[HN Gopher] US hunger crisis persists, especially for kids, olde...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       US hunger crisis persists, especially for kids, older adults
        
       Author : atlasunshrugged
       Score  : 67 points
       Date   : 2021-04-01 20:14 UTC (2 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (apnews.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (apnews.com)
        
       | zozin wrote:
       | Did anyone in the comments even read the article or did they just
       | skim the title and decide to chide America since that's so du
       | jour right now?
       | 
       | The gist of the article is that an enormous crisis created
       | strains on connecting people and free meals, but various entities
       | stepped up to the plate and came up with flexible solutions
       | (school districts delivering meals on school buses or making food
       | available for pickup, cities paying restaurants to feed seniors,
       | expansion of federal funding, food banks and churches expanding
       | their food operations, etc.).
       | 
       | The title could've been "US system of free and subsidized meals
       | bends but does not break", but that just doesn't get clicks, does
       | it? Negative title creates negative emotions, which leads to
       | negative thought patterns (America sucks!!), and then the cycle
       | continues.
        
       | throwaway8581 wrote:
       | This idea that people are actually going hungry due to poverty in
       | the US is absurd. A full day's worth of calories can be had for
       | less than $3. And I'm not just talking about going to McDonalds
       | and ordering off the dollar menu, which is certainly an option
       | occasionally. I mean real food.
       | https://www.upstart.com/blog/lowest-cost-per-calorie-foods
       | 
       | And in fact, it is firmly established that it's the poorest
       | people in America who tend to be the fattest. And what free
       | school lunches often solve is not _hunger_ but _neglect_. There
       | are lots of shitty parents who don 't care enough to deposit
       | lunch money in the school account or pack lunch for their kid, or
       | who make appalling dietary choices for their children.
       | 
       | I wish people would have a little more skepticism and apply some
       | independent common sense when consuming statistics. People
       | getting food from food banks or consuming free lunch doesn't mean
       | that they are otherwise going hungry. It means they are accepting
       | something offered for free. There are myriad, complicated reasons
       | why those patterns would change. But it's a strong, unjustified
       | conclusion to say it's because they would otherwise go hungry.
        
         | maxerickson wrote:
         | Eat cold lard for a month challenge.
        
           | throwaway8581 wrote:
           | Eggs - $1.61 per 2,000 calories
           | 
           | Spaghetti - $1.49 per 2,000 calories
           | 
           | Pinto beans - $1.39 per 2,000 calories
           | 
           | Whole milk - $1.37 per 2,000 calories
           | 
           | Peanut butter - $1.25 per 2,000 calories
           | 
           | White rice - $0.41 per 2,000 calories
           | 
           | Top ramen (beef & chicken) - $1.82 per 2,000 calories
           | 
           | Potatoes - $1.79 per 2,000 calories
           | 
           | And if you do more research, you'd see that a loaf of bread
           | is about $2 for about 2000 calories.
        
             | heavyset_go wrote:
             | Are you supposed to eat the spaghetti uncooked? What about
             | the eggs? Where are homeless people getting the
             | refrigerators to store their milk and eggs?
        
         | heavyset_go wrote:
         | > _A full day 's worth of calories can be had for less than $3_
         | 
         | The problem is that people often don't have that $3.
        
           | throwaway8581 wrote:
           | Believe it or not, America is a welfare state and while not
           | as generous as Europe, no one is lacking for $3 to buy food
           | unless they are blowing their government money on something
           | they shouldn't be.
        
             | Valkhyr wrote:
             | > Believe it or not, America is a welfare state [...]
             | 
             | Compared to where? Certainly not most industrialized
             | western countries.
        
               | swebs wrote:
               | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_social
               | _we...
        
               | Valkhyr wrote:
               | Thank you for the source.
               | 
               | I can't help but feel confused how the US can spend so
               | much per capita on social welfare, yet I hear all those
               | horror stories about medical costs, people having to work
               | multiple jobs etc.
        
               | bhupy wrote:
               | Believe it or not, the United States has a higher median
               | income PPP adjusted after taxes and transfers than pretty
               | much every European nation; it's ranked #3 in the world:
               | 
               | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disposable_household_and_pe
               | r_c...
               | 
               | The US also has a lower percentage of low-income people
               | than almost any European country, despite having greater
               | inequality:
               | 
               | https://twitter.com/Noahpinion/status/1376074233642557442
               | 
               | Also, the US is ranked #11 in the world for food
               | security, ranked higher than Canada, Germany, Denmark,
               | New Zealand, France, Norway, and Australia (to name a
               | handful): https://foodsecurityindex.eiu.com/Index
        
             | heavyset_go wrote:
             | > _no one is lacking for $3_
             | 
             | I mean, it must be nice to believe this, but the lived
             | experience of millions of Americans would beg to differ.
        
