 48 ounces. 12 servings. $1.08 per serving
Vegetable: http://www.samsclub.com/sams/del-mon....ip?navAction= $5.88, roughly 30 servings. $0.20 per serving
Fruit: http://www.samsclub.com/sams/bananas-3-lbs/156801.ip $1.47, 3 pounds, 12 bananas. $0.12 per banana
Bread: http://www.samsclub.com/sams/grant-s...navAction=push $3.98, 40 ounces, roughly 40 servings. $0.10 per serving.
Dinner total for the week: $10.50

Overall total: $21.67

Overbudget by $1.67. You can find better deals on fish and produce locally, usually chicken as well. Especially with coupons or at the discount grocery stores.

I'm not saying that I eat like this now, but I have in the past (for even less) and would have no problem doing so in the future if I had to. It's obviously nothing fancy, but it provides you with protein, fruit, vegetables, and healthy grains. It could probably use a little bit of fat somewhere, but overall not bad.

Active people would obviously need more calories, but if you are active, you can find a way to make more than $20 for food. ;-)

Umm, I think so.

Respect :thumbsup

However, as an example:
chicken 6 pounds, 24 servings. 1 pound 4 servings, thats like 110 grams per servings. I do not eat much at all, but I easily eat 300 grams of chicken breats with rice and beans etc. I can not imagine how little is 1/3d of what I eat.

ps: looks like food is super cheap in US..

Some people will need more. The above is actually more than I need, I could not eat all of that.

I said above that I could eat for $20 a week so I backed it up. The average guy should be able to do between $30-50 without too much trouble.

that's racism

Obama is responsible for the poor and hungry? He's supposed to fix, in 3.5 years, a problem that has been building for over 30 years?

What have Republicans ever done to help the hungry? Cut taxes on millionaires?

What would Mitt RobMe do? http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics...the-very-poor/

http://markamerica65.files.wordpress...at_was_not.jpg

The average guy, maybe. The average American, I don't think so, because he's obese and he didn't get there by eating for only $30/week.

Not being able to afford to over-eat is a pretty good reason to get your shit together and to start eating healthier... :2 cents:

Fat and poor. Chicken and egg?

Sly is completely right, there is no reason why someone can't live off of <$100/month, I've done it for years while I was in college... it wasn't even that hard, it just takes some getting used to....

No argument there. Would be curious to see how it plays out for them. :)

In college I lived on chicken breast, canned tuna, potatoes, and rice. Could not stand Ramen. I probably spent less and ate better than all of my friends.

Impressive! :thumbsup

Yeah, i've seen the error of my ways and in my thinking.

I like your way.

I need to start to appreciate the fact that I have to stand in line behind 20 broke fucking idiots buying lottery tickets instead of groceries, every time I walk into a gas station to get something to drink.

Of course, we all agree that people need help... except no one seems to mind taking a poor persons money by encouraging them to gamble against impossible odds with government lotteries... then encourage that behavior with 8 figure marketing campaigns. I like your world. It makes perfect sense. Start taking 80% of their money, then give them back 20% in social services. Brilliant stuff. After all, the cornerstone of Liberal thinking is that people need to be protected from themselves.. so its consistent.

I've often asked myself...

When is being poor the poor persons fault?

Never? Really? There aren't any low life douchebags that make shitty decisions? There aren't any young women having 6 kids before 25 years old and raising them as a single mother? There aren't any drug dealers that just like being drug dealers? There aren't any people drawing state/federal funds just because they can? Interesting. I always assumed the situation was more complex than it is.

According to most, anyone who rents 24" wheels for their 1500.00 car is just a victim of circumstance... .not a fucking retard. I always assumed the opposite. I see how I was wrong.

I am 100% for helping people that can be helped.

I am 100% opposed to the idea that everyone can be helped if you just throw money at them.

Sly is one frugal motherfucker, good for you.

LOL @ Sly. Good stuff. :)

Nobody minds? I'm surprised you do, I thought objecting to the lottery rackets would be considered "socialist". I would have them banned outright, like ponzi schemes and other scams are.

It's not a case of never, obviously there are exceptions, but it's also not a case of "always", which seems to be the right-wing stance. And is it really the fault of the person bringing up the kid, rather than the deadbeat who abandons both of them?

If not, then instead of scapegoating single-moms, it should be recognized what an important job it is they're doing, for society. And if they can't do it adequately, because no father is there to help them, then everything should be done by the rest of society to help them, because helping them helps their child become a normal, functioning member of that society.

If the society stops giving a shit about people, abandons them because - for whatever reason - they're in a mess or need help, then how do you expect them to behave? What incentive is there for them to contribute to a society that doesn't give a shit about them?

If you think it's more complex why are you attempting to simplify it to a few basic strawmen arguments that I haven't made? I'm sure there are people who like being dealers, because there is always going to be a criminal element in society. However we can also look at what things should and should not be crimes. If drugs were legalized, and the supply controlled, then how many people would be out there dealing?

There's no problem admitting that a tiny minority of people are 'bad' in a society, but unless that's all you're saying why bother mentioning it? Problem is many people cite the tiny minority of bad apples and use it as evidence that everyone they have an axe to grind about is the same.

Again, I seriously doubt that accounts for more than a tiny minority of poor people. And if people are being led to believe that what they own (or can show off) equals 'success' then it's not 100% their fault if they feel pressured or influenced into buying shit like that.

I'm 100% opposed to using a tiny minority of people to draw conclusions about the majority.

Let them eat cake

http://threesaparty.files.wordpress....cake.jpg?w=500