               | bhupy wrote:
               | "Lived experience" is just a fancy word for "anecdote". I
               | can also point to the lived experience of millions of
               | Americans that enjoy dinner every day (myself included),
               | and we'd be no better off in understanding what the truth
               | is.
               | 
               | Per the data, the US is ranked #11 in the world for food
               | security: https://foodsecurityindex.eiu.com/Index
        
         | soared wrote:
         | There are other factors besides money at play. I only know the
         | basics so I'm sure someone can do a better job, but a few
         | examples:
         | 
         | * Food deserts. Many low income neighborhoods don't have
         | grocery stores, so residents would need to take public
         | transport both ways with all of their groceries.
         | 
         | * Building on above, it takes time to cook your own food.
         | Especially if you're riding the bus to the store, and to work,
         | and to pick up the kids, etc.
         | 
         | * Education. Many low income people are taught mcdonalds is the
         | cheapest food, and so thats what they buy. Can you blame
         | someone for something they do not know?
         | 
         | * Financial planning and decision making. Same as above.
         | 
         | Its difficult for us to understand the low income situation. A
         | family member of mine is a counselor at a high school for kids
         | who get expelled. All these kids want to be lawyers, police
         | officers, or government workers when they grow up because
         | they've literally never seen a white collar worker in real
         | life. They don't know that data science exists, much less step
         | 1 in getting there.
        
           | barry-cotter wrote:
           | Food deserts are a matter of lack of demand, not supply.
           | Where poor people want fresh food the market is quite willing
           | to sell it to them.
           | 
           | > THE GEOGRAPHY OF POVERTY AND NUTRITION: FOOD DESERTS AND
           | FOOD CHOICES ACROSS THE UNITED STATES
           | 
           | > We study the causes of "nutritional inequality": why the
           | wealthy tend to eat more healthfully than the poor in the
           | U.S. Using two event study designs exploiting entry of new
           | supermarkets and households' moves to healthier
           | neighborhoods, we reject that neighborhood environments have
           | economically meaningful effects on healthy eating. Using a
           | structural demand model, we find that exposing low-income
           | households to the same food availability and prices
           | experienced by high-income households would reduce
           | nutritional inequality by only 9%, while the remaining 91% is
           | driven by differences in demand. In turn, these income-
           | related demand differences are partially explained by
           | education, nutrition knowledge, and regional preferences.
           | These findings contrast with discussions of nutritional
           | inequality that emphasize supply-side issues such as food
           | deserts.
        
             | nitrogen wrote:
             | Supply/demand is a feedback system. Both are the cause.
             | When trying to change a feedback system, you don't look for
             | a root cause because it's literally an infinite loop.
             | Instead you either look for a way to break the loop, or
             | look for a variable you can change that has the best ROI.
             | 
             | In the case of a food desert within a residential area,
             | it's probably a lot easier to boost demand by artificially
             | increasing supply, rather than the other way around.
        
         | libraryatnight wrote:
         | I used to wonder this too, and it's a much more nuanced (like
         | everything!) problem than just money/calories. But the point
         | you make is more or less addressed in any literature or
         | documentation on food issues in the US should you care to find
         | it. I suppose here's the modern starting point for most people
         | engaging with a topic they don't understand:
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hunger_in_the_United_States
        
         | igammarays wrote:
         | If all of your money is going to rent, health bills have
         | bankrupted you, and you don't have the energy and clarity of
         | mind that comes with healthy food and a stable home, you're
         | expecting such a person to have the mental energy required to
         | cost-optimize on $3/day?
         | 
         | Cost-optimization is a hard problem, which is why companies
         | spend a lot of money for consultants to do it, and programmers
         | spend a lot of time figuring out ways to optimize CPU/RAM, for
         | example. So yes, it's actually very easy to end up in a
         | situation where you would go hungry without food banks, even in
         | America.
        
       | brink wrote:
       | The negative side-effects of lockdowns is so grossly under-
       | represented in discussions, especially of those in power.
       | Depression, joblessness, separation of families, separation of
       | bi-national couples, suicides, financial stress, hunger, a
       | collapsing economy.. These things need to be taken seriously.
       | 
       | Many politicians have been acting like these things don't exist
       | while ordering more and more stringent lockdowns, giving passing
       | condolences at best, and it borders on negligence. There needs to
       | be a balance. Yes, avoiding the chance of death matters for you
       | and those around you, but what is it worth if you're miserably
       | suicidal and have lost hope as a result of it?
       | 
       | I know this has been said before, but I feel the need to keep
       | saying it, as it's still a problem to this day.
        
         | spaetzleesser wrote:
         | "Many politicians have been acting like these things don't
         | exist while ordering more and more stringent lockdowns, giving
         | passing condolences at best, and it borders on negligence.
         | There needs to be a balance. Yes, avoiding the chance of death
         | matters for you and those around you, but what is it worth if
         | you're miserably suicidal and have lost hope as a result of
         | it?"
         | 
         | I personally am very happy not to have to make decisions in
         | this situation. Unless you have dumb luck (the pandemic is not
         | as bad as thought originally but there was no way you could
         | have known that) either you will get heat because businesses
         | are dying or you will get heat because people are dying. Or
         | both. It pretty easy to criticize what's going on but how can
         | you make decisions with very little input data and dire
         | consequences either way?
         | 
         | Us techies want people to believe us on tech matters because we
         | are subject matter experts but it seems we are not willing to
         | believe what scientists in multiple countries are recommending
         | because somehow we know better. Brazil clearly shows that
         | ignoring the pandemic is not exactly a recipe for success. So
         | what's a leader to do?
         | 
         | One reasonable thing would be to keep businesses open as much
         | as possible while having super strict masking and disinfection
         | requirements. But somehow there is this correlation between
         | people wanting businesses to be open and at the same time not
         | wanting masks. Reminds me of the abortion situation. Abortion
         | opponents also up often oppose sex education and contraception.
         | So they oppose the one thing that would help their cause the
         | most.
        
         | nonameiguess wrote:
         | Where? In the US? Is this overview lying?
         | https://www.usatoday.com/storytelling/coronavirus-reopening-...
         | 
         | It seems to indicate the vast majority of places are loosening
         | restrictions. Only one state out of 50 is currently imposing
         | more stringent lockdowns.
        
         | Pyramus wrote:
         | I see this argument more often and I don't fully understand it.
         | No elected official (in a Western democratic society) wants
         | lockdowns. The electorate does not want lockdowns. I do not
         | want lockdowns. Nobody I've spoken to has said, let's keep
         | lockdowns. Lockdowns are bad for exactly the reasons you've
         | described. No elected official I know has said, well, the
         | economy, children's mental health, education, joblessness -
         | these are just minor issues, let's do lockdowns. Not at the
         | county, district, state or national level.
         | 
         | We are currently in a loose-loose situation - either way people
         | will suffer, and different (Western democratic) societies are
         | sharing this suffering differently. E.g. in the US, the
         | consensus has been to trade more loss of life for personal
         | freedom than in European countries.
         | 
         | I do not want you to suffer. In fact, if you are in a state of
         | distress through no fault of your own, I do want my taxpayer
         | money to go directly into your pockets.
        
           | CWuestefeld wrote:
           | _No elected official I know has said, well, the economy,
           | children 's mental health, education, joblessness - these are
           | just minor issues, let's do lockdowns. _
           | 
           | This is precisely the problem. Our leaders refuse to
           | acknowledge that their myopic quest for safety from covid at
           | all costs has serious repercussions. They bluster on citing
           | data from the CDC and all, but without more than a wink at
           | the collateral damage - all the time buoyed by sycophantic
           | supporters chanting, "follow the science!". It's as if
           | biology is the _only_ science, and there 's no need to
           | consult economists.
        
             | Pyramus wrote:
             | I do not live in the US, so YMMV, but I can only re-iterate
             | that this has absolutely not been my experience.
             | 
             | Have you actually spoken to somebody 'in power'? Go to the
             | next council meeting, speak to your local mayor, call a
             | local representative. We have been doing this for over a
             | year now and in my experience they know very well what the
             | toll of lockdowns is.
        
         | ryandrake wrote:
         | But this article is about the US, where there have been no
         | lockdowns. Only (mostly) unenforced stay-at-home orders,
         | (mostly) unenforced business closures, and (mostly) unenforced
         | mask mandates. I don't see the link. Lots of people have been
         | out horsing around, doing whatever they wanted this past year,
         | and sidestepping the token, unenforced roadblocks that were
         | half-assed by governments. Something must be causing all these
         | terrible things, but it's not lockdowns.
         | 
         | I would start looking at _lack_ of government action rather
         | than the little they actually did.
        
           | ezequiel-garzon wrote:
           | I don't live there, but isn't there a large portion of the
           | student population that is returning to schools after a year?
           | I doubt most parents in that case were setting up play dates,
           | so in effect this has been almost a lockdown for those
           | children.
        
           | [deleted]
        
           | nradov wrote:
           | Santa Clara County in the middle of Silicon Valley
           | aggressively enforced lockdown rules and fined hundreds of
           | businesses. This wrecked many segments of the local economy,
           | and drove people into poverty and hunger.
           | 
           | https://www.mercurynews.com/2021/03/28/why-san-mateo-
           | county-...
           | 
           | Those of us fortunate enough to still be employed can help by
           | donating to local food banks like Martha's Kitchen.
           | 
           | https://www.marthas-kitchen.org/donate.html
        
             | ryandrake wrote:
             | What wrecked the economies was the length of the pandemic.
             | If we _actually_ locked down for a month or so we might
             | have had a shot at beating it with less long-term misery,
             | but since covid was so politicized and government was too
             | timid to actually do that, we half-assed it instead, and
             | here we are a year later.
             | 
             | Go outside Silicon Valley and a few other metro areas, and
             | you'll still see widespread lack of enforcement. Most of
             | the good behavior has been voluntary. Good
             | people/businesses listening to health guidance. Nobody is
             | getting pulled over in rural America and fined for
             | violating stay-at-home. If I wanted to, I could
             | "unessentially" drive across the state of CA right now, sit
             | down at a fully-open bar or restaurant unmasked, and nobody
             | would lift a finger to stop me.
        
           | swiley wrote:
           | >unenforced business closures,
           | 
           | No, these were enforced by the police and courts in most
           | places (certainly where I live.) Lots of people didn't/don't
           | have work.
        
             | msrenee wrote:
             | It was not enforced at all where I live. We had a mask
             | mandate in our county for less than a week this summer.
             | Businesses chose what measures to take and they were all
             | over the place. Thankfully it's a pretty well-to-do county.
             | Only 2 counties in my state had any kind of regulation and
             | there were no mandated business closures to my knowledge in
             | either.
        
           | an_opabinia wrote:
           | > I would start looking at lack of government action rather
           | than the little they actually did.
           | 
           | The simple reality of it is that there was a colossal finance
           | related economic crash, similar to 2008, that was blamed on
           | the lockdown when the lockdown wasn't really to blame. We're
           | still in the "dead cat bounce" phase of that crash.
        
             | tastyfreeze wrote:
             | Hit the nail on the head. The pain of the 2008 crash was
             | just kicked down the road by bailing out banks. We will
             | have to reckon with the consequences of government economic
             | meddling at some point. Shutting down the economy was just
             | a shove towards the cliff.
             | 
             | I think that we are going to really see the crash kick off
             | whenever the eviction moratorium is lifted. There is no way
             | that all landlords are able to service their loans. Anybody
             | that has been patient with savings will be cleaning house
             | snatching up cheap properties and businesses.
        
               | an_opabinia wrote:
               | The eviction moratorium is overblown. Forbearance on
               | mortgages is an extremely cheap way to keep landlords
               | from feeling the pain, and lenders have little upside and
               | much downside from mass selling among landlords when
               | financing is so cheap nowadays. Anyway NY state is $61b
               | estimated lost rent which is comparable to student loan
               | debt (like $40b), neither of these things matter as much
               | as people think they do.
               | 
               | Why? These people are already in default. The renters who
               | need the moratorium were already "in default," you just
               | didn't account for it yet. To the degree that the market
               | has known NYC and LA renters' rent was "too damn high"
               | for decades now, it's hard to see how people predictably
               | on the verge of default (ie economic default) now having
               | to live somewhere they can afford (ie accounting default)
               | will cause a crash. If anything REITs prices will rise as
               | information (ie who is really capable of paying rents)
               | flows into the system. The renters who can actually
               | afford to live in NYC and LA are richer, and the people
               | who move out will be richer than many people where
               | they're moving to.
               | 
               | Another way to look at this is that CDOs were responsible
               | for the 2008 crash. Not people taking mortgages they
               | can't afford.
               | 
               | Constantly economic crashes are the result of
               | derivatives. My feeling is that we will find out what
               | toxic derivative will crash the economy for real when
               | someone takes a long look at PIPEs for SPAC transactions.
               | Another place I would look for nasty derivatives is
               | untaxed cash of large corporations in offshore accounts,
               | especially of the major tech companies.
        
               | quickthrowman wrote:
               | > We will have to reckon with the consequences of
               | government economic meddling at some point.
               | 
               | Not necessarily, the Fed isn't obligated to unwind its QE
               | purchases. They may not even be willing to, see 'taper
               | tantrum' and Oct-Dec 2018. We won't see another bear
               | market without another black swan.
               | 
               | House prices may come down when the moratorium is lifted,
               | back to 2020 prices. There won't be as much selling by
               | landlords as you think, lots of them likely qualified for
               | forbearance which makes non-payment of rent a virtual
               | non-issue. It'll take a 2.5-3% 10y yield to really push
               | mortgage rates up enough to where it starts to affect
               | house prices, or the Fed needs to stop buying MBSes, or
               | both.
        
               | ericmcer wrote:
               | Yeah sure lol, the federal reserve is willing to float
               | asset prices indefinitely. Neither party wants to be
               | incumbent the one that deals with the fallout of raising
               | interest rates. Anyone who has been patient with savings
               | will get wrecked by inflation.
        
               | tastyfreeze wrote:
               | Only if you're savings is in USD. If you have the
               | foresight to see the impending crisis you would also have
               | the foresight to exit USD well before it happens. Savings
               | isn't just cash.
               | 
               | The way I see it playing out is the government is going
               | to try to print prosperity. Foreign governments stop
               | buying our debt and move on to a new reserve currency
               | without the US. If the US is willing to use force to try
               | to maintain USD reserve status things get really ugly.
               | Domestically this is a world of hurt for middle and low
               | income classes. Any country that is preparing for this
               | eventuality is going to do better. But, all countries are
               | playing the same monetary debasement game. Just a few
               | countries are increasing their purchase of gold and
               | decreasing their purchase of US debt.
        
               | hanniabu wrote:
               | Another great reason for bitcoin/ethereum
        
             | Pyramus wrote:
             | Absolutely. Now add the absence of a welfare system that is
             | meant to alleviate the distress.
        
               | swebs wrote:
               | The USA is actually in the top 10 welfare states in terms
               | of spending per capita, behind only some northern
               | European countries.
               | 
               | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_social
               | _we...
        
               | kevin_thibedeau wrote:
               | Spending pocketed by wealthy middlemen.
        
           | loveistheanswer wrote:
           | >But this article is about the US, where there have been no
           | lockdowns. Only (mostly) unenforced stay-at-home orders,
           | (mostly) unenforced business closures, and (mostly)
           | unenforced mask mandates. I don't see the link.
           | 
           | Your privileged, pedantic ignorance of the major
           | socioeconomic problems caused by the covid 19 response
           | perfectly illustrates OP's point.
        
             | Pyramus wrote:
             | No it doesn't. We have been doing the whole spiel for over
             | a year now, running different experiments in different
             | countries.
             | 
             | Lockdowns are not silver bullets - what drives viral spread
             | is behaviour, not legal measures. In fact, if _everybody_
             | would stay at home for 14 days, the virus dies (decays
             | exponentially).
             | 
             | What actually happened is that folks made the wearing of a
             | piece of cloth, meant to protect others, a political
             | statement and a 'restriction of personal freedom'.
        
           | CWuestefeld wrote:
           | Your emphasis on "unenforced" ignores the fact that there's a
           | huge amount of people trying to do what they're told is the
           | right thing, even without a gun to their head.
        
         | 908B64B197 wrote:
         | How could these policies be disconnected from the average Joe's
         | experiences?
         | 
         | They were agreed by our politicians and doctors who's kids
         | tutor were happy to not have to commute to their suburban
         | estate.
        
         | swiley wrote:
         | we're starting to hear it. Fresh air (part of APM/NPR and
         | typically much less factual than NPR news) noted that drug
         | overdoses were up by 26% last year although I'm not sure they
         | attributed it to the lockdown.
        
         | heavyset_go wrote:
         | > _Depression, joblessness, separation of families, separation
         | of bi-national couples, suicides, financial stress, hunger, a
         | collapsing economy.. These things need to be taken seriously._
         | 
         | It seems to me as if many politicians have never taken those
         | things seriously, before the pandemic or during it.
         | 
         | I've also noticed that some politicians suddenly say that they
         | care about those problems during lockdowns, yet they haven't
         | pushed for any legislation to actually help mitigate those
         | deep-seated issues. It seems to me like they're just using
         | those issues, and the suffering of others, as tools to complain
         | about policy they don't like.
        
           | hn8788 wrote:
           | The difference is that before you could try and do something
           | about those problems, even if politicians didn't care. Now
           | those problems still exist, but people are forced to stay at
           | home because keeping a low infection rate is all people care
           | about.
        
             | heavyset_go wrote:
             | There are certainly responses politicians could have made
             | to help with mental health, loss of income, hunger and
             | homelessness before the pandemic and during it. The
             | problems existed before the pandemic and required a
             | solution, and the problems still exist during the pandemic
             | and require a solution.
             | 
             | The issue is that the solution to either of those problems
             | upset those who finance politicians. There are powerful
             | people who would rather have others starve, die from
             | exposure and go without treatment for their mental
             | illnesses than give them the resources they need to live
             | dignified lives.
        
         | lucian1900 wrote:
         | Plenty of countries have paired lockdowns with rent&mortgage
         | freezes, furlough, assistance for the needy in general, etc.
         | 
         | Both problems have solutions.
        
           | TaylorSwift wrote:
           | A lot of my peers are in a certain age that should be dating.
           | But it's been 1 year now, and there are paranoia and concerns
           | about safety. It's really tiring. Missing out on 2 years of
           | developing a healthy social relationship with other people --
           | it really is a lost of time in a prime age.
        
             | saiya-jin wrote:
             | I can't honestly imagine how bad indirect negative impact
             | of all related to covid will be, I would say at least on
             | scale of direct deaths / long time sufferers (although
             | those things are obviously not directly comparable). And
             | yet despite all these costs, most of the world failed
             | desperately and repeatedly in handling it and the show is
             | far from over.
             | 
             | Meeting the other sex is a topic on its own - all normal
             | venues often just disappeared, especially here in Europe.
             | No bars, no restaurants, concerts, schools, group sports,
             | and most importantly not that much work in the office,
             | arguably the most common place for folks to meet their
             | significant other.
             | 
             | I am just a remote observer of this, we were lucky to get
             | married in summer 2019 - one year later the marriage would
             | be with 6 guests max if it would happen at all. But still
             | can't wrap my head around all this no matter which angle I
             | try to look it form.
             | 
             | Me, my wife and my son been through covid in February, my
             | parents back home are going through it now and I really do
             | have respect from this unpredictable sickness. But as
             | damage mounts in each one of us and there is always this
             | fleeting political promise that in next 2 months it will be
             | much better, I am getting tired of largely inefficient yet
             | very restrictive constraints and starting to lean more
             | towards 'fuck it, keep basic measures mandatory everywhere
             | and lets go back to behavior as it was before covid'. It
             | may be just a stupid kneejerk reaction, but over 1 year
             | wears one out
        
             | lucian1900 wrote:
             | Certainly years of this are not sustainable. That's why the
             | approach taken by a few countries to eliminate local
             | transmission are preferable (China, Vietnam, New Zealand,
             | South Korea).
        
           | makomk wrote:
           | Every country has had plenty of people who fall through the
           | holes in whatever assistance programs they have in place, and
           | the US media has downplayed their downsides compared to what
           | the US did. For example, there's been a tendency in the
           | American press to push the UK's furlough program as better
           | than the US approach because it kept more people off
           | unemployment, but as far as I could tell the US enhanced
           | unemployment was substantially better for the worst-off
           | amongst you than UK furlough, and those who didn't benefit
           | from furlough and had to go on unemployment - for example,
           | because their employer went out of business, or they were
           | between jobs, or had started a new job too recently - were
           | _much_ worse off here.
        
             | lucian1900 wrote:
             | The UK certainly didn't do enough either, so many here are
             | in rent arrears for example. Rents should've been frozen as
             | the first act.
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | bloaf wrote:
         | Economic slowdowns have historically been associated with
         | increased life expectancy, despite their impact on mental
         | health:
         | 
         | https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-00210-0
        
         | BrianOnHN wrote:
         | Lockdowns wouldn't be necessary if half the country didn't
         | insist on living like barbarians.
        
         | 11235813213455 wrote:
         | On the other side, I see many positive side-effects, we're
         | forced to adapt, to take care of others who can't, to eliminate
         | non-necessary things and consumption from our life, which is
         | good
        
         | watwut wrote:
         | How was it underrepresent when major political party, the one
         | in power, went out of its way to prevent lockdowns and other
         | measures?
         | 
         | Also, suicides rose, but not enough to counteract stats.
         | Domestic violence went up too, but still not enough to
         | counteract anything.
        
       | chmod775 wrote:
       | Isn't this just embarrassing? A country that sent people to the
       | moon decades ago and spends 2,600 USD per inhabitant per year on
       | their military can't even _feed_ their people _today_?
       | 
       | Excuse me but _what the fuck_.
        
         | bpodgursky wrote:
         | > "It got really ugly," said Silvia Baca Garcia, 33, a Phoenix
         | resident from Honduras who scrambled to feed her three children
         | and granddaughter during months of unemployment caused by the
         | viral outbreak. "It had been a lot easier when my two boys were
         | in school and getting their hot breakfasts and lunches
         | everyday."
         | 
         | It's not explicitly stated, but many of these examples are
         | very, very likely to be non-legal immigrants, who do not
         | qualify for SNAP aka food stamps. That is a huge political
         | hairball. I'd be pretty surprised if many citizens fell into a
         | similar category.
         | 
         | (with older adults I'm not sure what's going on, but my guess
         | is communication or service literacy problems are a large part
         | of it. ie, just getting people registered who don't know that
         | they are eligible.)
        
         | maxerickson wrote:
         | It's not that we can't, we choose not to.
         | 
         | Like the only reason that children get shamed for not having
         | money for school lunch is because some people like it that way.
         | There's no lack of resources.
         | 
         | This is more than embarrassing.
        
           | sm4rk0 wrote:
           | But the USA are the embodiment of democracy. How can't you
           | choose something better? /s
        
             | jfengel wrote:
             | Because a lot of people believe that if you're hungry, it's
             | because you're stupid, lazy, or morally deficient, and thus
             | deserve to be hungry.
             | 
             | I suspect you think I'm joking. I'm not. "Work is better
             | than welfare" is a common refrain. Here it is on a state
             | government web site:
             | 
             | https://www.dshs.wa.gov/esa/chapter-1-engaging-parents-
             | workf...
             | 
             | It's widely considered that if you feed people for free,
             | they will have no incentive to work. They will live off of
             | your effort, have more children who will learn from their
             | parents that work isn't required, and possibly commit
             | crimes to obtain more. There is a genuine fear that they
             | will literally lead more comfortable lives than you do by
             | working.
             | 
             | Again, I suspect you think I'm exaggerating, or that this
             | is an extreme minority opinion. This is a very common
             | opinion among Americans -- effectively universal among
             | conservatives, and significant among progressives.
             | 
             | We don't choose better because the things that you think of
             | as "better" are supported by only a minority of Americans.
             | Most Americans think it will make us lazy, weak, and
             | stupid.
        
               | kmonsen wrote:
               | This is like the ultimate example of this, coincidentally
               | at the very beginning of the pandemic (before anyone
               | could know how bad it would be) the previous
               | administration proposed to cut SNAP, or what is commonly
               | called food stamps by ~30%:
               | https://www.cbpp.org/research/food-
               | assistance/presidents-202...
               | 
               | It would also make work requirements for adults to be
               | eligible.
        
               | kbelder wrote:
               | You don't think work is better than welfare (at least for
               | anybody that's capable of work)?
               | 
               | I find that weird, and a little sad.
        
         | bhupy wrote:
         | That same country is ranked higher in food security than
         | several other high quality of life industrial nations in the
         | world: https://foodsecurityindex.eiu.com/Index
        
         | throwawaysea wrote:
         | We do fund programs to feed people - for example the federal
         | food stamps program, which is formally known as SNAP
         | (https://www.fns.usda.gov/snap/supplemental-nutrition-
         | assista...). Around 10.5% of households in the US experience
         | food insecurity, a term that includes both households with
         | uncertainty but no disruption to eating patterns (for example
         | households successfully relying on federal food assistance
         | programs), and also households that experienced disruption to
         | food patterns at some point in the year (at least once). The
         | definitions of these terms are at the USDA website
         | (https://www.ers.usda.gov/topics/food-nutrition-
         | assistance/fo...), and there we see 4.1% experienced "very low
         | food security" in 2019, meaning they experienced disruption to
         | normal eating patterns at least once during the year.
         | 
         | SNAP covers 11% of Americans, and its covered benefits were
         | expanded by 40% at the start of the pandemic
         | (https://www.npr.org/2020/09/27/912486921/food-insecurity-
         | in-...) - so it's not like no effort was put into trying to
         | manage food insecurity under the pandemic. However, we don't
         | have very precise metrics on how well people are covered by
         | SNAP. Because the definition of "very low food insecurity"
         | includes those with disruption to eating patterns at least once
         | in a given year (from self-reported surveys), we don't have
         | measures for sustained malnutrition or hunger.
        
       | endisneigh wrote:
       | Unfortunately with the pandemic it was kind of no win for a
       | politician.
        
       | technofiend wrote:
       | Yeah this one really tears at the heart strings. Google "food
       | insecurity charity" or Charity Navigator or Charity Watch to find
       | one you trust if you'd like to help.
       | 
       | https://www.charitynavigator.org/ https://www.charitywatch.org/
        
         | imnotlost wrote:
         | Charity is great but...
         | 
         | None of these issues will be improved, much less solved,
         | through shaming and moralizing, hoping 330M individuals will
         | make charitable contributions and recycle.
         | 
         | Give a can of food while doing your Christmas shopping so the
         | super-corps can pay less tax and claim it gives to charity.
         | 
         | Just another systemic problem pushed to the individual, and
         | swept under the rug.
        
           | heavyset_go wrote:
           | Through all of history, charity has never been enough to
           | solve those issues. It would be wrong to think that your
           | charity alone is enough to solve those problems.
           | 
           | However, while the solutions to those problems aren't being
           | implemented, charity can help soften the blow. It would be
           | correct to think that your charity helps somewhat, but much,
           | much more needs to be done.
           | 
           | Get involved with charity, but also get involved in policy at
           | all levels, local to federal.
           | 
           | To give an example about why this is important, several
           | places I've lived have criminalized things like addiction,
           | homelessness, feeding people who need food, and community
           | gardens.
           | 
           | It was local and state activism that made so that if an
           | overdose was called in via 911, everyone who helped the
           | victim didn't get arrested as a result. That stopped the
           | trend of people not getting help for overdoses, as well as
           | disturbing trends like overdose victims being left on the
           | side of the road.
           | 
           | Local and state activism helped get affordable housing
           | measures passed, as well.
        
       | throwawaysea wrote:
       | As an aside, without comment on this particular issue: we really
       | need to stop using words like "crisis", "emergency", "justice",
       | etc. I am very much desensitized to these words from their
       | overuse, especially since very often the terms are used in a
       | hyperbolic fashion for maximal effect when pushing political
       | goals. I find them to be imprecise and unhelpful.
        
       | arrosenberg wrote:
       | It's not a coincidence that a number of New Deal programs were
       | focused on meeting the basic needs of kids (e.g. school lunches
       | and the CCC) and the elderly (e.g. Social Security and Medicare).
        
         | kazen44 wrote:
         | in history, it is also one of the first needs people who want
         | to gain power deliver. (think of gangsters feeding communities,
         | or revolutionaries establishing schools in occupied territory).
        
       | tehjoker wrote:
       | The graphic in the article is telling. While the coronavirus is
       | shocking in the severity with which the lack of response has
       | impoverished people, it is only a 1.5x worsening of the
       | situation! This tells a story of longstanding institutional
       | neglect that allows millions to remain in a state of
       | impoverishment indefinitely.
       | 
       | Moreover, the chart shows that food distribution was growing
       | prior to the pandemic, which could mean the problem was worsening
       | (or more locations appeared, or more food was distributed per
       | capita).
        
         | tastyfreeze wrote:
         | Impoverishment of lower classes is the direct result of
         | monetary debasement. There is simply no way to move up when
         | what little you earn buys less each year. Monetary debasement
         | is also why we have seen an increase in the wealth gap.
        
           | freeone3000 wrote:
           | If money was truly debased, you'd see wages and product
           | prices rise. The asset classes we've seen increase in price
           | are stocks, bonds, healthcare, education, and property. What
           | we haven't seen increase are food, consumer goods, or
           | _wages_. You can say that the currency is being debased, but
           | the numbers are the same for 2010 as they in 2020. The issue
           | is that there simply is no way to accumulate wealth on the
           | amount earned -- there 's nothing left after expenses.
           | Inflation or deflation wouldn't help this.
        
             | tastyfreeze wrote:
             | Wages haven't grown with monetary supply inflation. Every
             | dollar earned buys less each year and wages stay mostly the
             | same. Without debasement what you earn buys mostly the same
             | amount of stuff the next year. Then you are able to save
             | and count on your money actually being worth something when
             | you need it. We have had over 100 years of debasement that
             | increased in rate after 1971. You need to look at a longer
             | time frame to see how badly we have all be fucked.
             | 
             | We haven't had obvious consumer price inflation because the
             | money supply is hitting the financial class first. Instead
             | we have seen asset prices increase rapidly. With the
             | stimulus checks every citizen has had a taste of what has
             | been happening with banks for a century. But, we have had
             | price inflation. Instead of raising the price at the store
             | most manufacturers have opted to reduce package sizes for
             | the same price. They didn't do this for your health. The
             | price creep up is slow enough that it can be hard to
             | notice. I am not sure how old your are. Think back of how
             | much a dollar bought you when you were young. Can you buy
             | those same items for a dollar now? How about 5 dollars?
             | This is the pernicious result of debasing the currency.
        
       | mdoms wrote:
       | Wealthiest nation in the world.
        
         | annoyingnoob wrote:
         | The top 10% owns over 50% of that wealth. The bottom 50% owns
         | 2% of that wealth. Wealthy for some, hungry for many.
         | 
         | https://www.federalreserve.gov/releases/z1/dataviz/dfa/distr...
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2021-04-01 23:02 UTC)